HMS Daring

big_white_dog84 said:
England does not have a fleet you ignorant tube. Where are you from?
Click to expand...

What are you on about, it should be "where are YOU from?!!" :rolleyes:

The British Navy is one of the best in the world and England has a great fleet.

I can only hope that you are being sarcastic, otherwise I would be stunned at YOUR ignorance.
 
Last edited:
Nana said:
complete and utter waste of money so we can kill innocent people for more oil for Mr Bush, is it any wonder we are hated?
Click to expand...

I am at a loss at to the point of your post and to the relevance of it.

I am also keen to hear your alternatives ? Disband the Royal Navy perhaps and let the US Navy do the job for us ? Please post reasons why and back them up instead of posting utter tosh like the above. The nation we live in, hated or not, is surrounded by water and that means we need a large and modern Navy to help protect our interests both here and around the world. Technology moves forward at such a rate now that we must have such military hardware that is able to counter any threat. The ships they will replace are getting on now as are the carriers we have which will be replaced by 2 supercarriers.

We do not have the finest Navy in the world to please Mr Bush, the nation he runs or the oil question. Can I remind you that as far back as the 1600's the Royal Navy commanded the seas when the United States was little more than a backwater wilderness and the average citizen painted their face with goat****.
 
Last edited:
Lovely boat, each individual one should be worth two entire interceptor squadrons. Fantastic design too.

Would love to see them exported to Greece ;)
 
big_white_dog84 said:
We do not have a large fleet at all. The 6 Daring class destroyers will replace an original 12 type 42s. Although these ships will occasionally escort our new carriers they will also be used extensively as lone units on anti-narcotics and embargo enforcing operations. We need a strong anti-air capability to keep us fit to fight wars like the Falklands. Some of the tree-huggers with their heads in the cloud that have posted here might think we don't need a highly capable fleet but considering today's assymmetric threat we need to be ready for all eventualities.
Click to expand...

When we decomissioned some ships near the Falklands, a very short while before the Falklands was invaded. It was then invaded, primarily because we didn't have an immediate fleet within the area to respond accourdingly. Although, we did have nuclear submarines patrolling the area. We need a large fleet because the planet is largely sea and water. We HAVE to protect our interests, to say otherwise is idiotic and shows how little you know (not implying this to you) about how the world works. Before anyone else raises it - yes I know there is much more to why the Falklands happened, but the decomissioned fleet only added to it.

As for the WWIII remarks and the war over in a day, I disagree. I say this because of Mutually Assured Destruction - MAD has no benefit. Academics theorise that contempory warfare will be dominant, but if say a Neo-Nazi dictatorship were facing defeat, it is likely nuclear would be used a last resort etc. Also, many people believe that the Cold War classified as WWIII and the War on Terror is WWIV. It all depends on your definition.

One thing the "politically correct" people here need to realise is that the world is not a pretty place. There is an ongoing power stuggle and when it comes down to it, all self-determining nations are looking out for number one. Invasion is still a very real threat today as it was 200 years ago. It's just much less expected.

As for Iran (I think someone touched on it) - It is very possible that the area will be a focus for attention within the next few years. Iran holding a nuclear playing card will only heighten Isreal tensions and shift the power balance in the middle-east. We could very well see another arms race (we all know where that can lead to). The world is right to be worried about Iran's intentions. There's more to it than energy. However, the US does depend highly on oil for its economy and it will want to keep the areas military at a minimum.
 
Last edited:
Nana said:
this is nothing to do with security.

Aggression actually breeds insecurity and makes us more likely to be attacked - so in some ways our vast military spending makes us a bigger target.

Ever asked yourself why nations with virtually no military infrastructure are not being targetted? 650 million quid so we can kill poeple.. it genuinely makes me ashamed of being british.
Click to expand...

What, like kosovo, the kurds etc.
 
lucasade1 said:
Going back to the original question, the fleet can be seen here:

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/static/pages/2204.html
Click to expand...

That is an impressive fleet I must say! :cool:

The British fleet and navy is one of the oldest (but not tired) and grandest (not necessarily largest) military forces of the world. Even if it isn't as required as it used to be, it's the heritage it brings with it. It's that part of my British upbringing that I am happy to be part of.

It's the one things the froggies are less good at.

Working in a lot of shipyards (some of which with military builds) owing to my line of work, I get to see some amazing ships built - I love the yachting world, I just wish I got to appreciate them more than I do!
 
Now I know what's been waking me up the last few weeks during the night. I live near the BAE shipyards where it was launched and they've been doing a fair bit of overtime to get it ready.

One thing I find funny is that they're building a lot of two-bedroom luxury flats across the water from the yard (going rate £120,000) and I'm thinking people must be mad to buy them. I mean, think of all the noise and dust every day and night even with double-glazing. :eek:
 
Good to see more ships like this - they are exactly the type of ship we need. Makes a refreshing change from orders being given for inadequate ships just to save some dockyard or other.

As technology increases advanced missiles will fall into more hands - the falklands was a long time ago but they had the french made exocet which could basically tear our fleet apart, it was only the French government giving us the codes to nullify them that saved our fleet.

Next time I'd rather we had a ship that could rip these missiles out of the air than hope the people who made them like us enough to help.
 
Freefaller said:
The British fleet and navy is one of the oldest (but not tired) and grandest (not necessarily largest) military forces of the world. Even if it isn't as required as it used to be, it's the heritage it brings with it. It's that part of my British upbringing that I am happy to be part of.
Click to expand...
Famous naval signal, just after WWII (iirc) an American admiral signalled to a British counterpart "How's the second biggest navy in the world?".

The return signal was "Fine thanks, how's the second best?"

Touche I think the word is.
 
fatiain said:
Famous naval signal, just after WWII (iirc) an American admiral signalled to a British counterpart "How's the second biggest navy in the world?".

The return signal was "Fine thanks, how's the second best?"

Touche I think the word is.
Click to expand...

Touche sums it up neatly! :D
 
-Mic- said:
Im from Ireland. You know, the country next door, it says so just under my user name.
Not being british, I wouldnt know if you had a fleet, but someone who is british and would take his word anyday of the week over yours
Click to expand...

Whappers said:
The British Navy is one of the best in the world and England has a great fleet.
Click to expand...

You are both missing the point. As I have said I serve in the Royal Navy and I can assure you that England does not have a fleet. Nor does Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. The Royal Navy belongs to Britain first and last.
There are also many sailors from the commonwealth who serve proudly beside the Brits.
 
Nana said:
this is nothing to do with security.

Aggression actually breeds insecurity and makes us more likely to be attacked - so in some ways our vast military spending makes us a bigger target.

Ever asked yourself why nations with virtually no military infrastructure are not being targetted? 650 million quid so we can kill poeple.. it genuinely makes me ashamed of being british.
Click to expand...

You've gotten worse since the last time i saw you post you are more resentful of yourself every day.

Countries with no military infrastructure are not being attacked? Kosovo/Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan? Hmmm must be me being daft.

650million Quid for a state of *** art Destroyer, be interesting see how it compares to Aegis.

If you're ashamed of being British last time i check it was a few hundred quid for a flight to Saudi and a short trek across the border.

>| Raoh |<
 
the likelihood of the UK having to repel a naval invasion in this day and age is unthinkable.

So the role of this boat is to support aircraft carriers... ok.. why the hell do we need aircraft carriers? Our armed forces are being used as a backup to any old invasion the yanks propose, and the good old british taxpayer keeps paying so Dubya gets rich, and some of the finest people in the country are getting killed, in nasty ways, so Dubya, and Halliburton can get oil, and you all defend it. Ok, is it any wonder we are hated?

And Balddog, regardless of what you say, the UK and US is hugely despised around the world.

And to all the moronic remarks suggesting I live in Afghanistan or whatever, really grow up. Dissent is a vital part of democracy. It's our money and our leaders are killing poeple in OUR NAME, we have blood on our hands, and with technology like this, we can get even more poeple killed, even quicker, evern further away in an even more sanitized way. Hooray.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom