Eurofighter

Soldato
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
5,000
Stelly said:
thing that really annoys me about the carriers that they are not carrying on the name Ark Royal :( thats really unfortunate

Stelly

I agree. Should have been Ark Royal and Indomitable, Implacable or Indefatigable for the second. Or another Glorious. Traditional carrier names !

I think we ended up with the names we are going to get because they were the names of the last "proper" carriers that got cancelled at the design stage in the 1960's. Which for my mind sets a bad precedent since won't quite believe these ones are going to happen until they are both commissioned. They just seem like a tax cut funding budget cut waiting to happen.
 
Don
Joined
5 Oct 2005
Posts
11,154
Location
Liverpool
Stolly said:
I agree. Should have been Ark Royal and Indomitable, Implacable or Indefatigable for the second. Or another Glorious. Traditional carrier names !

I think we ended up with the names we are going to get because they were the names of the last "proper" carriers that got cancelled at the design stage in the 1960's. Which for my mind sets a bad precedent since won't quite believe these ones are going to happen until they are both commissioned. They just seem like a tax cut funding budget cut waiting to happen.

I have always thought that this was a pleeeease dont kick up a fuss admirals about us cutting the fleet down and we will give you two knew BIG carriers?

Stelly
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
5,000
Stelly said:
I have always thought that this was a pleeeease dont kick up a fuss admirals about us cutting the fleet down and we will give you two knew BIG carriers?

Stelly

They cut the frigates, and the SHAR, and i don't think a keel has been laid yet.

If Gordon Brown does cut them in 2008, what exactly are the admirals going to do about it ? They've already given up everything they were asked for.

Whats the AEW platform going to be anyway ? Radar pickets didn't work out too well in 1982, for the pickets at least, and the sea kings won't be around for much longer.

I think you are right, these were a carrot, and the cynic inside me says that its just going to be taken away when its not needed anymore.
 
Don
Joined
5 Oct 2005
Posts
11,154
Location
Liverpool
Stolly said:
They cut the frigates, and the SHAR, and i don't think a keel has been laid yet.

If Gordon Brown does cut them in 2008, what exactly are the admirals going to do about it ? They've already given up everything they were asked for.

Whats the AEW platform going to be anyway ? Radar pickets didn't work out too well in 1982, for the pickets at least, and the sea kings won't be around for much longer.

I think you are right, these were a carrot, and the cynic inside me says that its just going to be taken away when its not needed anymore.

I get your point, BUT I dont think that these will be taken away since, well, with the french interested, millions spent on R&D and last time that Ark Royal was dismantled there was a public outcry and thats why there is an Ark Royal now... as a tribute to the amazing ship itself :)

I guess I'm not that much of a cynic... and I dont think we can do without carriers... our Navy is on verge of being a joke

Stelly
 
Associate
Joined
18 May 2006
Posts
474
Location
Somewhere South
For a country that used to pride itself on its maritime power we have become a complete joke, even the damned French however rubbish their carrier may be have a more able carrier fleet than we did it was a joke at the southampton trafalgar celebration when the french who were were celebrating being detroyed rolled up with a carrier that easily dwarfed anything that we had
 
Don
Joined
5 Oct 2005
Posts
11,154
Location
Liverpool
lucifersam said:
For a country that used to pride itself on its maritime power we have become a complete joke, even the damned French however rubbish their carrier may be have a more able carrier fleet than we did it was a joke at the southampton trafalgar celebration when the french who were were celebrating being detroyed rolled up with a carrier that easily dwarfed anything that we had

Did you see the paddles coming out the side as they rowed it along? :)

French dont have an NHS to fund :(

I cant wait to get these new carriers... they will be grrrreat ;)

Stelly
 
Associate
Joined
18 May 2006
Posts
474
Location
Somewhere South
Stelly said:
Did you see the paddles coming out the side as they rowed it along? :)

French dont have an NHS to fund :(

I cant wait to get these new carriers... they will be grrrreat ;)

Stelly
If we spend the NHS money on the navy we could probably have something nearly the size of quarter of the US carrier fleets!
 
Associate
Joined
13 Mar 2003
Posts
1,331
Location
location,location
Stelly said:
French dont have an NHS to fund :(

Stelly

The French spend a lot more on their health system than we do. Hence they have much better healthcare and higher taxes :D

Re the RN etc. There was a defense review a few years ago that stated that the UK would not launch any major military action on our own again but only as part of a US led coalition. Hence all our military has really been downgraded to the status of additional forces for the US government.
 
Don
Joined
5 Oct 2005
Posts
11,154
Location
Liverpool
freebooter said:
The French spend a lot more on their health system than we do. Hence they have much better healthcare and higher taxes :D

Re the RN etc. There was a defense review a few years ago that stated that the UK would not launch any major military action on our own again but only as part of a US led coalition. Hence all our military has really been downgraded to the status of additional forces for the US government.

I dont believe that for one second... I want quotes mister :p

talk about political suicide... thats sh** mate

stelly
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
12,354
freebooter said:
The French spend a lot more on their health system than we do. Hence they have much better healthcare and higher taxes :D

Re the RN etc. There was a defense review a few years ago that stated that the UK would not launch any major military action on our own again but only as part of a US led coalition. Hence all our military has really been downgraded to the status of additional forces for the US government.

That's a legacy from the Cold War, during which different NATO allies were assigned specific roles. Britain was supposed to be part of the sub-hunting fleet (along with most other European Navies) whilst the US claimed the assault role for themselves.
 
Back
Top Bottom