Admiral Sir George Parr discusses the future of the British Navy. And the London Olympics. Incidently, the HMS Daring is now in Portsmouth.. news.bbc.co.uk/... Olympic-sized swimming pools at the ready
Remember seeing this clip used during training in the Royal Navy. The instructor stated it was more accurate regarding the current state of the carriers (at that time) and that the security forces were looking into where they got the info...
@@mrpusser0348 - may be a gash dit, but a retiring admiral giving last call fireside chats, pretty much confirmed what was said here - including the fact that he would be long gone and it would be someone else’s problem.
Met John Bird in Black Park near Slough while he was waiting for his scene in some film. Bored waiting he came over to help us feed the ducks and was entirely charming and humble.
I hadn’t heard about the sad passing of John Bird until today. This is one of the finest Bird & Fortune sketches and deserves to viewed a great deal. John Bird’s other comedy performances were very funny especially as the low-down cheating skunk John Fuller-Carp in BBC Radio’s “Chambers”. Just as a side note… I met John Fortune on a train once and he was utterly charming.
Almost like the statement, "We can reduce the armour on our war ships because they are so fast that the enemy will not be able to catch them". Seriously that is what they told us. So off to the Falklands with all the protection of a bullet proof vest made of coke cans. Fast is only useful if you are running away from an enemy that has no aerial capability and hasn't heard about the invention the outboard motor.
Britain has bimodal population distribution, creatives and total greedy idiots. Sadly the latter are always in charge due to the English anachronistic class system.
F35s are in service on the carriers and they can sail anywhere on the ocean with those planes. Of course this sketch (as funny as it is) was made in the 2000s when it presumed that major military projects aimed at countering peer opponents would be unnecessary and/or unlikely. As recent events in eastern Europe has shown, sadly that threat remains and so renders necessary the means to counter that (e.g. lots of stealth fighters able to be projected around the world)
The two Johns, absolutely brilliant. John Fortune's death is a blow to the anti- establishment forces in Britain. Their humour was razor sharp and showed up the British ruling class and all their sycophantic hangers on for the self serving class obsessed nonentities that they are and always have been. RIP Comrade
Here we are in 2024 and both ships still don't have full crews or air wings, both have spent more time in Rosyth for propeller shaft failures, both have had floods, HMS Queen Elizabeth caught fire after having to be humiliatingly withdrawn from the Red Sea and sent back for more repairs. I'd love to see Admiral Sir George Parr's explanation...
It still is. The RAF had to hit the Houthis from Cyprus with tanker support because of the inability to launch planes from the Queen Elizabeth, even though she was right in the neighbourhood. A pair of floating white elephants that neither the Russians or Chinese will lose any sleep over.
The most effective and hard hitting comedy is satire based entirely on facts! Those two wonderful Teachers are enlightening people in the best and the most effective way, through the laughter! It is as powerful as documentary movie Matrix with Keany Reeves!
ABSOLUTELY, SATIRE DOWN THE AGES, HAS BEEN DEVASTATING, AND THAT'S---WHY IT HAS BEEN (UNOFFICIALLY) BANNED FROM OUR TV SCREENS. EVER SINCE BLIAR STARTED TO DESTROY OUR COUNTRY, FOR THAT VERY REASON.
It is so simple isn't it. Two men sitting opposite talking and pure comedy flows out from their dialogue. The genius and simplicity of John Bird and the sorely missed John Fortune.
I wouldn't imagine youngsters today would understand this type of humour. they are not used to the lack of swear words, the timing and clever writing behind the script.
They could have named the aircraft carrier the Camilla Parker-Bowles and just changed the words the queen says to something like, oh I don't know, how about "I name this ship Camilla Parker-Bowles. God bless her and all the seamen in her." Actually, thinking about it. Perhaps not.
or as Peter Cook would have said "difficulty, I think the word difficulty is a good one" We spend billions on multiple tennis courts, whilst we have a shortage of beds, or hospital to be more exact. RIP both John's
I think it was Steve Bell, the cartoonist, who said something like if you argue with them, it gives them credibility. If you want to destroy them, you have to make everybody laugh at them. I think he had John Major in mind. He did it with visual image. These guys do it with fact-based piss take. It's wonderful stuff.
This had me looking up who Des Browne was! Under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, he was Secretary of State for Defence 2006 to 2008 and Secretary of State for Scotland from 2007 to 2008. {:o:O:}
@tisFrancesfault Agreed, the French were adapting the design and building it themselves. But nuclear propulsion was never on the cards for the ship, they were always going to have the RR MT30. But looks like they may want to go nuclear now again, if they do it's likely they'll have to use a clean sheet design - although that's not really compatible with a shrinking budget.
Update from 2021. 20 years later and they are finally in service. With US Marines flying from them. : / What are they for? Currently they seem to be for defending the colony of Hong Kong... which the British handed over more then 20 years ago. So, still no purpose. On the up side the practice of the navy being top heavy does actually make sense. Hear me out. It takes decades to train an admiral or commodore while only a few months to train a gunner. Training overseen by an admiral or commodore. For example the well famed admiral Gilbert Stevens "the terror of Tobermory." So by being top heavy in peace time the navy is protecting its competitive base and can grow fairly quickly if the schnit hits the fan.
This sketch is 14 years old. The HMS Prince of wales still hasn't been built and charlie has been promoted since then. Also, the Lizzie was nearly a decade late.
@@robgazzard4432 _delayed by the Labour Govt_ And the cons have had power for 12 years. We still haven't seen the Price of wales in active service and the lizzie broke down just after setting sail.
@Gary Williams you are mistaken. HMS Prince of Wales was declared fully operational in late 2021 and participated in various international exercises. She suffered damage to her propeller in August 2022. HMS Queen Elizabeth has suffered no damage but has been conducting international operations including a well publicised global project across the Indian Ocean and disputed waters in the South China Seas. Its so sad people have such a poor understanding of the Royal Navy.
@@robgazzard4432 _HMS Prince of Wales was declared fully operational in late 2021_ You have a funny idea of "fully operational". Repairs to aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales will not be complete until the spring, the Royal Navy has confirmed. The £3bn warship broke down off the Isle of Wight in August as it headed to the US from Portsmouth Naval Base. _Its so sad people have such a poor understanding of the Royal Navy._ It's so sad that people seem to think fully operational means laid up in dock for repairs five minutes after launching.
@@gdwnet are you unable to understand what I have said above? You seem to provide incorrect information and then ignore the correct information. Are you well?
@ckyliu the French arnt buying one of ours. they were going to build one based on what we designed, modified to use French jets and have a nuclear reactor instead of a diesel.
flankerpraha actually the problems are fixed the Americans are using them now and they work fine the RAF is using them and they work fine stop believing everything you read
@@samuel10125 Well, it would be sad if they wouldn't fix the problems after the next 4 years, some 25 years after the beginning of the program JSF. But the fact that most of the problems were finally fixed (or we are told so) several years after I've written what was the fact in that time does not negate the fact that it was far from oprational capability when I've written that. So, your point is completely invalid.
Sorry, does anyone know if all this information is true? I mean, I could well believe it, but it does seem surprising that even the British army could be so badly equipped
@@sirdigbyminge1639 however there was a military dislike of Harrier (as in long decision not to up grade / build new one , I think the multi role Tornado was pencilled in as part replacement )
£3.5bn seems an awful lot for two artifical reefs which is what they will be if there's ever a war. Notably the Chinese navy apparently has only one carrier, which means they will need to buy two torpedos to deal with ours whereas we will only need one to sort theirs out.
c2757 They've just commissioned a second into service with a third on order. The Chinese have also conventionally armed ballastic missiles that are designed to take out carrier strike groups. You were saying?
Brilliant still true, shouldn’t they have enough aircraft?. - no, this is Britain almost pay for things but not quite! It’s long standing tradition. Brilliant.
Excellent. I've never met a pleasant and peaceful person that didn't enjoy Cleese and his style of comedy. Here in America it's a good measuring stick w/o asking about politics. Just say "Hey, Fawlty Towers is the best sitcom ever." When they give you a blank stare say "You know, Monty Python?" If that doesn't work you know to try to talk about things like Thomas Kinkaide and above ground pools.
A glaring error here is that Afghanistan is ABOUT 300 MILES from the nearest sea, not 1200! So, in fact the 400 mile Harrier range would at least get it there!
I haven't laughed so hard in years !!!. Mind you despite the enormous waste described by the good "Admiral" they are still amateurs compared to the American Navy.
@@mikedegraaf4747 indeed the RN by Henry VIII was running out of timber, at least two of his ships sunk effectively overloaded when re-designed to look impressive, Nelson blew the opposition up at Copehagen and The Nile instead of capturing needed warships ( the UK did to well in capturing US Civil Naval Vessels in C 19th war when one of my ancesters had a schooner and a corsair captured alleged gun-running in international waters.
EdMcF1 he's spot on about the Harrier good piece of kit for its time today it's absolutely shit and the F-35B LIGHTNING despite its over exaggerated problems by the media it's pretty much a very advanced Harrier.
@ilovemejau Thomson designed it yes, but BAE are building them. Welcome to the world of competitive tenders; I'm all for it personally. Who cares who designed it, you simply want the most efficient design that best meets your needs for your budget, and the French delivered. Admittedly it serves no purpose at the moment having no aircraft, but you can hardly blame that on poor ship design. As regards range they still have a better range than the Invincible class they are replacing.
@ilovemejau The carriers never going to be nuclear powered. Far too expensive; might give you a good range but remember you still have to keep the thing stocked with aircraft fuel and food anyway. Then there is the astronomical cost of decommissioning and servicing it. CODAG is a much better choice from a cost-benefit viewpoint; the French are buying our carrier when they already have a nuclear one. Scrapping the Harrier is indeed a new and in my opinion, highly stupid move.
You'll see a long list of people here, below, who haven't quite understood what this sketch is about. See if you can spot them. Clue - they'll often have a reference to 'aircraft carriers' or the Navy in their comment! FFS!
