Hi,

Airbus made " Taipan " military helis have proved a disaster for us.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUUwIwIXdH8

They will all be scrapped, sold for parts or dumped on gullible customers.
A similar number of Sikorsky Black Hawks and Sea Hawks are to be ordered.

Famous warning: " 90 % of everything new is garbage".

....... Phil

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote

> Airbus made " Taipan " military helis have proved a disaster for us.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUUwIwIXdH8
>
> They will all be scrapped, sold for parts or dumped on gullible customers.
> A similar number of Sikorsky Black Hawks and Sea Hawks are to be ordered.
>
> Famous warning: " 90 % of everything new is garbage".

More of your utterly mindless bullshit.

On 22/12/21 12:56, Phil Allison wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Airbus made " Taipan " military helis have proved a disaster for us.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUUwIwIXdH8
>
> They will all be scrapped, sold for parts or dumped on gullible customers.
> A similar number of Sikorsky Black Hawks and Sea Hawks are to be ordered.
>
> Famous warning: " 90 % of everything new is garbage".
>
>
>
> ...... Phil
Just wait for the submarines

--
Marty

marty wrote:
==========
>
> > Famous warning: " 90 % of everything new is garbage".
>
> Just wait for the submarines

** Think we just got rid of the 90 % chance in that example.

AFAIK the new "nuke" subs will be tried and proven designs.
The only newish part may be the nuke reactor modules that make all the electricity.
Plus electronics tech that can be upgraded any time.

But we need the buggers fast !!

...... Phil

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
> marty wrote

>>> Famous warning: " 90 % of everything new is garbage".

>> Just wait for the submarines

> Think we just got rid of the 90 % chance in that example.

> AFAIK the new "nuke" subs will be tried and proven designs.
> The only newish part may be the nuke reactor modules that make all the
> electricity.
> Plus electronics tech that can be upgraded any time.

> But we need the buggers fast !!

Bullshit we do. Subs are completely useless to us and are a complete waste
of billions.

Rod Speed has a Negative IQ:
---------------------------------------------
> > But we need the buggers fast !!
>
> Bullshit we do. Subs are completely useless to us and are a complete waste
> of billions.

** Tell 'em Rod !!

Oh great omniscient genius.

...... Phil

On 23/12/21 5:41 am, Rod Speed wrote:
> Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
>> marty wrote
>
>>>> Famous warning: " 90 % of everything new is garbage".
>
>>> Just wait for the submarines
>
>> Think we just got rid of the 90 % chance in that example.
>
>> AFAIK  the new "nuke" subs will be tried and proven designs.
>> The only newish part may be the nuke reactor modules that make all the
>> electricity.
>> Plus electronics tech that can be upgraded any time.
>
>> But we need the buggers fast !!
>
> Bullshit we do. Subs are completely useless to us and are a complete
> waste of billions.

I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons and have also never
thought that we needed them.
Better to spend the money on surface ships and aircraft based in our north.

--
Daryl

Daryl the Dope wrote:
=================
>
> I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons and have also never
> thought that we needed them.

** But you have no history of actual thought ?

> Better to spend the money on surface ships and aircraft based in our north.

** Nuclear subs have unique abilities, long term invisibility being the main one.

....... Phil

Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
>>> marty wrote
>>
>>>>> Famous warning: " 90 % of everything new is garbage".
>>
>>>> Just wait for the submarines
>>
>>> Think we just got rid of the 90 % chance in that example.
>>
>>> AFAIK the new "nuke" subs will be tried and proven designs.
>>> The only newish part may be the nuke reactor modules that make all the
>>> electricity.
>>> Plus electronics tech that can be upgraded any time.
>>
>>> But we need the buggers fast !!
>>
>> Bullshit we do. Subs are completely useless to us and are a complete
>> waste of billions.

> I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons

Not necessarily. They can be useful if say someone attempts an invasion.

> and have also never thought that we needed them.

Yeah, they would only be theoretically useful if say Trump decided to
invade.

> Better to spend the money on surface ships and aircraft based in our
> north.

Only real use for surface ships is to use when one
of the fucked island states has a natural disaster.

We already have the aircraft but it was stupid to be buying all those F35s

There is no possibility of Indonesia invading even if they get a Trump
driving
the bus and the FA18s were quite capable of stopping that if it happened.

China won't be invading.

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
> Daryl wrote

>> I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons
>> and have also never thought that we needed them.

>> Better to spend the money on surface ships and aircraft based in our
>> north.

> Nuclear subs have unique abilities, long term invisibility being the main
> one.

And we have no need for that.

Rod Speed Has a Negative IQ wrote:
===========================
> > Nuclear subs have unique abilities, long term invisibility being the main
> > one.
>
> And we have no need for that.

** Tell 'em Rod !!

Oh great omniscient genius.

...... Phil

On 23/12/21 11:50 am, Rod Speed wrote:
> Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> marty wrote
>>>
>>>>>> Famous warning: " 90 % of everything new is garbage".
>>>
>>>>> Just wait for the submarines
>>>
>>>> Think we just got rid of the 90 % chance in that example.
>>>
>>>> AFAIK  the new "nuke" subs will be tried and proven designs.
>>>> The only newish part may be the nuke reactor modules that make all
>>>> the electricity.
>>>> Plus electronics tech that can be upgraded any time.
>>>
>>>> But we need the buggers fast !!
>>>
>>> Bullshit we do. Subs are completely useless to us and are a complete
>>> waste of billions.
>
>> I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons
>
> Not necessarily. They can be useful if say someone attempts an invasion.
>
>> and have also never thought that we needed them.
>
> Yeah, they would only be theoretically useful if say Trump decided to
> invade.
>
>> Better to spend the money on surface ships and aircraft based in our
>> north.
>
> Only real use for surface ships is to use when one
> of the fucked island states has a natural disaster.

Certainly have multiple uses but IMHO a reasonable deterrent if there is
enough of them.
>
> We already have the aircraft but it was stupid to be buying all those F35s

Don't think we have enough aircraft in the right places.
By the time we get all of our F35's fully sorted they will be obsolete,
agree that buying those wasn't a great plan.
>
> There is no possibility of Indonesia invading even if they get a Trump
> driving
> the bus and the FA18s were quite capable of stopping that if it happened.
>
> China won't be invading.

I can't imagine anyone invading, why invade when they can just buy the
place.

--
Daryl

On 23/12/21 11:52 am, Rod Speed wrote:
> Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
>> Daryl wrote
>
>>> I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons
>>> and have also never thought that we needed them.
>
>>> Better to spend the money on surface ships and aircraft based in our
>>> north.
>
>> Nuclear subs have unique abilities, long term invisibility being the
>> main one.
>
> And we have no need for that.

I don't think so either but I guess the Navy see's them as a deterrent
to an imaginary invasion.

--
Daryl

Daryl bullshitted:
=============
>
> > China won't be invading.
>
> I can't imagine anyone invading, why invade when they can just buy the
> place.
>

** Not even faintly possible.

Only fools post rhetorical Qs like that when they have no case whatever.

...... Phil

On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 13:01:27 +1100, Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au>
wrote:

>On 23/12/21 11:52 am, Rod Speed wrote:
>> Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Daryl wrote
>>
>>>> I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons
>>>> and have also never thought that we needed them.
>>
>>>> Better to spend the money on surface ships and aircraft based in our
>>>> north.
>>
>>> Nuclear subs have unique abilities, long term invisibility being the
>>> main one.
>>
>> And we have no need for that.
>
>
>I don't think so either but I guess the Navy see's them as a deterrent
>to an imaginary invasion.
>
It's our media ramping up Chinese aggression!

Australia sold/leased to China a refueling base in port of Darwin.

When a China Navy ship refuels there,
then sales past HMAS Supply (II).
The Chinese ship is called a spy ship. the HMAS Supply (II) is called
a intelligence ship?
HMAS Supply (II) while big and important it is the slowest ship
Australia has. Speed of 13 knots when fully loaded.
You get the idea
--
Petzl
Only the Irish Leprignomes have remained aloof and their family
heritage remains pure and unconfused. Gnome watchers believe that the
reason for this stems from the unfortunate events that led to their
expulsion from the peat bogs of Ireland in the late 1700s. It is
thought that the ambitious Leprignomes encroached on the territorial
boundaries of the intellectually superior Leprechauns. The Grand
Legislature of Leprechauns banished the ringleaders of this audacious
uprising to Australia. As a parting gesture they cast such a powerful
spell on the Leprignomes that, even today, they remain too shy to
associate with other gnome species.

Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>> marty wrote
>>>>
>>>>>>> Famous warning: " 90 % of everything new is garbage".
>>>>
>>>>>> Just wait for the submarines
>>>>
>>>>> Think we just got rid of the 90 % chance in that example.
>>>>
>>>>> AFAIK the new "nuke" subs will be tried and proven designs.
>>>>> The only newish part may be the nuke reactor modules that make all the
>>>>> electricity.
>>>>> Plus electronics tech that can be upgraded any time.
>>>>
>>>>> But we need the buggers fast !!
>>>>
>>>> Bullshit we do. Subs are completely useless to us and are a complete
>>>> waste of billions.
>>
>>> I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons
>>
>> Not necessarily. They can be useful if say someone attempts an invasion.
>>
>>> and have also never thought that we needed them.
>>
>> Yeah, they would only be theoretically useful if say Trump decided to
>> invade.
>>
>>> Better to spend the money on surface ships and aircraft based in our
>>> north.

>> Only real use for surface ships is to use when one
>> of the fucked island states has a natural disaster.

> Certainly have multiple uses but IMHO a reasonable deterrent if there is
> enough of them.

Not anymore. Surface ships don’t deter anything anymore.

And the problem with that line is that
there is no one that needs deterring.

Only the yanks have any capability for invading
this country and if they decide to do that, no
subs we have would be able to deter that.

Just as true if that fool Xi decided
to sink shipping coming here too.

>> We already have the aircraft but it was stupid to be buying all those
>> F35s

> Don't think we have enough aircraft in the right places.

Corse we do for anything that could possibly happen.

If the US did decide to invade, we can have
enough aircraft to stop that or even deter that.

> By the time we get all of our F35's fully sorted they will be obsolete,
> agree that buying those wasn't a great plan.

And even if everything was fully sorted today,
they don’t had anything useful to what we have.

They don’t even add anything to what we need
if the US was stupid enough to try to invade.

Afghanistan proves that the US wouldn’t
be able to stay even if they did invade.

>> There is no possibility of Indonesia invading even if they get a Trump
>> driving the bus and the FA18s were quite capable of stopping that if it
>> happened.

>> China won't be invading.

> I can't imagine anyone invading,

So there is no point in the F35s.

In theory we could say start bombing Indonesia
if it decided to say attack Malaysia or Singapore
but in reality we didn’t do that when it did last time.

We could certainly do something if say Xi stupidly tried
to stop shipping using the Java Straits etc but the reality
is that the US has what is needed if that happens and
even if say Harris chose to do nothing, we can never
afford what would be needed to stop Xi doing that.

And there are other ways the shipping can go anyway
and the subs wouldn’t be any use in that situation either.

> why invade when they can just buy the place.

They cant do that either if we decide to stop that.

Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Daryl wrote

>>>> I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons
>>>> and have also never thought that we needed them.

>>>> Better to spend the money on surface ships and aircraft based in our
>>>> north.

>>> Nuclear subs have unique abilities, long term invisibility being the
>>> main one.

>> And we have no need for that.

> I don't think so either but I guess the Navy see's them as a deterrent to
> an imaginary invasion.

No they don’t, they just won't accept that the only
use for a navy now is to do a bit of intervention in
the Gulf and helping the pacific island states after
natural disasters and doing a bit of posturing in
the south china sea with surface naval vessels when
that fool Xi tries to claim that that’s chinese territorial
waters. Even the subs are useless for posturing.

Rod Speed has Negative IQ:
========================>
> No they don’t, they just won't accept that the only
> use for a navy now is to do a bit of intervention in
> the Gulf and helping the pacific island states after
> natural disasters and doing a bit of posturing in
> the south china sea with surface naval vessels when
> that fool Xi tries to claim that that’s chinese territorial
> waters. Even the subs are useless for posturing.

** Tell 'em Rod !!

Oh great omniscient genius.

...... Phil

Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
> Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Daryl wrote

>>>>> I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons
>>>>> and have also never thought that we needed them.

>>>>> Better to spend the money on surface
>>>>> ships and aircraft based in our north.
>>>> Nuclear subs have unique abilities, long
>>>> term invisibility being the main one.
>>> And we have no need for that.

>> I don't think so either but I guess the Navy see's
>> them as a deterrent to an imaginary invasion.

> It's our media ramping up Chinese aggression!

Hyping up rather than ramping up, yep.
> Australia sold/leased to China a refueling base in port of Darwin.

In fact not just the refuelling base, the docking too.
> When a China Navy ship refuels there,
> then sales past HMAS Supply (II).
> The Chinese ship is called a spy ship. the
> HMAS Supply (II) is called a intelligence ship?
> HMAS Supply (II) while big and important it is the slowest
> ship Australia has. Speed of 13 knots when fully loaded.
> You get the idea

Yeah, tho the chinese did have at least one spy ship
watching the naval exercises with landing craft with
the USA on the east coast of Qld recently.

On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 15:16:13 +1100, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

>Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
>> Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>> Daryl wrote
>
>>>>>> I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons
>>>>>> and have also never thought that we needed them.
>
>>>>>> Better to spend the money on surface
>>>>>> ships and aircraft based in our north.
>
>>>>> Nuclear subs have unique abilities, long
>>>>> term invisibility being the main one.
>
>>>> And we have no need for that.
>
>>> I don't think so either but I guess the Navy see's
>>> them as a deterrent to an imaginary invasion.
>
>> It's our media ramping up Chinese aggression!
>
>Hyping up rather than ramping up, yep.
>
>> Australia sold/leased to China a refueling base in port of Darwin.
>
>In fact not just the refuelling base, the docking too.
>
>> When a China Navy ship refuels there,
>> then sales past HMAS Supply (II).
>> The Chinese ship is called a spy ship. the
>> HMAS Supply (II) is called a intelligence ship?
>> HMAS Supply (II) while big and important it is the slowest
>> ship Australia has. Speed of 13 knots when fully loaded.
>> You get the idea
>
>Yeah, tho the chinese did have at least one spy ship
>watching the naval exercises with landing craft with
>the USA on the east coast of Qld recently.
>
I find everything the Chinese make is broken unreliable crap
--
Petzl
Stalin has decreed that murder is a capitalist disease; there is no
murder in a communist paradise. The soviet governments job was to
shoot and kill anyone who had proof of something different

"Our" government and media decree that this "secular multiculturalism
paradise" does not have immigrant crime and remove anyone stating
different!.

On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 19:54:19 -0800 (PST), Phil Allison
<pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:

> Rod Speed has Negative IQ:
>=========================
>>
>> No they don’t, they just won't accept that the only
>> use for a navy now is to do a bit of intervention in
>> the Gulf and helping the pacific island states after
>> natural disasters and doing a bit of posturing in
>> the south china sea with surface naval vessels when
>> that fool Xi tries to claim that that’s chinese territorial
>> waters. Even the subs are useless for posturing.
>
>** Tell 'em Rod !!
>
>Oh great omniscient genius.
>
Much cheaper to send satellites loaded with bombs to be dropped on
earth than using nuclear submarines
https://www.rocketlabusa.com/
--
Petzl
Barack Obama once warned not to underestimate
Joe Biden’s ‘ability to f**k things up’

Trump was never running against Biden.
He was running against voter fraud.
https://youtu.be/U4c5dYDD9xw
The Democrats’ First Bill of 2021 Is to Lock In
Fraudulent Election Maneuvers and Steal Elections in Perpetuity

The left loathes Trump so much it totally blinds them
to anything he says, even when what he says
could potentially save thousands of lives.

Amazing where in America a lifetime of lying, thieving,
fraud and cheating will take you in politics?
https://youtu.be/D1j0FS0Z6ho
Joe Biden's son, zero track record, for jobs in languages
he don't speak thrown out of navy for doing coke,
turned in a rental car with crack pipes in it,
hid from a process server for getting a girl pregnant
to avoid child support.
And now he's a high paid artist with no discernible talent.

Five days with dad on Chinese trip was paid US$1.5 billion dollars?
Corruption by proxy,a new corruption that is difficult to detect

Joe Biden had a little boy
his nose was white with snow
And everywhere Joe Biden went
his son was sure to go
He followed to Ukraine one day
and scored a lot of dough
This made Joe Biden worry so
he did a quid pro quo : Anon

Somewhere out there is a 2-year-old girl whose mother is a stripper,
her father is a crackhead and her grandpa is President of the United States
.. --Fact check THAT.

Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>> Daryl wrote
>>
>>>>>>> I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons
>>>>>>> and have also never thought that we needed them.
>>
>>>>>>> Better to spend the money on surface
>>>>>>> ships and aircraft based in our north.
>>
>>>>>> Nuclear subs have unique abilities, long
>>>>>> term invisibility being the main one.
>>
>>>>> And we have no need for that.
>>
>>>> I don't think so either but I guess the Navy see's
>>>> them as a deterrent to an imaginary invasion.
>>
>>> It's our media ramping up Chinese aggression!
>>
>>Hyping up rather than ramping up, yep.
>>
>>> Australia sold/leased to China a refueling base in port of Darwin.
>>
>>In fact not just the refuelling base, the docking too.
>>
>>> When a China Navy ship refuels there,
>>> then sales past HMAS Supply (II).
>>> The Chinese ship is called a spy ship. the
>>> HMAS Supply (II) is called a intelligence ship?
>>> HMAS Supply (II) while big and important it is the slowest
>>> ship Australia has. Speed of 13 knots when fully loaded.
>>> You get the idea
>>
>>Yeah, tho the chinese did have at least one spy ship
>>watching the naval exercises with landing craft with
>>the USA on the east coast of Qld recently.
>>
> I find everything the Chinese make is broken unreliable crap

I don't. My iphones have been very reliable and the two
different nail clippers have been perfectly reliable. The
spanner bit sets too. And the telescopic wheel brace.

Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
> Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>> Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>> Daryl wrote
>>>
>>>>>>>> I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons
>>>>>>>> and have also never thought that we needed them.
>>>
>>>>>>>> Better to spend the money on surface
>>>>>>>> ships and aircraft based in our north.
>>>
>>>>>>> Nuclear subs have unique abilities, long
>>>>>>> term invisibility being the main one.
>>>
>>>>>> And we have no need for that.
>>>
>>>>> I don't think so either but I guess the Navy see's
>>>>> them as a deterrent to an imaginary invasion.
>>>
>>>> It's our media ramping up Chinese aggression!
>>>
>>>Hyping up rather than ramping up, yep.
>>>
>>>> Australia sold/leased to China a refueling base in port of Darwin.
>>>
>>>In fact not just the refuelling base, the docking too.
>>>
>>>> When a China Navy ship refuels there,
>>>> then sales past HMAS Supply (II).
>>>> The Chinese ship is called a spy ship. the
>>>> HMAS Supply (II) is called a intelligence ship?
>>>> HMAS Supply (II) while big and important it is the slowest
>>>> ship Australia has. Speed of 13 knots when fully loaded.
>>>> You get the idea
>>>
>>>Yeah, tho the chinese did have at least one spy ship
>>>watching the naval exercises with landing craft with
>>>the USA on the east coast of Qld recently.
>>>
>> I find everything the Chinese make is broken unreliable crap
>
> I don't. My iphones have been very reliable and the two
> different nail clippers have been perfectly reliable. The
> spanner bit sets too. And the telescopic wheel brace.

And the Philips Hue stuff too. Haven't had a single failure.

The Audew jump starter too, very well done.

On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 20:06:19 +1100, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

>Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>> Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>> Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>> Daryl wrote
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons
>>>>>>>>> and have also never thought that we needed them.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Better to spend the money on surface
>>>>>>>>> ships and aircraft based in our north.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nuclear subs have unique abilities, long
>>>>>>>> term invisibility being the main one.
>>>>
>>>>>>> And we have no need for that.
>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think so either but I guess the Navy see's
>>>>>> them as a deterrent to an imaginary invasion.
>>>>
>>>>> It's our media ramping up Chinese aggression!
>>>>
>>>>Hyping up rather than ramping up, yep.
>>>>
>>>>> Australia sold/leased to China a refueling base in port of Darwin.
>>>>
>>>>In fact not just the refuelling base, the docking too.
>>>>
>>>>> When a China Navy ship refuels there,
>>>>> then sales past HMAS Supply (II).
>>>>> The Chinese ship is called a spy ship. the
>>>>> HMAS Supply (II) is called a intelligence ship?
>>>>> HMAS Supply (II) while big and important it is the slowest
>>>>> ship Australia has. Speed of 13 knots when fully loaded.
>>>>> You get the idea
>>>>
>>>>Yeah, tho the chinese did have at least one spy ship
>>>>watching the naval exercises with landing craft with
>>>>the USA on the east coast of Qld recently.
>>>>
>>> I find everything the Chinese make is broken unreliable crap
>>
>> I don't. My iphones have been very reliable and the two
>> different nail clippers have been perfectly reliable. The
>> spanner bit sets too. And the telescopic wheel brace.
>
>And the Philips Hue stuff too. Haven't had a single failure.
>
>The Audew jump starter too, very well done.
>
I supect if the quality control is done by companies outside of China
it works.
Then you get TEAC most call Total East Aisian Crap.
--
Petzl
Good lawyers know the law
Great lawyers know the judge

Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>> Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>> Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>>> Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>>> Daryl wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've always thought of subs as offensive weapons
>>>>>>>>>> and have also never thought that we needed them.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Better to spend the money on surface
>>>>>>>>>> ships and aircraft based in our north.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nuclear subs have unique abilities, long
>>>>>>>>> term invisibility being the main one.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And we have no need for that.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think so either but I guess the Navy see's
>>>>>>> them as a deterrent to an imaginary invasion.
>>>>>
>>>>>> It's our media ramping up Chinese aggression!
>>>>>
>>>>>Hyping up rather than ramping up, yep.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Australia sold/leased to China a refueling base in port of Darwin.
>>>>>
>>>>>In fact not just the refuelling base, the docking too.
>>>>>
>>>>>> When a China Navy ship refuels there,
>>>>>> then sales past HMAS Supply (II).
>>>>>> The Chinese ship is called a spy ship. the
>>>>>> HMAS Supply (II) is called a intelligence ship?
>>>>>> HMAS Supply (II) while big and important it is the slowest
>>>>>> ship Australia has. Speed of 13 knots when fully loaded.
>>>>>> You get the idea
>>>>>
>>>>>Yeah, tho the chinese did have at least one spy ship
>>>>>watching the naval exercises with landing craft with
>>>>>the USA on the east coast of Qld recently.
>>>>>
>>>> I find everything the Chinese make is broken unreliable crap
>>>
>>> I don't. My iphones have been very reliable and the two
>>> different nail clippers have been perfectly reliable. The
>>> spanner bit sets too. And the telescopic wheel brace.
>>
>>And the Philips Hue stuff too. Haven't had a single failure.
>>
>>The Audew jump starter too, very well done.

> I supect if the quality control is done by companies outside of China it
> works.

That wasn't true of the nail clippers and spanners, they aren't even
branded.

> Then you get TEAC most call Total East Aisian Crap.