CVF

Yeah your all right its a load of balls, just an excuse for Liam Fox to have a pop.

Lemme see – LM say they can deliver F-35B starting 2014. First CVF ready 2015 or 2016. IOC of F-35B 2017.

Where’s the clash? You deliver the first aircraft, start working up, carrier ready, work up on ship, achieve IOC.

2017 is a bit disappointing, but I don’t see the discrepancy between that, the start of deliveries, & the carrier schedule.

Don’t see the point of the Times having a defense editor as they seem as useless as any other jerno on defense:mad:

Lemme see – LM say they can deliver F-35B starting 2014. First CVF ready 2015 or 2016. IOC of F-35B 2017.

Where’s the clash? You deliver the first aircraft, start working up, carrier ready, work up on ship, achieve IOC.

2017 is a bit disappointing, but I don’t see the discrepancy between that, the start of deliveries, & the carrier schedule.

The “clash” his in the head of a generalistic journo from the Times that doesn´t understand the diferences between “IOC” and “first delivery”…

Cheers 🙂

Lemme see – LM say they can deliver F-35B starting 2014. First CVF ready 2015 or 2016. IOC of F-35B 2017.

Where’s the clash? You deliver the first aircraft, start working up, carrier ready, work up on ship, achieve IOC.

2017 is a bit disappointing, but I don’t see the discrepancy between that, the start of deliveries, & the carrier schedule.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5569934.ece

i had wondered why Britains deliveries are due to start after that of some level 2 or 3 partners (whose requirement lets face it isn’t as desperate as Britains)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5569934.ece

More stuff ordered today. Mainly fixtures and fittings, but they are now cutting and assembling steel at appledore 😎

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/90mContractsForWorkOnCarriers.htm

Every baby step counts………:D

great news and at long last took forever but now its started. Airwing next then logistic’s and escorts

More stuff ordered today. Mainly fixtures and fittings, but they are now cutting and assembling steel at appledore 😎

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/90mContractsForWorkOnCarriers.htm

Ok, guys, I don’t think any of us care who was at fault because by this stage your posturing has disrupted the conversation. If you carry on this way you’ll probably both end up on our ignore lists and no one will read your comments whether they’re good or not.

sealord, he says he has you on ignore so the only people who can read your comments are us and frankly we’re not interested in what you have to say about him.

Fedaykin, please don’t try to make us take sides. We’re not stupid and can decide who is being a prat or not by ourselves.

Now if you have some sort of a problem with each other I suggest you both resist the temptation to interact until such time as you can do so maturely.

Whilst I don’t want the thread locked Badgers comment is hardly going to help and I am fed up with Sealord lording over the forum.

I have asked you for facts for a proper discussion and all you have provided is insults and anger.

I made a fair post and he decided to miss read it and then poo poo my opinion.

If it was fair you would have been able to support it.

Excellent posts Badger 1968, Wanshan and Scooter, and you have my apologies for falling for Fedaykins trolling.:o

motion seconded.

Whilst I don’t want the thread locked Badgers comment is hardly going to help and I am fed up with Sealord lording over the forum.

I made a fair post and he decided to miss read it and then poo poo my opinion.

Nuff said.

Both of you just shut the ^%$ up before you get the thread locked.

motion seconded.

:(:(:(:(

Both of you just shut the ^%$ up before you get the thread locked.

You know as you are on my ignore list what ever petty rant you have just typed out is pointless….

Ho hum.

Maturity is clearly one of your qualities.:rolleyes:

You know as you are on my ignore list what ever petty rant you have just typed out is pointless….

Ho hum.

Well you clearly have a thin skin and frankly enjoy lording over this forum.

Quite the contrary.

I would argue that you without a reasonable argument resorted to insulting me!

I am sure you would.

When 1) I stated irritation with FRES…which YOU missread and jump in with a stupid comment. 2) Insult me when I express a personal opinion over the name of the carriers!

Then please provide some facts and I will happily discuss FRES with you.

Well I am tired of you Lording over this forum and am going to do what everyone else does and block your profile. IN the end you will have none to talk to and go away. I hope…:mad:

How very uncivilised. You certainly are easily angered, i hope you do not so over react in the real world?

I don’t make a point of insulting fellow forum members as you clearly do regularly with a general “I’m right everyone else is wrong attitude!”

But you do make a point of insulting other forum members.

Because you dont have one, hence your earlier switch to insults.

Really? How much and on what?

Not at all. All previous carriers were constructed when battleships remained in the RN inventory or procurement plans. Or were regarded as cruisers and thus not capital vessels. As you have already been told CVA-01 was to be called Queen Elizabeth II, if anything that makes the name even more appropriate.

We all not it is easy and that is why you decided to do it when you were called out.

Not to someone who so rapidly jumps to insults.

Hypocritical in the extreme.

Well you clearly have a thin skin and frankly enjoy lording over this forum.

I would argue that you without a reasonable argument resorted to insulting me!

When 1) I stated irritation with FRES…which YOU missread and jump in with a stupid comment. 2) Insult me when I express a personal opinion over the name of the carriers!

Well I am tired of you Lording over this forum and am going to do what everyone else does and block your profile. IN the end you will have none to talk to and go away. I hope…:mad:

I don’t make a point of insulting fellow forum members as you clearly do regularly with a general “I’m right everyone else is wrong attitude!”

Well I’m not going to bother with argument.

Because you dont have one, hence your earlier switch to insults.

Firstly plenty of money was spent on FRES as a program up to this point.

Really? How much and on what?

Secondly if no carrier was a capital vessel up to this point then there should be no issue with using a non monarch based name now.

Not at all. All previous carriers were constructed when battleships remained in the RN inventory or procurement plans. Or were regarded as cruisers and thus not capital vessels. As you have already been told CVA-01 was to be called Queen Elizabeth II, if anything that makes the name even more appropriate.

Finally its very easy to say another poster knows nothing and you certainly don’t like it when someone suggests it of you!

We all not it is easy and that is why you decided to do it when you were called out.

I certainly am well versed in RN history and I suggest that you show a greater degree of humility. YOU WERE very happy to call ME a PETTY REPUBLICAN for just EXPRESSING AN OPINION!

Not to someone who so rapidly jumps to insults.

All I can say is GROW UP!

Hypocritical in the extreme.