dark light

Super Nimrod

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 953 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: CVF #2065187
    Super Nimrod
    Participant

    Although in the article attached they claim otherwise, the maths is something like this.

    No future orders for super yachts = build CVF bits instead = save nearly 400 jobs = everyone is happy including govt

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/7677609.stm

    It would not surprise me at all if a few more military projects now found funding that were scratching round for money last year.

    in reply to: BBC Four – Aviation Season – Ideas Wanted #1172204
    Super Nimrod
    Participant

    A proper documentary about the post war military jets, when it seemed like new deisigns were coming out almost monthly. There must be loads of archive material out there

    in reply to: Royal Navy – Austerity version #2067506
    Super Nimrod
    Participant

    I would do some things around the edges. You may be aware but the UK keeps a register of militarily useful civilian ships on the British register that runs to quite a few vessels. I would advocate a ‘super list’ for ships that as part of their original design are fitted for but not with weapons and naval equipment that could be useful if the balloon went up.

    These would all be civilian vessels and vessels owned by the numerous government agencies that operate vessels up to 80 m or so. Typical features would be strengthened decks for gun mountings large flat decked sterns that could take a helicopter, tankers that are rigged for at sea ship to ship transfers of fuel (Some already have this but the Navy don’t say which ones). Typical vessels that might qualify are oil field service vessels, large trawlers, small offshore RoRo ferries like Calmac operate in Scotland. This lot wouldn’t be perfect but it would at least mean that there might be something to fall back on if needed. It woulnd’t necessarily cost that much either.

    The RN should then invest in containerised weapons sytems so that a ship could be converted from a civilian role to something more warlike in the space of a week or so.

    In return for this the government would pay a small amount towards the vessels purchase to reflect the modifications and some sort of retainer or tax breaks would be put in place for the inconvenience caused to the owners

    in reply to: Qantas incident #505274
    Super Nimrod
    Participant

    There more …..Laptops on wireless being investigated

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10536660 😮

    in reply to: RAF RC-135? #2460961
    Super Nimrod
    Participant

    I am with swerve on this one. $1billion would easily fix all the airframe problems with the current R1’s and with plenty of change in hand 😡

    As said in numerous publications the current standard RC’s are not necessarily as good as the R1 to start with.

    Maybe RAF procurement are using this eyewatering price as a back door way to get the R1’s fixed ?

    in reply to: RAF RC-135? #2462719
    Super Nimrod
    Participant

    There is a major difference between borrowing a few RC-135’s and this option and that $1billion could be spent beter elsewhere.:mad:

    The best of it is, that that won’t be all the kit as there is bound to be other non USA derived technology to be added to the airframe that will fall outside of the remit of this purchase request.

    in reply to: Rebuilding the Royal Navy #2068889
    Super Nimrod
    Participant

    Agreed, Swerves list plus:

    Cease all ship Frigate / destroyer sales and retirements until the numbers are again up to the 32 required by the 1998 SDR.

    3 enlarged Type 45 for the amphibious littoral fire support role. Yes, you might call them cruisers at a push

    A 230 metre swing role flat top built cheap and cheerful

    One more bay class as a proper ‘grey’ hospital / humanitarian / aviation training vessel.

    Some of the new C1/C2’s to be built ice capable for when it eventually kicks off in the very north or the south.

    in reply to: G-ZAPW Royal Mail? #507945
    Super Nimrod
    Participant

    Are you sure it was ZAPW as I understood that as its occasionally used for passenger charters when Royal mail colours wouldn’t be appropriate ? My brother said he saw ZAPW only a week or so ago and it was in normal Titan colours.

    There is a rumour at Stansted about ZAPV that is probably rubbish, but worth repeating as I don’t believe in letting the truth get in the way of a funny yarn. :rolleyes: Anyone who has seen ZAPV may have noticed that its colour is a little lighter than the normal post office red. Gossip has it that the plane was sent to Belgium for repainting with instructions to paint it ‘Post Office red’. This they duly did…………………………..Belgian post office red :eek::D:diablo:

    in reply to: Madrid Tragedy #512568
    Super Nimrod
    Participant

    The Times are saying that they didn’t deploy the flaps as well. Wasn’t there a serious DC9 incident many years ago that was very similar, that led to various warning systems being fittted ?

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4685414.ece

    in reply to: Madrid Tragedy #515761
    Super Nimrod
    Participant

    According to the Times, analysis of some airport video shows no sign of an engine fire

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4587944.ece

    in reply to: Madrid Tragedy #516352
    Super Nimrod
    Participant

    Has anyone seen any photos of the aircraft, all the photos I have seen suggest that it went into some sort of wide ditch, but none of them actually show the MD82, only the smoke. Very sad 🙁

    in reply to: Eurofighter Typhoon news II #2487076
    Super Nimrod
    Participant

    I don’t think this is much of a surprise but it looks like the RAF won’t be getting Tranche 3 according to Today’s FT

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d33939d0-6e50-11dd-b5df-0000779fd18c.html

    There is no mention if the newfound Russian expansionism will change this policy but it doesn’t look good.:(

    in reply to: KC767, KC45 ….. Latest news! #2487721
    Super Nimrod
    Participant

    Its a very useful capability that the USA has not necessarily optimised in the past. Including it in the competition seems very sensible

    in reply to: Alternatives to STOVL JSF? #2073189
    Super Nimrod
    Participant

    Someone at BAE is bound to have a Harrier GR10/11 upgrade planned on paper as a fallback position if the F35 was delayed by several years, but as has been said above F-35 is really the only show in town.

    in reply to: KC767, KC45 ….. Latest news! #2454657
    Super Nimrod
    Participant
Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 953 total)