Jump to content

Coronavirus (COVID-19)


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, 101 said:

Also I presume if we have contracted out this then some private company have to have a nuclear bunker and staff there to operate it.

How far are we off topic now btw 😁

Pretty far.

To your question, we lease the missile bodies from the US government, the lease is managed by Lockheed Martin who build them. Periodically the missiles go back into a common pool in the States for maintenance. We then get allocated another 70 odd missile bodies (or however many it is we "own" now)

The warheads are designed and built in Aldermaston Berkshire, wholly British owned (though they don't deviate massively from US design) they get mated to the missile bodies prior to loading on the submarines.

Once out at sea, the on board trigger is the only thing required to "operate" the missile. Weirdly our system is a bit more 'Crimson Tide' than the US system in terms of how much interpretation of orders we leave up to the Captain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, sparky88 said:

Before long the Italian media will be full of stories of the horrors taking place in the UK. 

I suppose UK and Scottish government's might point to the fact the NHS hasn't been overwhelmed.

I wonder how much capacity of ICU we are actually currently using...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the one question in that article I don't agree with, and it's something that annoys me every time I see it.

People completely miss the point about why there needs to be some sort of limit on who can move to the UK. It's got nothing to do with degrading people who currently work in those roles.

It's a cheap, virtue signalling shot.

20200411_100953.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before long the Italian media will be full of stories of the horrors taking place in the UK. 
I suppose UK and Scottish government's might point to the fact the NHS hasn't been overwhelmed.
IMO, that's all they care about anyway. The number of deaths is largely inconsequential to the folk running the show, in comparison to the capacity of the healthcare system.

People dying because they caught coronavirus and were unable to be saved would rightly be viewed in a different light to people dying of coronavirus because they were unable to get any treatment, because the hospitals are bursting at the seams.

The last thing you want to see is people dying who werent even given a fighting chance. That should (but probably wouldnt in this country) lead to the govt being savaged by the media.

The govt have fucked up enough already with their ridiculous testing promises, shouts about antibody tests and ignoring emails from the EU. They will cling for dear life to the fact that they have (so far and fingers crossed) kept the NHS under 100%
Link to comment
Share on other sites



This is the one question in that article I don't agree with, and it's something that annoys me every time I see it.
People completely miss the point about why there needs to be some sort of limit on who can move to the UK. It's got nothing to do with degrading people who currently work in those roles.
It's a cheap, virtue signalling shot.
20200411_100953.thumb.jpg.c80fd5030e094aad9886f8b6712d29e5.jpg


Can I risk a massive derailment by asking why there should be a limit?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Can I risk a massive derailment by asking why there should be a limit?

 

IMO, and I accept that others may disagree, there is no reason (or benefit to the UK) for someone to move to the UK to take up any of those roles.

We have enough able bodied people in the UK to do so.

You can't move to Australia to work in a Supermarket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, and I accept that others may disagree, there is no reason (or benefit to the UK) for someone to move to the UK to take up any of those roles.
We have enough able bodied people in the UK to do so.
You can't move to Australia to work in a Supermarket.
I think that's a myth. I dont think people in the UK want those jobs, and as such, foreign people moved here to fill the void. I think youl find the UK workforce turning its nose up at Hotel work, berry picking, fish processing etc to name a few that have a high amount of foreign workers, and thats why they are here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bairnardo said:

IMO, that's all they care about anyway. The number of deaths is largely inconsequential to the folk running the show, in comparison to the capacity of the healthcare system.

People dying because they caught coronavirus and were unable to be saved would rightly be viewed in a different light to people dying of coronavirus because they were unable to get any treatment, because the hospitals are bursting at the seams.

The last thing you want to see is people dying who werent even given a fighting chance. That should (but probably wouldnt in this country) lead to the govt being savaged by the media.

The govt have fucked up enough already with their ridiculous testing promises, shouts about antibody tests and ignoring emails from the EU. They will cling for dear life to the fact that they have (so far and fingers crossed) kept the NHS under 100%

It's rightfully mainly about capacity, the only thing the conspiracy troll Jerome was right about was that we wouldn't shut down nearly the entire economy in a bad flu year which have killed more than hopefully we'll see with Covid19. The frightening thing about this one is the thought of being left alone to die, desperately trying to suck in air with fucked lungs, because there are no beds, staff or equipment left to give you oxygen and a decent dose of morphine to see you off.

Edited by welshbairn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, dirty dingus said:

Alastair Campbell may be a bit of a dick but he's spot on here.

https://www.thearticle.com/media-questions-at-no10-briefings-are-woeful-here-are-20-they-should-ask

absolutely right and well said - but he has missed out one question:

21) so, prime minister, do you actually have any quantifiable, irrefutable evidence to back up the claims which you are using as a premise to take this country to war ?

accountability really isn't the strongest suit he could be playing....

Edited by Herman Hessian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Herman Hessian said:

absolutely right and well said - but he has missed out one question:

21) so, prime minister, do you actually have any quantifiable, irrefutable evidence to back up the claims which you are using as a premise to take this country to war ?

accountability really isn't the strongest suit he could be playing....

Aye well the twat may be right at the moment, doesn’t excuse him or his former boss.

Mind you, one think at a time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:
5 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:
IMO, and I accept that others may disagree, there is no reason (or benefit to the UK) for someone to move to the UK to take up any of those roles.
We have enough able bodied people in the UK to do so.
You can't move to Australia to work in a Supermarket.

I dont think people in the UK want those jobs, and as such, foreign people moved here to fill the void. I think youl find the UK workforce turning its nose up at Hotel work, berry picking, fish processing etc to name a few that have a high amount of foreign workers, and thats why they are here.

I don't disagree with any of that.

But it makes absolutely no sense for the UK to continue to allow international workers to come and settle in the UK to fill these roles and at the same time provide a safety net and assistance to those already here that could do the work, but just don't want to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Todd_is_God said:

I don't disagree with any of that.

But it makes absolutely no sense for the UK to continue to allow international workers to come and settle in the UK to fill these roles and at the same time provide a safety net and assistance to those already here that could do the work, but just don't want to.

You are sort of getting into the realms of forced employment there....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bairnardo said:

You are sort of getting into the realms of forced employment there....

Not at all. But the premise of Job Seekers Allowance is surely that you are actively seeking a job?

If you don't want to do a job you aren't forced to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

IMO, that's all they care about anyway. The number of deaths is largely inconsequential to the folk running the show, in comparison to the capacity of the healthcare system.

People dying because they caught coronavirus and were unable to be saved would rightly be viewed in a different light to people dying of coronavirus because they were unable to get any treatment, because the hospitals are bursting at the seams.

The last thing you want to see is people dying who werent even given a fighting chance. That should (but probably wouldnt in this country) lead to the govt being savaged by the media.

The govt have fucked up enough already with their ridiculous testing promises, shouts about antibody tests and ignoring emails from the EU. They will cling for dear life to the fact that they have (so far and fingers crossed) kept the NHS under 100%

I guess one question is why the numbers are so high when our healthcare system hasn't fallen apart as it seemingly did in Italy. No immediate answer to that one, unfortunately. 

The numbers are alarming at the moment but they are also an utter mess. The vast majority of the deaths reported yesterday were in the previous 7 days with "only" 140 of them actually taking place in the usual reporting timeframe. Around 1400 previous deaths just appeared in the figures that last couple of days as a morbid data dump. 

How can you make the right decisions when the data is shit and can't be relied upon?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, renton said:

Pretty far.

To your question, we lease the missile bodies from the US government, the lease is managed by Lockheed Martin who build them. Periodically the missiles go back into a common pool in the States for maintenance. We then get allocated another 70 odd missile bodies (or however many it is we "own" now)

The warheads are designed and built in Aldermaston Berkshire, wholly British owned (though they don't deviate massively from US design) they get mated to the missile bodies prior to loading on the submarines.

Once out at sea, the on board trigger is the only thing required to "operate" the missile. Weirdly our system is a bit more 'Crimson Tide' than the US system in terms of how much interpretation of orders we leave up to the Captain.

Was there not a time when a US naval officer would be seconded to UK submarines with a dual launch key/code so a nuke could only be launched with his permission? Probably remembering it from some crappy Cold War film or airport thriller, and doesn't sound practical as he could be forced to do whatever necessary in extremis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...