UK's first live test firing of the Tomahawk Land Attack Block 4

Stolly · 3 Jul 2007 at 18:03

Troop said:
Anyone have a guess at what were paying for this ?, total waste of money, why do we need more ways of killing people

We should arm our troops with sharp sticks only. Then all potential enemies will follow suit and do the same.

Right ?

teaboy5 · 3 Jul 2007 at 18:06

Has no one noticed this is from the states?

Stolly · 3 Jul 2007 at 18:09

Shackley said:
All a bit far-fetched don't you think?

the missile is launched;

it whizzes around unnoticed at 500mph, just over the horizon;

our "HumInt" source sees a good target (e.g. his Mother-in-law);

he gets on the blower to dispatch - on an 0845 number;

he listens to Vivald's "Four Seasons" a few times;

dispatch has gone home and an answering machine tells him to call another number;

eventually, he gets through to "The Man" - who has to call someone else to get the target coordinates changed

- just as the trusty Tomahawk Land Attack Block 4 gets bored and decides to take out a particularly tasteless BBQ pit somewhere

Or more likley in the time it takes to get the missile to where the target is, he's got in his car and driven somewhere else.

Rather than have a missile slam into a building that contains no target or worse, it can be directed to a new location.

Thats a capabilty worth having.

Slam62 · 3 Jul 2007 at 18:09

the sun so basically forget it

Stolly · 3 Jul 2007 at 18:10

teaboy5 said:
Has no one noticed this is from the states?

Like all the previous versions. What of it ?

Sleepy · 3 Jul 2007 at 18:15

Clinkz said:
During the first 6 months of the iraq war, 50 precision airstrikes were conducted against Iraqi leadership; of these strikes, none hit its intended target.

Typical leftie tactic, use an related fact to attempt to justify some earlier idiotic comment :rolleyes:

Troop said:
Anyone have a guess at what were paying for this ?, total waste of money, why do we need more ways of killing people

To provide greater flexibility and capability to accomplish UK strategic and tactical objectives

6thElement said:
The UK Skynet defence system is already online.

And has been for decades ...

Tom|Nbk · 3 Jul 2007 at 18:22

That was ***** ace tbh. Yeeeehaww all the way into Orbit you ****'s

Fully star out any swearies

Margaret · 3 Jul 2007 at 18:30

AcidHell2 said:
I hope your joking, lets see what would happen if we got rid or our armed forces, see how the world would react to us.

Least we've got America!

Moredhel · 3 Jul 2007 at 18:30

As the guy says "And a cheer goes up from the croud", the timer is at 13:37

Clinkz · 3 Jul 2007 at 18:42

Sleepy said:
Typical leftie tactic, use an related fact to attempt to justify some earlier idiotic comment

What....?

Glaucus · 3 Jul 2007 at 18:48

Clinkz said:
What....?

Your two statements, didn't have anything to do with each other. But you where using it as evidence.

teaboy5 · 3 Jul 2007 at 18:58

Stolly said:
Like all the previous versions. What of it ?

.....................

Glaucus · 3 Jul 2007 at 18:59

teaboy5 said:
Check the thread title and get back to me.

It doesn't mean we're not getting the missiles.

Clinkz · 3 Jul 2007 at 19:02

AcidHell2 said:
Your two statements, didn't have anything to do with each other. But you where using it as evidence.

Nothing to do with each other? A human being is to the sky like a grain of sand is in a desert. Precision strike missiles do not work which has been proven time and time again.

Glaucus · 3 Jul 2007 at 19:04

Clinkz said:
Nothing to do with each other? A human being is to the sky like a grain of sand is in a desert. Precision strike missiles do not work which has been proven time and time again.

post a link then, the majority do work. all your saying is although the missiles functioned fine, the target had already left by the time it exploded.

Judge Mortis · 3 Jul 2007 at 19:05

Clinkz said:
Exactly what these hope to achieve i do not know.

Have you served in the military?

scorza · 3 Jul 2007 at 19:07

Clinkz said:
Nothing to do with each other? A human being is to the sky like a grain of sand is in a desert. Precision strike missiles do not work which has been proven time and time again.

Err they do work, and they do work well - can't remember the exact rate but a very high percentage of all tomahawks launched in Gulf War 2.0 hit their intended target.

What they aren't much good at is being used in assassination attempts, due to the length of time it takes from launch to hitting the target, something which this version of tomahawk is supposed to improve on.

iCraig · 3 Jul 2007 at 19:09

Clinkz said:
Nothing to do with each other? A human being is to the sky like a grain of sand is in a desert. Precision strike missiles do not work which has been proven time and time again.

I dare you to to stand under this one and say that, when a missile-shaped shadow is following you around.

Judge Mortis · 3 Jul 2007 at 19:23

Bar a failure in software, hardware, guidance, satellite or radar link .... guided weapons do work.

If a target is lased, a laser guided weapon will hit it and that goes for radar guided, satellite guided or whatever. Your alternative to destroy a target is ground forces, risky in enemy territory, and saturation bombing as seen in WWII and Vietnam and the collateral damage of that is far worse.

Duke · 3 Jul 2007 at 19:25

That rocks! We rule :cool: