Originally posted by Retseh
The only thing you can ever guarantee with a British military development initiative is that it will be late, and grossly over-budget.
I thought as were are talking ships I would post something appropriate for context and balance
Lesson on How Not to Build a Navy Ship - NY Times
Enough said.
Regards
|
reply to post by FredT
I wish I could copy a lengthy piece I just added to another Weaponery thread, "Aircraft Carriers--A Simple Alternative," but I cannot.
I really hate to shoot down your aircraft carriers, but duty calls. If you want the real deal on navies in general, look for the piece by Aliensun on
the above thread.
|
Originally posted by Retseh
My prediction - they'll build the first one, which will be delivered late and hugely over-budget, the air wing and self defence weapons will be
stripped to reduce cost overheads. The only reason for its completion will be to preserve jobs in the ship building industry.
I really couldn't have been much closer with my prediction could I.
www.timesonline.co.uk...
Anyone still want to argue this one with me hmmmmm?
|
reply to post by Retseh
Yep, me. They will get built (I still wish they hadn't been ordered), The Times article has been rubbished, and both will be able to carry the F35
(assuming Lockheed Martin don't continue to screw things up and it goes into production) as well as providing cover/additional capacity in the LPH
role. Now that you're back, you might like to take the time to have a look at some of the other threads here including those discussing problems with
the M4 and M16 in A/stan or provide us with some more light entertainment by demonstrating your 'knowledge' of modern Naval sensor systems. I think
your claims of infallibility are a little over stated.
Nostradamus claimed his powers were a gift from God. You seem to get your 'insights' from easy to read on-line journals. Welcome back Troll, We've
missed you.
|
