What a joke.

Typical airhead gash. The Falklands was an aberration. Does this ring any bells Ken ‘the RAF will cover the fleet wherever it needs to’.

How about the SIOP tasked CVN’s?. After all the Cold War did call for a bit more than just sending the big old heavy bombers in to get shot down the same old way….were you not, in fact, the one castigating the Harrier and the very notion of STOVL because, and please correct me if I paraphrase you wrong, ‘no fixed base would survive to generate the second or third sortie’.

Well Ken if no fixed base would survive where is your local base-in?. Then we come to today bang up to date – they’ve put ex-RN Phalanx guns in to try and interdict the half-hearted flow of indirect munitions falling on Basra airport. How long would you keep your always available local base-in there if the locals got serious about having us leave?.

Lastly what is the value of more expeditionary capability in 2020 than now?. Little thing called the 98SDR….you would be advised to read it before making ludicrous assertions.

Carriers and Power Projection.

Naval power is in many ways intangible, it is the foundation of any global power yets its influence is difficult to describe beyond the obvious provision of highly mobile firepower. Let me put it this way,

You can get shore bases overseas, but why is that? The USN is the foundation of US global power.

As for the 1998 SDR, well it is entirely optional, it is a paper of ideological choice and not security neccesity. Within that policy framework the carriers themselves are also optional. However as long as UK governments decide to engage os being a ‘force for good’ the carriers are needed, certainly far more than the RAF is required to exist.

[QUOTE=flex297;1326605]

I agree. I never said anything about racism. Do you read the responses at all?
If I were to accuse you of something, then it would be religious xenophoby.

In which case you would still owe me an apology.

Without further explanation this response holds no value. If you actually cared to say clearly what you meant then this whole fuzz would be superfluous.

Your entire contribution to this thread holds no value.

Pfff.. You obviously don’t even know what the word means.. My response to you stated: You gotta admit you got something of that stupid stereotype imagination about all Muslims just looking for a way to die as martyrs, don’t pretend you don’t.

I referred to Muslims, which is a religion. Racism refers to races, not religions..
Can you finally come to reading the responses before you start trolling? You are becoming tiring with this.

You are the one falsely accusing people of racism and xenophobia thus you are the troll.

Due to massive cost increases on both ships, all production contracts for any ships past the first two have been canceled. There are plans to recompete the next three ships, wth the winner getting to build two and the loser one. This assumes that both contractors are willing to bid.

LCS is on the brink of death and my own predictions for USN shipbuilding are coming true. DDG-1000 has been culled beyond three units (and it was congress that demanded the third unit) and the USN is planning to keep building Burkes up to 2015. The 2006 GAO report was correct and the USN’s preferred all general-purpose destroyer doctrine has won through. It is just a shame that so much money had to be wasted along the way.

You’ve a degree in psychology now?

If I was that well qualified I would have stated rather than questioned.

Again, where did I say russian shiphbuilding and design industry is healthy. Don’t put words in my mounth, thank you.

In that case it would appear that we agree.

You pointed out Talwar class is basically ‘just’ a modded Krivak III. Well, if you look closely at drawings of project 22350 and compare to Talwar class, you will also see the Krivak lineage in the 22350. That’s all I said.

Fair enough, and it reinforces my point.

Meaning one could fit 32 ESSM in the same silos necessary to just match the capacity of a “standard” RAM outfit, launchers only without the usual reloads.

Ah well. Germany is supposedly considering a navalized IRIS-T SL. Would be yet another system in the same class (though more of a ESSM competitor).

True. But with ESSM being quad-packed and Burkes having 96 cells some might argues its worth it.

im just taking the **** as you said i was completely wrong, The Ark was a very useful ship in the 70’s.

Given the low availability provided by a single unit that is highly questionable.

I think the VLS is a matter of customer choice. They’ll fit Mk 41 & Mk 48 or 56, or Sylver A50 or 43, & A35 – whatever you prefer. The pictures are illustrative, not definitive.

I note from recent reports that the VT1 missile (made in Belfast) was successfully fired from Sylver A35 last month, & that DCNS & Thales are working on a quadpack for it, enabling A35 (& presumably the longer Sylver launchers) to carry 4 short-range missiles per silo. Some nice competition between Thales & MBDA going on there.

Was it definately from an A35? I seem to remember reading something a about a 6 round launcher and IIRC janes did not mention a luancher. The only previous references of a VLS launched VT-1 that I can find are of a self contained launcher being developed in cooperation with Fakel. i will have to wait until Monday to confirm that though.:confused:

I think the images might be a bit more definitive than they appear. The radar/director suite is clearly the CEA Technologies suite which is now associated with the SAAB 9LV-MK3 CMS (indeed SAAB markets the combined system as a ship defence system or something like that) whilst the images also depict SAAB Rbs-15 AShM’s.

Whilst clearly the design is adaptable it is also orientated towards a specific suite.

Mk-48 and Mk-56 are essentially the same system, they are however much smaller than Mk-41 and my question was really to determine how many full size VLS cells the ship could take?

So far I much prefer this design to FREMM although that design does have the advantage in that it is actually going to be built, albeit in much reduced numbers. Although it is interesting to note that the Italian FREMM’s will be significantly better vessels.