Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolven
A part of me thinks... why not both? I have no idea how much cost savings there is in getting all 12 of the subs from the same place but I expect that the savings is not as much as I would hope for.
But based on that video, having 6 of each would be an interesting balance approach. The Germany subs are more sneaky and hardened for cold and the Korean subs are more advanced and pack a bigger punch.
Build the Korean sub support base in Vancouver and the German Sub support base in Halifax.
|
I think that's a good idea. You really can't discount Germanys long history of successful and desperate sub xp where necessityis the mother of all invention. I love the wire-guided submerged-launched anti-air missile they've got going, effectively eliminating air threats which are probably a submarines biggest weakness. Hunted becomes hunter vibe. I think of the 212CD as a hidden sniper capable of taking on anything with confidence, while the KSS-III is something designed to provide multi-mission flexibility/options on a superior timetable. Our arctic sovereignty issue is urgen, and when procurement is measured in decades, it gives gives us a good answer quickly.
It's unfortunate, but I think any amount of cost savings will overrule dual systems for the same assigned task.
I'm glad it's not my decision.
Sent from my SM-F741W using Tapatalk