But kind of scary in that it seems to be foreshadowing an impending or unavoidable war. China has been pretty isolationalist when it comes to international conflicts, but now that they are economically branching out globally, I can't help but think they are going to join the other super powers in projecting power outside of their traditional sphere through their military.
I'm not sure that is true, they just have their own that aren't traditional western conflicts. There is the South China Sea thing, they have tension with Japan over some islands, the Tibet thing, issues with Taiwan etc...They were also involved with stopping Somalian piracy, the Mali conflict and the war on terror.
But kind of scary in that it seems to be foreshadowing an impending or unavoidable war. China has been pretty isolationalist when it comes to international conflicts, but now that they are economically branching out globally, I can't help but think they are going to join the other super powers in projecting power outside of their traditional sphere through their military.
Showing them dying for their country would be more emotional.
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
A federal trade tribunal has ordered the government to put a $60-billion program to buy a new fleet of warships on hold while it investigates claims the vessel selected doesn’t meet the military’s needs.
Quote:
It also noted in that challenge that the requirements and other parameters of the surface combatant project were altered 88 times during the process in a way that diluted the requirements for the warship, allowing the government and Irving to pick what it calls “an unproven design platform.”
Quote:
Several European shipbuilders decided against submitting bids for the $60-billion project because of concerns about the fairness of the process.
Some raised concerns about BAE’s closeness with Irving which, as prime contractor for the Canadian surface combatant program, helped the government select the preferred bidder.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
he Conservatives have accused the Liberals of avoiding the purchase of the F-35 stealth jet through manufacturing a crisis by claiming the air force doesn't have enough fighters to meet its international commitments. The auditor found that the military could not meet the government's new policy commitment and even ignored advice that one of its proposed solutions — buying brand-new Super Hornets to fill the capability gap —would actually make their problems worse, not better.
That statement, said Huebert, suggested a jaw-dropping break with reality on the government's part.
"They [the Liberals] were just making things up," he said.
It might have been too optimistic to expect the Liberals to fix the system, said Armstrong, given the short four years between elections.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
We may have dodged a torpedo by having not gone with the F100 derived Frigate. Early reports from the Helge Ingstad indicate a severe design flaw that makes watertight compartments, well...not watertight.
Quote:
All of these compartments are all supposed to be watertight, specifically to help contain damage from spreading. Unfortunately, the frigate’s crew found that water was rushing from the generator room into the gear room, which was not otherwise breached, through the hollow propeller shaft tubes. Stuffing boxes in bulkheads in the gear room also failed, leading to flooding in the adjacent aft and fore engine rooms.
“This meant that the flooding became substantially more extensive than indicated by the original damage,” the report explains. “Based on the flooding of the gear room, it was decided to prepare for evacuation.”
Check out the Swedish Gotland class subs. 12 of those would be more of a deterrent than 12 frigates.
Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk
I like the Gotland's but they're no faster then the Victoria's. They're also a tiny boat with a crews compliment of about 40 people. Both the Victoria and the Gotland could be described as pure coastal patrol boats.
Neither is well suited to carry boarding crews or do boarding actions.
Also the Gotland is slightly slower then the Victoria, and has the advantage of a AIP system for greater underwater transition range, neither is well suited to patrol the arctic or go under ice.
If you want to do specialized missions like inspections and boarding you need a boat that can keep up with a pursuit, you also need the intimidation factor, Submarines are more designed for intelligence gathering and sneaking and punching large holes in unsuspecting ships.
I just think that Subs are ill suited to the mission your talking about. Where they are helpful is to covertly track suspicious ship and call in assets to seize and board.
If we decided that we just wanted to kill vessels that were doing illegal activities (smuggling, drug running, illegal fishing) then I would say go for it, but it seems expensive to use a torpedo on a boat.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
We may have dodged a torpedo by having not gone with the F100 derived Frigate. Early reports from the Helge Ingstad indicate a severe design flaw that makes watertight compartments, well...not watertight.
Perhaps. But the rendition of the damage, as well as the photos, indicates - I don't know - 5-6 bulkheads damaged? I think the damage surpassed all damage control design considerations for even the most water-tight compartments. Essentially, they were fecked and quite fortunate they drifted aground. In the open ocean, that ship would have gone under quickly with probably a loss of a lot of life.
Perhaps. But the rendition of the damage, as well as the photos, indicates - I don't know - 5-6 bulkheads damaged? I think the damage surpassed all damage control design considerations for even the most water-tight compartments. Essentially, they were fecked and quite fortunate they drifted aground. In the open ocean, that ship would have gone under quickly with probably a loss of a lot of life.
Yeah I was leaving that post to you, thanks for this. My knowledge of naval design and damage control amounts to a sum of nothing.
No worries, but my knowledge is limited, too. The photos of the damage are very conclusive I think.
My second link mentioned something about the Helge conducting nav training. Supposedly, there are issues with GPS tracking in this channel because of the mountains and overhead power lines. Also, the northern latitudes can limit the satellite service. No problem, because the ships should have paper charts and binos anyway, right?
I am interested to see what the investigation reveals and hopefully it is made available as a case study.
__________________
"If you do not know what you are doing, neither does your enemy."
- - Joe Tzu
Perhaps. But the rendition of the damage, as well as the photos, indicates - I don't know - 5-6 bulkheads damaged? I think the damage surpassed all damage control design considerations for even the most water-tight compartments. https://medium.com/@cargun/radar-ima...n-a71e3f516b54
The Drive isn't rock solid in terms of accuracy all the time but here's what they say in the article:
Quote:
After the collision, the frigate’s crew identified flooding in three compartments, the aft generator room, a crew quarters, and the stores room. Damage parties were uncertain about whether or not the steering engine room, the ship’s aftmost compartment, was also filling with water.
Water went from the generator room into the non compromised gear room and from there into the engine rooms. So three compromised compartments went to 5 or 6 due to design flaws.
Will be interesting to see how this affects their bid for FFG(X).
Last edited by I-Hate-Hulse; 11-30-2018 at 04:29 PM.
