In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
07:37:37 on Fri, 16 Mar 2012, remarked:
"The scheme is currently the largest civil engineering project in
Europe." Really? Bigger than the Gotthard Base Tunnel?

I see no-one answered this.

I had a go. Here's an additional comment: the Crossrail budget is
about twice the Gotthard one. How do you define "large"?

Yes, I saw that later. However, most of the difference is explained by
stations and works off the tunnel route, isn't it?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 16/03/2012 17:18, Paul Scott wrote:
"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...

We still have HMS Illustrious, though she's not in commission.

Yes she is.

Illustrious remains in service until some time in 2014, when Ocean will
become the only operational carrier.


I thought she was still under refit, must have completed it.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On 16/03/2012 17:47, Paul Scott wrote:
"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 16/03/2012 15:01, Paul Scott wrote:

We have two aircraft [helicopter] carriers. HMS Ocean and HMS
Illustrious.

You mean we don't have any fixed wing capability.

Because we don't have any fixed wing aircraft. Assuming the ski-jump
has been removed (wasn't the last time I saw her), it would be easy to
refit to HMS Illustrious if we had any Harriers left.

Wrong assumption however. The ski jump is definitely still there. It
would have cost a huge amount to remove it, as modifications since the
1982 version led to it being enlarged and fully utilised internally for
accomodation, storerooms etc.


Still haven't got any Harriers though, which are the only aircraft that
are cleared for using the ski-jump.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On 16/03/2012 17:57, 77002 wrote:
On Mar 16, 2:56 pm, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 14:03:40 +0000

Graeme wrote:
Generals all tend to fight the last war...

I'm intrigued by the concept of the UK being /under/ defended. Against
what military threat?

I'm sure every general in the world would love the forsight to be able to
see who their next enemy will be 10 or 20 years down the line.

Currently we have nuclear missile submarines with no one to aim them at,
high performance fighters with no one to fight, an aircraft carrier with
no aircraft and carrier escort destroyers with no carriers to escort.

So your solution would be what, start building military equipment after we've
been attacked? Btw , we don't have any carriers right now.

B2003

Britain scraped by at the start of WWII because of the "phoney war".
That gave the UK time to manufacture aircraft, etc.

Had the battle of Britain happened earlier we may not have done so
well.

You think we are in serious danger of going to war with Germany again
sometime soon?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On 16/03/2012 18:41, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 17:03:32 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 16/03/2012 14:56, d wrote:
On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 14:03:40 +0000
Graeme wrote:
Generals all tend to fight the last war...

I'm intrigued by the concept of the UK being /under/ defended. Against
what military threat?

I'm sure every general in the world would love the forsight to be able to
see who their next enemy will be 10 or 20 years down the line.

Currently we have nuclear missile submarines with no one to aim them at,
high performance fighters with no one to fight, an aircraft carrier with
no aircraft and carrier escort destroyers with no carriers to escort.

So your solution would be what, start building military equipment after we've
been attacked?

Who is going to attack us that we need trident missiles to defend against?

The world is not short of loony leaders. Those who invent technologies
always run the risk of losing out to others who copy it.


That doesn't answer the question.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On 16/03/2012 20:15, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 16/03/2012 18:41, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 17:03:32 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 16/03/2012 14:56, d wrote:
On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 14:03:40 +0000
Graeme wrote:
Generals all tend to fight the last war...

I'm intrigued by the concept of the UK being /under/ defended. Against
what military threat?

I'm sure every general in the world would love the forsight to be
able to
see who their next enemy will be 10 or 20 years down the line.

Currently we have nuclear missile submarines with no one to aim
them at,
high performance fighters with no one to fight, an aircraft carrier
with
no aircraft and carrier escort destroyers with no carriers to escort.

So your solution would be what, start building military equipment
after we've
been attacked?

Who is going to attack us that we need trident missiles to defend
against?

The world is not short of loony leaders. Those who invent technologies
always run the risk of losing out to others who copy it.


That doesn't answer the question.

People don't figure out exactly who is going to nick their stuff before
taking out insurance.

Also the world takes notice of the latest Kim, or Pakistani general, and
Iran gets the world's attention, but no-one cares about their
equivalents in Africa or wherever.

Plus the frogs have got nukes.
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On 16/03/2012 20:14, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 16/03/2012 17:57, 77002 wrote:
On Mar 16, 2:56 pm, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 14:03:40 +0000

Graeme wrote:
Generals all tend to fight the last war...

I'm intrigued by the concept of the UK being /under/ defended. Against
what military threat?

I'm sure every general in the world would love the forsight to be
able to
see who their next enemy will be 10 or 20 years down the line.

Currently we have nuclear missile submarines with no one to aim them
at,
high performance fighters with no one to fight, an aircraft carrier
with
no aircraft and carrier escort destroyers with no carriers to escort.

So your solution would be what, start building military equipment
after we've
been attacked? Btw , we don't have any carriers right now.

B2003

Britain scraped by at the start of WWII because of the "phoney war".
That gave the UK time to manufacture aircraft, etc.

Had the battle of Britain happened earlier we may not have done so
well.

You think we are in serious danger of going to war with Germany again
sometime soon?

No - next time we'll have the sense to be on their side...

OTOH, were people expecting war with Germany in the mid-1930s, or the
1900s? It was a possibility, at least for rabble-rousers, but not an
expectation.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

"Graeme Wall" wrote

We still have HMS Illustrious, though she's not in commission.

We also have one commissioned battleship - HMS Victory.

Peter

On 16/03/2012 00:17, wrote:

"The scheme is currently the largest civil engineering project in Europe."
Really? Bigger than the Gotthard Base Tunnel?
But that isn't in Europe...
It is in Switzerland

Jim

On 16/03/2012 20:46, Peter Masson wrote:


"Graeme Wall" wrote

We still have HMS Illustrious, though she's not in commission.

We also have one commissioned battleship - HMS Victory.


Currently in refit :-)


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail