British economy is best in the world, outstripping US, Japan and EU


IdRatherBeSkiing
#151
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

Against the Spanish and French...lol.

I think the French surrendered to themselves yesterday.
 
Tecumsehsbones
+2
#152
Speaking of the British economy:


If Britain were a U.S. state, it would be the second-poorest, behind Alabama and before Mississippi

By Hunter Schwarz August 26

If Britain were to join the United States, it would be the second-poorest state, behind Alabama and ahead of Mississippi.

The ranking, determined by Fraser Nelson, an editor of The Spectator magazine, was made by dividing the gross domestic product of each state by its population, and it took into account purchasing power parity for cost of living. Several other European countries were also included in the ranking.

Ranking by GDP per capita instead of just GDP means that states with mega-economies such as California, which has the top GDP in the United States (its GDP is also larger than most countries’), was knocked down to 14th place among the states when divided by its more than 38 million residents. Alaska comes in first, with a GDP of more than $59 billion divided by a population of 735,000.

Norway was the top European country on the list, between Massachusetts and New Jersey. Nelson wrote that the United Kingdom’s low ranking showed Britain had “no reason to feel smug” about recent events in Ferguson, Mo.:

“The United States may be a great place to be rich, we like to think, but they treat their deprived appallingly over there. We tend to watch reports from poorer American states with a shudder, thankful that our country is run along different, more compassionate lines.

But if Britain were to somehow leave the European union and become the 51st state of America, we would actually be one of the poor states. If you take our economic output, adjust for living costs and slot it into the US league table then the United Kingdom emerges as the second-poorest state in the union. We’re poorer than much-maligned Kansas and Alabama and well below Missouri, the scene of all the unrest in recent weeks. Only Mississippi has lower economic output per head than the UK; strip out the South East and Britain would rank bottom. We certainly have our problems; we’re just better at concealing them.”

Nelson argues that income inequality and racial tension in the United States are more visible because of factors such as “white flight,” which Britain doesn’t have space for, and Americans’ tendency to publicly discuss these issues.

“No one beats up America better than Americans,” he wrote. “They openly debate their inequality, conduct rigorous studies about it, argue about economics vs. culture as causes…. And the debate is so fierce that the rest of the world looks on, and joins in lamenting America’s problems. A shame: we’d do better to get a little angrier at our own.”

If Britain were a U.S. state, it would be the second-poorest, behind Alabama and before Mississippi - The Washington Post

Nice to see not all Brits are drooling Little England recta.
Last edited by Tecumsehsbones; Aug 26th, 2014 at 03:16 PM..
 
EagleSmack
#153
Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post



If Britain were a U.S. state, it would be the second-poorest, behind Alabama and before Mississippi


Roll Tide!


 
captain morgan
#154
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

Against the Spanish and French...lol.

"Deise jungs saugen."

Amazing how that sentiment still rings true today


Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

If the imaginary aircraft carrier even floats it will be fully loaded with US Aircraft and Canadian technology.

I recall the pictures of the ancient electronics that were unused, US Navy surplus that are to be installed in the new fleet.... I'm still laughing about that.
 
Blackleaf
#155
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morgan View Post

I appreciate your educating me on this topic.

Another question; based on the severity of this explosion, did the British Navy specifically construct the Hood to explode with such force and violence?



The reason that I ask is I could understand some form of twisted logic that the Brits might have believed that if they designed the ships to blow-up with this kind of force and magnitude, the Germans would be scared of the force and concerned of indirect damage from the debris that would, in effect, represent millions of small missiles.

What part of "several shells hit HMS Hood, with one penetrating the magazine aft packed full of ammunition and explosives" do you not understand?

Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

Speaking of the British economy:


If Britain were a U.S. state, it would be the second-poorest, behind Alabama and before Mississippi

By Hunter Schwarz August 26

If Britain were to join the United States, it would be the second-poorest state, behind Alabama and ahead of Mississippi.

The ranking, determined by Fraser Nelson, an editor of The Spectator magazine, was made by dividing the gross domestic product of each state by its population, and it took into account purchasing power parity for cost of living. Several other European countries were also included in the ranking.

