Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37528951

How very unlike comrade Corbyn whose idea of protecting the UK is telling our potential enemies that he'd never use the nuclear deterrent... :nutter:

I wonder how hard the SNP will object to all the jobs which will be created or secured in Scotland...


* notwithstanding those state of the art aircraft carriers with no aircraft...

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

The new subs are needed sooner rather then later but I'd like to have seen a confirmation that the type 26 frigate would also start construction as well as they are integral to the new battlegroup doctrine the navy will be adopting. Despite what was reported by the time the carriers enter service they will have their full complement of F35's and other aircraft but when has the media let a fact get in the way of a headline.

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

Why couldn't this deal have secured some steel workers jobs to Mr fallon?

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.tel...android-h3g-gb

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

It comes down to the type of steel we produce versus the type of steel this job requires.

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

Yes Michael Fallon claimed, yesterday, that no British bid had been received for the steel work on this first stage. If that's the case there's not much he could have done about it is there? :shrug:

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

They did take a great big gamble with our maritime power but the timetable for the QE-class carriers and F35Bs isn't it. Despite ill-informed commentary, mostly by Fleet Street hacks with little real understanding of the issues, the truth is that the aircraft will be available to the carriers according to a schedule which steps up the ships' capability in manageable stages. The Royal Navy hasn't operated a full-size fleet carrier since 1979 and has never operated one this large. Even if the F35B was available in numbers come HMS QE's expected operational date in 2020, the Navy would still lack the competence to operate them effectively.

The gamble, taken purely for money saving purposes, was to sell off all our harriers and relegate HMS Illustrious to the status of an amphibious helipad. It wouldn't have taken much more of a deterioration in our relationship with Kirchner's Argentina, for example, for them to speculate that it might be worth another crack at the Falkland Islands. Retiring the tools of power projection also looks like retirement from the business of power projection in certain world capitals.

---------- Post added at 12:52 ---------- Previous post was at 12:46 ----------

Haven't you heard? In the independent nirvana of Scotland, Faslane will be the base for the entire Scottish navy. There will be plenty of room for our population share of approximately half a destroyer, one out of date frigate and the captain's yacht off one of the new aircraft carriers.

Just don't ask awkward questions, like why you'd base your navy on the west coast when all your strategic maritime interests are off the east cost, drilling away in the North Sea ...

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

This might be a stupid question but.....why don't we spend the money on building a massive death laser operated from the moon which will obliterate all our enemies? Good luck with your 'nukes' when we have the death ray.

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

Because the yanks 'own' the moon... ;)

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

We'll take the Sun then! Much bigger.

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

Been done: Requiem

State of the art boom boom.:D

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

By Jove you've got it! All we need is a giant, remotely controlled magnifying glass located between the sun and Earth and we can fry anyone. It'd be environmentally friendly too... :D

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

Yanks don't own all the moon I've got four acres and am open to offers :).

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

You've met that guy in the pub too then... :D

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

I won some competition not sure I'd be confident enough to try and back it up but i got a picture of three craters that are mine lol.

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

You've not thought that through Damien. What if our enemies kept hiding on the opposite side the earth to the moon..... Guess we could build a reflective mirror in space, but what if we zapped the Space Station or Sky's satellites ? Its just not on old chap.

Best to spend over £200 billion on weapons we'd never use, more than double the annual cost of the NHS. Britain must have the best kit after all, how else are we going to showcase our shiny weapons to dodgy foreign regimes, who might just use them against us....

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

This is a common misconception - Trident missiles *are* in use, every day of the year. Their primary purpose is to exist and to provide a credible threat of retaliation to a nuclear first strike. By being deployed aboard Vanguard subs and patrolled around the North Atlantic Ocean, they are being used right now.

Their fall-back purpose is to actually be fired at Moscow or wherever in the event of a nuclear attack on the UK.

"Best kit" meanwhile, is a term better ascribed to conventional arms that can be used in conflicts where the UK has legitimate concerns at levels below that of existential threat. Overwhelming military superiority has a deterrent effect of its own, and also has benefits on the battlefield if deployment is necessary. That was a lesson hard won by the US in Vietnam.

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

We'd never use them and they know we wouldn't.

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

I agree with you in terms of a credible nuclear deterrent but "Overwhelming military superiority" on the battle field?

We no longer have "The boots to put on the ground" due to sucessive cut to our armed forces which in peacetime (for the UK) are stretched to the limit acting as pseudo - mercenaries.

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

I was thinking in terms of aspiration rather than in practice when it comes to conventional arms, it has to be said. :D

---------- Post added at 09:26 ---------- Previous post was at 09:25 ----------

Thank you, Mr Bloefeld. Don't suppose you'd care to name your moles in Whitehall and the Kremlin?

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

... and the name of his crystal ball supplier. :D

The only certainty is that if we don't have them we definitely can't use them, no matter what. Definitely no deterrent. Now that's a fact for you...

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

Better to have them and not need to use them then need to use them and not have them our own independent nuclear capability keeps the UK in the bigger game. In an ideal world we wouldn't have them or any offensive capability our military would be there for airshows and tourist stuff but given our world is not ideal it's best to have all the options we can. An increase in ground forces would be a good next step as we are too stretched atm.

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

Most other European countries don't see the need
Not in favour of disarmament while Russia et al have nukes, but the US has more than enough. The cost alone is obscene, and we overestimate our own importance.

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

Most other European countries are content to shelter behind Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which is only worth the paper it's written on because it is backed up by nuclear arms, and crucially arms held by three different governments with overlapping but not identical military and foreign policy outlooks. That makes any calculation such as you appeared to make earlier (we wouldn't use them and they know we wouldn't) impossible for any opponent to make. Three capitals, three heads of government, three different fingers on three different triggers and three different sets of standing orders.

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

AH! I see what you mean Chris. - A minefield! Better than nothing though.

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

Yes they certainly don't mind being protected by those within Nato who do have the nukes.

Re: Work starts on new nuclear subs
 

On this issue, agree with Trump.

If you want to be protected by NATO, pay for it. At least pay you bit, your 2%