Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Royal Navy sends nuclear sub with cruise missiles to Falkland Islands

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
Just to add, the Astute is that advanced that USN observers who have been allowed to check her out have been gobsmacked at the technology that is that boat.


Cool story. Do you have a link ?


Originally posted by paraphi
To subject. This is all posturing. Because it is a submarine and their movements are generally quite closely guarded we won't know if it is going to the Falklands or not.


There were multiple sources reporting. I woudn't be surprised if the MoD released the info themelves. Even if Argentina knows there is an SSN operating near the Falklands, there are still tens of thousands of square miles of ocean to search.

They are hoping the mere mention of the SSN deployment will calm things down, but I'm sure the submarine is on station, they aren't bluffing about that.




posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Thats was exactly wot i was thinking,


*Salute*

Sorry to quote the post above also, i agree if it was during war with the argy's then sure it would not be mentioned, as its not i can see by saying this it serves how ever you want it to, it may be there it may not be there either way you wont find it and you wont try anything, for all they know is its tracking there every move and waiting to strike, i can see why it was annouced,





[edit on 13-4-2010 by BRITWARRIOR]



posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   
LOL LOL LOL,

I have to laugh at the speculation of you Brits. I have known about the oil off the Falkland Islands for over 20 years now.

Why do you think the British Government sent troops down there in the 1980s. I most certainly was not for any noble reasons like protecting the sheep population. The Argentines knew there was oil down there as well.
The Argentines wanted the oil to pay off their heavy loans to the IMF. They lost the war and their economy has been a train wreck since.

But get it out of your mind right now that there was anything to the first Falklands Island war other than Oil.

Also for your information's...America supplied your Navy with fuel and missile spares...ammunitions...and also observers to monitor and record how the weapons and technologies worked out. I do know that among the SAS types our government observers were interested in how well a silenced version of the Sterling 9mm machine gun worked in those days.

Lots of data and information's was taken down by our observers.

As to the Astute Submarine..most of the systems in that boat are already working in the Virginia and Sea Wolf Class submarines. Also much of that automation is being retro fitted into Aircraft carriers and destroyers.

It is also being installed in 688 class submarines ..those coming in for refit and not decommissioned. Alot of their ships logs are taken by computers now..not roving watches as in the olde days with pounds and pounds of paperwork.

The first attempt at a highly automated submarine here was the Sea Wolf class...to high tech and automated..they are called Pier Wolfs for a reason...to complex...and expensive.

This is the reason for the Virginia class boats. The technology is changing that fast..even within the boats still coming on line.

You folks have been needing a new class of submarine and surface ships for awhile now. Your wrecked economy is not helping at all. Our economy too is slated to follow the same pattern....as thieves take over our country to follow the European models of government by deficit.

They are only now getting around to developing the Falklands Islands oil and do not want any challenges to their investment. Someone has been sitting on these sites for many years. I remember listening to the BBC about a year after the Falklands Island war when they announced that the British Government was taking bids for oil leases off the Falkland Islands.
That was when I realized all those young Brits and Argentines fought and died for oil. It most certainly was not for the sheep. Neither the Argentines nor the Brits were interested in the sheep. And it was most certainly was not for Island sovereignty or allegiance to England. That was just window dressing for a gullible public.

A submarine is the single biggest threat to any surface ship or another submarine out there. This is known information's in the trade.

With the sinking of one ship..the General Belgrano..the whole Argentine Navy went back to port. It was not safe out there and they knew it...they were outclassed by one submarine.

This is why you often have the bands and news reporters there when the fleet comes back home..with all the hoopla...but not at the submarine piers. You don't show your aces...you show your kings queens and jacks..but not your aces. It is just the nature of the business.

They are just giving notice to the Argentines not to try it again. Cheap insurance..is al it is.
But I have known about the oil for over 20 years...your own media/government has been keeping this from many of you. Just as they do here...in he States.

If you folks know the name of the boat..and its skipper..find out if the skipper has been through the Perisher Course. This should tell those of you who are savvy ...quite alot.

Orangetom


[edit on 26-4-2010 by orangetom1999]



posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
LOL LOL LOL,

I have to laugh at the speculation of you Brits. I have known about the oil off the Falkland Islands for over 20 years now.


You're not anything special mate, we've known thar be Oil since the 60's, it's just not been economic until recently to drill it. Get off your high horse.


Originally posted by orangetom1999
But get it out of your mind right now that there was anything to the first Falklands Island war other than Oil.


