Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New warship is 'quantum leap forward' for the Navy (Visiting Americans 'Shaken and Shocked')
news.telegraph ^ | 2 February 2006 | Thomas Harding

Posted on 02/01/2006 5:21:30 PM PST by Cornpone

The most powerful frontline warship since the Second World War was launched by the Countess of Wessex yesterday, marking a resurgence of British naval ship building.

The first of Britain's new Type 45 destroyers took to the waters of the Clyde as the world's most advanced air defence ship.

Daring will be able to track and destroy a target the size of a cricket ball travelling at more than three times the speed of sound, a "quantum leap forward in the Navy's capabilities", according the Royal Navy.

The boat's defensive system, combining a hugely powerful radar and missile system, has left American visitors to the yard "shaken and shocked", according to BAE Systems, its builders.

The destroyer's launch was watched by a crowd of 11,000 and hundreds of Daring's Glaswegian shipbuilders.

In the next 10 years, as many as eight T45s could be built at a cost of £650 million each. Also to be commissioned are two large aircraft carriers (£3.5 billion), four Astute class hunter killer submarines (£3 billion) and a fleet of up to 14 auxiliary ships (£3.5 billion).

Daring will be fitted with its radar and missile systems before its sea trials in early 2007. Its Samson radar, from its current location in Portsmouth, can monitor all take offs and landings from every major European airport.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: defense; navalwarfare; navy; royalnavy; usn
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121 next last
To: Wiseghy
I think the F35 radar cross section is smaller.

I'm certain the F22 radar cross section is smaller.

And then there's the.... no, wait, if I told you that I'd have to kill you.

Also, my understanding is that the type 45 destroyers are using only technology licensed from US developers.

The nick name for the USS Ronald Reagan is the "Ronnie ray gun" for a reason, folks. (it's better and faster than Teddy's "big stick.")

The Brits can certainly track and launch against a target the size of a "cricket ball" (roughly the size of a softball), but they'll be launching a conventional weapon, either a missile or something like an (American) Phalanx system. The US developed the tracking and guidance systems with them (and others) that they're touting here. Our purpose is to use them with directed energy systems.

They absolutely contributed heavily to this development (as did the Israelis and several other allies to be named later) but this article implies that it is some sort of British coup (and a march on those nasty Yanks). The real professionals in the British Navy are not into that sort of stuff. Their PR flacks and media drones, however...

41 posted on 02/01/2006 6:29:04 PM PST by Phsstpok (There are lies, damned lies, statistics and presentation graphics, in descending order of truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone
That's all well and good, but the Brits need to get back to what made their navy great:

"Over the centuries, the amount of rum changed from time to time. Prior to 1740, Pusser's Rum was issued to the men neat, that is without water. They received 1/2-pint twice daily!"

"In 1970, the Admiralty Board decreed that there was no place for the daily issue of rum in a modern navy, and so ended the daily issue of Pusser's Rum in the Royal Navy on July31st,1970. This date since then, is referred to "Black Tot Day".

42 posted on 02/01/2006 6:36:46 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
Image hosted by Photobucket.com Plymouth Gin...
43 posted on 02/01/2006 6:41:52 PM PST by Chode (American Hedonist ©®)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

The finest rum ever.


44 posted on 02/01/2006 6:42:13 PM PST by 359Henrie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok

Your post reinforces the assurance we should feel if Iran were stupid enough to try and block the Strait of Hormuz. We could station the Navy there which, in conjunction with the Air Force, would defend against sea and land-based threats - silkworm anti-ship missles and other shore hazzards. Even if an Iranian missle were to somehow get within several miles of an American ship, well, I assume you know what a radar-guided Phalanx system can do to an incoming target in a fraction of a second :)


45 posted on 02/01/2006 6:55:06 PM PST by wingsof liberty (Marines - the few, the proud, the best!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Wiseghy
Not that it matters, but isn't that about the radar cross section of an F-35?

I'm certain it is much smaller. The F-117's Xsection has been compared to a bumblebee.

46 posted on 02/01/2006 7:00:38 PM PST by Straight Vermonter (John 6: 31-69)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Shermy

Quite well.


47 posted on 02/01/2006 7:01:17 PM PST by RightWhale (pas de lieu, Rhone que nous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle

If that's not a phallic symbol...


48 posted on 02/01/2006 7:03:10 PM PST by appeal2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DesScorp

There's probably on 20 sailors on it anyway.


49 posted on 02/01/2006 7:07:43 PM PST by appeal2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
It would be a hell of a lot cheaper than what we're doing now. The main reason brass and contractors seem to hate the battleships is not enough money/pork in it.

Me, I'd keep two of the 16" turrets and put one of Gerald Bull's super guns on the third turret for shooting people I really, really, really didn't like. I'd probably keep two of the double 5" mounts on either side, updated, and make the rest of the 5" mounts into phalanx systems. All of that would leave plenty of room for Tomahawks and anything else appropriate.

50 posted on 02/01/2006 7:18:52 PM PST by ironwoodchuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DesScorp
It looks like a civil war ironclad that's been absorbed by the Borg.

ROFLMAO!

Resistance is Futile!

51 posted on 02/01/2006 7:24:48 PM PST by COEXERJ145 (Despite Popular Opinion, Tom Tancredo Does Not Support Deporting Illegal Aliens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

marker


52 posted on 02/01/2006 7:35:02 PM PST by GretchenM (What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul? Please meet my friend, Jesus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Tom Paine
If it runs on oil, it is a waste of money unless England has some oil wells.

The United Kingdom has quite a few (think North Sea); the Wikipedia lists these:


53 posted on 02/01/2006 7:41:36 PM PST by snowsislander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
The new chinese "sunburn" missles really move...

The Sunburn is Russian and is over 20 years old. Hardly "new."

54 posted on 02/01/2006 8:28:59 PM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DesScorp
What kind of sailing is that if you never see the Ocean?

The dark kind, I would imagine.

55 posted on 02/01/2006 8:41:05 PM PST by Reaganesque
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

""Over the centuries, the amount of rum changed from time to time. Prior to 1740, Pusser's Rum was issued to the men neat, that is without water. They received 1/2-pint twice daily!" "

from what I ahve seen of the very high cask strengths of rum casks stored in cooler climates, this daily allowance could have been 75% alcohol (150 US proof).


56 posted on 02/01/2006 8:44:06 PM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone; All

57 posted on 02/01/2006 8:45:22 PM PST by OnRightOnLeftCoast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cornpone
I've always loved the names the British give their war ships. No fooling around with wimpy names.

How are these for a list of some past and present names

Dreadnought.....Warspite.....Valiant.....Revenge.....Resolution.....Superb.....Conqueror.....Thunderer.....Magnificent.....Majestic.....Victorious.....Formidable.....Implacable.....Triumph.....Immovable.....Terror.....Victory.

My favorites, HMS Spanker, HMS Audacious and HMS Irresistable, LOL.

Hail, Brittania!

Leni

58 posted on 02/01/2006 8:47:42 PM PST by MinuteGal ("FReeps Ahoy 4" thread is up. Click red "4" in Keywords list on top of "Latest Posts" page)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Androcles

The American military is protecting Israel and will continue to do so.


59 posted on 02/01/2006 9:06:35 PM PST by TFMcGuire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle

60 posted on 02/01/2006 9:10:59 PM PST by Denver Ditdat (Leftist New Year's resolution: force Christians into the closets vacated by gays)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson