Resend my activation email : Register : Log in 
BCF: Bike Chat Forums


HMS Daring launch

Reply to topic
Bike Chat Forums Index -> Politics & Current Affairs Goto page Previous  1, 2
View previous topic : View next topic  
Author Message

zaknafien




Joined: 25 Mar 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 19:28 - 28 Feb 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

Battleship's were made obsolete years ago, having the biggest gun's on the open sea's no longer matter's.
____________________
02 Firestorm.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

dibbster
Nearly there...



Joined: 15 Apr 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 19:42 - 28 Feb 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

I went to a talk on the type 45's at the back end of last year by a guy from BAE.

The ship was built in three seperate sections and then put together at Clyde.
Alll the cabins were built seperately and are self contained boxes which are loaded into the ship then bolted together. There are alot of clever aspects to it but there does seem to have been alot of comprimise to keep the project on budget.
____________________
Suzuki RF 600 - The two wheeled Testarossa (Deceased)
Suzuki GSXR - Now stops on a sixpence; SBK3's Thumbs Up
www.bikepics.com/members/dibbster
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Mister James
I want to believe!



Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 20:37 - 28 Feb 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

sickpup wrote:
killa wrote:
Why don’t we just make the biggest battle ship ever so it holds the most guns?


American aircraft carriers even with there large escorts have been taken out in war games by the British using much smaller craft.

I heard from a mate who's ex-aussie navy that they have managed it as well.

Don't put all your eggs in one basket.


A little one-sided - most western navies will have stories of defeating an american carrier group on exercise. Naturally, those same navies keep quiet about the dozens of times they've been annihilated by Yankee CBGs on similar maneuvres. I've vectored an RN sub onto an american taskforce before, resulting in a dead cruiser and a mission-kill on the carrier. Equally, I've stood by and watched US forces take Nato OPFORs apart piece by piece.

It's a little glib to bring up eggs and baskets.

We have less eggs in less baskets than them - I'd rather have their fleet than ours!
____________________
>Soultrader Mister James, I bet you are a copper
>Bazza Wow. Eyes like a shithouse rat, you...
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

killa
Won't Shut Up



Joined: 18 Oct 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 10:07 - 01 Mar 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

No ones told me if the type 45’s got an oven yet…. Rolling Eyes

I don’t think you’ve thought about how big I’m thinking the battleship would be, he he.
____________________
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult.
Bike:- Yamaha TRX850 | Killas Biking History | Killas Gaming History | Killas autmotive history
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website You must be logged in to rate posts

Mister James
I want to believe!



Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 10:53 - 01 Mar 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

killa wrote:
No ones told me if the type 45’s got an oven yet…. Rolling Eyes
.


Perhaps everyone is giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming that even you couldn't be so dumb as to not realise that all the warships in the RN have ovens?
____________________
>Soultrader Mister James, I bet you are a copper
>Bazza Wow. Eyes like a shithouse rat, you...
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

killa
Won't Shut Up



Joined: 18 Oct 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 11:06 - 01 Mar 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laughing Thumbs Up

Sorry James, just messing....
____________________
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult.
Bike:- Yamaha TRX850 | Killas Biking History | Killas Gaming History | Killas autmotive history
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website You must be logged in to rate posts

zaknafien




Joined: 25 Mar 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 18:04 - 01 Mar 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

killa wrote:
I don’t think you’ve thought about how big I’m thinking the battleship would be, he he.


Just makes it easier to kill. Thumbs Up
____________________
02 Firestorm.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Mister James
I want to believe!



Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 23:25 - 01 Mar 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quite - ask the Yamato!

Russian tactics for dealing with the American CBGs involved swarm tactics with massive anti-ship missiles. All those big steel cans floating on the water were lovely targets.

Failing that, a tactical nuke would do the trick quite nicely.
____________________
>Soultrader Mister James, I bet you are a copper
>Bazza Wow. Eyes like a shithouse rat, you...
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

sickpup
Old Timer



Joined: 21 Apr 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 11:18 - 03 Mar 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mister James wrote:


A little one-sided - most western navies will have stories of defeating an american carrier group on exercise. Naturally, those same navies keep quiet about the dozens of times they've been annihilated by Yankee CBGs on similar maneuvres. I've vectored an RN sub onto an american taskforce before, resulting in a dead cruiser and a mission-kill on the carrier. Equally, I've stood by and watched US forces take Nato OPFORs apart piece by piece.

We have less eggs in less baskets than them - I'd rather have their fleet than ours!


Yes I agree it would be nice to have huge fleets. My point was it's no use having one huge ship as it will get taken out by something smaller and cheaper.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Mister James
I want to believe!



Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 17:21 - 03 Mar 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

And my point was that something smaller and cheaper is just as easily taken out, without having been as much use in the first place.

Very few navies in the world actually have the technology and expertise to sneak through a US CVN's escort screen and cripple or sink it, and most of those are western navies unlikely to ever go into action against the Yanks. (until we all get taken over by Sharia governments!)

Most wargames were we've embarassed the Yanks have actually been designed to handicap the American forces to even the playing field, and fall in line with 'Train Hard, Fight Easy' doctrine.
____________________
>Soultrader Mister James, I bet you are a copper
>Bazza Wow. Eyes like a shithouse rat, you...
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Lost_Prophet
Borekit Bruiser



Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 14:07 - 10 Mar 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

in terms of advancement are the 45's a giant leap ahead of the 42's, and how long will the technology be 'in-date' for, if something like that can be measured,

and yes the americans have a bigger possibly better fleet than us, but the simple fact is that they have the man-power and money to build a fleet like that, where as we dont.

and if we did have a fleet equal to that of the americans, we would'nt have enough people to man every ship.

but are we going to have a war with america any time soon?

and so there forces as a whole are bigger, but ours tend to be better trained
____________________
Its not how fast you ride, its how you ride fast
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Mister James
I want to believe!



Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 18:33 - 10 Mar 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's an oft-repeated mantra, and it's true in many cases. What people forget to factor in is that a large amount of that training is negated by the fact we are forced to make do with technologically inferior hardware.

While individual units often perform comparably (or better) to superior american units, overall their firepower, intel capability and taskforce flexibility are all far beyond our own.

That not only has an impact on the unlikely situation of fighting them, it means our abilities to stage unilateral operations are reduced.

When the Harrier is pensioned off in the near future, we'll have no organic airsupport for the fleet - thus being reliant on the Yanks or Frogs for CAP cover.
____________________
>Soultrader Mister James, I bet you are a copper
>Bazza Wow. Eyes like a shithouse rat, you...
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Lost_Prophet
Borekit Bruiser



Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 01:22 - 11 Mar 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

but we're still better trained Wink

the thing we are forced to make do becasue this country does'nt produce as much 'disposable income' to keep up to date, or ahead of date.

its just not high enough on the country's list of things to do, to make us more technicogically (SP*) advanced, for the means of fighting, defending and peacekeeping
____________________
Its not how fast you ride, its how you ride fast
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Mister James
I want to believe!



Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 10:11 - 11 Mar 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

You misunderstand me. I'm quite aware of the disparity in UK/US defence budgets, my point is that it's all very well harping on about being better trained, but one has to remember a lot of that superior training and know-how is negated making up for our relatively crummy gear.
____________________
>Soultrader Mister James, I bet you are a copper
>Bazza Wow. Eyes like a shithouse rat, you...
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Lost_Prophet
Borekit Bruiser



Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 16:09 - 11 Mar 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

agreed

sucks does'nt it
____________________
Its not how fast you ride, its how you ride fast
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Darkside
Trackday Trickster



Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 09:26 - 07 Apr 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mister James wrote:
When the Harrier is pensioned off in the near future, we'll have no organic airsupport for the fleet - thus being reliant on the Yanks or Frogs for CAP cover.


Check out the Joint Strike Fighter, we have ordered 150 currently, wont be ready till 2009 mind you, an extremely adequate harrier replacement. and it does the vertical takeoff and landing thing too!
____________________
https://www.facebook.com/p/Francis-Lloyd_Cummings/630915297

https://www.r1-superbike.com
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Mister James
I want to believe!



Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 16:23 - 07 Apr 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darkside wrote:

Check out the Joint Strike Fighter, we have ordered 150 currently, wont be ready till 2009 mind you, an extremely adequate harrier replacement. and it does the vertical takeoff and landing thing too!


Well aware of it's existence, we were fine-tuning our desired specs when I was still in, several years ago.

The simple fact is, they've yet to turn out a work pre-production model - so it's nowhere near being able to enter squadron service for the forseeable future. Last I heard, they were struggling to get the weight down so that the VTOL version could actually VTOL! It would also be worth considering the possibility that we might withdraw from the contract because the Yanks are refusing to pass us the code that governs the avionics systems.

The FA2s are being stood down now - leaving us with nothing but ground attack RAF planes with short ranged AIM9s - utterly inadequate for any kind of structured air defence.

JSF will be a nice plane - assuming they ever actually build it.
____________________
>Soultrader Mister James, I bet you are a copper
>Bazza Wow. Eyes like a shithouse rat, you...
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

WishayKillie
World Chat Champion



Joined: 15 Mar 2005
Karma :

PostPosted: 07:32 - 08 Apr 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Yanks have aperently been having a lot of problems with the JSF. They had big problems with the VTOL and had to go to Rolls-Royce for an answer and they gave them the lift fan installed just behind the pilot and now the yanks are giving the engine contract to GE and not the shared Pratt & Whitney, RR contract. Cunts!
____________________
Current; 10' Aprilia Dorsoduro 750.
Previous; 05 Triumph Daytona 600, 08' Ducati 1098s.
"Needs a check-up, fae the neck up!"
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

WildGoose
White Van Man



Joined: 21 Mar 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 15:08 - 08 Apr 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

JSF will be a nice plane - assuming they ever actually build it.


i'd be surprised, the RAF might get the standard take off and landing variant (A) at some point in the future, but there are a million things wrong with the STOVL (B) which is the one we want for our new carriers

biggest problem being the americans, its a ridiculous situation for them not to release what we need, and they need to reach a compromise otherwise it will never go ahead

the french are ordering identical carriers to us and are flying Dassault Rafale from them, looks like the simplest option for us would be to adopt this instead and just fit catapults and arrestor gear, dont see it going down very well with anyone though, that the british would be flying french built aircraft

time will tell, but the JSF will be a lot later than 2009, i'd be surprised to see it much before 2015 if not 2018
____________________
So in other words, he stopped you for being flagrantly in posession of a motorcycle in direct contravention of the Hippies, Darkies and People Whose Face I Don't Like The Look of (Police Powers) Act. 1976
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

WildGoose
White Van Man



Joined: 21 Mar 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 15:12 - 08 Apr 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

this is interesting

https://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/DefencePolicyAndBusiness/LordDraysonJsfOperationalSovereigntyIsVitalForUkDefenceInterests.htm

basically, if they dont give us access to what they want, they can shove it, written in far nicer terms Razz
____________________
So in other words, he stopped you for being flagrantly in posession of a motorcycle in direct contravention of the Hippies, Darkies and People Whose Face I Don't Like The Look of (Police Powers) Act. 1976
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Mister James
I want to believe!



Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 20:36 - 08 Apr 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aye on all counts Goose, especially your predicted squadron service date for the JSF - you only have to look to the Typhoon program to see that we've no hope of it sticking to schedule.

The Drayson report was interesting, and spot on. I believe that when Condi was asked about it, she hinted that a deal would be struck, so hopefully that will be soon. I don't think the US can afford to constantly keep slapping us in the face, considering the military and diplomatic over-stretch they are facing.

If they have security concerns, I would suggest it's far more likely a chinese spy would be able to get access to the JSF data at their end, than we would be to allow it to escape into the public domain.
____________________
>Soultrader Mister James, I bet you are a copper
>Bazza Wow. Eyes like a shithouse rat, you...
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Scorpius
Scooby Slapper



Joined: 19 Oct 2005
Karma :

PostPosted: 21:25 - 08 Apr 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agreed. There shouldn't even be any need for political pressure considering the military support they have been recieving over the last few years. They must by now be learning that their power does indeed have limits.

ps Goose or James either of you guys have any links to detailed info on the JSF?
____________________
Cagiva Mito 125 (sold)
Honda CBR400RR NC23 (sold)
Currently riding: Honda CBR600F
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

WildGoose
White Van Man



Joined: 21 Mar 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 22:06 - 08 Apr 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-35.htm

https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/jsf/

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-35.htm

that should keep you satisfied, but cant guarantee the accuracy of any of it
____________________
So in other words, he stopped you for being flagrantly in posession of a motorcycle in direct contravention of the Hippies, Darkies and People Whose Face I Don't Like The Look of (Police Powers) Act. 1976
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

zaknafien




Joined: 25 Mar 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 22:07 - 08 Apr 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.jsf.mil/
https://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/jsf.htm
https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/jsf/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-35_Joint_Strike_Fighter
____________________
02 Firestorm.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

WildGoose
White Van Man



Joined: 21 Mar 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 22:10 - 08 Apr 2006    Post subject: Reply with quote

arf Wink
____________________
So in other words, he stopped you for being flagrantly in posession of a motorcycle in direct contravention of the Hippies, Darkies and People Whose Face I Don't Like The Look of (Police Powers) Act. 1976
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts
Old Thread Alert!

The last post was made 18 years, 65 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful?
  Display posts from previous:   
This page may contain affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that third-party cookies will be set.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bike Chat Forums Index -> Politics & Current Affairs All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
 

Debug Mode: ON - Server: birks (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.10 Sec - Server Load: 0.41 - MySQL Queries: 13 - Page Size: 136.52 Kb