We have a new submarine

[jimothy]

S7Paul said:

Geoff82 said:

jimothy said:

S7Paul said:

Dirty Boy said:

S7Paul said:

Aaah, but it can do much more than just launch Spearfish torpedoes & Tomahawk missiles (can't go into any further detail).

(worst I know more about this sub than you post ever)

Thanks very much for the compliment!

I'm glad it can do more - I worked on the Spearfish tests and a few years ago it couldn't hit a barn door from close range!

How long ago are we talking?

Should have been testing it in water then! It wasn't designed to hit barn doors.

Admittedly this was 9 years ago. I actually automated the reporting process to take data of an antique vax box and create excel reports. Before they were doing it by hand using printouts. I think I may have annoyed a few career report writers by reducing their workload...

[Geoff82]

jimothy said:

S7Paul said:

Geoff82 said:

jimothy said:

S7Paul said:

Dirty Boy said:

S7Paul said:

Aaah, but it can do much more than just launch Spearfish torpedoes & Tomahawk missiles (can't go into any further detail).

(worst I know more about this sub than you post ever)

Thanks very much for the compliment!

I'm glad it can do more - I worked on the Spearfish tests and a few years ago it couldn't hit a barn door from close range!

How long ago are we talking?

Should have been testing it in water then! It wasn't designed to hit barn doors.

Admittedly this was 9 years ago. I actually automated the reporting process to take data of an antique vax box and create excel reports. Before they were doing it by hand using printouts. I think I may have annoyed a few career report writers by reducing their workload...

You'll be pleased to know the Spearfish software has been vastly improved since then.

[tonyvid]

We better celibrate these boats as the Government appear to have given the Carrier money to the Banks and work-shy

[jimothy]

Geoff82 said:

jimothy said:

S7Paul said:

Geoff82 said:

jimothy said:

S7Paul said:

Dirty Boy said:

S7Paul said:

Aaah, but it can do much more than just launch Spearfish torpedoes & Tomahawk missiles (can't go into any further detail).

(worst I know more about this sub than you post ever)

Thanks very much for the compliment!

I'm glad it can do more - I worked on the Spearfish tests and a few years ago it couldn't hit a barn door from close range!

How long ago are we talking?

Should have been testing it in water then! It wasn't designed to hit barn doors.

Admittedly this was 9 years ago. I actually automated the reporting process to take data of an antique vax box and create excel reports. Before they were doing it by hand using printouts. I think I may have annoyed a few career report writers by reducing their workload...

You'll be pleased to know the Spearfish software has been vastly improved since then.

Breathes sigh of relief

[andy400]

Geoff82 said:

MiniMan64 said:

So we have a sexy new submarine?

What about the Yanks and the Russians, didn't they have this sort of thing 10 years ago?

Defintely not.

ETA, I should say its not as black and white as that. Each countries submarines have their own relative strengths. On balance at the moment the U.K. is on top.

Edited by Geoff82 on Wednesday 10th December 13:44

So our one good submarine (which isn't in service yet) is better than the US subs? All hundred or so of them? Big deal.

[anonymous-user]

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.... also have a new T45 to go with it... now that is a bad-ass mofo...

[G'kar]

jimothy said:

Geoff82 said:

jimothy said:

S7Paul said:

Geoff82 said:

jimothy said:

S7Paul said:

Dirty Boy said:

S7Paul said:

Aaah, but it can do much more than just launch Spearfish torpedoes & Tomahawk missiles (can't go into any further detail).

(worst I know more about this sub than you post ever)

Thanks very much for the compliment!

I'm glad it can do more - I worked on the Spearfish tests and a few years ago it couldn't hit a barn door from close range!

How long ago are we talking?

Should have been testing it in water then! It wasn't designed to hit barn doors.

Admittedly this was 9 years ago. I actually automated the reporting process to take data of an antique vax box and create excel reports. Before they were doing it by hand using printouts. I think I may have annoyed a few career report writers by reducing their workload...

You'll be pleased to know the Spearfish software has been vastly improved since then.

Breathes sigh of relief

Jimothy, were you MUSL/BAe Systems or whatver name is now being used?

[Geoff82]

andy400 said:

Geoff82 said:

MiniMan64 said:

So we have a sexy new submarine?

What about the Yanks and the Russians, didn't they have this sort of thing 10 years ago?

Defintely not.

ETA, I should say its not as black and white as that. Each countries submarines have their own relative strengths. On balance at the moment the U.K. is on top.

Edited by Geoff82 on Wednesday 10th December 13:44

So our one good submarine (which isn't in service yet) is better than the US subs? All hundred or so of them? Big deal.

What happened to quality not quantity?

Compared to the Yanks we're a very small fish in a very big pond. Hardly suprising given their budget.

[andy400]

Geoff82 said:

andy400 said:

Geoff82 said:

MiniMan64 said:

So we have a sexy new submarine?

What about the Yanks and the Russians, didn't they have this sort of thing 10 years ago?

Defintely not.

ETA, I should say its not as black and white as that. Each countries submarines have their own relative strengths. On balance at the moment the U.K. is on top.

Edited by Geoff82 on Wednesday 10th December 13:44

So our one good submarine (which isn't in service yet) is better than the US subs? All hundred or so of them? Big deal.

What happened to quality not quantity?

Compared to the Yanks we're a very small fish in a very big pond. Hardly suprising given their budget.

Forgive me my naval-based cynicism, but whilst quality is important, it doesn't mean all that much when you can't afford more than a handful of anything, you don't have the manpower to run them when you do, and half of them, minimum, will be alongside at any one time due to these, and other, restrictions. Ever thought why are we buying two carriers? (If we get them, which we won't) Well, it's so that we can have one at sea for more than just 'sometimes'. One at sea, the other more-or-less mothballed. Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the waves - in the Thames estuary, maybe, if we're lucky. Cynic out.

[Geoff82]

andy400 said:

Forgive me my naval-based cynicism, but whilst quality is important, it doesn't mean all that much when you can't afford more than a handful of anything, you don't have the manpower to run them when you do, and half of them, minimum, will be alongside at any one time due to these, and other, restrictions. Ever thought why are we buying two carriers? (If we get them, which we won't) Well, it's so that we can have one at sea for more than just 'sometimes'. One at sea, the other more-or-less mothballed. Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the waves - in the Thames estuary, maybe, if we're lucky. Cynic out.

You're not a skimmer are you? You lot never stop whinging...

[andy400]

Geoff82 said:

andy400 said:

Forgive me my naval-based cynicism, but whilst quality is important, it doesn't mean all that much when you can't afford more than a handful of anything, you don't have the manpower to run them when you do, and half of them, minimum, will be alongside at any one time due to these, and other, restrictions. Ever thought why are we buying two carriers? (If we get them, which we won't) Well, it's so that we can have one at sea for more than just 'sometimes'. One at sea, the other more-or-less mothballed. Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the waves - in the Thames estuary, maybe, if we're lucky. Cynic out.

You're not a skimmer are you? You lot never stop whinging...

Skimmer? Moi?

[Kuroblack350]

Bushmaster said:

Go on then, what is Vertical Build?



[Gets notebook and pencil out to jot it all down and sell to the Chinese]

Sections of the boat are constructed vertically, rather than the traditional horizontal method, it makes it a shed load easier to install the fixtures, pipework etc, as you can lower into the sections. The sections are then flipped, and connected. It also means that you can use the manufacturing space better.

[castrolcraig]

bbc reporting that MOD has confirmed the 2 new supercarriers are to be delayed by at least 2 years......

[Swilly]

jimothy said:

S7Paul said:

Dirty Boy said:

S7Paul said:

Aaah, but it can do much more than just launch Spearfish torpedoes & Tomahawk missiles (can't go into any further detail).

(worst I know more about this sub than you post ever)

Thanks very much for the compliment!

I'm glad it can do more - I worked on the Spearfish tests and a few years ago it couldn't hit a barn door from close range!

I imagine torpedoes arent too hot on dry land !!

[AngryS3Owner]

castrolcraig said:

bbc reporting that MOD has confirmed the 2 new supercarriers are to be delayed by at least 2 years......

Tossers, not cutting VAT and ordering them would have done more for the economy, just think of the number of jobs and suppliers that go into one of them!

[Chainguy]

AngryS3Owner said:

castrolcraig said:

bbc reporting that MOD has confirmed the 2 new supercarriers are to be delayed by at least 2 years......

Tossers, not cutting VAT and ordering them would have done more for the economy, just think of the number of jobs and suppliers that go into one of them!

I can think of one engineering company that has been going for over 150 years, that will have to cut jobs if they don't get the carrier project. They have already been promised some of it, and were keeping skilled men in employment waiting on it.

Nice one Gordon. Now fk off and die you fat one eyed bd.

[Ron Burgundy]

But will it take off on a conveyor?

[anonymous-user]

AngryS3Owner said:

castrolcraig said:

bbc reporting that MOD has confirmed the 2 new supercarriers are to be delayed by at least 2 years......

Tossers, not cutting VAT and ordering them would have done more for the economy, just think of the number of jobs and suppliers that go into one of them!

or rather production will start as planned but the delivery date has been put to the right by two years to move it in line with JCA...so, start date the same, delivery date two years later...everyone understand?

some people should get the facts straight before ranting and raving...

[F i F]

And of course our No 1 enemy is still......































The French.

[Skywalker]

So...we are choosing to pay for two more year's work?

The press I read today said "one to two years" which to me means 'never'

They should set an in service date.

I suppose that ZanuLabour are hoping that Obama cans the JSF project.