Uk's Nuclear Threat - From Uk's Nukes

[hackey lad 3,987]

20 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

hackey thinks we can just carry on testing them every twelve years until we get it right.

 

In the meantime,  if we have a war,  we'll just have to get our catapults out and manage with them.  Putin must have nearly died laughing.

 

God, preserve us from our own.

Do you really think that is the only missile we have ?

[melthebell 864]

3 hours ago, hackey lad said:

Its a test ,  do it until  it works properly  . 

They don't do that though, 2 tests in what 12 years, and both have failed, they don't test willy willy as each missile costs millions, so they only fire one.

Again if they needed to fire a live one tommorow what would the difference be?, blind patriotism won't fix it, schnapps blindly saying it'll be reyt won't fix it

Edited February 21 by melthebell

[Al Bundy 1,577]

I don't know why folk are getting their corduroy jackets in a twist.

 

Labour will make everything perfect once they win the next election.

 

Sorted.

👍

[vmam 35]

I heard the the Tridents blue paper touch paper got wet !

[crookesey 635]

Do Lockheed Martin issue guarantees with their products? 

[ab6262 202]

12 hours ago, Delbow said:

A second fail in a Trident missile test launch from a UK submarine, when the missile that was supposed to travel for thousands of miles landed not far from the sub itself. In  a previous test, the missile veered off course and landed nowhere near the target. But hey, don't worry! Grant Schapps says that if it were fired in a real war with a real nuclear warhead on it, it would be fine. Without explaining why. It just would be fine, okay? He was there at the launch, incidentally, and said that “The test reaffirmed the effectiveness of the UK’s nuclear deterrent". The failed test.

 

 

er its why we do tests to check they work and then adjust, is that hard to understand in your world???

[Findlay 116]

You wont get funding if it works so a failure will mean lots of funding and lots of testing to get the capability measure back.

A great way to do testing as its not portrayed at any aggressor.

[Al Bundy 1,577]

33 minutes ago, ab6262 said:

er its why we do tests to check they work and then adjust, is that hard to understand in your world???

Got to have something to moan and get all stampy feet about, gets em through the day.

 

 

Edited February 22 by Al Bundy

[Axe 836]

9 hours ago, melthebell said:

They don't do that though, 2 tests in what 12 years, and both have failed, they don't test willy willy as each missile costs millions, so they only fire one.

Again if they needed to fire a live one tommorow what would the difference be?, blind patriotism won't fix it, schnapps blindly saying it'll be reyt won't fix it

The difference would be it would not be launched in test mode.  When they do a test it is also in safe mode and  over caution  can  override the default settings.  Nothing to worry about if a live situation occurs if you are on our side and not the enemy. 

[Mkapaka 219]

7 minutes ago, Axe said:

The difference would be it would not be launched in test mode.  When they do a test it is also in safe mode and  over caution  can  override the default settings.  Nothing to worry about if a live situation occurs if you are on our side and not the enemy. 

Resident nuclear arms expert posting the explanation on sheffield forum - who’d have thought it.

[Organgrinder 1,946]

2 hours ago, vmam said:

I heard the the Tridents blue paper touch paper got wet !

I've seen better rockets than than being set off on our street Nov, Xmas & New year.

[Organgrinder 1,946]

58 minutes ago, Mkapaka said:

Resident nuclear arms expert posting the explanation on sheffield forum - who’d have thought it.

I'm surprised he hasn't said that Boris should be in charge of those.