Search results

It will be a clean sheet design. You don't just convert a diesel over even it is larger. The experience gained in making diesel submarines though, that's going to show.

It's not installed yet for B jetty.

What that reporter doesn't understand that service and support, and technology transfer ARE combat elements. Because they directly related to ship availability rates and a domestic industry that can support and service in wartime when we are potentially cut off from Europe or Korea. The thing...

No, the navy reviewed all the submarines with their requirements in mind. Took the two that met them. The requirements for operational abilities were specific enough but broad enough. For example they didn't tell anyone how to get the indiscretion rate they wanted (AIP, batteries whatever)...

Even know what? That they need domestic sustainment? That they know how to operate submarines? Not sure what you're driving at.

It's clearly a weapons program. But given that both submarines meet the requirements the RCN wants for combat capability then you need other factors to outscore the other guy. It's a tight race. If the navy was more specific in its requirements then maybe there would more differential between...

Maybe? But honestly I would prefer them to build their icebreakers and CCG ships at a higher clip. If there is another RCN ship to be built after Preserver then it should be more JSS.

Increasing productiveness is one of the ways we compete with the world. Canadian productiveness is terrible. I applaud Seaspan for going this direction. It's only going to improve their shipyard.

Piranha 10x10 and LAV 10x10 are basically the same thing, and since no LAV 10x10 has been built yet I'm pretty sure the Piranha will be the baseline design. Like I said though, we'll have a good look at the Piranha and probably know what we are getting into overall.

RFI (Request for Information) isn't a bid, industry submits their feedback. Things like "this is actually impossible" or "we can meet the requirements in a different way". Plenty of times the RFI get re-released because the ask was too much or ignorant of current availability. Or it was...

Irving costs are not out of control. Not even close to it. We've barely paid anything. I think you'll find that once the bills start showing up the Parliamentary budget office estimates for the RCD will be shown to be way off. Especially as DND is now starting to break down contract costs for...

Its an RFI. If the RFP is the same then you can start complaining. The RFI is sent out to see what industry has to offer. If the Korean's offer a K9 with Nitrous Oxide booster to meet some of the speed requirements game on (WITNESS ME!!). You then use the RFI to develop the RFP (or award...

In addition I would like to add that Leadmark 2050 was fairly prescient in prediction of UXV proliferation, the timelines for AOPS/JSS and RCD's, future threats and other things. Pg 43 and beyond.

There is documentation on this. From Leadmark 2050. Obviously the specifics have been OBE but the base thinking hasn't changed. RCD's are the expeditionary (away game) ships. They are to either join an allied task group or sail in an RCN TG of 3 or 4 (4 is the preferred option) around an...

Subs I would split evenly. Its easier to get to the arctic from the east coast but the Pacific is a submarine ocean. So even split or more subs out west. CDC sounds like its designed to fight right in the middle of the St. Laurence. Also with its smaller size the Atlantic is a better ocean...

I don't see it honestly. The idea was that one submarine would be always swimming in every ocean we touch. So 12 is the right number. I would be more interested to see the first sub get replaced soon after the last sub gets built.

Some things I learned today. I was aware of the Rule of Three. One ship in refit, one ship returning/working up and one ship available (not necessarily sailing). But there are other "rules". Rule of Four: If you have four of the same class one will be at sea at all times. So not just...

Same could almost be argued for Europe facing Russia. But instead of Russia hitting shipyards it would be Germany redirecting resources to deal with a land war (or taking our delivery for themselves and Norway). Either way I think there is risk, and war blows out all previous planning.

I have no vote in the matter but I'm team (S)SK at this point. I think that there is much more future growth potential in the SK bid and the timelines are better. Bit inwill not complain of a GerNor submarine. It's an excellent choice and may lead to future naval cooperation on other...

It's a hedge for sure. Well put. Hedge against HFX rust out and RCD delay. Has its own risks though.