Falkland Islands under threat once more - huge oil reserves in peril

Andy_L

Road_Hog wrote: »

The first sentence, HMS Bulwark is the flag ship. What is the obsession about HMS Ocean?

Thats a very good question, we may be in furious agreement. I think the confusion started when you said "Royal Navy flagship is currently a helicopter carrier" when the Bulwarks aren't helicopter carriers (ie an LPH) whilst HMS Ocean is (as is Illustrious now the Harriers have gone.. if it ever comes back into service).

brit1234

GlynD wrote: »

You can't say which ship the navy commander will fly his flag from. Ocean is an "amphibious assault ship". She was designed to replace Albion & Bulwark and is the largest ship in the navy.

Ocean didn't replace Albion & Bulwark, it was Ocean, Albion & Bulwark that replaced Intrepid and Fearless. All 3 are capable of being the flag ship and have been designed that way. Unlike Fearless and Intrepid they are far better designed with far more room and more importantly a lot bigger doors so troops with their kit can move about. If I remember Ocean was built out of a spare hull from one of our air craft carriers so is the same size Ark Royal, Invincible etc.


HMS Ocean (LPH)


HMS Albion (LPD)


HMS Bulwark (LPD)


HMS Fearless (LPD)


HMS Intrepid (LPD)

Oh there are 3 big problems to Argentina

1. Submarines
2. RAF squadron now based there
3. Far bigger garrison

The argies can't counter HMS Astute, only mad crewman and sand banks are a threat.

GlynD

brit1234 wrote: »

Ocean didn't replace Albion & Bulwark, it was Ocean, Albion & Bulwark that replaced Intrepid and Fearless. All 3 are capable of being the flag ship and have been designed that way. Unlike Fearless and Intrepid they are far better designed with far more room and more importantly a lot bigger doors so troops with their kit can move about. If I remember Ocean was built out of a spare hull from one of our air craft carriers so is the same size Ark Royal, Invincible etc.


HMS Ocean (LPH)


HMS Albion (LPD)


HMS Bulwark (LPD)


HMS Fearless (LPD)


HMS Intrepid (LPD)

Oh there are 3 big problems to Argentina

1. Submarines
2. RAF squadron now based there
3. Far bigger garrison

The argies can't counter HMS Astute, only mad crewman and sand banks are a threat.

Some of the information I provided was obviously wrong. However I stand by my comments that ANY ship can be the flagship. There is more than one meaning for "flagship" however and that is where I think Road Hog et al are going wrong. You can have a "flagship project" and this is why the navy will say that a particular ship is the flagship of the navy. In reality though the flagship is where the senior admiral chooses to fly his flag. (and live and work). In essence what you have said is quite true. Any one of the ships you've quoted is more likely to be chosen as the flagship for a particular operation but not necessarily. The admiral could choose to fly his flag from a minesweeper if he so desires. Highly unlikely I give you but possible.

brit1234

Yes you are right that any ship can be a flagship even a mine layer. Its just Albion, Bulwark and Ocean have purposely designed for command and control in large missions unlike the other ships.

GlynD

brit1234 wrote: »

Yes you are right that any ship can be a flagship even a mine layer. Its just Albion, Bulwark and Ocean have purposely designed for command and control in large missions unlike the other ships.

Thank you. At last, someone with common sense. You've hit the nail right on the head there too by mentioning the command and control facilities on the purpose built ships.

ruggedtoast

All this is very nice but if the Americans decide the Falkland Islands are going to be owned by Argentina with a nominal British tie, then that is what will happen. If Obama gets in for a second term that will become a lot more likely.

GlynD

ruggedtoast wrote: »

All this is very nice but if the Americans decide the Falkland Islands are going to be owned by Argentina with a nominal British tie, then that is what will happen. If Obama gets in for a second term that will become a lot more likely.

You're very wide of the mark. Both the US and the UK are permanent members of the UN Security Council and either can veto any suggestion.

brit1234

ruggedtoast wrote: »

All this is very nice but if the Americans decide the Falkland Islands are going to be owned by Argentina with a nominal British tie, then that is what will happen. If Obama gets in for a second term that will become a lot more likely.

Servilely doubt that, British Oil groups have powerful lobby groups in the US. Plus the US has refused to supply fighters to the Argies. The Argintinian air force has 30 year old fighter jets which were no match for harriers in 1982 let alone probably the best fighter jet in the world the Euro fighter. I think Libya would of really worried the Argentinians with the Euro fighter proving itself.

GlynD

brit1234 wrote: »

Servilely doubt that, British Oil groups have powerful lobby groups in the US. Plus the US has refused to supply fighters to the Argies. The Argintinian air force has 30 year old fighter jets which were no match for harriers in 1982 let alone probably the best fighter jet in the world the Euro fighter. I think Libya would of really worried the Argentinians with the Euro fighter proving itself.

At the risk of sounding pedantic could I point out that the Super Etendards of the Argie Air Force weren't outclassed by our Harriers. They were outflown! "Viffing" was a trick which nobody knew about. On paper the Super Etendards were the better plane.

FTBFun

ruggedtoast wrote: »

All this is very nice but if the Americans decide the Falkland Islands are going to be owned by Argentina with a nominal British tie, then that is what will happen. If Obama gets in for a second term that will become a lot more likely.

Yeah, the US economy is !!!!ed so this is obviously a high priority.

You really seem to be keen on giving the Falklands to Argentina, don't you? It's ok for public sector workers to "put up a fight" but not for the islanders to determine their own sovereignty.