2x QE Aircraft Carriers -- Queen Elisabeth, Ark Royal ???????/ what? Its HMS Prince of Wales, not ark royal. Other than that, and your rant on your political opinion, you share very similar views as me :P I wish to see billions more pumped in to defence. Persoanlly i support Iraq war but no longer should we join US forces in a war we didnt want to go in to initially. Id like to see 8 type 45s, both QE class operational, and 9 ssn's.
@Pringles352 Lets hope they spell "Queen Elizabeth" properly though!!!!! Whist talking names, they should actually be Warspite and Dreadnought to reflect the really great ships of our Navy not the names made "popular by stupid media!
The U.K just needs to pull out of the other countries, we shouldn't be going in to every fucking war USA does to help them and help other people because as soon as something happens to Britain like usual we are on our own. So why waste money/ships/planes/men and resources for everyone else?
@Elitepoosniff problem is not the budget, problem is waste, too much waste. If UK managed to maintain 327 000 professionals on same budget in 2000, why it can't do same now with less than 250 000 personal in armed forces. Pays and inflation didn't go that much up in past 10 years, and costs have increased only by 15% over past decade.
UK's MOD manges to waste 6.5 billion pounds on all sorts of shit, and 11 billion pounds on wars we can't give a flying fuck about.
@micoforion Its the MOD ordering destroyers, Frigates, subs and carriers along with carrier fighter jets and then cancelling numbers that cost shit loads more money then it would to keep those ordered ships, same in the RAF with the Nimrods cancelled them and then had to pay more money to get rid of them than I would of cost to make them and then have them in service for 20 years, a stupid Government along with a MOD that ruins itself and puts Britain at danger.
@Elitepoosniff its more than just government and MOD to blame, much has to do with lobby politics and military industrial complex which purposely lies to get contracts and when you have cost overruns they bet MOD will pick up the tab. Whole mentality must change, right now we are still paying for stupidity and ineptitude, BTW UK needs a bare minimum 8 Type 45 destroyers, I am betting another 2-4 destroyers will be ordered in 2015, and tax payers will again need to pick up the tab.
@Elitepoosniff as costs of new ships will rise, due to new contracts, and UK can't afford to support US in ever single war they fight,simply put we aren't rich enough to afford 12 billion pounds on wars alone, especially not in recession, btw this is the cost of 2011 Afghan mission and pull out of Iraq.
We also must look to our EU allies for future defence programs we can't afford to develop new systems on our own anymore, too expensive.
@micoforion so you put 75000 and there families out looking for jobs and hosing out when there's a rescission more people add to the dole I wonder what a saving that would be
the type 26 are replacing the type 23's also i thaught it was 12-14 type 26's. Then the Vanguards are being replaced, with a new submarine design, more than likely a better varient of the astute. Im just hopefull the navy will build on these and hopefully add 2 more destroyers and type 26 frigates and 1 more astute. I also hope these planes are ready for the QE's launch, although i doubt it.
What suprised me was that the numbers of planes in the RAF has actually increased in the past 10 days!! We're getting more planes so that's good. We're cutting the number of Challengers down though.
@MrXray2011 i dont no i no were have jets and over aircraft on order but didnt no we have received any wot aircraft was thay
and i no there is UCAV like the taranis comeing and i hope the replica stealth jet is true i no thay worked on it in i think 2000 when thay declassification of a single photograph of the jet who nose tho it could be out now
and yes cutting the CH2 but we dont need them at min so no point in upgradeing all of them
@wiganerrmc Taranis looks like it will be another world beater for BAE! There was another UCAV that I saw (not in real life, you understand) that was a turbo-prop that had a huge payload. I can only hope that, like you said we're going to spend £150 Billion over the next 8 years because if we do not then we're done as a Major World Power. It doesn't matter whether we need the 'CH2' at the moment- what if things go wrong in Iran, or Argentina or any other country...
@MrXray2011 we wouldn't have an armoured battalion big enough. Iran has 1,800 tanks while we're cutting ours from 420 to 200- even Argentina has a larger amount of tanks than that (200).
We should build new tanks and lots of them.
Really we need to re-arm because we're going to be taken by suprise and it won't end well for us because we don't have enough tech! This is all Labour's fault... stupid Marxists couldn't handle the UK's finances.
@MrXray2011 thing with Argentina thay couldnt even invade the falklands now we have 1000 marines there plus 2 eurofighters wot could probley take on all the argies airforce
and iran thay dont have any good tanks 200 CH" could take on all of these plus we would have about 4.000 abrams with us plus we have about 1000 warriors wot could probley take on most of there tanks
@wiganerrmc The US would not help us just like they didn't help us in '82!!! And yeah we would beat the Argies but the Iranian's have lots of tanks (not as good as the CH2 but still
@MrXray2011 no im not onabout US helping us with the argies we wouldnt need it thay couldnt take the falklands now in 82 britian had about 60 marines on the island with very little equipment i dont even think we have jets there thats the only reason argies got on the island and it was only because britian withdrew some ships from around the falklands thats only reason thay invaded now we have atleast 1 nuclear sub atleast 1 type 23 and a destroyer and its now 4 eurofighters
@MrXray2011 >>>> and next bit yes iran have about 1000-1500 tanks but none of them are good i think there best tank is a t-72 and 1 CH2 in iraq destroyed 7 t-72s before thay could even get a shot off i would pick 200 CH2 over all irans tanks anbd plus anyway the ch2 will have support from apaches wot would pick them tanks off like flys
@wiganerrmc But you talked about "4.000 abrams". And yeah we have good tech but it can only be in one place at a time. And we have a Type 45 going next month too. The Argies will never get the Falkland's they're ours- always have been and always will be!
@MrXray2011 ye im onabout the 4.000 abrams in iran if we invaded because US would be on are side plus many more countrys we have sent a some ships there and US as sent battle groups because iran said thay was gona block strait of hormuz were most of the worlds oil passes through
@wiganerrmc Ah right; I'm with you now. Iran will never close the Straight of Hormuz because the US and the UK said no! It will never get to the stage that we have yo use force because Iran will not risk war with the UK and the US.
The number of Type 45's may be low as they're planning on buying UXV Combatants- which would explain it... I would like to see the Royal Navy get the UXV Combatant as well. HMS QE will be used as a helicopter carrier for the first few months then the F35 should be ready.
@MrXray2011 I've never heard of the UXV combatant although having a look on wikipedia it looks like a useful ship and if they did commit to this ship it would show their intentions for developing UAV technology.
@thethreelions3 Have you seen Taranis? That is the type of UCAV that would fly from the UXV. They will be able to dogfight and attack ground targets!!! It would give us a huge advantage in war and peacekeeping.
@MrXray2011 Yeah i wish they would show more of taranis thow, a mean seeing it flying or taking off etc also the prototype cost something like 140m which would mean a lot of mone to equip them. And also could these not need an airstrip? although these could be used to control them when their in flight. I think these (if built) would be used for small UAV's, unmanned land vehicles and unmanned helecopters.
@thethreelions3 It hasn't flown yet, it is due to fly, for the first time later this year in Australia. And the UXV would "...have large quantities of Taranis type aircraft." Although what the UK deems as 'large quantities' is different to the US. UK= 10... USA= 300. The RN should get UXV's and Tananis type UCAV's. The UXV would be designed to fly all types of new UAV/UCAV's and possibly F-35B's. They would also be a destroyer with an emphasis on land attack.
@MrXray2011 if you say so, although im not sure from the pictures ive seen, it looks like all it has is a helecopter deck and if the taranis takes off in the same way as its american counterpart it will need a runway. I hope the F35B's are added to the navy's aircraft also, replace the hole the harrier left.
@thethreelions3 It'll use 'cats and traps' but they won't be big enough for larger, manned jets- only Taranis and other new UCAV's. We're getting the F-35C to replace the Harrier, it is better as the 'C' version has better range, pay load and stability at low speed. And the wing tips fold in so we can fit more onto the QE Class. I guess we could get the 'B' version to fly from HMS Ocean and larger flight decks of Frigates and Destroyers.
@MrXray2011 i dont thnk we will purchase both tbh i think ocean, albion class, frigates and destroyers will stick to helecopters. Your previous comment does say 'and possibly F35B's' to fly on the UXV?
@thethreelions3 Yeah they will but I was just saying that if they did buy the F35B then they would be able to land on Frigates and Destroyers. I think that it said "I guess we could get the 'B' version to fly from HMS Ocean..." Whether we would... I doubt it. We're getting apx 150 F35's and a total of about 200-250 EF Typhoons. Then more UAV/ UCAV's.
@MrXray2011 150 F35's? The QE can hold 40, then theres spare ones if anything happens + i thought the RAF were buying some, maybe even replacing the typhoon although thats unlikely.
@MrXray2011 What a pathetic naval strength that will be. When the last Falklands war finished it was stated by HM Govmt. then that the RN could never go below 50 Destroyers/frigates, as that was the realistic min. to carry out our security! So much for Government promises! With a RN of the above size we may as well pack up the bloody lot and leave it to France/USA to keep NATO at sea.
@semperfidelis677 One must remember that technology has advanced since 1982 but one ship can only be in one place at a time. France and the USA are behind, technologically. But we have to make cuts although we're still paying £26,000 to the workshy- that's more than some people who work are on! The Government have set aside £150 Billion for the military (ships and planes) for the next 8 years! If we put this money to good use then we would be 'sailing' if you'll pardon the pun
They could of spent money designing a carrier version of the Typhoon but instead they gave the USA 4 billion to help design a stealth aircraft which can land on a carrier.
The USA forgot to put the landing hook in a good place so after recent trials it can't catch the cables. We have a plan to have 13 F-35 on each carrier and 5 yes 5 apaches on out current helicopter carrier. 5?
@FunnyVideoCollector The F-35 has the small advantage of being stealthy though that's it's only advantage.
The QE Class will have 13 F35's in peace time- remembering that we're getting around 150 of them to begin with so we can boost the number to 50+ when needed. And again with HMS Ocean/ Illustrious the number of Apache's will be increased in times of war. HMS Ocean is not normally armed with Apache's anyway. Normally Lynx, Merlin's and SeaKing's...
We can all hope the Royal Navy is up to its normal standards like it should be when we were known as one of the best navy powers. but with the Goverment knowin fuck all about Military stuff all they care about is there next pay check its just ganna get worse, we could save 10Billion 10BILLION!, if we buy Super Honets instead of these new Lightning fighters from the US, we could buy hundreds of Super Honets enough for our 2 new carriers and some to put on the falklands. but noo FUCK U GOVERMENT.
Strikes me that, if we absolutely had to, I mean if the shit REALLY hit the fan and the need was dire enough, we could recreate a significantly bigger navy pretty quickly simply by reactivating decommissioned warships and calling up retired sailors back into service. UK still has quite a few deactivated ships in storage - say we recalled all personnel who retired from the Navy in the last ten years or so to crew them.....of course this would only happen in the unlikely event of a major war.
@MrCutsteel What decommissioned warships are you on about? The vast majority have been scrapped, there's about two in Haslar creek at presnt...big help they would be, plus the fact that they are about 30+ years old!
The days when Britannia ruled the waves are long gone, sadly. However, we do potentially still have the basis of a half decent fleet, but we need more hulls in the water. Could do with a couple of dozen global corvettes / light frigates to bolster the fleet numbers-wise in an affordable way. Also could do with more than 7 SSNs. By the way, that simulation of the QE carriers is out of date. The ski-jump will not now be fitted as they are now being completed with angled decks and catapults.
There will be nothing left soon even the new carriers, they are being modified now extensively to take the JCA (F35) as the harriers no longer exist. The chances of both carriers ever being launched and used are remote, yes they will be built, but as the Navy says as things stand today we would be pushed to put one to sea never mind two carriers, no man power due to the thousands of sailors made redundant over the last 18 months and more to come. A very sad state of affairs.
@bangkapi10240 They were going to be ready in 2015 but the F-35's weren't going to be ready until 2018/9 and so they would have only flown the harriers for a couple of years. What is the point in having 3rd gen fighters when we could have 5th gen stealth fighters??!! HMS QE will go to sea and HMS PoW will be in 'extended readiness' although by 2018, when she is due to be finished the economic crisis will be long gone and they'll both go to sea, if we have the money!!
@bangkapi10240 im Australian so i may not know all about whats happening but you dont build two ships and then not use them so im betting theyre going to sail once built and a lot of your sailors are comming to aus as its recruiting them and americans to make up for ours who jumped ship for the mines so by the times these are floating you be able to get some back anyhow i came here looking for myself in footage when your queen was here im in one of parades.
I just want to say thanks to Australia although i support our government its bad what there doing to our sailors but i guess as our ships get more advance they don't even need as many sailors.
@bangkapi10240 Yes your summary is unfortunately correct..I doubt if we will ever see both carriers in commission at all. Lets face it, UK cant afford 'em!!
A few things wrong with this...we are having 13x Type 26's which will replace the Type 23's as they come into service. The Ocean goiing Corvettes have yet to be designed or even officially spoken about. The Vanguard Class will be replaced from 2020 by a new SSBN, as far as I know at least one will be used as a Special Forces carrier, if the economy picks up then there is a possibility that we will use two or even three.
@JBC814 Ummmmm no!!! We don't want a united europe... and if a united europe is the future of the UK then I'm moving to Australia.
RULE BRITANNIA, God Save the Queen and for goodness sake Mr Cameron... do what any good Conservative leader would do and either re-negotiate the EU or leave it. We don't like it, we never have. All we want is free trade... not to be ruled by the French, Belgians or Germans.
@MrXray2011 I was speaking only in respect to their common defense through NATO, not the EU. I totally agree that the common currency idea was going too far with the "united Europe" trend. Hopefully, Europe will return to its previous sovereign currencies in the near future, if not ASAP. Britain should be the first to make a break from the EU, if for no other reason than to avoid bankruptcy.
@JBC814 The UK should leave the EU and join the NAFTA it would benefit us more than the EU. And yes I know that all of the Royal Families of Britain, Germany and Russia were related I do History, it's kind of an important part to the whole war thing. And we would not have lost the war. Britain invented the Tank in 1917 and were were forcing the German's back. Troops were pouring in from the Empire by 1916- once we realised that it wasn't going to be "over by Chirstmas."
@MrXray2011 We would have won with or without the USA's help... remember we were the most powerful nation... the German Navy was smaller and less technologically advanced, the Royal Navy was blockading all major German ports in 1917 and Germany was slowly starving out... they were also suffering a Flu epidemic.
Germany were losing by 1916... then in 1917 they knew that they were going to lose and in 1918 they really did lose.
@mollymoo71 That much is very clear. Although it is not uncommon for people to forget (thick, moronic people mind you) that Britain was, 60 years ago the most powerful nation on earth... and still would be if we hadn't given the Empire independance.
@MrXray2011 The sad part is; we weren't in a position to do otherwise, we were stoney broke. The two world wars had emptied the chest. we only finished paying our war debt to the USA about three years ago, that is how bad things were. Social changes in the UK were also prevalent, the NHS etc...everything had changed, we weren't the country we were in 1939 anymore, in all aspects. Sad but true.
@JBC814 Onward with the dissolution of the EU and the Euro alike. Waste of time and much needed money. If you're British then you should be ashamed of yourself. Although I doubt you are because no Briton's actually like the EU or most of the countries in it!
Britain lost it's ability to voice an opinion after they lost a war to one of their little colonies ;) so when I say jump, you say how high :) hoorah baby.
@Trollawk The War of Independance was primarily started over a fight over taxes. British officials raised taxes after protected that special little colony from the French. If it wasn't for the Royal Navy, America could be French. Or German if they successfully carried out the wars. But ultimately, this doesn't matter. You may still be living a few centuries ago, but the world has moved on.
@Trollawk Well technically we lost our voice in 1950, almost 200 years later!!! Look up Plan Red. The planned US invasion of the British Empire.T hey didn't do it... why, I hear you ask? Because they [America] figured that we could raise millions of well trained troops in the same amount of time that you could raise hundreds of thousands. Then the Royal Navy blockaded the US and would have starved you out like we did to the Germans in 1917-8. You didn't fight us because you would lose!
@Trollawk King George was not the sharpest tool in the shed, as they say, and he had incompetent advisers at that time. Obviously, the U.S. could have been Britain's ticket to world domination, but Britain did not realize that she was sitting on a gold mine that was worth more than all the other potential colonies of the world. So much for empire building. Did the Spanish make the same mistake with South America, or were they facing a different set of circumstances?
I think by 2020/25 Britain will have a thoroughly modern high tech navy more capable than it's ever been, it might be leaner but a lot meaner than previous generations...RULE BRITANNIA !!!
@MrXray2011 The reason why the british navy isnt that great at the moment is because we are trying to actually cut our deficits not spend on high tech warships, we could if we wanted to commision a navy bigger than the US navy ,but there would be no point because lets be honest the UK and the US are close allies so we can depend on you.
1 Queen Elizabeth carrier will be in active service while the other will be in extended readiness. Albion and Bulwark in a similar situation. HMS Ocean currently entering refitted will be replaced temporary by HMS Illustrious, one of these will be decommissioned pending the analysis of which is more appropriate for the role.
Let's be frank here. The fact that once again there is an annoying Yank on here who feels the need to desecrate everything that isn't American and in particular something that is British, just shows how insecure he must really feel.
@lankinator24 It's sad really because most American's are actually nice, respectful people- it's just the odd few which seem to like residing on here that make them all look like complete fools.
yes ok ur going on abit i am patriotic bu in 2015 a whoping 500 billion extra pounds will be put in so we will probabely get what u say but please look stuf up before u say it
RN faces some really tough challenges ahead, I am worried about what's to become of RN come 2025/7. My attitude is that UK needs a good navy, as UK is more active in humanitarian operations, we can hardly send in army to deliver aid to earthquake affected zone, Haiti fine example. UK needs to look towards common EU defence policy, work with France, Holland, Germany and Spain in creating a common naval doctrine geared for force projection as well as humanitarian relief. Europe is our future IMHO.
Guys, 2010 Defence White paper was what I used to get idea what Royal Navy might have circa 2020-2025, UK will have no other ships, actually even my list might be bit optimistic, UK under same Defence White paper had 25+ escorts of which 6 are Destroyers and 20 Frigates. The reality is RN might not get its 20 Frigates but plug holes with smaller corvettes and patrol ships. 4 bay class might be reduced to 3 and at least 2 Replenishment ships might be sacrificed if conservatives have their way.
@micoforion We're not going to have 20 Frigates, we're getting 13 Type 26's to replace the Type 23 one-for-one. As a type 23 goes out of service a Type 26 will replace it. We will have a total escort of 19 ships (Destroyers,6 and Frigates,13) We need more but this may come in the form of the UXV Combatant. We should have stuck with having 12 Type 45 as were initially planned and 20 Type 26's.
@micoforion We're getting a total of 6 Destroyers and 13 Frigates... these are subject to change but these are the current and (planned) future ships.
@cubosensaj Trype 45s use British radars, not sure which radar you are referring to, but if you are referring to S1850M its UK radar system, S1850M is based on SMART-L radar, but its not the same radar, i UK developed system, no other navy uses it, its a search radar with 500km search range, although at that range only flying objects will be detected due to Earth's curvature. Dutch systems are less capable.
and i believe the smart-l is getting upgraded because they are going to be a part of the nato missle shield or something and the range is going to be 2000km to detect missles
and who knew the "peace loving" (or at least thats how other countries view them) dutch made such capable systems?
@cubosensaj Its 400km from what I understood, UK's system is 500km, but as i've already said, curvature of Earth prevents accurate detection of low flying objects or warships, so real detection range is around 180-220km.
As to the Dutch, this radar isn't something special, its a phased array, most modern warships are equipped with one, be it US, French/UK or German/Dutch version.
The Battleship Hood sums up the Royal Navy. Held in much esteem by the British, Taught to be invincible and feared abroad, Centuries of victory behind them, Slightly outdated, but crewed by chipper and plucky sailors that will win trough with British grit and spirit..........would in reality be blown out of the water in 5 minutes of real battle, not try that again, and spend the rest of the war supporting the US navy.
