dark light

RN Phantom

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 85 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: MOD's £38b 'black hole' almost balanced #2315565
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    At last some good news (hopefully) clearly things had become so screwed up that the MoD and the forces needed “shock therapy” like the SDSR to make them get their act together. It’s going to take a long time to restore some of the capability we’ve lost but maybe this is the start.

    in reply to: China's hacking into F-35 led to spiraling costs? #2342464
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    What idiots think that you can have online discussions about secrets, & keep them secret? :confused: Doh!

    There’s a lot to be said for a good old fashioned meeting in a room with no fancy electronic networks involved! 😀

    in reply to: Is the UK getting cold feet? #2366703
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    I’ve read somewhere that apparently one of the reasons why the change in CVF’s configuration from STOVL to CATOBAR was because the MoD had gotten wind of the F-35B’s development problems and wanted to have a fall back option in case that version got canned, so it would be highly ironic and sadly all too typical of British procurement if the C model gets the chop.

    However I would expect that this issue will be sorted out, if the worst comes to the worst we can simply get Boeing and Dassault to name their best price for the SH and the Rafale.

    in reply to: Rafale news part XI #2312007
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    I’ve a general question about the Rafale and instead of starting a new thread I thought I’d just ask it here 😉

    First, the Rafale M doesn’t have a folding wing, I read in a book a while ago that this is because the multi-spar wing structure can’t be folded, but I’ve since read on various web forums that this was simply a cost cutting measure, so which is it?

    in reply to: type 26 frigate #2029928
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    Just out of interest, what do the members who are critical of the Type 26’s planned weapons fit think it should have?

    in reply to: type 26 frigate #2030022
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    Looks very impressive, hopefully what comes out of the other end of the sausage factory that is the MoD procurement process will live up to it. 🙁

    in reply to: CVF Construction #2037051
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    I quite agree. Gerald Ford had a brief and comically inept presidency. The only thing of note which happened during his term of office was that the USA stood by and let its ally South Vietnam fall to a Communist invasion, the very fate which over 50,000 Americans had died to prevent. That merits a carrier being named for you? I wouldn’t name a coal barge after that cretin.

    It’s also frustrating when you think of all the famous USN carrier names such as Ticonderoga, Valley Forge, Ranger, Saratoga etc that are not currently in use. At this rate it’s only a matter of time before that Simpsons gag about the USS Walter Mondale comes true. 🙁

    in reply to: CVF Construction #1997121
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    If/when an FAA squadron stands up with F-35C, would the have an “alpha” symbol on the tail?:D

    Speaking personally I think that No. 809 NAS would be a better choice for the RN’s first frontline CTOL unit since 1978 as it’s emblem is a Phoenix and that would be very appropriate for the occasion.

    http://www.hms-vengeance.co.uk/images5/809.gif

    in reply to: CVF Construction #1997842
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    Great models Geoff! What aircraft is that on the CVA-01’s waist cat?

    in reply to: CVF Construction #1999630
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    I wish I could be as optimistic as you about the future. All we know for a fact is that here and now we have no carrier capacity, and the fixed wing Fleet Air Arm is dead. In future we might have one carrier equipped to operate F35Cs, and occasionally the RAF might even let some of them operate from it, assuming we even end up buying the F35C when all is said and done. But seriously, this coalition government has done more damage to the Royal Navy than any other in history. They have no strategic interest in the Navy, and just seem to see it as a cost to be cut. If we really do end up with a fleet of 140 fast jets I will be amazed!

    No political party has been good on defence over the last 50 years, a combination of economic weakness, lack of political courage to tackle the real money pits like the NHS and welfare and an increasing lack of interest in defence issues from the electorate has made defence an easy target when the economy has regularly hit the wall. The sad fact is that the state of the public finances and the total mess the MoD budget was in meant that huge cuts were inevitable no matter who was in power.

    And given Labour’s role in creating the said messes I fail to see why they would be any better. They’re all as bad as each other. 😡

    in reply to: PLAN News, Photos and Speculation #3 #2000090
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    Media in the region reporting that the first cruise has been delayed until August due to unspecified “mechanical difficulties,” also makes reference to tensions in the South China Sea.

    http://focustaiwan.tw/ShowNews/WebNews_Detail.aspx?ID=201106300040&Type=aTOD

    I suppose it makes sense to wait until the latest spat over the Spratly Islands has cooled down a bit.

    in reply to: MORE UK defence cuts??? (Merged) #2382710
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    Yes, it’s not just the case with the MOD though the public sector are suckers when it comes to negotiating contracts for infrastructure and equipement purchases, just look at how many IT projects are delivered late, vastly over budget and not fit for purposes.

    Companies bidding for these contracts deliberately low ball them in the knowledge that the contract isn’t worth the paper it is written on and won’t deliver what the customer (Government) wants, they do this in the sure knowledge that additional funds will be made available to put it right.

    I know all about that! I work as a town planner in Northern Ireland, in 2004 the Agency decided to get a new IT system they received a bid costed at £9 million with an in service date of mid 2006. Shortly before it was due to go live they started the user tests on it, they quickly discovered that the new system had no provision for staff to write site reports, the single most important part of the process. The reason why was because senior management hadn’t specified that requirement in the original specification, the people in question were all of an admin background and had never worked in a frontline role! Try to imagine a new assault rifle for the Army that doesn’t have a magazine, that’s how fundamental an omission this was! 😮

    So the system had to be taken away for a complete rebuild, it only went live a year ago, the cost of development and also of keeping the old system going beyond it’s projected end date is near £30 million! Of course the people responsible for the original balls up were quietly shuffled off before the **** hit the fan and are probably still ballsing up another Agency. 😡

    in reply to: MORE UK defence cuts??? (Merged) #2383623
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    As has been speculated on blogs the past few days, the UK still has around £10bn of defence cuts gaps to fill
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/8597366/10bn-black-hole-means-new-defence-cuts-loom.html

    Could see an RAF of less than 100 fast jets if they want to be able to afford the F35 in future years.

    FFS how does the MoD keep getting into this mess where it regularly seems to find a huge gap in it’s budget?? Is it a case that they constantly go for “the best case” option in budget bids to the Treasury only to be forced to admit later that it’s going to cost a whole lot more? 😡

    in reply to: Harriers and Carriers #2000827
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    Of course retaining the ski jump mans that Lusty can still be used for operations with USMC, Spanish or Italian Harriers if the need ever arose.

    in reply to: 2nd MN CV status #2002033
    RN Phantom
    Participant

    And it was the tories who stuffed up the defence budget post cold war, which included postponing replacement of the SSN fleet causing problems in the Astute programme and stuffing up the MRA4 contract by ensuring they would be rebuilds.

    Let’s be honest, labour and conservative have been stuffing up defence expenditure/planing etc for decades, no one party is any worse than the other, they are both equally as bad as each other.

    Agreed theyve both been clueless, as for the current lot, I’ll judge them properly in 5-10 years if they get both CVD’s into service and if the institutional changes that Fox is introducing at the MoD puts an end to the debacles listed above.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 85 total)