Page 1584 of 1584 FirstFirst ... 5841084148415341574157615771578157915801581158215831584
Results 23,746 to 23,759 of 23759

Thread: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

  1. #23746

    Default

    The Queen Elizabeth is capable of launching French nuclear missiles! Wow.

  2. #23747
    Member Noisy Ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    haunting a place near you !!!
    Posts
    301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RetroSicotte View Post
    I'm still afraid I don't understand you. Our missiles aren't British made. We have American missiles in Vanguard. We aren't paying to develop new missiles at all. Trident isn't being replaced.
    I think we paid 5% towards the development costs but in reality it is a US system/missile , our special relationship resulted in us signing the 1958 mutual defence agreement with the US , also the Polaris sales agreement which covers our nuclear weapons cooperation , which if I'm correct have been modified recently to reflect the uk wanting to up our cooperation with the US in this field .

  3. #23748

    Default

    France would have every right to have a different foreign policy to the U.K remember the second gulf war . a commitment to N.A.T.O being different to actions against a state the partners have differing views apon

  4. #23749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whitewhale View Post
    The Queen Elizabeth is capable of launching French nuclear missiles! Wow.
    Mmm,, Polititions don't always think of everything, you may be surprised to know. We need to reduce our costs, to help protect our Carriers with more escorts. Sharing the cost of nuclear deterence with a Friend would share the cost of the boats, manning, and maintainance, or is that free too?.
    The general level of sarcasm from some quarters is very sad indeed.

  5. #23750
    Member Noisy Ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    haunting a place near you !!!
    Posts
    301

    Default

    On the French question , The US is by far our closest friend and allie and that relationship as benefits with out equal , and I can not see a situation were we would be firing missiles with out the US doing the same ,
    France is more drawn towards Germany than us , yes we have signed a few defence cooperation deals with France and I see France as one of the few doers in Europe militarily but I wouldn't want to get that involved with them tbh , as friends and allies sure , nuclear deterrent noooooooooooo thank you lol.

    PS Maybe this discussion should be in the Uk armed forces thread , apologies for going off topic guys
    Last edited by Noisy Ghost; 8 Hours Ago at 03:49 PM.

  6. #23751

    Default

    Its not so much sarcasm as cynism as to the ability of nation states to agree on measures and quickly respond to an identified crisis , I seem to recall that Russia was against further nuclear weapon cutbacks in its arsenal .
    The shipyard proposal seems to indicate one per year, wasnt there also a plan for the devlopment of these ships for export, could one yard handle an unknown number of exports ?

  7. #23752

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Noisy Ghost View Post
    On the French question , The US is by far our closest friend and allie and that relationship as benefits with out equal , and I can not see a situation were we would be firing missiles with out the US doing the same ,
    France is more drawn towards Germany than us , yes we have signed a few defence cooperation deals with France and I see France as one of the few doers in Europe militarily but I wouldn't want to get that involved with them tbh , as friends and allies sure , nuclear deterrent noooooooooooo thank you lol.
    OK. In who's name a retalatory nuclear strike is made would be pretty irrelavant as we would all be toast. This is not a first strike weapon. I'm just making the point that while i don't agree with the cruise missile option we do need to save money somewhere to help give greater protection to our conventional strike Carriers, a tool that is much more likely to be used. I would rather see cooperation on deterence than the loss of other conventional capability. That was all. France would be the obvious choice due to it's similar sized force, proximity, and if either of us are on the end of a Nuclear attack it's the end of us all anyway. I will leave it there.

  8. #23753
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    US
    Posts
    550

    Default

    If I was the UK or France I would want my own nuclear capability.

  9. #23754
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Piacenza, Italy
    Age
    24
    Posts
    1,471

    Default

    I have always worried that our closest ally (USA) may well have some code secreted in 'our' SLBM's such that they could prevent us launching (or guide our missiles off-target) should we want to use them in a way that doesn't suit the USA.
    Not necessary when much of the indispensable satcom and satellite intelligence comes from US satellites. In the absurd scenario that requires them to hamper british operations they do not like, they could just stop supplying comms and satellite imagery and intelligence, and the UK would be in trouble in trying to communicate with the SSBNs and very likely in even worse trouble if needing to fire Tomahawks due to their guidance and employment method... Have you ever noticed how spectacularly light the UK is in national satellite resources compared to France or even Italy...? Aside from Skynet comms, there's no military satellites. No radar-sat, no imagery-sat. And a very fair share of submarine communications lean on US satellites, most notably via the new AEHF constellation.

  10. #23755

    Default

    I would not expect the R.N to operate these carriers in hostile situations for the most part unless as a partner of a coalition ,

  11. #23756
    Member Noisy Ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    haunting a place near you !!!
    Posts
    301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seaspear View Post
    I would not expect the R.N to operate these carriers in hostile situations for the most part unless as a partner of a coalition ,
    But tbh that can not be guaranteed , and planning for independent operations is were the start to go up because you can't relie on other nations to fill your capability gaps .
    Last edited by Noisy Ghost; 6 Hours Ago at 05:42 PM.

  12. #23757

    Default

    "I would not expect" are probably the most ill advised words to use when discussing possible future military operations. Who would have thought on September 10th 2001 that even years later we would be fighting the Taliban and Al Qaeda, removed Saddam and Gaddafi, assisted the French in Mali and heaven knows what else we don't know about.

    Now we know PoW and QE will both be commissioned, is it conceivable that they would or could sail together in the same task force? Do we have enough sailors to man both ships at the same time? That would make an awesome sight!

    Perhaps one of the resident artists could produce a picture of both in a task group with their escorts........

  13. #23758
    Senior Member CarrierFan2006's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    The United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,386

    Default

    Two things...

    SSBN replacement is being done with the US. The nuclear non proliferation treaty means that we cannot share our nuclear weapons. We can cooperate with the Americans to build our own, but we cannot share. Same with France. Therefore it won't be likely that the UK and France will start swapping recipes for thermonuclear weapons. Besides which, the UK and France rarely seem to have common interests - at least not as often as us and the Americans.

    Second, successors deterrent is not QNLZ or QEC carriers. Come on guys... Let's at least pretend we are trying to stay on or near topic

    Finally, third of my two things, no QNLZ will not be carrying ICBMs, unless Enigmatically knows something he can't disclose?!

  14. #23759

    Default

    Without the abilities members like SWO have mentioned the carrier will have operational limitations on acting independantly in a high threat scenario perhaps the R.N had believed they were getting a carrier that could have been developed to catobar capabilities and like many were later disapointed ,the R.N planners who engage in various scenarios with these capital ships will be aware of the strengths and increased risk of limitations of some operation for deployments .

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •