Turn on thread page Beta

Defence Cuts: Carrier 'fully operational in 2030' watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15928953

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

    Opinions?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    19 ****ing years!

    :wtf:
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Kiss)
    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?
    There are submarines and typhoons on the Falklands, I doubt the Argies are going to try and take them again
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    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.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Inb4 pseuds saying 'HURR DURR DEY ONLY KILL AFGHAN BABIEZZZ'
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thegodofgod)
    19 ****ing years!

    :wtf:
    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.


    (Original post by Aj12)
    There are submarines and typhoons on the Falklands, I doubt the Argies are going to try and take them again
    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.

    (Original post by Elipsis)
    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 that's reasurring.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Kiss)

    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.
    .
    Would be stupid on their part though. If they try to take them again we should consider something harsher than merely taking the Islands back.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiss)
    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.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Welsh_insomniac)
    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.
    Well we have lots of other non-nuclear weaponery like balistic missiles, which wouldn't do as much environmental harm. Not as powerful but they can still do a lot of damage.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiss)
    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.
    Without some significant spenditure on defence who's going to buy those science and technological advancements?

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

    11
    ReputationRep:
    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.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amime)
    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.
    Haha, yeah
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiss)
    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?
    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 ****-up for defence procurement. Jesus ****ing christ . . .
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
    That said, talk about another ****-up for defence procurement. Jesus ****ing christ . . .
    What do you expect when the customer changes the requirement every 5 minutes?

    Imagine ordering a bespoke suit and then halfway through it being made ask for it to be 3 buttons rather than 2, to have a different lining, be made of a different cloth and to fit a different person. Would you then complain that the cost had changed? The Gov and the media always seem surprised that this is the case.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    There are submarines and typhoons on the Falklands, I doubt the Argies are going to try and take them again

    (Original post by Drewski)
    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.

    (Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
    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 ****-up for defence procurement. Jesus ****ing christ . . .
    I feel privelleged that +8s are talking to me
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: November 29, 2011
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.