Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Post Galileo

Old 8th Jun 2018, 13:59
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 51.50N 1W (ish)
Posts: 1,147
Received 42 Likes on 16 Posts
And it is largely because of the EU that we haven't had to do so since 1945!!
The usual EU canard. The EU was formed after the Soviet Union collapsed (Maastricht Treaty, 1993). You could argue an effective date of 1986 (Single European Act).

If you substitute NATO for the EU in your statement, it might make sense, but NATO has many non-EU members, including the most powerful member by far.

But enough of Brexit intrusion.....
Fitter2 is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2018, 14:10
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Beyond the M25
Posts: 536
Received 62 Likes on 32 Posts
If you substitute NATO for the EU in your statement, it might make sense, but NATO has many non-EU members, including the most powerful member by far.
You forget that NATO includes Turkey which invaded Cyprus, which at that time was under the effective control of NATO member Greece.

No EU (or its pre-1993 or 1986 iterations) member state has ever gone to war with another EU member state. Fact.

No worries on the Brexit intrusion, it's important stuff.
Mil-26Man is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2018, 00:08
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Fact.

Love that little witticism when the FACTS are presented.

Ref. A Compendium of Witticisms
glad rag is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2018, 11:53
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Jupiter
Posts: 120
Received 240 Likes on 179 Posts
Originally Posted by Blacksheep
When it comes to security we need our own military system that is not reliant upon a political-economic entity that includes former Warsaw Pact nations that are only in it for the money.
We do? Why? GPS has been operational since 1990, any particular hurry?

Also a fully independent navigation system will require about 24 satellites. How many operational frontline aircraft are there again? Just to compare one thing against the other...
Lascaille is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2018, 12:11
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,903
Received 351 Likes on 124 Posts
Lascaille wrote:
Also a fully independent navigation system will require about 24 satellites.
Not forgetting all the GNSS receiver modificaton needed to receive such an absurd BritNav folly.... As well as the command and control infrastructure, launch sites etc. etc.
BEagle is online now  
Old 9th Jun 2018, 12:25
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: liverpool uk
Age: 67
Posts: 1,339
Received 16 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Mil-26Man
You forget that NATO includes Turkey which invaded Cyprus, which at that time was under the effective control of NATO member Greece.

No EU (or its pre-1993 or 1986 iterations) member state has ever gone to war with another EU member state. Fact.

No worries on the Brexit intrusion, it's important stuff.
They dn't spend enough on their armed forces to go to war with each other.
air pig is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2018, 19:42
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Beyond the M25
Posts: 536
Received 62 Likes on 32 Posts
They dn't spend enough on their armed forces to go to war with each other.
They dn't need to spend enough on their armed forces to go to war with each other - fixed it for you.

And that's largely because of the EU.
Mil-26Man is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2018, 05:29
  #68 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 18,095
Received 2,150 Likes on 977 Posts
Thatís it - the UK is out of Galileo.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...e-after-brexit
ORAC is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2018, 07:01
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by ORAC
Thatís it - the UK is out of Galileo.
An interesting situation.
Due to the high-pitched UK Political stance on this, I suspect that the implications for UK Mil / UK tech are somewhat extreme. The reality of "going it alone" costs are considerable. My guess is UK will have to suck it up and crawl on knees to POTUS. UK tech will take a hit.
The further implications for NATO cohesion are grave. The Donald is intent on ruling the roost and putting Europe back in it's box.

OAP
Onceapilot is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2018, 08:06
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fitter2
The usual EU canard. The EU was formed after the Soviet Union collapsed (Maastricht Treaty, 1993). You could argue an effective date of 1986 (Single European Act).

If you substitute NATO for the EU in your statement, it might make sense, but NATO has many non-EU members, including the most powerful member by far.

But enough of Brexit intrusion.....
iron & steel community 1951
treaty of rome 1956
we applied to join in 1962

I dont know where you get 1986 from as its the same organisation,staffed by the same people and located in the same place for 67 years........
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2018, 11:27
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 2,167
Received 48 Likes on 24 Posts
It gives us a fair inkling of how the UK military, security and intelligence organisations will be treated post-exit. It seems absurd that any EU NATO member would vote-out another NATO member on the basis of operational security, let alone pocketing a quick £Billion.

I think the French desire for a strategic military partnership with the UK is utterly DOA. No doubt one Brussel's based organisation is rather pleased with the broken furniture today but I doubt the other Brussel's based organisation will see it in the same way - especially with the dwindling support in the current US administration for all things NATO. Still, Stu Peach is know for his political correctness, superficial analysis and light-touch style of leadership so I am sure he will play nice.

Anybody else now view the eastern fringe of NATO as sacrificial buffer states rather than a trip-wire?
Just This Once... is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2018, 11:44
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Beyond the M25
Posts: 536
Received 62 Likes on 32 Posts
Originally Posted by Just This Once...
It seems absurd that any EU NATO member would vote-out another NATO member on the basis of operational security, let alone pocketing a quick £Billion.
What's absurd is the UK being surprised that the rules that it helped write up and which it fully agreed to are being enforced. Leaving the EU means the UK is making itself a third-country, and so is excluding itself in accordance with the rules and regulations that it helped draft and implement.

Brexit means Brexit, folks. Own it.
Mil-26Man is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2018, 12:32
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Depending upon circumstances, there could conceivably be security advantages of going solidly with the USA. I suspect that the USA have far better policing capabilities in space for a start. It would also not surprise me if the EU did some other weird political contortion with the Galileo system in the future.

OAP
Onceapilot is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2018, 12:44
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: moraira,spain-Norfolk, UK
Age: 82
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Somewhere on my computer at home (I am in Spain for a while), I have a copy of a book written
by Jean Monnet, K Adenaur & others outlining the path to European Unification. Published about 1933, I think.
"Change things a little at a time until there is no going back" comes to mind.
Their plans were interrupted a bit by WW2.
esa-aardvark is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2018, 12:46
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Beyond the M25
Posts: 536
Received 62 Likes on 32 Posts
We could have access to any system we want, including Galileo. The point is, that as a third-country to any of them we will have to pay. Do you think that the current US administration is minded to give us mates rates?
Mil-26Man is offline  
Old 15th Jun 2018, 09:42
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: moraira,spain-Norfolk, UK
Age: 82
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Read up a bit on Galileo (and argued with some former mates). Galileo seems to be a bit of a vanity
project aimed at cycling taxpayers money around EU Aerospace companies. Some satellite hardware problems,
so costs will go up. PRS service is full of could/should/might statements. Is the present spat just a storm in a teacup ?
esa-aardvark is offline  
Old 15th Jun 2018, 09:48
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Time to give the Airbus space asset exclusivity contract a firm fisting up the backside, fingers spread!
VinRouge is offline  
Old 15th Jun 2018, 10:02
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by VinRouge
Time to give the Airbus space asset exclusivity contract a firm fisting up the backside, fingers spread!
the one they got cos they build the satellites in the UK and employ about 3,000 people in the space sector in England... talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face.
Daysleeper is offline  
Old 15th Jun 2018, 10:04
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by esa-aardvark
Read up a bit on Galileo (and argued with some former mates). Galileo seems to be a bit of a vanity
project aimed at cycling taxpayers money around EU Aerospace companies. Some satellite hardware problems,
so costs will go up. PRS service is full of could/should/might statements.k Is the present spat just a storm in a teacup ?
Public level accuracy <1m and PRS accuracy allegedly at 1cm. It has a lot of applications. Now unavailable, thanks to Brexit, for a whole host of game changing technologies.

As someone said, for those that wanted Brexit, the whole country try is now enjoying the benefit.
VinRouge is offline  
Old 15th Jun 2018, 10:31
  #80 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,264
Received 180 Likes on 106 Posts
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone is talking about the UK being unable to access the Galileo signal, at either level of service? I think the issue is sovereign access to the encryption algorithms, the ability to "see inside" the black boxes and to build our own kit rather than buy from the EU. 3rd party access will cost, and obviously it won't be a sovereign capability, so if they decide to cut us off, we're out. But the service will still be available.

Might have the wrong end of the stick on that, but fairly sure I don't!
PPRuNeUser0211 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.