Queen to name new aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
46
48
66
You can't break something that is already hopelessly broken.

... Then again, there is duct tape. Perhaps a generous overuse of that miracle product over Blackie's mouth and fingers (stops posting dontcha know) may be just the ticket

Buy ya gotta admit, half the wusses in here would be reporting posts, e eye-rolling, size 7-fonting and trying to impress everyone with George Carlin words and weak sarcasm. :lol:

This dude knows how to take it.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
The problem with aircraft carriers is that they can't be used effectively against peer opponents in the new era. They can be overwhelmed by non-stop barrages of cruise and ballistic missiles. Fire control can't be expected to handle that level of damage....unless the carriers stay out of range and serve primarily as offshore drone bases.

I was wondering myself about the thinking behind such expensive targets. Far as I know their only good for helpless land locked targets with no capability. You can't use them against a real military.

Buy ya gotta admit, half the wusses in here would be reporting posts, e eye-rolling, size 7-fonting and trying to impress everyone with George Carlin words and weak sarcasm. :lol:

This dude knows how to take it.
There should be some sort of award for sustained insensitivity.

Do any of these boats have ice breaking capabilities to meet the new climatic conditions or will they be restricted to warm waters?
 

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
46
48
66
There should be some sort of award for sustained insensitivity.

Around here it's more like maintained, as in: cause or enable (a condition or state of affairs) to continue insensitivity.

They really work hard to achieve their level of uncomfortableness toward certain events.

The poor-me, so fuk-you type, gamma-males.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
lmao I look in to see what's happening and see a buncha Tim Allens boasting about how big their countries' toys are. It's easy to sit here in my chair and gab about how big the toys other people play with, too. Also easy to sit here in my chair and say some other country's sports suck and mine is best. I won't but I will say it's bluddy funny.

"Perhaps the less we have, the more we are required to brag." - JOHN STEINBECK

You can't break something that is already hopelessly broken.

... Then again, there is duct tape. Perhaps a generous overuse of that miracle product over Blackie's mouth and fingers (stops posting dontcha know) may be just the ticket
NOOOOOOOO! He's funny as hell. Every time he brags about something I picture an Brit SJP sitting at his pc.
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
lmao I look in to see what's happening and see a buncha Tim Allens boasting about how big their countries' toys are. It's easy to sit here in my chair and gab about how big the toys other people play with, too. Also easy to sit here in my chair and say some other country's sports suck and mine is best. I won't but I will say it's bluddy funny.

.

Well I reckon you just summed up everyone on CanCon LG!

C'mon man... when did you the fly in the ointment?! ;)
 

WLDB

Senate Member
Jun 24, 2011
6,182
0
36
Ottawa
Seems like a waste of money. Like the big naval buildup in the 20s an 30s. Within a year or so all those battleships became obsolete because of aircraft carriers. I wonder which will do that to the aircraft carriers of today. Im thinking submarines, or just ICBMs that can reach just about any part of the planet.
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
Seems like a waste of money. Like the big naval buildup in the 20s an 30s. Within a year or so all those battleships became obsolete because of aircraft carriers. I wonder which will do that to the aircraft carriers of today. Im thinking submarines, or just ICBMs that can reach just about any part of the planet.

In the 20s and early 30s aircraft carriers just weren't "there" yet.

The thing about the carrier is that it can pack a wallop quick. A bigger punch than subs (unless they're using nukes) and surface fleets.

But I do foresee the day when the super carriers are obsolete. Everything goes obsolete someday.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
58,211
8,393
113
Washington DC
Seems like a waste of money. Like the big naval buildup in the 20s an 30s. Within a year or so all those battleships became obsolete because of aircraft carriers. I wonder which will do that to the aircraft carriers of today. Im thinking submarines, or just ICBMs that can reach just about any part of the planet.
Nah, arsenal ships. Look 'em up.
 

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
46
48
66
But I do foresee the day when the super carriers are obsolete.

 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Around here it's more like maintained, as in: cause or enable (a condition or state of affairs) to continue insensitivity.

They really work hard to achieve their level of uncomfortableness toward certain events.

The poor-me, so fuk-you type, gamma-males.

It never occured to me that this might be the case.
 

WLDB

Senate Member
Jun 24, 2011
6,182
0
36
Ottawa
Nah, arsenal ships. Look 'em up.

That'd do it. Thats what I had in mind when I thought submarines. Floating (or submerged) missile platforms. More useful than an aircraft carrier.

In the 20s and early 30s aircraft carriers just weren't "there" yet.

The thing about the carrier is that it can pack a wallop quick. A bigger punch than subs (unless they're using nukes) and surface fleets.

But I do foresee the day when the super carriers are obsolete. Everything goes obsolete someday.

Indeed, til a biplane with canvas skin disabled the Bismarck. It is kind of funny how something so small made such a difference and was not taken into account by those designing the ships at the time.

But yes, thats what I had in mind for subs. A lot of them do carry nukes with ranges going hundreds of miles. The US has more than enough of them, the Russians probably still do. The British are wasting their time and money on these aircraft carriers. Their Empire is long gone. They dont really have any need for these carriers other than as some sort of phallic symbol for BL.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,353
1,800
113
You can't break something that is already hopelessly broken.

... Then again, there is duct tape. Perhaps a generous overuse of that miracle product over Blackie's mouth and fingers (stops posting dontcha know) may be just the ticket


And how will you do that when I'm thousands of miles away from you?

The British are wasting their time and money on these aircraft carriers.

Money well spent on two VITAL carriers. In fact, in my opinion, two isn't enough. Just ten years ago we had three. We should have at least six.

As Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, former head of the Royal Navy, said: "To put it simply, countries that aspire to strategic international influence have aircraft carriers".

Of course (or, as the Royal Family would say in their native tongue, "Aber naturlich"). The aristocracy never misses Last Night of the Proms.


So the native tongue of the half-Scottish Queen, born in Mayfair, is German, is it?

Is German also the native tongue of her Greek husband?

In the 20s and early 30s aircraft carriers just weren't "there" yet.

The thing about the carrier is that it can pack a wallop quick. A bigger punch than subs (unless they're using nukes) and surface fleets.

But I do foresee the day when the super carriers are obsolete. Everything goes obsolete someday.


The first time a plane took off from a moving ship was way back in May 1912 when a biplane took of from (needless to say) the BRITISH ship HMS Hibernia.

In January 1912, aviation experiments began at Sheerness in Kent aboard the battleship HMS Africa, during which the first British launch of an aeroplane – the Short Improved S.27 biplane "S.38" (or "RNAS No. 2") flown by Commander Charles Samson – from a ship took place. Africa transferred her flying-off equipment, including a runway constructed over her foredeck above her forward 12-inch turret and stretching from her bridge to her bows, to HMS Hibernia in May 1912, and Hibernia hosted further experiments. Among these was the world's first launch of an aeroplane from a warship underway; Commander Samson, again flying "S.38," became the first man to take off from a ship which was underway – sources differ on whether the date of the flight was 2 May, 4 May, or 9 May 1912 – by launching from Hibernia while Hibernia steamed at 10.5 knots at the Royal Fleet Review in Weymouth Bay, England. During the fleet review, King George V witnessed a number of flights at Portland over a period of four days. Hibernia then transferred her aviation equipment to battleship HMS London.





 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
58,211
8,393
113
Washington DC
So the native tongue of the half-Scottish Queen, born in Mayfair, is German, is it?

Yep. Your language is Low German, Blackie. Your country has been ruled by Germans since Arthur's day, and all the fussing and fighting has been over which particular tribe of Germans. All the denial in the world won't change that, Schwarzblatt.

Sure, you've got some mixing of ethnicities in there (even some Irish, which I imagine'll distress you no end. King Malcolm of Scotland married Brian Boru's daughter). But it's mainline German right through to Boy George's lumpy little head.