dark light

pjhydro

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 556 through 570 (of 845 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2022029
    pjhydro
    Participant

    The Russian Navy would be almost certainly be better off scrapping those outdated money pits and building some modern and more efficient ships.

    Agreed, they could start with funding a decent combat management system and then building a 6-7000 tonner to stick it on. Perhaps with a crew 20% the size of a Kirov.

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2022032
    pjhydro
    Participant

    I DON’T BELIEVE THIS CRAP the U.S.N. said the same thing when the Su-24/27’s flew over thier Carriers, his is just “face saving” hahahaha!!!!

    I’m sure the peacetime USN, relaxing at normal states of peacetime readiness was soooo shocked that a couple of old fighter bombers in international waters flew by. The same stunt in a time of tension or war would have a very different outcome…. would like to see a 30 year old SU24 with next to no modern EW get near a USN battlegroup then.

    For that matter an RN, FN or Dutch BG either….

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2022035
    pjhydro
    Participant

    Most naive comment I’ve seen in a while.

    These ships can single-handedly take on some smaller Navies, and have no match in the world in terms of potential capability.

    Really? Honestly? The Kirovs belonged to another age when they were built and look like dinosaurs in the digital age. Yes they will add some powerful AshM to the fleet and some area defence but without an equivilant system to AEGIS or SAMPSON the Kirovs look “terribly 1980s”.

    The main reason for putting two ships to sea with a combined complement of 1420 men is that the RU has few large surface units to sit in the heart of a battlegroup, this is mainly a cosmetic to give the appearnce of military might and progress. Like the TU95s intercpted of Scotland last year, the same TU95s that Lightnings and Phantoms used to escort were now being met by Typhoons, the rest of the world has moved on the Russian military has been pretty static.

    in reply to: Does the RN need SSBN's anymore? #2022044
    pjhydro
    Participant

    Funny how people think a carrier which CAN move and defend itself is a sitting duck, yet a landlocked airbase which cannot move (unless it’s built on a geological fault!) is a smarter bet. At least a carrier makes an enemy work a bit to locate it, and then makes them run the gauntlet of layered air defence (or the ASW screen if the threat is a sub). How many airbases (which cost an OBSCENE amount of money to build) have been handed over to hostile nations without a shot being fired in the last century? The Soviets apparently really enjoyed the facilities at Cam Rahn Bay in Vietnam, constructed for the the USAF. A lot of former RAF bases are now in the hands of nations which, if not hostile now, have been in the past and could easily be again. By contrast, how many carriers have changed hands in such manner? How many have been lost to enemy action since WW2?

    Then there is the famous story of the jungle airfield in Burma that the RAF regt would storm in the morning allowing the RAF to use it through the day and then they had to allow the Japanese to take over at night before restorming in the morning. Never have the rock apes earned their keep more.

    in reply to: Does the RN need SSBN's anymore? #2022075
    pjhydro
    Participant

    What if we had put Blue Streak into the subs, a completely designed, developed & operated nuclear deterrent, proper rotation we would be talking now about the R boats replacement.

    Ok off to bed but couldn’t let it pass. Blue Streak was a massive liquid fueled rocket – now think submarine, pressurised liquid rocket fuel…. i’ll stick with the solid fuel polaris please…simpler, smaller, safer.

    in reply to: Does the RN need SSBN's anymore? #2022115
    pjhydro
    Participant

    Apart from the ones replaced after the Luftwaffe flattened much of the city?

    Then there are the ones the saxons gave a good shoeing to

    in reply to: Does the RN need SSBN's anymore? #2022117
    pjhydro
    Participant

    ahem :mad:. Bath is for the posh Bristolians to escape to. And for some reason all their buildings are 2000 years old, they need to update 😛 And they don’t even produce any defence equipment.

    Runs away.

    Not me ur running from…. think the wife is already on the M4 headed west…

    in reply to: Does the RN need SSBN's anymore? #2022125
    pjhydro
    Participant

    All the best stuff comes from Bristol :P.

    My wife says Bath, but you all sound the same to me….:cool:
    ducks behind parapet and looks over shoulder for misses.

    in reply to: Does the RN need SSBN's anymore? #2022127
    pjhydro
    Participant

    Trouble is, it’s a bit small, & it’s the only airport for the St. Helenans, for when they need to get somewhere without waiting for a ship to Capetown or the UK. Hard to keep anything secret completely out of sight of the harbour, the airfield, the BBC monitoring station & the visiting scientists. Closing the island to the people currently allowed on to it would tell the world you were doing something, & there’s also the difficulty of hiding anything fixed from satellites.

    You can conceal some details of what you’re doing, but everyone will know that you’re doing something.

    I’ve always thought the best place to do “secret” stuff like stash your obligatory pile of captured UFO junk etc would be somewhere like RAF Northolt…everyone is off photographing Boscombe Down etc meanwhile on the A40 in the London Borough of Hillingdon ……

    As it happens the “Northolt Station Flight” operates with little attention and scrutiny.

    in reply to: Does the RN need SSBN's anymore? #2022129
    pjhydro
    Participant

    Ah well, i wonder if they are very collectable. I hope so if not intresting reads for kids if they have an intrest. We did have awesome rocket names namely thanks to our rocket men 😀 men with beards given a chunk of the Isle of Wight and some money and left alone.

    I knew a bloke who helped design the nose cone for TSR2 and Concorde and he did have a massive beard.

    I’ve always fancied building a big secret rocket base on Ascension Island or one of the other isles in the South Atlantic nice and quiet out of the way. Perfect for secret stuff also since it southern it’s not totally covered by tracking radars.

    Actually Spadeadam where the RAF practices EW was considered as a space port back in the day. You can read why it wasn’t taken up here…

    http://www.spaceuk.org/bstreak/bs/cumbria.htm

    If we are going to build wacking great hypersonic jobs then any airfied will do, I would have said Benbecula would do.

    Im sure at some point mankind will unite to go into space and we’ll build some big starships. It’s only a matter of time i hope, first step is back to the moon which i think will be possible. Build a moonbase and ****** off into space once we have health and other issues nailed.

    Not in my life time, and probably not my daughters I would have thought, but I am sure it will happen at some point.

    in reply to: Subject Study- RAN Future FFG #2022131
    pjhydro
    Participant

    How unaffordable would it be (and i’m guessing very) to just keep building full spec F100s? If you are going to build a 7,000 ton warship it would seem a waste to fit it up with a pea shooter and a couple of couple of barrels of 4X???

    in reply to: Does the RN need SSBN's anymore? #2022259
    pjhydro
    Participant

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon

    surely adaptable to our purpose….and designed in Bristol!

    in reply to: Does the RN need SSBN's anymore? #2022283
    pjhydro
    Participant

    Weren’t the Americans toying with a sub-orbital bomber a while back, Hypersoar or something.

    We should just get it over with and build a honking great spaceship to dominate the planet, I call it a “Deathstar”. Everyone who’s ever watched a Hollywood movie already knows, the English are the bad guys, so we may as well play to it.

    You see i think the RN should get a bunch of those big triangle ******s….star destroyers??

    in reply to: Does the RN need SSBN's anymore? #2022287
    pjhydro
    Participant

    Oooo! Keep those comics safe they will be worth quite a bit if they are in great condition.

    Well worn and well read i’m afraid.

    You have a point in a way, we should really spend more money developing exotic technologies that can be dual use. Space technology is an area that frustrates me if you know your history well you should know why. We had the option of Concorde or Space we chose Concorde the French chose both Hmmm! Ooops so much for the idea that people dont want to blast things into space. Now we are reliant on foreign powers for space access so we cannot put something up there with others not knowing what exactly it is or does. The US are still toying with that idea of a suborbital bomber as part of a program to develop global strike components.

    Ah Black Knight, Blue Streak, Black Arrow! we did have coolest space rocket names. Really irritating thing is that the original Euro rocket used Blue Streak tech and concorde was a british design, as was the bloody mirage! 😡

    When it comes to Sat Comms and GPS we over rely on them far too much as either can be taken out quite easily or jammed by a foreign nation. I know it would be a bigger adversary but there is no political or human cost in war of popping sat’s outta the sky.

    Back in the 80’s when running the normal big NATO Op’s some US commander came up with the idea of saying all our space assets have been taken out. The yanks dropped a brick and struggled to use the older kit, our blokes broke out the codebooks and got on with it, rerouting US traffic as well for the Op. It was obvious that the US stopped training their blokes how to use the older kit. One thing i know is it hacked the Royal Signals off to no end 😛

    In my experience that was never hard, using the bendy stick thing on the top of the clansman for drying washing or digging **** out of your boots usually sent the sigs blokes purple….:D

    in reply to: Obama scraps BMD in Czech Republic & Poland #1812705
    pjhydro
    Participant

    Now my understanding was that there had been 14 intercept launches with a 57% success rate and 5 cancelled intercept launches as well as 18 non intercept launches. The Op tests have been just the last 4 and they had gained a 75% hit rate, but is that statistically significant? Proof of an improving system or just a luck? We will never know, which is sad.

    http://www.cdi.org/pdfs/gmd%20ift2.pdf

    http://www.cdi.org/news/missile-defense/gmd-booster.pdf

Viewing 15 posts - 556 through 570 (of 845 total)