Defence Cuts: Carrier 'fully operational in 2030'

Britain may be without a fully operational aircraft carrier until 2030, according to a report published by the Commons spending watchdog.

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) says two carriers being built will cost more, offer less military capability and be ready much later than planned.

It says the Royal Navy will be without a carrier until 2020, and it may not be fully operational until 2030.

HMS Prince of Wales will be mothballed and kept as a reserve vessel - while HMS Queen Elizabeth is expected to go into service around 2020, with both said to cost £5.9bn.

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond said the government was trying to get the MoD's finances "back into balance" having inherited a "black hole" from Labour.

He stressed the two aircraft carriers were already £1.6bn over budget when the coalition came to power - and said government spending cuts would save £4.4bn over 10 years on the carrier strike programme.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15928953



I'm a little skeptical knowing that this is what Argentina has been looking for in Britain's military spending........

Opinions?

19 ****ing years!

There are submarines and typhoons on the Falklands, I doubt the Argies are going to try and take them again

If you think our spending cuts are bad, you should see how hard and fast Argentina had to cut it's state sector after it properly crashed... They have no real navy to speak of, and certainly don't have the power to contend with us. It is a shame that the air craft carrier isn't fully operational, but we only need the bare bones at the moment for defence - if we ever need to go to war, previous wars have shown us how quickly we are capable of militarising.

Well I don't know. They still claim it belongs to them, and the recent incident in the UN when the representative of Argentina walked out of the meeting in disgust about the Falkland Island's sovereignty has made a bit more tension. I don't trust Argentina not to attack, since the closest base we have is probably Gibralta/Malta in defending the Falklands, but I hope they won't try it again.
.

Yeah, sucks. But maybe we should be investing in science and technological advancements without spending so much on defense. I mean, without sounding arrogant, we do have nuclear weapons after all. Not that I hope we'd have to use them but it's reasurring when confronted with someone who doesn't have them.

I hope we never use them and if we ever did we'd either start the destruction of humanity or become one of the most unpopular nations on Earth. Nuclear weapons have hideous environmental consequences that end up effecting many surrounding nations and the fallout can be felt on the other side of the globe. The use of them will mutilate survivors, kill fishing and agricultural industries and change the chemistry of this Earth making it inhospitable to human life.

I'm not a fan of conventional war, although I agree we need a formidable defence, but it's a million times better than the possibility of a nuclear war.

Yeah, sucks. But maybe we should be investing in science and technological advancements without spending so much on defense. I mean, without sounding arrogant, we do have nuclear weapons after all. Not that I hope we'd have to use them but it's reasurring when confronted with someone who doesn't have them.

Well I don't know. They still claim it belongs to them, and the recent incident in the UN when the representative of Argentina walked out of the meeting in disgust about the Falkland Island's sovereignty has made a bit more tension. I don't trust Argentina not to attack, since the closest base we have is probably Gibralta/Malta in defending the Falklands, but I hope they won't try it again.

I can just see in my head some super technology being brought out in 2029 that renders the carrier useless. Or as soon as it makes its first journey a meteorite comes down and hits it full on.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15928953



I'm a little skeptical knowing that this is what Argentina has been looking for in Britain's military spending........

Opinions?

That said, talk about another cock-up for defence procurement. Jesus ****ing christ . . .

There are submarines and typhoons on the Falklands, I doubt the Argies are going to try and take them again

Without some significant spenditure on defence who's going to buy those science and technological advancements?



It's called Ascension Island and it's a fair bit closer to the FIs than either of those you mentioned.

The Argentinian Navy couldn't sink a dinghy on the River Plate, much less try to take the Falklands again. Argentina has had a decade-long recession and it's military is falling apart. You think the RN's got problems? Ha!

That said, talk about another cock-up for defence procurement. Jesus ****ing christ . . .