Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[05omegav6]

F35 needs 550ft to take off conventionally, the ramp will possibly help...

But needs 700ft to stop without arrrester systems

I suspect we're only buying the F35b to appease the RAF so they can replace the Harrier like for like. Apparently we're buying 138 F35b for RAF and Navy use.

Given the carriers can operate upto 50 aircraft, surely it would be better to give the Navy 100 F35c, and the RAF 38 F35b

That way the RAF get their Harrier replacement, and the Navy get an aircraft which can actually land on a carrier without melting it, ie one with a hook fitted...

[LC0112G]

Your first point would appear to contradict the last point there, can you divulge?

The carrier(s) we currently have are HMS Illustrious and HMS Ocean, although Ocean wasn't designed for and never has operated fixed wing aircraft. HMS Ark Royal was retired at the same time we scrapped the RAF Harriers (2010-2011). HMS Invincible was retired in 2005 - at the same time as the RN lost it's Sea Harriers.

All of these carriers are small - less than one quater the size of Nimitz. If you're going to operate anything (fixed wing) off them it needs to be VSTOL (aka Jump Jet) - so basically Harrier. But we've scrapped/sold all our Harriers.

Loss of the Harriers has left us without any fixed wing stuff to operate from our ships. Many blame this on a struggle between the RN and RAF. The RAF want to operate ALL fixed wing jets, and don't want to embark on ships if they can help it. The RAF Harrier - the GR5/7/9 was becoming a very capable ground attack/support aircraft, but couldn't perform air defence because it didn't have a radar, and wasn't capable of carrying the latest air to air missiles. The Sea Harrier had a very good radar, and could launch all the latest air-to air missiles but it was an old underpowered design in need of replacement.

So - 2004/5 stage one of the RAF coup was to get MOD to 'suggest' to HMG that the Sea Harriers are retired, and the RN convert to the RAF version - the GR7 - thus saving money. RN squadrons would be allocated a portaloo and a (half a) tent at the RAF base in Rutland, and move up there (from sunny Somerset) to fly the RAF GR7's. For reasons no-one really understands, the Admiralty didn't object, and HMG then proceeded to scrap the Sea Harrier fleet, and retire the oldest carrier - HMS Invincible. Twelve new Type 45 destroyers could be used to defend the fleet from air attack.

Stage 2 - 2007-20010 embark on an upgrade of the GR7's to GR9 standard. Although this didn't involve adding an air-to-air radar it did add considerably to the capabilities of the aircraft. These were supposed to stay in service till 2018 when the new carriers, and the new F-35 Joint strike fighters would be introduced to replace them. Stage 3 - The smelly stuff hits the air conditioning, and HMG is skint. Savings have to be made. The choice at the RAF is to either half the Tornado GR4 fleet from 120 aircraft to 46 and keep the Harriers, or to scrap the Harriers, and keep all 120 off Tornados. An ex Tornado guy is in charge at the MOD. The decision is made to scrap the Harriers. And the order for Type 45's is reduced to 8 ships.

Stage 4 - The hysterical laughing from the RAF side of the MOD cause the RN/Admiralty to wake from their (rum induced?) coma and realise they have 2/3 aircraft carriers, and no aircraft fo operate from them. Even if the F35/JSF were to arrive on time, there was going to be a gap of 8-10 years without any aircraft. So scrap another carrier, convert the remaining ones for helicopter only ops, and hope no-one notices. And the order for Type 45's is reduced to 6 ships.

'Kin' idiots - the lot of them.

[LC0112G]

F35 needs 550ft to take off conventionally, the ramp will possibly help...

But needs 700ft to stop without arrrester systems

I suspect we're only buying the F35b to appease the RAF so they can replace the Harrier like for like. Apparently we're buying 138 F35b for RAF and Navy use.

Given the carriers can operate upto 50 aircraft, surely it would be better to give the Navy 100 F35c, and the RAF 38 F35b

That way the RAF get their Harrier replacement, and the Navy get an aircraft which can actually land on a carrier without melting it, ie one with a hook fitted...

You can't land an aircraft with a hook unless there is a way for the aircraft to 'bolt' incase it misses the wires. You can't 'bolt' if there is a ramp in the way - the stress on the undercarrage is too much. And we've put a 'ski jump' on the front of our carrier. The Americans don't have ramps on the front of their smaller carriers - the ones the US Marine Corps use harriers off. These are roughly the same size of the old Invincible class ships.

We haven't ordered ANY production F-35's yet - of any version. There are 3/4 prototype F-35B's that are 'ours' currently flying in the USA. The production order won't be made till after the next election, at the next SDR in 2015. It looks like this order may well be for 50 F-35B jump jets. We may end up with 100+ eventually, but I doubt all these will be ordered in 2015.

[tunnie]

Your first point would appear to contradict the last point there, can you divulge?

The carrier(s) we currently have are HMS Illustrious and HMS Ocean, although Ocean wasn't designed for and never has operated fixed wing aircraft. HMS Ark Royal was retired at the same time we scrapped the RAF Harriers (2010-2011). HMS Invincible was retired in 2005 - at the same time as the RN lost it's Sea Harriers.

All of these carriers are small - less than one quater the size of Nimitz. If you're going to operate anything (fixed wing) off them it needs to be VSTOL (aka Jump Jet) - so basically Harrier. But we've scrapped/sold all our Harriers.

Loss of the Harriers has left us without any fixed wing stuff to operate from our ships. Many blame this on a struggle between the RN and RAF. The RAF want to operate ALL fixed wing jets, and don't want to embark on ships if they can help it. The RAF Harrier - the GR5/7/9 was becoming a very capable ground attack/support aircraft, but couldn't perform air defence because it didn't have a radar, and wasn't capable of carrying the latest air to air missiles. The Sea Harrier had a very good radar, and could launch all the latest air-to air missiles but it was an old underpowered design in need of replacement.

So - 2004/5 stage one of the RAF coup was to get MOD to 'suggest' to HMG that the Sea Harriers are retired, and the RN convert to the RAF version - the GR7 - thus saving money. RN squadrons would be allocated a portaloo and a (half a) tent at the RAF base in Rutland, and move up there (from sunny Somerset) to fly the RAF GR7's. For reasons no-one really understands, the Admiralty didn't object, and HMG then proceeded to scrap the Sea Harrier fleet, and retire the oldest carrier - HMS Invincible. Twelve new Type 45 destroyers could be used to defend the fleet from air attack.

Stage 2 - 2007-20010 embark on an upgrade of the GR7's to GR9 standard. Although this didn't involve adding an air-to-air radar it did add considerably to the capabilities of the aircraft. These were supposed to stay in service till 2018 when the new carriers, and the new F-35 Joint strike fighters would be introduced to replace them. Stage 3 - The smelly stuff hits the air conditioning, and HMG is skint. Savings have to be made. The choice at the RAF is to either half the Tornado GR4 fleet from 120 aircraft to 46 and keep the Harriers, or to scrap the Harriers, and keep all 120 off Tornados. An ex Tornado guy is in charge at the MOD. The decision is made to scrap the Harriers. And the order for Type 45's is reduced to 8 ships.

Stage 4 - The hysterical laughing from the RAF side of the MOD cause the RN/Admiralty to wake from their (rum induced?) coma and realise they have 2/3 aircraft carriers, and no aircraft fo operate from them. Even if the F35/JSF were to arrive on time, there was going to be a gap of 8-10 years without any aircraft. So scrap another carrier, convert the remaining ones for helicopter only ops, and hope no-one notices. And the order for Type 45's is reduced to 6 ships.

'Kin' idiots - the lot of them.

Interesting summary 

Enjoyed reading that

[Varche]

Your first point would appear to contradict the last point there, can you divulge?

The carrier(s) we currently have are HMS Illustrious and HMS Ocean, although Ocean wasn't designed for and never has operated fixed wing aircraft. HMS Ark Royal was retired at the same time we scrapped the RAF Harriers (2010-2011). HMS Invincible was retired in 2005 - at the same time as the RN lost it's Sea Harriers.

All of these carriers are small - less than one quater the size of Nimitz. If you're going to operate anything (fixed wing) off them it needs to be VSTOL (aka Jump Jet) - so basically Harrier. But we've scrapped/sold all our Harriers.

Loss of the Harriers has left us without any fixed wing stuff to operate from our ships. Many blame this on a struggle between the RN and RAF. The RAF want to operate ALL fixed wing jets, and don't want to embark on ships if they can help it. The RAF Harrier - the GR5/7/9 was becoming a very capable ground attack/support aircraft, but couldn't perform air defence because it didn't have a radar, and wasn't capable of carrying the latest air to air missiles. The Sea Harrier had a very good radar, and could launch all the latest air-to air missiles but it was an old underpowered design in need of replacement.

So - 2004/5 stage one of the RAF coup was to get MOD to 'suggest' to HMG that the Sea Harriers are retired, and the RN convert to the RAF version - the GR7 - thus saving money. RN squadrons would be allocated a portaloo and a (half a) tent at the RAF base in Rutland, and move up there (from sunny Somerset) to fly the RAF GR7's. For reasons no-one really understands, the Admiralty didn't object, and HMG then proceeded to scrap the Sea Harrier fleet, and retire the oldest carrier - HMS Invincible. Twelve new Type 45 destroyers could be used to defend the fleet from air attack.

Stage 2 - 2007-20010 embark on an upgrade of the GR7's to GR9 standard. Although this didn't involve adding an air-to-air radar it did add considerably to the capabilities of the aircraft. These were supposed to stay in service till 2018 when the new carriers, and the new F-35 Joint strike fighters would be introduced to replace them. Stage 3 - The smelly stuff hits the air conditioning, and HMG is skint. Savings have to be made. The choice at the RAF is to either half the Tornado GR4 fleet from 120 aircraft to 46 and keep the Harriers, or to scrap the Harriers, and keep all 120 off Tornados. An ex Tornado guy is in charge at the MOD. The decision is made to scrap the Harriers. And the order for Type 45's is reduced to 8 ships.

Stage 4 - The hysterical laughing from the RAF side of the MOD cause the RN/Admiralty to wake from their (rum induced?) coma and realise they have 2/3 aircraft carriers, and no aircraft fo operate from them. Even if the F35/JSF were to arrive on time, there was going to be a gap of 8-10 years without any aircraft. So scrap another carrier, convert the remaining ones for helicopter only ops, and hope no-one notices. And the order for Type 45's is reduced to 6 ships.

'Kin' idiots - the lot of them.

Interesting summary 

Enjoyed reading that

Strange word to use as a UK taxpayer funding this ongoing debacle at a time when huge savings elsewhere are having to be made. I agree though it was a good summation.

[LC0112G]

Ref no aircraft to fly off it ............... the initial choice was the Vstol  F35B JSF but this is turning out to be a over budget, over weight sack of shite that melts the flight deck when it lands.

Overbudget - yes - overweight - yes, but the systems in all F-35 versions are light years ahead of anything we currently have - including Typhoon. And when we introduced the F4 Phantom into RN service (1968-69) it also proceeded to melt the decks on the USS Forrestal where it was being tested - so nothing new there 

Then we thought about the F35C which is to have a tail hook for conventional catapult operations 
Problem is that the new carriers was never designed to have one and would need to be torn apart to fit a steam generator and associated pipework / cabling 
So we went back to melting the flight decks instead  .

We should have gone for F35C from the outset, and the new carrier WAS supposed  to be designed for both steam/electromagnetic catapults and arrester cables to be easily retro-fitted. All the original documents state that this was a primary design objective. Many of the models/drawings produced back in the early noughties show F-18's on the deck. However, somehow, somewhen, this requirement was quietly dropped from the spec. Then when HMG went back to try and get the CATOBAR stuff installed they were told it would cost £2Bn+. Whoever allowed the CATOBAR stuff to be deleted from the spec in the first place ought to be publically flogged.

£2Bn is going to turn out to be an unbelivable bargain. Sometime after 2020 the RAF is going to start making noises about replacing Typhoon with F35. They won't want to use the F35B though because of it's limited payload and range. They will want the F35A the 'airforce version'. But - our brand new Voyager tankers can't in-flight refuel that version - they don't have the correct refueling probe fitted. The 'navy version' the F-35C does have the correct refuelling probe for our tankers. So we could have been operating a single fleet of F-35C's for both RN and RAF. Instead we are likely to be operating a mixed fleet of F-35B and C, with the RAF operating the navy version from land bases, and the RN operating jump jets from platforms 4 times larger than they need to be.

Iirc, the sea harriers are currently sat in a hanger near Wales rotting away 

All the SHAR's are gone from Shawbury. There are about a dozen used for deck handler training down at Culdrose in Cornwall, and there are a few a Yeovilton, although none of these are airworthy. One is still flying in private hands in the USA, and all the rest are either in museums or scrapped.

The 80 odd RAF GR7/9's were mostly sold to the USA for less than £2m each, were shipped from Southampton to North Carolina, stripped of all useable parts, and the remaining fuselages now lie in the AMARC boneyard outside Tuscon in Arizona.

[tunnie]

Your first point would appear to contradict the last point there, can you divulge?

The carrier(s) we currently have are HMS Illustrious and HMS Ocean, although Ocean wasn't designed for and never has operated fixed wing aircraft. HMS Ark Royal was retired at the same time we scrapped the RAF Harriers (2010-2011). HMS Invincible was retired in 2005 - at the same time as the RN lost it's Sea Harriers.

All of these carriers are small - less than one quater the size of Nimitz. If you're going to operate anything (fixed wing) off them it needs to be VSTOL (aka Jump Jet) - so basically Harrier. But we've scrapped/sold all our Harriers.

Loss of the Harriers has left us without any fixed wing stuff to operate from our ships. Many blame this on a struggle between the RN and RAF. The RAF want to operate ALL fixed wing jets, and don't want to embark on ships if they can help it. The RAF Harrier - the GR5/7/9 was becoming a very capable ground attack/support aircraft, but couldn't perform air defence because it didn't have a radar, and wasn't capable of carrying the latest air to air missiles. The Sea Harrier had a very good radar, and could launch all the latest air-to air missiles but it was an old underpowered design in need of replacement.

So - 2004/5 stage one of the RAF coup was to get MOD to 'suggest' to HMG that the Sea Harriers are retired, and the RN convert to the RAF version - the GR7 - thus saving money. RN squadrons would be allocated a portaloo and a (half a) tent at the RAF base in Rutland, and move up there (from sunny Somerset) to fly the RAF GR7's. For reasons no-one really understands, the Admiralty didn't object, and HMG then proceeded to scrap the Sea Harrier fleet, and retire the oldest carrier - HMS Invincible. Twelve new Type 45 destroyers could be used to defend the fleet from air attack.

Stage 2 - 2007-20010 embark on an upgrade of the GR7's to GR9 standard. Although this didn't involve adding an air-to-air radar it did add considerably to the capabilities of the aircraft. These were supposed to stay in service till 2018 when the new carriers, and the new F-35 Joint strike fighters would be introduced to replace them. Stage 3 - The smelly stuff hits the air conditioning, and HMG is skint. Savings have to be made. The choice at the RAF is to either half the Tornado GR4 fleet from 120 aircraft to 46 and keep the Harriers, or to scrap the Harriers, and keep all 120 off Tornados. An ex Tornado guy is in charge at the MOD. The decision is made to scrap the Harriers. And the order for Type 45's is reduced to 8 ships.

