The decommissioning of the old Britannia was a nasty, foolish, spiteful piece of class warfare that deprived the nation of a great asset. Replacing it would go a long way toward not only providing Her Majesty with a proper jubilee gift, but also to revive Britain's standing in the world. Not to mention that the last Britannia also doubled as a hospital ship in time of war, so she had more than diplomatic or trade duties to perform.
In fact, I'd go a step further and use the Royal Family to justify other initiatives. For example, no one questions the American Secret Service detail and the president's tank-like limousine. What about an elite fighter squadron tasked with escorting the Queen when she flies (sort of like a Red Arrows with live ammo) and similar details to match whatever transport she's using at the moment? Ostensibly, it would be a royal security detail, but it's real purpose would be to maintain an elite fighting force available in times of emergency. It would be a wonderful way of protecting areas of the defence budget by making them "prestige" items that dare not be touched without insulting the nation and by making them practical rather than ceremonial guards we'd be putting a 21st century face on the honour guards that surround Her Majesty at Buck House et al.
5 comments:
David, we think alike. I've long thought that the best way to ensure the continued existence, and more importantly independence from trendy politics, of the SAS, SBS, etc., would be to attach them to the Coldstream Guard.
While we're at it, attaching 1st RTR to the Household Cavalry isn't a bad idea either. But please- either give them M1A3s, or Leopard 2A6Ms, or at least go ahead with the proposal to yank the rifled 120 on the Challenger 2 and replace it with an M256 smoothbore Rhinemetall.
Tankers prefer guns that shoot where they're pointed, as a general rule.
cheers
eon
Eon;
The British army will almost certainly stick with rifled cannon due to their ability to fire HESH rounds, which have a very useful anti-fortification effect in addition to their anti-armour capability.
As for shooting straight, I've never heard of British tankers being less accurate than their American and German counterparts, but I haven't made a study of it.
As to the other suggestion, I wonder whether the queen would like a trident missile submarine, just in case someone with a rowboat and a grudge gets too near her new yacht...
Cthel;
Well, the U.S. Navy is taking the nuclear aircraft carrier Enterprise out of service this November, as it has reached its 50-year mark.
Considering that the first U.S.S. Enterprise was a sloop of war we, er, "appropriated" from His Majesty's Navy in 1778, I wonder if Her Majesty's Navy might like having one back- just as a vacation ship for Her Majesty?
Complete with an air group, just to make sure nobody disturbs her while she is relaxing. Or making a diplomatic call.
There's a reason CVANs are defined as "90,000 Tons of Diplomacy". And I think the Royal Navy deserves to be able to make the same sort of statement, if you take my meaning.
As for the 120, British tankers are quite accurate. It's the main gun on the Challenger that's not up to it- according to the gunners. BTW, you can fire HEP (aka HESH, Squash-Head, or "Wallbuster", to use Burney's original name) from a smoothbore gun, too; just use a fin-stabilized version.
HEAT (hollow-charge) works better through a smoothbore, as the lack of spin reduces dispersion of the "jet". Flechette (Beehive) anti-personnel works better, too, again due to lack of spin reducing dispersion; that's why shotguns aren't rifled, either.
cheers
eon
Eon;
Unfortunately, I suspect returning the name "Enterprise" to Britain would do something awkward to the continuity of Star Trek. Mind you, that might not be a bad thing...
As for the 120, I was under the impression that fin-stabilisation didn't work very well for HESH rounds, but I defer to your knowledge on the matter. As for re-gunning the challenger, it will probably end up being delayed (due to the economy/spending priorities/ etc) so long it'll be replaced with a railgun (which at least we're making decent progress in weaponising)
Cthel;
Star Trek has continuity left?
News to me- and I'm an OT (Original Trekkie).
;-)
As for railguns, I'm all for it. Hogg's Second Law- The best way to kill a tank- or anything else that needs killing- is to hit it as hard as possible as far away as possible.
BTW, Hogg's First Law is "Just because you're getting ready to attack, there's no law that prevents the other fellow from having a go at you first." As Stalin found out on 22 June 1941.
cheers
eon
Post a Comment