Topic: UK trident missile test fails for the 2nd time in a row

Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc started this discussion 2 years ago #116,297

"This is highly embarrassing for both the UK and the US manufacturer of the Trident missile"

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-68355395

Nearly blew up its own launching ship, lol!

"We can act tough all we like so long as big brother America protects us" - Rishi Sunak.

Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 8 minutes later[^] [v] #1,284,327

A defence source close to the Mr Shapps insisted the Trident "could absolutely fire in a real world situation" if it needed to.

"The issue that occurred during the test was specific to the event and would not have occurred during a live armed fire," the source said.

A written ministerial statement is expected from Mr Shapps later.

Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 1 minute later, 9 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,329

@previous (B)
The whole point of a test is to see if you are ready for the real thing.

Why even conduct the test if you are going to toss out negative results and assume it would work in an actual conflict?

Anonymous B replied with this 2 years ago, 40 seconds later, 10 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,330

@previous (C)

The issue that occurred during the test was specific to the event

Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 2 minutes later, 12 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,331

@previous (B)
Why conduct a test if the event is too different from an actual conflict to generate reliable results?

A successful fire would be hailed as a success, while this failure is disregarded. How convenient!

They should save some money, and just jump right to the conclusion they predecided on.

Indie the Grate joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 22 minutes later, 34 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,332

inb4 endless textwall of Russiaboo sperging that no one will ever read.

Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 15 minutes later, 50 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,333

@previous (Indie the Grate)
Failed QA? Let's just push it to the production branch anyway, fucking russian bot.

Indie the Grate replied with this 2 years ago, 4 minutes later, 55 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,334

@previous (C)
Never reply to me again. Thanks.

Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 14 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,335

@1,284,327 (B)

> A defence source close to the Mr Shapps insisted the Trident "could absolutely fire in a real world situation" if it needed to.

"The problem is we have absolutely no idea where it will actually fly to. It could end up blowing our own bollocks off" the source continued.

(Edited 46 seconds later.)

Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 39 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,336

@previous (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
> "The problem is we have absolutely no idea where it will actually fly to. It could end up blowing our own bollocks off" the source continued.

Nowhere in that article is this stated.

Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 15 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,338

@previous (E)
It's literally there in the article.

Anonymous E replied with this 2 years ago, 10 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,340

@previous (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
It's literally not there in the article, you berk.

Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 6 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,341

@previous (E)
Enable images and you'll see I've underlined it for you.

Anonymous E replied with this 2 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,342

@previous (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
My images are enabled, you berk.

Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,344

@previous (E)
Then you are either blind or illiterate. In which case: thanks, that'll be all.

Anonymous E replied with this 2 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,345

So you can't prove that statement was in the article. In which case: thanks, that'll be all.

Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,346

@1,284,334 (Indie the Grate)

Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 49 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,351

@1,284,344 (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)

> Then you are either blind or illiterate. In which case: thanks, that'll be all.

lol because people that are illiterate cant look at pictures? you are one retarded ass motherfucker

Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,352

@previous (F)

1:

> lol because people that are illiterate cant look at pictures?

See:

@1,284,341 (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)

> you'll see I've underlined it for you.

2:

> you are one retarded ass motherfucker

See:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/irony

3:

:)

Anonymous F replied with this 2 years ago, 8 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,354

@previous (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)

> 1:
>
> > lol because people that are illiterate cant look at pictures?
>
> See:
>
>
>
> > you'll see I've underlined it for you.
>
> 2:
>
> > you are one retarded ass motherfucker
>
> See:
>
> https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/irony
>
> 3:
>
> :)

lol you have absolutely no idea what irony is, you are dumb as shit.

Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 16 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,357

Pretty sure there was a Yes Prime Minister scene or three about this particular issue. Glad to see some things never change.

(Edited 7 seconds later.)

Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 6 hours later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,374

@1,284,344 (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
How old are you?

Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 2 hours later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,381

@previous (H)
He’s in his 40s

Anonymous B replied with this 2 years ago, 21 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,385

@1,284,331 (C)

They do not release the details to Minichan forites.

Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 1 hour later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,408

@previous (B)
They would if it worked.

Instead it exploded, and was such a massive fuck up the details spread here on thier own.

(Edited 14 seconds later.)

Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 1 hour later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,421

@1,284,330 (B)
Thanks.

Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 15 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,427

Try a little harder dave. If you're posting here as some form of escapism, it's not working. You get out what you put in. So start taking the craft a little more seriously.

Anonymous B replied with this 2 years ago, 13 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,563

@1,284,408 (C)

What details?

Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,570

@previous (B)

It exploded.

Anonymous B replied with this 2 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,580

@previous (C)

No it didn't. It wasn't carrying a warhead. And that isn't a detail.

Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 3 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,284,624

@previous (B)
I think it is.