Comments by "Billy Bob" (@davidrobertsemail) on "BFBS Forces News" channel.

  1.  @thomasrotweiler  I agree with your original post. Smaller carriers could be built quicker and cheaper snd keep the harriers until f35s were delivered. Politicians have ruined the military.
    1
  2. China is the threat. We aren’t ready.
    1
  3. What a joke
    1
  4. Diversity and Inclusion is how the British army is taught will win wars.
    1
  5. Not enough aircraft or support ships to defend it. It’s a sitting duck.
    1
  6. Another endless war we can’t afford.
    1
  7. Tge sooner we have peace the better.
    1
  8. Our government is destroying our country.
    1
  9.  @FelixIsMyName both carriers will never have a full complement of planes. There will only be enough for one carrier.
    1
  10.  @admiralmallard7500 we used to have three small carriers this the ability to always be able to field two and be in two places at once as well as sustain a carrier loss. Now we can only be in one place and can’t sustain a loss. Except it’s cost us a lot more money and taken longer. It’s a disaster.
    1
  11.  @admiralmallard7500 these carriers are not super economic. One is going to be a spare! What a waste of £3.5 billion! Yes I know the surface combat fleet has been slashed. That’s why this whole charade is a nonsense. Two carriers with not enough planes or escorts. It’s insane. A useless carrier coming back to port isn’t to be celebrated.
    1
  12.  @admiralmallard7500 we should have at least stuck with the original order of 12 destroyers. And 24 frigates. Cuts after cuts have left us in a mess. You can pretend otherwise if you like. Look a big shiny aircraft carrier with no planes. ;-)
    1
  13. Blah blah blah. Britain has hollowed out its military.
    1
  14. Pathetic.
    1
  15.  @firasajoury7813  CCP apologist.
    1
  16.  @Yummy-12-d7d  moronic comment. If you are that concerned look at the Belt and and road debt traps China uses to colonize countries. Half of Africa is Chinas now.
    1
  17.  @peterbrown1012  look up when we might be getting the upgraded challenger 2s from Germany. Then tell me that 140 is enough. We could upgrade all of our Challengers instead of giving them away.
    1
  18. Great destroyer. But only six of them is a joke.
    1
  19. Didn’t this just happen again?
    1
  20. Only six of them. Pathetic.
    1
  21.  @Orbital_Inclination deadbeats.
    1
  22. Green means slow
    1
  23. Pensioners are freezing but we are giving billions to Ukraine.
    1
  24. Bad reporting.
    1
  25.  @rayharth183  they already have because of open borders.
    1
  26. @SuperVHSchannel you mean the invasion?
    1
  27. @SuperVHSchannel our border is wide open. Our border force is importing thousands of fighting age men every month. Our barracks that used to hold soldiers are now housing foreigners who came illegally.
    1
  28. You can’t have a strong military with a weak economy. End the war on fossil fuels snd manufacturing. We should frack for cheap energy and build up our economy and military.
    1
  29. Socialism.
    1
  30. Britain is a second rate military power. Plenty of money for Ukraine and hotels for illegals but no money for defense. How sad.
    1
  31.  @davidhouseman4328  we spend more on debt interest than defense.
    1
  32.  @davidhouseman4328  my point was clear we need to spend more on defense and less on stupid things like putting illegals in fancy hotels. How did you watch this video snd conclude we needed to spend less on defense?
    1
  33.  @davidhouseman4328  how pedantic.
    1
  34.  @asb358  so we have two carriers with half an air wing. We MIGHT get two full air wings eventually in the fullness of time, all things being considered, ;-) You need lots of spares for maintenance and loses to sustain an air wing. These will never have fully operational air wings with 70/80 planes. These are floating targets. Expensive taxpayer funded floating targets.
    1
  35. It’s an aircraft carrier without planes mate. Pretending it doesn’t really need them or that it can realistic share planes is ridiculous.
    1
  36.  @asb358  we ordered 148 planes originally as that was what two carriers needed for training and losses now it’s down to 70/80. Half. The full air wing includes early warning. Still not available. Two 65,000 ships with half an air wing makes no sense. Huge ships without catapults makes no sense. The f35b is a compromise plane because of it weight and lack of range. No escort ships either! 6 destroyers that have a terrible operational record and half the number of required frigates. The whole thing is an incredibly expensive joke. Two big fat targets. As others have pointed out better to have three small ski ramp ships with the required escorts or two large carriers with catapults and much better f35cs I would point out that those saying we have 32 already are wrong. We only have 28 the other three are still in the US and we already lost one aircraft in training. That’s why we need lots more.
    1
  37.  @mikelovesbacon  so the original plane for 148 planes was a mistake? The US carrier fleet has been doing it wrong the whole time? And all our other carriers in the past got it wrong as well?
    1
  38.  @mikelovesbacon  fyi we don’t even have enough for one carrier!
    1
  39.  @verdebusterAP  “Operationally ready” without planes ;-)
    1
  40. The navy is a joke.
    1
  41. Several are in training use in the US and with repairs and maintenance you are looking at nearer 20 available. Even if we had all of the 74 that’s only enough for one carrier taking into account availability. Don’t forget due to the cancellation of the RAF planes they are supposed to be shared as well!
    1
  42. @cjjk914274 isn’t enough for two carriers! What nonsense. The availability rate of modern jets is 60-70% That means there will eventually be enough for one carrier. They are also sharing them with the RAF since their order of planes was canceled. Even if there were enough planes it’s moot because there’s not enough ships to support two carriers anyway! We are struggling to support one.
    1
  43. @cjjk9142two were ordered to be used. The second ship wasn’t supposed to be an incredibly expensive spare!!
    1
  44. @cjjk9142they were built to carry 36 jets or more. If we wanted smaller carriers we should have built smaller ones at a fraction of the cost and much much faster.
    1
  45. @cjjk9142the strategic defense review of 2015 was when the decision was made to only ever field one carrier with one in reserve. When the carrier replacement process started in the 90s and through into the early 2000s multiple carriers were planned. Two were settled on. Sadly cuts meant only one would get planes or support ships. So a very very expensive spare was born. It was never planned.
    1
  46. And the US. Democrats hate America
    1
  47.  @mistressofthewoods5333  simplistic view.
    1
  48.  @mistressofthewoods5333  profound
    1
  49.  @mistressofthewoods5333  you are naive.
    1
  50.  @mistressofthewoods5333  you obviously aren’t British. Why else would you be dismissive of the defense of Britain. What’s your nationality?
    1