Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:I still find it hard to believe that Britain is better than America in this area of military hardware, unless the Yanks have got a trick up their sleeves. Assuming on course they're not wearing t-shirts!!

The trick we have up our sleeve is known as the Carrier Air Wing. It does the same job as the Brits' boat, only many, many others, too.

ArbeitsSchu wrote:Its hardly sabre-rattling. Its replacing an older vessel in the same role. What are we supposed to do? Send out something old and crappy just so the Argies don't get upset? Swap the old ship for HMS Belfast? HMS Victory?

Gods no. In proper British fashion I expect ships, aircraft, and the Black Watch blasting bagpipes so loud they can hear them in Argentina. I expect the British have already secretly deployed guided haggis launchers on the island. Further, I believe Matty has made it down to Tijuana (he might be...delayed a few days) heading south.

Like a hurricane. Hurricane Mattrym.

Tyyr wrote:

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Sorry, but what's the ship at the far right middle? The Frank S. Cable? The Holland? Looks like a sub tender, although I see no reason for a sub tender to be in a carrier air wing. Just curious.

Frazzled wrote:This is not a big deal. We've had Aegis ships since before most of the posters on this board were born.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_Combat_System

Which is the point, it's an older model of the tech.

The British version is superior because it's brand spanking new. When the US decides to move on to a new generation anti-air ship, then it will build something with the best tech available at that time, which will in turn supercede the UK version.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JEB_Stuart wrote:I find the comment by Argentina's president to be amusing. She accuses Britain of carrying on with colonial goals, but she neglects the fact that Falklanders are overwhelmingly supportive of British rule.

The logic seems to rely entirely on British people being white, and therefore horrible colonials, whereas Argentinians are not white, and therefore couldn't possibly have colonial ambitions.

gak just got real.

Samus_aran115 wrote:

Tyyr wrote:

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Sorry, but what's the ship at the far right middle? The Frank S. Cable? The Holland? Looks like a sub tender, although I see no reason for a sub tender to be in a carrier air wing. Just curious.

It looks like USS(USNS)Camden which is a replenishment ship, fuel, ammo, and food for the group.

AustonT wrote:In that last paragraph DoD you mean cost wise, because I figure you can get 3 maybe 4 ABs for what a Type 45 costs.

I wish I could say I believed the USN could crank out a type 45 like destroyer in 5 years, instead they plan on a fourth flight of ABs instead of either the DDG-1000 or the CG(X) both of which the 4th flight will replace. It's fething ridiculous. The USN is doing it's level best to procure the least capable equipment at the highest possible cost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
DEAR GOD! how did the cost of the Type 45s go from 270M to 6B?!?!

British accounting is notoriously bad at predicting costs on government projects.

daedalus wrote:Heh. I halfway expected to see Thatcher standing at the bow, wielding a sabre, and screaming "Charge!"

Lol can you imagine how badly they would react if the Navy changed the name to HMS Thatcher


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sonophos wrote:

AustonT wrote:In that last paragraph DoD you mean cost wise, because I figure you can get 3 maybe 4 ABs for what a Type 45 costs.

I wish I could say I believed the USN could crank out a type 45 like destroyer in 5 years, instead they plan on a fourth flight of ABs instead of either the DDG-1000 or the CG(X) both of which the 4th flight will replace. It's fething ridiculous. The USN is doing it's level best to procure the least capable equipment at the highest possible cost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
DEAR GOD! how did the cost of the Type 45s go from 270M to 6B?!?!

British accounting is notoriously bad at predicting costs on government projects.

Indeed, remember the Nimrods!?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/01/27/nimrod_scrappage/

What Nimrods?

They would have been bloody useful against submarines but even GW couldn't justify that points to cost ratio.

ArbeitsSchu wrote:Its hardly sabre-rattling. Its replacing an older vessel in the same role. What are we supposed to do? Send out something old and crappy just so the Argies don't get upset? Swap the old ship for HMS Belfast? HMS Victory?

I for one would love to see the Victory taken from its dry-dock in Portsmouth, and set sail for South America.

(Reminds me of that Episode of South Park where the Red Coats are sailing back to take control of North American for the Queen )

sebster wrote:

Frazzled wrote:This is not a big deal. We've had Aegis ships since before most of the posters on this board were born.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_Combat_System

Which is the point, it's an older model of the tech.

The British version is superior because it's brand spanking new. When the US decides to move on to a new generation anti-air ship, then it will build something with the best tech available at that time, which will in turn supercede the UK version.

And thus technology advances. It's no coincidence that the advances in military tech and subsequent advances in other areas are so closely linked.

sebster wrote:

JEB_Stuart wrote:I find the comment by Argentina's president to be amusing. She accuses Britain of carrying on with colonial goals, but she neglects the fact that Falklanders are overwhelmingly supportive of British rule.

The logic seems to rely entirely on British people being white, and therefore horrible colonials, whereas Argentinians are not white, and therefore couldn't possibly have colonial ambitions.

It's the logic of a government desperate for credibility with it's claim, and so it desperately seeks to use the old Colonial ghost to try and irk some sympathy from other former colonies around it.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:I still find it hard to believe that Britain is better than America in this area of military hardware, unless the Yanks have got a trick up their sleeves. Assuming on course they're not wearing t-shirts!!

We had a big thread on a possible second conflict in the Falklands...
This was covered...
Not sure where that thread went...

Sonophos wrote:British accounting is notoriously bad at predicting costs on government projects.

Sort of. Really, any application of future tech will have fairly loose, best case scenario budgets when first proposed, because you can’t budget for so many unknowns. The same thing happens in the private sector sector too, whenever they’re attempting to deploy new technology. There’s a new kind of oil and gas thing up on our northern coast that was supposed to take three years and cost $500 million, but there’s been something like $2 billion spent already, it’s been four years and they’re still three or more years from completion.

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:And thus technology advances. It's no coincidence that the advances in military tech and subsequent advances in other areas are so closely linked.

Definitely. It’s also why the drive to have better tech in everything at all times is complete madness. Anything you develop will be superceded by someone else as soon as they develop a similar tech, and you can’t replace weapons platforms that quickly.

It's the logic of a government desperate for credibility with it's claim, and so it desperately seeks to use the old Colonial ghost to try and irk some sympathy from other former colonies around it.

Definitely.