PA2 likely to be cancelled - knockon effects for CVF? - The Royal Navy - Warships1 and NavWeaps Discussion Boards - Warships1 and NavWeaps Discussion Boards - Message Board

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

PA2 likely to be cancelled - knockon effects for CVF?

Author	Comment
Mikey	PA2 likely to be cancelled - knockon effects for CVF?	Lead	[-]
Posts: 1424 (21-Apr-2008 14:23:56) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	http://defensenews.com/story.php?i=3488563&c=EUR&s=SEA
Obi Wan Russell		#1	[-]
Posts: 179 (21-Apr-2008 15:05:20) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	The minister may be dropping hints, but his boss, Sarkozy is definitely behind the project. French politicians tend to speak 'out of line' more than British pollys do, so I wouldn't worry too much yet. This probably follows the British-only order for steel for the two CVFs, as the whole point of PA2 was to generate economies of scale by being part of a three ship project. The French were probably hoping for a larger share of the work too, much more than a third of the overall total and as some posters on this forum have failed to grasp, this was never going to happen. CVF is also a political project whose purpose from Gordons point of view is to shore up the Labour vote in Scottish constituencies, and the more gains the SNP make the more likely CVF will be as a way of swinging the vote back to Labour. Talk of having all three hulls built by the French were always unrealistic and perhaps the French are just realising it. Unless Sarkozy does a very public U-turn, I think PA2 is relatively safe. The MN still need it, and french pride won't allow them to fall behind the RN again.
Nathan	Re: PA2 likely to be cancelled - knockon effects for CVF?	#2	[-]
Posts: 2248 (21-Apr-2008 15:22:36) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Is it possible that the French Defence Minister is negotiating for more money: The President isn't giving me enough money for Defence, so if anything gets canceled, it should be whatever would be most politically damaging to the President? I'm also not very impressed by the line in the article: "Sarkozy had mooted the building of a second French aircraft carrier as early as February last year when he was campaigning for the presidency." Are they really suggesting that they believe French interest in a second CV only goes back 14 months? I don't think much of this journo's background research if that really is what he thinks.
CVA02		#3	[-]
Posts: 376 (21-Apr-2008 15:59:42) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Obi Wan Russell wrote: The minister may be dropping hints, but his boss, Sarkozy is definitely behind the project. French politicians tend to speak 'out of line' more than British pollys do, so I wouldn't worry too much yet. This probably follows the British-only order for steel for the two CVFs, as the whole point of PA2 was to generate economies of scale by being part of a three ship project. The French were probably hoping for a larger share of the work too, much more than a third of the overall total and as some posters on this forum have failed to grasp, this was never going to happen. CVF is also a political project whose purpose from Gordons point of view is to shore up the Labour vote in Scottish constituencies, and the more gains the SNP make the more likely CVF will be as a way of swinging the vote back to Labour. Talk of having all three hulls built by the French were always unrealistic and perhaps the French are just realising it. Unless Sarkozy does a very public U-turn, I think PA2 is relatively safe. The MN still need it, and french pride won't allow them to fall behind the RN again. The MN is currently facing a financial bottleneck, with FREMM, the Barrcuda class SSNs, the Rafael M and PA2 all requiring funding at the same time. Without a doubt, any British content in PA2 will cost more than French content, for the simple reason that the British shipbuilding sector is most decrepit in Western Europe. The benefits of share design and engineering have been diluted by British intransigence, namely the lowered specification sought by the RN for the sake of economy. France is left with the fiscal and political liability of supporting a Scottish shipbuilding sector, which very clearly isn't to the benefit of the French taxpayers, or the French shipbuilder workers who are being deprived of employment, despite their superior productivity over their Scottish counterparts. Sarkozy should indeed consider pulling out of PA2 for a wholly French design, utilizing the long lead time items that have already been funded, or even canceling the entire venture. It is a mystery as to why the French should subsidize Scotland in the same manner that England does? It is equally clear from SNP gains that the traditional Labor policy, bribing Scottish voters with public sector spending, isn't working anymore. Scotland has been treated as a servile fiefdom of the Labor party, with the assumption that as long as social spending remained high, the Scottish could be deprived of any real political voice. The patronage jobs generated by the CVF program will not save Labor in Scotland. Only a change in leadership can do that.
Rob		#4	[-]
Posts: 600 (21-Apr-2008 19:32:52) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I think some here are underestimating French budget problems, apparently they are worse than the UK's, the figure of a 40% shortfall gets mentioned from time to time.
Bledlow		#5	[-]
Registered Member Posts: 49 (21-Apr-2008 23:04:53) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	CVA02 wrote: ... Without a doubt, any British content in PA2 will cost more than French content, for the simple reason that the British shipbuilding sector is most decrepit in Western Europe. The benefits of share design and engineering have been diluted by British intransigence, namely the lowered specification sought by the RN for the sake of economy. France is left with the fiscal and political liability of supporting a Scottish shipbuilding sector, which very clearly isn't to the benefit of the French taxpayers, or the French shipbuilder workers who are being deprived of employment, despite their superior productivity over their Scottish counterparts. Sarkozy should indeed consider pulling out of PA2 for a wholly French design, utilizing the long lead time items that have already been funded, or even canceling the entire venture. It is a mystery as to why the French should subsidize Scotland in the same manner that England does.... You seem to be under the mistaken impression that PA2, or a significant part of it, will be built in Scotland. Not so: if built, it will be in France, and that has always been the plan. The only alternative ideas I know of are a joint build, with the French getting more than a third of the work because they can do it cheaper (a French idea), or blocks of PA2 being built in a cheaper, probably East European, yard, to save money. There will be no French subsidy to Scotland. For the French to pull out of PA2 for a wholly French design would be throwing money down the pan, since France has already paid for the right to use the design, & can't get any of that money back. There will be no significant British content in PA2, except that already paid for (partly in kind, the British designers having adopted some French design work) design. Last Edited By: Bledlow 21-Apr-2008 23:09:20. Edited 1 times.
CVA02		#6	[-]
Posts: 377 (22-Apr-2008 23:45:16) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Bledlow wrote: CVA02 wrote: ... Without a doubt, any British content in PA2 will cost more than French content, for the simple reason that the British shipbuilding sector is most decrepit in Western Europe. The benefits of share design and engineering have been diluted by British intransigence, namely the lowered specification sought by the RN for the sake of economy. France is left with the fiscal and political liability of supporting a Scottish shipbuilding sector, which very clearly isn't to the benefit of the French taxpayers, or the French shipbuilder workers who are being deprived of employment, despite their superior productivity over their Scottish counterparts. Sarkozy should indeed consider pulling out of PA2 for a wholly French design, utilizing the long lead time items that have already been funded, or even canceling the entire venture. It is a mystery as to why the French should subsidize Scotland in the same manner that England does.... You seem to be under the mistaken impression that PA2, or a significant part of it, will be built in Scotland. Not so: if built, it will be in France, and that has always been the plan. The only alternative ideas I know of are a joint build, with the French getting more than a third of the work because they can do it cheaper (a French idea), or blocks of PA2 being built in a cheaper, probably East European, yard, to save money. There will be no French subsidy to Scotland. For the French to pull out of PA2 for a wholly French design would be throwing money down the pan, since France has already paid for the right to use the design, & can't get any of that money back. There will be no significant British content in PA2, except that already paid for (partly in kind, the British designers having adopted some French design work) design. I referred to "any British content," not limiting the statement to Scotland, although it is very clear that PA2 will contain significant Scottish workshare.
reiverman		#7	[-]
Posts: 16 (22-Apr-2008 23:48:23) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	If the UK shipbuilding is so inefficient then how come both VT & BAE systems have won major export orders recently ? http://www.baesystems.com/ProductsServices/autoGen_106920132255.html http://www.vtplc.com/shipbuilding/newsdetails.asp?ItemID=723 Last Edited By: reiverman 22-Apr-2008 23:53:35. Edited 1 times.
Bledlow		#8	[-]
Registered Member Posts: 50 (22-Apr-2008 23:52:38) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	CVA02 wrote: Bledlow wrote: CVA02 wrote: ... Without a doubt, any British content in PA2 will cost more than French content, for the simple reason that the British shipbuilding sector is most decrepit in Western Europe. The benefits of share design and engineering have been diluted by British intransigence, namely the lowered specification sought by the RN for the sake of economy. France is left with the fiscal and political liability of supporting a Scottish shipbuilding sector, which very clearly isn't to the benefit of the French taxpayers, or the French shipbuilder workers who are being deprived of employment, despite their superior productivity over their Scottish counterparts. Sarkozy should indeed consider pulling out of PA2 for a wholly French design, utilizing the long lead time items that have already been funded, or even canceling the entire venture. It is a mystery as to why the French should subsidize Scotland in the same manner that England does.... You seem to be under the mistaken impression that PA2, or a significant part of it, will be built in Scotland. Not so: if built, it will be in France, and that has always been the plan. The only alternative ideas I know of are a joint build, with the French getting more than a third of the work because they can do it cheaper (a French idea), or blocks of PA2 being built in a cheaper, probably East European, yard, to save money. There will be no French subsidy to Scotland. For the French to pull out of PA2 for a wholly French design would be throwing money down the pan, since France has already paid for the right to use the design, & can't get any of that money back. There will be no significant British content in PA2, except that already paid for (partly in kind, the British designers having adopted some French design work) design. I referred to "any British content," not limiting the statement to Scotland, although it is very clear that PA2 will contain significant Scottish workshare. "France is left with the fiscal and political liability of supporting a Scottish shipbuilding sector" is clearly referring to Scottish content. What significant Scottish workshare do you believe it will contain?
CVA02		#9	[-]
Posts: 378 (23-Apr-2008 20:10:32) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	reiverman wrote: If the UK shipbuilding is so inefficient then how come both VT & BAE systems have won major export orders recently ? http://www.baesystems.com/ProductsServices/autoGen_106920132255.html Is the Brunei OPV fiasco something to be proud of?
CVA02		#10	[-]
Posts: 379 (23-Apr-2008 20:15:41) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Bledlow wrote: CVA02 wrote: Bledlow wrote: CVA02 wrote: ... Without a doubt, any British content in PA2 will cost more than French content, for the simple reason that the British shipbuilding sector is most decrepit in Western Europe. The benefits of share design and engineering have been diluted by British intransigence, namely the lowered specification sought by the RN for the sake of economy. France is left with the fiscal and political liability of supporting a Scottish shipbuilding sector, which very clearly isn't to the benefit of the French taxpayers, or the French shipbuilder workers who are being deprived of employment, despite their superior productivity over their Scottish counterparts. Sarkozy should indeed consider pulling out of PA2 for a wholly French design, utilizing the long lead time items that have already been funded, or even canceling the entire venture. It is a mystery as to why the French should subsidize Scotland in the same manner that England does.... You seem to be under the mistaken impression that PA2, or a significant part of it, will be built in Scotland. Not so: if built, it will be in France, and that has always been the plan. The only alternative ideas I know of are a joint build, with the French getting more than a third of the work because they can do it cheaper (a French idea), or blocks of PA2 being built in a cheaper, probably East European, yard, to save money. There will be no French subsidy to Scotland. For the French to pull out of PA2 for a wholly French design would be throwing money down the pan, since France has already paid for the right to use the design, & can't get any of that money back. There will be no significant British content in PA2, except that already paid for (partly in kind, the British designers having adopted some French design work) design. I referred to "any British content," not limiting the statement to Scotland, although it is very clear that PA2 will contain significant Scottish workshare. "France is left with the fiscal and political liability of supporting a Scottish shipbuilding sector" is clearly referring to Scottish content. What significant Scottish workshare do you believe it will contain? Are you going to claim that there will be no Scottish workshare for PA2? All of the superblocks are going to be built in France? Nonsense.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

PA2 likely to be cancelled - knockon effects for CVF?

PA2 likely to be cancelled - knockon effects for CVF?

Quick Reply