So, you vote for Brexit, and destroy confidence in your economy in order to not have to give foreigners your money.

Then, to restore that confidence, you have to give foreigners that money anyway and try to prop up your economy….which was strong before the vote.

If you think there is common sense in that I see how you ended up with an out vote!.??

So, because you haven’t noticed anything personally, nothing’s wrong. Is that the general message?.

You’ve not spotted the fact that today we’re cheering the fact we will likely miss recession when, before the vote, we were leading global recovery.

Our trade balance will miraculously correct so the problem of high import costs (Microsoft jacking their UK prices up between 10-20% just today) won’t be crippling. Can I ask what manner of evidence you have that guarantees this happy eventuality will come to pass?!.

Its funny that still now there is a real enduring stereotype of the average Leave voter. Not really one that’s too flattering either.

Hungary have clearly stated that they aren’t looking to leave the EU.

Other nations have seen EU popularity rise since the UK vote. Netherlands being the notable one.

UK economy heading into the toilet is going to have a galvanising effect on those who may have wished to slip the EU leash.

EU retrenchment is very much more likely than disintegration despite the imminent bloodletting in the Eurozone.

F-20 got to be in the running for the prettiest. When I was a kid drawing fighter planes based, of course, on Buck Rogers and Saturday morning cartoons I was unknowingly always drawing the F-20.

It just looks like the objective image of how a ‘fighter plane’ should look somehow!

Have I missed something? Have we decided on the Venator 110 design?
I would love to see real steel being fashioned into real ships for the Royal Navy with some sense of urgency.

A handful of ‘Longer River’ Class is all well and good, and I’m sure they will be of great benefit to an overstretched fleet.
But … come on! Get on with it! It is so frustrating seeing the bleedin’ obvious need for ships and having to endure years of prevarication.

R

Apologies if I gave that inference….no the project is barely in definition let alone completed its key requirements phase as far as I am aware. I simply used V110 as a baseline to illustrate the potential benefits.

Starfish,

Conversely I think recent experience has shown the very limited value of small-capacity cruise missile carrying ships. The lesson appears to be that, if you want to cruise-slam someone from the sea, you need something at least Arleigh Burke sized so you can deploy enough weapons to still be firing on day-2 of proceedings….not sailing home for reload.

The article mentions that the request calls for a single helo hangar. That’s surprising considering that maritime UAV capability is pretty much a necessity. The request should have mentioned a hangar big enough for one 10 ton helo and two UAVS the size of Camcopters.

http://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/media/6098065/VENATOR-110%20Technical%20Brief.pdf

Fits within the Indian specification. Will do medium chopper plus UAV/UUV/USV as needed owing to mission reconfigurable bay. Bit of a stretch calling 120m a corvette of course, but, when the Japanese get away with a 248m through-deck ‘DDH’ who is going to notice!.

What does this project say about the Kamorta’s though?. Would it not be more efficient to add 7 more to the build run and get scale economies – even if you get a little more ASW muscle than you actually need is that a bad thing?.

Small technicality that the UK Tridents haven’t been sold by the US or bought by the UK. The launch vehicles are leased to UK from the USN pool. MTCR doesnt apply to a nation with the technical capacity to develop and deploy the technology themselves.

The addition of an RF fuse-setter wired into the fire direction system aboard ship, allied to a programmable fuse, is possible for tubes from 20-203mm and bigger theoretically. Question is whether you have a gun mount that is enhanced by the fitting of such a system in the calibres you mention.

The Mk8 & mod1 will be around another 15-20yrs at least between the UK and South America. Brazil still manufactures 4.5″ shot, but, there aren’t all that many actual tubes in service. Would a gate-fused enhanced-frag round be a boost to Mk8’s limited anti air capability?. Certainly. Is AAW in the BN and RN screaming out for this capability?. No. Is anyone going to be persuaded to buy into Mk8 as a result of a programmable fused round?. Again no!. So, for the market, the rewards of undertaking the work dont offset the costs of doing it.

The French 100mm is a similar story. Clearly the Chinese bought in to the mount and there will be 3.9″ naval guns going to sea for a few years yet to come, but, the French have lost interest and, so the story goes, the Chinese enhanced copy of the French gun didn’t exactly improve on anything!. The decision to cut to a 76mm for the evolved frigates there seems to have decided matters. Without a viable long term mount to serve, despite the apparent suitability of the 100mm tube for an RF set gate-fused AA shell, its a non-starter.