Ranking by GDP per capita instead of just GDP means that states with mega-economies such as California, which has the top GDP in the United States (its GDP is also larger than most countries’), was knocked down to 14th place among the states when divided by its more than 38 million residents. Alaska comes in first, with a GDP of more than $59 billion divided by a population of 735,000.

Norway was the top European country on the list, between Massachusetts and New Jersey. Nelson wrote that the United Kingdom’s low ranking showed Britain had “no reason to feel smug” about recent events in Ferguson, Mo.:

“The United States may be a great place to be rich, we like to think, but they treat their deprived appallingly over there. We tend to watch reports from poorer American states with a shudder, thankful that our country is run along different, more compassionate lines.

But if Britain were to somehow leave the European union and become the 51st state of America, we would actually be one of the poor states. If you take our economic output, adjust for living costs and slot it into the US league table then the United Kingdom emerges as the second-poorest state in the union. We’re poorer than much-maligned Kansas and Alabama and well below Missouri, the scene of all the unrest in recent weeks. Only Mississippi has lower economic output per head than the UK; strip out the South East and Britain would rank bottom. We certainly have our problems; we’re just better at concealing them.”

Nelson argues that income inequality and racial tension in the United States are more visible because of factors such as “white flight,” which Britain doesn’t have space for, and Americans’ tendency to publicly discuss these issues.

“No one beats up America better than Americans,” he wrote. “They openly debate their inequality, conduct rigorous studies about it, argue about economics vs. culture as causes…. And the debate is so fierce that the rest of the world looks on, and joins in lamenting America’s problems. A shame: we’d do better to get a little angrier at our own.”

If Britain were a U.S. state, it would be the second-poorest, behind Alabama and before Mississippi - The Washington Post

Nice to see not all Brits are drooling Little England recta.


Why is he even comparing a whole country to a mere US state? You could do such a thing with anything.

I mean, we could compare the US GDP per capita, or each of its states, with that of Gloucestershire or Hertfordshire or Norfolk or Kent and see how it fares. Berkshire's GDP per capita of $47,516 is higher than that of the vast majority of US states.

We could compare the GDP per capita of the US to each English region, or compare Alaska's GDP with London's. It's silly.

The article overlooks the fact that the place with the highest GDP per capita in the WORLD - yes, the entire WORLD - is west London (the boroughs of Brent, Ealing, Hammersmith & Fulham, Harrow, Hillingdon, Hounslow and Richmond upon Thames) which has a mind-boggling GDP per capita of $152,116 (PPP). So the people who live in that part of west London are far wealthier on average than the Yanks.

I also have an issue with the GDP (PPP) figures of US states in that Spectator article. They all seem a bit high. According to that article, Alaska is the richest state with a GDP (PPP) per capita of $80,741 yet, according to the OECD, the richest US state is actually Delaware, with a GDP (PPP) per capita of just $59,591.

I'm a fan of The Spectator, but the figures in that article are suspect.

West London is the richest place on earth: List of OECD regions by GDP (PPP) per capita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(the US has five areas in the list of Top 20 GDPs per capita in the world; Britain has four; Canada only has one).
 
Tecumsehsbones
#156
Sing it with me now, Blackleaf!


Lynyrd Skynyrd - Sweet Home Alabama - Lyrics IN Video + Description (HD) - YouTube


Maybe one day your economy will come up to Alabama standards!
 
Blackleaf
#157
Quote: Originally Posted by BaalsTears View Post

Britain is becoming a Muslim country.

Canada is becoming one even quicker. Although with the amount of Muslim lovers on this forum when ISIS arrive in Canada - and Canada is so lefty liberal it's only a matter of time - they'll be welcomed with open arms.

Quote:

Btw, the British aircraft carrier under construction is going to use the naval version of the F-35 isn't it?

There are actually TWO aircraft carriers under construction.

As for the F-35 Lightning IIs (named after the English Electric Lightning), I regret that the RN have gone for them for the wonderful new carriers. When you look at the recent poor record of those planes, the things will probably just disintegrate in mid-air once they leave the flight deck.

Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

Sing it with me now, Blackleaf!
Maybe one day your economy will come up to Alabama standards!


Maybe one day the US economy will come up to British standards.






UK economy racing ahead of the rest of the world

Posted by Emma Cullen in Finances, Business trends on Fri, 25/07/2014 - 10:42


Britain’s growing economy is outstripping every other country in the world, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has revealed.

The UK is expected to grow by 3.2% this year according to an updated projection by the IMF. If Britain’s achieves its predicted growth, it will mark the country’s strongest year since the recession.

Britain’s 3.2% predicted growth sits considerably higher than any other developed country. IMF’s World Economic Outlook predicted that Germany would grow by 1.9%, the US by 1.7% and Canada by 2.2%.

The forecast marks a second increase for Britain this year and the fourth increase in a row. In 2013 IMF predicted that the UK would grow by 1.5%. April this year saw another IMF update, predicting increased growth to 2.9% for Britain’s GDP, out-performing countries such as Canada, US, France and Germany.

Chancellor George Osborne was previously criticised by IMF for his 'austere' policies, warning that they could cause an economic slump. IMF has since admitted it was wrong and Osborne said the forecast was "further evidence that our long-term economic plan is working" The gaining economic growth has been attributed to increased customer spending and a tentative rebound in the manufacturing sector.

Today the Office for National Statistics released figures confirming a 0.8% increase in UK GDP across the second quarter of 2014, revealing the second consecutive quarter on quarter increase of 0.8%. The results are 3.1% more this quarter, than the same period in 2013 and the service industries were noted to be the largest and steadiest contributor to economic growth and the only component of GDP where output has exceeded its pre-downturn peak.





UK economy racing ahead of the rest of the world

Quote: Originally Posted by captain morgan View Post

I recall the pictures of the ancient electronics that were unused, US Navy surplus that are to be installed in the new fleet.... I'm still laughing about that.

Have you got any evidence of that?
 
captain morgan
#158
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

What part of "several shells hit HMS Hood, with one penetrating the magazine aft packed full of ammunition and explosives" do you not understand?

It was one single, solitary shell and it was confirmed by the BBC that had eye witness correspondents on the scene.

"Deise jungs saugen"

Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

Have you got any evidence of that?

There are pictures that were posted on these forums... It's yesterday's news Blackie
 
EagleSmack
#159
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post


There are actually TWO aircraft carriers under construction.

As for the F-35 Lightning IIs (named after the English Electric Lightning), I regret that the RN have gone for them for the wonderful new carriers. When you look at the recent poor record of those planes, the things will probably just disintegrate in mid-air once they leave the flight deck.

New Brit carriers... the majority of the aircraft are US and the majority of electronics was made in Canada as a BBC report showed.

I am wondering if the crews will have to be US and Canadian as well. Most likely it would appear.

I wonder if they will have the blast feature that the HMS Hood had?




Quote:


UK economy racing ahead of the rest of the world

Racing ahead of Mississippi... but lagging behind Alabama.

Roll Tide!

 
Blackleaf
#160
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morgan View Post

It was one single, solitary shell and it was confirmed by the BBC that had eye witness correspondents on the scene.

Was it confirmed by the BBC? Because, if it was, they were wrong (although it wouldn't be the only time).

Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

New Brit carriers... the majority of the aircraft are US

The F-35 isn't a wholly American plane. It is being designed and built by an aerospace industry team which includes Britain's BAE Systems.

Saying the F-35 is American would be like someone saying the Eurofighter Typhoon is British.

Although I don't think the F-35 would have so many flaws and operational problems had it been a wholly British plane without any American involvement.

Quote: Originally Posted by captain morgan View Post

I
It's yesterday's news Blackie

Yeah, but is it true? Why on Earth would somebody put obsolete technology in new, modern ships?
 
darkbeaver
#161
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post





Why is he even comparing a whole country to a mere US state? You could do such a thing with anything.

I mean, we could compare the US GDP per capita, or each of its states, with that of Gloucestershire or Hertfordshire or Norfolk or Kent and see how it fares. Berkshire's GDP per capita of $47,516 is higher than that of the vast majority of US states.

We could compare the GDP per capita of the US to each English region, or compare Alaska's GDP with London's. It's silly.

The article overlooks the fact that the place with the highest GDP per capita in the WORLD - yes, the entire WORLD - is west London (the boroughs of Brent, Ealing, Hammersmith & Fulham, Harrow, Hillingdon, Hounslow and Richmond upon Thames) which has a mind-boggling GDP per capita of $152,116 (PPP). So the people who live in that part of west London are far wealthier on average than the Yanks.

I also have an issue with the GDP (PPP) figures of US states in that Spectator article. They all seem a bit high. According to that article, Alaska is the richest state with a GDP (PPP) per capita of $80,741 yet, according to the OECD, the richest US state is actually Delaware, with a GDP (PPP) per capita of just $59,591.

I'm a fan of The Spectator, but the figures in that article are suspect.

West London is the richest place on earth: List of OECD regions by GDP (PPP) per capita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(the US has five areas in the list of Top 20 GDPs per capita in the world; Britain has four; Canada only has one).

What's your cut of Britins GDP? I'll save you the trouble, fluck all, the filthy rich make up the bulk of GDP, the commoners are dirt.
 
EagleSmack
#162
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

Was it confirmed by the BBC? Because, if it was, they were wrong (although it wouldn't be the only time).



The F-35 isn't a wholly American plane. It is being designed and built by an aerospace industry team which includes Britain's BAE Systems.

Saying the F-35 is American would be like someone saying the Eurofighter Typhoon is British.

Although I don't think the F-35 would have so many flaws and operational problems had it been a wholly British plane without any American involvement.


The future yet still imaginary Brit carriers will be nothing more than modern day jeep carriers or support carriers compared to the US Super Carrier. And of course it's air wing will be made up of US Aircraft.
 
petros
#163
Quote:

several shells hit HMS Hood, with one penetrating the magazine aft packed full of ammunition and explosives

Wicked aim.

Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

The future yet still imaginary Brit carriers will be nothing more than modern day jeep carriers or support carriers compared to the US Super Carrier. And of course it's air wing will be made up of US Aircraft.

Good for cutting washers with a mini cooper on the flight deck.
 
Blackleaf
#164
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

The future yet still imaginary Brit carriers

Don't look very imaginary to me:






Quote:

will be nothing more than modern day jeep carriers or support carriers compared to the US Super Carrier.

Almost of the the aircraft carriers the US used in WWII were jeep carriers.

As for the Queen Elizabeth-class carriers, they'll be the second-largest carriers in the world.


Quote:

And of course it's air wing will be made up of US Aircraft.


Of course, its airwing will be made up almost entirely of British aircraft.
 
EagleSmack
#165
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post



Almost of the the aircraft carriers the US used in WWII were jeep carriers.

All of the Brits carriers in the future will be jeep carriers.

Quote:

As for the Queen Elizabeth-class carriers, they'll be the second-largest carriers in the world.

Second to each and every American carrier.

Including our decommissioned ones!

BOOM!





Quote:

Of course, its airwing will be made up almost entirely of British aircraft.

A Brit carrier based aircraft will be foreign made... along with the technology.
 
BaalsTears
#166
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

...
Of course, its airwing will be made up almost entirely of British aircraft.

The aircraft used in the attack/fighter role will be the naval version of the F-35.
 
EagleSmack
#167
Quote: Originally Posted by BaalsTears View Post

The aircraft used in the attack/fighter role will be the naval version of the F-35.

So true... linked from the HMS Queen Elizabeth website...

Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US Made... along with US Made Chinooks, Apaches and Merlins. Merlins are really US Made CH-53's. The ship (if it actually floats) will have space for US Made Ospreys.

BOOM!
 
Blackleaf
#168
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

All of the Brits carriers in the future will be jeep carriers.

The last jeep carrier, the USS Gilbert Islands, was broken up for scrap starting in 1976.

Quote:

Second to each and every American carrier.

Including our decommissioned ones!

BOOM!

The United States is five times the size of the United Kingdom.


Quote:

A Brit carrier based aircraft will be foreign made... along with the technology.

They're actually constructed in the UK.

Quote: Originally Posted by BaalsTears View Post

The aircraft used in the attack/fighter role will be the naval version of the F-35.

