General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

1IbramGaunt
Binkov's Battlegrounds
comments

Comments by "1IbramGaunt" (@1IbramGaunt) on "Could Argentina take over the Falklands today? (2017)" video.

We Brits have some of the original aircraft we used there still too. The difference? Ours, being nearly 40 years old now, are where they should be- in museums
196
Worth it though. Four modern, powerful jets, two state-of-the-art warships and a company of professional British soldiers. Means total air, land and sea superiority over anything Argentina can realistically send, and without having to keep half the actual proper British armed forces down there just in case
84
@dillonblair6491 kinda a rare thing huh 😂
41
Well you've been 'waiting and watching' for 32 years so far? don't you think you'd better get a move on while there's still a semblance of an Argentina left TO try taking them again?
38
@annyoung7853 an American-originated weapon, not an invention, there's a difference, the Germans are originally responsible for the missile part, that missile's just a development of their work, and the Manhatten Project had considerable British involvement
29
@b678 be fair though, a lot of that bashing is well-deserved
17
@CrazyNikel and yet Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, the Barbary Pirate Wars and the War Of 1812 happened... (Google them)
17
@TomlinsonFiuFiu given we actually didn't lose a single Harrier in air-to-air combat and they shot down EIGHTEEN Argentine jets I think your facts might be a little off there lol, that and the speed of the plane itself doesn't matter much if the missile it's firing goes supersonic
17
@CrazyNikel irrelevant huh? What does that make the countries we created then, like you, arrogant ungrateful self-obsessed peices of shit though you are. Incidentally I hope you ENJOY telling us how irrelevant to you we are via a few small, unimportant things we invented like the computer, world wide web, telephone and television; maybe you could even fly over here to tell us in person sometime using a jet-powered airliner. What can we say except you're welcome 😂
15
@CrazyNikel oh you mean website as in the WORLD WIDE WEB kind of website? without the 'WWW' part this would just be a screen full of code, just endless lines of indeciferable letters and numbers like in the fucking Matrix, turning THAT into THIS is British in origin whether you're prepared to admit it or not, as is for that matter the electronic computer
13
@TMoDDD at least we DID win it and largely without outside help
12
@CrazyNikel Oh and since our Queen's still official head of state in over 14 separate countries and unofficially in dozens more and our money is still stronger than yours Brexit or no Brexit, and our military can still match pretty much anything it'll come up against and then some I kinda call bullshit on that other part you were inferring there too...
12
@TMoDDD so? They didn't though did they
11
We don't this time, not unless Argentina has a really well-hidden REAL military no-one knows about lol, which I doubt somehow; but thanks a lot for the support anyway, both back in '82 and now 🙂
9
Well back in '82 those commanders were all well-trained, combat experienced professional soldiers, the problem was the bulk of the Argentine army being conscripts forced to fight against their will
8
@looinrims even if they got those new JF-17 Thunder aircraft from China via Pakistan they'd still stand no chance against F35's no matter what, and given the strength of the garrison, the weakness of the Argentine navy and the presence of radar on the islands, I don't see how the Argentines could possibly take the islands by surprise OR actually overcome the garrison either way even if they did, at least not within sufficient time before British reinforcements arrived
8
@TomlinsonFiuFiu yeah yeah keep telling yourself that pal, I understand your frankly pathetic state of complete and utter denial lol, I don't accept or believe a word of the utter bullshit you're spewing (nor does ANYONE outside Argentina lol) but I do understand WHY you're spewing it and cannot face the truth of your humiliating and total defeat by a completely superior opponent
8
@TomlinsonFiuFiu also I'd very much like to know who exactly these "highly reliable British sources" were you mention 😂😂😂 the only one you actually name is (A) frankly someone many have since disputed the accuracy of the accounts of, (although frankly compared to your media's accuracy on the matter he's a bloody infallible genius), and (B) you actually misspelled his name not once but TWICE 😂 as for myself I think I'll stick to the version of events I was told by a Paratrooper who actually FOUGHT THERE thanks, oh yeah and the fact I myself personally saw a ship your media claimed Argentina to have sunk, HMS Invincible, sail home completely intact 😂
8
@vulgrim909 the 'internet' as you know it today is not the same one they invented, the WORLD WIDE WEB adapted from it is though and THAT'S British. As for the computer look up Alan Turing and Tommy Flowers sometime; and as for code well no-one invented that in WW2, codes of one sort or another have been around for millennia, Britain WAS responsible for breaking Germany's in that war though. Everything I'm saying is either entirely true or definitely based in truth, so how about YOU get better educated yourself before accusing others of being 'dumb'
7
@TomlinsonFiuFiu ok then, just 13 words, "I myself actually personally SAW her sail home safe and sound and completely intact" lol 😂 and even if that WASN'T true and even if your media WASN'T as utterly full of sh*t as it clearly is? YOU STILL STARTED THAT WAR and YOU LOST IT
7
@Nicolas-zw5ex the thousands of people whose lives those M.B. ejection seats saved over the years wouldn't say they're so shitty
6
@vulgrim909 You CAN just admit to being wrong about something you know, no-ones going to judge you personally for it or anything
5
Trust me if we really wanted your collosal mess of a country we'd definitely be able to take it, but yeah we'd need more than what's on the islands- but we proved in 1982 that we can get a LOT of men and equipment a long way very quickly
4
Oh yeah? Russia's a LAND power, they always have been and tanks are next to useless on the Falklands due to the terrain. Their navy's all they could really use in a non-nuclear conflict TO help Argentina and it has one ancient aircraft carrier that works half of the time, on a good day. We have two brand new ones that are the second biggest and most advanced in the world, and we're about equal with them in modern destroyers and submarines- and all this is still assuming that somehow NO-ONE else comes in on our side
4
@TomlinsonFiuFiu even disregarding everything I've said though, and even if we DID actually somehow deny our own knowledge and common sense and accept everything you're saying as true? Still wouldn't change the fact you lost would it, and also if what you're saying IS true you should still have a virtually intact and still-powerful military whereas ours should've been pretty much devastated; therefore why don't you try again lol, why don't you actually send your mighty navy and air-force at the garrison guarding the Falklands again, right now this minute and see what happens, I'm sure they'll be almost undefended again by about 50 men with rifles, just like last time, nothing else more modern...
4
If you mean making the Argentinians think you were going to join the war on our side forcing them to keep a good-sized chunk of their forces on the Chilean border rather then attacking us then yep, you definitely helped in that sense, cheers from Britain guys :)
3
@vulgrim909 However since Wikipedia apparently is all Americans trust for this sort of thing these days: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Flowers https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing
3
michael reynolds as for submarines define submarine, the Hunley was certainly one of the first SUBMERSIBLES used in combat and the first to be effective but it was basically a big iron barrel powered by a hand-crank and armed with a bomb on a pole, and it killed basically everyone who got into the damn thing. By comparison, google the 'Holland' submarine series
3
michael reynolds sniping though, that one I'll give you, although bear in mind rifles and marksmen soldiers proficient with them were nothing particularly new, and Confederate snipers in the ACW actually often used British Whitworth rifles, to lethal effect
3
michael reynolds As for computers I said the ELECTRONIC computer was British but if we're talking earlier mechanical ones, try Charles Babbage
3
michael reynolds oh and one other thing, John Logie Baird was of Scottish descent, this is true; however when he made his first TV work THAT was in England, and both Scotland and England are still parts of a United Kingdom Of Great Britain ANYWAY
3
@CrazyNikel how about Tim Berners-Lee and the World Wide Web, what does your I'M SURE ENTIRELY UNBIASED ARTICLE say about them exactly
3
@gladiadorargentino5347 yeah? Prepared to actually say that to any actual British soldiers anytime soon lol?
3
@ImSadiaNadeem the heck? The JF-17 Thunder's a cheap Chinese-Pakistani piece of sh*t with dodgy weapons, dodgier engines and a fuselage design that belongs in the 50's, it's a bargain-basement knock-off of an F16. That thing couldn't handle a Eurofighter Typhoon if each JF-17 was flown by an ace and armed with nukes, the Typhoon's older sure but it's still very much a state-of-the-art supersonic all-weather air-superiority dogfighter with Beyond Visual Range capabilities, and a battle-proven one at that, not only has it spent the last 20 years blowing up half the Middle East on the ground, but in the air the thing's gone head-to-head with F22 Raptors and Sukhoi SU-30's in wargames and come out on top more often than not. A Typhoon also just scored the RAF's first actual real confirmed air-to-air kill in 30 or 40 years over Syria, only a drone but it's still more than most of the Typhoon's near-peer rivals can boast given the lack of real air-to-air combat in recent years, and DEFINITELY more than the JF-17 Thunder can claim that's for sure
3
@NACHON-bl7wf brave talented pilots but not experts, and they did plenty of damage to ships sure but lost every fight with an actual RAF plane they came up against
3
@ImSadiaNadeem that's without even MENTIONING the F35B Lightning II stealth-fighters our new aircraft carriers could bring to the party either mind
3
@PeacePetal Germany? Japan? Probably America, France, Holland and Spain in previous centuries too? We've been in a LOT of wars and the Royal Navy's seen more action than virtually any other navy still around. And that was seven ships out of over a hundred, when said ships were pretty much sitting ducks, so judge for yourself how impressive that really is. The only reason Argentina didn't lose just as many ships if not more is because the minute the General Belgrano went down, your entire navy promptly scuttled home with it's tails between it's legs and played no further active role in the war
3
@PeacePetal war crimes? This from the country that became a safe haven for escaped Nazi's after WW2, and that "disappeared" countless of it's own people under the rule of the Junta. As for Dresden nope, not proud of it, it's just something bad that happened in a war full of bad things done by all sides, let's not forget the Germans bombed US first, and rather nievely thought they could do that but not be bombed right back
3
@justatungstenrod9173 actually we wouldn't need to FIGHT a second Falklands War as just overcoming the EXISTING GARRISON on the islands themselves would be beyond Argentina at present, but if we somehow did have to actually retake them again, trust me the British armed forces COULD do it if we had to
3
@georgebarnes8163 we have about 150 Typhoons for whatever operating specifically from land is required, and the RAF wouldn't be losing it's F35's anyway would it, since as you've pointed out they're still operated BY the RAF regardless of being on carriers or not; more F35's are coming though, beyond just that 48 I mean, eventually the Royal Navy's 809 Squadron of the Fleet Air Arm will get some of their own jets starting next year (something I'm quite excited about as it should mean a more permanently available F35 presence on the carriers), and the US Marines can help make up the numbers where required too; all of which should free up more RAF Lightnings for more general use outside of carrier operations
3
@TomlinsonFiuFiu and with that, "good day" 💖
3
@Memeo. because he's an Argie who's clearly in such total and rather pathetic denial he still can't accept who won that war and who lost even after 38 years?
3
Yeah our guys need the target-practice lol
3
@rodrigoduarte5893 that's what every potential conqueror of these islands has thought for 900 years, feel free to look up what happened to all of them 😉
2
I know, kinda sad really isn't it
2
They know the terrain better than any Argentinian and have their own seperate volunteer defence force
2
AND the new aircraft carriers, which hopefully by the time this all supposedly kicks off will finally have planes on them
2
@gladiadorargentino5347 he was calling you a moron, that's an insult? Another word for an idiot or fool
2
@kcimb nah you're right, not sure about the rest but you are right about the Sidewinders and the fuel, thanks for that. What now, you want a f*cking medal? We still did the actual sailing down there and actual fighting parts ourselves so yeah, Rule Britannia
2
michael reynolds you clearly did not actually bother reading anything I already said in response to the other brainwashed idiots above about this before saying that did you 😑 jeezus
2
michael reynolds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Whittle
2
michael reynolds I also clearly said several times that there is a considerable difference between the 'internet' the US military came up with and the World Wide Web which is in fact what we are currently communicating through
2
@CrazyNikel how about YOU read MY comments above and yeah, not, happening, I am in the right and you are in the wrong and I am absolutely confident of this and secure in that position
2
@CrazyNikel oh an American website claiming Americans invented the internet? WHAT A SURPRISE
2
michael reynolds oh as for Baird's first prototype TV that was definitely created first, were you talking about his first PRODUCTION Television?
2
@highground7923 I will not quote "stand down" because (A) I am right, (B) you are wrong and (C) we probably said the same thing to you lot in 1776 haha, you didn't seem to think standing down over THAT whole thing was such a "simple thing" though did you and nor do I this
2
@anguswaterhouse9255 definitely both better than anything Russia and China can muster though, and surely that's the main point
2
@gladiadorargentino5347 there's about two hundred thousand 5.56 rounds in the chambers of modern assault weapons aimed by trained professional battle-hardened soldiers here that say otherwise lol, and that's if you get past all the tanks, warships and jet-fighters first, all of them modern, powerful state-of-the-art war-machines not, y'know, 40 or 50 year-old museum pieces. So yeah, again, good luck with that lol
2
@fedemanfredi hardly ONLY because of that, "Meurte Negra" ring a bell? 😉
2
@Bearded Guy yes? And? Emphasis on the word "serviceable"
2
@zebazvikle9582 even if we DID recognise Spanish dominion at the time that doesn't mean we still do, and even if so that's SPAIN not you
2
@Dejaelvicio507 yes and Argentine pilots have also adamantly claimed they sank HMS Invincible, a ship that tens of thousands of Brits personally saw sail safely back into harbour, so I'm not sure their testimony can entirely be trusted there lol
2
@PeacePetal SEVEN British ships, not nine, the rest were damaged sure but repairable, and of those seven only four were actual warships
2
@justatungstenrod9173 also the weight isn't really what makes the difference there, the British stuff's just better, more modern and more powerful...? And comparatively cheap though the Gripen is they don't have the cash even for that let's face it
2
If you're wanting to talk about new developments what about Britain's new Aircraft Carriers with their F35's
2
Alex Gonzalez those islands have plenty of natural resources, the third strongest and most advanced military in the entire world and even stronger allies. So yes my delusional friend, they CAN, and it's pretty rich you calling US the ignorant ones here
2
Nell Gainey well he's right and yup, they do, the 'special relationship' is at it's strongest between our respective militaries when they're going through obstacle courses and fighting mock battles while exchanging witty banter and good-natured insults :) one of my cousins is in the US marines himself
2
@patthonsirilim5739 well there you go, that's pretty much what I meant to say, the Falklands War was a pretty unique set of circumstances, if we'd invaded the mainland it may well have turned out differently as you say but we DIDN'T
1
@MDProductionsARG well you can still be well-trained, experienced professionals and yet be over-confident, arrogant and stupid, just look at the Americans in Vietnam 😉
1
@LH1980XX you might want to retract that statement given the carriers are rapidly both approaching full operational capacity, there's over 70 aircraft on order for them and one's already been on a round-the-world cruise escorted by a full carrier strike group, including three destroyers, three frigates, two support ships and a nuclear submarine
1
@mikelms20 good luck with that lol
1
@iikkuowo6735 we'll see about that won't we, her predecessors weren't "sunk quickly" in the original Falklands War despite all Argentina's best efforts, and air defenses on ships have come a long way since 1982
1
@BeardedBill86 the fixtures and fittings are all there and the ships and their decks are built more than big and strong enough for it, the new EMALS system could be fitted in theory
1
Richardsen depends on where they are and what they're doing, dug into proper defensive positions on the Falklands they could hold off half the damn world never mind a bunch of Argies who don't want to be there
1
Jay Son Wong we bought those missiles fair and square from the Americans and our own pilots then used them on our own aircraft being launched from our own ships, there's no detraction there from the British victory or the pride we should feel about it whatsoever; also we DIDN'T succeed in convincing the French to tell us about the Excocets actually so we had to find out how to shoot them out of the sky the old fashioned way
1
vladypunkyface we shall see won't we
1
EnglishXnXproud nah it was more than one destroyer mate, three in all although two weren't sunk in one go but did end up on fire and having to be abandoned TO sink
1
EnglishXnXproud 'take what was their's'? Wasn't theirs in the first place
1
vladypunkyface there are Eurofighter Typhoons and radar-guided Rapier missiles on the islands now, good luck getting past them with those museum pieces
1
Greg Moonen and we thank you for what assistance you gave us but that doesn't mean we couldn't have won without it and if you're sensible enough to see that I hope you'll tell that to any Argentines reading this still throwing that 'we lost to the US not you' crap
1
Conrado Villegas well it didn't seem to be keeping that peace very well back then, the only reason you invaded in '82 was to distract the people from their own problems at home and give them a different, foreign enemy in place of their own government. I'll grant you that army's definitely more suited to keeping your own people in line than it ever has been to actual war
1
Jesus H Christ we're not building them the Americans are and we're buying them at an extravagant COST, if you lot would consider helping out your best and strongest ally just ONCE financially with this shit it wouldn't be such a problem. If I were in charge the money would've gone into an angled flight deck, a steam catupult and about fifty arrestor hooks for the Typhoons we've already GOT instead, frankly a far better idea overall and I suspect what the original designers had in mind all along (going back to a straight-line flight deck and ramp arrangement was a sudden mid-development decision and an unpopular one, as was buying foreign planes and scrapping or selling the Harrier, an old but still highly effective aircraft we could be manning these things with right now if not for those dumb-ass decisions)
1
Used to be, could be again ;-)
1
mrsamsung2468 no, we're a nation which used to rule the world for over 400 years, spread modern civilization across it's entire surface and was already a centre of democracy, freedom of the individual and inventions that changed the course of human history before your loud-mouthed braggart of a nation even existed. I'd say to grow up and read a damn book- but that would require more intelligence than you appear capable of possessing
1
@copernico1191 the British fleet also won in the end
1
I have, incidentally Rule Britannia
1
@ll lll yeah? good luck with that. You guys should actually try again though, don't let this video and cold hard reality put you off! (if only because I want to see what modern RAF Typhoons would do to those barely-flying museum-pieces 😂)
1
@JohnMacbeth nice 😊 beautiful things those Babbage machines, all hand-crafted brass linkages shining like gold
1
@JohnMacbeth although if we are talking specifically mechanical ones it could actually be argued that the very first was that interesting collection of Ancient Greek stuff that looked like a mass of interlocking gears that archaeologists found, that MIGHT have once been a form of mechanical computer, and if so I happily bow and hand the crown to them there, we'll probably never know if it actually was one though
1
@VisibilityFoggy agreed on all you say and yeah the Tempest project looks amazing doesn't it 🙂 let's hope we actually get to see her fly within our lifetimes
1
@deprogramm ...nooo they didn't, they were all STALEMATES, they all ended as a draw of one sort or another, maybe look it up, in a source not filled with nothing but American patriotism
1
@robertballard4611 the US, and BRITAIN stopped them, along with South Korean forces themselves of course and forces from a number of other countries, it was actually the first proper UN coalition that did that, America may have been in charge and led the way but they sure as fuck didn't do it alone, and since both North and South Korea still EXIST at all I wouldn't call that war 'won' by EITHER side, classic draw that one. The UN Allied forces did a damn good job stopping their advance alright though, my grandfather among them
1
@robertballard4611 call Vietnam what you will, think seeing as Vietnam is, again not only still here but a free, prosperous and still proudly Communist nation (but one that rather ironically kicked China's arse a few years later), don't see how you can really claim victory there. As for what those pirates may or may not have said or signed on a bit of paper, the thing that truly stopped their effectiveness and eventually most of their actual attacks as a result was the first gradual, then rapid, development of more modern heavily armed and armoured european iron n' steam warships that the lightly-equipped, mostly still sail-powered North African pirates couldn't overpower and couldn't outrun anymore. As for 1812 does Canada exist as a separate nation? Yes? Again, you didn't f*ckin' WIN the WAR overall then did you lol, or at least achieve more than restoring the national borders to not far from where they started from in the first place, NEITHER side achieved their full war-goals, neither side could achieve a true victory over the other's homeland and France or no France and 'Old Ironsides' or no 'Old Ironsides' Britannia still ruled the waves all the same, so it ended as a drawn-out and bloody STALEMATE, not a win OR a loss but a draw, and that was my point about all of them, well that and pointing out that America clearly needs to re-evaluate it's history a little sometimes when they bang on about how star-spangled awesome they are, when was the last time they outright DID win anything outside their own soil and without direct outside assistance
1
@robertballard4611 'the entire conflict was considered a major victory for the US'?! outside of those desperately WANTING it to be seen that way who the hell said that?!
1
@robertballard4611 if you're brainwashed to the point of not being able to see any version of events but your own as having the slightest merit, not exactly surprising
1
@endmepleaseoml7333 I'm not "admitting" jack shit mate lol, anymore than YOU would ever "admit" that without OUR fighting on and refusing to give up or surrender in 1940, the war would have already been over for a full year before you even joined the fight in the first place, in other words without US you wouldn't have won it either lol. While to me that's a simple, obvious, undeniable and completely correct fact, it's also something I highly doubt you'll be admitting to anytime soon
1
Hog Nutz a few more fucking times before I'll stop being proud of Britain that's for damn sure, since to date as far as I'm concerned you never provably have "saved" us in the first place, we've saved ourselves
1
@RagingBulCorp couldn't agree more
1
@derbigpr500 damn right
1
@MyAqaa and we have over two hundred of them, all in state-of-the-art, virtually-undetectable nuclear submarines and all controlled solely by OUR government and no-one else, just in case Russia or China say are thinking of trying anything anytime soon 😁😎
1
@MyAqaa and yep, again, damn right and couldn't agree more
1
Britannia agreed and Rule Britannia indeed haha
1
@robertballard4611 yeah yeah keep telling yourself that my friend 🙄 like talking to a brick wall
1
Hog Nutz oh you have verifiable evidence WITH legitimate sources that Britain DIDN'T save itself in WW2 I suppose? I guess you can prove the Battle Of Britain was in fact won by America lol? Or that the German battleships Bismarck and Tirpitz were sunk by them, or the Dambusters raid or the raid on St.Nazaire were done by them, or the battle of El Alamein was won by them?
1
@Sleepy_Apocalypse whatever you say, how about we agree to disagree, mainly since I can't be arsed arguing on here anymore or responding to everything in that whole f*cking novel of a comment rather than because I agree with you in the least
1
@highground7923 Korea was a draw and not solely an American affair, and as for Vietnam, while I'm certainly no expert lol, I suspect if you think America outright won that war in any way, shape or form I might as well be considered one by comparison
1
@highground7923 An American accusing anyone besides themselves of being the hypocrites is what I'M currently "loving" 😂
1
@highground7923 in what way did I ever claim we won it "with no help"?
1
@highground7923 If you mean in WW2, sure, AFTER the war had already been going on for two years before you joined it and for four years before you actually turned up in any serious numbers in Europe mind, sure lol. Also it'd be pretty difficult for an island the size of Idaho to match the entire continental United States in terms of pure numbers wouldn't it. Good thing the sheer numbers involved aren't the only thing that matters in wars though or the Soviet Union would have you beat lock, stock and barrel there lol
1
@highground7923 as for Korea yeah seeing as the American-led ALLIED forces were winning pretty easily at the start against the North Korean forces alone, and that surely the ULTIMATE objective was to drive Communism out at all costs once and for all, something tells me that had China not suddenly gotten involved, by what were basically swarm-tactics sending over a million fucking troops at us lol, SOMETHING TELLS ME we wouldn't have just stopped at the old border had that not happened, just as THEY wouldn't have, given the opportunity to drive us out further since THEIRS was surely just as much to get rid of White Capitalism and White Imperialism from Korea (and from Asia in general) once and for all in turn, pretty sure neither side achieved their REAL ultimate objectives. And I say "we" and "us" above there because whether you like it or not and whether you want to admit it or not, that was an allied multi-national force fighting there and one that Britain was also a major part of
1
@highground7923 wow good response there. You CAN just admit to being wrong about something sometimes you know 😂
1
@highground7923 oh yeah good comeback there lol, full of actual factual information or historical evidence that clearly was 😂👍 maybe talk to me more after you've gone back to school for a few more years
1
Gaius Wyrden keep reading
1
@matthewmclean9012 cheers haha, just glad someone appreciates it, suggests there's at least a few people left here with actual functioning brain-cells
1
@seanpeter4992 no, I get quote "triggered" by the comments of overly-patriotic under-educated Americans who refuse to see the views of those from other countries with better education systems as having the slightest merit, there's a big difference
1
@gladiadorargentino5347 "friendly" huh lol. Well good luck with that, you're gonna need it lol
1
@gladiadorargentino5347 let's just say this quote "damn pig" isn't exactly gonna hold his breath waiting for you to show up, let alone actually last five minutes in a fight with us lol
1
@bbqnpcs5514 good one there lol
1
 @andydudley1775 gotta get to their targets first "this time" though haven't they, and things like radar and missiles will be waiting
1
@georgebarnes8163 which eventually will be enough to equip both carriers with a minimal air-wing or one carrier with a full air-wing, will it not
1
@georgebarnes8163 all bar the oldest ones are mostly still in good condition and can be made flyable again in an emergency, and either way the remaining Typhoons are more than capable of holding the line till either enough F35's are procured or until when or if the project for it's actual future replacement, the Tempest, bears fruit; if we still had the much bigger RAF of past decades the Tranche 1's would be kept in service too, as a combat-capable reserve to keep the numbers up, it's only because of the constant budget-cuts and stripping down of the forces to the bare minimum by the government that they're going anywhere
1
@georgebarnes8163 hey you're preaching to the choir there, I think the Typhoons should not only be kept in service but updated and upgraded and added to by buying more from other countries getting rid of theirs; the F35B is a good choice as a replacement for the Harrier and Tornado and certainly doesn't deserve all the hate it gets, but it's no dedicated air-superiority dogfighter, at least not in any way that makes it superior to the Typhoon, we'd need to be buying F22's instead for that. As for the Royal Navy though I think the F35 is actually the right choice for use from our new carriers, but that the QE-class should be in the originally-planned angled decks & catapults configuration, basically bigger modern versions of the old HMS Ark Royal from the 70's, and that it should be the F35C not the F35B flying from them; things are the way they are though and we've gotta just make the best we can of what we've ended up getting rather than wishing for something else, which the RN and RAF definitely have been doing so far
1
@georgebarnes8163 something that does give me some hope for the future though, is that the QE-class carriers were both built so that if the money, time and requirements arose in the future, and if EMALS could be made to work properly, they in fact COULD be altered to having cats and traps, and the new electromagnetic ones at that rather than the old steam-powered sort, the fixtures and fittings are all there and the decks are built to handle the extra weight and stress, it was just decided to save money and time by going back to 80's style ski-jumps instead. While a third British carrier being built as a catapult-type one is pretty unlikely, it's not impossible that a future refit of one or both of the existing two could see them with EMALS at some point
1
@georgebarnes8163 the Gripen's not made in a carrier-capable version either. French Rafales, F18E Super Hornets or the aforementioned F35C would be the primary choices, that or a carrier-capable version of the future 6th-gen Tempest of course, if that ever comes to be
1
@georgebarnes8163 never heard of that version but fair enough, if you say so, it's a small, single-engined, relatively short-ranged and lightly-armed cheapo-jet though, built to give maximum bang for very little buck to countries without much money and not a lot else, so I highly doubt they've had many orders from the countries big enough and rich enough to have aircraft carriers- after all if you're in a position to have those you're in a position to get bigger more powerful aircraft to go on them, too, and the small light carriers like Spain's can't operate anything but VTOL or STOVL aircraft
1
@georgebarnes8163 not yet they're not, looked it up, India still uses Mig 29K's, they've shown some interest and apparently tested a prototype one but that's about it
1
@georgebarnes8163 Brazil look like they'll buy them for their own new carrier they're supposed to be working on, but everyone else is either buying F35's instead or making their own indigenous aircraft for the role, like the Indian Tejas
1
And the UK is FIFTH so what was your point again?
