Comments by "David Houseman" (@davidhouseman4328) on "BFBS Forces News" channel.

  1. Most wars end in negotiation, total victory is rare.
    4
  2. This is a British development, MDBA is as much British as French, head office location means jack. Some MDBA projects are multinational but CAMM is a specifically British project.
    4
  3. Justifying them is just reality. This video points put the practical value not moral choice. Ultimately a country defending itself will use what it has available, especially when civilians are dieing daily. Just damning there use is flawed, providing sufficient alternative is a practical step.
    4
  4. It's not a stop gap, Tempest will fill a different role.
    4
  5.  @koolyman  more in the vein of the Typhoon, with a stronger air to air focus. Also obviously not STOVL, but not strengthen for catapults either.
    4
  6. Kinzhal is basically just a short range ballistic missile, just air launched. Defences exist for that type, though of course they aren't infallible. Getting Zircon working well will more of an issue. Also unless it nuclear tipped, one is unlikely to sink a carrier.
    4
  7. Not a lot at the moment but the good thing is they can works as eyes directing Typhoons missiles.
    4
  8.  @uioplkhj  we went without invitation, that's not why we're there now.
    4
  9. B52 is very much an exception but it's is still a ship of theseus with very little of the original. Type 23 replace is a combination of technological progress a la type 26 and economics a la type 31. Upgrades, cost of running, crew numbers, hours at sea will mean you get to a point when new is cheaper than old.
    4
  10. We've stopped buying Typhoons because we are buying F35s. They seem the more urgent need?
    4
  11. They can, but subs, frigates and helicopters will be competing to protect it. Like most things it's a constant armed race.
    4
  12.  @ThatCarGuy  it's not a back up to long range SAMs, it's a back up to jets.
    4
  13. Do you think we should fight fair?
    4
  14. All ships are she
    4
  15. Who's starting a war? NATO isn't going to attack Russia.
    4
  16.  @phuktard  most of the world was controlled by other powers for large chunks of time. A history of oppression doesn't say anything about the present. Estonia is the country of Estonians. They don't even have a Slavic language. Russia has no claim.
    4
  17. We haven't always done, see the F4 flown from previous carriers. But the F35 is a joint project, we build 15% of each. Net that's about 3x the about we will buy. The F35 is good for British aviation.
    4
  18. I don't think NATO has, I mean Turkey has stopped any Russian warships entering from the med for example.
    4
  19. Jim Ramsey Its the step between ordered and haven't got a clue how many. Would be changeable in the future but probably only from a SDSR.
    4
  20. That's it name, nowt to do with Brexit.
    4
  21. How?
    4
  22. Doesn't make sense to go alone, challenger 3 bridges the gap others like Germany or the US are looking for a new design.
    4
  23. No but it's not a straight forward partnership. For example with Sweden we are together on systems that might be in it rather than the overall jet. Italy is the other country current collaborating.
    4
  24. So she can only work with the US, Italy, Japan and South Korea rather than only with the US and France if it used catapults?
    4
  25. Hundreds of Europeans have died in Afganistan fighting on the USs behalf. The only time article 5 has been invoked.
    4
  26. Clearly explained.
    4
  27. A capable military allows you to decide on peace. Politicians decide how to use it.
    4
  28. To inform the British public. It the kind of thing any half baked any agency could find out with ease so no loss in secrecy.
    4
  29. They don't need the UKs help, but they certainly want it. Extra assets are extra assets.
    4
  30.  @theylied1776  lol. WW2. Precision bombing.
    4
  31. Yeah, modern tech and a highly trained force, classic liability.
    4
  32. Russia has lot more conscripts that the UK but are no threat. China is a powerhouse in the making. Russia just another regional power.
    4
  33.  @hs342  Do you want a statement like Putin saying he wasn't going to invade?
    4
  34. Good image.
    4
  35. It's been in active service for years?
    4
  36.  @FallenPhoenix86  you don't pay for them, they are paid from the crown estate.
    4
  37. A US Sec-Gen would reinforce views that NATO is just an extension of US policy. As it not really a power position, perception is an important part of the role. Canada/Belgium is likely more of chance/desire of good candidates as I believe they work from Brussels more local people are more likely to want the job.
    4
  38.  @bigboots8785  Some Russian troops are well trained and equipped, others are conscripts with Soviet gear.
    4
  39. Not that much money is actually spent on NATO and where it is it's mostly where collective operations help, like a combined AWACs fleet rather that multiple overlapping ones. Money is instead spent on national armed forces. As well as collective defence which may be more distant since the end of the cold war it also helps with interoperability, which we use in the wars we do fight and helps us benefit from the training methods and tactics of others.
    4
  40. Denis Nyokabi it's your choice but it would seem better to get the benefits of both east and west.
    4
  41.  @BillCameronWC  Yep, I heard reports that one of the big changes pilots converting to F35 are having is getting used to how much information is available.
    4
  42.  @Mmjk_12  outdated is different to less capable. The advanced nature of HMS QE is best illustrated by how few crew is needed for it to operate due to automation. If you want to compare a US carrier to a UK one you need to stack up 2 or 3 UK carriers for comparable purchase and operating costs. US may then still have some edges it looses a lot in flexibility.
    4
  43. I'd take well trained with poor equipment over the opposite. But of course we should have both.
    4
  44. Big Lizzy just went to New York and PoW is having well published propelllor issues, not sure how either is in stelath mode?
    4
  45. 623 base driving units and from what it looks like the same number of modules. The flexibility will be from more easily changing already deployed vehicles and being able to maintain each part separately.
    4
  46. Bulletproofcammy it's more important to be able to act quickly, the only time we need numbers is when we're occupying someone else's country.
    4
  47. Trials are normal, militaries are impressed by the F35, over budget is unfortunately how all these projects go, they aren't costed right to begin with.
    4
  48.  @sovietred7371  this is a video about the UK helping Estonia (it's friend down the street).
    4
  49.  @alexanderrose1556  Yeah, Poland would be the battleground, and allies take time to get there.
    4
  50.  @theabstract100  even without Belrus, there's Kaliningrad.
    4