Armed Forces Get £30bn for Defence Equipment

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by willsonline, Jul 17, 2007.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. OK guys this has been discussed over in ARRSE but obviously there is a large part devoted to the Senior Service...

    VT/BAE to merge headed up by Transco Boss, Sir John Parker. Funding for 6 X T45's have been secured, althoug the b**tards promised us 8!

    And, announcement expected on CVF project probably by the end of the week, to some extent a pretty good settlement, but leads to more questions than answers, like NBR....and have we got enough bodies to man these beasts of a ship, is there adequate escort ships.

    All that palava.
  2. Definitely more questions than answers: what about the rest of the ASTUTE class? - we will need 7/8 to maintain availability of 4 SSNs. DARING Class - 6? - probably need 8/10. Manpower - we still have not got the strategy correct (TOPMAST ??) let alone recruit (and retain) enough manpower to implement it :thumright:
  3. Ye Gods this news must be a bitter pill to swallow for the resident Brown haters.
  4. At one point I think it was 1SL or CDS, a few years back said the T45's were going to be a straight replacement for the Destroyers, ie. 10, this figure has been slowly whittled down to the current 6...

    I wouldn't rule out 1 more though, depends on the requirement of the day, it would be nice if they announced the home ports of the CVFs but a story appeared in the local rag (in pompey) about having a 3mnth consultation on the NBR, yet more delay.
  5. pompey news claimed last friday the new carriers were to based there
  6. Well there's a turn up well done MR B :money: :money:
  7. isnt this to cover the costs of JPA implementation ? ;-)
  8. Nah, the DII money-pit .........
  9. DII - you wont ever get that on board ship ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
  10. No mention of the change of the White Ensign to that of Belgium...
  11. Yehh!!!! you seen the new "60km sniper"?
  12. You would have thought that even for this bunch of shysters (sorry Finks, better have another Pimms) that they'd announce an order of that magnitude to Parliament first. Defence questions on Monday passed with the usual bland nonsense, including :

    John Robertson (Glasgow, North-West) (Lab): I hear what my hon. Friend has said, but he must agree that although the Daring is a class above any other destroyer that has been built on the Clyde, a lot of workers on the Clyde are looking for jobs. It appears that those jobs are linked to the decision whether there will be two carriers or one carrier. Will he make that decision now and let us know what is going on?

    Mr. Ainsworth: I cannot make that decision now, and my hon. Friend must wait a little while for a decision on whether the carriers will be provided. We are in the middle of a substantial shipbuilding programme, and a number of projects are either delivering ships or preparing for production. Over the next 10 years, £14 billion is likely to be allocated to those shipbuilding programmes.

    Now call me a sceptic, but there has never previously been a question of "whether" they'll be provided or not. More sh1te and spin methinks.....
  13. £14 billion? by the time we get them that should maybe give us two corvettes and seven rigid raiders (not the engines just the boats!)

  14. Little more needs to be said, No CV's


  15. OR looked at another way John Robertson is keen to know that his constiuents aint gonna be outta work when it comes to the next General Election.....
  16. Doesn't matter how capable a Daring class maybe; it still cannot be in 2 places at once. And if it is so capable, it's not best to only have 1 in a task group: one A1 OPDEF and that's game over.
  17. You make it sound as though the odd DD or three might get sunk or severely damaged in action, run aground, collide with a mership or sustain some other major operational defect. We all know that NEVER happens, don't we?
  18. You mention top mast and retaining manpower in the same sentance. This is from a serving AB. If it wasnt for the little top mast time people do get there would be an even bigger retainmnet problem.
    Bassicaly there isnt enough ships to fill our comitments and the ships are spending to much time at sea.
    The world is a very different place to it was as is the navy. People dont want to be away as much.
    Topmast might not be a perfect system but its the best we have.
  19. Danny

    The world is a very different place to it was as is the navy. People dont want to be away as much.
    Topmast might not be a perfect system but its the best we have.

    It begs the question, why TF did they join the Navy, if they didn`t want to be away as much? as much as what? Course they don`t do 18 month Far East Commissions anymore do they?[​IMG]

Share This Page