Search this Topic:
Sep 30 16 11:45 PM
Oct 11 16 1:50 PM
Oct 18 16 7:17 AM
LordArpad wrote:actually for all surface animosity, France is a very reliable ally of the US and always there when they ask - unless they want assistance on breaking and entering
Nov 6 16 4:35 PM
lesa wrote:IKL tried to tell the RAN what they needed in the 80s and lost out to the Swedes who asked them what they needed and talked to them about how close they could get to the ideal and the compromises involved, the impression I have had is the Germans are still doing the telling and the Japanese even more so.
Except the Swedes didnt win the principal evaluation. It is well known the Germans did. So I guess your speculation falls flat.
Dec 9 16 5:12 AM
France, Australia Reach Deal to Share Secrets on Defense Programs
By: Pierre Tran, December 8, 2016
PARIS – France and Australia yesterday signed a treaty for sharing classified information, a bilateral agreement aimed at supporting work on the Future Submarine Program, the two countries said Thursday.
“The agreement will directly support the delivery of the Future Submarine Program and will further enable greater cooperation on a range of national security matters,” the French defense ministry and Australian Attorney General’s office said in a joint statement.
Defense minister Jean-Yves Le Drian and Attorney General George Brandis signed the agreement, which sets out “mechanisms and safeguards to enable the sharing of classified information,” the partner nations said.
Dec 9 16 9:07 AM
Volkodav wrote:lesa wrote:IKL tried to tell the RAN what they needed in the 80s and lost out to the Swedes who asked them what they needed and talked to them about how close they could get to the ideal and the compromises involved, the impression I have had is the Germans are still doing the telling and the Japanese even more so.
Except the Swedes didnt win the principal evaluation. It is well known the Germans did. So I guess your speculation falls flat.Sorry for the late reply but I've been busy. Anyway If you read Peter Yule and Derek Woolners book on the Collins Class it will correct a lot of misconceptions you appear to have https://www.amazon.com.au/Collins-Class-Submarine-Story-Steel-ebook/dp/B00FF76OTE
Depending who you talk to there will be slight disagreements with what some of the interviewees claimed but overall it is the best overview of the project, what happened and why.
Major sticking points with the IKL proposal was it was a rehash of an unsuccessful design offered to the USN when they were considering procuring new SSKs in the 70s, it was a nice boat, very capable and very quiet but as it was not designed for the Austrlain requirements compromises had been made in terms of hotel power, accomodation and crew evolutions. For instance the assumption was that non watch crew would remain in their bunks to conserve air and power not just during the actual patrol but during transit as well, without this the design apparently could not achieve the range requirements. It really is too bad they weren't prepared to modify the design to better fit the RANs needs as they would have been very nice boats and maybe some (not all) issues could have been avoided. The shaft seals would still have leaked, the periscope would still have had the vibration issues and the combat system would still have been a travesty (it was a separate contract to the actual platform design and build), but the RAN would have gotten the MTUs they wanted and I don't imagine the Germans would have stuffed the welds on the first two hull sections like the Swedes did. All in the past and "what if" territory now so irrelivant except for lessons learnt, i.e. don't assume the international experts are perfect, make sure you have knowledgable people involved in every facet of the project and advise of any issues in time to mitigate them.
Feb 25 17 2:54 PM
© 2017 Yuku. All rights reserved.