Actually, it was more about propping up flagging polls for Maggie than either Oil or defending territory. A prime opportunity presented itself to Maggie and she took it.


Originally posted by orangetom1999
Also for your information's...America supplied your Navy with fuel and missile spares...ammunitions...and also observers to monitor and record how the weapons and technologies worked out.


Proof? Aside from getting some Sidewinders out of NATO stock, I am not aware of you supplying the fleet with fuel and ammo. What was the point in the RFA tankers that went with the task force in that case?



Originally posted by orangetom1999
As to the Astute Submarine..most of the systems in that boat are already working in the Virginia and Sea Wolf Class submarines. Also much of that automation is being retro fitted into Aircraft carriers and destroyers.


Really? Proof? You know the exact tech that has gone into an Astute? Even in the factory, parts of the boats are obscured from the wrkers themselves it is that secret. But we're to believe you know it all? I know you're viewed as some sort of "expert" in naval matters here, but your condescending attitude brings out the sceptic in me.


Originally posted by orangetom1999
But I have known about the oil for over 20 years...your own media/government has been keeping this from many of you. Just as they do here...in he States.


Not really. It seems it's you that thinks we've been kept in the dark, while people here have known about oil for decades. Just because you're all treated like mushrooms, don't think we're the same.

EDIT: Oh, as for your Perisher comment, of course he has otherwise he wouldn't be in command of the boat.

[edit on 26/4/10 by stumason]



posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 



First off..I did not originally see Schadens post at the top of this page.


They are hoping the mere mention of the SSN deployment will calm things down, but I'm sure the submarine is on station, they aren't bluffing about that.


Agree with what he is stating here...it is a type of insurance policy to cover the business interests or investments.



stumason,


You're not anything special mate, we've known thar be Oil since the 60's, it's just not been economic until recently to drill it. Get off your high horse.


I don't recall saying I am anything special...as to high horse..one has to be a bit on a high horse themselves to take it that way.

However..you are correct about economically able to drill it. Until then the area has been kept in storage..off the market ..just as is Iraqi oil, Vietnamese oil..et al. The timing has to be correct for it to get into the market.


Actually, it was more about propping up flagging polls for Maggie than either Oil or defending territory. A prime opportunity presented itself to Maggie and she took it.


It was about oil..nothing but oil. Maggie may have used it that way .but so too would any other PM or leader. I don't think for one minute that Maggie was running this show or any other. She was under instructions from someone else...more influential than the mere office of PM or President.

I can remember when the first Iraqi war occurred..Maggie came here to the Aspen Institute to speak to the elder Bush. He went in a dove..ready to do nothing and came out a hawk...with his marching orders and we went to war with Iraq....for oil. Same scenario ..different time and place.
Just history repeating itself. Maggie only gave the elder Bush his marching orders from her boss...and he obeyed.


What was the point in the RFA tankers that went with the task force in that case?


What???? Think this through more in line with how long they were there and how rapidly fuel stocks get burned up. Where is the nearest fuel depot??


Even in the factory, parts of the boats are obscured from the wrkers themselves it is that secret. But we're to believe you know it all? I know you're viewed as some sort of "expert" in naval matters here, but your condescending attitude brings out the sceptic in me.


It should bring out the skeptic in you...precisely. Well stated here. I don't claim to be an expert in naval matters. I don't know from whence you conclude such unless you are yourself on a high horse.

I do know that certain aspects of what is being worked on is kept from those workers who are not cleared for it. They are not allowed in certain areas when this work is going on or uncovered unless they have the right security clearances. Those with a need to know. When it is concluded...the area is secured..and sometimes special protective locks are applied. Each unlocking is carefully logged in as to time date and people working on it. When certain equipments are operating ..only those cleared for it are allowed in these areas.


Just because you're all treated like mushrooms, don't think we're the same.


This would be difficult to determine looking at some of the comments on page 1 of this thread. That you are not also treated like mushrooms by your government , media, and educational system.

However..you are correct in this about many Americans today...by our government, media, and educational system.

Someone here is trying very hard to make Brits, Continentals, and Aussies out of us.

Thanks,
Orangetom














[edit on 26-4-2010 by orangetom1999]



posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


You should try not to re-write history, Orangetom. Oil was not a primary motivator for either the Argentinean invasion, nor the UK's successful task force which took the Islands back.

It is certainly true that the Falklands provides access to the riches of the South Atlantic, whether that is oil, minerals, prestige, water, fisheries et al. However, the stated position of the UK for decades has been the fact that the Islanders are loyal to Britain and Thatcher was able to turn a bad situation to her advantage.

Oil was not the reason. Don't let the obession of the US addiction to oil get in the way of the reality. Just because the US do things for oil does not mean that everyone else does.

Regards



posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 01:11 AM
link   
reply to post by paraphi
 


Most of the oil in the Mid East and the deals still in existence were begun under British Rule. Americans are relative newcomers to this scene after WW2. The mid east was and still is mostly a British arena..not American.

Let me restate this for clarity...contrary to what has been posted among the news media as well as historical education..back then and also today.

The Argentines came to the Falklands in the 1980s because they wanted the sheep.
There ...how's that for sense and clarity.???

The Argentines strapped for cash to the world banks..were counting on the sheep to get them out of debt.

That should clear things up suitably.

If the Argentines wanted the islands (for the sheep) on a claim going back hundreds of years..the time to take the Islands back..was in WW2 when the Brits were so strapped with the war to do anything about it.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


No Orangetom, it does not clear it up because you are wrong in your assertion that the Falklands War was over oil and no amount of “sheep sarcasm” will prove that point.

The Argentineans invaded the Falkland Islands in a nationalistic quest to prop up a failing military Junta. The invasion was very popular in Argentina and the Junta was able to bask for a week or two in heady popularity, before being cut down to size by a British task force. Ironically, the British task force surged forth on the back of nationalism to restore British property to its rightful place.

Oil was never mentioned by either party because that was not the motivation of either belligerent.

It was only in WW2 that Argentinean policy began to covet the Falklands after many decades of acceptance of British jurisdiction and authority.

Besides, the Argentineans would not have been able to counter the British naval presence in the South Atlantic in WW2, so any attempt to take the Islands by force would have failed.

So, to repeat... The 1982 Falklands war was not about oil.

Regards



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 02:23 AM
link   

Someone here is trying very hard to make Brits, Continentals, and Aussies out of us.


This wont ever happen, you have my word.

The Americans will never be good enough at soccer to be British, wont ever be good enough in bed to be European, and wont ever be drunk enough to be Australian.



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 02:29 AM
link   
reply to post by BRITWARRIOR
 


I thought the liberal democrats said they were going to cancel those



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 02:43 AM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


Orangetom, the claims that all wars are about oil is rather fashionable these days but using this argument about the Falklands War of 1982 dislays a remarkable lack of understanding of the British political agenda of 1979-92. The curse of Tory policy throughout their time in office was a didastrous 'short-termism'. Everything that could be sold was sold for an immediate profit with zero consideration for the long term future. BT, Water, Coal, Gas, Electricity, Steel, Aerospace, the lot. All national assets sold to the highest bidder with no thought to the future., with the result that today almost nothing remains in British ownership. Yet in this situation you are trying to claim that the Govt committed to an expensive and risky (yes, risky) war over oil that we could not get near for more than 20 years? Utter bollocks.

A section of Britain, predominantly Tory, DOES have this sense of Britain and Empire, Britains standing as a world power had risen immeasurably, and out of all proportion as I remember, when the SAS stormed the Iranian Embassy in London in 1980. This image of Britain standing up against bullies was still fresh and with Maggies popularity falling again the Argentine aggression could only ever have one outcome if Britains 'standing in the world' was to be maintained. Make no mistake that this was the overriding consideration, nothing else.

Yes, we knew the oil was there. But we also knew it was out of reach with no solution in sight other than 'one day'. To the Govt of the time 'one day' might as well have been 'never'. If it *could* have been reached, it would have been sold.



[edit on 28-4-2010 by waynos]



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


And the timelord gets a white point star!

It is a well known fact that in the 80's the tories sold off anything that wasn't nailed down and that before the Argentine invasion Maggie was less popular than Gordon Brown is now.

The Task force was the perfect way to boost flagging popularity in the polls and the government knew it.

It was a very close run thing though, as the very same government had hacked the military apart in Defence cuts.

I would suggest all interested in the subject read the books Vulcan 607 by Rowland White (About operation Black Buck) and Forgotten voices of the Falklands by Hugh McManners (Who actually took part in the war)



posted on Apr, 28 2010 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
It is also being installed in 688 class submarines ..those coming in for refit and not decommissioned. Alot of their ships logs are taken by computers now..not roving watches as in the olde days with pounds and pounds of paperwork.


I'm really shocked yet pleased to here you talk about this automation retrofitting of he old boats.

It's about time. Besides the normal underway roving watches, I remember getting racked out to stand phone watches in the corpsman's space to monitor the deep depth guage ! For hours you'd be trapped there, off watch, simply to report the ship's depth while rigged for deep submergence. Even at that time, I heard some boats had a CCTV system installed, so it could be monitored from Control.

More automation = smaller crew = less hotracking



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999[/url]

I don't know where you got your info from my friend, but I suggest you check your 'sources'!

Most of the ammunition that was used during the Falkland campaign, was sent from Kineton via the old 7 MU site at Quedgeley, Gloucestershire, just down the road from me, where the main railhead was.

From there it went via rail to Portsmouth and Southampton and thus onward to the units involved.

As to your assertion that the USA supplied various stores and equipment, this is just plainly innaccurate.

There were only two things we received from Americans during the campaign: One was intelligence, which was often out of date and therefore could not be relied upon and the other was a couple of dozen renegade ex Marine snipers, none of whom survived the conflict.



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 02:14 AM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 



Yet in this situation you are trying to claim that the Govt committed to an expensive and risky (yes, risky) war over oil that we could not get near for more than 20 years? Utter bollocks.


Yes..Indeed..I am saying exactly that. What many governments do at the behest of their handlers...is to take oil off the market. At the same time they must keep competitors from getting it.

For America ...at the behest of her handlers... the solution was to develop Vietnam, at taxpayer expense, under the guise of a war. Then when the time was right ..to put the whole nation into storage by allowing a Communist government to take over the whole country. The oil remained in storage/off the market and competitors out.

In the Falklands..the thing of import was to keep competitors out..the Argentines..and keep the oil off the market until the time was right to develop it.

Once again..I don't think the Argentines came to get the sheep. Which was my main point to Paraphi.

The British government can say anything they want to their own people..just as does ours. But they came for the oil..both parties to this conflict. What they spoon fed the public was something different.

And before I forget...Schaden,


I'm really shocked yet pleased to here you talk about this automation retrofitting of he old boats.


I was surprised to see some of it on the USS Enterprise...as olde as is that ship. Laptop computers and the watches taking log readings and downloading them into some kind of Tough Book Laptop computer. They must be tough and somewhat sailor proof because the one I saw has a huge crack diagonally across the screen and it still worked.

By the way..on the subject of submarines..what do you make of the decision to put women on our submarines?? I am very dubious about it but I have been expecting it for some years now since back when they put women on surface ships...back then I knew it was coming. It is all over the papers here in this area.

fritz,

My sources have to do with one of the local gun shop dealers here who is also licensed to purchase fully automatic weapons. He was one of the dealers through whom and for some reason the government wanted to make purchases of several lots of this silenced Sterling Machine Gun version of which I earlier spoke..for testing. He did not win the bid..but during the process engaged in several conversations with military members overseeing the bidding.

Fuel supplies and I think it is called the Sidewinder missile were in great demand.
I don't recall how many supply ships were lost to the Argentines but one of them was called the Atlantic Conveyer. I have seen this very ship here in this shipyard for repairs. I do believe there were one or two more lost to the Argentines along with the Sheffield.
This caused concerns in the supply area...and other arrangements were quickly made. Now whether any of this material reached the front lines in the speed of which events happened I do not know. I am certain that fuel and missile stores were used as fuel goes quickly in the heat of battle and the moving of troops and supplies, ships etc.
I have no doubt that you received your stores from those sources but this is what I was told by this local gun store owner.
The other reason I remember this particular gun store owner is that he had one of the few surviving versions of the M1 Garand Rifle chambered in .303 British in an attempt to market this to the British Military. It did not go over well and the British kept their SMLE rifles in service for many years and as history records.


Thanks to all for their posts,
Orangetom



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
Just to add, the Astute is that advanced that USN observers who have been allowed to check her out have been gobsmacked at the technology that is that boat. Until a new class of US submarine is launched, she is apparently the most advanced submarine on the planet.



You mean just like the Typhoon which is apparently a match for the F-22, or the Type 45 destroyer which is the most advanced warship of its type in the world in spite of having no missiles, and let's not even start about the SA80 and how long that "revolutionary rifle" took to fix (and then only by the Germans) not to mention just about every other piece of British designed military equipment which has always proclaimed itself to be the best, when in fact it is often among the worst.

