dark light

rickusn

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 91 through 105 (of 163 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Karel Doorman Frigates to Portugal? #2079707
    rickusn
    Participant

    LOL

    Which part of this did you not understand:

    “BTW Ive heard all your excuses before.”

    I have collected yet another excuse from you to go along with six others.

    LOL

    How many do you have?

    in reply to: Karel Doorman Frigates to Portugal? #2079785
    rickusn
    Participant

    it a tiny fleet i wonder if thy have enough escorts for the rottodams LPD they operate or are they hope-ing that there hi value assects are operating in a mulit-national fleet

    If your looking for a response from me you will have to type a reasonably literate post.

    This is not an insult just a reasonable request.

    BTW Ive heard all your excuses before.

    Dont bother.

    Just for my sake, if not your own, clean it up.

    Thanks.

    in reply to: Karel Doorman Frigates to Portugal? #2079815
    rickusn
    Participant

    We often study and report on the UK RN, Russian RFS and USN fleet reductions.

    But the RNLN draw-down has been no less dramatic.

    Its amazing that in 1972 the Dutch plan was to have a surface combatant fleet made up of 26 warships:

    2 Tromps
    1 AAW ship (Later a single standard AAW variant and even later two. The JV Heemskerck class)
    6 Van Spejik class(Modernized)
    12 Kortenaers(Standard class)
    4 M class(Replacements for the Roofdier class. The class is now known as the Karl Doorman class)(Later a fifth was added two replace the 13th Standard.)

    The Van Spejiks began to be retired ten years early(Postulating a 30 year service life.) in 1986 with for leaving service and being transferred to Indonesia with the remaining to going to Indonesia in 1989/90.

    The Doorman class of four was to be ordered in 1980 but apparently this was deferred to 1987 and then brought forward to 1983. The fifth was eliminated from the plan at some point..

    Then in 1986 four more were ordered.

    Selling two under construction Kortenaers to Greece permitted the decision to be made to build two AAW variants of the class.

    Greece acquired four more in the 1990’s along with the UAE who received two and Greece bought four more this decade for a total fleet of ten.

    Chile has recently acquired the the two AAW variants of the Kortenaer/Standard class plus two K Doorman class.

    Belgium and Portugal are also in the process of buying two K Doorman class ships each.

    All this leaves the RNLN with only six surface combatants:

    4 De Zeven Provincien class AAW ships
    2 K Doorman class

    My how the world has changed.

    in reply to: shrinking USN carrier air wings #2090850
    rickusn
    Participant

    “to suggest that USN is letting conventional capabilitiy slip is a gross understatement and factually not backable.”

    So what else is new?

    Actually its good for the USN that they are still being underestimated, now for well over 200 years.

    It will make the next victories much more sweeter.

    LOL

    The Russians still think they have the best ships and navy.

    Good for them.

    But is nonetheless:

    ” factually not backable.”

    LOL

    What a world!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2040691
    rickusn
    Participant

    “Originally Posted by Andropov_Yuri
    Russia today has a really superb army, look at all military units not only the naval. maybe usa has more naval units but the quality of these are not like russians.”

    LOL

    What quality???

    rickusn
    Participant

    The MHC’s were designed and outfitted to protect US ports.

    The threat according to the USN no longer exists.

    Ergo good by MHC’s.

    rickusn
    Participant

    There are a # of sites with this info.

    Here is a starter site:

    http://navysite.de/cvn/cvw.htm

    in reply to: Carrier drag race. #2050618
    rickusn
    Participant

    “CVN-72 George Washington, CVN-76 Ronald Reagan.”

    CVN 72 is the Abraham Lincoln, CVN 73 is the GW.

    Caption:

    Philippine Sea (June 18, 2006) – The Kitty Hawk, Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Groups sail in formation…..

    in reply to: The LAST Gearing class still in service #2050634
    rickusn
    Participant

    “AFAIK they had one upgraded with a Bofors 57mm Mk2 “stealth” gun. I thought at least they would keep that one in sevice… There’s a picture of that upgraded one in the Jane’s Recognition guide (that is why it actually got my attention), the Bofors was placed in the B position in front of the bridge. Any idea what happened with it?”

    They simply removed it. Reason unknown although I suspect it was because she wasnt expected to be retained in service this long.

    AFAIK she is indeed the last Gearing class destroyer in active service.

    But at 60+ years old they better be careful in what kind of weather and sea states they operate her.

    in reply to: JFK over to NATO ? #2052884
    rickusn
    Participant

    Actually when it comes to this:

    “I would ask that you check your condescending attitude at the door, it is not welcomed!”

    The author of the above should heed his own advice!!!

    rickusn
    Participant

    Nicolas10:

    “And I am discouting the fact that you make the first 50 more expensive by including the R&D costs, while you make the remaining planes cheaper by excluding the R&D costs, which is flawed calculations at best (plain fact twisting at worst).”

    No. I and you(along with others)are well aware of the total cost.

    But if you say stop at 50 then be prepared for those aircraft to asorb the total program cost.

    You appear not ready to do that.

    The point that is made repeatedly, and I brought up with the nominal $133m cost, is that the incremental cost of buying one more aircraft is quite cheap.

    Now say we take that $20B and start a new program. How many aircraft will you get? 20? less? when?

    Compared to getting 150? Or whatever number you choose. And those quite soon.

    Ill be the first to agree that military hardware has really become unaffordable but it has far more to do with development cost than any other factor.

    rickusn
    Participant

    Duh.

    So whats your point?

    rickusn
    Participant

    Nicolas10 :

    Ok

    50 cost $1Billion each.

    Buying 150 more cost 133m each.

    Do the math once and get back to me.

    rickusn
    Participant

    “money on live examples”

    Well for one thing the development cost is the major expense.

    “apart from a few to develop the utilisation doctrines, weapons trials and so on”

    How many is that again?

    Ill use four. So you wont have to answer.

    Four Raptors would have cost about $7-8 BILLION each

    Do you think any aircraft program would get funded at such a cost?

    LOL On second thought maybe that wouldnt be such a bad idea.

    The incremental cost of building one more is relatively very little once production has started.

    And how simple do you think it would be to suddenly build what you need?

    And how quickly do you think you can train people to use and maintain them effectively?

    Personally I wish we didnt need a military at all but alas thats unrealistic.

    And unfortunately so is your scenario.

    rickusn
    Participant

    “I believe that this war has already started and the current American government is the ones who are trying to take the biggest slice of the pie.”

    Horse Manure

    And such inflammatory statements belong on a Political Board.

    But since you bring it up.

    Now back it up.

    Oh thats right you cant because the US has gained nothing from attempting to gain a bit of security much less “the biggest slice of the pie.”.

    In fact just the reverse is actually true the US economy has sacrificed greatly since 911 and there is no end in sight.

    I thought better of you but your just like the rest of the world more than willing to illogically and unrealistically bash the US for no good reason.

    What a disgrace.

    They always talk about rules on discussion boards but they only apply to a few.

    Another disgrace.

Viewing 15 posts - 91 through 105 (of 163 total)