As I've already pointed out, the F-35 isn't a wholly US aircraft. It is being designed and built by an aerospace industry team which includes Britain's BAE Systems. Why do I have to point this fact out to you? Saying the multinational F-35 JOINT Strike Fighter is American would be like calling the Eurofighter Typhoon British, or German.
Last edited by Blackleaf; Aug 28th, 2014 at 09:36 AM..
 
MHz
#169
So what time you dropping anchor in Gaza City?

Not the nicest way to get the contract to build the 3-mile harbor but time is short.

PS Don't forget to inspect the bung on this boat, Remember the Titanic FCS

Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

As I've already pointed out, the F-35 isn't a wholly US aircraft. It is being designed and built by an aerospace industry team which includes Britain's BAE Systems. Why do I have to point this fact out to you? Saying the multinational F-35 JOINT Strike Fighter is American would be like calling the Eurofighter Typhoon British, or German.

The false flag about what a dog the F-35 is is about as tricky as cardboard tanks in WWII. The only ones who believe that are the ones that don't matter. The big question would be why the push for so much money to fix non-existent problems unless some other black project was going a head at full steam. With all the hype we would only be safe flying bi-planes, our safety would have been in the fact the pilots were still allowed to think. If anything it might be the cardboard tank of this era because all the fast weapons are running a double digit mach. Or the advantage over Iraq having a fleet of SU-25's, they won't be part of any wave of attacks against anybody, cardboard is meant for distance in calm weather.
 
Blackleaf
#170
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

So true... linked from the HMS Queen Elizabeth website...

Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US Made... along with US Made Chinooks, Apaches and Merlins. Merlins are really US Made CH-53's.
BOOM!

Sometimes I get the impression that I'm the only one here who actually researches things.

British Apaches are not the same Apaches that the Yanks use. The British Apaches were designed and built by British company Westland Helicopters and were constructed at Yeovil in Somerset and are better than the ones the Yanks use.

The Merlins are NOT really US-made CH-53s. The Merlin is a medium-lift helicopter used in both military and civil applications. It was developed by joint venture between Westland Helicopters in the UK and Agusta in Italy in response to national requirements for a modern naval utility helicopter; until 2007, the aircraft had been marketed under the designation EH101. Several operators, including the armed forces of Britain, Denmark and Portugal, use the name Merlin for their AW101 aircraft. It is manufactured at factories in Yeovil, England and Vergiate, Italy.

The JSF Lightning II (named after the English Electric Lightning) is not an American aircraft. Just 30 seconds of quick research will show you that it is being designed and built by a team of aerospace companies, including Britain's BAE Systems. The fact that you thought it was a Yank aircraft says more about Yanks' ability to overstate their country's importance and abilities.

Quote:

The ship (if it actually floats) will have space for US Made Ospreys.

There are no Ospreys to be operated on the Queen Elizabeth-class carriers.

Of course, it was the British who invented such vertical take-off aircraft when we developed the Harrier Jump Jet in the 1960s. And there are many British-built Harrier Jump Jets serving in the US Marine Corps right now.
Last edited by Blackleaf; Aug 28th, 2014 at 10:14 AM..
 
EagleSmack
#171
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

The last jeep carrier, the USS Gilbert Islands, was broken up for scrap starting in 1976.

And the newest jeep carrier will be the HMS Queen Elisabeth.



Quote:

The United States is five times the size of the United Kingdom.

And we have 10 Active Super Carriers. Surely you can manage at least one.


Quote:

As I've already pointed out, the F-35 isn't a wholly US aircraft. It is being designed and built by an aerospace industry team which includes Britain's BAE Systems. Why do I have to point this fact out to you? Saying the multinational F-35 JOINT Strike Fighter is American would be like calling the Eurofighter Typhoon British, or German.

Lockheed-Martin F-35 Lightning II.


Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company is a major unit of Lockheed Martin with headquarters at Air Force Plant 4 in Fort Worth, Texas.
Lockheed Martin Aeronautics is also based in Marietta, Georgia and Palmdale, California. Palmdale is home to the Advanced Development Programs (ADP), informally known as the "Skunk Works". Various subassemblies are produced at locations in Florida, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia.
The company draws upon the history of the former Lockheed and Martin Marietta corporations. While the formation of Lockheed Martin in 1995 was a merger of equals, by far the greatest contribution to Lockheed Martin Aeronautics was the product portfolio of Lockheed. This included the C-5, C-130, and C-141 transports as well as the F-2, F-16 (purchased from General Dynamics), F-117, F-22, and F-35 Lightning II.




