I’m not sure day to day life would change much. You’d suspect the NHS south of the border may be a bit cheerier…single malt lovers may fall on hard times for a while. Bushmills Distillery will be ecstatic though!. Bagpipe sales in England are bound to drop off…from their peak of 3 a year it could drop down to near zero!. Sales of blue face paint will likely skyrocket though so I’d suggest, in event of a yes vote, investing in any face-paint retailer north of the border you can find!.

The biggest shame of it though will be the redacting of Doctor Who to eliminate all traces of David Tennant, however, this loss will likely be balanced by the televising of the hunting down and eventual lynching of the Krankies something that has to be good for the future development of mankind.

Derek

After stating how you were laughing at the guy and that you were happy to leave him in ignorance you’re not on very solid ground to criticise debating technique are you?. For my part I’d like to see you address the errors in some of his points…most notably no.s 4 & 5

…oh and as for arrogant I dont think you can show much more arrogance than the idea that you can walk away from the Union and do better on you’re own solely on the basis of resources that were once shared. If thats not ‘my ball and I’m taking it home’ I dont know what is!?. I’d not say that a yes-voting Scot will be able to call anyone arrogant for a good while to come!

You have to figure a near peer has the ability to perform combat ID and won’t shoot at just anything that beeps and squeeks.

Indeed, but, its going to be very much easier to saturate even a near-peer’s deployable response capability if all they are cueing on is a chatty TDL protocol suite. Anything else suggests that they would be reading the TDL and can differentiate fake messages from real…at range and in realtime…that would be a claim to make. Yes they can direct platforms to provide a posID based on the cueing from the RF but those ID platforms will be finite…and we have numerous examples of human error introduced in the fire chain caused by repetitive false alarms…the Sheffield and Stark being two that immediately spring to mind.

more on air-to-air UCAVs from the Navy, and I quote “This is not beyond the state-of-the-art,”
he’s talking about using manned aircraft as sensors and UCAVs as shooters, as I’ve been suggesting for years (and people telling me it couldn’t be done)
http://news.usni.org/2014/02/13/navys-uclass-air-air-fighter

Its not that it cant be done…its that it cant be done as a sensible and practical measure. Look at the description…the manned aircraft as the sensor platform. The platform that you need to be most survivable, therefore low-observable, is the one emitting either on radar or on multiple datalinks or both!. Then look at the type of UCAV identified as the a2a platform…a UCLASS…thats not a cheap little ‘throwaway’ Predator with a couple of sidewinders. Rather its going to be an expensive and integral part of the carrier air wing. Not sure our pilot friend quoted above would be so popular with his CAG for glibly sending his drone wingmen (wingthings?) to their dooms when they were rather needed for tomorrows deep strike mission!.

You could, perhaps, envisage a Uclass, equipped with HELLADS or a similar system accompanying a manned strike as a close escort in a kind of goalkeeper anti-AAM role…much the same as escort jammers have done for decades. These platforms, like the jammers, would very definitely not be cheap and disposable assets though!.

Just to be clear the op was more about what can be got for the money than the types however I still think they should look for 2 more Hamilton’s to have 4 and up rate them with Harpoon and searam plus I feel the OPV only need a 57mm main gun with to 25mm auto cannons and something like a 4100 radar for the helicopter

One point to remember though Tempest, useful as the WHECs are, they were commissioned 40-45yrs ago now. They were FRAM’d of course but even that was nearly a frigates lifetime ago. An extra hull would be good for depth as a hedge against a major failure aboard one of the active hulls, but, WHEC is a near-to-mid term solution for the Phillippines at best. No-one is really building anything like the WHECs anymore either…apart from the US with their fantastically expensive new cutters. Perhaps the Norwegian Svalbard class may count but again a pretty unique and specialised hull.

Bottom line is that the Phillippines need a new build patrol ship programme that will have delivered enough capability to take up the slack when the WHECs start to run out of economical service life. The long-term solution will be to ramp up local indigenous shipbuilding to a point where basic OPV’s like the Mexican design, or the OPV80, can be constructed in-country and refined and developed based on local needs and lessons. Whether that is a vessel that sports a 57 or 76mm is less important than whether it is suitable for deploying offboard mission effectors like LCP’s/choppers/UAV’s and whether it can cover a patrol slot for the highest time-on-station possible.

If, you can believe it, that the Government has contingency plans etc, then why are some Councils, in Devon, Cornwall, CHARGING householders for sandbags?.

Contingency funds was the term I used. Having worked, a couple of decades back, for a local authority’s Borough Engineers dept I know that contingency planning is done, properly, at the local level. If some of the authorities you list are charging for sandbags then they’d better prepare to make refunds. Central Govt. has already decreed sandbags are free.

It was on Sky news today, that at least 1 in 6 householders who have been flooded out, will be unable to get their properties Insured in the future.

Then if they’ve knowingly bought a home thats at risk of flooding I’d recommend they seek advice on what to do to prepare for the next time we get rainfall of the like not seen in two centuries. Just like if they’d bought a house under the flightline from Heathrow I’d suggest they should take measures for noise abatement. Dont see how the Govt should be held financially accountable for peoples lack of dilligence in their house purchasing decisions?.

Is the Government going to pay these unfortunate, uninsurable householders Insurance Policies for them, out of their bottomless pit of contingency fund?.

No. Why should they?.

We have seen householders, standing waist deep in water in their own homes, a little more than wet carpets Jonesy.

No not really it isnt. If they are waist deep in water the carpets are most assuredly wet. The house will need to be drained, cleaned, carpets and furniture replaced and tears dried. Then….well…thats life pretty much back to normal isnt it?. Its a bit of flooding man….its not the damned Asian tsunami!.

If this had happened in your home, would you still post the same answer as you have?.

No because I’d be too close to the topic for an objective view. Just the same as the plight of unemployed binmen in Solihull is likely more of a mind focussing issue if you happen to be a binman in Solihull!. Governance means taking a more big-picture view. Not getting caught up in the emotion of the moment.

And how does an elderly couple, late 60s early 70s cope?.and the disabled?. they can’t carry furniture upstairs to protect it, let alone lift it to do so. Not quite as simple as you make out, is it?.

I’d presume they would get help. In their 60’s and 70’s they’d have friends, neighbours, children, family to assist them. If they were unfortunate enough to not be in a position to get easy assistance they likely lose their furniture…unlucky. If you’re in your 60’s and 70’s and you live next to the Thames in Berkshire or on the lowlands in Somerset you’ve seen flooding before and, if you havent made proper preparation for a repeat, I’m sorry but more fool you.

Bottom line Jim all you’ve written is a very emotive, handwringing, plea for the poor souls of Berkshire etc but nowhere have you made a case for taking a penny out of the foreign aid budget?.

Hang on John, when we moved here 38 yrs ago, there was no mention whatsoever that this was a flood plain, it’s only come to light, that we do, about 10 yrs ago, so should I have done what you suggested 38yrs ago, “Just in case?”

Had you not noticed any flooding before in the intervening 28yrs Jim?. If not I’d suggest that its more the unique (so far) meteorological conditions thats caused the issues for you than your location?.

Unfortunately the article did not elaborate what the “boiler snag” was. It could be anything ranging from harmless to very serious. Steam turbines, in general, are very delicate form of propulsion very prone to breakages and malfunctions, and they require an experienced crew. All of which is why steam turbines are not much used anymore. Good news is that ship’s still under deliverers warranty.

Precisely.

Scot

Yet, the core of the story wasn’t so much the RAS but the loss of a boiler on a New Ship!

The RAS mention is indicative of a journalist who has little appreciation for his subject matter. In that context the article noting the failure of one boiler out of eight as a significant event is not a great surprise. This is just the first example of the generally high maintenance and operational support loading that comes with a large steam plant…a point well covered on here. This sort of thing will be a common occurrence and the plant designed to accommodate such issues. It places extra demands on the crew and the logistics infrastructure but its hardly a news story at this point in the game.

Is the S-3B viking such a bad idea as a MPA for the Philippines yes it is a old air-frame but there are 80+ of them in storage they have a 2700+ nm range 7 hrs endurance a radar capable of 150 nm detection they also have a fall set of weapons signed off and are capable of being and carrying out A2A refueling so if there are any air-frames with good hours left and they were fitted with EO turrets they could be very good for the Philippines however any MPA would allow better detection and tasking for the naval fleet with so much water to cover

Issue comes down to deploy/support costs you’d imagine. Refurbishing a small number for further service will have a price tag….setting up a support infrastructure will have a price tag. For that the refurbed S-3 will offer little useful that Feds Dash-8 wont. It being notable that civillian Q300/Q400 Dash-8’s operate in the Philippines and support infrastructure exists that the airforce could well leverage. If the US were to offer the upgrade/refurb Hoovers gratis and offer to assist the Philippines set up support then maybe thats a good option. Otherwise I’d expect the commercial-based type to be the better bet in the long run.

As a wildcard, seeings that manpower is a challenge and that the locals have experience with Predator, USCG Guardian type UAV’s might be an even more cost-effective option?