Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 10:24:00 -
[1]
The Royal Navy's newest warship has just completed it's first sea trial, and the results look encouraging.
Clicky
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Grez
Minmatar Sybrite Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 10:36:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Grez on 16/08/2007 10:37:00
Quote: She can turn full circle within three ship lengths
**** me...
Considering it's size, that's bloody impressive. ---
|
DarknessInc
Minmatar Legion of Corpses Federation Of united Corps
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 10:39:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Rodj Blake The Royal Navy's newest warship has just completed it's first sea trial, and the results look encouraging.
Clicky
Is it alright for me to say I wanna do dirty things to that boat. very naughty things
/signed. Much love to you too - Wachtmeister |
Sereifex Daku
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 10:59:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Sereifex Daku on 16/08/2007 11:00:07 What the hell? This is a bloody impressive ship...what are we doing with it? I was under the impression that our navy was severely lacking in resources, funding and testticles.
I'm guessing they funded this ship through the money the government gets from speed cameras and car clamping.
|
Asestorian
Minmatar Domination.
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 11:01:00 -
[5]
They're being built to go with the two new carriers the Royal Navy are getting.
---
---
|
Wild Rho
Amarr Endgame.
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 11:03:00 -
[6]
Now that's a nice piece of hardware
|
Jiminy BoB
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 11:07:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Sereifex Daku Edited by: Sereifex Daku on 16/08/2007 11:00:07 What the hell? This is a bloody impressive ship...what are we doing with it? I was under the impression that our navy was severely lacking in resources, funding and testticles.
I'm guessing they funded this ship through the money the government gets from speed cameras and car clamping.
Simon cowell pays more tax per year than money from speed cameras in a year
|
MrTriggerHappy
Caldari Fluffy Carebear killers
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 11:07:00 -
[8]
Yup, it's truely a nice ship, i remember seeing the hull being constructed when I went for a job interview at BAE many moons ago.
Now we just need a fleet of them... --------------------------------
My Comments in no way reflect my corp or alliance |
Kalazar
Amarr Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 11:22:00 -
[9]
I want me one of those... ----------------------------------------------
|
Red Gabba
JuBa Corp
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 11:28:00 -
[10]
Quote: The ship left American visitors to the yard on the Clyde "shaken and shocked", according to BAE Systems, its builders.
Love to know why this is..
Looks pretty impressive i have to agree
|
|
Frug
Zenithal Harvest
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 11:30:00 -
[11]
Yes, but does it have a death ray?
- - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles |
Grimpak
Gallente Trinity Nova KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 11:37:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Red Gabba
Quote: The ship left American visitors to the yard on the Clyde "shaken and shocked", according to BAE Systems, its builders.
Love to know why this is..
Looks pretty impressive i have to agree
basically it surpasses their current destroyers, considered top of the line ones. it is faster, has almost no fuel consumption due to the electric engine, and it has a nice arsenal to round up the hi-tech gizmos.
...tbh it's an impressive piece of hardware. ---
truth about EVE: Quote: "Guns are fine, boost players"
Quote: "Players are fine, boost guns"
|
Locus Bey
Gallente Qalandar
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 11:55:00 -
[13]
One can only hope it sinks or rapid rusts along with all the rest. Stupid waste of money imo
|
VorianAtreides
Caldari RONA Corporation
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 11:57:00 -
[14]
awsome, more than 1 would be nice though
|
Gone'Postal
Minmatar Vengeance 8 Interceptors
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 12:08:00 -
[15]
Nice.
I think they fracked up a little.
In the next 10 years, as many as eight T45s could be built, mainly to defend the two large aircraft carriers that were ordered last month.
&
Ordered: 2000
Either they need a smeg load of new shipyards.. or there going to be out of date before they get 20 off the production line. ----
Originally by: Drykor Customer service my ***.
|
Tigrelilly
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 12:12:00 -
[16]
That is impressive, would be nice to see a fleet of them
|
Mc Gyver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 12:13:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Grimpak
Originally by: Red Gabba
Quote: The ship left American visitors to the yard on the Clyde "shaken and shocked", according to BAE Systems, its builders.
Love to know why this is..
Looks pretty impressive i have to agree
basically it surpasses their current destroyers, considered top of the line ones. it is faster, has almost no fuel consumption due to the electric engine, and it has a nice arsenal to round up the hi-tech gizmos.
...tbh it's an impressive piece of hardware.
Well, it's like computer hardware... The latest is always the best...
I'm not sure if we (America) have any new destroyers in the works... Probably not. I think we have a new Carrier comming soon though...
|
Aturi Kuomi
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 12:15:00 -
[18]
Piity they can't use those billions of pounds on homes, helping the poor, the NHS or something worthwhile.
Freaking stupid government.
|
Mc Gyver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 12:21:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Aturi Kuomi Piity they can't use those billions of pounds on homes, helping the poor, the NHS or something worthwhile.
Freaking stupid government.
It's not stupid to build up your defenses...
There will always be poor, useless (to society) people in all countries taxing the system, you can't give them all a free ride at the expense of weakening your ability to defend yourself...
|
Weeman
Caldari KIA Corp KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 12:32:00 -
[20]
Very impressive, and tbh for what they've got ú1 billion is not much of an outlay. Basically for what RBS paid in tax last year they can fund 3 of those mofos. Imagine a bank with 3 of those bad boys collecting your late mortgate payment :o
I am very concerned on one point though. Will it be able to identify and elimate a terrorist at 20miles?
If not i'd rather see more police knocking about...but thats turning it slightly political :)
|
|
Mc Gyver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 12:35:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Weeman Very impressive, and tbh for what they've got ú1 billion is not much of an outlay. Basically for what RBS paid in tax last year they can fund 3 of those mofos. Imagine a bank with 3 of those bad boys collecting your late mortgate payment :o
I am very concerned on one point though. Will it be able to identify and elimate a terrorist at 20miles?
If not i'd rather see more police knocking about...but thats turning it slightly political :)
In time, terrorists will amass more & deadlier weapons, even WMD. I see no problem planning ahead for future defense.
I'm glad the UK is on our side and building nice ships like this. Our economy is on the decline, so we'll need more friends with kickass hardware in the future...
|
Ozzie Asrail
Infinitus Odium The Church.
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 12:42:00 -
[22]
One of the rare sensible decisions the goverment actually made but i'll stop there before the topic gets locked
Once the carriers get built a squad of a CVF, Type-45's and typhoons is gonna be damn impressive to see. The Royal Navy is so out of date at the moment, current carriers and destroyers are about 20+ years old i think? -----
|
Bob Stuart
Federation Fleet
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 12:56:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Weeman Very impressive, and tbh for what they've got ú1 billion is not much of an outlay.
According to the BBC, the build cost of the ship is about ú650 million, but the first group of 6 are part of a ú5.5 billion programme. So, the BPO, ME and PE research has cost about ú1.6 billion.
Originally by: Gone'Postal I think they fracked up a little.
In the next 10 years, as many as eight T45s could be built, mainly to defend the two large aircraft carriers that were ordered last month.
& Ordered: 2000
Either they need a smeg load of new shipyards.. or there going to be out of date before they get 20 off the production line.
There's a bunch of them building, one, maybe two, ships commissioning each year.
Daring itself was only started in 2004, launching 2006, so there's plenty of time to build more ships before the carriers finish.
|
Mc Gyver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 13:08:00 -
[24]
What kind of carriers do you guys (UK) have?
And what's with the buildup with all this new hardware?
|
Ozzie Asrail
Infinitus Odium The Church.
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 13:18:00 -
[25]
currently is the Invincible class carriers with harriers on board.
Yarrr
Designed for the cold war to hunt Russion nuclear subs in the atlantic and north sea. They don't really work so well as the long range airbase that modern carriers are used for. -----
|
Bob Stuart
Federation Fleet
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 13:28:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Mc Gyver What kind of carriers do you guys (UK) have? And what's with the buildup with all this new hardware?
Smallish carriers, that have about 16 Harrier jets. 2 active, 1 in reserve, plus a helicopter carrier.
Not really a buildup, more of a change in role, and replacement of old ships.
The Royal Navy role in the Cold war was anti-submarine warfare, nowadays there's more need for expeditionary warfare, (as seen in Falklands, Gulf, Yugoslavia, various other places), which requires different ships.
The Type 45s replace the Type 42s which were obsolescent by the mid 1990s.
|
Mc Gyver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 13:34:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Mc Gyver on 16/08/2007 13:35:13
Originally by: Ozzie Asrail currently is the Invincible class carriers with harriers on board.
Yarrr
Designed for the cold war to hunt Russion nuclear subs in the atlantic and north sea. They don't really work so well as the long range airbase that modern carriers are used for.
Ah yes, the familiar launch ramp...
So, are your new carriers going to be bigger? Nuclear powered? etc... Farther reaching sphere of influence type hardware...
You're going to be buying a bunch of JSF's correct? (Probably the VTOL ones?)
I love military hardware :)
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 13:42:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Rodj Blake on 16/08/2007 13:42:13
Originally by: Mc Gyver Edited by: Mc Gyver on 16/08/2007 13:35:13
Originally by: Ozzie Asrail currently is the Invincible class carriers with harriers on board.
Yarrr
Designed for the cold war to hunt Russion nuclear subs in the atlantic and north sea. They don't really work so well as the long range airbase that modern carriers are used for.
Ah yes, the familiar launch ramp...
So, are your new carriers going to be bigger? Nuclear powered? etc... Farther reaching sphere of influence type hardware...
You're going to be buying a bunch of JSF's correct? (Probably the VTOL ones?)
I love military hardware :)
There will be two carriers of the new class - details here.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Asestorian
Minmatar Domination.
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 13:53:00 -
[29]
Unfortunately we don't quite have the money that America has to spend on lots and lots of stuff, and even bigger carriers
Also, whether you like war or not, it's vitally important to keep our forces up to date. Otherwise we are going to find we don't really have much of a country left to complain about spending money on military stuff instead of the welfare system or whatever
---
---
|
Mc Gyver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 13:55:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Mc Gyver on 16/08/2007 14:05:44 Nice, that ship is quite a bit bigger than your old ones...
I found this when looking for spec's on your new carrier class.
I didn't realize so few countries had carriers...
I'm not sure if all those ships are in service? Shows 4 for the UK... There's no way we (USA) have that many in service...
Quote: Also, whether you like war or not, it's vitally important to keep our forces up to date. Otherwise we are going to find we don't really have much of a country left to complain about spending money on military stuff instead of the welfare system or whatever
So true, especially with the terror "wars" just starting up. It's only going to get worse. They will get more bold as they accumulate tech...
|
|
Syrin
Wildfire Laboratrories The Crimson Federation
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:05:00 -
[31]
Not to mention they poored 600 bil into the NHS over the last few years and its still borked.. i dont think that an extra bil will make that much difference on a national level not with labours ineffecient managment anyhow.
|
ry ry
StateCorp The State
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:06:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Red Gabba
Quote: The ship left American visitors to the yard on the Clyde "shaken and shocked", according to BAE Systems, its builders.
