Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Reasons Why The Uk Doesn't Need An Aircraft Carrier


Recommended Posts

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8354829/Libya-David-Cameron-vows-not-to-abandon-Libyan-people.html

Dr Liam Fox, the Defence Secretary, insisted that such criticism was a “red herring” because the base in Cyprus meant Britain could still operate jets over Libya if required.

Genius. I bet he said this with a straight face. Just as long as the country is within range of Cyprus it's all fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reason 3 - every time we significantly reduce our military capabilities we are plunged into a very expensive set of wars.

And boy, we could really do with a proper shooting war right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chinese/Russians/Iranians and [insert smart dictator here] have bought large quantities of anti ship missiles. The Chinese Russians and Iranians in particular have fast deadly ones which they have 1000s of. Meaning they can only be used against countries with little military capability. Use them against India, China or Russia and a carrier would be sunk pretty darned quickly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chinese/Russians/Iranians and [insert smart dictator here] have bought large quantities of anti ship missiles. The Chinese Russians and Iranians in particular have fast deadly ones which they have 1000s of. Meaning they can only be used against countries with little military capability. Use them against India, China or Russia and a carrier would be sunk pretty darned quickly.

You overestimate the military capability of those nations. There is also a lot more to military success than equipment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Britain has always had the same strategy for defence. All the other European powers are obliged to maintain large armies to defend their land borders. Britain alone can forego a large army and instead build a large navy. This prevents any of them landing their army on British soil. Thus Britain's strategy for hundreds of years has been to prevent any other European power from growing large enough that it has the budget to build a strong army and a strong navy. An aircraft carrier does nothing for defence, it is a pure attack weapon. An airfield is vastly superior to an aircraft carrier sitting off the Kent coast.

The problem we have is the admirals have forgotten their place. They like to sail around the world on the bridge of giant ships dropping bombs on little brown men. They want these carriers so they will be invited along to the party by the Americans. They could not care less the about defence of the realm, their real job. Well I for one don't want to pay for their toys. We could have a whole submarine fleet for the same price. Small disposable subs cannot be nuked because they are cheap and they cannot be found. Yet they can still sink the biggest carrier. But what glory is there for an admiral in such a ship? Commanding 20 sailors whilst hiding under the sea. No lets build a carrier so we can stand on the bridge and salute the American admirals on their giant ships. Its ******** and has nothing to do with defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Britain has always had the same strategy for defence. All the other European powers are obliged to maintain large armies to defend their land borders. Britain alone can forego a large army and instead build a large navy. This prevents any of them landing their army on British soil. Thus Britain's strategy for hundreds of years has been to prevent any other European power from growing large enough that it has the budget to build a strong army and a strong navy. An aircraft carrier does nothing for defence, it is a pure attack weapon. An airfield is vastly superior to an aircraft carrier sitting off the Kent coast.

It's too late now.If they had really wanted to save Britain they should have blown up the runways at Heathrow.The invasion is over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reason 5: We can call on the "faultless" logic of Injin to argue bore thread-hijack and sidetrack our way out of any situation.

Reason 7: The Banks have taken all the money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You overestimate the military capability of those nations. There is also a lot more to military success than equipment.

Yes training, but I severely doubt Chinese/Russian/Iranian military is little more than handing people a rifle and telling then to rush the enemy.

And the days of enemy pilots having less than 100 hours is long gone. The funnest story is the Icelandic wargames where NATO went against former warsaw pact pilots back in the 1990s. The NATO pilots thought they'd walk it. Their aircraft and training was supposed to be the best in the world. What really happened surprised them, MiG29 pilots would eat them for breakfast time and again and the Mig29s were power restricted AND flew with a full load. It took 100s of mock dogfights before the NATO pilots could adapt to the tactics of the Mig pilots.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reason 7: The Banks have taken all the money.

Reason 8: in a few years the Royal Navy will be handed over to Brussels to become part of the EU Navy, so why would any sensible government waste money buying hardware that they'll be giving away shortly? Let the French pay for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8354829/Libya-David-Cameron-vows-not-to-abandon-Libyan-people.html

Genius. I bet he said this with a straight face. Just as long as the country is within range of Cyprus it's all fine.

yes because Libya will be the last war the Uk is involved in , they won't have enough money to fight in anything after that

Link to post
Share on other sites

Britain has always had the same strategy for defence. All the other European powers are obliged to maintain large armies to defend their land borders. Britain alone can forego a large army and instead build a large navy. This prevents any of them landing their army on British soil. Thus Britain's strategy for hundreds of years has been to prevent any other European power from growing large enough that it has the budget to build a strong army and a strong navy. An aircraft carrier does nothing for defence, it is a pure attack weapon. An airfield is vastly superior to an aircraft carrier sitting off the Kent coast.

The problem we have is the admirals have forgotten their place. They like to sail around the world on the bridge of giant ships dropping bombs on little brown men. They want these carriers so they will be invited along to the party by the Americans. They could not care less the about defence of the realm, their real job. Well I for one don't want to pay for their toys. We could have a whole submarine fleet for the same price. Small disposable subs cannot be nuked because they are cheap and they cannot be found. Yet they can still sink the biggest carrier. But what glory is there for an admiral in such a ship? Commanding 20 sailors whilst hiding under the sea. No lets build a carrier so we can stand on the bridge and salute the American admirals on their giant ships. Its ******** and has nothing to do with defence.

Nicely put. I was hearing about weekly helicopter trips by navy officers to play golf, this was from a friend of a friend who was a civilian navy instructor. He thought it was entirely fair since (I paraphrase) "these people are prepared to die for their country". Unbelievable arrogance, he'd only been there a few months and had swallowed it whole.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicely put. I was hearing about weekly helicopter trips by navy officers to play golf, this was from a friend of a friend who was a civilian navy instructor. He thought it was entirely fair since (I paraphrase) "these people are prepared to die for their country". Unbelievable arrogance, he'd only been there a few months and had swallowed it whole.

+1

The only deaths in the Navy since WWII have been from Cirrhosis of the liver :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Check it out for yourself.....

http://www.naval-history.net/xDKCas1003-Intro.htm

Edit: I did spot one CPO who died of natural causes. Could possibly have been one rum too many!

I know, I know. Jeez you take one pop at our bell bottomed botty boys and everyone comes out in their defence :rolleyes:

I am just jealous tbh, wish I had spent my time floating around, seeing the world and getting a wicked tan :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Carriers are easy targets for new generation of carrier sinker missiles.

quite. Carriers are obsolete until missile defense catches up with the missiles available. But then, are we making assumptions that that has not already happened?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.