See the following in the Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=TNCEQDTVLMMDXQFIQMFCFFOAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2007/08/26/nbrown126.xml

Hamish

Since 1999 the Defence Budget has RISEN by a third, those monies have been made available to the Heads of the Armed Services to spend in a way THEY see fitting, so far this is where much of it has gone -

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23399926-details/Britain+launches+nuclear+sub+that+can+hear+a+ship+from+across+the+Atlantic/article.do


http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/design-preparations-continue-for-britains-new-cvf-future-carrier-updated-01630/


http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,,2134781,00.html


http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/britain-buying-new-land-vehicles-for-iraqi-afghan-theaters-02464/

It must not be forgot that we shall soon be facing a General Election and such misinformation is put out as a means of securing votes. No other government has seen the defense budget rise by one third in seven years.

WHATEVER YOUR POLITICS,WHAT MATTERS IS OUR SERVICES GET THE KIT TO DO THE JOB,TO PROTECT OUR COUNTRY AND WAY OF LIFE,

ro5=6372 wrote:

WHATEVER YOUR POLITICS,WHAT MATTERS IS OUR SERVICES GET THE KIT TO DO THE JOB,TO PROTECT OUR COUNTRY AND WAY OF LIFE

Yes Pete, but in today's world, I do not see this as necessarily the best way of spending limited resources. So, unless were going back to the days of the Atlantic convoys, I think this money would have been better spent from the ground/sea level upwards.

Beware these technical boffins and 'spin' doctors for, if you let them have their own way, they will have you disappear up your own backside quicker than you can say Dr Who? Moreover, these are the guys's who now have their own keys to, and who are now running the MoD!

"If water conditions are right, operators could pick up the QE2 cruise ship leaving New York harbour while sitting thousands of miles away in the English Channel."

So, what is the point of that statement other than to impress the general public just before a Gordon Brown type election? And what is the use of this statement militarily? For, the one thing they don't tell you here is how long it would takes them to detect this or any other ship leaving the New York harbour. However, assuming they have solved the inverse square law problem, the one thing I can tell you here and now is that it is just not possible to alter the laws of physics, in that the speed of light is far greater than that at which this sonar signal could travel across the Atlantic and back! and this is where they have the problem "If water conditions are right" for the speed at which this sonar signal travels depends on how much salt there is in the water and with the Ice caps melting this may vary considerably causing further problems.

So, while you and I are watching the QE2 leave New York harbour courtesy of Goggle Earth costing nothing! these guy's will be still sitting at the bottom of the English Channel in their £900million over-budget sub not having a clue about what's going on - brilliant!

Personally, I think this is just another piece of MoD misinformation and that we would be better off today had we of kept Concord flying a little longer and used the steel to better protect our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. But, having said that, she's a good bit of kit and God bless all who sail in her.

Just don't be fooled by this level of technology before an election, I'm sure the Russians aren't.

Stan

PS Better change my level of security as I don't want 400 laptops after me!

You must also realise redcapfred that no other government has seen the armed forces reduced by so much since the thirties either. Technology does cost more but without the boots on the ground, the tanks or the ships and aircraft we are a shadow of our previous strength so much so that we are now incapable of defending our homeland without American aid. Lets not get involved in the politics of this issue on this web site, suffice to say they (politicians) are all as bad as each other!

John
also a redcap