Stage 4 - The hysterical laughing from the RAF side of the MOD cause the RN/Admiralty to wake from their (rum induced?) coma and realise they have 2/3 aircraft carriers, and no aircraft fo operate from them. Even if the F35/JSF were to arrive on time, there was going to be a gap of 8-10 years without any aircraft. So scrap another carrier, convert the remaining ones for helicopter only ops, and hope no-one notices. And the order for Type 45's is reduced to 6 ships.

'Kin' idiots - the lot of them.

Interesting summary 

Enjoyed reading that

Strange word to use as a UK taxpayer funding this ongoing debacle at a time when huge savings elsewhere are having to be made. I agree though it was a good summation.

That was what I meant 

[tigers_gonads]

LC0112G
what's all the RAF coup crap 
Are you that bitter and twisted old sea dog "sharky ward" in disuse ?
Illustrious was turned into razor blades because the boat itself was knackered and falling apart 
Pretty much the same with Ark Royal too.
That left you with Lusty and the helicopter carrier, Ocean

As for using the gr7 / 9a at sea long term, both the jets would have had to have been torn apart and the magnesium parts replaced because magnesium and salt water don't mix very well   

The RAF scrapped the Harrier (wrongly imo) because we only had the Tornado with its far greater range to carry any decent ground attack weapons like stormshadow for instance.
The Typhoon had not got to tranch 3 yet so had next to f**k all air to ground capability.

As for the RAF / Royal Navy bitch fight over who fly's what, you lot started it with Mountbatten bad mouthing the TSR2 to the Aussies  when we was trying to sell them it   

At the end of the day, why do we need carriers anyway, not like we have a empire to look after anymore 

[Marks DTM Calib]

They were to have an electromagnetic linear catapult and I know of a scale working model which is great for launching tins and trays (at horrific speeds and very controled).

Trouble is, the cost of type approving the aircraft was billions.......so now the yanks have the technology!

[tigers_gonads]

They were to have an electromagnetic linear catapult and I know of a scale working model which is great for launching tins and trays (at horrific speeds and very controled).

Trouble is, the cost of type approving the aircraft was billions.......so now the yanks have the technology!

Yup, the yanks have been playing with the technology for a while.
Great idea if you want to build a super gun but given the rather delicate electronics of the F35. can see it giving the navy fairies plenty of practice swapping black boxes.
Still have the problem of EMF and finding a way to charge all those capacitors 

[Marks DTM Calib]

Oh the UK one was way ahead of all that, regenerating energy from the collapsing fields behind the projectile to assist with re-energising the storage set, hardly any EMF issues and very quiet EMC wise, fast re-gen to with much shorter time than the steam jobs.

Banks of IGBT's, nice bit of kit......Converteam now bought by GE so the tech ownership moved to the US.

[tigers_gonads]

Oh the UK one was way ahead of all that, regenerating energy from the collapsing fields behind the projectile to assist with re-energising the storage set, hardly any EMF issues and very quiet EMC wise, fast re-gen to with much shorter time than the steam jobs.

Banks of IGBT's, nice bit of kit......Converteam now bought by GE so the tech ownership moved to the US.

Good old UK plc strikes again.
Don't suppose we have arranged a percentage of any future profits have we   

[LC0112G]

LC0112G
what's all the RAF coup crap 
Are you that bitter and twisted old sea dog "sharky ward" in disuse ?
Illustrious was turned into razor blades because the boat itself was knackered and falling apart 
Pretty much the same with Ark Royal too.
That left you with Lusty and the helicopter carrier, Ocean

As for using the gr7 / 9a at sea long term, both the jets would have had to have been torn apart and the magnesium parts replaced because magnesium and salt water don't mix very well   

The RAF scrapped the Harrier (wrongly imo) because we only had the Tornado with its far greater range to carry any decent ground attack weapons like stormshadow for instance.
The Typhoon had not got to tranch 3 yet so had next to f**k all air to ground capability.

As for the RAF / Royal Navy bitch fight over who fly's what, you lot started it with Mountbatten bad mouthing the TSR2 to the Aussies  when we was trying to sell them it   

At the end of the day, why do we need carriers anyway, not like we have a empire to look after anymore 

My view is that the SHAR's should have been replaced with AV8B+ in the late 80's at the same time that the RAF were getting AV8B - aka GR5. The SHAR airframe was basically the same as the old 1960's GR3 - just with upgraded radar and weapons fit. It was a means to an end (keeping the RN in the fixed wing buisness) made necessary by not replacing the old Ark with a proper carrier.  It didn't have the power to land back on the deck of a carrier carrying a full weapons load in a hot climate - and ditching multi-million pound AMRAAMS just to land on gets expensive pretty quick. The Navy's of both Italy and Spain (and USA) did buy AV8B+ and are still operating them.

All RN ships are rustbuckets from the moment they first float. It's one of the main gripes that RAF personel make when they are forced on-board from their air conditioned hangars. Sailors know this and crack on regardless.

Yes Tornado carries Stormshadow (and Brimstone), and yes Typhoon is only just starting to get those capabilities. But in the Lybia conflict most of these missions had to be flown direct from the UK - supposedly because the Italian govt (where our detachments were set up) objected to their use. We didn't have feet on the ground in Libya (thankfully), but if we did then it would've been better to have the option of a dozen Harriers 100 miles off the coast rather than a squadron of GR4's 500 miles away in Gioia, or 4 squadrons 1500 miles away in Marham. 

Interservice rivalry at the sharp end isn't in my experiance much more than playful banter. Everyone does their bit to make the best of whatever they are tasked to do with whatever kit they are supplied with. But in the corridors of the MOD it is cuthroat stuff, and the RAF seem to be able to protect what they see as their core job better than the RN. I'm not really blaming the RAF for this - it's the Admiralty's fault for not protecting their interests better. But if the politicianls allow other services hand over 'air support' to the RAF, and then the RAF budget comes under threat, these support services seem to be the first to get cut.

What other major nation would allow (allowed!) their Air Force to supply ASW or Carrier based aircraft? And what is the UK's current ASW or Carrier capability? The USMC don't even trust the USN to supply their air cover, and they are a branch of the same service!

[tigers_gonads]

LC0112G
what's all the RAF coup crap 
Are you that bitter and twisted old sea dog "sharky ward" in disuse ?
Illustrious was turned into razor blades because the boat itself was knackered and falling apart 
Pretty much the same with Ark Royal too.
That left you with Lusty and the helicopter carrier, Ocean

As for using the gr7 / 9a at sea long term, both the jets would have had to have been torn apart and the magnesium parts replaced because magnesium and salt water don't mix very well   

The RAF scrapped the Harrier (wrongly imo) because we only had the Tornado with its far greater range to carry any decent ground attack weapons like stormshadow for instance.
The Typhoon had not got to tranch 3 yet so had next to f**k all air to ground capability.

As for the RAF / Royal Navy bitch fight over who fly's what, you lot started it with Mountbatten bad mouthing the TSR2 to the Aussies  when we was trying to sell them it   

At the end of the day, why do we need carriers anyway, not like we have a empire to look after anymore 

My view is that the SHAR's should have been replaced with AV8B+ in the late 80's at the same time that the RAF were getting AV8B - aka GR5. The SHAR airframe was basically the same as the old 1960's GR3 - just with upgraded radar and weapons fit. It was a means to an end (keeping the RN in the fixed wing buisness) made necessary by not replacing the old Ark with a proper carrier.  It didn't have the power to land back on the deck of a carrier carrying a full weapons load in a hot climate - and ditching multi-million pound AMRAAMS just to land on gets expensive pretty quick. The Navy's of both Italy and Spain (and USA) did buy AV8B+ and are still operating them.

All RN ships are rustbuckets from the moment they first float. It's one of the main gripes that RAF personel make when they are forced on-board from their air conditioned hangars. Sailors know this and crack on regardless.

Yes Tornado carries Stormshadow (and Brimstone), and yes Typhoon is only just starting to get those capabilities. But in the Lybia conflict most of these missions had to be flown direct from the UK - supposedly because the Italian govt (where our detachments were set up) objected to their use. We didn't have feet on the ground in Libya (thankfully), but if we did then it would've been better to have the option of a dozen Harriers 100 miles off the coast rather than a squadron of GR4's 500 miles away in Gioia, or 4 squadrons 1500 miles away in Marham. 

Interservice rivalry at the sharp end isn't in my experiance much more than playful banter. Everyone does their bit to make the best of whatever they are tasked to do with whatever kit they are supplied with. But in the corridors of the MOD it is cuthroat stuff, and the RAF seem to be able to protect what they see as their core job better than the RN. I'm not really blaming the RAF for this - it's the Admiralty's fault for not protecting their interests better. But if the politicianls allow other services hand over 'air support' to the RAF, and then the RAF budget comes under threat, these support services seem to be the first to get cut.

What other major nation would allow (allowed!) their Air Force to supply ASW or Carrier based aircraft? And what is the UK's current ASW or Carrier capability? The USMC don't even trust the USN to supply their air cover, and they are a branch of the same service!

Agree with most of that bud and love the banter 
Myself, I've been out 24 years, miss that and the drinking games in a big way 

At the end of the day, everybody who wears a uniform is just a bitch to the government of the day.
The cold war ended in 1990 when the old USSR went bankrupt and the year before when the wall fell down.

In those days, we knew who the enemy was but now days its all changed.
Imo, we should have never been anywhere Libya. Sweet FA to do with Great Britain, and the same with Syria.

I suppose it all depends on what this nation wants to be on the world stage 

Are we ever going to stop being Americas poodle and look after our own interests for a change ?
I really don't know.
It would be nice if this nation could speak softly and carry a friggin big stick.
If the argies started getting a bit lairy then pop down south with a carrier taskforce and ruin there day 

Are we to be the worlds next policeman when China calls in all its loans to the USA and they go bankrupt or are we just going to start looking after our own interests for a change 

Decisions decisions eh 
Would be nice to have a nice deep wallet to buy the toys we want and even better if we could actually build them ourselves but those days are all gone imo 

Back to the carriers, other then us sticking our noses in the middle east all the time and invading spain and argentina  , why do we need any carriers anyway ?

[LC0112G]

It would be nice if this nation could speak softly and carry a friggin big stick.

Trouble is, put any politician in charge of the big stick and they start talking loudly and threatening to use it. They believe they have to justify the expendeture to the electorate. And the military commanders quite like testing their new toys to see if/how well they work, so tend not to object too loudly untill they start taking casualties (JP233 anyone).

If the argies started getting a bit lairy then pop down south with a carrier taskforce and ruin there day 

What carrier taskforce? If they attack at the weekend whilst the RAF are busy drinking Stanley dry, we'd be stuffed - bit like if the Russians had attacked Germany. 

Are we to be the worlds next policeman when China calls in all its loans to the USA and they go bankrupt or are we just going to start looking after our own interests for a change 

China can't call in the loans, because the USA can't pay. It's the old story - If you owe the bank £100 and can't pay, then you're in trouble. If you owe the bank £100Million and can't pay, then the bank's in trouble.

Back to the carriers, other then us sticking our noses in the middle east all the time and invading spain and argentina  , why do we need any carriers anyway ?

You've totally missed the point, it's not the Argies, or Chinese, or Russians or Spanish we need to be worried about. It's the French - Please buy the boxed set of Yes Minister and refer to the wise words of Sir Humphery;D