Submit your comments on this article | |
Europe | |
Britain's New Ships Lose Power in Warm Waters | |
2016-06-10 | |
![]() Then they lose electrical power. Totally. I wish I were kidding, but the HMS Daring and her sister ships "cannot cope" with warm waters:
Who the hell designs a warship unfit for duty in the world's most likely war zone?
| |
Posted by:DarthVader |
#9 As for the Artic, "...They have 19 Destroyers + Frigates" > actually, former UK Fist Sea Lord Allan West says the number is actually 13 effective warships, not 19. Iff Britain's failure is lack of numbers + proper sea drives, ITS STILL ACCEPTABLE THAN AMERICA'S PROBLEM OF HAVING ANTI-US US POLITICOS + PRO-OWG-NWO GLBALISTS IN CHARGE OF AMERIKA'S ARMED FORCES. POTUS OBAMA SENT US WARSHIPS INCLUDING CVN NEAR OR JUST OUTSIDE CHINA'S 12-MILE LIMIT, NOT INTO CHINA'S 12-MILE LIMIT, WHICH ACCOMPLISHED NOTHING AS PER TRYING TO STOP CHINA'S CONTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IN THE SPRATLYS. CHINA NOW HAS EFFECIVE CONTROL OF THE SOUTH CHINA SEA, + WILL SOON TURN ITS FOCII TO THE FINAL RECOVERY OF TAIWAN + THE EAST CHINA SEA AGZ JAPAN + SOKOR. Amerika's other problem ... * WAFF > MASSIVE US NAVY SCANDAL [high-level corruption] BRINGS ITS FIGHTING ABILITY INTO QUESTION. Over 30 USN Admirals being investigated for various contracts fraud, bribery, + general corruption. IFF BRITAIN'S NAVY HAS TOO LITTLE MONEY TO IMPROVE UPON ITS TYPE 45 WARSHIPS, THE US NAVY ON ITS PART MAY HAVE TOO MUCH. |
Posted by: JosephMendiola 2016-06-10 23:47 |
#8 The RN's historical focii has bee defense of the Channel, espec Channel ports, along wid North Atlantic trade where cold weather is the norm. One of the main reasons why Thatcher sought a quick + decisive mil response to the 1980's Falkland Risis agz Argentina was the fear of RN shipboard power loss + rust. US Navy = UK-NATO Navies = will needs specialized lubes + solvents, etc. to deal wid global temperature + weather changes due to changes on solar activities. IMO GLOBAL-WARMING PROTECTED SHIPS BY 2030-2050 WON'T LOOK, RUN, OR "FEEL" AS WARSHIPS DO NOW. |
Posted by: JosephMendiola 2016-06-10 20:58 |
#7 Comment at site: The F-35 doesn't do to well to well in hot seas either. But A-10 so there! |
Posted by: Shipman 2016-06-10 20:25 |
#6 It might be best if their country didn't get itself into a "major war"... After dragging the US into 2 world wars, I'd just as soon they didn't. |
Posted by: Iblis 2016-06-10 16:14 |
#5 ![]() |
Posted by: Vast Right Wing Conspiracy 2016-06-10 13:41 |
#4 Which brings up the question: What happens to them in the gulf of mexico? (or the south china sea?) Al |
Posted by: Frozen Al 2016-06-10 12:18 |
#3 We have some US littoral vessels they can use...Once they change out the drivetrain. |
Posted by: Skidmark 2016-06-10 11:41 |
#2 To quote Insty: where's the graft in that?? Oh yeah, that's where. |
Posted by: AlanC 2016-06-10 11:29 |
#1 Who the hell designs a warship unfit for duty in the world's most likely warzone? Our "top men". Top. Men. |
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2016-06-10 11:26 |