|
Post by madmac on May 3, 2016 17:25:58 GMT 12
It seems that the Ozzie problems are not want they buy but what they spec in it (although I know engineers who have observed that these production lines they have, mean often they end up with a poorly built version of what they could have just brought form the OEM).
Maybe there is a method to their madness, if they start down this path, after X billions they can say the conventional propulsion is too hard, and its cheaper to go with Nuclear propulsion which is what they seem to have wanted in the first place (just can't sell it to the public yet).
|
|
|
Post by lesterpk on May 3, 2016 21:51:26 GMT 12
The Tigers may have been in service for a while but in what year did they receive their final operational certification? They havent yet IIRC.
|
|
|
Post by Calum on May 11, 2016 15:04:28 GMT 12
I understand that we are not all in the loop when it comes to these decisions but..... French submarine being modified from nuc to conventional power... none built yet from my understanding. German sub is a scaled up version of another sub.... none built yet from my understanding....... Japanese sub I am told (rightly or wrongly) is one of the best in its class and exists. What did someone else on this forum say... "Never be the first to buy No.1 of anything'! The Tigers may have been in service for a while but in what year did they receive their final operational certification? The Seasprite....... well.......... trying for too much in a small package. Bit like trying to put a watermelon in a condom.... it just didn't work. I shall wait and see just how it all pans out. Hopefully this time you won't be able to hear the noise of their propellors on the other side of the Pacific. If I am wrong with any of the above, and I certainly could be, I'll eat my words but from what we mere mortals can glean from all the press over the last twelve months it would seem that way. As to neutrality with Japan and China. .. It may come down one day to picking a side to back. Fence sitting only gives you splinters after a while. No you are wrong, about the Japanese sub. The current one requires significant changes to as well, to the point where it would be a new vessel. And all require a US combat system and weapons. Not their indigenous ones. There was never an off the shelf option that met the RAN's requirements, conventionally powered, range, weapons ,combat system etc. I'm confident the proposal that best met the requirements was chosen.
|
|