Page 17 – Key Publishing

Prom

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 241 through 255 (of 267 total)

← 1 2 3 … 16 17 18 →

Author

Posts
August 26, 2011 at 8:37 am in reply to: CVF Construction #2035665

Prom
Participant

[QUOTE=serge;1792760]

since theres a webcam of the dock on the ACA website

I assume that there is no way of watching that webcam except through the posted time-lapse sequence or the weekly stills?

August 25, 2011 at 9:28 pm in reply to: CVF Construction #2035680

Prom
Participant

The SDSR pretty much put paid to the slice of the cake back stabbing,

Have to disagree with you there Geoff. I have seen and heard loads since then, some of it in pretty poor taste in my view.

Another factor against converting QE now is that the ACA and MOD really are pushing quite hard to get her finished as per schedule.

August 23, 2011 at 4:22 pm in reply to: CVF Construction #2035801

Prom
Participant

Fox & the navy want cat & trap on both, ASAP. The RAF doesn’t want a penny spent on carriers that it can block. The army wants air support, from somebody, please! The Treasury doesn’t want anyone to spend anything. Stir together & see what comes out.

Hard to argue with that. So how about we let them fight it out?

RN & Army vs RAF & treasury

If an actual battle is deemed politically unacceptable then how about settling it on the rugby pitch?

August 23, 2011 at 12:37 pm in reply to: Navies news from around the world -IV #2035806

Prom
Participant

I suspect another factor is the general moratorium but we aren’t allowed to call it that on new spend until they had resolved the funding hole in the MoDs budgets and plans. This was due to end in September.

With the final announcement of the 14 Chinooks yesterday, which had also been held by this review, I wonder whether the gap has been closed and the MoD will start to have a little more freedom on announcing spend, provided that they can balance the books of course.

This would fit with the argument next year of “oh look its cheaper if we buy 2 sets of cats and traps”.

Whatever, I think somewhere, somehow, the RN will find the money to convert both. And I think Fox and DC will want them to too, which helps

August 19, 2011 at 12:50 pm in reply to: Air Ops Over Libya (Part Deux) #2329339

Prom
Participant

I dont think Gaddafi was threatening civilians only his opponents.

His opponents were civlians. they don’t just become armed combatants merely for opposing Gadaffi, they only armed themselves when his army started slaughtering them

Whose gonna protect Gaddafi supporters that are civilians or are they no good Gaddafi supporter a good one is a dead one?

Who is killing civilian Gaddafi supporters?
A few have been killed accidentally as collateral damage by rebels or the coalition, but that is very different from the systematic slaughter Gaddafi initiated

Ofcourse there would have been mass arrests and trials if Gaddafi crushed coup, but if happened in West would it be treated differently

They weren’t bothering to arrest and bring to trial. They were using heavy artillery against a civilian city. That is mass murder

Protecting civilians is the case why is there only a handful of peacekeepers with limited resources trying to keep peace in Congo. Certain civilians mean less then others?

because we cannot stop all crimes, that means we should not try and stop any? 17,000 is hardly a handful anyway

August 19, 2011 at 11:44 am in reply to: Rebuilding UK Carrier Strike after a decade's gap #2036166

Prom
Participant

As for the “manpower gap”, the USN is itself changing things up somewhat. While they will still have more ship’s crew aboard than CVF, the CVN-78+ class CVNs are to have only about 2/3 of the ship’s crew that the Nimitz class CVNs do… just over 2,000 vs the ~3,200 of CVN-65, & CVN-68>77.

That’s still 3 times that of CVF.

Whilst they are learning from the US and French (and rightly so), I think there is a long way to get from there to the RN procedures etc.

August 19, 2011 at 10:14 am in reply to: CVF Construction #2036186

Prom
Participant

Scrub that, I have found the tugs on AIS, but the barge doesn’t seem to be there. Currently passing Fraseburgh though, and ETA listed as 1200 on the 20th, so CockneyJock may wish to go there earlier

August 19, 2011 at 9:03 am in reply to: CVF Construction #2036187

Prom
Participant

For those not monitoring shipAIS, unlike me who has too much time on his hands, AMT trader is just passing Stornoway (Isle of Lewis) its doing 8 knots and to my untrained eye it looks like its making good progress.

I have heard 2 different reports when its arriving in Rosyth Saturday or Sunday, does anybody have anything more concrete than this?

I can’t see AMT Trader on shipAIS (which I’d never looked at before, thanks for that). Is it listed as something else?

August 18, 2011 at 1:23 pm in reply to: CVF Construction #2036228

Prom
Participant

On the ACA website http://http://www.aircraftcarrieralliance.co.uk/delivering-the-nations-flagships/designing-the-qe-class.aspx there is a picture showing the blocks and who manufactures them. LB04 has a note that it excludes T&U. I might be being dumb, but what is T&U?

August 18, 2011 at 12:37 pm in reply to: Countering a CBG(s) with CBG(s) #2036231

Prom
Participant

I don’t think there was an Aegis vessel escorting Missouri, I thought it was just Gloucester and Jarrett.

You’re right. I had it in my head that Jarrett was AEGIS, but she wasn’t.

So has AEGIS never faced an operational anti-ship missile?

August 18, 2011 at 9:29 am in reply to: Countering a CBG(s) with CBG(s) #2036266

Prom
Participant

Just to clarify the SSN cannot ‘chase’ a surface group down.

Although a carrier often (depending upon wind direction) makes it easier by turning round at regular intervals and going as fast as they can into the wind.

This makes them easier to overtake and easier to hear,

August 18, 2011 at 8:35 am in reply to: Countering a CBG(s) with CBG(s) #2036271

Prom
Participant

btw, has the early 90’s era aegis system ever faced a coordinated supersonic AshM attack wave under real battle field EW environment?
before co-op engagement and ESSMs and Active seekers for Standard missile and all that ?

The only example of Aegis facing a missile attack that I can think of is the GW I case where 2 Silkwork missiles were fired by Iraqi forces at the USS Missouri and USS Jarrett.

The Royal Navy destroyer HMS Gloucester shot down one and the other fell into the sea.

So hardly a coordinated attack, but not a great success story for the Aegis system either.

August 18, 2011 at 8:24 am in reply to: Rebuilding UK Carrier Strike after a decade's gap #2036272

Prom
Participant

Sorry Bager, I didn’t mean to suggest that we couldn’t or shouldn’t learn from the Americans or French, just wanted to highlight how far short this would still leave us.

Poor wording on my part

August 17, 2011 at 2:59 pm in reply to: Rebuilding UK Carrier Strike after a decade's gap #2036316

Prom
Participant

I think those suggesting working up with the aid of the americans or French understimate how different QEC will be from Nimitz or CDG. With such a massively smaller complement many of the practices will have to be very different, even without considering the different cultures of the 3 navies that have a marked difference on how they approach many activities.

The other side of the coin is of course the greater automation or improved capability for ammunition handling, ATC and virtually everything else that in theory at least allows such a smaller crew. However that again means that there is a limit to what can be learned from others

The pilots may be able to learn from our allies, but the crew running the carrier, deck operation etc are in many cases going to have to start from first principles. Especially with it being CATOBAR rather than STOVL

Quite a task.

August 17, 2011 at 1:13 pm in reply to: Carrier Hilarity on the Beeb #2330614

Prom
Participant

Three PMs (Blair, Brown, cameron) supported
Several Ministers for defence (Hutton onwards) supported it
Defence Select committe support it

Er… yes, and pretty-much nobody else. If you want evidence to support my view, I can only suggest you go and look for it. I don’t have the time or inclination to do it myself, simply to win an argument on a forum. If you think what I’m saying isn’t true that’s fine.

You will be pleased to know that I took your advice and did go looking. So I started with Hansard, and the first thing I found was an adjournment debate on the AIrcraft Carriers in Nov 2010.

What you will be less pleased to learn is that there were 8 speakers, representing all 3 main parties, but they all supported the construction of CVF. There was a disagreement about numbers, because one MP wanted 3 to be built. I admit that one of the speakers was Brown. So this is only 7 more to the list I posted above.

So I checked some more:
Lords Q&A, 2 speak in favour, 0 against
Defence Select Comittee 2nd Report – in favour
Scottish Affairs committee report – in favour

Can you give at least a hint where I might find all this suppressed opposition?
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 241 through 255 (of 267 total)

← 1 2 3 … 16 17 18 →