Want an example relevant to the Falklands, how about the Tigerfish torpedo, originally touted as the most advanced wire guided homing torpedo in the world (I actually remember Marconi saying that). Of course the truth was that it was essentially useless, as witnessed by the British using a Mk.VIII torpedo designed in 1925 in preference to the "world's best torpedo", because the Navy knew it didn't work.

Of course the actual truth with the Astute class is that the British were unable to even finish the lead boat without calling in the real experts from the Electric Boat Division to help them fix it. I guess the Americans were amazed at the quality of their own work.

news.bbc.co.uk...

But let's not let facts get in the way of the usual British BS about their weapons systems.

[edit on 30-4-2010 by Retseh]



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Retseh
 


I was not aware of those details of the Astute class construction problems. I am not surprised.

I do know that teams from General Dynamics Electric Boat also went down under to help the Aussies with updates and modifications of their Collins class boats when they were having problems.

Every new design has teething problems ..not just with the boat but with the teams building them. With the Brits there has not been a new boat built in some time. It does not take long to lose the skilled labor force they had on the last designs as they seek employment elsewhere or retire.
This is exactly what has happened here and in a much shorter time period...among engineers as well as supervision/labor. With the British it would be a stark transition. I thought this as well some time past when many of the photos were being posted of the construction process. There is an extensive learning curve of several boats before everyone gets familiar and fluent in the entire process. With the British this will be just about the time the last of three boats gets finished and significant number these peoples get laid off. They will keep just enough for post shakedown availability work. (PSA)

But what you have told me by the link is that some of the systems incorporated into the Virgina's is available or installed in the Astute class.
I was thinking this myself ..several posts up.

Many of the peoples here on this thread are proud to be British. I do not fault them for this. Their government may not be the brightest light in the land as is also the case for us here stateside. But I do not fault them for their being a proud people...and proud to be British.
I would that we have more people like this here stateside..proud to be Yanks. And proud of the stock and struggle from whence we came..not ashamed as is the fashion today.
I myself ..while not an anglophile as the expression goes..am very interested in certain aspects of British History..in particular the English Civil War and Oliver Cromwell...or the Lord Protector as he is sometimes called. Nasby Field and Marston Moor...etc.

Our government as well is following the British government template...Our military process will suffer accordingly as has theirs...as our military and its procurement procedures is highly political...and getting more so...about the politics and not the shooters out in the field and what they need/require. A sad state of affairs..not just for the Brits but us as well.

Edit to add...What you describe as Electric Boat helping the Brits with their problems on the Astute class boats..is also a part of the special arrangement America has had with Britian since the Boxer Rebellion and particularly WW1. This arrangement appears to have been extended to Australia as well since American companies and our military have extensive investments there after pulling out of much of Asia.

This arrangement seems also to have been in force in certain aspects of supplies to the Brits in their Falklands Islands buisness...where mostly as observers we remained in the background...and rightly so.

Thanks,
Orangetom



[edit on 30-4-2010 by orangetom1999]



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 01:48 PM
link   
How the Falklands war really started: link to bbc news

Really it was nothing more than an opportunistic war started by a government with terrible problems at home to boost their poll ratings. In the obvious comparison, at least we chose a war that could be quickly and easily won.



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by fritz
 


The UK's participation with the US in any activity require's the same agreement, be it a country or individual; No one can take advantage of you with out your consent.



posted on Apr, 30 2010 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


Hi Orangetom, you're a lot more forgiving than I am


In the submarine field, and this is just a personal opinion of course, only some of the Russian designs and the German Type 212 truly impress me, The Virginia class is a scaled down Sea Wolf, and the Sea Wolf itself doesn't particularly bowl me over in terms of being a next generation design, but then I haven't exactly been given a guided tour. As long as our most advanced submarine launched anti-submarine weapon remains the Type 48 ADCAP, I'll remain unimpressed of our capabilities regardless of the platform. Our submarines still do not possess a truly long range anti submarine weapon, a flaw in my opinion.

The British certainly have ability, but their stagnant development process renders them permanently playing catch up in every field. I could speculate about why they are so incredibly slow, but the days of radical developments like TSR-2 are certainly long gone, they spend most of their time fielding kit that is a half generation out of date and then calling it the best in the world, the Typhoon being somewhat applicable, ASRAAM even more so, with the Type 45 being the ultimate example.

One of these days you and I really need to discuss what happened to the USS Scorpion - perhaps the second greatest underwater conspiracy theory in history.

[edit on 30-4-2010 by Retseh]






top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join