dark light

kev 99

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 661 through 675 (of 1,460 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Navies news from around the world -III #2029265
    kev 99
    Participant

    I take it you don’t remember just how much havoc the PT boats caused during WWII then.

    And anyway, this is not a copy of the Bladerunner 51, that’s just hype

    Maybe, but they do have a Bladerunner 51, so maybe it’s actually in the offing.

    in reply to: UK Defence Review Part II #2370126
    kev 99
    Participant

    As the original poster in that thread said,

    We’d have to spend a fortune on infrastructure (how much to rebuild a base for it?), the running costs would be vastly higher than for the QE class, & then there’s what we’ve already spent on CVF.

    I can’t see how it wouldn’t end up far more expensive than buying both QE & PoW, both in the short & long term.

    Agreed, it’s a bloody stupid idea and I can’t see how anyone could give it any credence at all.

    Those Rum Rations postings look to be based on misinterpretations.

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -III #2029597
    kev 99
    Participant

    Well, I hope the US Navy is happy with all those features. Because at two ships it isn’t really going to do them much good.:rolleyes: Hopefully their next destroyer design will be a little more down-to-earth.

    Current plans say 3, unless I’ve missed something recently.

    in reply to: CVF Construction #2029702
    kev 99
    Participant

    If Type 26 comes in at the same sort of price as FREMM – in the region of ~ £250 million then I would be happy but I read yesterday that the Type 26 will be closer to £500 million. However if they want to export the Type 26 it got to come in at the lower end. The cost of fitting phalanx across the board is more like the cost of three maybe four OPV’s (using the Spanish BAM as an example) than a couple of frigates – I still think that if the RN has the money to fit Phalanx across the board they would be better off buying the OPV’s than fitting the Phalanx.

    Err aren’t the FREMMs supposed to come in at a price of half a billion Euros?

    in reply to: CVF Construction #2029765
    kev 99
    Participant

    Remember the number of Phalanx units available to the RN right now is a little deceptive to say the least, a number of units (around 18 I think) are going through upgrades to block 1b status presently, there is also a number that have been deployed to protect coalition bases in Afghanistan.

    in reply to: CVF Construction #2029771
    kev 99
    Participant

    Making a few rapid counts:
    4×2 = 8 Phalanx for the Bay class.
    2×2 = 4 Phalanx for the Wave
    2×4 = 8 Phalanx for the Fort class
    6×2 = 12 Phalanx for the Type 45
    (3×2= 6 Phalanx for CVF)

    I thought CVF Carried 4 Phalanx mounts?

    in reply to: CVF Construction #2030287
    kev 99
    Participant

    I view the whole Trident story as a cunning ruse – I think the Treasury is going to give Liam Fox the money for Trident less a 10 or 20% saving as part of the reduced MoD budget and all of the sudden over the long term the MoD’s budget goes up (i.e from 2015ish – 2025ish the budget will be between £1.6 – £1.8 billion higher than normal to pay for the replacement for Trident).

    You might be right, it certainly could be just an opening gambit in the horse trading over the MOD budget.

    in reply to: CVF Construction #2030723
    kev 99
    Participant

    Though accquiring CVF and then losing amphib capability is so self defeating it sounds like something defence planners would do! 😮

    It does sound like a particularly stupid idea.

    in reply to: Janes predict Nimrod MRA4 cancellation? #2381593
    kev 99
    Participant

    The Jane’s article does not predict anything of the sort, it predicts that the RAF has OFFERED to cut MRA4, it’s hardly the same thing, particularly because the RN will almost certainly oppose the move.

    in reply to: UK Defence Review Part I #2381995
    kev 99
    Participant

    Yes, a new Ocean has many advantages. My preference for a modified Juan Carlos is largely based on my feeling that it would be advantageous to have a third ship able to launch STOVL aircraft, as an emergency back-up.

    Note that I’m not proposing the purchase of a third carrier disguised as an LPH or LHD, but an LPH or LHD* which can, in emergency, be used as a STOVL lily-pad. That’s all.

    *I’m agnostic. I see more need for helicopter capacity than more docks, but it might not be worth messing around with the design to eliminate the dock.

    I’ve stated the same thing on numerous occasions.

    Other points in favour, it’s big, already exists and it’s not that expensive.

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2030962
    kev 99
    Participant

    In other news, it seems that the clowns (cough, sorry, “defense professionals”, cough) at defensetalk.com seem to think that Severodvinsk will sink during depth trials! 😀

    Apparently, the slight bends in the shape of the sail were not to their taste!

    Thank god smarter people than then actually designed the thing! 😮

    That banning really didn’t go down well did it.

    in reply to: SDR question. #2383778
    kev 99
    Participant

    Yes, ridiculous isn’t it.

    in reply to: CVF Construction #2031316
    kev 99
    Participant

    If you need to have the ramp open to operate it, I would not want to be in that helicopter at altitude.

    Sounds a bit parky doesn’t it.

    in reply to: UK Defence Review Part I #2385983
    kev 99
    Participant

    or with the economies of scale in our favour order a third QE…..

    I can’t see this as anything but a non-starter, it will always be too expensive compared to Ocean.

    in reply to: what will happen to the invincible Class carriers? #2031537
    kev 99
    Participant

    It’s a real waste to just scrap them like that. If their lifespans can be extended by another 15 years via refit then they can be used as helo carriers/LPDs or sold elsewhere in that role.

    Unless they can be sold there is no point in this, replacements are on the way, they will just be expensive to run manpower intensive ships that are not budgeted for and the Navy don’t really need.

Viewing 15 posts - 661 through 675 (of 1,460 total)