Love to know why this is..
no on-board McDonalds.
|
Teron D'Amun
The Burning Orphans Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:11:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Rodj Blake The Royal Navy's newest warship has just completed it's first sea trial, and the results look encouraging.
Clicky
those ships should go along nicely with Germany's newest and most advanced submarine
|
Asestorian
Minmatar Domination.
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:12:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Asestorian on 16/08/2007 14:12:24 As far as I know the UK only have two carriers in active service, with one in reserve.
Edit: Whoops, didn't realise there was a second page
---
---
|
Micheal Dietrich
Cynical Cartel
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:16:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Gone'Postal
Either they need a smeg load of new shipyards.. or there going to be out of date before they get 20 off the production line.
In WW2 America built an entire navy in a month. I'm sure other people could do it too
And yes, the US is currently building a new destroyer. I don't know the exact stats on it but I can say it's about as ugly as our stealth fighters and their working on a new age propulsion system for it that's gonna make it rocket across the water like none other. That's about all I learned when they were showing a little about it in town.
And the UK can get away with smaller aircraft carriers because of the harrier. Theres no need for a flight deck with VTOL jets. I know the US is also looking at something like that because it's really super expensive for us to send one super carrier out considering that it's escorted by atleast a half dozen ships.
___________________________
Never Forget, Never Forgive |
Mc Gyver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:18:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Originally by: Gone'Postal
Either they need a smeg load of new shipyards.. or there going to be out of date before they get 20 off the production line.
In WW2 America built an entire navy in a month. I'm sure other people could do it too
And yes, the US is currently building a new destroyer. I don't know the exact stats on it but I can say it's about as ugly as our stealth fighters and their working on a new age propulsion system for it that's gonna make it rocket across the water like none other. That's about all I learned when they were showing a little about it in town.
And the UK can get away with smaller aircraft carriers because of the harrier. Theres no need for a flight deck with VTOL jets. I know the US is also looking at something like that because it's really super expensive for us to send one super carrier out considering that it's escorted by atleast a half dozen ships.
I'd like to see our allies spend more on their defense so we can spend less :)
I also think it's time Japan changes it's constitution, and starts to build up it's own military... They have the cash to do so...
|
Asestorian
Minmatar Domination.
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:20:00 -
[37]
America has a lot more money to spend on the military than the UK does though. And it's also a lot bigger. We have smaller stuff because we can't afford to have uber-large stuff. But we make up for it by packing in the tech.
Also I think that the USes new stealth destroyer is the one that is going to use the Railguns if I'm not mistaken (British invention :P (at least I think it is)).
Also, submarine guy.. Astute Class.
Military stuff is awesome.
---
---
|
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:21:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Tarminic on 16/08/2007 14:26:08
Originally by: Teron D'Amun
Originally by: Rodj Blake The Royal Navy's newest warship has just completed it's first sea trial, and the results look encouraging.
Clicky
those ships should go along nicely with Germany's newest and most advanced submarine
While both of those are cool, nothing (except for railguns, or perhaps velociraptors) is as awesome as the mighty F-22. Now if only they didn't cost 130 million each.
EDIT:
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich In WW2 America built an entire navy in a month. I'm sure other people could do it too
Not entirely accurate - we already had our aircraft carriers and support ships, Pearl Harbor was a devastating attack against our battleships but the balance of naval power had already shifted toward the Aircraft Carrier.
Quote: And yes, the US is currently building a new destroyer. I don't know the exact stats on it but I can say it's about as ugly as our stealth fighters and their working on a new age propulsion system for it that's gonna make it rocket across the water like none other. That's about all I learned when they were showing a little about it in town.
Ooooh, I heard about it too - something about it having a very low radar signature to the point of being a stealth ship of sorts. I also heard later models will be including military-grade railguns. ------------ Whiners - Unite! Tarminic - 26 Million SP in Forum Warfare. |
Bob Stuart
Federation Fleet
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:23:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Mc Gyver I found this when looking for spec's on your new carrier class.
I'm not sure if all those ships are in service? Shows 4 for the UK... There's no way we (USA) have that many in service...
EDIT: Just looked, we have 10 in service... So not sure what that picture is trying to
That list has all the US helicopter carriers/amphibious assault ships in it, as well as the fixed-wing aircraft carriers. It probably includes ships being built and in reserve, as well as active ones.
The 4 ships for the UK are the 3 Invincible class aircraft carriers, (2 active, 1 reserve), and HMS Ocean - a helicopter carrier.
|
Mc Gyver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:25:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Mc Gyver on 16/08/2007 14:26:19
Originally by: Tarminic
Originally by: Teron D'Amun
Originally by: Rodj Blake The Royal Navy's newest warship has just completed it's first sea trial, and the results look encouraging.
Clicky
those ships should go along nicely with Germany's newest and most advanced submarine
While both of those are cool, nothing (except for railguns, or perhaps velociraptors) is as awesome as the mighty F-22. Now if only they didn't cost 130 million each.
I honestly think that will be the last high tech piloted military plane we make.
I think it would be better for us to go more towards UAV's...
Quote: America has a lot more money to spend on the military than the UK does though
That won't last forever, so we need you guys to step up to the plate! LOL
|
|
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:28:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Mc Gyver
I honestly think that will be the last high tech piloted military plane we make.
I think it would be better for us to go more towards UAV's...
Very true - the navy is already working on highly-intelligent, near-autonomous UAVs simply because the agility of military fighters is quickly outstripping the ability for pilots to withstand the strain it puts on their bodies. There was a really cool Popular Science article about it not too long ago... ------------ Whiners - Unite! Tarminic - 26 Million SP in Forum Warfare. |
Syrin
Wildfire Laboratrories The Crimson Federation
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:30:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Tarminic
Originally by: Mc Gyver
I honestly think that will be the last high tech piloted military plane we make.
I think it would be better for us to go more towards UAV's...
Very true - the navy is already working on highly-intelligent, near-autonomous UAVs simply because the agility of military fighters is quickly outstripping the ability for pilots to withstand the strain it puts on their bodies. There was a really cool Popular Science article about it not too long ago...
A few less friendly fire incidents maybe by certain air forces pilots.
|
Mc Gyver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:33:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Syrin
Originally by: Tarminic
Originally by: Mc Gyver
I honestly think that will be the last high tech piloted military plane we make.
I think it would be better for us to go more towards UAV's...
Very true - the navy is already working on highly-intelligent, near-autonomous UAVs simply because the agility of military fighters is quickly outstripping the ability for pilots to withstand the strain it puts on their bodies. There was a really cool Popular Science article about it not too long ago...
A few less friendly fire incidents maybe by certain air forces pilots.
It's not really the pilots, it's the targeters on the ground...
Actually, there could be more friendly fire incidents with UAV's... Joystick jockeys in a trailer somewhere not at the actual scene might make more mistakes...
|
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:33:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Tarminic on 16/08/2007 14:33:49
Originally by: Syrin
Originally by: Tarminic
Originally by: Mc Gyver
I honestly think that will be the last high tech piloted military plane we make.
I think it would be better for us to go more towards UAV's...
Very true - the navy is already working on highly-intelligent, near-autonomous UAVs simply because the agility of military fighters is quickly outstripping the ability for pilots to withstand the strain it puts on their bodies. There was a really cool Popular Science article about it not too long ago...
A few less friendly fire incidents maybe by certain air forces pilots.
If I remember correctly, the majority of friendly fire incidents. I think you're referring to the incident during the First Gulf War - a British tank column was moving through an area the US commanders had mistakenly designated as a "killbox," where anything inside was considered hostile and open to attacks of opportunity. This was caused by miscommunication at higher levels, which means automated drones would have still followed orders to blow up anything they spotted. EDIT: Though I'm no expert, so feel free to disagree. ------------ Whiners - Unite! Tarminic - 26 Million SP in Forum Warfare. |
Asestorian
Minmatar Domination.
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:33:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Asestorian on 16/08/2007 14:33:30
Quote:
Quote: America has a lot more money to spend on the military than the UK does though
That won't last forever, so we need you guys to step up to the plate! LOL
Yeah but we need to sort out our chav problem first :P This stuff isn't for fighting terrorists or other countries. No. It's for slaughtering chavs.
What?
A guy can dream
---
---
|
Syrin
Wildfire Laboratrories The Crimson Federation
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:37:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Asestorian Edited by: Asestorian on 16/08/2007 14:33:30
Quote:
Quote: America has a lot more money to spend on the military than the UK does though
That won't last forever, so we need you guys to step up to the plate! LOL
Yeah but we need to sort out our chav problem first :P This stuff isn't for fighting terrorists or other countries. No. It's for slaughtering chavs.
What?
A guy can dream
Hmmm a CHAV cannon.. now theres an idea. Wouldnt it count as Bio warfare ?
|
Mc Gyver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:43:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Asestorian Edited by: Asestorian on 16/08/2007 14:33:30
Quote:
Quote: America has a lot more money to spend on the military than the UK does though
That won't last forever, so we need you guys to step up to the plate! LOL
Yeah but we need to sort out our chav problem first :P This stuff isn't for fighting terrorists or other countries. No. It's for slaughtering chavs.
What?
A guy can dream
I think satellites with frickin laser beams would do more good for that problem... Less collateral damage as well...
|
Asestorian
Minmatar Domination.
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:44:00 -
[48]
Kind of reminds me of that story where the citizens of Basra thought we had released man eating badgers into the city to kill them all.
Now. Doing it with chavs would do two things. Killing the chavs, and.. Yeah just killing the chavs I guess. However I don't think the people we set them upon would be too happy about it. So it has some disadvantages.
But I guess if they're all gone we'll have more money available because they aren't leeching of the welfare system..
Hmm...
It's a difficult choice.
---
---
|
rhumbline
Caldari toxicology
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:47:00 -
[49]
From a standing start she reached 29 knots in just 70 seconds and can come to a dead halt within 800 yards.
That is bloomin amazing, considering her block coefficient.
She can turn full circle within three ship lengths, hmmm, not bad for a ship of her length.
She sure is a pretty ship, and its about time :)
|
Micheal Dietrich
Cynical Cartel
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:51:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Micheal Dietrich on 16/08/2007 14:52:21
Originally by: Tarminic
EDIT:
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich In WW2 America built an entire navy in a month. I'm sure other people could do it too
Not entirely accurate - we already had our aircraft carriers and support ships, Pearl Harbor was a devastating attack against our battleships but the balance of naval power had already shifted toward the Aircraft Carrier.
We had a navy in the Pacific but the one I'm talking about was built specifically for getting us to normandy. It consisted of about 1000 ships but they're including everything down to each troop transport that landed on the beach.
And heres a list of every carrier that the US previously and currently owns. We have more than most people think.
The Truman is currently headed to Iraq to replace another one thats down there but I'm not sure what one it is.
___________________________
Never Forget, Never Forgive |
|
rhumbline
Caldari toxicology
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:53:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Originally by: Tarminic
EDIT:
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich In WW2 America built an entire navy in a month. I'm sure other people could do it too
Not entirely accurate - we already had our aircraft carriers and support ships, Pearl Harbor was a devastating attack against our battleships but the balance of naval power had already shifted toward the Aircraft Carrier.
