Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
Trident test fire failure 10:08 - Feb 21 with 2588 viewsNthQldITFC



'The missile's booster rockets failed and it landed in the sea close to the launch site, according to the Sun, which first reported the malfunction.'

Maybe we should sell Putin a nice little rowing boat and invite him to come and laugh at our rusty old sub, then hope that if it all kicks off and he's close enough the bloody thing might land on his head!

# WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE #
Poll: It's driving me nuts

1
Trident test fire failure on 10:17 - Feb 21 with 2135 viewsGuthrum

Not the first launch failure we've had. Mind you, even with what little we hear about it, Russia's test record isn't any better.

Also, strategic nuclear missiles aren't meant to be used, they're just a threat-in-being. If it ever got to a situation where they had to be launched, then everybody has already lost.

Good Lord! Whatever is it?
Poll: McCarthy: A More Nuanced Poll
Blog: [Blog] For Those Panicking About the Lack of Transfer Activity

1
Trident test fire failure on 10:23 - Feb 21 with 2099 viewsBlueschev

Trident test fire failure on 10:17 - Feb 21 by Guthrum

Not the first launch failure we've had. Mind you, even with what little we hear about it, Russia's test record isn't any better.

Also, strategic nuclear missiles aren't meant to be used, they're just a threat-in-being. If it ever got to a situation where they had to be launched, then everybody has already lost.


What a ridiculous species we are. We waste billions on mass murder weapons we would only use in the event that the whole world is about to die.
9
Trident test fire failure on 10:25 - Feb 21 with 2088 viewsBlueBadger

Trident test fire failure on 10:23 - Feb 21 by Blueschev

What a ridiculous species we are. We waste billions on mass murder weapons we would only use in the event that the whole world is about to die.



I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
Poll: What will Phil's first headline be tomorrow?
Blog: From Despair to Where?

1
Trident test fire failure on 10:29 - Feb 21 with 2074 viewsGuthrum

Trident test fire failure on 10:23 - Feb 21 by Blueschev

What a ridiculous species we are. We waste billions on mass murder weapons we would only use in the event that the whole world is about to die.


Think where we'd be if that had been put into medical research.

Good Lord! Whatever is it?
Poll: McCarthy: A More Nuanced Poll
Blog: [Blog] For Those Panicking About the Lack of Transfer Activity

2
Trident test fire failure on 10:49 - Feb 21 with 2049 viewsStokieBlue

Trident test fire failure on 10:23 - Feb 21 by Blueschev

What a ridiculous species we are. We waste billions on mass murder weapons we would only use in the event that the whole world is about to die.


Very little point in them now but in the 1950's I think it's likely that the West and Russia would have gone at it in a conventional war which would have made WW2 look like a skirmish if the prospect of near instantaneous MAD didn't exist.

Instead they decided to use proxies and ruin a whole load of countries rather than their own.

SB

Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula

2
Trident test fire failure on 10:51 - Feb 21 with 2041 viewsSuperKieranMcKenna

“Maybe we should sell Putin a nice little rowing boat and invite him to come and laugh at our rusty old sub”

Though I’m not sure he has any grounds to gloat given the sinking of the Kursk. And rather than risk the west having a close up of a Russian sub thought it was better to just let all the Russian sailors die (by refusing international rescue help until it was too late).
0
Trident test fire failure on 11:05 - Feb 21 with 1991 viewsLinners

I guess this is why they test these things.
0
Trident test fire failure on 11:19 - Feb 21 with 1965 viewschicoazul

Hmm that’s weird I thought the S*n was terrible and everything in it was bad

In the spirit of reconciliation and happiness at the end of the Banter Era (RIP) and as a result of promotion I have cleared out my ignore list. Look forwards to reading your posts!
Poll: With Evans taking 65% in Huddersfield, is the Banter Era over?

-1
Login to get fewer ads

Trident test fire failure on 11:19 - Feb 21 with 1964 viewsChurchman

Trident test fire failure on 10:17 - Feb 21 by Guthrum

Not the first launch failure we've had. Mind you, even with what little we hear about it, Russia's test record isn't any better.

Also, strategic nuclear missiles aren't meant to be used, they're just a threat-in-being. If it ever got to a situation where they had to be launched, then everybody has already lost.


The missiles actually come from a central stock held by the Americans and are rotated. Their track record is, I gather is pretty good for that sort of technology.
0
Trident test fire failure on 11:21 - Feb 21 with 1942 viewsChurchman

Trident test fire failure on 10:29 - Feb 21 by Guthrum

Think where we'd be if that had been put into medical research.


Speaking Russian probably.

But yes, as a species the human race seems programmed to kill itself and everything else
0
Trident test fire failure on 11:25 - Feb 21 with 1920 viewsBlueBadger

Trident test fire failure on 11:19 - Feb 21 by chicoazul

Hmm that’s weird I thought the S*n was terrible and everything in it was bad


The S*n probably had the tip off from some overseas friends who were here to visit Salisbury cathedral.

I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
Poll: What will Phil's first headline be tomorrow?
Blog: From Despair to Where?

1
Trident test fire failure on 11:39 - Feb 21 with 1876 viewsGuthrum

Trident test fire failure on 11:21 - Feb 21 by Churchman

Speaking Russian probably.

But yes, as a species the human race seems programmed to kill itself and everything else


I wasn't suggesting unilaterally!

From everything I've read, the Soviets were most of the time more scared of the West trying to eradicate them than really wishing to start an aggressive war of their own.

Good Lord! Whatever is it?
Poll: McCarthy: A More Nuanced Poll
Blog: [Blog] For Those Panicking About the Lack of Transfer Activity

1
Trident test fire failure on 11:45 - Feb 21 with 1851 viewsNthsuffolkblue

Trident test fire failure on 10:17 - Feb 21 by Guthrum

Not the first launch failure we've had. Mind you, even with what little we hear about it, Russia's test record isn't any better.

Also, strategic nuclear missiles aren't meant to be used, they're just a threat-in-being. If it ever got to a situation where they had to be launched, then everybody has already lost.


We would be hoping every single one failed, I guess!

Poll: Is Jeremy Clarkson misogynistic, racist or plain nasty?
Blog: [Blog] Ghostbusters

0
Trident test fire failure on 11:46 - Feb 21 with 1846 viewsChurchman

Trident test fire failure on 11:39 - Feb 21 by Guthrum

I wasn't suggesting unilaterally!

From everything I've read, the Soviets were most of the time more scared of the West trying to eradicate them than really wishing to start an aggressive war of their own.


I don’t believe that. Yes, the west over estimated USSR strength for political reasons primarily, but Russia was (and is - growth exceeding the rest of the G7 put together, despite ‘sanctions’ and a war) militarily very strong, particularly in quantity- and that is what counts.

There was never a threat of the west pushing eastwards. It had neither the capability or political will after WW2. The USSR knew this. Dictatorships always have a desire to push outwards. They are rarely benign. It cements their power and their perceived immortality.
0
Trident test fire failure on 12:12 - Feb 21 with 1791 viewsSuperKieranMcKenna

Trident test fire failure on 11:46 - Feb 21 by Churchman

I don’t believe that. Yes, the west over estimated USSR strength for political reasons primarily, but Russia was (and is - growth exceeding the rest of the G7 put together, despite ‘sanctions’ and a war) militarily very strong, particularly in quantity- and that is what counts.

There was never a threat of the west pushing eastwards. It had neither the capability or political will after WW2. The USSR knew this. Dictatorships always have a desire to push outwards. They are rarely benign. It cements their power and their perceived immortality.


Though for perspective, NATO total annual military spend is around $1.3trn. Russia currently budget under $100bn per annum. They are increasing militarily spending to 6pc of GDP but that’s with an economy smaller than Italy’s.
0
Trident test fire failure on 12:32 - Feb 21 with 1754 viewsGuthrum

Trident test fire failure on 11:46 - Feb 21 by Churchman

I don’t believe that. Yes, the west over estimated USSR strength for political reasons primarily, but Russia was (and is - growth exceeding the rest of the G7 put together, despite ‘sanctions’ and a war) militarily very strong, particularly in quantity- and that is what counts.

There was never a threat of the west pushing eastwards. It had neither the capability or political will after WW2. The USSR knew this. Dictatorships always have a desire to push outwards. They are rarely benign. It cements their power and their perceived immortality.


Indeed, there wasn't a real actual threat of the West attacking the USSR. They would never have managed the political unity to launch one.

But there was an inbuilt paranoia at the top of the Soviet leadership (age profile didn't help, or cultural history). They were also very aware of the inefficiencies and economic frailty of their own system. Plus the growing technology gap as the Cold War progressed. Raw numbers of tanks, aircraft and men did not tell the whole story. It took a lot of effort to keep the existing Eastern Bloc together, without trying to take on more territory.

Dictatorships like to project hostility outwards, but actual war is a very dangerous gamble. From Napoleon and Hitler to Galtieri, history is littered with examples of dictators who launched wars and came a cropper as a result. Whereas post 1953 the Kim dynasty has maintained its position very successfully.

I don't at all trust Russia's current economic growth figures. Even if not flat-out lying* (and who has audited the numbers?), there is a large degree of currency manipulation and the inclusion of wartime military spending, neither of which are genuine, productive "growth".




* Edit: OK, to be a bit more generous, "propaganda".
[Post edited 21 Feb 12:48]

Good Lord! Whatever is it?
Poll: McCarthy: A More Nuanced Poll
Blog: [Blog] For Those Panicking About the Lack of Transfer Activity

0
Trident test fire failure on 12:43 - Feb 21 with 1656 viewsbournemouthblue

Trident test fire failure on 10:17 - Feb 21 by Guthrum

Not the first launch failure we've had. Mind you, even with what little we hear about it, Russia's test record isn't any better.

Also, strategic nuclear missiles aren't meant to be used, they're just a threat-in-being. If it ever got to a situation where they had to be launched, then everybody has already lost.


That's the crazy thing with Nukes

If they are ever fired, they have ceased being a deterrent

Alcohol is the answer but I can't remember the question!
Poll: Rate this transfer window

0
Trident test fire failure on 12:55 - Feb 21 with 1608 viewsSuperKieranMcKenna

Trident test fire failure on 12:32 - Feb 21 by Guthrum

Indeed, there wasn't a real actual threat of the West attacking the USSR. They would never have managed the political unity to launch one.

But there was an inbuilt paranoia at the top of the Soviet leadership (age profile didn't help, or cultural history). They were also very aware of the inefficiencies and economic frailty of their own system. Plus the growing technology gap as the Cold War progressed. Raw numbers of tanks, aircraft and men did not tell the whole story. It took a lot of effort to keep the existing Eastern Bloc together, without trying to take on more territory.

Dictatorships like to project hostility outwards, but actual war is a very dangerous gamble. From Napoleon and Hitler to Galtieri, history is littered with examples of dictators who launched wars and came a cropper as a result. Whereas post 1953 the Kim dynasty has maintained its position very successfully.

I don't at all trust Russia's current economic growth figures. Even if not flat-out lying* (and who has audited the numbers?), there is a large degree of currency manipulation and the inclusion of wartime military spending, neither of which are genuine, productive "growth".




* Edit: OK, to be a bit more generous, "propaganda".
[Post edited 21 Feb 12:48]


We were discussing this on another thread yesterday. The growth in fairness was projected by the IMF. But it is off the back of a 10c contraction, and as you guessed it’s almost entirely driven by government spending and production of military equipment and weapons. The sanctions have made it fairly difficult for the average Russian, in order to prop up the Rouble and tame inflation, interest rates have risen to 20pc, the exodus of Western FDI and sanctions have led to imports becoming incredibly expensive.

