UK Trident
-
I found claims UK already owned AIM-9L[^] prior the invasion. I've got the feeling this story was spinned to counterbalance US 'inactivity' at the beginning of the conflict. Can't prove it for now, that's just a prejudice.
Rob Caldecott wrote:
he Trident missiles used by the UK/US are regularly "swapped out
What's the point?
The most wasted of all days is that on which one has not laughed Fold with us! ¤ flickr
-
So Anglo-US military links = Pah! I laugh in the face of your inferior deterrent! Anglo-French military links = Magnifique! Plus fort ensemble! he he he. :) How would we share an aircraft carrier? How about Britain has it every other week and for two weeks during the summer holidays? :) OT again: My in-laws just made an offer on a house South-West of Bergerac. Looks like I will visiting your side of the Channel a lot... every summer in fact. And Christmas. And Easter. etc. etc. (my wife and her parents are very close, and flights from Southampton are very cheap). :) :)
Rob Caldecott wrote:
Anglo-French military links
non nuclear military links :)
Rob Caldecott wrote:
How about Britain has it every other week and for two weeks during the summer holidays?
Not quite, but not that far. 'We' need an aircraft carrier when the Charles De Gaulle[^] is under maintenance. If the Royal Navy wants to keep an aeronaval capacity, it needs two aircrafts carriers to have one constantly at sea. The second one could be shared.
Rob Caldecott wrote:
South-West of Bergerac
A lovely place. Perigord is such a beautiful country - Do you will learn French language?
The most wasted of all days is that on which one has not laughed Fold with us! ¤ flickr
-
K(arl) wrote:
Can't prove it for now, that's just a prejudice.
Vous l'avez dit bébé!
K(arl) wrote:
What's the point?
The point is that the US is hardly likely to give secrets about a weapon it also uses to a UK enemy.
-
Rob Caldecott wrote:
Anglo-French military links
non nuclear military links :)
Rob Caldecott wrote:
How about Britain has it every other week and for two weeks during the summer holidays?
Not quite, but not that far. 'We' need an aircraft carrier when the Charles De Gaulle[^] is under maintenance. If the Royal Navy wants to keep an aeronaval capacity, it needs two aircrafts carriers to have one constantly at sea. The second one could be shared.
Rob Caldecott wrote:
South-West of Bergerac
A lovely place. Perigord is such a beautiful country - Do you will learn French language?
The most wasted of all days is that on which one has not laughed Fold with us! ¤ flickr
-
K(arl) wrote:
Do you will learn French language?
Je ne vivrai pas là… encore. Si je, alors naturellement j'apprendrai à parler français.
Not bad! :) Even if you won't live there, you will have to interact with indigens. So if you can use their language to communicate, they will be much warmer to you... even if you are english ;)
The most wasted of all days is that on which one has not laughed Fold with us! ¤ flickr
-
bébé? WTF! I meant 'what's the point to swap missiles?'
The most wasted of all days is that on which one has not laughed Fold with us! ¤ flickr
-
K(arl) wrote:
bébé? WTF!
*cough* Guess the Google translation facilities aren't perfect yet then? :)
The translation is good, but the usage is not. "bébé" could possibly used as a "tender word", a nickname you would use for your beloved one (even if I would hate to be reduced to some immature forl of life unable to survive by itself - I'm not a kid, and my beloved one is not my mother, dammit!) So as long as our relationship is epistolary , I find the use of such words a little bit premature :-D;)
Where do you expect us to go when the bombs fall?
-
The translation is good, but the usage is not. "bébé" could possibly used as a "tender word", a nickname you would use for your beloved one (even if I would hate to be reduced to some immature forl of life unable to survive by itself - I'm not a kid, and my beloved one is not my mother, dammit!) So as long as our relationship is epistolary , I find the use of such words a little bit premature :-D;)
Where do you expect us to go when the bombs fall?
-
bébé? WTF! I meant 'what's the point to swap missiles?'
The most wasted of all days is that on which one has not laughed Fold with us! ¤ flickr
At a guess it's part of a unified maintenance/refurbishment process, with both US and UK missiles going in one end of the queue, and the ships immediately reloading with the ones just coming out instead of standing idle while their entire load is being overhauled. Pluses for both sides would be it's cheaper than maintaining separate overhaul facilities and a full subs worth of spares, and for the UK that they're getting the exact same model as the US not a neutered export model.
-- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.
-
At a guess it's part of a unified maintenance/refurbishment process, with both US and UK missiles going in one end of the queue, and the ships immediately reloading with the ones just coming out instead of standing idle while their entire load is being overhauled. Pluses for both sides would be it's cheaper than maintaining separate overhaul facilities and a full subs worth of spares, and for the UK that they're getting the exact same model as the US not a neutered export model.
-- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.
Then there 's no absolute certainty for UK that their missiles can not be controled one way or another by the US. So if it requires so much confidence in each others, I don't see why UK doesn't entirely rely on the US nuclear umbrella.
The most wasted of all days is that on which one has not laughed Fold with us! ¤ flickr
-
Not bad! :) Even if you won't live there, you will have to interact with indigens. So if you can use their language to communicate, they will be much warmer to you... even if you are english ;)
The most wasted of all days is that on which one has not laughed Fold with us! ¤ flickr
K(arl) wrote:
if you can use their language to communicate, they will be much warmer to you
Totally agree with you there - I can't stand the standard English approach of talking LOUDER and S L O W E R...
-
if you're going down that road, a 1MT nuke over downtown London would kill ~20% of the population in the greater metro area but only destroy ~5% of the infrastructure. Which means the survivors would be richer after the strike than before. Nukes really are that surreal. :wtf:
-- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.
Congestion would probably be reduced as well ;P