alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Are they really as crap as the Guardian claims ? http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/nov/15/hms-astute-submarine-slow-leaky-rusty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 (edited) No where near Points I would like to see the point of a carrier travelling at 30 knots. If so, it would never be in an operational posture and would not require SM protection. It would have the screening of warships An SM travelling at 30 knots it pretty useless. That would go for every single SM in the world As for leads and gauges. Pretty minor problems for the 1st of a class too. It would have happened to HMS Vanguard and HMS Trafalgar. Also, we have not built an attack sun for years before Astute and this class contains many advanced technologies It is not perfect and some parts are ready out of date. But that article is pretty funny Edited 16 November, 2012 by Thedelldays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyo-Saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 That's that thread done then. More exciting adventures from under the sea this time week folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 That's that thread done then. More exciting adventures from under the sea this time week folks. Indeed, I should imagine that a different paper with a different political leaning would make astute out to be utterly amazaballs!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyo-Saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Nice editing there Delldays, giving a full answer is certainly more informatative but not nearly as funny as the origional "nowhere near". Btw if we have anymore questions for you can we use the hash tag #Askdelldays on twitter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 I would rather bring back "ask Adrian's" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyo-Saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 There have been very few moments when I have actually Lol'd for real when reading this forum but your origional answer had me. I do wish you had kept it and left it there. Just the thought of alpine's sad little face looking at it like a disappointed kid on Xmas day is still funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 16 November, 2012 No where near Points I would like to see the point of a carrier travelling at 30 knots. If so, it would never be in an operational posture and would not require SM protection. It would have the screening of warships An SM travelling at 30 knots it pretty useless. That would go for every single SM in the world As for leads and gauges. Pretty minor problems for the 1st of a class too. It would have happened to HMS Vanguard and HMS Trafalgar. Also, we have not built an attack sun for years before Astute and this class contains many advanced technologies It is not perfect and some parts are ready out of date. But that article is pretty funny Does the 30kts requirement stem from the early day of the carrier program when it was not yet clear if they would be CATOBAR ? Such carriers need to go at full-pelt into the wind to get the planes up in the air. Still I would find it an odd notion that a sub would keep pace with a carrier in the middle of launch operations. Nevertheless, not sure I like the idea of new subs being slower than the old subs they are replacing, and the whole idea of mating Vanguard reactors to Trafalgar turbines on a new class of sub does sound sloppy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 16 November, 2012 (edited) There have been very few moments when I have actually Lol'd for real when reading this forum but your origional answer had me. I do wish you had kept it and left it there. Just the thought of alpine's sad little face looking at it like a disappointed kid on Xmas day is still funny. You have some issues, it seems. My latest sad little stalker. Better luck than your predecessors. Edited 16 November, 2012 by alpine_saint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 If you think a T class goes around at 30 knots You would be hugely mistaken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 16 November, 2012 If you think a T class goes around at 30 knots You would be hugely mistaken Are we talking operationally or capability ? Wikipedia claims a Trafalgar is capable of 32kts submerged. Seems from the release bumpf about Ambush that Astute subs are limping along at 25Kts. That doesnt sound like progress to me. Yes, there may not be many operational scenarios where max speed is required (modern torpedos are up to 45-50kts, so there is sod-all chance of out-running one in either case), since stealth is the key to operational capability, but in an emergency such as a crash surface ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 There are no operational scenarios where 30 knots is required A sub does not limp around at 25 knots It just does not happen Ships also very rarely, if ever do it because of fuel consumption Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 No where near Points I would like to see the point of a carrier travelling at 30 knots. If so, it would never be in an operational posture and would not require SM protection. It would have the screening of warships An SM travelling at 30 knots it pretty useless. That would go for every single SM in the world As for leads and gauges. Pretty minor problems for the 1st of a class too. It would have happened to HMS Vanguard and HMS Trafalgar. Also, we have not built an attack sun for years before Astute and this class contains many advanced technologies It is not perfect and some parts are ready out of date. But that article is pretty funny Is there plenty of storage storage space in the kitchens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 If any piece of important defence equipment doesn't perform to the specification set for it, then that is a problem. If that piece of equipment employs a nuclear reactor, and it subsequently turns out that this safety critical component has been shoddily made, than that's more than a problem - that's damn right alarming. One can only hope the concerns raised in this story have been exaggerated. One also hopes that the costs involved in correcting any design and construction flaws are carried by BAE for once, not the long suffering tax payer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 16 November, 2012 There are no operational scenarios where 30 knots is required A sub does not limp around at 25 knots It just does not happen Ships also very rarely, if ever do it because of fuel consumption What fuel ? Astutes are supposed to be fuelled sufficiently for their lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Is there plenty of storage storage space in the kitchens? I'd be more worried about the comments about there not being enough storage space for the crew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 What fuel ? Astutes are supposed to be fuelled sufficiently for their lifetime. I'm talking about ships Subs do not limp at 25 knots. So have no idea what you are saying there And ships rarely go to 30 knots due to fuel consumption... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 I'm talking about ships Subs do not limp at 25 knots. So have no idea what you are saying there And ships rarely go to 30 knots due to fuel consumption... What speed do they go Jamie? Is it like the hunt for Red October? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 What speed do they go Jamie? Is it like the hunt for Red October? You'd be surprised Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirking_Saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 You have some issues, it seems. My latest sad little stalker. Better luck than your predecessors. If you took any offence to that you really are a precious little flower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 16 November, 2012 I'm talking about ships Subs do not limp at 25 knots. So have no idea what you are saying there And ships rarely go to 30 knots due to fuel consumption... I am beginning to wonder if you know what you are talking about. If a ships reactor and turbines are mis-matched, so that the performance of one is being unexpectedly restricted by the other, I call that a text-book definition of "limping". Again, Astutes are designed to not need refuelling during their lifetime. So WTF are you talking about need to restrict fuel consumption ? Does the Astute class sub reach its design criteria for top speed or not ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 You do realise ships don't have reactors don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 16 November, 2012 What speed do they go Jamie? Is it like the hunt for Red October? Under 10kts when on station/patrol, I suspect, in order to make them silent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 16 November, 2012 You do realise ships don't have reactors don't you? OK, so you tell me what speed is required by the US carriers in order to get aircraft like Super Hornets into the air then. Its a well known fact that carriers turn into the wind and hit top speed in order to get as much lift as possible for the aircraft and reduce their take-off fuel consumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 OK, so you tell me what speed is required by the US carriers in order to get aircraft like Super Hornets into the air then. Its a well known fact that carriers turn into the wind and hit top speed in order to get as much lift as possible for the aircraft and reduce their take-off fuel consumption. Could give a fuk about US carriers Just saying rarely do RN ships go to 30 knots because of fuel consumption And an SM doing 25 knots is far from limping around Happy to help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Could give a fuk about US carriers Just saying rarely do RN ships go to 30 knots because of fuel consumption And an SM doing 25 knots is far from limping around Happy to help Trafalgars - 32kts top speed Astutes - Less than 29kts design target top speed. Progress or "limping" ? I know which one I would describe it as. As for your stupid goal-post moving comment about the carriers, well up until a few months ago we were back on CATOBAR designs with F-35Cs, and the QE carriers were originally supposed to be re-configurable so I asked the perfectly reasonable question as to whether launch speed might have been design factor for Astutes, if they really were to provide escort duty. But as usual you assume that arrogant patronising air like you are talking to a clueless child and ruin what might have been an interesting discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Ok. The stats on wiki are definitely 100% accurate You definitely know more than me on this subject Definitely Edit. Pleas tell me what use is an SM is doing 30 knots.... Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Alpine you clearly love stoking the fires of hatred towards you. Tokyo is not a stalker but thats a term you use quite frequently As for the hub of the thread, I think dell days knows a lot more about subs than the guardian does and certainly more knowledge than you have accrued from the observor book on submarines for boys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Alpine you clearly love stoking the fires of hatred towards you. Tokyo is not a stalker but thats a term you use quite frequently As for the hub of the thread, I think dell days knows a lot more about subs than the guardian does and certainly more knowledge than you have accrued from the observor book on submarines for boys I am not sure he does any more, outside of the galley at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 I am not sure he does any more, outside of the galley at least. Brilliant Go on, tell me what use it is at 30 knots Seeing as that speed is so important If you think our ships go round the world at 30 knots (if that is possible) then you are massively mistaken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Brilliant Go on, tell me what use it is at 30 knots Seeing as that speed is so important If you think our ships go round the world at 30 knots (if that is possible) then you are massively mistaken I gave one example already and you ignored it. If you dont like digs, try responding in a normal adult manner and without the patronising air. You changed the subject from the subs to ships, and I tried to ask you about a scenario which, though now currently unlikely, may have been in the design thinking. If there are no scenarios for high speed in subs, why are American and Russian subs capable of higher speeds than ours ? I know the reasons for not going fast, such as radiated noise and stripping the anechoic tiles from the hull. But emergencies still occur (and seemed to have happened often in the last 10-15 years) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 I know the reasons for not going fast, such as radiated noise and stripping the anechoic tiles from the hull. But emergencies still occur (and seemed to have happened often in the last 10-15 years) I.e. sometimes they is having to outrun a randy Blue Whale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Indeed, I should imagine that a different paper with a different political leaning would make astute out to be utterly amazaballs!! Did you know that "amazeballs" was seeded into the script of Skins specifically so the writers could see what sort of moron would actually use it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notnowcato Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Did you know that "amazeballs" was seeded into the script of Skins specifically so the writers could see what sort of moron would actually use it? There is a sort of moron? This interests me greatly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 (edited) I gave one example already and you ignored it. If you dont like digs, try responding in a normal adult manner and without the patronising air. You changed the subject from the subs to ships, and I tried to ask you about a scenario which, though now currently unlikely, may have been in the design thinking. If there are no scenarios for high speed in subs, why are American and Russian subs capable of higher speeds than ours ? I know the reasons for not going fast, such as radiated noise and stripping the anechoic tiles from the hull. But emergencies still occur (and seemed to have happened often in the last 10-15 years) we have some of the quietest subs in the world..much of that is the tiles on the subs...the yanks and the russians or many (if any) others dont employ the same sound proofing as us...our method, infact slow the subs down at high speeds.... our subs are generally quieter than the yank subs...considering the money they spend is remarkable..but theirs are slightly quicker.. dont forget, their area of operations are 1000's of miles from their bases.....they have vast oceans to get through quickly...like the atlantic and pacific. no matter how quick they can go (only a 3-5 knots quicker than ours)...it is all irrelevant at high speeds..they are simply pretty useless Edited 16 November, 2012 by Thedelldays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 There is a sort of moron? This interests me greatly. Of course there are. Don't you remember the comedy classic "morons from outer space". The moron sector has grown rapidly in the last 20 years. Some sub-classification is mandated, a bit like the way eskimos have 80 words for "snow". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyo-Saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 You have some issues, it seems. My latest sad little stalker. Better luck than your predecessors. Sorry to disappoint Alps but you are nowhere near interesting enough for me to stalk. All those negative trolling posts on all things saints are just far too obvious for me and besides my time is all but taken up memorising information about Turkish and keeping bearsy off the register. I would suggest you could become some kind of forum rival, a Holmes to my Moriarty but SB already has that role and I don't think your banter will be anywhere near as eloquent as Beltch or as funny as spudders. Besides, I know as soon as you get anything good back at you, you'll be whinging like a little girl and hitting the complaint button faster than you hit the cakes (I bet you complain about this reply ) It sounds like your previous stalkers have got bored and left though, you've even turned on delldays here despite the fact he edited his first reply to save you from embarrassment and stole my lols. Forgive me a little schadenfreude my Teutonic forum friend, for I was just amused at the thought of you sitting there, up in your eagles nest, building your latest model sub and thinking "I wonder what Jamie thinks of this sub? I won't pm him, I'll start a new thread." Delldays, fresh back from serving up 57 full English breakfasts is thinking, "the last thing I want to talk about is subs", he reads your thread and thinks "oh feking hell, I can't just write 'whatever' Alps will be p!ssed, I know, I will put 'no where near', that will do... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Sorry to disappoint Alps but you are nowhere near interesting enough for me to stalk. All those negative trolling posts on all things saints are just far too obvious for me and besides my time is all but taken up memorising information about Turkish and keeping bearsy off the register. I would suggest you could become some kind of forum rival, a Holmes to my Moriarty but SB already has that role and I don't think your banter will be anywhere near as eloquent as Beltch or as funny as spudders. Besides, I know as soon as you get anything good back at you, you'll be whinging like a little girl and hitting the complaint button faster than you hit the cakes (I bet you complain about this reply ) It sounds like your previous stalkers have got bored and left though, you've even turned on delldays here despite the fact he edited his first reply to save you from embarrassment and stole my lols. Forgive me a little schadenfreude my Teutonic forum friend, for I was just amused at the thought of you sitting there, up in your eagles nest, building your latest model sub and thinking "I wonder what Jamie thinks of this sub? I won't pm him, I'll start a new thread." Delldays, fresh back from serving up 57 full English breakfasts is thinking, "the last thing I want to talk about is subs", he reads your thread and thinks "oh feking hell, I can't just write 'whatever' Alps will be p!ssed, I know, I will put 'no where near', that will do... You are Bearsy in disguise, arent you ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Sorry to disappoint Alps but you are nowhere near interesting enough for me to stalk. All those negative trolling posts on all things saints are just far too obvious for me and besides my time is all but taken up memorising information about Turkish and keeping bearsy off the register. I would suggest you could become some kind of forum rival, a Holmes to my Moriarty but SB already has that role and I don't think your banter will be anywhere near as eloquent as Beltch or as funny as spudders. Besides, I know as soon as you get anything good back at you, you'll be whinging like a little girl and hitting the complaint button faster than you hit the cakes (I bet you complain about this reply ) It sounds like your previous stalkers have got bored and left though, you've even turned on delldays here despite the fact he edited his first reply to save you from embarrassment and stole my lols. Forgive me a little schadenfreude my Teutonic forum friend, for I was just amused at the thought of you sitting there, up in your eagles nest, building your latest model sub and thinking "I wonder what Jamie thinks of this sub? I won't pm him, I'll start a new thread." Delldays, fresh back from serving up 57 full English breakfasts is thinking, "the last thing I want to talk about is subs", he reads your thread and thinks "oh feking hell, I can't just write 'whatever' Alps will be p!ssed, I know, I will put 'no where near', that will do... I certainly wouldn't consider myself an Alps stalker, but I've had my run ins with him and am amuzed [sic] that the seems to presenting himself as an indefatigable master of debate! Alps, I've seen you utterly trounced on here time and time again. I can well imagine that you might believe that your strategy of just going on and on might be a winner, but Tokes is right; at least with me. I get bored. If I think I've pretty much made my point, why make it again just because someone is calling me names or whatever? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyo-Saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 I certainly wouldn't consider myself an Alps stalker, but I've had my run ins with him and am amuzed [sic] that the seems to presenting himself as an indefatigable master of debate! Alps, I've seen you utterly trounced on here time and time again. I can well imagine that you might believe that your strategy of just going on and on might be a winner, but Tokes is right; at least with me. I get bored. If I think I've pretty much made my point, why make it again just because someone is calling me names or whatever? **** off scouser! I'm stalking him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 16 November, 2012 I certainly wouldn't consider myself an Alps stalker, but I've had my run ins with him and am amuzed [sic] that the seems to presenting himself as an indefatigable master of debate! Alps, I've seen you utterly trounced on here time and time again. I can well imagine that you might believe that your strategy of just going on and on might be a winner, but Tokes is right; at least with me. I get bored. If I think I've pretty much made my point, why make it again just because someone is calling me names or whatever? How can an exchange of opinions end in a "trouncing" ? What utter b*ll*cks. Do you see an exchange of views as a battle to be won ? Weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notnowcato Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Of course there are. Don't you remember the comedy classic "morons from outer space". The moron sector has grown rapidly in the last 20 years. Some sub-classification is mandated, a bit like the way eskimos have 80 words for "snow". Lots of food for thought here. Do you consider the moron sector to have grown or has the wonderful world wide web given the moron and the sub-morons a platform to show themselves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notnowcato Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 How can an exchange of opinions end in a "trouncing" ? What utter b*ll*cks. Do you see an exchange of views as a battle to be won ? Weird. *CHOMP* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 How can an exchange of opinions end in a "trouncing" ? What utter b*ll*cks. Do you see an exchange of views as a battle to be won ? Weird. Easily. Winston Churchill once said "you're a master of the unsaid word, and a slave to everything you've uttered", or something like that. Another old maxim; better to be silent and suspected of being a fool rather than speak up and confirm it. People are often unwittingly self-defeating in their exchange of views, Alps. One liners or character assassinations may make you feel better, but what it says to anyone with a brain is that "you have nothing to say". Now, I can't lay that claim at your feet exclusively, no more than Chief Name Caller Alps can claim that he doesn't see these exchanges as battles. You clearly do, or you wouldn't spend as much time trying to unsuccessfully push people into the ground. FWIW, I think you're a decent writer who is more than capable of getting his point across. However, I do have trouble reconciling your perpetual b!tching about the UK with your inability to live here and the oft-repeated smears that left-wingers don't love their country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Don't know much about subs so I'm not sure who to side with in this epic battle of wills. Of course if I knew that one of you had years of experience as Submariner in the Royal Navy I'd be more inclined to believe you..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Lots of food for thought here. Do you consider the moron sector to have grown or has the wonderful world wide web given the moron and the sub-morons a platform to show themselves? The Internet certainly hasn't helped. Back in the old days, the moron population congregated on the basis of vicinity. e.g. it wasn't easy for the moron of Manchester to teach new tricks to the morons of Memphis. Such restrictions have now been completely lifted. They're now coming together, like a dim-witted Borg Collective, to discuss Jersey Shore and say "amazeballs". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Author Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Don't know much about subs so I'm not sure who to side with in this epic battle of wills. Of course if I knew that one of you had years of experience as Submariner in the Royal Navy I'd be more inclined to believe you..... Erm, I am not sure there has actually been a "I'm right, you are wrong" discussion here. I started the thread and asked about the veractiy of the Guardian article, was told it was b*ll*cks in what I considered was a snooty manner, but am not convinced about the reasons given as to why it is b*ll*cks. And remain so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyo-Saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Bang! Bang! you're dead Pap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 Bang! Bang! you're dead Pap. Why are we even talking about Astute class submarines? Surely the more pressing issue is that we now have proof that giants exist. Look at the size of that bloke compared to (what I assume to be) full size submarines! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyo-Saint Posted 16 November, 2012 Share Posted 16 November, 2012 You obviously know very little about subs Paps, they are advanced class miniatures. We make them smaller than the yanks do to make them harder to spot. They may only fire toothpicks but that is all you need to sink a Russian dingy or make the Italians change sides in a major conflict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now