Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: wojo71 on October 19, 2010, 03:21:58 PM
-
Wow this this looks like a lot
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11574573
Even going as far to build a CV then mothball it as soon as its done.
If they decommission the Ark Royal immediately doesn't that leave them CV less?
-
(http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/gwa/lowres/gwan1075l.jpg)
the new UK airforce
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01695/spitfires87-460_1695743c.jpg)
the new UK tank
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rqH4fUbko2U/THRZ3mlxNEI/AAAAAAAARqM/qz1Kai8rYrI/s1600/rubber+tank.jpg)
-
Don't they still have Invincible and Illustrious?
-
the new UK tank
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rqH4fUbko2U/THRZ3mlxNEI/AAAAAAAARqM/qz1Kai8rYrI/s1600/rubber+tank.jpg)
That's Russia's new tank! Didn't they just order a lot of "vehicles" like that?
-
why do they need a military at all, dont they still have the US to finnish any fight they may find themselves in???? :neener: :neener:
(just a joke people, dont take it to heart :aok )
-
I believe the British will remain true to the NATO role. They are small, but highly professional, highly trained, and very mobile. I'd also be willing to bet that their CV goes "live" once it is done.
-
overall they seem to be making the cuts in the right places, we're still going to have the 4th largest defence budget worldwide.
and they decided to go with catapults and F35Cs for the QE class carriers at last :aok
-
I still hope they took into consideration that a big down size like that makes Argentina think they are weak and to make another move on the Falklands.
I'd hate to see the Earth's past largest, efficient, and respectfully feared Royal Navy become unable to defend it's interests abroad.
ROX
-
With torps that can go 600knots and could be armed with tactical nukes, it has been well known for the past 10 years or so,that carrier fleets are highly vulnerable.
-
With torps that can go 600knots and could be armed with tactical nukes, it has been well known for the past 10 years or so,that carrier fleets are highly vulnerable.
ummmmmmmm has somebody been watching Iranian PROPOG..... oops! i mean, the Iranian news lately?
-
No, and what's that got to do with anything? the russian's made it first.
-
Is that the one they were testing on the Kursk?
-
With torps that can go 600knots and could be armed with tactical nukes, it has been well known for the past 10 years or so,that carrier fleets are highly vulnerable.
Nuke torpedos are not necessary anymore. Any ship in the world can be sunk with one conventional torpedo.
They are designed now to not even hit the ship. They create a void underneath and the weight of the ship cracks it in half. Then when the water rushes back into the void it tears it in half.
-
Nuke torpedos are not necessary anymore. Any ship in the world can be sunk with one conventional torpedo.
They are designed now to not even hit the ship. They create a void underneath and the weight of the ship cracks it in half. Then when the water rushes back into the void it tears it in half.
Still remains to be seen whether or not that works against a CVN...Smaller ships, sure, but I'm guessing it might take more than that.
-
I don't want my fleet taken out by salvo of this :uhoh
http://www.youtube.com/v/4D1MR1iqZQY&hd=1
-
Is that the one they were testing on the Kursk?
Rino, for the win. :rock
-
I still hope they took into consideration that a big down size like that makes Argentina think they are weak and to make another move on the Falklands.
I'd hate to see the Earth's past largest, efficient, and respectfully feared Royal Navy become unable to defend it's interests abroad.
its not a massive downsizing really and most cuts are in sensible places. eg. we currently have 2 full armoured divisions in germany - 25,000+ personnel, 15ish full battalions of armour and infantry, 250 Challengers, 150 AS90s etc etc. since we dont expect to see hundreds of russian tanks rolling across eastern europe it doesnt make alot of sense having that kind of deployment. big cuts at the ministry too, which has become very bloated over the years.
in terms of force projection my only slight concern is the reduction of our frigate fleet, although its the 4 older type 22s we will lose (they are already on extended service) and the new type 26s are on the way to replace them. my feeling is that our frigate fleet pays for itself through trade agreements anyway, gunboat economics :)
as for argentina, the force they would face these days in the falklands would be way deadlier than in the 80s. just one type 45 destroyer and the resident typhoons could make falklands airspace inpenetrable, a couple of SSNs would prevent anything on the surface getting close.
edit: of course it will be alot cheaper if we dont trash our new toys before they go into active service :rolleyes:
(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/49613000/jpg/_49613917_sub_464.jpg)
-
apparently the defense cuts are already taking its toll
UK sub runs aground
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101022/wl_nm/us_britain_nuclear_submarine (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101022/wl_nm/us_britain_nuclear_submarine)
apparently to save money they hired this guy to drive the boat
(http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45217000/jpg/_45217121_5e6f18b5-da18-450c-8b54-180c8d2b88c4.jpg)