We had a navy in the Pacific but the one I'm talking about was built specifically for getting us to normandy. It consisted of about 1000 ships but they're including everything down to each troop transport that landed on the beach.
And heres a list of every carrier that the US previously and currently owns. We have more than most people think
Are you taliing about the liberty ships? one of the most amazing construction feats ever. building a complete ship in about 5 days. not sure if there are any still around, but there were in the 90's.
|
Mc Gyver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 14:57:00 -
[52]
I tell you what.
Was at an air show this past weekend, saw an F-18 SuperHornet demo.
It's a cool plane but I miss the F-14 Tomcat already
Looking at those older pictures, it's cool to see all those F-14's...
|
Belloc Slunv
Amarr Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 15:38:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Mc Gyver I honestly think that will be the last high tech piloted military plane we make.
I think it would be better for us to go more towards UAV's...[/quote
Don't forget about the f-35 JSF. F-35
|
Micheal Dietrich
Cynical Cartel
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 15:48:00 -
[54]
Originally by: rhumbline
Are you taliing about the liberty ships? one of the most amazing construction feats ever. building a complete ship in about 5 days. not sure if there are any still around, but there were in the 90's.
Correct. We tried this same feat back in the French-American war too I think but essentially what we came up with then was a bunch of row boats with a .22 on them. That fleet was decimated.
___________________________
Never Forget, Never Forgive |
Mc Gyver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 15:50:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Belloc Slunv
Originally by: Mc Gyver I honestly think that will be the last high tech piloted military plane we make.
I think it would be better for us to go more towards UAV's...[/quote
Don't forget about the f-35 JSF. F-35
True, but I guess I meant the F-22 should be the last ultra expensive superiority fighter with a pilot we build for the Air Force. (Navy will not be using them)
The JSF doesn't have some of the capabilities of the F-22, and it's more of a jack of all trades aircraft...
It costs too much to worry about keeping pilots alive, and there is a performance barrier with a pilot inside...
|
Lucian Alucard
Caldari Black Vice Industries
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 17:32:00 -
[56]
The sad thing about the Super Carriers is that in most theaters of Operations in the past 25 years they were out classed by the Midway Class carriers which were left overs from WW2, the reasoning is that they are unable to navigate many water ways like the Persian Gulf for instance due to their size, just turning one of those carriers around in the Gulf would cause an international incident and I am not joking in the least.
As far as destroyers go I can't wait until America comes up with an answer to this, back in the late 40's you guys made the first angled flight deck carriers,we responded with the Forestal Class.
Now if we could just get missle/rail gun based modern battleships.
|
Micheal Dietrich
Cynical Cartel
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 17:39:00 -
[57]
I watched a program recently on the either the military channel or the history channel and they stated that battleships are being phased out and replaced with smaller, faster ships like missile cruisers and such.
___________________________
Never Forget, Never Forgive |
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 17:40:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Locus Bey One can only hope it sinks or rapid rusts along with all the rest. Stupid waste of money imo
Ah yes, because it'll be much less of a waste if it's useless, won't it?
Now they've bought the damned thing, we might as well hope it works...
Originally by: Gone'Postal Nice.
I think they fracked up a little.
In the next 10 years, as many as eight T45s could be built, mainly to defend the two large aircraft carriers that were ordered last month.
&
Ordered: 2000
Either they need a smeg load of new shipyards.. or there going to be out of date before they get 20 off the production line.
The year 2000, not 2000 ships --------
|
jbob2000
Gallente KIA Corp KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 01:19:00 -
[59]
but...will it blend? ________________________________
|
|
GM Faolchu
Game Masters
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 01:22:00 -
[60]
Hailing from the UK, I can only say this will add firepower my side of the debate in office of who would win the next cod war. |
|
|
Royaldo
Gallente KVA Noble Inc. Institute of Cooperative Education
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 02:15:00 -
[61]
Quote: That won't last forever, so we need you guys to step up to the plate! LOL France & Australia as well... It wouldn't hurt if the Scandinavian countries could pitch in with more stuff too...
why should we help you? if wouldnt hurt you if we helped you, but whats in it for us?
|
Mc Gyver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 02:33:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Mc Gyver on 17/08/2007 02:38:58 Edited by: Mc Gyver on 17/08/2007 02:37:18
Originally by: Royaldo
Quote: That won't last forever, so we need you guys to step up to the plate! LOL France & Australia as well... It wouldn't hurt if the Scandinavian countries could pitch in with more stuff too...
why should we help you? if wouldnt hurt you if we helped you, but whats in it for us?
Aren't allies supposed to have each others backs?
The more globalized the world becomes, the more diversified the "allied forces" will have to become... The USA won't have the cash to spend on this stuff forever. Sooner or later our combined forces will be all we have against whatever opposes our way of life down the road... And I'm sorry to say, UN & NATO forces are not up to the challenge.
You don't have to help us for us alone, but I'd hope you'd want to keep allied nations able to continue with the prosperity we all (for the most part) are experiencing right now. At some point in the future the USA will no longer be able to go it alone... It will take a combined effort...
There will be economic globalization someday, but I think we can all see before we get to that point, there is going to be at least two sides of humanity that oppose one another (maily due to cultural & political differences)... Both of those sides will need offensive & defensive capabilities, not just capabilities for each country to defend themselves alone... Don't you want to be assured your side has military superiority?
So I didn't really mean helping the USA directly, we all know none of you care to do that (Except the UK & Australia, they always seem to help even if they disagree)... But collectively, I think we need to start worrying about the future, one that includes the USA no longer as a superpower...
|
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 03:22:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Royaldo
Quote: That won't last forever, so we need you guys to step up to the plate! LOL France & Australia as well... It wouldn't hurt if the Scandinavian countries could pitch in with more stuff too...
why should we help you? if wouldnt hurt you if we helped you, but whats in it for us?
Simple - military and diplomatic economy of scale. The US and Europe can do together what might not be possible for either the US or Europe to do alone. Granted, most of the time our interests won't coincide that well, but cooperation can't us any harm.
And we all saw where a policy of unilateralism has gotten us. ------------ Whiners - Unite! Tarminic - 26 Million SP in Forum Warfare. |
Calisto Cody
Minmatar The Black Swan Society
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 05:10:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich I watched a program recently on the either the military channel or the history channel and they stated that battleships are being phased out and replaced with smaller, faster ships like missile cruisers and such.
must of being an old rerun because as far as I know none are in any active fleet...
ah found the quote
"With the decommissioning of the last Iowas, no battleships remain in service (including in reserve) with any navy worldwide. A number are preserved as museum ships, either afloat or in dry-dock. The USA has a large number of battleships on display."
"I just like ships that are symmetrical, not ships with 5 propulsion jets on one side and 3 on the other and than maybe one in another random spot." |
Amarria Black
Clan Anthraxx
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 05:51:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Calisto Cody
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich I watched a program recently on the either the military channel or the history channel and they stated that battleships are being phased out and replaced with smaller, faster ships like missile cruisers and such.
must of being an old rerun because as far as I know none are in any active fleet...
ah found the quote
"With the decommissioning of the last Iowas, no battleships remain in service (including in reserve) with any navy worldwide. A number are preserved as museum ships, either afloat or in dry-dock. The USA has a large number of battleships on display."
The fleet role of ship-killing gunships and offshore bombardment platforms went the way of pith helmets and press gangs. When a ship the size of a bus can kill another ship from over the horizon, why on earth would you field one half the size of an aircraft carrier? Also, when a stealth aircraft can take off from Alabama, bomb a target in Baghdad, and fly home, why the hell would you risk non-essential assets in the Persian Gulf? Battleships just make absolutely no sense in a modern navy. Sucks, though, as I've always been a big fan of battleships and battlecruisers in a general sense.
On an unrelated note, take a couple of these new Type 45 destroyers and an AEGIS cruiser, and you could arguably dominate any chunk of sea you saw fit. I'm having a tough time coming up with a method of killing them short of target saturation or resource denial.
|
Calisto Cody
Minmatar The Black Swan Society
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 06:16:00 -
[66]
I love battleships too :(
Originally by: Amarria Black I'm having a tough time coming up with a method of killing them short of target saturation or resource denial.
Blob? ^_^
"I just like ships that are symmetrical, not ships with 5 propulsion jets on one side and 3 on the other and than maybe one in another random spot." |
Amarria Black
Clan Anthraxx
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 06:21:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Calisto Cody I love battleships too :(
Originally by: Amarria Black I'm having a tough time coming up with a method of killing them short of target saturation or resource denial.
Blob? ^_^
Heh, that would be the saturation part. Fire a missile at an AEGIS crusier, the cruiser swats the missile out of the sky with little effort, uses its over-the-top sensor equipment to find you, and then proceeds to WTFPWN you. Fire 50, and you get a better (albeit more expensive) result.
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 12:55:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Amarria Black
Originally by: Calisto Cody I love battleships too :(
Originally by: Amarria Black I'm having a tough time coming up with a method of killing them short of target saturation or resource denial.
Blob? ^_^
Heh, that would be the saturation part. Fire a missile at an AEGIS crusier, the cruiser swats the missile out of the sky with little effort, uses its over-the-top sensor equipment to find you, and then proceeds to WTFPWN you. Fire 50, and you get a better (albeit more expensive) result.
You could build and take along your own one of these: stalemate! Both ships can do nothing but throw missiles at each other and watch them explode at a point about equidistant between the two. The winner? Whichever one brought along the most ammunition! --------
|
Calisto Cody
Minmatar The Black Swan Society
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 17:23:00 -
[69]
or use like 50 PT boats !!
"I just like ships that are symmetrical, not ships with 5 propulsion jets on one side and 3 on the other and than maybe one in another random spot." |
Verone
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 17:49:00 -
[70]
Quote: Crew comforts: First warship to include email facilities and iPod charging points.
Christ... they get everywhere...
>>> THE BEAUTY OF NEW EDEN <<<
|
|
Belloc Slunv
Amarr Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 18:13:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Amarria Black
Originally by: Calisto Cody
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich I watched a program recently on the either the military channel or the history channel and they stated that battleships are being phased out and replaced with smaller, faster ships like missile cruisers and such.
must of being an old rerun because as far as I know none are in any active fleet...
ah found the quote
"With the decommissioning of the last Iowas, no battleships remain in service (including in reserve) with any navy worldwide. A number are preserved as museum ships, either afloat or in dry-dock. The USA has a large number of battleships on display."
The fleet role of ship-killing gunships and offshore bombardment platforms went the way of pith helmets and press gangs. When a ship the size of a bus can kill another ship from over the horizon, why on earth would you field one half the size of an aircraft carrier? Also, when a stealth aircraft can take off from Alabama, bomb a target in Baghdad, and fly home, why the hell would you risk non-essential assets in the Persian Gulf? Battleships just make absolutely no sense in a modern navy. Sucks, though, as I've always been a big fan of battleships and battlecruisers in a general sense.
