Royal Marines Gucci Rebrand

Polyester

Old-Salt
They are, MH47F
No I should have read his post properly. I edited it when I spotted what he had actually written. I was posted to 7 at Odiham when the new chinooks were being talked about. As I say, I should have read his post correctly.
 

Polyester

Old-Salt
When was the last time the Allies had to fight for Air Superiority?
What has that got to do with anything? We prepare for fighting against peer competitors, not what has existed up until now. That’s a ridiculous position to take.
 
Bollocks - the Speyed Phantoms lost about a hundred knots of theoretical top speed (no armament or pylons, just a measured-mile sprint - also known as "that part of the envelope nobody ever used on operations"), but had better climb and acceleration and more endurance down low (especially useful in the 'GR' bits of the job)

That's what you get for replacing turbojets with turbofans with 15% more thrust and lower SFC at low level - it was an expensive political bung to Rolls-Royce, but the Spey outperformed the J79 in the areas the Phantom was actually seeing use.

But hey, taking an F-4J and giving it 15% more power apparently makes it worse in every way than.. an F-4J. (Same airframe, different engine)
I always understood that the Spey was needed for the extra grunt on account of dinky UK carriers as for the loss of Top end fitting the larger Diameter Speys* that should have been obvious after all
What happens if you Spay a bitch ==It gets fat in the arse and slows down
Ergo What happens if you spey a phantom.......

*UK rather likes naming engines after rivers Conway, Dart, tyne, trent, spey Adour** nene etc

I do so look forward to the day the captain announces "Today our aircraft is powered by rolls Royce test engines"

**Being a joint engine with les grenouilles
 

Jasenite

Clanker
Rather than rebranding the Marines, I think it would be more than appropriate to disband them, the SBS and the Para Battalions.

Hereford can deal with all the "difficult and sensitive" military Ops.

Why triplicate resources when there is absolutely no need?
 

Cyberhacker

Old-Salt
You have it written into the contract that if the bins blow over at 8pm on a Saturday night, the contractor comes in to sort it out?
I'm not sure what piss-poor bins you have, but ours do not just blow over.

Having crap bins, so you can abuse your juniors is poor management, IMHO.
 
Rather than rebranding the Marines, I think it would be more than appropriate to disband them, the SBS and the Para Battalions.

Hereford can deal with all the "difficult and sensitive" military Ops.

Why triplicate resources when there is absolutely no need?
Thanks for that...
 
I'm not sure what piss-poor bins you have, but ours do not just blow over.

Having crap bins, so you can abuse your juniors is poor management, IMHO.
Should have just bought of the shelf US bins -taking old bins & replacing the lid and wheels with new ones was doomed to failure
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
bit of a bugger the SU-27 had been in front line service with the PVO by the time the first production Typhoon wunderwaffe took to the skies.

And yet again, try not to make a virtue out of its lateness, it first was a twinkle in the RAFs eye in 1972.

it only morphed into a full on air superiority fighter in the late 80’s because the Tornado ADV was so late and proved to be rather a lot crap and hopeless against the newly emerging Russian Teenski Fighters.
Bollocks, frankly.

All the way back through ACA/EAP, call it what you will, the aim was to have a fighter.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Yes Air To Air Combat Bloody Well Has Been In Steep Decline Since WW-ll!

It is a fact that WW-l Pilots in their wood and canvas aircraft shot down far more enemy aircraft than the Fast Jet Pilots of post WW-ll. (Compare Richthofen' 80 Victories with the 17 Victories of that Israeli Fighter Ace). The U.S. has not had a double-figure Fighter Ace since Korea, and in Vietnam only a few Pilots/R.I.O.s made Ace status.
You could make the same point about land warfare being in sharp decline, or naval warfare.

You're comparing global war with the regional and smaller wars since. You're comparing rather larger aircraft fleets with modern fleets. How many modern air forces could mount a 1,000-bomber raid today?

The numbers do not reflect the continuing need, nor the continuing development of capabilities, nor the number of combat aircraft - there are far fewer around today because, hey, for instance, a modern-day Typhoon costs rather more than a Spitfire even in comparative terms.

None of that describes a situation of 'decline'.

Trust me, if a peer-to-peer conflict kicked off you'd see the numbers racking up pretty sharpish - frighteningly so, probably. Some of the 'just enough' fleet numbers might prove a little embarrassing. You probably wouldn't see a personal score to match von Richthofen's, though (where 'probably' = 'definitely').
 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
Bollocks, frankly.

All the way back through ACA/EAP, call it what you will, the aim was to have a fighter.
No, no, ACA/EAP was only ever meant to be a replacement for Hawk and Jaguar. But the USAF offered us eleventy thousand F-15s for free, and to stop the RAF from having them, Typhoon was turned into a "fighter".

(Same as HMS Queen Elizabeth was only scoped as the replacement Gosport ferry, until the US Navy said they'd pay us to take a dozen of their spare Nimitz-class CVNs off their hands)

It's really easy having opinions once you no longer have to maintain even tenuous connections to reality...
 

Mufulira

War Hero
I know zero about weapon systems. What’s the advantage of this C8 over the standard SA80?
IIRC the C8 is the Canadian made version of "M16" and its ever so nice and definitely NOT cheap --- so the queue forms now as only expensive pieces of kit allowed.
 
When I see articles like that ( most on the site, and that of the Wavell Room ) I really do despair.

All characterised by reliance on jargon, superfluous footnoting, seemingly endless sentences and precious little self-awareness or clarity of thought.

The sites are intended to parade the idea that the forces, far from being officered by the likes of General Melchett and Lieutenant George, are actually vibrant intellectual communities.

Unfortunately, they come across as the equivalent of an A Level student cramming at the last minute to meet an essay submission deadline, or bum-snorkling SO3s in a hurry to impress their 2RO.

Suffice to say, the link isn't evidence that the RM moves are actually evidence of a well-thought out plan rather than short term politicking.
 
I'm not sure what piss-poor bins you have, but ours do not just blow over.

Having crap bins, so you can abuse your juniors is poor management, IMHO.
Its was an example I didn't realise as well as everyone having a regular hours only job, that every single camp also had great bins.
 

Mölders 1

Old-Salt
You could make the same point about land warfare being in sharp decline, or naval warfare.

You're comparing global war with the regional and smaller wars since. You're comparing rather larger aircraft fleets with modern fleets. How many modern air forces could mount a 1,000-bomber raid today?

The numbers do not reflect the continuing need, nor the continuing development of capabilities, nor the number of combat aircraft - there are far fewer around today because, hey, for instance, a modern-day Typhoon costs rather more than a Spitfire even in comparative terms.

None of that describes a situation of 'decline'.

Trust me, if a peer-to-peer conflict kicked off you'd see the numbers racking up pretty sharpish - frighteningly so, probably. Some of the 'just enough' fleet numbers might prove a little embarrassing. You probably wouldn't see a personal score to match von Richthofen's, though (where 'probably' = 'definitely').
Alright, that's good enough for me.
 
But who is doing Pte Bloggs' day-job while he's stagging on at the gate?

I never quite understand the logic of having an orbat (or MTOE for the septics) which is cut to the bone, then we start overloading those posts with additional duties... and when the time comes to deploy, first you have to form a rear-party - because that rear party is not a formed part of the orbat/TOE.

How often can a unit deploy at 100% actual strength, never mind paper strength?
His peers are doing his day job like what until quite recently was standard.
You can get the MPGS to stag on instead but yet again they want money
 

Buddy!

War Hero
When I see articles like that ( most on the site, and that of the Wavell Room ) I really do despair.

All characterised by reliance on jargon, superfluous footnoting, seemingly endless sentences and precious little self-awareness or clarity of thought.

The sites are intended to parade the idea that the forces, far from being officered by the likes of General Melchett and Lieutenant George, are actually vibrant intellectual communities.

Unfortunately, they come across as the equivalent of an A Level student cramming at the last minute to meet an essay submission deadline, or bum-snorkling SO3s in a hurry to impress their 2RO.

Suffice to say, the link isn't evidence that the RM moves are actually evidence of a well-thought out plan rather than short term politicking.
Accurate assessment IMO!
 

Cyberhacker

Old-Salt
His peers are doing his day job like what until quite recently was standard.
You can get the MPGS to stag on instead but yet again they want money
Ah, the old "we've always done it this way" ripost.

The MPGS will want paying, yes... but it means that Pte Bloggs can do what he's paid to do.
 
Top