“The problem is that the Russian economy cannot take such growth. Since the start of 2022 its supply side has shrunk. Workers, often highly educated, have fled the country. Foreign investors have withdrawn around $250bn-worth of direct investment, nearly half the pre-war stock.

Red-hot demand is running up against this reduced supply, resulting in higher prices for raw materials, capital and labour. Unemployment, at less than 3%, is at its lowest on record, which is emboldening workers to ask for much higher wages. Nominal pay is growing by about 15% year on year. Companies are then passing on these higher costs to customers.

Higher interest rates might eventually take a bite out of such demand, stopping inflation from rising more. An oil-price recovery and extra capital controls could boost the rouble, cutting the cost of imports. Yet all this is working against an immovable force: Mr Putin’s desire for victory in Ukraine. With plenty of financial firepower, he has the potential to spend even bigger in future, portending faster inflation still. As on so many previous occasions, in Russia there are more important things than economic stability”
0
Trident test fire failure on 13:04 - Feb 21 with 1579 viewsGuthrum

Trident test fire failure on 12:55 - Feb 21 by SuperKieranMcKenna

We were discussing this on another thread yesterday. The growth in fairness was projected by the IMF. But it is off the back of a 10c contraction, and as you guessed it’s almost entirely driven by government spending and production of military equipment and weapons. The sanctions have made it fairly difficult for the average Russian, in order to prop up the Rouble and tame inflation, interest rates have risen to 20pc, the exodus of Western FDI and sanctions have led to imports becoming incredibly expensive.

“The problem is that the Russian economy cannot take such growth. Since the start of 2022 its supply side has shrunk. Workers, often highly educated, have fled the country. Foreign investors have withdrawn around $250bn-worth of direct investment, nearly half the pre-war stock.

Red-hot demand is running up against this reduced supply, resulting in higher prices for raw materials, capital and labour. Unemployment, at less than 3%, is at its lowest on record, which is emboldening workers to ask for much higher wages. Nominal pay is growing by about 15% year on year. Companies are then passing on these higher costs to customers.

Higher interest rates might eventually take a bite out of such demand, stopping inflation from rising more. An oil-price recovery and extra capital controls could boost the rouble, cutting the cost of imports. Yet all this is working against an immovable force: Mr Putin’s desire for victory in Ukraine. With plenty of financial firepower, he has the potential to spend even bigger in future, portending faster inflation still. As on so many previous occasions, in Russia there are more important things than economic stability”


Another thing is that they've lost a lot of revenue selling gas to western Europe. Sure, they can flog some to China and India, but you can bet big discounts are being demanded and the supply capacity (i.e. pipelines) simply isn't there.

That revenue is not coming back. Europe has worked fast to wean itself off Russian gas (using LPG/renewables) and acclimatised somewhat to higher prices.

If they can't sell gas and oil, they'll have to drop production, which will eventually lead to wells going out of commission (you can't just turn them off, then back on again later).

Good Lord! Whatever is it?
Poll: McCarthy: A More Nuanced Poll
Blog: [Blog] For Those Panicking About the Lack of Transfer Activity

0
Trident test fire failure on 13:14 - Feb 21 with 1553 viewsstonojnr

Its just a regular reminder that rocket engineering is hard, science is the easy bit.
1
Trident test fire failure on 13:18 - Feb 21 with 1524 viewsSuperKieranMcKenna

Trident test fire failure on 13:04 - Feb 21 by Guthrum

Another thing is that they've lost a lot of revenue selling gas to western Europe. Sure, they can flog some to China and India, but you can bet big discounts are being demanded and the supply capacity (i.e. pipelines) simply isn't there.

That revenue is not coming back. Europe has worked fast to wean itself off Russian gas (using LPG/renewables) and acclimatised somewhat to higher prices.

If they can't sell gas and oil, they'll have to drop production, which will eventually lead to wells going out of commission (you can't just turn them off, then back on again later).