BOOM!

Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

Sometimes I get the impression that I'm the only one here who actually researches things.

British Apaches are not the same Apaches that the Yanks use. The British Apaches were designed and built by British company Westland Helicopters and were constructed at Yeovil in Somerset and are better than the ones the Yanks use.

Apaches... US Design... US Made

Quote:

The Merlins are NOT really US-made CH-53s. The Merlin is a medium-lift helicopter used in both military and civil applications. It was developed by joint venture between Westland Helicopters in the UK and Agusta in Italy in response to national requirements for a modern naval utility helicopter; until 2007, the aircraft had been marketed under the designation EH101. Several operators, including the armed forces of Britain, Denmark and Portugal, use the name Merlin for their AW101 aircraft. It is manufactured at factories in Yeovil, England and Vergiate, Italy.

CH-53s... plain and simple.

Quote:

The JSF Lightning II (named after the English Electric Lightning) is not an American aircraft. Just 30 seconds of quick research will show you that it is being designed and built by a team of aerospace companies, including Britain's BAE Systems. The fact that you thought it was a Yank aircraft says more about Yanks' ability to overstate their country's importance and abilities.

Named after English Electric Lightning. LMAO... what a tard.

HMS Queen Elizabeth (R0 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





Quote:

There are no Ospreys to be operated on the Queen Elizabeth-class carriers.

HMS Queen Elizabeth (R0 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The hangars are designed for CH-47 Chinook operations without blade folding and the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor, whilst the aircraft lifts can accommodate two Chinooks with unfolded blades"

Both US Aircraft

So easy.

Quote:

Of course, it was the British who invented such vertical take-off aircraft when we developed the Harrier Jump Jet in the 1960s. And there are many British-built Harrier Jump Jets serving in the US Marine Corps right now.

Of course and as usual you are wrong. VTOL aircraft developed in the late 1940's and VTOL jets in the 1950s by the US.

BOOM!
 
gore0bsessed
#172
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morgan View Post

Wall Street owns the UK (for what it's worth)

You'd think that Blackie would show a little gratitude to their American Masters and grovel for a few scraps that is befitting of his position.... After all, they are considered indentured servants

The rich elites own all and make all the decisions. Wallstreet is their puppet.
 
Blackleaf
#173
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

And the newest jeep carrier will be the HMS Queen Elisabeth.

The Queen Elizabeth-class carriers are 65,000 tons. They're hardly "jeep carriers". Jeep carriers are what the US mostly used during WWII. Most US "carriers" in WWII were merely little jeep carriers.


Quote:

And we have 10 Active Super Carriers. Surely you can manage at least one.

We'll have three carriers if you count helicopter carrier HMS Ocean, too. That means we will have more aircraft carriers per head of population than the US.


Quote:

Lockheed-Martin F-35 Lightning II.


Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company is a major unit of Lockheed Martin with headquarters at Air Force Plant 4 in Fort Worth, Texas.
Lockheed Martin Aeronautics is also based in Marietta, Georgia and Palmdale, California. Palmdale is home to the Advanced Development Programs (ADP), informally known as the "Skunk Works". Various subassemblies are produced at locations in Florida, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia.
The company draws upon the history of the former Lockheed and Martin Marietta corporations. While the formation of Lockheed Martin in 1995 was a merger of equals, by far the greatest contribution to Lockheed Martin Aeronautics was the product portfolio of Lockheed. This included the C-5, C-130, and C-141 transports as well as the F-2, F-16 (purchased from General Dynamics), F-117, F-22, and F-35 Lightning II.

BOOM!

The F-35 is a MULTINATIONAL programme, hence its name - JOINT Strike Fighter. Its design and build involves several multinational companies, including Britain's BAE Systems. To say that it is an American aircraft is just sheer and breathtaking American arrogance of the highest order, and ignores those companies and people from several nations, including Britain, who are helping develop the aircraft.

