thaibeachlovers Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 1 hour ago, joeyg said: I think "everything " can be done with armed drones and satellite weaponry. No boots on the ground please. just press buttons. No sane person wants that. It leads to catastrophic civilian deaths as we see with the drone strikes already happening. Having a bunch of kids that think they are playing video games is no way to fight war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punchjudy Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said: No sane person wants that. It leads to catastrophic civilian deaths as we see with the drone strikes already happening. Having a bunch of kids that think they are playing video games is no way to fight war. Guess the same was said of firearms, bows and spears at the time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyg Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said: No sane person wants that. It leads to catastrophic civilian deaths as we see with the drone strikes already happening. Having a bunch of kids that think they are playing video games is no way to fight war. Stalin killed aprx. 25 million with "boots on the ground" Mao 45 to 80 million depending on the source. I'm sure you've got a much better plan. As far as your "psych eval" "Thank You!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyg Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 On 12/22/2017 at 1:47 PM, observer90210 said: Was it built by the same contractor as the leaky Phuket Airport ?!! Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenny2017 Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 Can't they sell it to Prayut? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auriane Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 What should not be understood as nonsense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExpatOilWorker Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 Meanwhile... https://www.wsj.com/articles/german-engineering-yields-new-warship-that-isnt-fit-for-sea-1515753000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyg Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 36 minutes ago, ExpatOilWorker said: Meanwhile... https://www.wsj.com/articles/german-engineering-yields-new-warship-that-isnt-fit-for-sea-1515753000 i saw that makes ya wonder. Also these new Chinese Aircraft carriers, with the "ski jump" launch deck are a very bad design. think the Brits are making the same design now. Unbelievable... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinneil Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 4 minutes ago, joeyg said: i saw that makes ya wonder. Also these new Chinese Aircraft carriers, with the "ski jump" launch deck are a very bad design. think the Brits are making the same design now. Unbelievable... Keep up please, you think the British are making the same design now. The British started this design for the Harrier, when they built Invincible/ Illustrious/ Ark Royal, all off which have been decommisioned. Also HMS hermes which was sold to India after the Falklands war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evadgib Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 (edited) 17 minutes ago, colinneil said: Keep up please, you think the British are making the same design now. The British started this design for the Harrier, when they built Invincible/ Illustrious/ Ark Royal, all off which have been decommisioned. Also HMS hermes which was sold to India after the Falklands war. If there weren't so many threads containing the words Trump; Brexit or Referendum in the title this newsworthy obituary might have reached the board... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/obituaries/2018/01/14/surgeon-captain-rick-jolly-naval-surgeon-falklands-war-obituary/ Edited January 15, 2018 by evadgib Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaibeachlovers Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 6 hours ago, colinneil said: Keep up please, you think the British are making the same design now. The British started this design for the Harrier, when they built Invincible/ Illustrious/ Ark Royal, all off which have been decommisioned. Also HMS hermes which was sold to India after the Falklands war. LOL, the British are learning that they are being run by a bunch of incompetents, that a/ didn't build replacement ACCs BEFORE the other ones were retired, b/ designed a carrier that needs the American piece of junk F 35, as Britain apparently no longer makes warplanes, c/ think 2 expensive targets are a "good idea". How the mighty have fallen, and all in my lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyg Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 20 hours ago, colinneil said: Keep up please, you think the British are making the same design now. The British started this design for the Harrier, when they built Invincible/ Illustrious/ Ark Royal, all off which have been decommisioned. Also HMS hermes which was sold to India after the Falklands war. keep up please. Said "I think" the Brits were making this bad design. Means I'm not sure. You are a treasure trove of information though. i was stationed on a US carrier for many years... http://strikefighterconsultinginc.com/blog/uncategorized/the-problem-with-ski-jump-aircraft-carriers/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyg Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 2 minutes ago, joeyg said: keep up please. Said "I think" the Brits were making this bad design. Means I'm not sure. You are a treasure trove of information though. i was stationed on a US carrier for many years... http://strikefighterconsultinginc.com/blog/uncategorized/the-problem-with-ski-jump-aircraft-carriers/ Knowing your confused is half the problem. Good job!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evadgib Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 The Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson experienced the world-class technology of the new F-35 today in a Lockheed Martin F-35 simulator in London. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-stealth-fighter-jet-takes-off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaibeachlovers Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 2 hours ago, evadgib said: The Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson experienced the world-class technology of the new F-35 today in a Lockheed Martin F-35 simulator in London. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-stealth-fighter-jet-takes-off So a simulator works. WOW, we are saved ( sarcasm alert ). 55555555555555555555 There are probably millions of lines of computer code needed to fly that plane. Even one line wrong could be catastrophic. The whole thing, IMO, is a huge, expensive con, and a failure waiting to happen. I hope it's all protected from an EMP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaibeachlovers Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 2 hours ago, evadgib said: The Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson experienced the world-class technology of the new F-35 today in a Lockheed Martin F-35 simulator in London. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-stealth-fighter-jet-takes-off During his visit to the cockpit demonstrator, the Defence Secretary also met with representatives from some of the 500 UK companies who are in the F-35 supply chain. UK industry will provide approximately 15% of each F-35 to be built and, with more than 3,000 aircraft projected, the programme will support 20,000 UK jobs over the 30 year production phase. Once upon a time Britain had the engineering talent and expertise to make the best warplanes in the sky. WTH happened? How about Britain makes it's own warplanes, or is that impossible because Britain doesn't have anyone that can actually make anything anymore? They could even reopen the Harrier production lines and update the technology, but even that is apparently beyond their capabilities. Seems the UK government really is a waste of space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evadgib Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said: Seems the UK government really is a waste of space. It'll be "I'm Brian and so is my wife" if ever they're needed Edited January 18, 2018 by evadgib Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyg Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 On 1/18/2018 at 10:59 AM, evadgib said: The Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson experienced the world-class technology of the new F-35 today in a Lockheed Martin F-35 simulator in London. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-stealth-fighter-jet-takes-off OK I'll bite. https://www.quora.com/Military-Why-dont-US-Aircraft-Carriers-have-ski-jumps https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/32828/what-is-the-benefit-of-a-curved-up-flight-deck I'll raise ya 2... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattd Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 (edited) 22 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said: During his visit to the cockpit demonstrator, the Defence Secretary also met with representatives from some of the 500 UK companies who are in the F-35 supply chain. UK industry will provide approximately 15% of each F-35 to be built and, with more than 3,000 aircraft projected, the programme will support 20,000 UK jobs over the 30 year production phase. Once upon a time Britain had the engineering talent and expertise to make the best warplanes in the sky. WTH happened? How about Britain makes it's own warplanes, or is that impossible because Britain doesn't have anyone that can actually make anything anymore? They could even reopen the Harrier production lines and update the technology, but even that is apparently beyond their capabilities. Seems the UK government really is a waste of space. It is nothing to do with the availability of the expertise in the UK, I would imagine that the only reason the UK doesn't is down to cost, the cost of developing and then actually building a suitable aircraft would be enormous, especially given the relatively small amount of planes that the UK actually need, it would simply make no sense whatsoever, far better to purchase a plane that has been developed and is being produced and at the same time gain employment / revenue from it. As it happens, my BIL is heavily involved with the F35 via BAE and heads up quite a large team based in Preston. Regarding the leak from the shaft, this, as has been mentioned, is really not uncommon, building something as complex as an aircraft carrier is bound to involve some niggles that need sorting, hence the sea trials and the length of time needed to commission. Exactly why the F35 deliveries lag are so so far behind the carrier itself is a bit of mystery to me, were they just ordered too late, a design change delay or is it just they cannot be produced fast enough? Possibly one of the biggest mistakes made with these two carriers is the power plant, ideally this should have been nuclear, again it probably came down to cost, lets hope that they have learnt from the type 45 design mistakes and resolved the cooling issues in warmer waters, as this is likely where they will be most operational. The other mistake is the defense systems deployed, these are out of date and not really suitable for a large carrier, especially given the lack of available suitable support ships to form a viable carrier group. Edited January 19, 2018 by Mattd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaibeachlovers Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 26 minutes ago, Mattd said: It is nothing to do with the availability of the expertise in the UK, I would imagine that the only reason the UK doesn't is down to cost, the cost of developing and then actually building a suitable aircraft would be enormous, especially given the relatively small amount of planes that the UK actually need, it would simply make no sense whatsoever, far better to purchase a plane that has been developed and is being produced and at the same time gain employment / revenue from it. As it happens, my BIL is heavily involved with the F35 via BAE and heads up quite a large team based in Preston. Regarding the leak from the shaft, this, as has been mentioned, is