1
Didn't know that, it WAS a 20 years old design at the time though and had just flown 8000 miles so give it a break, Vulcans were good planes in their day. Also don't know about that one but the REST of the planes completed their mission anyway
1
Well too bad 'coz we're here to stay, deal with it :)
1
Alex Gonzalez we don't actually beleive that stuff anymore, we're not the British Empire anymore and we know it, and yes other countries have bigger navies now it's true. What we DO have is a long and glorious history and we like to remind the rest of the world of it once in a while, THAT'S why we still say that stuff sometimes, but it's not in the present tense. As for the carriers one of them's ready to go and the other's not far behind, they'd be operational already if it wasn't for the Americans we're buying the planes for them off dragging their heels; and in regard to YOUR carrier krr-ching thankyou, you're welcome :p as for liquidating us Argentina, Russia, Iran, China and North Korea are all welcome to try it but they'd better remember what happened to all the countries that DID try, with the exception of the one that later became our strongest ally- the United States Of America
1
Alex Gonzalez they intercepted it, not seized it, the Vulcan and it's crew got to go home
1
Alex Gonzalez yeah that's quite simply a load of complete and utter bullshit my Argie friend :) and incidentally the Eurofighter Typhoon is a proven combat platform optimised for air superiority, trust me YOU underestimating THEM is definitely the bad idea here
1
Alex Gonzalez yeah you didn't even watch the video did you
1
@georgebarnes8163 the Royal Air Force does though? Just because the Royal Navy nominally has no F35's doesn't mean none can actually be deployed on the carriers at all
1
@tetraxis3011 so? Combined with the Typhoons it's still more than enough to easily wipe the skies clear of Argentine aircraft
1
@tetraxis3011 where the hell did you get that idea?! The F35B does have both VTOL and STOVL capabilities and that's the version the RAF's buying, specifically so they CAN operate from the carriers
1
@georgebarnes8163 the F35B was specifically designed and built with the ability to take off and land vertically if it has too, just like the old Harriers and AV8's it replaced, it just doesn't very often because it's much better at STOVL
1
@tetraxis3011 Argentina "modernising" is gonna be pretty difficult with a British arms embargo on anything with British components don't you think, and with your entire logistics train set up for Western military equipment the Russians and Chinese ain't gonna be able to help much either, even IF you had the money to pay for their stuff. There's always the "mighty" Chengdu JF-17 Thunder courtesy of Pakistan of course, but if you think that's a match for a Eurofighter Typhoon or Lockheed-Martin F35B Joint Strike Fighter, even if each JF17 is flown by an ace and armed with nukes lol, you are very sadly mistaken; that and it uses a British Martin-Baker ejection seat and is set up for Chinese weapons, so not exactly ideal
1
@tetraxis3011 the Typhoon never came in a carrier-capable variant anyway and we have no intention of trying to make it into one; the F35B is more than adequate for the job, we're slowly getting more and more of them and even if we weren't? 19 fully-armed F35 stealth-jets with fully-trained RAF pilots is enough to achieve total air-superiority over all of South America, let alone just Argentina
1
@georgebarnes8163 if it's in a position of actually needing direct vertical take-off or vertical landing, chances are it'll either not be carrying much ordnance or will have ditched it and will indeed not have much fuel left. Since ours operate either from runways or from our carriers 99% of the time anyway though the question simply isn't likely to arise regardless, but it could do it if it had to, and that was the only point I was originally making; one time a Harrier was stranded out to sea a long way from home, and forced to either ditch or make an emergency landing on a civilian cargo ship. Not much room on top of a shipping container but he made it
1
@someguy3766 I'm sure that if all the British military forces stationed there ON the Falklands just went home suddenly, Argentina would, y'know, respect the wishes of the locals actually living there regardless, and wouldn't try to take them at all then? especially not if there was yet another failing government trying to save themselves there?
1