On an unrelated note, take a couple of these new Type 45 destroyers and an AEGIS cruiser, and you could arguably dominate any chunk of sea you saw fit. I'm having a tough time coming up with a method of killing them short of target saturation or resource denial.
Submarines. The Type 45 is fitted for, but does not come with (Standard) stingray torps. And these new fangled torpedoes have atuo targetting warheads in them. That's the best solution I can think of. (I did a search for AEGIS cruisers and only found American stuff, which is why I didn't include it. After looking at the Ticonderoga class, submarines don't appear to be very viable.)
|
Krulla
Minmatar True Centii
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 18:29:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Amarria Black
Originally by: Calisto Cody
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich I watched a program recently on the either the military channel or the history channel and they stated that battleships are being phased out and replaced with smaller, faster ships like missile cruisers and such.
must of being an old rerun because as far as I know none are in any active fleet...
ah found the quote
"With the decommissioning of the last Iowas, no battleships remain in service (including in reserve) with any navy worldwide. A number are preserved as museum ships, either afloat or in dry-dock. The USA has a large number of battleships on display."
The fleet role of ship-killing gunships and offshore bombardment platforms went the way of pith helmets and press gangs. When a ship the size of a bus can kill another ship from over the horizon, why on earth would you field one half the size of an aircraft carrier? Also, when a stealth aircraft can take off from Alabama, bomb a target in Baghdad, and fly home, why the hell would you risk non-essential assets in the Persian Gulf? Battleships just make absolutely no sense in a modern navy. Sucks, though, as I've always been a big fan of battleships and battlecruisers in a general sense.
On an unrelated note, take a couple of these new Type 45 destroyers and an AEGIS cruiser, and you could arguably dominate any chunk of sea you saw fit. I'm having a tough time coming up with a method of killing them short of target saturation or resource denial.
Well someone theroized that with the advent of Railguns (these will actually become viable weapons in the next twenty years or so), the battleship might make a comeback. The reason being that railguns need such a giant amount of power to run them, so the smaller ships wouldn't be able to house the powerplants.
|
Amarria Black
Clan Anthraxx
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 18:30:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Belloc Slunv Submarines. The Type 45 is fitted for, but does not come with (Standard) stingray torps. And these new fangled torpedoes have atuo targetting warheads in them. That's the best solution I can think of. (I did a search for AEGIS cruisers and only found American stuff, which is why I didn't include it. After looking at the Ticonderoga class, submarines don't appear to be very viable.)
My postulate was assuming ASW choppers on at lest the cruiser if not one or more of the destroyers.
And yeah, Ticos are the current class of AEGIS cruiser. They're anti-sub, they're anti-warship, they're anti-whateverpoorbastichcomescalling. The sensor package can find and track anything below, on, or above the ocean up to the horizon and potentially beyond. Hell, most Tycos could paint a dot on the moon and sterilize targets at 100 yards using their solid-state arrays. They're armed with anti-ship and anti-missile systems, and can put aloft enough missiles to buttpound whatever is stupid enough to oppose it. Add to this anti-submarine sensors, weapons, and aircraft. Simply put, if a Tico can see it, it's probably dead.
|
smashsmash
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 18:32:00 -
[74]
why do people like the idea of railguns so much?
|
Amarria Black
Clan Anthraxx
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 18:39:00 -
[75]
Originally by: smashsmash why do people like the idea of railguns so much?
Because a straight-line weapon in atmosphere with penetration power enough to soft-kill an APC is pretty much the holy grail of weapons systems in the current strategic environment. Short of the omni-directional kill-all gun, that is.
|
Calisto Cody
Minmatar The Black Swan Society
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 18:41:00 -
[76]
or the holy hand grenade
"I just like ships that are symmetrical, not ships with 5 propulsion jets on one side and 3 on the other and than maybe one in another random spot." |
Micheal Dietrich
Cynical Cartel
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 19:02:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Amarria Black
Originally by: smashsmash why do people like the idea of railguns so much?
Because a straight-line weapon in atmosphere with penetration power enough to soft-kill an APC is pretty much the holy grail of weapons systems in the current strategic environment. Short of the omni-directional kill-all gun, that is.
I may be wrong but I thought a .50 sniper rifle with uranium rounds were capable of that. The only thing I know of rail guns is that they're supposed to have very little or none at all recoil.
Aren't we just the best species in the world! We find more brutal and gruesome ways to annihalate ourselves everyday!
___________________________
Never Forget, Never Forgive |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 19:09:00 -
[78]
Edited by: Tarminic on 17/08/2007 19:10:32
Originally by: smashsmash why do people like the idea of railguns so much?
What isn't appealing about using a massive electrical current to propel a solid-metal projectile with such force the sheer impact is more effective than a cruise missile?
Originally by: Micheal DietrichI may be wrong but I thought a .50 sniper rifle with uranium rounds were capable of that. The only thing I know of rail guns is that they're supposed to have very little or none at all recoil.[/quote
A .50 with the right ammunition can punch a hole through an engine block or pretty much any unarmored or lightly-armored vehicle. I think that something like an APC or Tank would be able to repel it though. And yes, another nicety is that they have no recoil. ------------ Whiners - Unite! Tarminic - 26 Million SP in Forum Warfare. |
Icheckjitamarketlol
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 19:26:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Originally by: Amarria Black
Originally by: smashsmash why do people like the idea of railguns so much?
Because a straight-line weapon in atmosphere with penetration power enough to soft-kill an APC is pretty much the holy grail of weapons systems in the current strategic environment. Short of the omni-directional kill-all gun, that is.
I may be wrong but I thought a .50 sniper rifle with uranium rounds were capable of that. The only thing I know of rail guns is that they're supposed to have very little or none at all recoil.
They'd actually have massive recoil, I think. The current versions are huge weapons that require a nuclear reactor to power, and can in theory only be fitted to ships or land-based turrets.
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich Aren't we just the best species in the world! We find more brutal and gruesome ways to annihalate ourselves everyday!
Yep.
|
Micheal Dietrich
Cynical Cartel
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 19:30:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Tarminic Edited by: Tarminic on 17/08/2007 19:10:32
Originally by: smashsmash why do people like the idea of railguns so much?
What isn't appealing about using a massive electrical current to propel a solid-metal projectile with such force the sheer impact is more effective than a cruise missile?
Originally by: Micheal DietrichI may be wrong but I thought a .50 sniper rifle with uranium rounds were capable of that. The only thing I know of rail guns is that they're supposed to have very little or none at all recoil.[/quote
A .50 with the right ammunition can punch a hole through an engine block or pretty much any unarmored or lightly-armored vehicle. I think that something like an APC or Tank would be able to repel it though. And yes, another nicety is that they have no recoil.
uranium shot as I remember watching is encased in soft lead. When the shot hits the target the lead portion spreads out and causes a small indentation in the armor. The uranium then uses the indentation to melt right through the armor and right through the crew compartment.
I don't know how true the next part is but supposidly the uranium round then bakes the crew inside of the vehicle leaving you with a perfectly good (although I would think radiated) apc or tank.
And I would think that rails would be of great use if we ever get into space because as far as I can see they dont require air to fire.
___________________________
Never Forget, Never Forgive |
|
Micheal Dietrich
Cynical Cartel
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 19:36:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Icheckjitamarketlol
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich The only thing I know of rail guns is that they're supposed to have very little or none at all recoil.
They'd actually have massive recoil, I think. The current versions are huge weapons that require a nuclear reactor to power, and can in theory only be fitted to ships or land-based turrets.
Recoil is mainly caused by gases leaving the weapon. When you fire a gun theres a chemical reaction caused by the gunpowder that expands and pushes the round out of the barrel.
With a rail gun you have electro-magnetic rails that send a pulse up the barrel launching the projectile that way, like how our rail trains currently work. With the lack of chemicals and gases I would think the recoil would be far less.
___________________________
Never Forget, Never Forgive |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 19:53:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Icheckjitamarketlol
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich The only thing I know of rail guns is that they're supposed to have very little or none at all recoil.
They'd actually have massive recoil, I think. The current versions are huge weapons that require a nuclear reactor to power, and can in theory only be fitted to ships or land-based turrets.
Nope, no recoil at all on railguns. They suffer from two major problems right now - the require such a large power source that it's difficult to mount large ones on anything other than a static defense or a nuclear-powered ship, and the conductive rails melt after each round is fired due to the massive current. The ones the navy is building are scaled-down versions that will operate off of smaller generators on patrol ships in addition to large guns mounted on destroyers. They could also be used to very effectively take down missiles due to the extreme muzzle velocity. ------------ Whiners - Unite! Tarminic - 26 Million SP in Forum Warfare. |
lofty29
Infinitus Odium The Church.
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 20:49:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Gone'Postal Nice.
I think they fracked up a little.
In the next 10 years, as many as eight T45s could be built, mainly to defend the two large aircraft carriers that were ordered last month.
&
Ordered: 2000
Either they need a smeg load of new shipyards.. or there going to be out of date before they get 20 off the production line.
Means they were ordered in year 2000 ---
Project Mayhem 2 |
Malcanis
High4Life Curse Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 21:13:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Originally by: Icheckjitamarketlol
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich The only thing I know of rail guns is that they're supposed to have very little or none at all recoil.
They'd actually have massive recoil, I think. The current versions are huge weapons that require a nuclear reactor to power, and can in theory only be fitted to ships or land-based turrets.
Recoil is mainly caused by gases leaving the weapon. When you fire a gun theres a chemical reaction caused by the gunpowder that expands and pushes the round out of the barrel.
With a rail gun you have electro-magnetic rails that send a pulse up the barrel launching the projectile that way, like how our rail trains currently work. With the lack of chemicals and gases I would think the recoil would be far less.
Recoil is caused by the operation of Newton's Laws. Specifically the one that goes:
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
If you apply 100,000N of force to the projectile, then 100,000N is also applied to you. There is no way around this within the realm of known science.
Rail guns will have recoil, and plenty of it.
CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that. |
Belloc Slunv
Amarr Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 21:51:00 -
[85]
If I remember correctly the uranium rounds use depelted uranium, which basically means -less- radiation. If any at all, I know when the A-10 warthogs blow something up I never saw pictures of our troops inspecting the damage in radhaz suits.
|
Micheal Dietrich
Cynical Cartel
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 22:00:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Belloc Slunv If I remember correctly the uranium rounds use depelted uranium, which basically means -less- radiation. If any at all, I know when the A-10 warthogs blow something up I never saw pictures of our troops inspecting the damage in radhaz suits.
Yeah each time they talk about it I can imagine a sniper talking about his kills while he's getting kemo . But I'm sure they've worked around this.
And I love Warthogs. The T-bolts were always our tanks in the sky even back in WW2.
___________________________
Never Forget, Never Forgive |
Priest Valour
Amarr Ramdon Industries corporation
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 22:26:00 -
[87]
hmm interesting subject....
Now let me review a few points,
The U.K. is building ships that can shoot down enemy missiles 'the size of cricket balls and ONE ship can protect the whole of London. Sooo 10 - 15 ship can protect the entire U.K. ? So we (the U.K.) could nuke anyone without direct consequence, given we had 10 or 15 of these ships..... again interesting.
Germany is continuing to rearm itself substantially and is already a major economic force in Europe/The world.(now given there record in the past .....). This coupled with the fact that the european elite are trying to make a super state with america (The idea disgusts me no end) and a european super army, which in turn equaqtes to a european super/hyper power .....this is very very interesting.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The European super power will have a competitor in 50 or so years (probably alot less but I feel in a very benevolent mood) which will be China. Which at the moment is just interested in securing energy. If China should choose to 'Join the arms race' given the fact that it could field an ARMY the size of America's population (Chinese national consrciption anyone? lets hope we never see it in it fullest form). is again very interesting.
America is going to crash and burn, I say this with no malice as I have lots of family in America, but the small hardcore of greedy intelligent people that run America/West have over stretch themselves in to many areas. The American economy is like an Easter Egg, it looks very nice, tastey and pretty but if you are able to take a big bite of it you will see it is hollow.
In 30 - 50 years America and maybe some parts of the west, well we will have alot in common with the old South Africa. The only difference being it won't be race that divides us it will be class.
We have some dark choices ahead of us, we do indeed live in interesting times.
Predictions from Priest Valour based on current events.
|
Red Gabba
JuBa Corp RONA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.17 23:31:00 -
[88]
Nice Pic of a current British carrier and a US one, the new British carrier will be a similar size apparently to a Nimitz class carrier.
|
DarkMatter
Sintered Sanity
|
Posted - 2007.08.18 01:54:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Priest Valour hmm interesting subject....
Now let me review a few points,
The U.K. is building ships that can shoot down enemy missiles 'the size of cricket balls and ONE ship can protect the whole of London. Sooo 10 - 15 ship can protect the entire U.K. ? So we (the U.K.) could nuke anyone without direct consequence, given we had 10 or 15 of these ships..... again interesting.
Germany is continuing to rearm itself substantially and is already a major economic force in Europe/The world.(now given there record in the past .....). This coupled with the fact that the european elite are trying to make a super state with america (The idea disgusts me no end) and a european super army, which in turn equaqtes to a european super/hyper power .....this is very very interesting.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The European super power will have a competitor in 50 or so years (probably alot less but I feel in a very benevolent mood) which will be China. Which at the moment is just interested in securing energy. If China should choose to 'Join the arms race' given the fact that it could field an ARMY the size of America's population (Chinese national consrciption anyone? lets hope we never see it in it fullest form). is again very interesting.
America is going to crash and burn, I say this with no malice as I have lots of family in America, but the small hardcore of greedy intelligent people that run America/West have over stretch themselves in to many areas. The American economy is like an Easter Egg, it looks very nice, tastey and pretty but if you are able to take a big bite of it you will see it is hollow.
In 30 - 50 years America and maybe some parts of the west, well we will have alot in common with the old South Africa. The only difference being it won't be race that divides us it will be class.
We have some dark choices ahead of us, we do indeed live in interesting times.
Predictions from Priest Valour based on current events.
It's tough to say exactly what will happen. But you're view of the American economy is a bit flawed. Yes it's on the decline, but it's not as strong as some think, and it's not as weak as you think.
It will indeed be interesting to see what happens... Things can change, China can change. I guess we really don't know who will be dominating in 50 years...
My Infinity Ship Designs: T-Y9, Hauler |
Priest Valour
Amarr Ramdon Industries corporation
|
Posted - 2007.08.18 02:11:00 -
[90]
Edited by: Priest Valour on 18/08/2007 02:13:32 It's tough to say exactly what will happen. But you're view of the American economy is a bit flawed. Yes it's on the decline, but it's not as strong as some think, and it's not as weak as you think.
It will indeed be interesting to see what happens... Things can change, China can change. I guess we really don't know who will be dominating in 50 years...
Ofcourse you are right I didn't wish to come across so arrogant, but tbh if we sustain the same level of life and quality as we have now in 30 years I will be very impressed. But these are my predictions/beliefs. But without a doubt we some err... challenging times ahead of us considering we are alreays feeling the begginings of what the world will be without cheap oil. This is but the start. Bring on hydro/fusion/sustainable technology please. I hope it is not too late. People need to stop worrying about climate change and start worrying about what nations will do when there people start to starve/feel hardship.
|
|
Amarria Black
Clan Anthraxx
|
Posted - 2007.08.18 04:20:00 -
[91]
On the railgun topic:
A sniper rifle is not a straight-line weapon. Bullet drop results in long shots being a shallow parabola. A railgun fires at such a disgusting velocity that on Terra, you're essentially firing a straight-line weapon. Where you point = what you hit, within a few centimeters. also due to said disgusting projectile velocity, railguns require little to no lead on moving targets. A Barrett M82A1 .50 cal has a muzzle velocity of 853 m/s. The railguns the Navy is ****ing around with have a muzzle velocity of around 3500 m/s. Also, I don't care if you're firing DU rounds from the Barrett, they're just going to splash against the armor plating of a main battle tank. A railgun firing DU could very well have the kinetic energy to penetrate.
On the dire predictions of the future topic:
I'm going to be brief so as to avoid politics. If 2012 isn't the dire end-of-the-world that some make it out to be, I predict that the next twenty years are going to be a period of great social upheaval in the Western world. You're going to see unrest in the US (and possibly Europe) that'll make the 60's look like a f'n tea party. Race riots, class riots, mass death. The haves getting richer, the have nots getting poorer, the middle class disappearing, and the have nots murdering the haves to get their stuff. A totalitarian-esque state, or a return to purer Constitutionalism, or anarchy, or some combination thereof. There's a simmering anger at all strata of society, and at a level not seen in generations.
|
Multras
Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.08.18 06:10:00 -
[92]
Could very well penetrate it? I think any decent calibre would make it so the armor plate doesnt exist anymore .
Thanks to EVE Art Store for the sig. |
Captain Hudson
Caldari Intergalactic Space Defense Force THE R0CK
|
Posted - 2007.08.18 11:06:00 -
[93]
Edited by: Captain Hudson on 18/08/2007 11:08:18
Originally by: Tarminic
Originally by: Priest Valour America is going to crash and burn, I say this with no malice as I have lots of family in America, but the small hardcore of greedy intelligent people that run America/West have over stretch themselves in to many areas. The American economy is like an Easter Egg, it looks very nice, tastey and pretty but if you are able to take a big bite of it you will see it is hollow.
Though I agree that America is on the decline in several respects, I don't think we're near economic colapse. Unfortunately our education system continues to decline at both elementary/high school levels and at the college level, and this will eventually result in our decline as an economic and military superpower, combined with a few other problems we have that will only be getting worse. America, when it goes down, will go out with a wimper, not a bang. The question is when (hopefully not in my lifetime).
Sorry to say guys but America is on the very tip of the great slide to recession, and whats funny is that China has been pumping billions and billions of dollars into the free market to stop your stock's completely crashing so in a way the folk some of you yankies hate a lot are trying to help you,even if it is to their own beifit. Oh and one of America's biggest morgage companies is asking a chinese bank to buy them if i read correctly. And no i dont hate america. Anyway on topic - its about time our navy got its respect back, once we used to have the largest navy, now its a joke!.
Originally by: SPQRMocton
We would love to have a bunch of teenage pimple boys with no real pvp ability to fil our corpse yards
|
Elliot Reid
Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2007.08.18 11:18:00 -
[94]
Originally by: lofty29
Originally by: Gone'Postal Nice.
I think they fracked up a little.
In the next 10 years, as many as eight T45s could be built, mainly to defend the two large aircraft carriers that were ordered last month.
&
Ordered: 2000
Either they need a smeg load of new shipyards.. or there going to be out of date before they get 20 off the production line.
Means they were ordered in year 2000
Who built it? The same Australian firm who build Wembly Stadium?
"It'll be ready in 2004 and cost ú400 million, honest guv" __________________________________
|
Jago Kain
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.08.18 18:59:00 -
[95]
I see...
Not only is it able to track really small targets at the same time as dishing out the lumps to BS, the targetting boost (more than 1000 targets) is hugely unfair when compared to other ships in it's size class.
The small sig will make it difficult to hit with anything but the smallest guns.
Aside from the basic stats, I fail to see how it can mount all those mods with less than 12 mid slots and 9 lows. Have they even bothered to consider play-balance?
The provision of e-mail facilities and i-pod points will mean that it can spam the forums at the same time as spamming cruise missiles and there will be even more badly put together gank videos with mind-numbing death metal soundtracks littering the forums.
This thing needs a major nerfing and quick before it unbalances the game completely.
Thank you CCP for ruining my gaming experience with [INSERT RANDOM WHINGE HERE]... I will be terminating my EVE online account the very minute that BoB takes delivery of the first one.
|
DarkMatter
Sintered Sanity
|
Posted - 2007.08.18 20:34:00 -
[96]
Quote: Sorry to say guys but America is on the very tip of the great slide to recession
We've heard this many times in the past.
Our economy in a full blown recession is still stronger than most.
It will take decades for the USA to decline. It's not going to happen over night.
And it's our own fault for so many years letting China get away with the trade crap they pull... We should have been tougher on Chinese imports, now it's too late, they own all our banks, using money the American people gave to them for buying their **** products for so may years...
And our big corporations going global, pretty much just means going to where they can hire slaves & not workers, is also going to add to our demise. Along with the left wing liberal school system that doesn't want learning to be hard, it should only be fun, which equates to a useless education.
Yes, we are falling. But it will take a while...
I give it at least 20 years before we are no longer a superpower...
My Infinity Ship Designs: T-Y9, Hauler |
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.18 21:03:00 -
[97]
Thats capitalism for ya. Chinese firms managed to out-perform American firms through exploiting cheap labour, and ended up on top.
Time to switch to communism? --------
|
Gyfrex
Minmatar Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2007.08.18 23:21:00 -
[98]
The Type 45s look really nice spec-wise (I can't say I'm a great fan of the rather phallic looking radar tower poking out the top of it though) as do the new carriers (go RN tbh ).
Anyway just gunna give my two cents on the whole Railgun topic. In regards to comparing it to an explosive based projectile weapon such as a .50 caliber such as the Barret M82a1 or M109, I think you're comparing the wrong things. The Railgun as stated before in this thread is in all probability going to only be mounted onto large scale platforms such as stationary silo-type bases or onto warships, a .50cal anti-material rifle is a hand-held weapon, which firstly is a very specific style of weapon, and secondly, in theory if you pumped enough power through the Railgun to boost its exit velocity (being VERY hypothetical here) you could probably cause the same amount of damage as a nuclear missile (once again I state the how hypothetical I'm being) and so its almost impossible to compare the two types of weapon. It would be better to compare the Railgun to something more large scale such as a cruise missile when looking at potential effectiveness, at least for the moment. In regards to a hand-held Railgun...keep dreaming, at least for now ^^.
