"Unless your referring to theoretical war gaming you may have noticed that there isn't actually a real air threat to surface forces these days."
That type of talk got us into a whole lot of bother in 1982. In 1966 Healy and his Light Blue Henchmen Colluded to get rid of carriers as the RAF said they could defend the fleet from air attack anywhere in the world. The losers 16 years later were service personell (From ALL Three Services) who in whatever theatre could not depend on air support. The last 7 ships that the RN lost were down to air attack and all but one were in a Brown Water environment. SHAR was regarded as inadiquate then. Now after a massive upgrade HMG are getting rid of it all together. We now see ourselves in a situation where we are realligning our forces with focus on an amphibious assult. Ship-based SAM is only as good as the range of its radar and any radar at present cannot see though land - mass. The only Aircraft that can see far enough to give warning is the Sea King ASiC and then it's only good for giving a heads up.
Like most Pro-SHAR men I Quote the falklands. I know that the Argentinean Govt have said they will never try and take the islands by force again but we all know the value of words from a Government Minister don't we? I've also read in one of the latest defence select comittee meetings that 'The Argentinean Forces are in no fit state to take anyone on' - I wonder???
...Gonna have to stop Looking at these things after a night in the Pub - it just winds me up