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 Battlecruiser Hood was never considered invincible, and indeed it was a pride of navy, bu it was criticized for being under armored and not up to the latest standards, Also Royal Navy role was much greater, Royal Navy engagements were limited to the Atlantic and few missions outside Atlantic were primarily ones to protect Singapore and Australia. And I agree that old fashion attitude that prevailed at the Admiralty was main fault for RN's poor showing at the start of WW2.
@micoforion total 'small' ships will be 12 Type 45's and at least 10 frigates. We'll also have dozens of transport/amphibious assault ships (which can double as helicopter carriers) and support craft (such as resupply and minesweeper/layer craft).
@titytit We're not getting 12 type 45's we're getting 6- which is terrible. My guess is that once the economy picks up we may get more but I doubt it. We're having 13x Type 26's and maybe ocean going corvettes.
Amphibious warships= Albion and Bulwark, one to be mothballed incase she is needed. The Bay class can carry troops= 3 of them. Ocean (going into refit) so covered by Illustrious until 2014. Total 6x Amphibious warships. Not dozens I'm afraid. I'm British BTW.
@titytit We're not getting 12.... We were going to get 12, then it was cut to 8 then to 6. It was cut from 8 to 6 so that we could bring forward the Type 26. The only new destroyer that we might get would be the UXV Combatant... no more Type 45's!!! 6 is our lot.
plus the navy has ordered more of all types of ships. And when i said dozens i meant the number including all the support and supply ships the RN has, which number in the dozens.
the RN is also getting more amphib warships and transports.
@titytit The Royal Navy is not getting more destroyers... amphibious warfare ships... alas we are getting new frigates but only 13. HMS Albion is being mothballed and HMS Ocean may be retired and HMS Illustrious would take over her role as Helicopter Carrier. We will have a total of; 6x Type 45, 13x Type 23/26, 2x QE Class, 7x Astute Class, 2x Albion Class, 1x Ocean Class, 1x Invinsible Class, 3x Bay Class, 4x Vanguard replacements. Thats it (apart from RFA ships)
@MrXray2011 the government has said that many contracts are being put on hold,which would include the other 6 type 45s,the frigate contract,and contract for other craft
Both aircraft carriers and the other smaller transport/amphib and helicotpers carriers will be completed but only used when needed, as its cheaper to maintain and run them when they are only used when needed.It's bigger than what you said, and will be bigger in the future, but it all depends on the goverments spending
@titytit The Navy is the same size that I told you. If you do not believe me, look on the RN website. 6x Destroyers, 13x Frigates, 7x Astute/ Traflagar Class, 4x Vanguard Class, 2x QE Class, 2x Albion Class, 2x Ocean/ Invinsible Class, 3x Bay Class. As I said that is it, for now. I suspect that that will be it, overall for many years to come. It is sad but it is also fact. I've not heard anything about the other half of this 'contract'. 6x Type 45's were cancelled, not postponed!
@MrXray2011 the government actually said that it would (for some inexplicable reason) const more to cancel contracts, so they decided to put most naval contracts on hold, not cancel them. We will eventually have the 12 destroyers, 20+ frigates, 2 aircraft carriers, multiple Albion/bay Class ships, dozens of small/support craft etc but it will probably be a rather long time before they are all completed/resumed.
@titytit Actually that was the aircaft carriers that would have cost more to cancel; the reason was that the builder, BAE Systems, made the contracts watertight and there were big penalty clauses for cancellation, so it actually would have cost more to cancel. However, no contracts were ever signed for the other six Type 45s and the frigates are still in the design stage, so no building contract signed for them either.
@titytit: I believe they did, but only for the contracts that were actually signed, ie for ships 1-6. There never were any contracts for ships 7-12. 12 ships were originally in the planning assumptions, yes, but building contracts were only signed for the first 6. I'd like to think we were going to get the rest but I can't see it happening, not with a £35 billion shortfall in MOD funding. It would require an increase in the defence budget - not going to happen anytime soon, I'm afraid.
@titytit In a sense, we DO have the money right now, just that it's being spent on other things - welfare, health, foreign aid etc. It's all about politics. In the Cold War period we spent 4-5% of GDP on defence, now it's just over 2%. If we went back to, say, 4%, we could afford the sort of Navy (and Army, and RAF) many of us would like to see, but political priorities lie elsewhere. I think our leaders are being shortsighted, but nothing I can do about it.
@MrCutsteel As for the RAF - big cuts there too I'm afraid. Originally we were supposed to be getting 232 Typhoons, now down to 160, Tornado numbers reduced, Nimrod scrapped, Harriers cut etc.
@MrCutsteel the typhoons and harriers were replaced plane for plane with Joint Strike Fighters (i tihnk thats the F-35?). at least thats what they said in the defence report a while back.
@titytit: Nope, the F35 isn't in production yet and won't enter service for another decade or so (maybe longer). Meanwhile, the Harriers have been scrapped (and the Tornado and Typhoon numbers cut) effective immediately. If and when we do get F35, I can't see us getting more than a few dozen of them at most - nowhere near a plane for plane replacement. What we really should be doing is buying F18 or Rafale as a stopgap, but our political leaders think otherwise.
@MrCutsteel The Rafale`s is the best equivalent option for maintaining modern Air Naval capabilities, but what about a cheaper alternative such as the SAAB Grippen? BAE is involved in the manufacturing of some of the components of the aircraft, I guess Britain could even start manufacturing the aircraft with the proper agreements with SAAB.
@titytit: I think they may be made to realise their mistake eventually, yes, but it may take a major military defeat to bring the point home to them. Worrying times.
@lankinator24 We can just mothball them in our huge naval yards, maybe you could too..........Oh wait you sold all your (Rusty old) naval facilities. Anyways we ain't bankrupt yet, but we would still have a huge fleet even if it was cut in half. The US navy would still have five times the number of carriers you losers have and six times the number of proper subs. Royal navy will become a small patrol fleet, best you guys stay near your coast and not get hurt by the big boys with proper fleets.
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 We do have a proper fleet that would sail incase of war. And yes your fleet is much bigger than ours. We may only have 11 submarines at the moment but the Astute class are the best in the world. All nuclear powered and all can fire weapons in anger, some could destroy the world so do you define them as 'proper' now? It's yanks like you that give the US a bad name. And look up the Type 45!!!!
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 Yeah but we don't need to try and rule the world anymore. We've been there and done that!!!
And well done your Nimitz class does need to be protected and so will our QE class. Why are you trying to insult the UK we've supported you in every war just like you did when we were the worlds super power, we are allies and always defend eachother. As I have said before it's Americans like you that make the whole country look like arrogant fools!!!
@MrXray2011 You never ruled the world, you just went around invading weaker nations and playing bully-boy. You had about 70 years of Naval supremecy and slid into decay after WW1. The problem is that you are nearly always a very junior supporter, not even giving 10% of the manpower we provide. You Brits seem to think we in the USA should be grateful for your miniscule help.
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 We ruled the world from about 1800 to about 1950 when the Labour government gave the Empire away and the US can hardly talk about invading other nations. And we did still have naval supremacy after WWI look up 'Plan Red' and you'll find that the US knew that they could not beat the Royal Navy. And we only provide 10% because you have 1.5 million in your army and we have 100,000. How can you compare the two. And the fact is we do help and you should be grateful.
@MrXray2011 Gave the empire away? boo hoo, I doubt India, Ireland, The Middle East (which you fucked up) and most of Africa were sorry to see you go. Plan red was a load of bullshit.
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 Ireland went in 1922, and Africa is worse off now than it was underthe British Empire and do you think that 9/11 would have happened if we still controlled the Middle East. And yes Plan Red was a load of Bullshit because your country thought that it could fight the British Empire. I am not denying that the US is more powerful, I'm glad that we're allies and most of us friends. It's a shame that people like you feel this way towards us [Brits]
@MrXray2011 So you would regard your percived right to rule these countries, regardless of how they are doing now, as more important then the wishes of those people to determine their own destiny? Typical self absorbed Brit. I think 9/11 happened because you did such a bad job when you controlled the middle east. Plan red was less about naval strategy, it was going to be the invasion of Canada. Which you would have never gotten back considering how many men we could have thrown into the fight.
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 You look into Plan Red they realised that Canadian Forces would attack them and the British Empire could have had million of troops (outnumbering the US) in Canada within months. In the words of an American "We did not go to war with Britain, because everyone who went to war with Britain lost" that was an American Historian speaking about why the US didn't go to war with the BE. We would have blockaded the US with our Navy which would have forced you to surrender anyway.
@MrXray2011 Ha Ha I doubt you would have had the stomach for another bloody war in the 1920's especially after the disaster that was WW1. Anyways you were too busy shooting civilians in Ireland in the early 20's. You're strategy of blockade wouldn't have worked, we would have been self sufficient in all essential resources and food for a few years, and could have got what we needed from South America. Where would you get these millions of men from? The graveyards of Flanders? HA HA HA
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 I hope that any other American reading these comments made by this knob head are a much nicer human being because this cunt is the sort of person that the world thinks the US is made of. Thankfully I know differently. We would have been able to blockade you and the millions of troops would have come from the Empire (you know that EMpire that was the largest that the world has or ever will see.) The fact is the US is being over taken as the only super power in the world
@MrXray2011 ... by China who you owe Trillions to, India who, by 2025, will have the largest population on earth (yes ever bigger than China) and the European Union- we have technology, power and influence. I may not like the EU as it is at the moment (effecting our laws and immigration) but it will become the most powerful political union on earth by 2025. The USA is in trouble, you owe Trillions to a nation which is building it's strenght in many ways including politically, economically etc.
@MrXray2011 This sounds just like the mid 1950's when the US took over from the UK as the worlds superpower... Oh dear, you're going to be having the argument with someone from China soon.
"The bodies from Flanders" US soldiers died there to you dumb, idiotic fucking CUNT. You really are the most inhuman person that I have ever talked to. You may not like us but that does not mean that you can talk about 'Our Glorious Dead' like that. You're a sick cunt. And I hate using that word.
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 Fuck off you self obessed arse hole. You think that the USA is undefeatable- thats why 9/11 came as such as shock and you all shat yourselves and went to war to feel all big and important again after a nasty boy came and hurt you.
In the UK, on the other hand, the day after the terror attacks people were at the bus stops and on the trains not really giving a shit- we can come through anything unlike you. And I am not generalisng here not all yanks are like you
@MrXray2011 Well I think 3,500 civilians dying in that kind of an attack would come as a surprise to any nation, especially seeing as it was the first time in history such an attack had been carried out. Of course you got back on the buses, you've had plenty of experience from bombs thanks to the nut jobs your disgraceful conduct in Ireland has helped foster,....By the way wasn't that the country that shot its way out from your mighty "empire", are you still harping on about 7/7 as you call it.
@MrXray2011 Awwww I think you just don't like facts do you. Go back to looking at black and white photo's of your "Glorious" Empire and all the wonderous things it achieved, I'm sure they hold the British in esteem all over the world for the acts of selfless nation building you embarked on in your proud history....US is gonna have competition with China, but unlike you we have no plans on rolling over and SELLING off our assets as you done in the 70's and 80's. That is why you are a joke today.
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 HAHAHAHAHAH I laugh at your sheer stupidity, most of the world would not exist if the British Empire hadn't ruled the world in fact you amazing all singing all dancing country couldn't exist without us. How do you feel about that you're basically just a Brit. You think that we are seen as a joke- maybe in your sick and twisted mind but we are seen as the second most influential country in the world, we have better ships than you in the navy just not as many.
@MrXray2011 Well you don't have as many aircraft carrier.....Oh wait you have none. Most of the world wouldn't exist without you? Well thanks for inventing Germany, France Italy and all the post Roman empire western nations. Great Job. HA HA. I doubt America would be the great nation it is today if we had to deal with your restrictive sensabilities and class structure. We are part Brit, but as we say in Philly, even the butt ugliest of Mothers gives birth to at least one winner. Ha Ha.
We have one aircraft carrier and a helicopter carrier which can also be used as an ACC. The only reason that they don't carry planes is because the Harriers have all been taken out of service. And ok there were countries before the British Empire, and Germany didn't exist until 1871 (After the BE was created.) That is a pretty funny saying TBH that is one thing that you have said that made me smile. You're wrong but it's funny.
@MrXray2011 In the bigger picture you guy's would be better off accepting you are a spent force and develop anti-submarine ships and support vessel's that would aid our fleet better than a small aircraft carrier that would just crowd the battle space and require extra men to co-ordinate. I mean really how could your midget carriers with about 20 harriers achieve anything more than blowing a few out-dated Argentinian Turbo props out of the sky? RN should be USSN (united states support navy) Amen
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 What a stupid comment, we are the most technologically advanced navy in the world, yet because you have 10x the amount of ships you assume that the USN is the best. And so what if the harriers were outdated, they did the job- we still rule the Falklands.
@MrXray2011 No you are not. You have out-dated sub's, can't decide whether to update your out-dated SBN missile systems, you just retired the Nimrod which was a fossil from the 60's and have NO aircraft carrier. 6 medium sized modern destroyers doesn't count as advanced. Yeah you beat up a banana republic. I'd like to see how you would have fared against something like the Soviet navy. You got lucky in that war, they fused their bombs wrong, could have been more Tommy cookers like the Sheffield.
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 Outdated subs!!! The Trafalgar class came in between the early 80's to early 1990's, and are now being replaced by the Astute Class- which is better than any US sub at the moment. The Vanguard Class came in during the early to late 1990's and are going to be replaced by 2020- again these new subs will be better than their American counterparts. Yes 6 destroyers, the most advanced in the world, as well as 13 large frigates.
@MrXray2011 Bullshit, I think you are just another self obsessed Brit. Us navy has already got the next gen in service. You are ten years behind, How do you know they are the best?, have they released the classified specs? have you got all the international specs of every sub, so you can compare? ha ha taught not. Popaganda and national pride dosen't make you the best. your navy sucks, all your new boats are smaller copies of American designs and concepts. You are not a powerful navy anymore.
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 Oh FUCK YOU!!! The Astute Class are newer than your's so they are naturally going to be better than yours. Naxt Gen my arse!!! You think that I'm "just another self obsessed Brit" well you're not a typical American as you're being a complete cunt towards me. We have redesigned all aspects of our navy we don't use Aegis- we developed a newer and better system. The guns on most of your ships are built by BAE Systems so fuck you and your incorrect views on the UK and the RN
@MrXray2011 Blah Blah British made, British is better, Blah Blah. Who cares about guns? it's not 1815, missiles made in the USA will be what sinks the surface threat. Your designs are just cheap knock-off's of our designs. Your whole navy is a joke, I laughed when I saw that show on Discovery about the Ark Royal, what an amateur outfit the RN is. You developed a newer and better system?, wrong you just used our design as a bass and slapped some extras on top.French are Europe's true sea power.
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 actually a lot of missiles are made in china, even the ones your precious navy use. In fact i think you'd be surprised how much Britain actually does, one of our main exports are weapons through companies like BAE. and as for talking about France, they have one big aircraft carrier, ive seen it up close and really is nothing special, though give the French their due they did bail you out during your little revolution, without them you'd still be British subjects
@Pippinn13 Yeah you make lots of things for India I hear. LOL. You're even giving them the Ark Royal. Ha Ha. Your flagship will be gutted on the banks of the Ganges. Ha Ha Ha. USA USA.
So what's your purpose in coming on this page, dedicated to the Royal Navy, and insulting them? The US and the UK are strong allies. You should be insulting the Chinese Navy, not an allied one. So fed up of ignorant trolls like you...
You represent a tiny idiotic part of the American population. Stop making your entire country look bad by acting like an arrogant prick over the internet.
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 and your point is??? There is quite a large population in Britain of Indian migrants and descendants of migrants, and if had you actually studied the history of India under Britain, you'd know that Britain didn't invade India or conquer it, and despite India having independence they are still part of the commonwealth of nations and a good friend of Britain unlike America, oh and newer and bigger don't mean better which is also why we've continued to use Nimrods
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 The Chinooks that you designed... and we've lost 1. Tell me how's the USS Cole now tut tut tut ... Can't even protect your own all singing, all dancing navy. tut tut tut.
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 oh and if america is soooo great how come they essentially have no space programme and their astronauts rely on the russians to get them up into space, the guys at nasa must be pretty thick how many people have they killed with their shitty shuttles and rockets???? no wonder they gone to the russians
@Pippinn13 We put a man on the moon 40 years ago, you couldn't even put a man in orbit today. We are developing the replacement for the shuttle. We did more for manned exploration of space than you ever could. By the way space technology is another field in which the French surpass you, suppose you'll be borrowing a rocket from them, they migh do you a deal when your using their carrier.
Why can't we all just get along?
dodododa 3 days ago
And this is Royal Navy I'd love to see:
2x QE Aircraft Carriers -- Queen Elisabeth, Ark Royal ???????/ what? Its HMS Prince of Wales, not ark royal. Other than that, and your rant on your political opinion, you share very similar views as me :P I wish to see billions more pumped in to defence. Persoanlly i support Iraq war but no longer should we join US forces in a war we didnt want to go in to initially. Id like to see 8 type 45s, both QE class operational, and 9 ssn's.
Pringles352 1 week ago
@Pringles352 Lets hope they spell "Queen Elizabeth" properly though!!!!! Whist talking names, they should actually be Warspite and Dreadnought to reflect the really great ships of our Navy not the names made "popular by stupid media!
semperfidelis677 1 week ago
The U.K just needs to pull out of the other countries, we shouldn't be going in to every fucking war USA does to help them and help other people because as soon as something happens to Britain like usual we are on our own. So why waste money/ships/planes/men and resources for everyone else?
oiReWiin 1 week ago
We should make the Royal navy bigger! not down size the armed forces, put more money into the defence budget.
Elitepoosniff 1 week ago 5
@Elitepoosniff problem is not the budget, problem is waste, too much waste. If UK managed to maintain 327 000 professionals on same budget in 2000, why it can't do same now with less than 250 000 personal in armed forces. Pays and inflation didn't go that much up in past 10 years, and costs have increased only by 15% over past decade.
UK's MOD manges to waste 6.5 billion pounds on all sorts of shit, and 11 billion pounds on wars we can't give a flying fuck about.
micoforion 1 week ago
@micoforion Its the MOD ordering destroyers, Frigates, subs and carriers along with carrier fighter jets and then cancelling numbers that cost shit loads more money then it would to keep those ordered ships, same in the RAF with the Nimrods cancelled them and then had to pay more money to get rid of them than I would of cost to make them and then have them in service for 20 years, a stupid Government along with a MOD that ruins itself and puts Britain at danger.
Elitepoosniff 1 week ago
@Elitepoosniff its more than just government and MOD to blame, much has to do with lobby politics and military industrial complex which purposely lies to get contracts and when you have cost overruns they bet MOD will pick up the tab. Whole mentality must change, right now we are still paying for stupidity and ineptitude, BTW UK needs a bare minimum 8 Type 45 destroyers, I am betting another 2-4 destroyers will be ordered in 2015, and tax payers will again need to pick up the tab.
micoforion 1 week ago
@Elitepoosniff as costs of new ships will rise, due to new contracts, and UK can't afford to support US in ever single war they fight,simply put we aren't rich enough to afford 12 billion pounds on wars alone, especially not in recession, btw this is the cost of 2011 Afghan mission and pull out of Iraq.
We also must look to our EU allies for future defence programs we can't afford to develop new systems on our own anymore, too expensive.
micoforion 1 week ago
@micoforion so you put 75000 and there families out looking for jobs and hosing out when there's a rescission more people add to the dole I wonder what a saving that would be
Tony2438 3 days ago in playlist Favorite videos
the type 26 are replacing the type 23's also i thaught it was 12-14 type 26's. Then the Vanguards are being replaced, with a new submarine design, more than likely a better varient of the astute. Im just hopefull the navy will build on these and hopefully add 2 more destroyers and type 26 frigates and 1 more astute. I also hope these planes are ready for the QE's launch, although i doubt it.
thethreelions3 3 weeks ago
@thethreelions3 yes the british goverment have put aside £150 billion pound to spend on equipment like warships and jets over the next 8years
wiganerrmc 3 weeks ago
@wiganerrmc
What suprised me was that the numbers of planes in the RAF has actually increased in the past 10 days!! We're getting more planes so that's good. We're cutting the number of Challengers down though.
MrXray2011 3 weeks ago
@MrXray2011 i dont no i no were have jets and over aircraft on order but didnt no we have received any wot aircraft was thay
and i no there is UCAV like the taranis comeing and i hope the replica stealth jet is true i no thay worked on it in i think 2000 when thay declassification of a single photograph of the jet who nose tho it could be out now
and yes cutting the CH2 but we dont need them at min so no point in upgradeing all of them
wiganerrmc 3 weeks ago
@wiganerrmc Taranis looks like it will be another world beater for BAE! There was another UCAV that I saw (not in real life, you understand) that was a turbo-prop that had a huge payload. I can only hope that, like you said we're going to spend £150 Billion over the next 8 years because if we do not then we're done as a Major World Power. It doesn't matter whether we need the 'CH2' at the moment- what if things go wrong in Iran, or Argentina or any other country...
MrXray2011 3 weeks ago
@MrXray2011 we wouldn't have an armoured battalion big enough. Iran has 1,800 tanks while we're cutting ours from 420 to 200- even Argentina has a larger amount of tanks than that (200).
We should build new tanks and lots of them.
Really we need to re-arm because we're going to be taken by suprise and it won't end well for us because we don't have enough tech! This is all Labour's fault... stupid Marxists couldn't handle the UK's finances.
MrXray2011 3 weeks ago
@MrXray2011 thing with Argentina thay couldnt even invade the falklands now we have 1000 marines there plus 2 eurofighters wot could probley take on all the argies airforce
and iran thay dont have any good tanks 200 CH" could take on all of these plus we would have about 4.000 abrams with us plus we have about 1000 warriors wot could probley take on most of there tanks
wiganerrmc 3 weeks ago
@wiganerrmc The US would not help us just like they didn't help us in '82!!! And yeah we would beat the Argies but the Iranian's have lots of tanks (not as good as the CH2 but still
MrXray2011 3 weeks ago
@MrXray2011 no im not onabout US helping us with the argies we wouldnt need it thay couldnt take the falklands now in 82 britian had about 60 marines on the island with very little equipment i dont even think we have jets there thats the only reason argies got on the island and it was only because britian withdrew some ships from around the falklands thats only reason thay invaded now we have atleast 1 nuclear sub atleast 1 type 23 and a destroyer and its now 4 eurofighters
wiganerrmc 3 weeks ago
@MrXray2011 >>>> and next bit yes iran have about 1000-1500 tanks but none of them are good i think there best tank is a t-72 and 1 CH2 in iraq destroyed 7 t-72s before thay could even get a shot off i would pick 200 CH2 over all irans tanks anbd plus anyway the ch2 will have support from apaches wot would pick them tanks off like flys
wiganerrmc 3 weeks ago
@wiganerrmc But you talked about "4.000 abrams". And yeah we have good tech but it can only be in one place at a time. And we have a Type 45 going next month too. The Argies will never get the Falkland's they're ours- always have been and always will be!
MrXray2011 3 weeks ago
@MrXray2011 ye im onabout the 4.000 abrams in iran if we invaded because US would be on are side plus many more countrys we have sent a some ships there and US as sent battle groups because iran said thay was gona block strait of hormuz were most of the worlds oil passes through
wiganerrmc 2 weeks ago
@wiganerrmc Ah right; I'm with you now. Iran will never close the Straight of Hormuz because the US and the UK said no! It will never get to the stage that we have yo use force because Iran will not risk war with the UK and the US.
MrXray2011 2 weeks ago
@MrXray2011 ye i no but thay said thay was gona shut it thats why we sent warships there
wiganerrmc 2 weeks ago
@wiganerrmc That was a 'just in case measure'. Iran hasn't got the military power to combat the UK, let alone the UK and the USA.
MrXray2011 2 weeks ago
@thethreelions3 Current plans are;
To keep the number of Type 45's at 6,
13 Type 26's
7 Astute Class'
4 Vanguard replacements.
The number of Type 45's may be low as they're planning on buying UXV Combatants- which would explain it... I would like to see the Royal Navy get the UXV Combatant as well. HMS QE will be used as a helicopter carrier for the first few months then the F35 should be ready.
MrXray2011 3 weeks ago
@MrXray2011 I've never heard of the UXV combatant although having a look on wikipedia it looks like a useful ship and if they did commit to this ship it would show their intentions for developing UAV technology.
thethreelions3 3 weeks ago
@thethreelions3 Have you seen Taranis? That is the type of UCAV that would fly from the UXV. They will be able to dogfight and attack ground targets!!! It would give us a huge advantage in war and peacekeeping.
MrXray2011 3 weeks ago
@MrXray2011 Yeah i wish they would show more of taranis thow, a mean seeing it flying or taking off etc also the prototype cost something like 140m which would mean a lot of mone to equip them. And also could these not need an airstrip? although these could be used to control them when their in flight. I think these (if built) would be used for small UAV's, unmanned land vehicles and unmanned helecopters.
thethreelions3 3 weeks ago
@thethreelions3 It hasn't flown yet, it is due to fly, for the first time later this year in Australia. And the UXV would "...have large quantities of Taranis type aircraft." Although what the UK deems as 'large quantities' is different to the US. UK= 10... USA= 300. The RN should get UXV's and Tananis type UCAV's. The UXV would be designed to fly all types of new UAV/UCAV's and possibly F-35B's. They would also be a destroyer with an emphasis on land attack.
MrXray2011 3 weeks ago
@MrXray2011 if you say so, although im not sure from the pictures ive seen, it looks like all it has is a helecopter deck and if the taranis takes off in the same way as its american counterpart it will need a runway. I hope the F35B's are added to the navy's aircraft also, replace the hole the harrier left.
thethreelions3 3 weeks ago
@thethreelions3 It'll use 'cats and traps' but they won't be big enough for larger, manned jets- only Taranis and other new UCAV's. We're getting the F-35C to replace the Harrier, it is better as the 'C' version has better range, pay load and stability at low speed. And the wing tips fold in so we can fit more onto the QE Class. I guess we could get the 'B' version to fly from HMS Ocean and larger flight decks of Frigates and Destroyers.
MrXray2011 2 weeks ago
@MrXray2011 i dont thnk we will purchase both tbh i think ocean, albion class, frigates and destroyers will stick to helecopters. Your previous comment does say 'and possibly F35B's' to fly on the UXV?
thethreelions3 2 weeks ago
@thethreelions3 Yeah they will but I was just saying that if they did buy the F35B then they would be able to land on Frigates and Destroyers. I think that it said "I guess we could get the 'B' version to fly from HMS Ocean..." Whether we would... I doubt it. We're getting apx 150 F35's and a total of about 200-250 EF Typhoons. Then more UAV/ UCAV's.
MrXray2011 2 weeks ago
@MrXray2011 150 F35's? The QE can hold 40, then theres spare ones if anything happens + i thought the RAF were buying some, maybe even replacing the typhoon although thats unlikely.
thethreelions3 2 weeks ago
@MrXray2011 What a pathetic naval strength that will be. When the last Falklands war finished it was stated by HM Govmt. then that the RN could never go below 50 Destroyers/frigates, as that was the realistic min. to carry out our security! So much for Government promises! With a RN of the above size we may as well pack up the bloody lot and leave it to France/USA to keep NATO at sea.
semperfidelis677 3 weeks ago
@semperfidelis677 One must remember that technology has advanced since 1982 but one ship can only be in one place at a time. France and the USA are behind, technologically. But we have to make cuts although we're still paying £26,000 to the workshy- that's more than some people who work are on! The Government have set aside £150 Billion for the military (ships and planes) for the next 8 years! If we put this money to good use then we would be 'sailing' if you'll pardon the pun
MrXray2011 3 weeks ago
They could of spent money designing a carrier version of the Typhoon but instead they gave the USA 4 billion to help design a stealth aircraft which can land on a carrier.
The USA forgot to put the landing hook in a good place so after recent trials it can't catch the cables. We have a plan to have 13 F-35 on each carrier and 5 yes 5 apaches on out current helicopter carrier. 5?
FunnyVideoCollector 3 weeks ago
@FunnyVideoCollector The F-35 has the small advantage of being stealthy though that's it's only advantage.
The QE Class will have 13 F35's in peace time- remembering that we're getting around 150 of them to begin with so we can boost the number to 50+ when needed. And again with HMS Ocean/ Illustrious the number of Apache's will be increased in times of war. HMS Ocean is not normally armed with Apache's anyway. Normally Lynx, Merlin's and SeaKing's...
MrXray2011 3 weeks ago
@MrXray2011 as she was designed for the Royal Marines as was HMS Bulwark and HMS Albion-+ the Bay Class RFA ships.
In summary we don't usually have Apache's on HMS Ocean anyway and 5 Apache's did a good enough job in Libya.
It's really not that bad.
Cutting the nuber of tanks to 200 was a mistake that we'll pay for though.
MrXray2011 3 weeks ago
We can all hope the Royal Navy is up to its normal standards like it should be when we were known as one of the best navy powers. but with the Goverment knowin fuck all about Military stuff all they care about is there next pay check its just ganna get worse, we could save 10Billion 10BILLION!, if we buy Super Honets instead of these new Lightning fighters from the US, we could buy hundreds of Super Honets enough for our 2 new carriers and some to put on the falklands. but noo FUCK U GOVERMENT.
PyrrusOfEpirusTW 4 weeks ago
All the comments are big, but i don't know a lot about the navy so i'm just going to say looks cool!
MrAxonmate 1 month ago
cool
ottocb22 1 month ago
OMG look at the size of every comments o_O
linkincr17 1 month ago
Strikes me that, if we absolutely had to, I mean if the shit REALLY hit the fan and the need was dire enough, we could recreate a significantly bigger navy pretty quickly simply by reactivating decommissioned warships and calling up retired sailors back into service. UK still has quite a few deactivated ships in storage - say we recalled all personnel who retired from the Navy in the last ten years or so to crew them.....of course this would only happen in the unlikely event of a major war.
MrCutsteel 1 month ago
@MrCutsteel What decommissioned warships are you on about? The vast majority have been scrapped, there's about two in Haslar creek at presnt...big help they would be, plus the fact that they are about 30+ years old!
semperfidelis677 3 weeks ago
The days when Britannia ruled the waves are long gone, sadly. However, we do potentially still have the basis of a half decent fleet, but we need more hulls in the water. Could do with a couple of dozen global corvettes / light frigates to bolster the fleet numbers-wise in an affordable way. Also could do with more than 7 SSNs. By the way, that simulation of the QE carriers is out of date. The ski-jump will not now be fitted as they are now being completed with angled decks and catapults.
blertdrax 1 month ago
There will be nothing left soon even the new carriers, they are being modified now extensively to take the JCA (F35) as the harriers no longer exist. The chances of both carriers ever being launched and used are remote, yes they will be built, but as the Navy says as things stand today we would be pushed to put one to sea never mind two carriers, no man power due to the thousands of sailors made redundant over the last 18 months and more to come. A very sad state of affairs.
bangkapi10240 1 month ago
@bangkapi10240 They were going to be ready in 2015 but the F-35's weren't going to be ready until 2018/9 and so they would have only flown the harriers for a couple of years. What is the point in having 3rd gen fighters when we could have 5th gen stealth fighters??!! HMS QE will go to sea and HMS PoW will be in 'extended readiness' although by 2018, when she is due to be finished the economic crisis will be long gone and they'll both go to sea, if we have the money!!
MrXray2011 1 month ago
@bangkapi10240 im Australian so i may not know all about whats happening but you dont build two ships and then not use them so im betting theyre going to sail once built and a lot of your sailors are comming to aus as its recruiting them and americans to make up for ours who jumped ship for the mines so by the times these are floating you be able to get some back anyhow i came here looking for myself in footage when your queen was here im in one of parades.
MrFattyfatfatboy 1 month ago
I just want to say thanks to Australia although i support our government its bad what there doing to our sailors but i guess as our ships get more advance they don't even need as many sailors.
doctorwhodidapoo 1 month ago
@bangkapi10240 Yes your summary is unfortunately correct..I doubt if we will ever see both carriers in commission at all. Lets face it, UK cant afford 'em!!
semperfidelis677 3 weeks ago
@semperfidelis677 You'd be surprised how quick the UK could get them if they really wanted them
oiReWiin 1 week ago
floating junkyards
210482fmj 1 month ago
A few things wrong with this...we are having 13x Type 26's which will replace the Type 23's as they come into service. The Ocean goiing Corvettes have yet to be designed or even officially spoken about. The Vanguard Class will be replaced from 2020 by a new SSBN, as far as I know at least one will be used as a Special Forces carrier, if the economy picks up then there is a possibility that we will use two or even three.
MrXray2011 2 months ago
Hail Britannia! Onward with a united Europe!
JBC814 2 months ago
@JBC814 Ummmmm no!!! We don't want a united europe... and if a united europe is the future of the UK then I'm moving to Australia.
RULE BRITANNIA, God Save the Queen and for goodness sake Mr Cameron... do what any good Conservative leader would do and either re-negotiate the EU or leave it. We don't like it, we never have. All we want is free trade... not to be ruled by the French, Belgians or Germans.
MrXray2011 2 months ago
@MrXray2011 I was speaking only in respect to their common defense through NATO, not the EU. I totally agree that the common currency idea was going too far with the "united Europe" trend. Hopefully, Europe will return to its previous sovereign currencies in the near future, if not ASAP. Britain should be the first to make a break from the EU, if for no other reason than to avoid bankruptcy.
JBC814 2 months ago
@JBC814 The UK should leave the EU and join the NAFTA it would benefit us more than the EU. And yes I know that all of the Royal Families of Britain, Germany and Russia were related I do History, it's kind of an important part to the whole war thing. And we would not have lost the war. Britain invented the Tank in 1917 and were were forcing the German's back. Troops were pouring in from the Empire by 1916- once we realised that it wasn't going to be "over by Chirstmas."
MrXray2011 1 month ago
@MrXray2011 We would have won with or without the USA's help... remember we were the most powerful nation... the German Navy was smaller and less technologically advanced, the Royal Navy was blockading all major German ports in 1917 and Germany was slowly starving out... they were also suffering a Flu epidemic.
Germany were losing by 1916... then in 1917 they knew that they were going to lose and in 1918 they really did lose.
MrXray2011 1 month ago
@MrXray2011 There is no point arguing with the ignoramous, it's obvious he doesn't know his history.
mollymoo71 1 month ago
@mollymoo71 That much is very clear. Although it is not uncommon for people to forget (thick, moronic people mind you) that Britain was, 60 years ago the most powerful nation on earth... and still would be if we hadn't given the Empire independance.
MrXray2011 1 month ago
@MrXray2011 The sad part is; we weren't in a position to do otherwise, we were stoney broke. The two world wars had emptied the chest. we only finished paying our war debt to the USA about three years ago, that is how bad things were. Social changes in the UK were also prevalent, the NHS etc...everything had changed, we weren't the country we were in 1939 anymore, in all aspects. Sad but true.
mollymoo71 1 month ago
@JBC814 Onward with the dissolution of the EU and the Euro alike. Waste of time and much needed money. If you're British then you should be ashamed of yourself. Although I doubt you are because no Briton's actually like the EU or most of the countries in it!
RULE BRITANNIA!!!
MrXray2011 1 month ago
Theres now 4 type 45 destroyers in portsmouth. They have them double up on the south quay
barry8472 2 months ago
Second best navy in the world! Great ships, could take on russia on its own
MrSouter2 2 months ago
Britain lost it's ability to voice an opinion after they lost a war to one of their little colonies ;) so when I say jump, you say how high :) hoorah baby.
Trollawk 2 months ago
@Trollawk so when you say jump? and you represent America? okay...
11Cheesewaffles 2 months ago
@Trollawk The War of Independance was primarily started over a fight over taxes. British officials raised taxes after protected that special little colony from the French. If it wasn't for the Royal Navy, America could be French. Or German if they successfully carried out the wars. But ultimately, this doesn't matter. You may still be living a few centuries ago, but the world has moved on.
ChumbaWumbaStudios 2 months ago
@Trollawk Well technically we lost our voice in 1950, almost 200 years later!!! Look up Plan Red. The planned US invasion of the British Empire.T hey didn't do it... why, I hear you ask? Because they [America] figured that we could raise millions of well trained troops in the same amount of time that you could raise hundreds of thousands. Then the Royal Navy blockaded the US and would have starved you out like we did to the Germans in 1917-8. You didn't fight us because you would lose!
MrXray2011 2 months ago
@Trollawk King George was not the sharpest tool in the shed, as they say, and he had incompetent advisers at that time. Obviously, the U.S. could have been Britain's ticket to world domination, but Britain did not realize that she was sitting on a gold mine that was worth more than all the other potential colonies of the world. So much for empire building. Did the Spanish make the same mistake with South America, or were they facing a different set of circumstances?
JBC814 2 months ago
I agree with u 100% gladifly
SuperJAmEzEr 2 months ago
OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WORLD, BE SCARED!!!!!
SuperJAmEzEr 2 months ago
I think by 2020/25 Britain will have a thoroughly modern high tech navy more capable than it's ever been, it might be leaner but a lot meaner than previous generations...RULE BRITANNIA !!!
TyphoonDelta1 2 months ago
pompous hypocrites... right, pigs fly and america is the land of the free
Pippinn13 2 months ago
@Pippinn13 If pigs do fly, I can think of one thing they won't be taking off from......A Royal Navy Carrier (howls of laughter) HA HA HA HA HA HA.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 2 months ago
0:18 i wish Royal Navy had one those during the Falklands war
xsf908 2 months ago
what is the song in the video?
qiovanni 2 months ago
Guys, were friends. US + UK! let's focus the real enemies. North Korea, China, Iran and blah blah blah
qwis96 3 months ago
Comment removed
theolliepotter 3 months ago
Don't look down! It's WWIII
explorer47422 3 months ago 2
@MrXray2011 The reason why the british navy isnt that great at the moment is because we are trying to actually cut our deficits not spend on high tech warships, we could if we wanted to commision a navy bigger than the US navy ,but there would be no point because lets be honest the UK and the US are close allies so we can depend on you.
XELITEXBONGOZUK 3 months ago
1 Queen Elizabeth carrier will be in active service while the other will be in extended readiness. Albion and Bulwark in a similar situation. HMS Ocean currently entering refitted will be replaced temporary by HMS Illustrious, one of these will be decommissioned pending the analysis of which is more appropriate for the role.
DaaronUSSR 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 What a cunt you are.
212NATH 3 months ago
Let's be frank here. The fact that once again there is an annoying Yank on here who feels the need to desecrate everything that isn't American and in particular something that is British, just shows how insecure he must really feel.
lankinator24 4 months ago
@lankinator24 It's sad really because most American's are actually nice, respectful people- it's just the odd few which seem to like residing on here that make them all look like complete fools.
MrXray2011 3 months ago
yes ok ur going on abit i am patriotic bu in 2015 a whoping 500 billion extra pounds will be put in so we will probabely get what u say but please look stuf up before u say it
jasonpemberton99 4 months ago
RN faces some really tough challenges ahead, I am worried about what's to become of RN come 2025/7. My attitude is that UK needs a good navy, as UK is more active in humanitarian operations, we can hardly send in army to deliver aid to earthquake affected zone, Haiti fine example. UK needs to look towards common EU defence policy, work with France, Holland, Germany and Spain in creating a common naval doctrine geared for force projection as well as humanitarian relief. Europe is our future IMHO.
micoforion 4 months ago
@micoforion you can forget that we want out of the EU not in.
gladifly 2 months ago
Guys, 2010 Defence White paper was what I used to get idea what Royal Navy might have circa 2020-2025, UK will have no other ships, actually even my list might be bit optimistic, UK under same Defence White paper had 25+ escorts of which 6 are Destroyers and 20 Frigates. The reality is RN might not get its 20 Frigates but plug holes with smaller corvettes and patrol ships. 4 bay class might be reduced to 3 and at least 2 Replenishment ships might be sacrificed if conservatives have their way.
micoforion 4 months ago
@micoforion We're not going to have 20 Frigates, we're getting 13 Type 26's to replace the Type 23 one-for-one. As a type 23 goes out of service a Type 26 will replace it. We will have a total escort of 19 ships (Destroyers,6 and Frigates,13) We need more but this may come in the form of the UXV Combatant. We should have stuck with having 12 Type 45 as were initially planned and 20 Type 26's.
MrXray2011 3 months ago
@micoforion We're getting a total of 6 Destroyers and 13 Frigates... these are subject to change but these are the current and (planned) future ships.
MrXray2011 2 months ago
im sad that we have a dutch radar system on the type 45's
we should have made our own
cubosensaj 4 months ago
@cubosensaj Trype 45s use British radars, not sure which radar you are referring to, but if you are referring to S1850M its UK radar system, S1850M is based on SMART-L radar, but its not the same radar, i UK developed system, no other navy uses it, its a search radar with 500km search range, although at that range only flying objects will be detected due to Earth's curvature. Dutch systems are less capable.
micoforion 4 months ago
@micoforion isnt the smart-l 480km range?
and i believe the smart-l is getting upgraded because they are going to be a part of the nato missle shield or something and the range is going to be 2000km to detect missles
and who knew the "peace loving" (or at least thats how other countries view them) dutch made such capable systems?
cubosensaj 4 months ago
@cubosensaj Its 400km from what I understood, UK's system is 500km, but as i've already said, curvature of Earth prevents accurate detection of low flying objects or warships, so real detection range is around 180-220km.
As to the Dutch, this radar isn't something special, its a phased array, most modern warships are equipped with one, be it US, French/UK or German/Dutch version.
micoforion 4 months ago
@micoforion which is on it's own quite an achievement for the dutch actually being able to (although barely)
operate those frigates
their navy is quite advanced considering the country is the size of the average US backyard
do they really need all that fancy expensive stuff?
cubosensaj 4 months ago
The Battleship Hood sums up the Royal Navy. Held in much esteem by the British, Taught to be invincible and feared abroad, Centuries of victory behind them, Slightly outdated, but crewed by chipper and plucky sailors that will win trough with British grit and spirit..........would in reality be blown out of the water in 5 minutes of real battle, not try that again, and spend the rest of the war supporting the US navy.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 Battlecruiser Hood was never considered invincible, and indeed it was a pride of navy, bu it was criticized for being under armored and not up to the latest standards, Also Royal Navy role was much greater, Royal Navy engagements were limited to the Atlantic and few missions outside Atlantic were primarily ones to protect Singapore and Australia. And I agree that old fashion attitude that prevailed at the Admiralty was main fault for RN's poor showing at the start of WW2.
micoforion 4 months ago
@micoforion total 'small' ships will be 12 Type 45's and at least 10 frigates. We'll also have dozens of transport/amphibious assault ships (which can double as helicopter carriers) and support craft (such as resupply and minesweeper/layer craft).
We'll also have the 2 super carriers.
titytit 4 months ago
@titytit We're not getting 12 type 45's we're getting 6- which is terrible. My guess is that once the economy picks up we may get more but I doubt it. We're having 13x Type 26's and maybe ocean going corvettes.
Amphibious warships= Albion and Bulwark, one to be mothballed incase she is needed. The Bay class can carry troops= 3 of them. Ocean (going into refit) so covered by Illustrious until 2014. Total 6x Amphibious warships. Not dozens I'm afraid. I'm British BTW.
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 we have 6 now. we are getting 12.
titytit 4 months ago
@titytit We're not getting 12.... We were going to get 12, then it was cut to 8 then to 6. It was cut from 8 to 6 so that we could bring forward the Type 26. The only new destroyer that we might get would be the UXV Combatant... no more Type 45's!!! 6 is our lot.
MrXray2011 2 months ago
12 in total that is.
plus the navy has ordered more of all types of ships. And when i said dozens i meant the number including all the support and supply ships the RN has, which number in the dozens.
the RN is also getting more amphib warships and transports.
titytit 4 months ago
@titytit The Royal Navy is not getting more destroyers... amphibious warfare ships... alas we are getting new frigates but only 13. HMS Albion is being mothballed and HMS Ocean may be retired and HMS Illustrious would take over her role as Helicopter Carrier. We will have a total of; 6x Type 45, 13x Type 23/26, 2x QE Class, 7x Astute Class, 2x Albion Class, 1x Ocean Class, 1x Invinsible Class, 3x Bay Class, 4x Vanguard replacements. Thats it (apart from RFA ships)
MrXray2011 2 months ago
@MrXray2011 the government has said that many contracts are being put on hold,which would include the other 6 type 45s,the frigate contract,and contract for other craft
Both aircraft carriers and the other smaller transport/amphib and helicotpers carriers will be completed but only used when needed, as its cheaper to maintain and run them when they are only used when needed.It's bigger than what you said, and will be bigger in the future, but it all depends on the goverments spending
titytit 2 months ago
@MrXray2011 which, for the military, is set to grow slowly, which will eventually mean the contracts will be resumed.
titytit 2 months ago
@titytit The Navy is the same size that I told you. If you do not believe me, look on the RN website. 6x Destroyers, 13x Frigates, 7x Astute/ Traflagar Class, 4x Vanguard Class, 2x QE Class, 2x Albion Class, 2x Ocean/ Invinsible Class, 3x Bay Class. As I said that is it, for now. I suspect that that will be it, overall for many years to come. It is sad but it is also fact. I've not heard anything about the other half of this 'contract'. 6x Type 45's were cancelled, not postponed!
MrXray2011 1 month ago
@MrXray2011 the government actually said that it would (for some inexplicable reason) const more to cancel contracts, so they decided to put most naval contracts on hold, not cancel them. We will eventually have the 12 destroyers, 20+ frigates, 2 aircraft carriers, multiple Albion/bay Class ships, dozens of small/support craft etc but it will probably be a rather long time before they are all completed/resumed.
titytit 1 month ago
@titytit Actually that was the aircaft carriers that would have cost more to cancel; the reason was that the builder, BAE Systems, made the contracts watertight and there were big penalty clauses for cancellation, so it actually would have cost more to cancel. However, no contracts were ever signed for the other six Type 45s and the frigates are still in the design stage, so no building contract signed for them either.
MrCutsteel 1 month ago
@MrCutsteel i thought BAE did the same for the type 45 contract?
titytit 1 month ago
@titytit: I believe they did, but only for the contracts that were actually signed, ie for ships 1-6. There never were any contracts for ships 7-12. 12 ships were originally in the planning assumptions, yes, but building contracts were only signed for the first 6. I'd like to think we were going to get the rest but I can't see it happening, not with a £35 billion shortfall in MOD funding. It would require an increase in the defence budget - not going to happen anytime soon, I'm afraid.
MrCutsteel 1 month ago
@MrCutsteel although, it doesnt mean that once we have the money we wont get/build/buy more ships.
At least the air force has maintained the same elvel of equipment, just with an upgrade.
titytit 1 month ago
@titytit In a sense, we DO have the money right now, just that it's being spent on other things - welfare, health, foreign aid etc. It's all about politics. In the Cold War period we spent 4-5% of GDP on defence, now it's just over 2%. If we went back to, say, 4%, we could afford the sort of Navy (and Army, and RAF) many of us would like to see, but political priorities lie elsewhere. I think our leaders are being shortsighted, but nothing I can do about it.
MrCutsteel 1 month ago
@MrCutsteel As for the RAF - big cuts there too I'm afraid. Originally we were supposed to be getting 232 Typhoons, now down to 160, Tornado numbers reduced, Nimrod scrapped, Harriers cut etc.
MrCutsteel 1 month ago
@MrCutsteel the typhoons and harriers were replaced plane for plane with Joint Strike Fighters (i tihnk thats the F-35?). at least thats what they said in the defence report a while back.
titytit 1 month ago
@titytit: Nope, the F35 isn't in production yet and won't enter service for another decade or so (maybe longer). Meanwhile, the Harriers have been scrapped (and the Tornado and Typhoon numbers cut) effective immediately. If and when we do get F35, I can't see us getting more than a few dozen of them at most - nowhere near a plane for plane replacement. What we really should be doing is buying F18 or Rafale as a stopgap, but our political leaders think otherwise.
MrCutsteel 1 month ago
@MrCutsteel The Rafale`s is the best equivalent option for maintaining modern Air Naval capabilities, but what about a cheaper alternative such as the SAAB Grippen? BAE is involved in the manufacturing of some of the components of the aircraft, I guess Britain could even start manufacturing the aircraft with the proper agreements with SAAB.
XxLIVRAxX 1 month ago
@MrCutsteel they might realise their mistake if iran heats up.
titytit 1 month ago
@titytit: I think they may be made to realise their mistake eventually, yes, but it may take a major military defeat to bring the point home to them. Worrying times.
MrCutsteel 1 month ago
2020+ is when it all get's better
lankinator24 5 months ago
@lankinator24 Maybe the French can lend you an aircraft carrier, or we in the US will give you one we don't need. HA HA. USA USA USA USA.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 well when your trillion dollar deficit goes out of control, and your Navy is cut in half will see if you are so optimistic.
lankinator24 4 months ago
@lankinator24 We can just mothball them in our huge naval yards, maybe you could too..........Oh wait you sold all your (Rusty old) naval facilities. Anyways we ain't bankrupt yet, but we would still have a huge fleet even if it was cut in half. The US navy would still have five times the number of carriers you losers have and six times the number of proper subs. Royal navy will become a small patrol fleet, best you guys stay near your coast and not get hurt by the big boys with proper fleets.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 We do have a proper fleet that would sail incase of war. And yes your fleet is much bigger than ours. We may only have 11 submarines at the moment but the Astute class are the best in the world. All nuclear powered and all can fire weapons in anger, some could destroy the world so do you define them as 'proper' now? It's yanks like you that give the US a bad name. And look up the Type 45!!!!
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 Yada yada yada, Nimitz class aircraft carrier and it's battle support group.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 Yeah but we don't need to try and rule the world anymore. We've been there and done that!!!
And well done your Nimitz class does need to be protected and so will our QE class. Why are you trying to insult the UK we've supported you in every war just like you did when we were the worlds super power, we are allies and always defend eachother. As I have said before it's Americans like you that make the whole country look like arrogant fools!!!
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 You never ruled the world, you just went around invading weaker nations and playing bully-boy. You had about 70 years of Naval supremecy and slid into decay after WW1. The problem is that you are nearly always a very junior supporter, not even giving 10% of the manpower we provide. You Brits seem to think we in the USA should be grateful for your miniscule help.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 We ruled the world from about 1800 to about 1950 when the Labour government gave the Empire away and the US can hardly talk about invading other nations. And we did still have naval supremacy after WWI look up 'Plan Red' and you'll find that the US knew that they could not beat the Royal Navy. And we only provide 10% because you have 1.5 million in your army and we have 100,000. How can you compare the two. And the fact is we do help and you should be grateful.
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 Gave the empire away? boo hoo, I doubt India, Ireland, The Middle East (which you fucked up) and most of Africa were sorry to see you go. Plan red was a load of bullshit.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 Ireland went in 1922, and Africa is worse off now than it was underthe British Empire and do you think that 9/11 would have happened if we still controlled the Middle East. And yes Plan Red was a load of Bullshit because your country thought that it could fight the British Empire. I am not denying that the US is more powerful, I'm glad that we're allies and most of us friends. It's a shame that people like you feel this way towards us [Brits]
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 So you would regard your percived right to rule these countries, regardless of how they are doing now, as more important then the wishes of those people to determine their own destiny? Typical self absorbed Brit. I think 9/11 happened because you did such a bad job when you controlled the middle east. Plan red was less about naval strategy, it was going to be the invasion of Canada. Which you would have never gotten back considering how many men we could have thrown into the fight.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 You look into Plan Red they realised that Canadian Forces would attack them and the British Empire could have had million of troops (outnumbering the US) in Canada within months. In the words of an American "We did not go to war with Britain, because everyone who went to war with Britain lost" that was an American Historian speaking about why the US didn't go to war with the BE. We would have blockaded the US with our Navy which would have forced you to surrender anyway.
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 Ha Ha I doubt you would have had the stomach for another bloody war in the 1920's especially after the disaster that was WW1. Anyways you were too busy shooting civilians in Ireland in the early 20's. You're strategy of blockade wouldn't have worked, we would have been self sufficient in all essential resources and food for a few years, and could have got what we needed from South America. Where would you get these millions of men from? The graveyards of Flanders? HA HA HA
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 I hope that any other American reading these comments made by this knob head are a much nicer human being because this cunt is the sort of person that the world thinks the US is made of. Thankfully I know differently. We would have been able to blockade you and the millions of troops would have come from the Empire (you know that EMpire that was the largest that the world has or ever will see.) The fact is the US is being over taken as the only super power in the world
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 ... by China who you owe Trillions to, India who, by 2025, will have the largest population on earth (yes ever bigger than China) and the European Union- we have technology, power and influence. I may not like the EU as it is at the moment (effecting our laws and immigration) but it will become the most powerful political union on earth by 2025. The USA is in trouble, you owe Trillions to a nation which is building it's strenght in many ways including politically, economically etc.
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 This sounds just like the mid 1950's when the US took over from the UK as the worlds superpower... Oh dear, you're going to be having the argument with someone from China soon.
"The bodies from Flanders" US soldiers died there to you dumb, idiotic fucking CUNT. You really are the most inhuman person that I have ever talked to. You may not like us but that does not mean that you can talk about 'Our Glorious Dead' like that. You're a sick cunt. And I hate using that word.
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 Stop replying to yourself, you look like a schizo
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 Fuck off you self obessed arse hole. You think that the USA is undefeatable- thats why 9/11 came as such as shock and you all shat yourselves and went to war to feel all big and important again after a nasty boy came and hurt you.
In the UK, on the other hand, the day after the terror attacks people were at the bus stops and on the trains not really giving a shit- we can come through anything unlike you. And I am not generalisng here not all yanks are like you
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 Well I think 3,500 civilians dying in that kind of an attack would come as a surprise to any nation, especially seeing as it was the first time in history such an attack had been carried out. Of course you got back on the buses, you've had plenty of experience from bombs thanks to the nut jobs your disgraceful conduct in Ireland has helped foster,....By the way wasn't that the country that shot its way out from your mighty "empire", are you still harping on about 7/7 as you call it.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 Awwww I think you just don't like facts do you. Go back to looking at black and white photo's of your "Glorious" Empire and all the wonderous things it achieved, I'm sure they hold the British in esteem all over the world for the acts of selfless nation building you embarked on in your proud history....US is gonna have competition with China, but unlike you we have no plans on rolling over and SELLING off our assets as you done in the 70's and 80's. That is why you are a joke today.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 HAHAHAHAHAH I laugh at your sheer stupidity, most of the world would not exist if the British Empire hadn't ruled the world in fact you amazing all singing all dancing country couldn't exist without us. How do you feel about that you're basically just a Brit. You think that we are seen as a joke- maybe in your sick and twisted mind but we are seen as the second most influential country in the world, we have better ships than you in the navy just not as many.
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 Well you don't have as many aircraft carrier.....Oh wait you have none. Most of the world wouldn't exist without you? Well thanks for inventing Germany, France Italy and all the post Roman empire western nations. Great Job. HA HA. I doubt America would be the great nation it is today if we had to deal with your restrictive sensabilities and class structure. We are part Brit, but as we say in Philly, even the butt ugliest of Mothers gives birth to at least one winner. Ha Ha.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8
We have one aircraft carrier and a helicopter carrier which can also be used as an ACC. The only reason that they don't carry planes is because the Harriers have all been taken out of service. And ok there were countries before the British Empire, and Germany didn't exist until 1871 (After the BE was created.) That is a pretty funny saying TBH that is one thing that you have said that made me smile. You're wrong but it's funny.
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 In the bigger picture you guy's would be better off accepting you are a spent force and develop anti-submarine ships and support vessel's that would aid our fleet better than a small aircraft carrier that would just crowd the battle space and require extra men to co-ordinate. I mean really how could your midget carriers with about 20 harriers achieve anything more than blowing a few out-dated Argentinian Turbo props out of the sky? RN should be USSN (united states support navy) Amen
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 What a stupid comment, we are the most technologically advanced navy in the world, yet because you have 10x the amount of ships you assume that the USN is the best. And so what if the harriers were outdated, they did the job- we still rule the Falklands.
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 No you are not. You have out-dated sub's, can't decide whether to update your out-dated SBN missile systems, you just retired the Nimrod which was a fossil from the 60's and have NO aircraft carrier. 6 medium sized modern destroyers doesn't count as advanced. Yeah you beat up a banana republic. I'd like to see how you would have fared against something like the Soviet navy. You got lucky in that war, they fused their bombs wrong, could have been more Tommy cookers like the Sheffield.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 Outdated subs!!! The Trafalgar class came in between the early 80's to early 1990's, and are now being replaced by the Astute Class- which is better than any US sub at the moment. The Vanguard Class came in during the early to late 1990's and are going to be replaced by 2020- again these new subs will be better than their American counterparts. Yes 6 destroyers, the most advanced in the world, as well as 13 large frigates.
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 Bullshit, I think you are just another self obsessed Brit. Us navy has already got the next gen in service. You are ten years behind, How do you know they are the best?, have they released the classified specs? have you got all the international specs of every sub, so you can compare? ha ha taught not. Popaganda and national pride dosen't make you the best. your navy sucks, all your new boats are smaller copies of American designs and concepts. You are not a powerful navy anymore.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 Oh FUCK YOU!!! The Astute Class are newer than your's so they are naturally going to be better than yours. Naxt Gen my arse!!! You think that I'm "just another self obsessed Brit" well you're not a typical American as you're being a complete cunt towards me. We have redesigned all aspects of our navy we don't use Aegis- we developed a newer and better system. The guns on most of your ships are built by BAE Systems so fuck you and your incorrect views on the UK and the RN
MrXray2011 4 months ago
@MrXray2011 Blah Blah British made, British is better, Blah Blah. Who cares about guns? it's not 1815, missiles made in the USA will be what sinks the surface threat. Your designs are just cheap knock-off's of our designs. Your whole navy is a joke, I laughed when I saw that show on Discovery about the Ark Royal, what an amateur outfit the RN is. You developed a newer and better system?, wrong you just used our design as a bass and slapped some extras on top.French are Europe's true sea power.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 4 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 actually a lot of missiles are made in china, even the ones your precious navy use. In fact i think you'd be surprised how much Britain actually does, one of our main exports are weapons through companies like BAE. and as for talking about France, they have one big aircraft carrier, ive seen it up close and really is nothing special, though give the French their due they did bail you out during your little revolution, without them you'd still be British subjects
Pippinn13 3 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 oh and whilst im here your a WANKER!!!!
Pippinn13 3 months ago
@Pippinn13 Yeah you make lots of things for India I hear. LOL. You're even giving them the Ark Royal. Ha Ha. Your flagship will be gutted on the banks of the Ganges. Ha Ha Ha. USA USA.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 3 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8
So what's your purpose in coming on this page, dedicated to the Royal Navy, and insulting them? The US and the UK are strong allies. You should be insulting the Chinese Navy, not an allied one. So fed up of ignorant trolls like you...
theolliepotter 3 months ago
@theolliepotter
You represent a tiny idiotic part of the American population. Stop making your entire country look bad by acting like an arrogant prick over the internet.
theolliepotter 3 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 and your point is??? There is quite a large population in Britain of Indian migrants and descendants of migrants, and if had you actually studied the history of India under Britain, you'd know that Britain didn't invade India or conquer it, and despite India having independence they are still part of the commonwealth of nations and a good friend of Britain unlike America, oh and newer and bigger don't mean better which is also why we've continued to use Nimrods
Pippinn13 2 months ago
@Pippinn13 Nimrods??? aren't they retired because they have the habit of falling out of the sky, just like the Chinooks you can barely maintain.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 2 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 The Chinooks that you designed... and we've lost 1. Tell me how's the USS Cole now tut tut tut ... Can't even protect your own all singing, all dancing navy. tut tut tut.
MrXray2011 2 months ago
@Thespeakerofmanytru8 oh and if america is soooo great how come they essentially have no space programme and their astronauts rely on the russians to get them up into space, the guys at nasa must be pretty thick how many people have they killed with their shitty shuttles and rockets???? no wonder they gone to the russians
Pippinn13 2 months ago
@Pippinn13 We put a man on the moon 40 years ago, you couldn't even put a man in orbit today. We are developing the replacement for the shuttle. We did more for manned exploration of space than you ever could. By the way space technology is another field in which the French surpass you, suppose you'll be borrowing a rocket from them, they migh do you a deal when your using their carrier.
Thespeakerofmanytru8 2 months ago