Forces braced for more cuts .....
Well if you're going to take it like that.....
There is a difference between what the Joint Capabilities Board and its predecessors, HMG and our closest allies think is needed and what an embittered former pilot with a tenuous grasp of facts thinks is needed.
One tends to have rather more weight than the other......
There is a difference between what the Joint Capabilities Board and its predecessors, HMG and our closest allies think is needed and what an embittered former pilot with a tenuous grasp of facts thinks is needed.
One tends to have rather more weight than the other......
OAP
Fact is, HMG are in a political/economic/existential corner, idiot Polis have been led into an unnecessary and hugely expensive military project by infighting Service chiefs. Fact is, either it will be scrapped or, if it is retained other more important UK Military capabilities will suffer.
Things are changing in the UK. What was decided a few years ago is all bilge water now. Remember HMS Vanguard? TSR2? etc?
OAP
Things are changing in the UK. What was decided a few years ago is all bilge water now. Remember HMS Vanguard? TSR2? etc?
OAP
Fact is, HMG are in a political/economic/existential corner, Agreed, that's a fact
idiot Polis - also a fact
have been led into an unnecessary and hugely expensive military project by infighting Service chiefs. That's an opinion, unless you're talking about FSTA! Some - not me - would also add Typhoon, but would still be an opinion
Fact is, either it will be scrapped - a fact, sometime in the fifties or sixties like as not
or, if it is retained other more important UK Military capabilities will suffer. not a fact, again, an opinion
Things are changing in the UK. What was decided a few years ago is all bilge water now. Remember HMS Vanguard? TSR2? etc? Vanguard (one assumes you mean the battlewagon) had already been superseded by the aircraft carrier when she commissioned. You may have noticed that numerous nations are - or plan to - recapitalise their carrier capabilities or even re-introduce one. US, China, India have ships in build, Russia would love to, but is discovering the effects of Mr Putins social skills, Japan, S Korea, Brazil, Australia not in the carrier game yet, but thinking about it.
TSR2 was a specific aircraft design, not a capability.
OAP
idiot Polis - also a fact
have been led into an unnecessary and hugely expensive military project by infighting Service chiefs. That's an opinion, unless you're talking about FSTA! Some - not me - would also add Typhoon, but would still be an opinion
Fact is, either it will be scrapped - a fact, sometime in the fifties or sixties like as not
or, if it is retained other more important UK Military capabilities will suffer. not a fact, again, an opinion
Things are changing in the UK. What was decided a few years ago is all bilge water now. Remember HMS Vanguard? TSR2? etc? Vanguard (one assumes you mean the battlewagon) had already been superseded by the aircraft carrier when she commissioned. You may have noticed that numerous nations are - or plan to - recapitalise their carrier capabilities or even re-introduce one. US, China, India have ships in build, Russia would love to, but is discovering the effects of Mr Putins social skills, Japan, S Korea, Brazil, Australia not in the carrier game yet, but thinking about it.
TSR2 was a specific aircraft design, not a capability.
OAP
When I said tenuous grasp of facts, I meant you weren't prepared to dig down and unearth the actual numbers and where they come from. I didn't realise you couldn't discern between facts and opinions.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do we practice expeditionary warfare?
It really hasn't got us anywhere.
Now we have two massive bemoths to continue the practice.
My objections are the ideals of projecting UK national policy whilst tied to the apron strings of US foreign policy see line one above.
However hats off to BAE they have played a blinder.
It really hasn't got us anywhere.
Now we have two massive bemoths to continue the practice.
My objections are the ideals of projecting UK national policy whilst tied to the apron strings of US foreign policy see line one above.
However hats off to BAE they have played a blinder.
Falklands?
No carriers, hello Malvinas.
The fact that there is an airfield there means nothing, one good airstrike and goodnight.
No carriers, hello Malvinas.
The fact that there is an airfield there means nothing, one good airstrike and goodnight.
Why do we practice expeditionary warfare?
It really hasn't got us anywhere.
Now we have two massive bemoths to continue the practice.
My objections are the ideals of projecting UK national policy whilst tied to the apron strings of US foreign policy see line one above.
However hats off to BAE they have played a blinder.
It really hasn't got us anywhere.
Now we have two massive bemoths to continue the practice.
My objections are the ideals of projecting UK national policy whilst tied to the apron strings of US foreign policy see line one above.
However hats off to BAE they have played a blinder.
If anyone can listen to the UK political news today and imagine that a huge budget scythe is going to miss the UK Mil, they have had too much grog. 
Maybe some clever people can identify the capabilities we do not need, as opposed to the capabilities that we do need?
OAP
Maybe some clever people can identify the capabilities we do not need, as opposed to the capabilities that we do need?OAP
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Sneaking up on the Runway and leaping out to grab it unawares
Age: 61
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