really not uncommon, building something as complex as an aircraft carrier is bound to involve some niggles that need sorting, hence the sea trials and the length of time needed to commission. Exactly why the F35 deliveries lag are so so far behind the carrier itself is a bit of mystery to me, were they just ordered too late, a design change delay or is it just they cannot be produced fast enough? Possibly one of the biggest mistakes made with these two carriers is the power plant, ideally this should have been nuclear, again it probably came down to cost, lets hope that they have learnt from the type 45 design mistakes and resolved the cooling issues in warmer waters, as this is likely where they will be most operational. The other mistake is the defense systems deployed, these are out of date and not really suitable for a large carrier, especially given the lack of available suitable support ships to form a viable carrier group. Well done, you just supported my contention that Britain is a "has been" nation that can't afford to do much at all, it seems. Can't even run a huge international construction company without a corrupt management stuffing it up. I guess the world we live in is lucky that we had a Britain in WW2 that could build the best planes in the world and people like R.J.Mitchell to design them, but apparently it's all just too expensive now to defend yourself. It might even be excusable if the F35 wasn't a flying turkey. Back a ways, my point was that for the money spent to build 2 non nuclear powered floating targets, Britain could build something themselves that actually worked in the present world environment. Unfortunately, the good 'ol planners are still planning for the last war ( WW2 ) and have lost the plot. By wasting all that money, the rest of the navy is in a sad way and they can't improve conditions to get people to actually want to sign on to a life on the ocean wave. The real problem, as I see it, is what exactly the government wants to do with these two white elephants, other than delivering supplies to countries after natural disasters and picking up lots more refugees in the Med? The US uses carriers to project power, but the UK has no "power" to project. The Russians use carriers as fleet support, but Britain has no "fleet" left to support. That whirring sound you can hear is Churchill spinning in his grave, and Monty is weeping in his. Perhaps they can be moored in the Thames alongside the Belfast and earn some money as a tourist attraction with guided tours through the unoccupied hangers because the planes supposed to use them are a bad joke. Of course they could put in some old Harriers as an example of a plane that actually worked. Just as well Britain has Polaris, or they would be as undefended as Monaco. I don't know if post WW2 governments have deliberately set out to destroy the military, but they sure did a great job so far. Since they ran away from a few terrorists in Palestine, and rolled over when the US said they shouldn't take back the Suez, it's been a long, slow, sad decline. I guess I'm lucky I won't be around when the next superpower takes over, as it's not going to be very good for us westerners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattd Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said: Just as well Britain has Polaris, or they would be as undefended as Monaco. You are a little out of date, that went ages ago! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaibeachlovers Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Mattd said: You are a little out of date, that went ages ago! Quite right there. It's Trident now, of course. You'll have to excuse an old mind that no longer remembers stuff as well as it used to. I did know that, of course, but I just didn't remember that I knew it at the time I was writing. Bit like most of my life that is fading away. I know I'm somewhat hard on the present state of the British military, but I grew up in a world saved ( in part ) from tyranny by the vast and powerful British military machine, and I admired the vast and powerful army on the Rhine. I was fortunate that I was able to serve alongside British soldiers in ANZUK, and lamented that they were withdrawn ( presumably to save money ). My time on Singapore was wonderful, but only because of the British military organisation, which vanished when they left. Whatever can be said about the British military in the 70s, they really knew how to support the troops in Singapore. Job well done. It makes me sadder than I could ever express, to see how it has declined in my lifetime. Edited January 19, 2018 by thaibeachlovers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evadgib Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 Failure to deliver the UK's aircraft carrier and jet programme on budget will put other defence projects at risk, ministers have been warned. A Public Accounts Committee report said defence budgets are "very strained". The programme - two aircraft carriers, F-35 Lightning II jets and a new radar system - leaves the Ministry of Defence "financially exposed," MPs said. The MoD said that it was committed to keeping costs down. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42734191 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaibeachlovers Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 42 minutes ago, evadgib said: Failure to deliver the UK's aircraft carrier and jet programme on budget will put other defence projects at risk, ministers have been warned. A Public Accounts Committee report said defence budgets are "very strained". The programme - two aircraft carriers, F-35 Lightning II jets and a new radar system - leaves the Ministry of Defence "financially exposed," MPs said. The MoD said that it was committed to keeping costs down. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42734191 Anyone that thinks we need to defend ourselves must be seriously worried by the MoD that is obviously incompetent, though also obviously hamstrung by government budget cuts. From the link: In 2016, the government pledged to spend £178bn on new military equipment over the next 10 years. But that is on the assumption it can also find £7.3bn of efficiency savings - on top of £7.1bn previously announced - by selling off property and other efficiencies. .... The Commons Defence Select Committee says the department will struggle to find the £7.3bn in savings required to pay for the new hardware. It said the MoD had proved "incapable" of making such savings in the past. "This will inevitably lead either to a reduction in the numbers of ships, aircraft and vehicles or to even greater delays in their acquisition," he added. The committee's chairwoman Meg Hillier said keeping the project, known as Carrier Strike, on budget will be "no easy task" due to "uncertainty over some costs and the potentially negative impact of foreign exchange rates". Which is why it's not a good idea to have to buy everything from another country. They are even buying Boeing planes, instead of Airbus, even if they had to modify them themselves. The MoD said that it was committed to keeping costs down. What else would one expect from a bunch of bureaucrats, none of which will have to face an enemy? I doubt they actually know what that means. Is it that they'll only issue half the number of bullets? the carriers would have an expected service life of up to 50 years and be used for both humanitarian relief So I got it right about them going to use the ships for delivering supplies for aid. However, that would depend on whether they can afford to put fuel in them. Perhaps if the MoD had thought about it, they wouldn't have bought 2 big expensive targets and bought something actually useful, like Marine helicopter ships. NB Marine ships can also deliver aid to post natural disaster countries, and don't need piece of junk F35s to function. I'm not sure, but they might even be able to carry Harriers ( which actually work, and don't cost the earth ). It's all very reminiscent of another country we know of that bought an ACC which doesn't have any planes on it or actually sail anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyg Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 15 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said: Anyone that thinks we need to defend ourselves must be seriously worried by the MoD that is obviously incompetent, though also obviously hamstrung by government budget cuts. From the link: In 2016, the government pledged to spend £178bn on new military equipment over the next 10 years. But that is on the assumption it can also find £7.3bn of efficiency savings - on top of £7.1bn previously announced - by selling off property and other efficiencies. .... The Commons Defence Select Committee says the department will struggle to find the £7.3bn in savings required to pay for the new hardware. It said the MoD had proved "incapable" of making such savings in the past. "This will inevitably lead either to a reduction in the numbers of ships, aircraft and vehicles or to even greater delays in their acquisition," he added. The committee's chairwoman Meg Hillier said keeping the project, known as Carrier Strike, on budget will be "no easy task" due to "uncertainty over some costs and the potentially negative impact of foreign exchange rates". Which is why it's not a good idea to have to buy everything from another country. They are even buying Boeing planes, instead of Airbus, even if they had to modify them themselves. The MoD said that it was committed to keeping costs down. What else would one expect from a bunch of bureaucrats, none of which will have to face an enemy? I doubt they actually know what that means. Is it that they'll only issue half the number of bullets? the carriers would have an expected service life of up to 50 years and be used for both humanitarian relief So I got it right about them going to use the ships for delivering supplies for aid. However, that would depend on whether they can afford to put fuel in them. Perhaps if the MoD had thought about it, they wouldn't have bought 2 big expensive targets and bought something actually useful, like Marine helicopter ships. NB Marine ships can also deliver aid to post natural disaster countries, and don't need piece of junk F35s to function. I'm not sure, but they might even be able to carry Harriers ( which actually work, and don't cost the earth ). It's all very reminiscent of another country we know of that bought an ACC which doesn't have any planes on it or actually sail anywhere. Don't worry man. Anything comes up we Yanks will back ya up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaibeachlovers Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 1 minute ago, joeyg said: Don't worry man. Anything comes up we Yanks will back ya up! I hope so. You need to look after Bush's poodle! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyg Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said: I hope so. You need to look after Bush's poodle! Excellent!!! No worries. We bomb the s$$t out of everybody. It's our specialty!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaibeachlovers Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, joeyg said: Excellent!!! No worries. We bomb the s$$t out of everybody. It's our specialty!!! Great movie, from a day when movies were not just about big explosions, and not a single female kickass superheroine in it. The shots of the B52s in flight were amazing. Even more amazing to think that they are still in use. Not the same ones, obviously. BTW, I grew up in an era that they might actually have used nukes in a real nuke war, unlike the rather overblown NoKo fussburger going on now. I don't remember anyone needing psychiatric attention to deal with the "stress" of it. Edited January 19, 2018 by thaibeachlovers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyg Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 Just now, thaibeachlovers said: Great movie, from a day when movies were not just about big explosions, and not a single female kickass superheroine in it. The shots of the B52s in flight were amazing. Even more amazing to think that they are still in use. Not the same ones, obviously. Yep!!! How many nukes would you like? We do discount on volume... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now