Future Carrier (Including Costs)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by rduarte
It is nice to know, but in the CoAN ( CANA for you brits or morons? Even gringos),during training they called by the aircraft nº as for instance Lobo 07.
As long as we are on the subject of numerical designators, any 25 de Mayo successor will probably be known as "Contact 01, range 18,000 thousand yards, angle on the bow is 0 degrees......." to a potential adversary.
My dear rduarte, I would like to say how your contribution to this thread has enlivened the debate on the UK CVF and naval aviation in general.
However, as you appear to be confused as to whether you are French, Portuguese or Argentinian I suggest that you content yourself with the following thread until you've made up your mind.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread166587/pg1
Best of luck!
However, as you appear to be confused as to whether you are French, Portuguese or Argentinian I suggest that you content yourself with the following thread until you've made up your mind.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread166587/pg1
Best of luck!
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: London
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CVF
Lets face it what can cost more than the eurofighter! Nice looking jet but still was out done by the FA2 before her early sad departure! Roll on the CVF where we hope will bring about the rebirth of the FAA and stop those pesky light blues from trying to get their hands on it too much! We were doing great before they stuck their nose in.
sorry, rant over!
CVF is a great project and wish it every succes.
sorry, rant over!
CVF is a great project and wish it every succes.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: pomme....pomme !
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin
However, as you appear to be confused as to whether you are French, Portuguese or Argentinian I suggest that you content yourself with the following thread until you've made up your mind.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: troon
Age: 61
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think our Gallic friend might appreciate this
http://politicalhumor.about.com/libr...chmagazine.htm
Sorry - couldn't resist
http://politicalhumor.about.com/libr...chmagazine.htm
Sorry - couldn't resist
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: pomme....pomme !
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by brickhistory
Ah, French!! With your long line of historical naval victories, please entrance us some more with your expertise! 
Think about morons,if the argentinians have sunk several british ships 25 years ago, don t you think than the french navy would do better ( of course you, brits and gringos need a brain for that.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by rduarte
Today the french navy is stronger than the RN.
Think about morons,if the argentinians have sunk several british ships 25 years ago, don t you think than the french navy would do better ( of course you, brits and gringos need a brain for that.
Think about morons,if the argentinians have sunk several british ships 25 years ago, don t you think than the french navy would do better ( of course you, brits and gringos need a brain for that.
Given the past track record, ummm, no.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: pomme....pomme !
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want talk about the brits and the Malvinas islands go to this site :
http://www.malvinasonline.com.ar/for...2556a046f63e64
http://www.malvinasonline.com.ar/for...2556a046f63e64
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rduarte
Today the french navy is stronger than the RN.
rduarte!
Over the past couple of pages you have provided me with much amusement! You have all the hallmarks of a rather agitated & bitter Frenchman with lots and lots of energy to put into bantering us Brits (not always the best of banter but keep it up none-the-less!!).
Regarding the quote above, I am interested to learn why it is that you think this to be the case. I am assuming that as the number of French warships has recently (narrowly) surpassed the number of British, that you believe your above statement to be reality.
Well, let me throw a few points into the mix. The RN has been active in the Middle East for the past 16 years - including 2 shooting wars. A few years before that we took a battle to the very far reaches of the Atlantic and won (granted there were losses but those lessons have been learnt and, well, it was a WAR - sustaining losses is part and parcel unfortunately). Since then we have landed and sustained forces in Sierra Leone and participated in the Kosovo conflict. What have you guys been up to apart from building aircraft carriers that are too short?!
The point I am trying to make is, considering the operational experience and the quality of training the RN gives its people, does the number of platforms in your navy being slightly higher than ours really make you stronger?? I mean significantly stronger??
That is definitely open to debate! The RN is the second largest navy in the world in terms of tonnage I think you will find.
But its our people that make the RN (and the Brit armed forces as a whole) the strong and capable force it is - it was our people that beat you at Trafalgar and it will be our people that beat you again and again
But as we are allies (
) and as the chances of us ever actually going to war are miniscule - why are you bringing all this to a thread that should really be focused on the aircraft carriers that we are going to sell you?!Sense1
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Gloucestershire
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sense1
rduarte!
Over the past couple of pages you have provided me with much amusement! You have all the hallmarks of a rather agitated & bitter Frenchman with lots and lots of energy to put into bantering us Brits (not always the best of banter but keep it up none-the-less!!).
Regarding the quote above, I am interested to learn why it is that you think this to be the case. I am assuming that as the number of French warships has recently (narrowly) surpassed the number of British, that you believe your above statement to be reality.
Well, let me throw a few points into the mix. The RN has been active in the Middle East for the past 16 years - including 2 shooting wars. A few years before that we took a battle to the very far reaches of the Atlantic and won (granted there were losses but those lessons have been learnt and, well, it was a WAR - sustaining losses is part and parcel unfortunately). Since then we have landed and sustained forces in Sierra Leone and participated in the Kosovo conflict. What have you guys been up to apart from building aircraft carriers that are too short?!
The point I am trying to make is, considering the operational experience and the quality of training the RN gives its people, does the number of platforms in your navy being slightly higher than ours really make you stronger?? I mean significantly stronger??
That is definitely open to debate! The RN is the second largest navy in the world in terms of tonnage I think you will find.
But its our people that make the RN (and the Brit armed forces as a whole) the strong and capable force it is - it was our people that beat you at Trafalgar and it will be our people that beat you again and again
But as we are allies ( ) and as the chances of us ever actually going to war are miniscule - why are you bringing all this to a thread that should really be focused on the aircraft carriers that we are going to sell you?!
Sense1
Over the past couple of pages you have provided me with much amusement! You have all the hallmarks of a rather agitated & bitter Frenchman with lots and lots of energy to put into bantering us Brits (not always the best of banter but keep it up none-the-less!!).
Regarding the quote above, I am interested to learn why it is that you think this to be the case. I am assuming that as the number of French warships has recently (narrowly) surpassed the number of British, that you believe your above statement to be reality.
Well, let me throw a few points into the mix. The RN has been active in the Middle East for the past 16 years - including 2 shooting wars. A few years before that we took a battle to the very far reaches of the Atlantic and won (granted there were losses but those lessons have been learnt and, well, it was a WAR - sustaining losses is part and parcel unfortunately). Since then we have landed and sustained forces in Sierra Leone and participated in the Kosovo conflict. What have you guys been up to apart from building aircraft carriers that are too short?!
The point I am trying to make is, considering the operational experience and the quality of training the RN gives its people, does the number of platforms in your navy being slightly higher than ours really make you stronger?? I mean significantly stronger??
That is definitely open to debate! The RN is the second largest navy in the world in terms of tonnage I think you will find.
But its our people that make the RN (and the Brit armed forces as a whole) the strong and capable force it is - it was our people that beat you at Trafalgar and it will be our people that beat you again and again
But as we are allies (
) and as the chances of us ever actually going to war are miniscule - why are you bringing all this to a thread that should really be focused on the aircraft carriers that we are going to sell you?!Sense1
A U.S. Navy Admiral was attending a naval conference that included Admirals from the U.S., British, Canadian, Australian and French navies. At a cocktail reception, he found himself standing with a large group of officers that included personnel from most of the countries.
Everyone was chatting away in English as they sipped their drinks but a French admiral suddenly complained that, whereas Europeans learn many languages, Americans learn only English. He then asked "Why is it that we always have to speak English in these conferences rather than speaking French?"
Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied "Maybe it's because the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Americans arranged it so you wouldn't have to speak German."
You could have heard a pin drop
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: pomme....pomme !
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sense1
rduarte!
Over the past couple of pages you have provided me with much amusement! You have all the hallmarks of a rather agitated & bitter Frenchman with lots and lots of energy to put into bantering us Brits (not always the best of banter but keep it up none-the-less!!).
Regarding the quote above, I am interested to learn why it is that you think this to be the case. I am assuming that as the number of French warships has recently (narrowly) surpassed the number of British, that you believe your above statement to be reality.
Well, let me throw a few points into the mix. The RN has been active in the Middle East for the past 16 years - including 2 shooting wars. A few years before that we took a battle to the very far reaches of the Atlantic and won (granted there were losses but those lessons have been learnt and, well, it was a WAR - sustaining losses is part and parcel unfortunately). Since then we have landed and sustained forces in Sierra Leone and participated in the Kosovo conflict. What have you guys been up to apart from building aircraft carriers that are too short?!
Oh! Sierra Leone and the Kosovo have a Navy ?
And I belive that the commander in Kosovo is french and not brit.
The point I am trying to make is, considering the operational experience and the quality of training the RN gives its people, does the number of platforms in your navy being slightly higher than ours really make you stronger?? I mean significantly stronger??
you do not have any fighters in your CVS,the CDG has Rafale and SEM
That is definitely open to debate! The RN is the second largest navy in the world in terms of tonnage I think you will find.
You need to review you maths, take a look of the tonnages of Japan,Russia,China and India navies, you will be suprised.
But its our people that make the RN (and the Brit armed forces as a whole) the strong and capable force it is - it was our people that beat you at Trafalgar and it will be our people that beat you again and again
Trafalgar ???? I talk about TODAY
But as we are allies ( ) and as the chances of us ever actually going to war are miniscule - why are you bringing all this to a thread that should really be focused on the aircraft carriers that we are going to sell you?!
Since when Thales is a british outfit ??????
Sense1
Over the past couple of pages you have provided me with much amusement! You have all the hallmarks of a rather agitated & bitter Frenchman with lots and lots of energy to put into bantering us Brits (not always the best of banter but keep it up none-the-less!!).
Regarding the quote above, I am interested to learn why it is that you think this to be the case. I am assuming that as the number of French warships has recently (narrowly) surpassed the number of British, that you believe your above statement to be reality.
Well, let me throw a few points into the mix. The RN has been active in the Middle East for the past 16 years - including 2 shooting wars. A few years before that we took a battle to the very far reaches of the Atlantic and won (granted there were losses but those lessons have been learnt and, well, it was a WAR - sustaining losses is part and parcel unfortunately). Since then we have landed and sustained forces in Sierra Leone and participated in the Kosovo conflict. What have you guys been up to apart from building aircraft carriers that are too short?!
Oh! Sierra Leone and the Kosovo have a Navy ?
And I belive that the commander in Kosovo is french and not brit.
The point I am trying to make is, considering the operational experience and the quality of training the RN gives its people, does the number of platforms in your navy being slightly higher than ours really make you stronger?? I mean significantly stronger??
you do not have any fighters in your CVS,the CDG has Rafale and SEM
That is definitely open to debate! The RN is the second largest navy in the world in terms of tonnage I think you will find.
You need to review you maths, take a look of the tonnages of Japan,Russia,China and India navies, you will be suprised.
But its our people that make the RN (and the Brit armed forces as a whole) the strong and capable force it is - it was our people that beat you at Trafalgar and it will be our people that beat you again and again
Trafalgar ???? I talk about TODAY
But as we are allies (
) and as the chances of us ever actually going to war are miniscule - why are you bringing all this to a thread that should really be focused on the aircraft carriers that we are going to sell you?!Since when Thales is a british outfit ??????
Sense1
Last edited by rduarte; 17th Aug 2006 at 00:14.
Suspicion breeds confidence
OK guys, reality check.
1. UK and France will not go to war
2. UK and Argentina are very unlikely to go to war unless one of the two was extremely stupid. But it has happened.
Would it be much of a fight? Major NATO power vs Latin American pseudo democracy. Same result as 82.
I vaguely recall a reinforcement exercise in 1980s which involved 1500 or so troops plus air assets being flown into MPA at very short notice at the same time as a trip to Argentina by the US Sec of State. Strange coincidence. Lots of noses out of joint in BA.
Idiots. If they had just been patient they would have got what they wanted. Now they never will.
1. UK and France will not go to war
2. UK and Argentina are very unlikely to go to war unless one of the two was extremely stupid. But it has happened.
Would it be much of a fight? Major NATO power vs Latin American pseudo democracy. Same result as 82.
I vaguely recall a reinforcement exercise in 1980s which involved 1500 or so troops plus air assets being flown into MPA at very short notice at the same time as a trip to Argentina by the US Sec of State. Strange coincidence. Lots of noses out of joint in BA.
Idiots. If they had just been patient they would have got what they wanted. Now they never will.
Last edited by Navaleye; 17th Aug 2006 at 00:47.
