Good news all round, hopefully they will be to time and to budget. The South Koreans are good at this kind of thing. £150million coming into UK industry is good, in the end UK yards are only geared up for complex warship building now and the only yard which could still turn its hand to it H&W is turning its sight to other stuff.

As for Shadow Defence Secretary Jim Murphys comments:

“bad news for British industry”.

“First we lose out to France over fast jets and now we lose out to South Korea over Royal Navy tankers,” said Murphy.

“The government do not have an active defence industrial strategy. I’d like to see more of our defence industry with a ‘Made in Britain’ stamp on it – for example halving the Type 45 order which had the effect of pushing up the unit cost. The country will want the government to do more to support British industry.”

If his government (and the prior Tory as well to be fair) hadn’t starved British ship yards of orders then they might of been in a better position to make them in Britain. If prior governments had also supported British shipbuilding properly to allow it to join the Cruise ship building boom then they would of been in a better position to bid on this kind of contract and complex ship building would of been cheaper to boot through the economies of shifting personnel between civil and military ship building…There is a reason why Navantia win all those orders these days!

Unfortunately Chuck Yeager doesn’t know what Fanny means in Great Britain…

Then again he is a bit of an idiot by all accounts…if only the Miles M/52 hadn’t been cancelled then we would of had the god like Eric ‘Winkle’ Brown in the history books and Chuck Yeager would of been lost to history.

Well the Danish do use the Lynx so it would fit into their infrastructure far easier. Then again a navy looking for a new type would be mighty tempted by the MH-60R Romeo as it is very capable and backed up by a large USN procurement.

Nice modern cockpit and it isn’t in that horrid blue/green that the Russians often use!

Respectfully you seem to be missing my point, all the issues I have raised bar one that was totally avoidable were nothing to do with up-scaling a design.

People have in this thread on this very day…you are choosing to ignore them…
Your funeral…now that’s classy!

I think the biggest issue we would have with the Navantia version is to look at the initial problems with the Collins, it was an upscaled version. It is, as I am sure you are aware, not as simple as just adding an extra one or two compartments and then say “there it’s bigger”. The Japanese Soryu replacement will be designed for our operating region, designed to the size we are after, with the systems we need.
But as mentioned previously, the Government of the day…….

Well to play devils advocate was any of the issues with the Collins class to do with up-scaling a prior design? Major issues as far as I can see were:

1) Defective welding
2) Noise due to the nose being changed to accommodate a different sonar, model tests were done with the old design but not revised when the changes were made to sonar fit
3) Propulsion system
4) Periscopes and masts – RAN requesting a dubious redesign of the periscope from base design to allow the optical view when the scope was raised
5) CMS – the biggest problem in many ways and utterly avoidable if they had gone for an off the shelf system (as they did in the end)

Aside from point 2 none of these issues are due to scaling up the design and I would argue point 2 was utterly avoidable if they had done hydrodynamic model testing of the redesigned hull.

Scaling up and scaling down submarines is a fairly common process and if managed properly should not throw up too many issues.