It is believed their fossil fuel income for 2023 halved, and excess gas was being burned off since they couldn’t sell in sufficient quantity. Whilst people point to China and India picking up the slack, it’s important as you note the pipelines and infrastructure don’t exist to transit natural gas in the same volumes as they did in Europe (Nordstream etc). Furthermore natural gas and crude prices are much lower than they were after the initial impact of the war on supplies.
[Post edited 21 Feb 13:21]
0
Trident test fire failure on 13:55 - Feb 21 with 1460 viewsSouthBucksBlue

Trident test fire failure on 11:39 - Feb 21 by Guthrum

I wasn't suggesting unilaterally!

From everything I've read, the Soviets were most of the time more scared of the West trying to eradicate them than really wishing to start an aggressive war of their own.


Have you read The Spy and the Traiter by Ben Macintyre? It tells the story of Oleg Gordievsky and confirms that the USSR were indeed paranoid of a Western attack. Gordievsky‘s intelligence influenced Western policies to proactively allay their fears which helps diffuse the Cold War. Great book or audiobook if you’re into them.
[Post edited 21 Feb 14:41]
0
Trident test fire failure on 16:16 - Feb 21 with 1364 viewsDJR

Trident test fire failure on 12:32 - Feb 21 by Guthrum

Indeed, there wasn't a real actual threat of the West attacking the USSR. They would never have managed the political unity to launch one.

But there was an inbuilt paranoia at the top of the Soviet leadership (age profile didn't help, or cultural history). They were also very aware of the inefficiencies and economic frailty of their own system. Plus the growing technology gap as the Cold War progressed. Raw numbers of tanks, aircraft and men did not tell the whole story. It took a lot of effort to keep the existing Eastern Bloc together, without trying to take on more territory.

Dictatorships like to project hostility outwards, but actual war is a very dangerous gamble. From Napoleon and Hitler to Galtieri, history is littered with examples of dictators who launched wars and came a cropper as a result. Whereas post 1953 the Kim dynasty has maintained its position very successfully.

I don't at all trust Russia's current economic growth figures. Even if not flat-out lying* (and who has audited the numbers?), there is a large degree of currency manipulation and the inclusion of wartime military spending, neither of which are genuine, productive "growth".




* Edit: OK, to be a bit more generous, "propaganda".
[Post edited 21 Feb 12:48]


I've no doubt the presence of nuclear weapons on their doorstep was a factor too.

Just look how paranoid the US got during the Cuban missile crisis, a confrontation which, according to Wikipedia, is widely considered the closest the Cold War came to escalating into full-scale nuclear war.

And on paranoia more generally, let's not forget things like McCarthyism.
[Post edited 21 Feb 16:20]
0
Trident test fire failure on 17:34 - Feb 21 with 1296 viewsNthQldITFC

Trident test fire failure on 16:16 - Feb 21 by DJR

I've no doubt the presence of nuclear weapons on their doorstep was a factor too.

Just look how paranoid the US got during the Cuban missile crisis, a confrontation which, according to Wikipedia, is widely considered the closest the Cold War came to escalating into full-scale nuclear war.

And on paranoia more generally, let's not forget things like McCarthyism.
[Post edited 21 Feb 16:20]


Be careful what you wish for

# WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE #
Poll: It's driving me nuts

0
Trident test fire failure on 17:37 - Feb 21 with 1289 viewsRadlett_blue

So, yes, our hugely expensove "nuclear deterrent" involves launching some potentially defective missiles that may self destruct, may land and exterminate friendly people nearby & just might do some damage to our foes.
When will our politicians accept that we can't afford to play games with the big boys like the USA & China? We also wasted billions on 2 near obsolete aircraft carriers, which we can't ever risk deploying in action because we don;t have nearly enough support ships? These leviathans are incredibly vulnerable to missile attacks.

Poll: Should horse racing be banned in the UK?

0
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2024