I lol’d, that was a good one.

Very true. No point in reporting it, because they’ll just keep complaining that we are making it harder for them to have another crack at it, which is clearly unfair and unsportsmanlike.

They’re making it hard enough for themselves as it is.

The Victors were pretty damn impressive as well, but there’s a lot of other things I’d much rather see the money spent on.

“They can do air defense” – is damn right, and much better than any “smaller cheaper” ships since they can carry far far more CIWS systems, and more missiles of medium – long range, and carry more powerful sensors.

And those carriers, nuclear, will go really well with nuclear battle cruisers as the core of an attack group.

CIWS don’t really make for decent AAW, sure they’ve got lots of missiles on them but can they do AAW better than 3 destroyers where the 700 odd crew of a Kirov could be better employed?

A Kirov’s huge AAW loadout is really just there to protect while it gets into range for using those Granits which outside of an full blown war against a peer opponent really do seem a bit pointless.

An aircraft carrier should be able to do all the core functions such as flagship duties of a taskgroup, there’s shouldn’t be any need for a big battlecruiser to share those with.

Haha, you mean the air-defense-less RN that has no missiles installed on its shiny new toy destroyer? Seriously now . . .

Missile less because the useless government cut funding to testing, its not the only MOD equipment programme to get dragged out excessively and ballsed up and it won’t be the last, it’s not such a huge issue right now, when they are fully operational they will be damn fine at their job.

The new destroyer slated to be revealed in 2011 will hopefully feature a naval S-400 or maybe even S-500 system 😉

The Russian Navy would do better to accelerate this programme than spending money on putting back into service outdated and labour extensive Cold War era monstrosities like Kirovs.

I’m not sure thats true entirely, these things usually need one person to blink first so everyone else feels they can do same thing. The root cause is money but Brown and Labour do have anti-nuclear ‘form’. I imagine warheads will go down too, i’m guessing to less than a hundred based on three modified astutes each with 8-12 missiles. (so spoke an orrificer in Plymouth couple of weeks ago…)

We’ve already made the gesture down to 160, I don’t recall anyone else doing likewise?

To be honest I don’t see this as doing anything to hasten nuclear disarmament, that has to come from the USA and Russia first, when they hold 95% of stocks of warheads between them anything coming from another nation smacks of token gesture.

Brown move to cut UK nuclear subs

The Lib Dems said keeping Trident on a ‘like-for-like’ basis was ‘unrealistic’

The prime minister is to tell the United Nations that he is willing to cut the UK’s fleet of Trident missile-carrying submarines from four to three.

Gordon Brown will make the offer at a meeting of the UN Security Council over halting the spread of nuclear weapons and reducing existing stockpiles.

The proposed cuts come as the government searches for ways to reduce the massive deficit in public finances.

However Number 10 said keeping the UK’s nuclear deterrent was “non-negotiable”.

At the UN meeting, Mr Brown will call for all nations to come together to achieve the long-term ambition of a nuclear-free world.

He will say: “If we are serious about the ambition of a nuclear-free world we will need statesmanship, not brinkmanship.”

Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg welcomed the proposals, saying they were an important development.

He told the BBC: “I really do welcome that finally the dam has burst on this.

“It’s just unrealistic for us to believe that we can foot the £100bn like-for-like replacement costs for Trident over the next 25 years.

“I think the strategic context in which that decision is taking place is very different as well – we’re not facing the Cold War threat in the same way that we once were.”

The government has already announced that it has cut the UK’s stockpile of Trident warheads from 200 to 160, and many Labour MPs would like the government to scrap the weapons altogether.

However Foreign Secretary David Miliband said it was imperative the UK kept hold of an independent nuclear deterrent.

He said: “We reject unilateral nuclear disarmament for ourselves precisely because the world cannot end up in a situation where responsible powers get rid of their weapons, but the danger of nuclear proliferation by other powers remains.

“As President Obama said in Prague, this is a very long-term goal which may outlive his children, not just himself.”

Officials travelling with the prime minister warned that reducing the number of submarines, which are based at Faslane on the Clyde, from four to three would not result in a proportionate 25% cut in cost, as more would have to be spent to maintain the overall deterrent.

Kate Hudson, chairwoman of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), welcomed the proposals, describing them as “a serious and positive first step towards the scrapping of both the current Trident nuclear weapons system and its replacement”.

But Ms Hudson emphasised the ultimate goal should be total disarmament.

US President Obama is chairing the meeting of the UN Security Council on Thursday as part of the process of drawing up a replacement for the Non-Proliferation Treaty, designed to stop countries developing nuclear weapons.

Mr Obama has said he will try to negotiate with Moscow to reduce US and Russian nuclear warheads – which make up 95% of the world’s total – from 2,000 each to 1,500.

However the most pressing issue for leaders at the meeting will be how to stop the further spread of weapons to non-nuclear states.

Nice one Mr Brown:mad:

Test-firings of the developmental FireShadow loitering munition (LM) are expected to resume in Sweden in mid-2010.

FireShadow is being developed under contract to the UK Ministry of Defence by the Team LM industrial consortium. This is led by MBDA and includes Blue Bear Systems Research, Cranfield Aerospace, Cranfield University, Lockheed Martin UK INSYS, Marshalls SV, Meggitt, QinetiQ, Roxel, Selex Galileo, Thales UK, Ultra Electronics and VEGA.

The consortium began work on the FireShadow assessment phase in January 2007, the first demonstrator was fired in April 2008 and the second in May this year.

Prompted by the earlier flights and parallel wind-tunnel testing, the third demonstrator will embody a number of design changes now planned for an ‘early capability’ (EC) operational version of FireShadow which it is anticipated could reach the hands of troops in early 2011. Some of these were reflected in a half-scale model shown at the DSEi exhibition in London in early September.

MBDA has dramatically altered the configuration of its Fire Shadow loitering munition, but plans to have an operationally capable weapon available for user trials from 2010.

A half-scale model of the new-look Fire Shadow is being exhibited at the DSEi show in London, with extensive modifications having been made following windtunnel tests and two initial test firings conducted in April 2008 and earlier this year.

The munition’s body now has a more square shape than originally featured, and its previously folding forward-swept wing configuration has been replaced with a shorter, straighter design to enhance in-flight stability.

A Selex Galileo-sourced electro-optical/infrared seeker will also allow for the man-in-the-loop identification of battlefield targets. Finally, large lattice fins have been incorporated to the weapon’s detachable rocket motor unit to ensure safe separation from the air vehicle.

The revised configuration will undergo its first firing trials next year under a risk-reduction effort funded by industry and the UK Ministry of Defence, which forms part of the nation’s Team Complex Weapons initiative. “We will deliver a capability with a set of parameters – range, altitude and loiter time,” says marketing executive Mike Taylor. “We’ve got a customer that can’t wait to have it,” he adds.

MBDA says the Fire Shadow design has an operating range of around 100km (55nm) and an endurance of about 10h. However, the company stresses that the current design is a first iteration of a product that could undergo considerable further development over its operating life.

Potential export customers are also being sought for the loitering weapon, which was first shown in model form at DSEi two years ago.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/09/10/332091/dsei-picture-mbda-revises-fire-shadow-weapon-design.html

Most naive comment I’ve seen in a while.

These ships can single-handedly take on some smaller Navies, and have no match in the world in terms of potential capability.

They can do area air defence but then so can much smaller and cheaper ships, lets face it they only really exist to carry a load of Granits and what exactly is the relevance of those now the Cold War has ended?

The Russian Navy should scrap these money pits and build what it really wants: aircraft carriers.