Board logo

標題: 皇家海軍有新玩具??? [打印本頁]
作者: derek_lok    時間: 1-4-2008 17:29     標題: 皇家海軍有新玩具???

海軍新型驅逐艦第二階段測試
(星島) 04月 01日 星期二 03:04PM

英國    海軍新型45型驅逐艦，開始第二階段的測試。據英國報道，海軍的勇敢號驅逐艦，即45型驅逐艦的首艦，已經開始第二階段的海試，包括在蘇格蘭    西海岸的水域進行多項測試，預計將持續五周。這些試驗將專門針對武器系統，雷達和平台性能。據報，45型驅逐艦排水量為7350噸，是世界上最先進的艦艇，它將成為21世紀前半期英國海軍主要防空力量。在第一階段的海試中，果敢號航行了大約4100海里，平均每天使用35立方米的燃料，只添加了一次燃料。

文中的提及的是Type 45嘛!?

作者: MF    時間: 1-4-2008 18:01

type 45都未正式服役
HMS daring下水都成兩年前既事

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Daring_%28D32%29
作者: hmstalent    時間: 1-4-2008 19:03

希望Royal Navy可以再次復興啦
作者: derek_lok    時間: 1-4-2008 19:17

外型上已經 ...........

未知其他資訊
作者: derek_lok    時間: 1-4-2008 19:19

返而我想知新個艘航空母艦搭載F-35B/C 幾時下水
作者: MF    時間: 1-4-2008 19:36

引用:
原帖由 derek_lok 於 1-4-2008 19:19 發表
返而我想知新個艘航空母艦搭載F-35B/C 幾時下水
wikipedia 幫到你

search Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carrier
作者: louise    時間: 1-4-2008 20:45

個外型真系有D........
不過如果可以令到RN再次復興個樣都冇所謂LA
作者: adrianyahk    時間: 1-4-2008 21:09

點解個個都話唔靚...? 我覺得幾型wor!
特別係後面果舊.....唔記得左叫咩 tim...
作者: derek_lok    時間: 1-4-2008 21:27

自從神盾艦一出,,架架船艦到搞到四四方方,,雖然係新趨勢,,作為軍事愛好者的在下覺得.........艦!!始終都係要巨艦大炮先夠型!!!無作用又係第2件事實
作者: auxair    時間: 1-4-2008 22:15

Royal Navy will have two full size carriers (HMS Queen Elizabeth, HMS Prince of Wales) in the next decade - 75,000 tonnes displacement, 951 feet long. The planned carrier air group will boast 35 F-35C Lightning II STOL fighters

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Que ... ss_aircraft_carrier

"Rule, Britannia!"

[ 本帖最後由 auxair 於 1-4-2008 22:17 編輯 ]
作者: MF    時間: 2-4-2008 01:00

晒氣啦 RN冇錢又冇人, 復條毛就有

四四方方係減低radar signature, 多數新艦都係以呢個方向發展, 唔關神盾事
作者: auxair    時間: 2-4-2008 01:24

晒氣啦 RN冇錢又冇人, 復條毛就有

++++

what is this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Que ... ss_aircraft_carrier

復條毛?
作者: 皇家御貓    時間: 2-4-2008 01:27

引用:
原帖由 auxair 於 2-4-2008 01:24 發表
晒氣啦 RN冇錢又冇人, 復條毛就有

++++

what is this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Que ... ss_aircraft_carrier

復條毛?
有裝備都未夠....缺乏人才先係重點....


你睇台灣就知...裝備唔差但根本就無人識得發揮運用....
作者: auxair    時間: 2-4-2008 01:40

Are you putting RN, a true blue water navy with 800 years of history and ROCN on the same level?

ROCAF fought a lot of air battles and even launched the first ever sidewinder missile in anger in history, what sea battles did the ROCN fight?

[ 本帖最後由 auxair 於 2-4-2008 02:07 編輯 ]
作者: jwlchan    時間: 2-4-2008 01:55     標題: 回覆 #14 auxair 的帖子

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_China_Navy#1911_-_1949

好似同大陸打過一兩次, 但衰得好慘.....我做細佬時記憶中睇過

There is not the same level together when you talking about Royal Navy!

[ 本帖最後由 jwlchan 於 1-4-2008 17:58 編輯 ]
作者: MF    時間: 2-4-2008 02:55

引用:
原帖由 auxair 於 2-4-2008 01:24 發表
晒氣啦 RN冇錢又冇人, 復條毛就有

++++

what is this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Que ... ss_aircraft_carrier

復條毛?
i don't deny these are very capable equipments, but new generation of aircraft carrier does not mean it is going to 復興 the royal navy again. even the first sea lord admitted that these ships are designed to integrate with the US navy, so where the hell is the pride if the navy is pseudo subordinate to the US navy?

lets face it, RN has been in steady decline since WWII, main cause is the constraint in government defense budget, but also the steady decline in number of people willing to join the armed forces.  

they plan to have two new CVs, but experience tells that by the time one is almost ready, the second one will be canceled due to budget concerns.
作者: MF    時間: 2-4-2008 02:57

引用:
原帖由 皇家御貓 於 2-4-2008 01:27 發表




有裝備都未夠....缺乏人才先係重點....


你睇台灣就知...裝備唔差但根本就無人識得發揮運用....
ROCN點同RN比.....ROCN用既9成係二手野/次一等貨式
作者: auxair    時間: 2-4-2008 08:53

MF

Now that the Cold War era is gone, except for the PLA Navy and Indian Navy, all navies are now just a shadow of their former glory, even the US Navy.

Comments analytical and fact based wil certainly bring in higher quality discussions and  better than remarks such as  復條毛就有, especially when you are 版主, who should set a good example for the rest to engage in logical and educated discussions.

I wonder what is in the mind of the planners of UK naval strategy - I can imagine how the old "Invincible" class carriers would fit into the scheme of Cold War NATO war plan, taking an ASW role agains Soviet subs, but how would UK Carrier Battle Groups fit into modern US naval strategy?

[ 本帖最後由 auxair 於 2-4-2008 13:57 編輯 ]
作者: MF    時間: 2-4-2008 18:18

引用:
原帖由 auxair 於 2-4-2008 08:53 發表
MF

Now that the Cold War era is gone, except for the PLA Navy and Indian Navy, all navies are now just a shadow of their former glory, even the US Navy.

Comments analytical and fact based w ...
man you need some sense of humour!!!

by the way if i didn't make that comment would this discussion be initiated? look on the bright side!!

i am no expert on naval strategy, i don't know how exactly this is going to integrate with the US navy but the evidence is clear
引用:
Admiral Sir Alan West former First Sea Lord giving evidence in the House of Commons

(for a) deep strike package, we have done …quite detailed calculations and we have come out with the figure of 36 joint strike fighters …that is the thing that has made us arrive at that size of deck and that size of ship, to enable that to happen.

I have talked with the CNO (Chief of Naval Operations) in America. He is very keen for us to get these because he sees us slotting in with his carrier groups. He really wants us to have these, but he wants us to have the same sort of clout as one of their carriers.
I have been living in the UK for the past 8 years, and one thing that I understand of this country very clear is the pace that things are done. The carriers were first proposed in 1998, that has been 10 years and procurement for the steel has just only started. With this way of doing things, how is UK going to 復興? That is why I said 復條毛, of course I am not going to leave it like that, this is just a way of initiating discussions.
作者: jwlchan    時間: 2-4-2008 19:50

其實英國海軍實力真係"條毛咁", 先睇以前福島戰爭, 須要徵用商船始可成行, 英海軍實力, 比以前實在差得遠....."復興"實在談何容易!
又其實我地"廣東人"(多數香港人係)談話直接, 通俗, 用"條毛"形容"No Good"係幾貼切...而且, 在此我地志在清談, 不須太過認真.....
英國人做事比較慢係事實, 但英海軍實力, 我相信"百足之虫", 都好過好多其他國家既!

[ 本帖最後由 jwlchan 於 2-4-2008 13:09 編輯 ]
作者: derek_lok    時間: 2-4-2008 19:53

引用:
原帖由 MF 於 2-4-2008 02:57 發表


ROCN點同RN比.....ROCN用既9成係二手野/次一等貨式
你咁講令在下諗起.........


HMS Illustrious  泊住艘 CVN,,頓時縮水,,成架USMC個d  兩棲攻擊艦(LHD)咁一樣.............

復興!?!?有機會既........|)

[ 本帖最後由 derek_lok 於 2-4-2008 19:54 編輯 ]
作者: qm00    時間: 2-4-2008 21:30

As I remember a year before, there are 80% of sailors in the RN don't know how to swim. Does the situation is the same as before? If this is the case, no matter how upgrade on the naval technology, it still can't bring back the sun for the empire.
作者: jwlchan    時間: 2-4-2008 23:42

There is not a requirement for the members in the Royal Navy know how to swim....as far as I know. However, when I was in the Army we have swimming test each year!



歡迎光臨 CGF (http://wargamehk.com/cgf/) Powered by Discuz! 6.0.0