Why did we build a huge Aircraft carrier?

What's Hot
245

Comments

  • RavenousRavenous Frets: 1443
    Badgers are furious fighters. Do NOT mess with them!
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • VimFuegoVimFuego Frets: 6033
    edited January 12
    where else do we need to protect that can't be reached from either our own airbases or an allies?

    EDIT: and is it cost effective to protect these places with a carrier or can we find a cheaper way (like, oh I dunno, the one I already mentioned)?

    I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • VimFuegoVimFuego Frets: 6033
    I mean, we currently have airforces operating in Syria (flying from cyprus) we recenty had air forces operating over Afghan, operating I assume from Saudi or mebbe India (somewhere friendly to us anyways), all without rather expensive aircraft carriers. 

    I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • munckeemunckee Frets: 1032
    VimFuego said:
    where else do we need to protect that can't be reached from either our own airbases or an allies?

    EDIT: and is it cost effective to protect these places with a carrier or can we find a cheaper way (like, oh I dunno, the one I already mentioned)?
    Who knows how big an area can we hit with our current capacity, not enough I suspect is the answer.  Not sure of the average speed of a badger in flight but I can't see us hitting North Korea for example (other crazy countries are available).
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • SporkySporky Frets: 12905
    VimFuego said:
    not sure about the badger catapult, mostly cos I've not seen one before. Is that a catapult operated by badgers or one that fires badgers at the enemy?
    Most definitely the latter.
    Be your own evil twin. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • VimFuegoVimFuego Frets: 6033
    edited January 12
    munckee said:
    VimFuego said:
    where else do we need to protect that can't be reached from either our own airbases or an allies?

    EDIT: and is it cost effective to protect these places with a carrier or can we find a cheaper way (like, oh I dunno, the one I already mentioned)?
    Who knows how big an area can we hit with our current capacity, not enough I suspect is the answer.  Not sure of the average speed of a badger in flight but I can't see us hitting North Korea for example (other crazy countries are available).
    so we're building these very expensive things with no clear plan or idea of where they will be used. Are we that wealthy that we can afford to spunk away 700 very large just on a whim? I thought we were skint and we had to do a bit of the old belt tightening. If we've got enough money to give some overgrown children big toys to play with, we can probably also bung a bit more to the NHS and get a few more bobbies on the beat.

    I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • SporkySporky Frets: 12905
    munckee said:

    Not sure of the average speed of a badger in flight but I can't see us hitting North Korea for example (other crazy countries are available).
    That's part of the point. A badger catapult isn't a sabre-rattling threat to other countries. It does, however, adequately demonstrate a bat-shit-crazy approach to home defence, and bat-shit-crazy can be a pretty good defence.
    Be your own evil twin. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RavenousRavenous Frets: 1443
    Sporky said:
    munckee said:

    Not sure of the average speed of a badger in flight but I can't see us hitting North Korea for example (other crazy countries are available).
    That's part of the point. A badger catapult isn't a sabre-rattling threat to other countries. It does, however, adequately demonstrate a bat-shit-crazy approach to home defence, and bat-shit-crazy can be a pretty good defence.

    Kinda like our Trident Nukes (wouldn't dare use them either, would we?) - and a lot cheaper.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • munckeemunckee Frets: 1032
    VimFuego said:
    munckee said:
    VimFuego said:
    where else do we need to protect that can't be reached from either our own airbases or an allies?

    EDIT: and is it cost effective to protect these places with a carrier or can we find a cheaper way (like, oh I dunno, the one I already mentioned)?
    Who knows how big an area can we hit with our current capacity, not enough I suspect is the answer.  Not sure of the average speed of a badger in flight but I can't see us hitting North Korea for example (other crazy countries are available).
    so we're building these very expensive things with no clear plan or idea of where they will be used. Are we that wealthy that we can afford to spunk away 700 very large just on a whim? I thought we were skint personally, and we had to do a bit of the old belt tightening. If we've got enough money to give some overgrown children big toys to play with, we can probably also bung a bit more to the NHS and get a few more bobbies on the beat.
    I gather that the theory is that we need to shake our c0ck at the world otherwise they will be all over us like a cheap suit.  The old cardboard cut out trick is old hat ruined by Egypt.  Having an aircraft carrier has always put us at the top table.  Whether we need to try and be at the top table is another point entirely.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • WolfetoneWolfetone Frets: 950
    I find that the planes fall into the sea without the big aircraft carrier underneath them. Always been a problem...
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RavenousRavenous Frets: 1443
    Ballistic Badgers. Hmmm. Anyone looking for a band name?
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • FX_MunkeeFX_Munkee Frets: 1952
    VimFuego said:
    re protecting the falklands (assuming there is an actual credible threat to them and not just a bunch of strawmen) wouldn't it be cheaper just to station some jets down there? It wouldn't take many to show whoever may wish to invade some windswept islands stuck out in the middle of nowhere that we are willing to defend them. Hell, with the savings, we could also afford to buy a dedicated destroyer or something to patrol down there. 
    You know, if the government were serious about value for money.
    They've got 4 Typhoons, should suffice I think.
    Shot through the heart, and you’re to blame, you give love a bad name. Not to mention archery tuition.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • VimFuegoVimFuego Frets: 6033
    munckee said:
    VimFuego said:
    munckee said:
    VimFuego said:
    where else do we need to protect that can't be reached from either our own airbases or an allies?

    EDIT: and is it cost effective to protect these places with a carrier or can we find a cheaper way (like, oh I dunno, the one I already mentioned)?
    Who knows how big an area can we hit with our current capacity, not enough I suspect is the answer.  Not sure of the average speed of a badger in flight but I can't see us hitting North Korea for example (other crazy countries are available).
    so we're building these very expensive things with no clear plan or idea of where they will be used. Are we that wealthy that we can afford to spunk away 700 very large just on a whim? I thought we were skint personally, and we had to do a bit of the old belt tightening. If we've got enough money to give some overgrown children big toys to play with, we can probably also bung a bit more to the NHS and get a few more bobbies on the beat.
    I gather that the theory is that we need to shake our c0ck at the world otherwise they will be all over us like a cheap suit.  The old cardboard cut out trick is old hat ruined by Egypt.  Having an aircraft carrier has always put us at the top table.  Whether we need to try and be at the top table is another point entirely.
    that is exactly why we have them, so let's get rid of this silly notion once and for all that they are about defence. They are nothing of the sort, it's a monumentally expensive piece of cock waving and we can't afford it. We've got an NHS in crisis, police numbers being slashed and a crisis in elderly care. Let's use that money to better life for people, build a better infrastructure to improve the economy, lessen our dependence on foreign gas and oil so we don't have a need to expand our interests abroad. Let's improve the rail network, make it a viable and affordable alternative to the car. IMO these are all better uses for that money that two useless follies.

    I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me.

    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • VimFuegoVimFuego Frets: 6033
    FX_Munkee said:
    VimFuego said:
    re protecting the falklands (assuming there is an actual credible threat to them and not just a bunch of strawmen) wouldn't it be cheaper just to station some jets down there? It wouldn't take many to show whoever may wish to invade some windswept islands stuck out in the middle of nowhere that we are willing to defend them. Hell, with the savings, we could also afford to buy a dedicated destroyer or something to patrol down there. 
    You know, if the government were serious about value for money.
    They've got 4 Typhoons, should suffice I think.
    I'd have thought so as well and if a credible threat did occur we could always fly a few more down there, gotta be quicker than sending an aircraft carrier. 

    I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RavenousRavenous Frets: 1443

    The carriers aren't that expensive - about the same as that House of Commons renovation I think?

    The planes that will (eventually?) be based on it were about double the last time I thought about this (don't have the figures right now.)

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • I believe there were some studies done on the velocity of swallows, both laden and unladen, back in the 70s. A group of very smart university graduates published their work and it is still available today. Look for the Holy Grail project online. I suspect their research could be applied to ballistic badger defence systems research. At least it would give us a head start. 

    My Trading Feedback    |    You Bring The Band

    Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RavenousRavenous Frets: 1443
    I believe there were some studies done on the velocity of swallows, both laden and unladen, back in the 70s. A group of very smart university graduates published their work and it is still available today. Look for the Holy Grail project online. I suspect their research could be applied to ballistic badger defence systems research. At least it would give us a head start. 

    Their military strategy was superior too - especially when confronted by fierce white rodents.

    Run Away!

    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 31120
    Wolfetone said:
    I find that the planes fall into the sea without the big aircraft carrier underneath them. Always been a problem...
    What planes? We sold them all, and the new ones are either going to be too expensive or delivered too late or both, so the big aircraft carriers are going to be used as very big and overpriced helicopter carriers.

    If we needed helicopter carriers we could have built a couple of those, and/or some landing ships, support vessels, or loads of fishieries protection boats (ie the stuff the Navy actually wanted) for less than what the two useless aircraft carriers cost.
    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone."
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • SporkySporky Frets: 12905
    Ravenous said:
    I believe there were some studies done on the velocity of swallows, both laden and unladen, back in the 70s. A group of very smart university graduates published their work and it is still available today. Look for the Holy Grail project online. I suspect their research could be applied to ballistic badger defence systems research. At least it would give us a head start. 

    Their military strategy was superior too - especially when confronted by fierce white rodents.

    Run Away!

    Point of clarification; I believe that tactic was deployed when in combat with lagomorphs rather than rodentia.
    Be your own evil twin. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RavenousRavenous Frets: 1443
    Sporky said:

    Point of clarification; I believe that tactic was deployed when in combat with lagomorphs rather than rodentia.
    Heh thanks.  Genuinely delighted; I never knew that!
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Sporky said:
    Ravenous said:
    I believe there were some studies done on the velocity of swallows, both laden and unladen, back in the 70s. A group of very smart university graduates published their work and it is still available today. Look for the Holy Grail project online. I suspect their research could be applied to ballistic badger defence systems research. At least it would give us a head start. 

    Their military strategy was superior too - especially when confronted by fierce white rodents.

    Run Away!

    Point of clarification; I believe that tactic was deployed when in combat with lagomorphs rather than rodentia.



    My Trading Feedback    |    You Bring The Band

    Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • not_the_djnot_the_dj Frets: 5495
    I believe there were some studies done on the velocity of swallows, both laden and unladen, back in the 70s. A group of very smart university graduates published their work and it is still available today. Look for the Holy Grail project online. I suspect their research could be applied to ballistic badger defence systems research. At least it would give us a head start. 
    I recall that study being flawed due to a mix up in SI units and regional variations....I predict a similar issue when dealing with Eurasian badgers and the obviously inferior American variety.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • SporkySporky Frets: 12905
    I believe there were some studies done on the velocity of swallows, both laden and unladen, back in the 70s. A group of very smart university graduates published their work and it is still available today. Look for the Holy Grail project online. I suspect their research could be applied to ballistic badger defence systems research. At least it would give us a head start. 
    I recall that study being flawed due to a mix up in SI units and regional variations....I predict a similar issue when dealing with Eurasian badgers and the obviously inferior American variety.
    One thing I think I can guarantee; when there's a badger flying at you at a significant velocity, the last thing you do is try to check its passport.
    Be your own evil twin. 
    2reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RavenousRavenous Frets: 1443
    Sporky said:

    One thing I think I can guarantee; when there's a badger flying at you at a significant velocity, the last thing you do is try to check its passport.
    Oh well. Always look on the bright side...
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • jpfampsjpfamps Frets: 1327
    ICBM said:
    Wolfetone said:
    I find that the planes fall into the sea without the big aircraft carrier underneath them. Always been a problem...
    What planes? We sold them all, and the new ones are either going to be too expensive or delivered too late or both, so the big aircraft carriers are going to be used as very big and overpriced helicopter carriers.

    If we needed helicopter carriers we could have built a couple of those, and/or some landing ships, support vessels, or loads of fishieries protection boats (ie the stuff the Navy actually wanted) for less than what the two useless aircraft carriers cost.

    Well the F35B is already late and over budget.

    We're selling our helicopter carrier HMS Ocean (which has been one of the busiest ships in the navy) to Brazil, so presumably we don't need any helicopter carriers.............
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Ravenous said:
    Sporky said:

    One thing I think I can guarantee; when there's a badger flying at you at a significant velocity, the last thing you do is try to check its passport.
    Oh well. Always look on the bright side...
    I think we could negate the whole problem by using Honey badgers. They will fuck up your shit and enjoy it. 

    My Trading Feedback    |    You Bring The Band

    Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • VimFuegoVimFuego Frets: 6033
    oh lord, not the honey badgers, we'll be onto flat earths and moon landings soon.

    I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • VimFuego said:
    oh lord, not the honey badgers, we'll be onto flat earths and moon landings soon.
    In a study of badger flight, would they travel further with a flat earth or with a curvature?

    My Trading Feedback    |    You Bring The Band

    Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • VimFuegoVimFuego Frets: 6033
    hah, you won't catch me out that easy, there's no such thing as flight.

    I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me.

    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • GarthyGarthy Frets: 1643
    VimFuego said:
    munckee said:
    VimFuego said:
    munckee said:
    VimFuego said:
    where else do we need to protect that can't be reached from either our own airbases or an allies?

    EDIT: and is it cost effective to protect these places with a carrier or can we find a cheaper way (like, oh I dunno, the one I already mentioned)?
    Who knows how big an area can we hit with our current capacity, not enough I suspect is the answer.  Not sure of the average speed of a badger in flight but I can't see us hitting North Korea for example (other crazy countries are available).
    so we're building these very expensive things with no clear plan or idea of where they will be used. Are we that wealthy that we can afford to spunk away 700 very large just on a whim? I thought we were skint personally, and we had to do a bit of the old belt tightening. If we've got enough money to give some overgrown children big toys to play with, we can probably also bung a bit more to the NHS and get a few more bobbies on the beat.
    I gather that the theory is that we need to shake our c0ck at the world otherwise they will be all over us like a cheap suit.  The old cardboard cut out trick is old hat ruined by Egypt.  Having an aircraft carrier has always put us at the top table.  Whether we need to try and be at the top table is another point entirely.
    that is exactly why we have them, so let's get rid of this silly notion once and for all that they are about defence. They are nothing of the sort, it's a monumentally expensive piece of cock waving and we can't afford it. We've got an NHS in crisis, police numbers being slashed and a crisis in elderly care. Let's use that money to better life for people, build a better infrastructure to improve the economy, lessen our dependence on foreign gas and oil so we don't have a need to expand our interests abroad. Let's improve the rail network, make it a viable and affordable alternative to the car. IMO these are all better uses for that money that two useless follies.
    The NHS has been in crisis since its inception, it has never not been in crisis. The railway network has similarly been a bag of shit since WW2, and elderly care has never been anything less than shambolic.

    The carriers will cost £6bn all in, for a likely 50 year service life. At current spending levels the NHS will soak up £400bn in that time, Lancashire alone will spend £17bn on adult social care over the same timescale. Social protection, welfare etc will be 12 trillion pounds over the same time scale.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.