Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Don't buy second hand submarines from the Brits if you can help it!

Comments

  • #2
    OS119
    Registered Users Posts: 2,518 ✭✭✭OS119


    Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »
    Canada learnt that lesson the hard way. Its got so embarrassing now that a British MP has raised the issue in the House of Commons.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/02/27/submarines-2030.html


    http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/sub-support-contract-creating-canadian-controversy-04563/

    the slight problem with the headline is that the RN operated these very subs trouble free for 4 years - apart from a design fault that required a re-build around the torpedo tubes - as they entered service. one of the boats spent 6 months away from the UK on deployments and exercises. not bad for an SSK.

    now, it could be that they were built with timebombs in them, or that the Canadians have fcuked up royally in operating them.

    which do you think is the most likely?


  • #3
    Dogwatch
    Registered Users Posts: 5,553 ✭✭✭Dogwatch


    Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »
    Canada learnt that lesson the hard way. Its got so embarrassing now that a British MP has raised the issue in the House of Commons.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/02/27/submarines-2030.html


    http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/sub-support-contract-creating-canadian-controversy-04563/


    Like all used military equipment, there are no guarantees.

    The Canadians bought them knowing the state they were in so why blame the British.


  • #4
    johngalway
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,271 ✭✭✭✭johngalway


    Rather buy a British submarine than a Russian submarine any day. Unfortunately for both countries I am up to my quota of submarines at the moment.


  • #5
    tac foley
    Registered Users Posts: 5,504 ✭✭✭tac foley


    There are five better-working submarines in the water features in the West Edmonton Shopping Mall.

    tac


  • #6
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    O
    OS119 wrote: »
    the slight problem with the headline is that the RN operated these very subs trouble free for 4 years - apart from a design fault that required a re-build around the torpedo tubes - as they entered service. one of the boats spent 6 months away from the UK on deployments and exercises. not bad for an SSK.

    now, it could be that they were built with timebombs in them, or that the Canadians have fcuked up royally in operating them.

    which do you think is the most likely?

    Or it could be part of a plan to sell the Canadians dodgey military equipment so that Britain can invade and steal all their oil?


  • Advertisement
Advertisement