Onto the whole ordeal of recoil, when using a Railgun. As someone previously stated according to newtons law, there should be at least some form of recoil, however I think in this situation it would be good to consider how the railgun actually works. The way recoil works on an explosion-based projectile weapon is that the gas rapidly expanding from the gunpowder after exiting the the weapon forces the weapon backwards, and has very little to do with the actual force, newtons law comes in when the round hits . As such the Railgun, not using any explosives to propel the projectile, would only have minuscule amounts of recoil, and as with the explosive based projectile weapons, newtons law only really comes into effect when the round hits something. If it affected it according to newtons law, the round wouldn't go anywhere on either your standard Assault Rifle, or your super high tech Railgun .
....I think I'm right, no flaming if I'm wrong please I'm just a little weapons nerd . Oh and sorry for the rant
---
|
Liisa
Infinitus Odium The Church.
|
Posted - 2007.08.19 00:25:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Priest Valour *snip* Germany is continuing to rearm itself substantially and is already a major economic force in Europe/The world.(now given there record in the past .....). This coupled with the fact that the european elite are trying to make a super state with america (The idea disgusts me no end) and a european super army, which in turn equaqtes to a european super/hyper power .....this is very very interesting.
*snip*
/me blinks
Germany is rearming itself? ----------------------------------
Currently pursuing a "deviant playstyle." |
Jago Kain
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.08.19 03:00:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Liisa
Originally by: Priest Valour *snip* Germany is continuing to rearm itself substantially and is already a major economic force in Europe/The world.(now given there record in the past .....). This coupled with the fact that the european elite are trying to make a super state with america (The idea disgusts me no end) and a european super army, which in turn equaqtes to a european super/hyper power .....this is very very interesting.
*snip*
/me blinks
Germany is rearming itself?
It would appear so.
Quick! Visit Germany before Germany visits you!
The next revolution won't be televised; it'll be pod-cast. |
|
Mercurye
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.19 18:55:00 -
[101]
All this stuff about "We have a nice ship, costed us some billions, it will aid our defenses!" are people where you can almost see the testosterone coming out of their eyes
Warships and wars should stay in games...
--~--~--~--~ ~NOTE: Freak~ |
Kalor Bayloch
Anqara Industries
|
Posted - 2007.08.19 19:53:00 -
[102]
Next-gen US destroyer
Quote: Warships and wars should stay in games...
The problem with "swords to plowshares" is that the people that do it become slaves to the people that didn't (not said by me, don't remember where I picked it up)
|
Sereifex Daku
|
Posted - 2007.08.19 20:28:00 -
[103]
Edited by: Sereifex Daku on 19/08/2007 20:32:10 Edited by: Sereifex Daku on 19/08/2007 20:28:22
Originally by: Mercurye
Warships and wars should stay in games...
"Do you care about freedom? Dreams may have inspired it, and wishes prompted it, but only war and weapons have made it yours." -- Robert Ardrey
Nothing personal, but if we all became idealistic hippies it would allow all the dictators in the world to deprive us of everything we have worked so hard to build. Our violent nature certainly saved us from the leader of the Third Reich, as well as Napoleon and many many others.
|
Glassback
M. Corp M. PIRE
|
Posted - 2007.08.19 20:34:00 -
[104]
Officers claim that if it was stationed in the River Thames, its weapon system would be able to single-handedly destroy any incoming airborne attack on Greater London.
G.
If Eve was just a game, it would have a pause button.
|
Mercurye
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.19 20:48:00 -
[105]
Yes, maybe Im indeed idealistic
The world would be better without ..........
Anyway, nice ship, too bad its "needed" --~--~--~--~ ~NOTE: Freak~ |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.08.19 21:17:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Mercurye
All this stuff about "We have a nice ship, costed us some billions, it will aid our defenses!" are people where you can almost see the testosterone coming out of their eyes
Warships and wars should stay in games...
If everyone thought that way, it would be true. Unfortunately I don't think that will ever happen...it's human nature. ------------ Whiners - Unite! Tarminic - 26 Million SP in Forum Warfare. |
Arvald
Caldari House of Tempers
|
Posted - 2007.08.19 21:21:00 -
[107]
ill take 3
forum warrior in training ya cant stop the rokh |
Malcanis
High4Life Curse Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.19 21:51:00 -
[108]
Edited by: Malcanis on 19/08/2007 21:53:47
Originally by: Gyfrex
Anyway just gunna give my two cents on the whole Railgun topic. In regards to comparing it to an explosive based projectile weapon such as a .50 caliber such as the Barret M82a1 or M109, I think you're comparing the wrong things. The Railgun as stated before in this thread is in all probability going to only be mounted onto large scale platforms such as stationary silo-type bases or onto warships, a .50cal anti-material rifle is a hand-held weapon, which firstly is a very specific style of weapon, and secondly, in theory if you pumped enough power through the Railgun to boost its exit velocity (being VERY hypothetical here) you could probably cause the same amount of damage as a nuclear missile (once again I state the how hypothetical I'm being) and so its almost impossible to compare the two types of weapon. It would be better to compare the Railgun to something more large scale such as a cruise missile when looking at potential effectiveness, at least for the moment. In regards to a hand-held Railgun...keep dreaming, at least for now ^^.
Onto the whole ordeal of recoil, when using a Railgun. As someone previously stated according to newtons law, there should be at least some form of recoil, however I think in this situation it would be good to consider how the railgun actually works. The way recoil works on an explosion-based projectile weapon is that the gas rapidly expanding from the gunpowder after exiting the the weapon forces the weapon backwards, and has very little to do with the actual force, newtons law comes in when the round hits . As such the Railgun, not using any explosives to propel the projectile, would only have minuscule amounts of recoil, and as with the explosive based projectile weapons, newtons law only really comes into effect when the round hits something. If it affected it according to newtons law, the round wouldn't go anywhere on either your standard Assault Rifle, or your super high tech Railgun .
....I think I'm right, no flaming if I'm wrong please I'm just a little weapons nerd . Oh and sorry for the rant
You are wrong and right... sort of
You are much heavier than a baseball. Stand on a skateboard which is on a very smooth, level surface and throw a baseball along the line of the skateboard. (use a flat base and some ball-bearings to eliminate directional effects) No exhaust gases are involved, but you will still move away from the point where you threw the ball. Newton is not mocked!
Exhaust gases may add to the recoil in as much as they have mass and are also ejected from a chemically powered weapon (making it in to a sort of rocket) but their main job is to push the projectile (and thus also the gun).
Railgun <-- X newtons --> projectile
Cannon <-- X newtons --> projectile <-- Y Newtons --> exhaust gases
Skaterboi <-- X newtons --> baseball
The physics are essentially the same. I don't know the ratios of X and Y in "real world" equipment.
Recoil is also much increased if the projectile is relatively large and the gun is relatively small. Loosely speaking, the gun and the projectile will both have the same momentum. So if we use a 100Kg perfectly efficient gun to fire a 1Kg projectile at 1,000m/s, recoil will give the gun sufficient impetus to recoil at 10m/s*. If the projectile only masses 0.1Kg but is accelerated to 10,000m/s the recoil is the same, even though the projectile has 10x the kinetic energy of the larger. On a historical note, those ships of the line with black powder cannons firing a 32-pound ball at not even a couple of hundred metres a second required huge amounts of reinforcement for the kinetic energy they delivered.
*It is easy to see that the dude on the skateboard will have to throw the baseball very hard indeed to get much speed up. However if he were to throw, say, a large watermelon weighing 5Kg he could easily get a very noticeable impetus.
CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that. |
DarkMatter
Sintered Sanity
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 02:54:00 -
[109]
Edited by: DarkMatter on 20/08/2007 02:54:38
Originally by: Patch86 Thats capitalism for ya. Chinese firms managed to out-perform American firms through exploiting cheap labour, and ended up on top.
Time to switch to communism?
Hardly, we just need to even out the trade imbalance with China.
Only allow China to export to us what they import from us in dollar value. That would pretty much **** their economy over. Only reason they have an economy is becauise of US Wal-Mart shoppers...
My Infinity Ship Designs: T-Y9, Hauler |
Tyleritus
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 03:14:00 -
[110]
The D Class Typer 45's are to replace the old Type 42 Destroyers, there main purpose is Anti Air allthough all ships poses 4.5inch Howitzer for NGS and all ships have anti-sub role.
It has a new Radar System that works 3D this was originally a British invention but sold to the yanks and only recently aquired back.
Names are Daring, followed by Diamond and Dragon others to follow all begin with the Letter D but i forget there names.
The New carriers are super carriers teh same size as USS Enterprise and will have the new JSF Aircract and be able to launch modified Eurofighters as well as Helos' eg Apache.
Names Are HMS Queen Elizebeth II and HMS Prince Of Wales
Astute Class subs will carry Tomahawk Tigerfish and Swordfish, also will be able to lauch Special Frces in mini Subs for covert insertion and use the latest Sonar (which unfortunatly kills Dolphins by frying there brains).
I know all this as i left the Royal Navy in 2005 but all of this can be found wither at Janesnavy.com or from the RN's own paper The Navy News (or as sailors call it the dockyard Dandy).
|
|
Amarria Black
Clan Anthraxx
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 03:31:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Tyleritus The New carriers are super carriers teh same size as USS Enterprise and will have the new JSF Aircract and be able to launch modified Eurofighters as well as Helos' eg Apache.
Names Are HMS Queen Elizebeth II and HMS Prince Of Wales
That's awesome. QE2 as a supercarrier... Having a ship named after Prince Chuck (I know, it's named after the title, not the man) is somewhat entertaining as well.
|
Micheal Dietrich
Cynical Cartel
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 04:09:00 -
[112]
Originally by: DarkMatter Edited by: DarkMatter on 20/08/2007 02:54:38
Originally by: Patch86 Thats capitalism for ya. Chinese firms managed to out-perform American firms through exploiting cheap labour, and ended up on top.
Time to switch to communism?
Hardly, we just need to even out the trade imbalance with China.
Only allow China to export to us what they import from us in dollar value. That would pretty much **** their economy over. Only reason they have an economy is becauise of US Wal-Mart shoppers...
You do know that wal-mart is world wide dont ya.
___________________________
Never Forget, Never Forgive |
Bellicose
Gallente Beets and Gravy Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 04:37:00 -
[113]
Quote: Crew comforts: First warship to include email facilities and iPod charging points.
i bet all those sailors love to get spam mail in the middle of the atlantic ocean, esp. those pee-pee enlargement spams Your signature image exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Sahwoolo Who needs a showel when you have a nice big cannon? |
Micheal Dietrich
Cynical Cartel
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 04:46:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Bellicose
Quote: Crew comforts: First warship to include email facilities and iPod charging points.
i bet all those sailors love to get spam mail in the middle of the atlantic ocean, esp. those pee-pee enlargement spams
I don't see how that is true. My coworkers daughter is on the Truman and she emails AND calls her mother (my coworker) all the time. Unless they're just talking about UK ships having this royalty for the first time.
___________________________
Never Forget, Never Forgive |
Epoch
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 05:16:00 -
[115]
Edited by: Epoch on 20/08/2007 05:16:35
Originally by: Captain Hudson
Sorry to say guys but America is on the very tip of the great slide to recession, and whats funny is that China has been pumping billions and billions of dollars into the free market to stop your stock's completely crashing so in a way the folk some of you yankies hate a lot are trying to help you,even if it is to their own beifit. Oh and one of America's biggest morgage companies is asking a chinese bank to buy them if i read correctly. And no i dont hate america.
I'm a financial analyst in the mortgage industry. What are your creditials? I'm guessing a student who listens too closely to their professors anti-american rhetoric.
Our mortgage industry is a fraction of our investments market. If you bothered to look at the dow over the past 6 months, you'll see its barely dropped. The us, canadian and euro markets were UP as of friday. The asian markets were all DOWN.
China has been pumping billions into the free market to save our market? What in the **** are you talking about? The fed pumped ~120b into the banking market and cut the discount rate 0.50%.
Have you been reading the news? The US as well as several European countries are in the process of placing higher restrictions on chinese imports. lead on our kids toys? read a paper ffs!
Americas largest mortgage company asked a chinese bank to buy them?! you dont even know the name of the company! its Countrywide, the largest mortgage lender in the country (~18%) and they didnt ask a chinese bank to buy them. infact, their stock was up 18% as of friday.
are investors getting screwed because a small percentage of gordon gecko wannabes repackaged sub-prime loans as sound investments and sold them overseas and at home? yes
is the us about to fall into a deep, dark, scary recession? no.
|
Imperius Blackheart
Caldari Trinity Nova
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 07:45:00 -
[116]
Quote: The system is so powerful it can monitor all take-offs and landings from every major European airport within 200 miles of Portsmouth.
I love that quote from the Telegraph, how many major European airports are within 200 miles of Portsmouth? Poor grammer FTW
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 08:49:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Imperius Blackheart
Quote: The system is so powerful it can monitor all take-offs and landings from every major European airport within 200 miles of Portsmouth.
I love that quote from the Telegraph, how many major European airports are within 200 miles of Portsmouth? Poor grammer FTW
Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted are definitely all within 200 miles of Portsmouth.
Charles de Gaulle and Birmingham may be as well.
On top of that, City, Southampton and Bournemouth probably also count as major airports.
That's a lot of air traffic.
Anyway, the impressive thing is that it can track aircraft within 200 miles of Pompey while it's sat off the coast of Thailand
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
DarkMatter
Sintered Sanity
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 10:06:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Originally by: DarkMatter Edited by: DarkMatter on 20/08/2007 02:54:38
Originally by: Patch86 Thats capitalism for ya. Chinese firms managed to out-perform American firms through exploiting cheap labour, and ended up on top.
Time to switch to communism?
Hardly, we just need to even out the trade imbalance with China.
Only allow China to export to us what they import from us in dollar value. That would pretty much **** their economy over. Only reason they have an economy is becauise of US Wal-Mart shoppers...
You do know that wal-mart is world wide dont ya.
They are now, yes...
But I'm guessing the market share Wal-Mart holds in the US compared to the rest of the planet is still skewed in favor of white trash America...
In any event, Wal-Mart is peddling Chinese crap all over the world (Thanks to Americans who made Wal-Mart what it is today), so we're all now feeding Communist China's agenda...
Even the EU is falling prey to China, attaining a multi-billion dollar trade deficit with them...
To bad you don't have much of a choice. Everything you pick up these days has that little gold oval shaped Made In China sticker on it...
We should not be feeding our enemies economy in such a manner, but the lowest price wins, right?
What I see today is that so many families buy so much junk from China, and it ends up in our landfills within a few years... We may as well just garnish our wages and send it to the Chinese government, it would be easier, and better for our environment.
I certainly don't remember having as many crappy toys like kids have today. Disposable toys, they get busted & thrown out in a month time. Not just toys either. I've made the mistake of buying hand tools made in China, no wonder why they are 1/10th the price of real tools. Complete trash...
Harbor Freight, Northern tool, Sears, you name it. All selling Chinese rubbish...
I guess we won't learn until our country is in the gutter, then we'll wonder what went wrong...
My Infinity Ship Designs: T-Y9, Hauler |
Xtreem
Gallente Naughty 40 Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 10:21:00 -
[119]
if i had a billion, id buy one :)
|
DarkMatter
Sintered Sanity
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 10:32:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Xtreem if i had a billion, id buy one :)
And do what with it? Fishing? lol...
My Infinity Ship Designs: T-Y9, Hauler |
|
Xtreem
Gallente Naughty 40 Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 10:46:00 -
[121]
Originally by: DarkMatter
Originally by: Xtreem if i had a billion, id buy one :)
And do what with it? Fishing? lol...
ultimate pulling machine, oh you have a {insert nice car here} i have a one billion quid high tech weapon of ultimate power, oh and it has a double bed! = i win!
:) obviously id still have the flashy car to drive me to the docks to get in it :)
|
Imperius Blackheart
Caldari Trinity Nova
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 10:51:00 -
[122]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Originally by: Imperius Blackheart
Quote: The system is so powerful it can monitor all take-offs and landings from every major European airport within 200 miles of Portsmouth.
I love that quote from the Telegraph, how many major European airports are within 200 miles of Portsmouth? Poor grammer FTW
Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted are definitely all within 200 miles of Portsmouth.
Charles de Gaulle and Birmingham may be as well.
On top of that, City, Southampton and Bournemouth probably also count as major airports.
That's a lot of air traffic.
Anyway, the impressive thing is that it can track aircraft within 200 miles of Pompey while it's sat off the coast of Thailand
And there was I thinking that from 200 miles off portsmouth it could monitor every major european airport.
|
Locus Bey
Gallente Qalandar
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 11:05:00 -
[123]
"A warship that can defend the entire city of London from missile and aircraft attack ... The ship can engage 12 air targets.." Am I the only 1 to see the problem here?
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 11:30:00 -
[124]
Originally by: DarkMatter Edited by: DarkMatter on 20/08/2007 02:54:38
Originally by: Patch86 Thats capitalism for ya. Chinese firms managed to out-perform American firms through exploiting cheap labour, and ended up on top.
Time to switch to communism?
Hardly, we just need to even out the trade imbalance with China.
Only allow China to export to us what they import from us in dollar value. That would pretty much **** their economy over. Only reason they have an economy is becauise of US Wal-Mart shoppers...
And there I was thing espirit de capitalism was a free and unrestricted trade environment in which corporations sink or swim solely based on their merits and competitiveness on the open market.
If you're willing to accept trade limitations to favour a particular nationality, wouldn't it make sense to employ trade limitations in order to protect the humble consumer too? Because that'd be espirit de socialism instead --------
|
Locus Bey
Gallente Qalandar
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 11:39:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Patch86
Originally by: DarkMatter Edited by: DarkMatter on 20/08/2007 02:54:38
Originally by: Patch86 Thats capitalism for ya. Chinese firms managed to out-perform American firms through exploiting cheap labour, and ended up on top.
Time to switch to communism?
Hardly, we just need to even out the trade imbalance with China.
Only allow China to export to us what they import from us in dollar value. That would pretty much **** their economy over. Only reason they have an economy is becauise of US Wal-Mart shoppers...
And there I was thing espirit de capitalism was a free and unrestricted trade environment in which corporations sink or swim solely based on their merits and competitiveness on the open market.
If you're willing to accept trade limitations to favour a particular nationality, wouldn't it make sense to employ trade limitations in order to protect the humble consumer too? Because that'd be espirit de socialism instead
It wil never happen, as those 'American' companies are no longer 'American' companies, but global entities. Now that the US is not much more than a raw supplier, its only ability to steer 'trade imbalances' is with the third world via the World Bank and other vampire entities. The exploiters always end up the exploited. Long live 'Democracy!'
|
Xantia Gedur
House of Gedur
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 12:33:00 -
[126]
Originally by: Aturi Kuomi Piity they can't use those billions of pounds on homes, helping the poor, the NHS or something worthwhile.
Freaking stupid government.
It's called a defence budget, they have limited money to put towards military toys and do not touch the money from other departments such as health or education.
A very impressive and modern ship although i'm sure they are not releasing its 'full features' to the general public only the ones that you need to know. On the price, 1 bil is nothing, in times we live in it pays to be one step ahead of the enemy.
Ahh theres nothing like flopping your international peen on the table and saying 'hey guys look what we got!'
Good job Royal Navy
|
DarkMatter
Sintered Sanity
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 12:38:00 -
[127]
Edited by: DarkMatter on 20/08/2007 12:39:33
Quote: And there I was thing espirit de capitalism was a free and unrestricted trade environment in which corporations sink or swim solely based on their merits and competitiveness on the open market.
It's never been truly free though...
We've always had limitations imposed upon us when we were exporting large amounts of goods... And we allowed many countries to have huge trade imbalances with us, all in the name of cheaper goods. Not better goods...
We're getting cheaper goods for our lower & middle class, but at the same time giving their jobs away...
Politicians are just so ignorant...
My Infinity Ship Designs: T-Y9, Hauler |
Cmdr Sy
Appetite 4 Destruction
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 16:35:00 -
[128]
You will need a few ships like that with you if someone starts spamming Sunburns.
Logoffs
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 21:31:00 -
[129]
Originally by: Xantia Gedur
Originally by: Aturi Kuomi Piity they can't use those billions of pounds on homes, helping the poor, the NHS or something worthwhile.
Freaking stupid government.
It's called a defence budget, they have limited money to put towards military toys and do not touch the money from other departments such as health or education.
A very impressive and modern ship although i'm sure they are not releasing its 'full features' to the general public only the ones that you need to know. On the price, 1 bil is nothing, in times we live in it pays to be one step ahead of the enemy.
Ahh theres nothing like flopping your international peen on the table and saying 'hey guys look what we got!'
Good job Royal Navy
Ironically enough, in theory new military technology could be a money saver in the future.
If you consider that this is a very small ship that can do the work of several old-tech much larger ships, that means that it'll need to be staffed by less crew, have less bits that need replacing, less fuel being burned, etc. etc. etc...
Think, if every ship in the Royal Navy was replaced with the equivalent in fire power of these little guys, that'd be a lot of money being saved.
In theory... --------
|
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 21:35:00 -
[130]
Originally by: Patch86 Ironically enough, in theory new military technology could be a money saver in the future.
If you consider that this is a very small ship that can do the work of several old-tech much larger ships, that means that it'll need to be staffed by less crew, have less bits that need replacing, less fuel being burned, etc. etc. etc...
Think, if every ship in the Royal Navy was replaced with the equivalent in fire power of these little guys, that'd be a lot of money being saved.
In theory...
Maintenance costs are also a concern - a lot of older Naval vessels cost more to maintain due to their design and the components used. Newer ships tend to be lower-cost not just due to their (lack of) age but also because of design revisions and technological improvements. ------------ Whiners - Unite! Tarminic - 26 Million SP in Forum Warfare. |
|
Xtreem
Gallente Naughty 40 Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.08.21 09:17:00 -
[131]
Originally by: Locus Bey "A warship that can defend the entire city of London from missile and aircraft attack ... The ship can engage 12 air targets.." Am I the only 1 to see the problem here?
not at all!! have you never seen the films, City attacks are normally either with 1 missile at a time, or a small sqaud of never more than a 8 jets, so one would easyily be enough :)
|
ry ry
StateCorp The State
|
Posted - 2007.08.21 09:22:00 -
[132]
Originally by: Xtreem City attacks are normally [..] a small squad
if only the military played eve. we'd have a blob of these things by now.
|
Darteis Elosia
|
Posted - 2007.08.21 10:57:00 -
[133]
Edited by: Darteis Elosia on 21/08/2007 11:02:37 Hmm intresting ship... Got a chuckle when i read about the iPod charge ports.
What does this "passive naval decoy" system do?
But i still think the Visby class frigate looks cooler. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visby_class_corvette
|
Micheal Dietrich
Cynical Cartel
|
Posted - 2007.08.21 16:58:00 -
[134]
Originally by: Darteis Elosia
What does this "passive naval decoy" system do?
scales the ships signature down tomake it look like a fishing boat on radar/sonar
___________________________
Never Forget, Never Forgive |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.08.21 17:10:00 -
[135]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Originally by: Darteis Elosia
What does this "passive naval decoy" system do?
scales the ships signature down tomake it look like a fishing boat on radar/sonar
Not to mention reducing missile damage! ------------ Whiners - Unite! Tarminic - 26 Million SP in Forum Warfare. |
Ozzie Asrail
Infinitus Odium The Church.
|
Posted - 2007.08.21 19:25:00 -
[136]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Originally by: Bellicose
Quote: Crew comforts: First warship to include email facilities and iPod charging points.
i bet all those sailors love to get spam mail in the middle of the atlantic ocean, esp. those pee-pee enlargement spams
I don't see how that is true. My coworkers daughter is on the Truman and she emails AND calls her mother (my coworker) all the time. Unless they're just talking about UK ships having this royalty for the first time.
I belive the article means in-cabin PC's and ipod charger rather than just in a shared lounge.
One the the ships my company is building has been spec'd with a chip PC and xbox 360 in every cabin -----
|
Thorliaron
|
Posted - 2007.08.21 23:03:00 -
[137]
Originally by: Epoch Edited by: Epoch on 20/08/2007 06:07:59 Edited by: Epoch on 20/08/2007 05:34:07 Edited by: Epoch on 20/08/2007 05:16:35
Originally by: Captain Hudson
Sorry to say guys but America is on the very tip of the great slide to recession, and whats funny is that China has been pumping billions and billions of dollars into the free market to stop your stock's completely crashing so in a way the folk some of you yankies hate a lot are trying to help you,even if it is to their own beifit. Oh and one of America's biggest morgage companies is asking a chinese bank to buy them if i read correctly. And no i dont hate america.
I'm a financial analyst in the mortgage industry. What are your creditials? I'm guessing a student who listens too closely to their professors anti-american rhetoric.
Our mortgage industry is a fraction of our investments market. If you bothered to look at the dow over the past 6 months, you'll see its barely dropped. The us, canadian and euro markets were UP as of friday. The asian markets were all DOWN.
China has been pumping billions into the free market to save our market? What in the **** are you talking about? The fed pumped ~120b into the banking market and cut the discount rate 0.50%.
Have you been reading the news? The US as well as several European countries are in the process of placing higher restrictions on chinese imports. lead on our kids toys? read a paper ffs! china is in the middle of an industrial revolution. their economy is still ~100 years behind the us, canada + just about every other western european country. if they dont pull their **** together and stop exporting toothpaste w/ antifreeze, toys with lead based paint and dirty ******* food, they're going to slide further behind.
Americas largest mortgage company asked a chinese bank to buy them?! you dont even know the name of the company! its Countrywide, the largest mortgage lender in the country (~18%) and they didnt ask a chinese bank to buy them. infact, their stock was up 18% as of friday.
are investors getting screwed because a small percentage of gordon gecko wannabes repackaged sub-prime loans as sound investments and sold them overseas and at home? yes
is the us about to fall into a deep, dark, scary recession? no.
...and thats an incredible ship.
If u really are a financial analyst in the mortgage sector your not a very good one,Countrywide was not the bank looking to china.Fed reserve only added $120b in liquidity? bank of japan added 700B Yen into the market, thats more than $120b, Fed Reserve only did what it should of done ******* ages ago. And its not just the mortgage sector thats being effected, lots of Hedge Fund companies are being effected aswell but i guess you already knew that right?!
|
Epoch
|
Posted - 2007.08.22 01:36:00 -
[138]
Edited by: Epoch on 22/08/2007 01:43:21 Edited by: Epoch on 22/08/2007 01:41:09 Edited by: Epoch on 22/08/2007 01:40:40
Originally by: Thorliaron
Originally by: Epoch Edited by: Epoch on 20/08/2007 06:07:59 Edited by: Epoch on 20/08/2007 05:34:07 Edited by: Epoch on 20/08/2007 05:16:35
Originally by: Captain Hudson
Sorry to say guys but America is on the very tip of the great slide to recession, and whats funny is that China has been pumping billions and billions of dollars into the free market to stop your stock's completely crashing so in a way the folk some of you yankies hate a lot are trying to help you,even if it is to their own beifit. Oh and one of America's biggest morgage companies is asking a chinese bank to buy them if i read correctly. And no i dont hate america.
I'm a financial analyst in the mortgage industry. What are your creditials? I'm guessing a student who listens too closely to their professors anti-american rhetoric.
Our mortgage industry is a fraction of our investments market. If you bothered to look at the dow over the past 6 months, you'll see its barely dropped. The us, canadian and euro markets were UP as of friday. The asian markets were all DOWN.
China has been pumping billions into the free market to save our market? What in the **** are you talking about? The fed pumped ~120b into the banking market and cut the discount rate 0.50%.
Have you been reading the news? The US as well as several European countries are in the process of placing higher restrictions on chinese imports. lead on our kids toys? read a paper ffs! china is in the middle of an industrial revolution. their economy is still ~100 years behind the us, canada + just about every other western european country. if they dont pull their **** together and stop exporting toothpaste w/ antifreeze, toys with lead based paint and dirty ******* food, they're going to slide further behind.
Americas largest mortgage company asked a chinese bank to buy them?! you dont even know the name of the company! its Countrywide, the largest mortgage lender in the country (~18%) and they didnt ask a chinese bank to buy them. infact, their stock was up 18% as of friday.
are investors getting screwed because a small percentage of gordon gecko wannabes repackaged sub-prime loans as sound investments and sold them overseas and at home? yes
is the us about to fall into a deep, dark, scary recession? no.
...and thats an incredible ship.
If u really are a financial analyst in the mortgage sector your not a very good one,Countrywide was not the bank looking to china.Fed reserve only added $120b in liquidity? bank of japan added 700B Yen into the market, thats more than $120b, Fed Reserve only did what it should of done ******* ages ago. And its not just the mortgage sector thats being effected, lots of Hedge Fund companies are being effected aswell but i guess you already knew that right?!
You must be the mailboy at an investement bank.
What was the name of this mortgage company kid? As an analyst, my job is to reduce exposure/risk & save the company money. Actually, I am good at my job. And, I know exchange rates . 1 trillion yen = ~8.4b USD. That is how much japan injected into the market on Friday, 400b yen the day before. That's real ******* far from 120b USD. If I ever want to lose money, I'll listen to your financial advice.
|
LUH 3471
|
Posted - 2007.08.22 01:51:00 -
[139]
Edited by: LUH 3471 on 22/08/2007 01:53:37
Originally by: Aturi Kuomi Piity they can't use those billions of pounds on homes, helping the poor.
qft
|
Thorliaron
|
Posted - 2007.08.22 01:52:00 -
[140]
Edited by: Thorliaron on 22/08/2007 01:52:47
Originally by: Epoch Edited by: Epoch on 22/08/2007 01:43:21 Edited by: Epoch on 22/08/2007 01:41:09 Edited by: Epoch on 22/08/2007 01:40:40
Originally by: Thorliaron
Originally by: Epoch Edited by: Epoch on 20/08/2007 06:07:59 Edited by: Epoch on 20/08/2007 05:34:07 Edited by: Epoch on 20/08/2007 05:16:35
Originally by: Captain Hudson
Sorry to say guys but America is on the very tip of the great slide to recession, and whats funny is that China has been pumping billions and billions of dollars into the free market to stop your stock's completely crashing so in a way the folk some of you yankies hate a lot are trying to help you,even if it is to their own beifit. Oh and one of America's biggest morgage companies is asking a chinese bank to buy them if i read correctly. And no i dont hate america.
I'm a financial analyst in the mortgage industry. What are your creditials? I'm guessing a student who listens too closely to their professors anti-american rhetoric.
Our mortgage industry is a fraction of our investments market. If you bothered to look at the dow over the past 6 months, you'll see its barely dropped. The us, canadian and euro markets were UP as of friday. The asian markets were all DOWN.
China has been pumping billions into the free market to save our market? What in the **** are you talking about? The fed pumped ~120b into the banking market and cut the discount rate 0.50%.
Have you been reading the news? The US as well as several European countries are in the process of placing higher restrictions on chinese imports. lead on our kids toys? read a paper ffs! china is in the middle of an industrial revolution. their economy is still ~100 years behind the us, canada + just about every other western european country. if they dont pull their **** together and stop exporting toothpaste w/ antifreeze, toys with lead based paint and dirty ******* food, they're going to slide further behind.
Americas largest mortgage company asked a chinese bank to buy them?! you dont even know the name of the company! its Countrywide, the largest mortgage lender in the country (~18%) and they didnt ask a chinese bank to buy them. infact, their stock was up 18% as of friday.
are investors getting screwed because a small percentage of gordon gecko wannabes repackaged sub-prime loans as sound investments and sold them overseas and at home? yes
is the us about to fall into a deep, dark, scary recession? no.
...and thats an incredible ship.
Countrywides shares only enjoyed a small lift upwards recently because of the massive speculation that Warren Buffett is going to make a move for them but you proberly already knew that too right kid?!
|
|
Tyleritus
|
Posted - 2007.08.22 02:41:00 -
[141]
Originally by: Darteis Elosia
What does this "passive naval decoy" system do?
Ita inflatable thing that deploys and drifts dehind it, to the missiles RADAR is looks teh size of a Aircraft Carrier or in the new carriers one I would imagine they would make it bigger to make it look even bigger so it goes for that instead.
|
Captain Hudson
Caldari Intergalactic Space Defense Force
|
Posted - 2007.08.22 03:49:00 -
[142]
Edited by: Captain Hudson on 22/08/2007 03:54:03 Hold on they already have another one almost finished? HMS Dauntless?. What with those dodgy russians trying to reclaim some power back by flying their bombers into our air space im glad we are spending all these money on these ships and these new f00k off aircraft carriers aswell.
Originally by: SPQRMocton
We would love to have a bunch of teenage pimple boys with no real pvp ability to fil our corpse yards
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |