New Google phones UK release date | Pixel XL price, new features, specifications: Pixel X and…
I'm still trying to work out why the latest decision to scrap cat and cap aircraft carriers has been ordered and the decision to go back to ski jump carriers is now the thing to go for.
We have scrapped any aircraft we had capable of using this type of carrier and the only ones available are American F35B.
And from what I have read these are not very good in combat against some of the planes produced by Russia.
We are supposed to in in a save money time and the ones in power seem to think that millions wasted is pocket money.
The Chief of the Defence Staff have been in turn a fast jet RAF pilot and now an Army General. Neither of whom seem to know about naval aviation and I question the quality of their advice. The carriers isn't the only part of military aviation that has had bad decisions for instance look at the current RAF transport fleet and the scrapping of the Nimrod, failure to buy the P3.
The Fleet Air Arm is likely the be in the same situation as before the second world war. People don't seem to learn.
The cynic might think that BAe also had a say in this. They are building the carriers, quoted an exorbitant price to install a catapult and arrester gear and have an interest in producing parts for the F35. If we got a proper carrier then we could buy the cheaper F18 or Rafale as interim measure but then BAe would lose business.
Without a catapult or arrestor gear then other navies (USN and French) will not be able to operate from our decks (oops deck - when it is not in maintenance or refit).
i thought this thread was about postal carriers, any i say bring back our own sea harrier
bring back into service all our harriers and build some new ones as well, instead of relying on the yanks who quite often cheat us out of our economy and everything else.
""Amateurs" = desk soldiers, i.e. those who have little knowledge of the needs of the forces, "
"The Chief of the Defence Staff have been in turn a fast jet RAF pilot and now an Army General. Neither of whom seem to know about naval aviation and I question the quality of their advice."
I think you'll find that this was entirely a political derision, and had little to do with strategic or tactical requirements.
Having said that, the old saying still holds good - no0on ever gets promoted for saying "No"..
Regardless of the colour of the uniform, you don't get to be CDS without being known as a safe pair of hands!
**"Because the cretins that made the decision did not know that the carriers, as ordered, and as johndrew has said. had no catapults or arrestor gear to operate conventional aeroplanes. Amateurs."**
Referring to people as 'cretins' is offensive- please don't do it.
The 'amateurs' you refer to are the chiefs of all three services, and the Chief of the defence staff, all of whom have supported the decision. It has also been supported by Bob Ainsworth, The former Labour defence secretary. He says the government has taken the right decision. It's always so easy to look back and - with the benefit of hindsight - say that this or that decision was wrong, but of course you need to view things in context.
"bring back into service all our harriers and build some new ones as well"
The Harrier was a great aircraft, but technologically it was getting long in the tooth - modern aircraft could, in the words of one defence expert, 'run rings around it'. It's a contentious subject, and I'm certainly not qualified to argue the finer points of the Harrier issue. The decision was made, and that's that.
Referring to "yanks who quite often cheat us out of our economy and everything else." is a bit silly.
"Referring to people as 'cretins' is offensive- please don't do it.2
According to the COD cretin means stupid, which admittedly is offensive, but I didn't think such a mild term offended against normal posting rules (unless I referred directly to another member).
It was, and is, a genuinely held view, I thought that people who made the decision were stupid. However, I withdraw the remark and apologise for any offence caused.
"The 'amateurs' you refer to are the chiefs of all three services, and the Chief of the defence staff, all of whom have supported the decision. "
Like I said, nobody gets promoted for saying no, not since de Gaulle anyway.
Oops, posted too soon.
The amateurs I referred to are those who took the decision, not their advisers.
They were all politicians, and that is their profession.
Hammond did not enter Parliament u til 97, less tha twenty years ago.
He was appointed to Defence barely sis months ago, having previously served in Transport.
I stand by my belief, once again genuinely held, that he is an amateur.
Compare him, for instance, with Menzies Campbell, defence spokesman for his party for many years, and a one time member of the Defence Select Committee.
Hammond never shadowed Defence, or served any Defence interests until he was placed in charge.
I served under people like him , (Fred Mulley, Portillo, Rifkind and the like) for a long time, time servers all.
If they're not amateurs they gave a damned good impression of it when they were in office.
You seem to be under the impression that decisions about military hardware are based purely on the views of the politicians involved, which of course isn't the case.
Military and defence department experts advise on ships and aircraft, but quite obviously there will be budgetary considerations, too. You and I don't have access to the information that goes into the decision making process,so neither of us can make truly informed judgements about what should or should not have been done.
For my part I'm encouraged by the news that all three service chiefs approved the decision.
Cretin comes originally from the French word crétin, used to describe someone who was mentally retarded. It's now regarded as an offensive term.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.