Put it this way - you saying that the F-35 is an American aircraft would be like me saying that that other great multinational aircraft, the Eurofighter, is a British-only plane.


Quote:

Apaches... US Design... US Made

The British Apaches are made to a different design to their American counterparts and were designed and built in Yeovil, Somerset by British company Westland Helicopters.

The British Apache is superior to the American one. Changes from the American version include more powerful Rolls-Royce engines, a new electronic defensive aids suite and a folding blade mechanism allowing the British version (unlike the American one) to operate from ships.


Quote:

CH-53s... plain and simple.



This is an RAF Merlin. It was developed by joint venture between Westland Helicopters in the UK and Agusta in Italy in response to national requirements for a modern naval utility helicopter. It is manufactured at factories in Yeovil , England and Vergiate , Italy



This is a CH-53, a completely different aircraft to the Merlin, and is operated solely by the US, Israel, Iran and Germany.

Quote:


Named after English Electric Lightning. LMAO... what a tard.

HMS Queen Elizabeth (R0 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The reason I know the F-35 is named after the English Electric Lightning is because I've done my research, which always helps.

Quote:


"The hangars are designed for CH-47 Chinook operations without blade folding and the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor, whilst the aircraft lifts can accommodate two Chinooks with unfolded blades"

Both US Aircraft

So easy.

The Queen Elizabeth-class carriers will be operating F-35s, Chinooks, AgustaWestland Apaches, Merlin, Lynx Wildcats and Merlin Crowsnest AEWs. They will not be operating V-22 Ospreys. Britain doesn't even have any V-22 Ospreys.


Quote:

Of course and as usual you are wrong. VTOL aircraft developed in the late 1940's and VTOL jets in the 1950s by the US.

BOOM!

The British developed the first VTOL aircraft in 1947, the Fairey Gyrodyne.

 
captain morgan
#174
Quote: Originally Posted by gore0bsessed View Post

The rich elites own all and make all the decisions. Wallstreet is their puppet.



Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

The Queen Elizabeth-class carriers are 65,000 tons. They're hardly "jeep carriers". Jeep carriers are what the US mostly used during WWII. Most US "carriers" in WWII were merely little jeep carriers.


... Just like the HMS Hood... Cannon fodder and target practice for real navies
 
Blackleaf
#175
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morgan View Post






... Just like the HMS Hood... Cannon fodder and target practice for real navies


And, in turn, the Bismarck would be sunk by King George V and Rodney, and the Royal Navy would go on to defeat the Kriegsmarine in WWII.

At the start of the war in September 1939, the Royal Navy was still the largest and most powerful naval force on the planet, with 15 battleships and battlecruisers; seven aircraft carriers with a further five under construction; 66 cruisers; 184 destroyers; 60 submarines; 45 escort and patrol vessels; and 56 Flower-class corvettes were on order.

The RN had even swallowed parts of other navies in the Empire, and had six Australian cruisers; five Australian destroyers; two Australian sloops; six Canadian destroyers; six Indian escorts and patrol vessels; two New Zealand cruisers; and two New Zealand sloops (until October 1941, the Royal New Zealand Navy was actually part of the Royal Navy) in its ranks.

In 1945, the RN had grown even more, and in August of that year it consisted of 58 aircraft carriers; 35 cruisers; 277 destroyers; and 178 submarines, plus several other ships.
Last edited by Blackleaf; Aug 29th, 2014 at 08:29 AM..
 
Tecumsehsbones
#176
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

And, in turn, the Bismarck would be sunk by King George V and Rodney, and the Royal Navy would go on to defeat the Kriegsmarine in WWII.

At the start of the war in September 1939, the Royal Navy was still the largest and most powerful naval force on the planet, with 15 battleships and battlecruisers; seven aircraft carriers with a further five under construction; 66 cruisers; 184 destroyers; 60 submarines; 45 escort and patrol vessels; and 56 Flower-class corvettes were on order.

The RN had even swallowed parts of other navies in the Empire, and had six Australian cruisers; five Australian destroyers; two Australian sloops; six Canadian destroyers; six Indian escorts and patrol vessels; two New Zealand cruisers; and two New Zealand sloops (until October 1941, the Royal New Zealand Navy was actually part of the Royal Navy) in its ranks.

