Thanks Thanks:  46
Likes Likes:  91
Dislikes Dislikes:  9
Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910
Results 226 to 246 of 246
  1. #226
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by morpheus View Post
    Pity we dont have anything like this

    http://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/why-we-need-the-navy/

    in ireland
    Lead the way.

  2. #227
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,097
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    I didn't think they were ever going to be operational at the same time? Thought the plan was always 1 in and 1 out?
    Again depends on the state of readiness required, either will always have to be 'functional ' to a degree in the vent of either or both being required. This takes money and man power.

    Can't just turn the key in lock, walk away and expect it to work on demand. So its not going to be cheap or easy
    Just visiting

  3. #228
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    885
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Again depends on the state of readiness required, either will always have to be 'functional ' to a degree in the vent of either or both being required. This takes money and man power.

    Can't just turn the key in lock, walk away and expect it to work on demand. So its not going to be cheap or easy
    I get that, I thought the plan was for one to either be in refit or in extended readiness, with the budget and manpower issues the RN has (and will have with the SSBN's spinning up), is it realistic to think short of the operational one being heavily damaged that the "spare" would be brought online? Short of a significant change in spending I can't see both operational at the same time, wouldn't that mean issues for the air group, escorts, RFA if they were operating independently?

  4. #229
    Space Lord of Terra morpheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Metropolis
    Posts
    2,960
    Post Thanks / Like
    the 100Bn they wont be paying to EU could fund a decent fleet.
    "He is an enemy officer taken in battle and entitled to fair treatment."
    "No, sir. He's a sergeant, and they don't deserve no respect at all, sir. I should know. They're cunning and artful, if they're any good. I wouldn't mind if he was an officer, sir. But sergeants are clever."

  5. #230
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    885
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by morpheus View Post
    the 100Bn they wont be paying to EU could fund a decent fleet.
    Did it say that on the side of a bus?

  6. Thanks CTU thanked for this post
    Likes na grohmití, EUFighter liked this post
  7. #231
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,319
    Post Thanks / Like
    They are so short of manpower, especially technical manpower, for all of their fleet, especially submarines, that it's a wonder they have enough ships at seas at all. They have found out the hard way, that techs (regardless of rank) like to get paid well and treated well and techs can get that ashore for less graft, so why would they go to sea?

  8. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  9. #232
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    63
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    Did it say that on the side of a bus?
    Tangental, but sadly, the remoaners keep using every opportunity to shout "where has that £350 million you promised gone?", yet they hinder the speedy exit of the UK from the EU at every chance. Written on the side of a bus or not, while the UK is still in the EU, that money cannot appear.

  10. Dislikes The real Jack, Herald, na grohmití, Sparky42, CTU, mugs disliked this post
  11. #233
    Amadan Orion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Osborne's Very Very Broke Island
    Posts
    1,255
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by barrybadrinah View Post
    Tangental, but sadly, the remoaners keep using every opportunity to shout "where has that £350 million you promised gone?", yet they hinder the speedy exit of the UK from the EU at every chance. Written on the side of a bus or not, while the UK is still in the EU, that money cannot appear.
    Some comments on the financial side of Brexit ....

    I think you will find that actual UK to EU annual contribution is around £8.5bn per year (2016 figures) having taken into account the 'Thatcher' rebate and EU payments direct into the UK

    The quoted sum on the famous bus was based on an unsupported estimate of £55m per day

    Also the informative bus (rather unfairly I think) didn't tell us that this sum was a gross amount with no consideration of discounts/rebates and subsidies

    The hoped for UK financial benefits from leaving the EU were at the very least oversold

    https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-m...ee-55-million/

    Good to see that the spirit of Hartlepool Man is alive and well in one who is not from Hartlepool ...

    for another thread I think
    Last edited by Orion; 18th August 2017 at 19:33.

  12. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes CTU, The real Jack, DeV, Herald, na grohmití liked this post
  13. #234
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,097
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    I get that, I thought the plan was for one to either be in refit or in extended readiness, with the budget and manpower issues the RN has (and will have with the SSBN's spinning up), is it realistic to think short of the operational one being heavily damaged that the "spare" would be brought online? Short of a significant change in spending I can't see both operational at the same time, wouldn't that mean issues for the air group, escorts, RFA if they were operating independently?
    I think the classic examples is the RN and its LPDs of Old , Intrepid and Fearless,

    Build two, run the shite out of one and then reactivate the other when required, the down side the second unit doesn't get all the upgrades the primary one does and ends up all but useless in time of emergency.

    Intrepid ended up as a source of spares for Fearless and went to the scrapyard before Fearless, albeit months, but with far less miles on the clock so to speak.

    There isn't an ideal solution, unless you use both to full capacity unless in re fit, its a waste of money building them initially.

    Not saying anything about the capabilities or any other aspect of the builds, indeed fine looking vessels but just born of the wrong time.
    Just visiting

  14. #235
    Private 3*
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    29
    Post Thanks / Like
    I don't know, I have the feeling 1 or maybe even both carriers will have relatively short service lives with the RN...

  15. #236
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    342
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    I think the classic examples is the RN and its LPDs of Old , Intrepid and Fearless,

    Build two, run the shite out of one and then reactivate the other when required, the down side the second unit doesn't get all the upgrades the primary one does and ends up all but useless in time of emergency.

    Intrepid ended up as a source of spares for Fearless and went to the scrapyard before Fearless, albeit months, but with far less miles on the clock so to speak.

    There isn't an ideal solution, unless you use both to full capacity unless in re fit, its a waste of money building them initially.

    Not saying anything about the capabilities or any other aspect of the builds, indeed fine looking vessels but just born of the wrong time.
    They also did it with the last big flat-tops they had, Ark Royal and Eagle. Even there they used Eagle for spares even if a lot of people though she was the better ship!

  16. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  17. #237
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,097
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    They also did it with the last big flat-tops they had, Ark Royal and Eagle. Even there they used Eagle for spares even if a lot of people though she was the better ship!
    Problem with these was they were never designed for what they were actually tasked with doing. They were essentially to small and could never operate the array of aircraft they should have been able to operate. Again trying to do it on the cheap reduced the service lives.

    But again at least they are being built and the debate about should they be built is over. But just because you have two carriers doesn't make you a super power.

    Will the operational costs impact on future operations that they should have been capable of doing?
    Just visiting

  18. #238
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    885
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    They also did it with the last big flat-tops they had, Ark Royal and Eagle. Even there they used Eagle for spares even if a lot of people though she was the better ship!
    From what I've read there was plenty of stupid political decisions involved in that rather than just how the RN ran things, since Ark Royal was picked for Phantomisation Eagle's usefulness was just as spares, even though her boilers were in vastly better condition. I wonder what shape the RN would have been if the money for some of the more "questionable" refits went into the '52 carriers instead of using the two WW2 era hulls.

  19. Likes EUFighter liked this post
  20. #239
    Major General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,234
    Post Thanks / Like
    Who remembers CVA01?
    Well, there's good news and bad news. The bad news is that Neil will be taking over both branches, and some of you will lose your jobs. Those of you who are kept on will have to relocate to Swindon, if you wanna stay. I know, gutting. On a more positive note, the good news is, I've been promoted, so... every cloud. You're still thinking about the bad news aren't you?

  21. Likes EUFighter, hptmurphy liked this post
  22. #240
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    885
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmití View Post
    Who remembers CVA01?
    Seem to remember some within the admiralty were glad it got cancelled in the end given how compromised the design had become, that's why I was suggesting the '52 design instead.

  23. #241
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,097
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    From what I've read there was plenty of stupid political decisions involved in that rather than just how the RN ran things, since Ark Royal was picked for Phantomisation Eagle's usefulness was just as spares, even though her boilers were in vastly better condition. I wonder what shape the RN would have been if the money for some of the more "questionable" refits went into the '52 carriers instead of using the two WW2 era hulls.
    You need to read a book call Royal Navy Ship Development since 1945 to get a good idea why the RN took some of the steps it did.

    the biggy after WW2 was the lack of cheap steel and a huge fleet that in peace time it didn't need, a lot of it on its last legs and lastly Britain was bankrupt and all the current issues have their roots in these.
    The PoW class are an effort to put Carriers back where the natural progression should have been directly after WW2.

    Aeroplanes had evolved too fast for carriers to keep up so short term upgrades were sought. In the case of ArK Royal, it was never designed to operate the likes of phantoms and if it was even safe is open to discussion.

    All the supports were hybrids and the first true new design was the Leanders, problem being the RN became over dependant on them.

    Ship design was done by hand and various mathematical calculations and was an artform in itself just to get a conventional ship to model form so its not suprising how limited progress was.
    Enter the POW class which have all but set records from design to build to finish and thus actually frightening a lot of people.

    If they were operated by the US or even the French they could be a success, but penny pinching in the RN along with political interference will be the ruination of them service wise no matter how good they actually are.
    Just visiting

  24. #242
    MIA mugs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Lisburn
    Posts
    1,966
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by morpheus View Post
    the 100Bn they wont be paying to EU could fund a decent fleet.
    Ha! We'll end up paying it, one way or another. Don't listen to them!

    Even if the Ruskies were mooring next to Parliament on the Thames, the tories still wouldn't take defence seriously. Certainly not the Navy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocinante View Post
    I don't know, I have the feeling 1 or maybe even both carriers will have relatively short service lives with the RN...
    Razor blades, anyone?
    Last edited by mugs; 7th September 2017 at 01:51.
    Theirs not to make reply,
    Theirs not to reason why,
    Theirs but to do and die:
    Into the valley of Death
    Rode the six hundred.

    The Charge of the Light Brigade

  25. Likes DeV, Flamingo liked this post
  26. #243
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    885
    Post Thanks / Like
    Reports that more cuts are being looked at by the MOD due to further budget issues going forward:
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/w...cuts-q7nr0stsz

    Included is a slow down of purchases of the F 35 by 10 airframes, though the total amount remains the same

  27. #244
    CQMS spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,487
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    Reports that more cuts are being looked at by the MOD due to further budget issues going forward:
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/w...cuts-q7nr0stsz

    Included is a slow down of purchases of the F 35 by 10 airframes, though the total amount remains the same
    I thought Lynx was out of service and replaced by Wildcat...if not its out of service fairly imminently

    The two mine hunters...again I'm sure that's old news

    Every single government department in every government in the world is constanly reviewing its spending...nothing new here...they are still spending £175Bn on new ships and equipment though.
    'History is a vast early warning system'. Norman Cousins

  28. #245
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    885
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by spider View Post
    I thought Lynx was out of service and replaced by Wildcat...if not its out of service fairly imminently

    The two mine hunters...again I'm sure that's old news

    Every single government department in every government in the world is constanly reviewing its spending...nothing new here...they are still spending £175Bn on new ships and equipment though.
    22 were upgraded and were in service it seems, so over half are being dropped.

    The Minehunters, I don't think is old news, last time it was suggested I thought the US was fairly negative about it.

    As for your "nothing new" that seems disingenuous, the MOD clearly has another black hole in it's budget (in fact the RN admitted such when saying the first 26 was going to take 9 years from start to In service), added to the fact that they are now using hulls as "training ships", I'm sure the other services have equal issues (the cutting training for example). The cuts of 2010-2015 were meant to fill the hole, now it's reported there's another 20 billion issue...

  29. #246
    CQMS spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,487
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    22 were upgraded and were in service it seems, so over half are being dropped.

    The Minehunters, I don't think is old news, last time it was suggested I thought the US was fairly negative about it.

    As for your "nothing new" that seems disingenuous, the MOD clearly has another black hole in it's budget (in fact the RN admitted such when saying the first 26 was going to take 9 years from start to In service), added to the fact that they are now using hulls as "training ships", I'm sure the other services have equal issues (the cutting training for example). The cuts of 2010-2015 were meant to fill the hole, now it's reported there's another 20 billion issue...
    The Lynx mk9a were upengined airframes for operating in Afghanistan. They were a temporary requirement whilst Wildcat was brought into service. These aircraft were going anyway...as I said I thought they were withdrawn from service already.

    SDSR 2015 talkjs about Future Force 2025...the RN are only projected to have 12 minehunters under that model...that's probably where I'd got the impression that was old news. Expect another one to get chopped in the next few years.

    Disingenuous... really...don't think so...defence may well have to find savings so scrapping two thirty year old minehunters and some helicopters they were planning to take out of service doesn't bother me. If anything I'd be more concerned about the cuts in OTX's...if what I'm hearing is correct that will cut the number of Prairie Storm exercises in Canada...I've been on a PS and there's no way of replicating that level of training in the UK.

    Then again...I do recall not that many years ago that there was talkj about Canada closing all together...that didn't happen...and hopefully we'll be back to the full scope of exercisers out there in the following training year.
    'History is a vast early warning system'. Norman Cousins

  30. Thanks EUFighter thanked for this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •