Post Galileo
And it is largely because of the EU that we haven't had to do so since 1945!!
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.....
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.
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.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Mars
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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 wrote:
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.
Also a fully independent navigation system will require about 24 satellites.
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.
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.
And that's largely because of the EU.
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
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
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.....
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.....
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........
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?
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?
Brexit means Brexit, folks. Own it.
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
OAP
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.
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.
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?
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 ?
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 ?
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
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.k Is the present spat just a storm in a teacup ?
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 ?
As someone said, for those that wanted Brexit, the whole country try is now enjoying the benefit.
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!
Might have the wrong end of the stick on that, but fairly sure I don't!