In 1945, the RN had grown even more, and in August of that year it consisted of 58 aircraft carriers; 35 cruisers; 277 destroyers; and 178 submarines, plus several other ships.

Psst! Don't anybody tell Blackleaf that 1945 was 69 years ago. Poor boy'd be crushed.
 
captain morgan
#177
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

And, in turn, the Bismarck would be sunk by King George V and Rodney, and the Royal Navy would go on to defeat the Kriegsmarine in WWII.

They were not sunk with a single shot... They shamed the Royal navy on multiple occasions, most notably, sinking the 'pride of the British navy' (HMS Hood) with one single, solitary shot.
 
Blackleaf
#178
Britain's economy storms ahead: Number of people in work in the UK rises by more than the WHOLE of EU put together

Since 2010, an extra 1.6million people have found a job in the UK
But there are 1.08million FEWER people in work in all the other 27 EU nations
David Cameron boasts the figures show his economic plan is working
Tells Tory MPs how the economy is booming 'but the job is not yet done'

By Matt Chorley, MailOnline Political Editor
4 September 2014
Daily Mail

The number of people in work in Britain has increased by more than the rest of the EU put together.

Since 2010, an extra 1.6million people have found a job, while across the rest of the EU total employment has fallen by 1.08million.

David Cameron revealed the extraordinary statistic during a meeting with Tory MPs as he set out how the economic revival will be central to his hopes of winning next year’s election.


Between March 2010 and March 2014, the number of people in work in the UK has risen by 1.6million, but in the other 27 EU countries the figure has fallen by 1.07million, according to Eurostat figures


David Cameron, pictured at the Nato summit in Wales, has boasted that the figures show his economic plan is working. Today he held talks with (left to right) France's President Francois Hollande, Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko, US President Barack Obama, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi

Growth in the UK jobs market has surged in the last year, in marked contrast with other EU countries.

The economy is now bigger than before the 2008 financial crash, after securing growth of 3.2 per cent in the year to June.

There are now more than 30million people in work, the highest since records began.

Between March 2010 and March 2014, the number of people in work in the UK rose from 28.66million to 30.26million, a rise of 1.6million or six per cent, according to figures from Eurostat.

Over the same four year period, the numbers in work in all 28 EU member states rose by 540,000 to 215 million, an increase of just 0.3 per cent.

When Britain is excluded, employment in the remaining 27 countries fell by 1.067million or 0.6 per cent.

Only Germany saw a bigger rise in the numbers in work, up by 1.996million.

By contrast, there have been dramatic falls in employment in Spain (down 1.7million), Greece (942,000) and Italy (586,000) – countries hardest hit by the eurozone crisis.

Mr Cameron boasted of the trend as he addressed a meeting of Tory MPs on Tuesday evening.

He delivered an upbeat message that the economy is booming but the job is not yet done, stressing that the Conservatives can win 'if we stick to our long term economic plan'.





Yesterday it emerged Britain’s economy has grown more quickly than previously thought since the Coalition took power.

In the four years since 2010 the economy has grown by 8.1 per cent – 1.1 per cent more than the original estimate, according to the Office for National Statistics.

It means the economy is now 2.7 per cent bigger than it was before the economic crash in 2007.

Overall, Britain has enjoyed the third best economic growth in the G7 since 2010 – more than France and Germany, but still behind the US and Canada.

Speaking at Prime Minister Questions, Mr Cameron said: ‘ ‘There should not be any complacency, because the job is not yet done, but our long-term economic plan is working and it is the way to secure a better future for our country.’


Read more: Number of people in work in the UK rises by more than the rest of the EU put together | Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Quote: Originally Posted by captain morgan View Post

They were not sunk with a single shot....

And neither was the Hood, as I've pointed out countless times, yet you still keep banging on as though it was.
 
EagleSmack
+1
#179
The Hood was sunk with such ease.

"Diese jungs saugen."
 
captain morgan
#180
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

The Hood was sunk with such ease.

"Diese jungs saugen."

Well, when you construct a boat designed for ease of retreat and surrender, I guess that you don't have any ability to defend against a missile attack.

This is the case with the HMS Hood.