Brown denies French navy merger - The Royal Navy - Warships1 and NavWeaps Discussion Boards - Warships1 and NavWeaps Discussion Boards - Message Board - Yuku

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Brown denies French navy merger

Author	Comment
Moskit		#21	[-]
Posts: 1010 (21-Jun-2008 07:10:15) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	"Besides considering the way the Canadians got screwed over with those subs they bought I doubt they'll be looking torward the UK for any defense purchases in the future. " Leaving aside the obvious inaccuracy in the premise contained in the first part of this statement, if being "screwed over" was a showstopper as far as procuring from a country was concerned the US would have serious problems selling to anyone!
AegisFC		#22	[-]
Posts: 240 (21-Jun-2008 08:35:42) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Oh please the Canadians made a big mistake buying those used subs and only one is operational right now and the others are not scheduled to be operational for several years. What is inaccurate about my first statement? The RAN doesn't use anything from the RN, all their weapons are US designed, the RCN surface ships don't use any UK equipment either.
StevoJH		#23	[-]
Registered Member Posts: 107 (21-Jun-2008 09:03:02) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	AegisFC wrote: Oh please the Canadians made a big mistake buying those used subs and only one is operational right now and the others are not scheduled to be operational for several years. What is inaccurate about my first statement? The RAN doesn't use anything from the RN, all their weapons are US designed, the RCN surface ships don't use any UK equipment either. The RAN doesnt use any UK equipment because they bought the Adams Class DDG instead of the County class, due to being sceptical of the Sea Slug missile. Because they already had SM1 it made sense to purchase the Perry Class which also used SM1, rather then T22 or T42, both of which look to be rather outmatched by the "cheap" escorts as well as using a different missile system. Anzac has sea sparrow/ESSM because there is/was nothing comparable in the RN inventory.
Rob		#24	[-]
Posts: 645 (21-Jun-2008 09:41:36) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	"Besides considering the way the Canadians got screwed over with those subs they bought I doubt they'll be looking torward the UK for any defense purchases in the future. " 1) Canada has only itself to blame buying old submarines that have been in storage for years. 2) Canada and Australia remain large customers for UK designed and/or built kit: M777, Supacat Extender, Hawk AJTs, etc... .
MSR		#25	[-]
Posts: 2701 (21-Jun-2008 14:13:39) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	It bothers me that the Sun still sell enough papers to be a viable concern. Least they could do is print it on grease proof paper, or perhaps something soft and pliable that you can't put your finger through when wet. Maybe they could sell it on rolls of 3 ply. The aim of diplomacy is to achieve results, not win arguments
Bledlow		#26	[-]
Registered Member Posts: 124 (21-Jun-2008 16:23:06) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	StevoJH wrote: Last time i checked i was Australian. The fact is that the interests of all three countries are pretty similar. Besides would make joining the forces a much better proposition. Join the navy and you could be posted to europe or canada or australia. Larger forces also mean you would have a better chance of promotion. But how many of your compatriots share your opinions? For every one like you, I see about ten who are convinced that the only sensible route for Australian defence is close co-operation with the USA, & the USN in particular. In naval terms, where do our interests coincide, other than in areas where they coincide at least as much with other countries? What naval interests do the UK & Australia have which are not shared by Australia & Portugal, for example? The shared interests argument applies much more strongly to the UK & some of its neighbours, so if you think that's an argument for combining navies, you should be telling us to merge our navy with the Dutch, French, Spanish, etc. Likewise, if you're serious, the obvious place to start is with your neighbours. Convince NZ - which really does have almost identical interests to you - before even thinking of any wider combination. I'd also like to hear from Australian mariners who see North Atlantic postings as an attractive option.
Moskit		#27	[-]
Posts: 1012 (21-Jun-2008 19:57:47) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	What is inaccurate about my first statement? rather than being "screwed over" as you so eloquently put it, the Canadians knew EXACTLY what they were buying. Last Edited By: Moskit 21-Jun-2008 20:00:13. Edited 1 times.
Zen9		#28	[-]
Posts: 3636 (21-Jun-2008 22:33:11) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I'd also like to hear from Australian mariners who see North Atlantic postings as an attractive option. So does'nt the RAN go to the Australian Bight or the Heard and McDonald Islands?

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Quick Reply