TurbiniaSo comercial development means turning a country into a Sweatshop of the world with full of pollution. Most of profits goes to Western retailers and corporations.
Russia have been very successfull in high end stuff like sending a space tourists and satellite launch business. Less human resources are need to create greater profits. there is high end R&D in every project of the world where russian brain is there. But since the end product is manufactured in China so you only see made in China Label. u cannot put list of countries on each product for idea to mathematical models. and i dont believe in your so called enhanced wealth phenomena. A wealthy country should sustain very high inflation not scared by it.
Forgive me if I think of kettles calling pots black when you criticise China for having a pollution problem, we all know the USSR and now Russia leads the world in environmental protection:rolleyes: You insist on burying your head in the sand and pretending Chinese economic growth is a myth, all the while China grows in power and capability and is now a crucial part of the whole global economy, a development India is also following with their economic growth. What sort of economics did you learn to think inflation is somehow good?:confused: :rolleyes: None of which really matters to a debate on carriers and a ship that is running massively late and massively over budget in a shipyard that is failing to demonstrate any degree of competency to manage such a program.
TurbiniaCommercial economic development means selling stuff people want to buy. Russia can do that with military equipment, they seem unable to do so with consumer goods and non military products. China has seen explosive economic development, massively enhanced personal wealth and is becoming ever more technologically advanced.
TurbiniaGorskhov is still a bargain thats why India is still interested in it. u have to take into account cost and time ove runs in Italain carrier and F-35 planes for next 15 years.
Russia tremendous wage growth and inflation. It is understandable that they will walk out of most the depreciating export contacts and concentrate more on stratgic high end stuff like floating nuclear reactors, ice breakers, SSBN, SSN, SSK and aircraft carrier.
Commerical ship building is low end industry like auto, textiles in 21st century etc. So even China can Supertankers but it will take long time for the to make a single decent carrier or SSBN/SSK/SSN at high production rate with some acceptable standards.
No, not by any stretch can Gorshkov now be described as a “bargain”. You clearly have no understanding of the technology of other industries, to describe automotive industry as low tech/low margin displays a total lack of understanding. And you clearly don’t understand commercial ship building (we’ll set aside the question of quite why Sevmash signed a tanker building contract if it was so low end and why they have failed to deliver if it is so easy) as in terms of basic platform design (i.e. hull form, propulsion, control systems etc.) commercial vessel design is years ahead of military design, have you ever wondered why the IEP fan fare is making many scratch their heads when the concept was accepted by commercial operators years ago and is actually a thoroughly proven, mature technology. And that brings me to China, whatever people think of China, they do know how to build ships and are building up a first class maritime industrial base that puts them in a very strong position to build up their fleet in the future, if that is what they want, including building carriers if carriers are in the PLAN plan. In a way this is a microcosm of the whole challenge facing Russia, i.e. how to translate excellent military technology into a strong commercial economy, China has done it the other way, developed a strong commercial economy that means they are now financially able and technically capable of military expansion/development and it has worked better IMO.
TurbiniaWell, Norwegian commercial ship owners don’t seem too impressed with the ability of Sevmash to build a decent ship and given the huge cost and time over runs of the gorshkov there now seems little reason to justify buying that ship over accelerating the IAC program IMO. The Gorshkov was always a long run for a small slide in terms of it’s air group, it’s no longer even a bargain, and like it or not it’s a 70’s type that was laid up and rusting for over a decade. Something to remember, basic naval platform design and manufacture relies on marine engineering and naval architecture, those two disciplines are driven by commercial development, and Italy is way ahead of Russia in commercial marine engineering and naval architecture. That is what China have done right, they’re establishing a very developed ship building industry that is developing expertise and improved QC all of the time, meaning when China does decide to build carriers they will be in a very strong position to do it. China-get a ship building base of excellence, scavenge the Varyag for ideas and hey presto-carriers by the bucket load if they want them.
TurbiniaSeems this ship yard are also unable to make tankers and are incapable of understanding a commercial ship building contract.
TurbiniaFor half the price of a new carrier that would be purpose built for the IN’s own requirements they’re getting a re-fitted several decades old vessel that spent how many years rusting away in mothballs? Realistically, if this program had been costed originally at this level and with a realistic delivery schedule (the original time line was always a bit of a joke that hardly anybody expected to be met) would the IN still have gone for it?
TurbiniaSomething that seems to be taken for granted in many attitudes here is that the world and global relations have been frozen for twenty years. India is a rapidly growing economy and gaining in wealth all the time, and now very much a part of the global trading system. Their interests are now much more closely alligned with the USA in a shared vested interest in maintaining this trading system than in the past (same goes for China). The world arms market is a buyers market where buyers with big $$$$$$$$’s can call the shots. Their defence interests are their own and lie quite outside the traditional cold war rivalries. So why do people seem to think there will not be a major shift in Indian foreign relations and a move much closer to the USA? It’s already started happening IMO.
TurbiniaAt the risk of sounding a cynic, spending large sums of money is no indication on anything having a future when owned by the UK government, the UK specialises in investing £££££’s on equipment and facilities that are then immediately sold for peanuts or just demolished/scrapped.
TurbiniaBAE SYSTEMS TO PARTNER WITH BMT AND DSME FOR MARS FLEET TANKERS15 Feb 2008 | Ref. 052/2008
London, United Kingdom – A consortium led by BAE Systems has today submitted its response to the Ministry of Defence’s Pre-Qualifying Questionnaire (PQQ) to design and build up to six fleet tankers for the UK Royal Fleet Auxiliary. The company will partner with BMT Defence Services Ltd and Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering Co., Ltd. (DSME) to bid for the contract for the ships, the first part of the Military Afloat Reach and Sustainability (MARS) programme.
BAE Systems through its Surface Fleet Solutions business will act as lead contractor and programme manager, BMT will be the design partner and the ships are planned to be built by DSME in Korea. This approach combines the best global experience in both commercial and military shipbuilding.
Vic Emery, managing director of BAE Systems Surface Fleet Solutions, said “By bringing together this unique mix of UK and Korean commercial and naval design, ship-build and project management capability, the consortium will offer the Ministry of Defence an unparalleled degree of flexibility and experience in delivering the MARS fleet tankers.
“While it is intended that all vessels will be constructed in Korea, a unique feature the consortium offers, in terms of flexibility, is the ability to provide UK build options, should such an approach become necessary”.
David Rainford, commercial director of BMT Defence Services, said “As a relatively small, innovative organisation, we are pleased with the smooth and positive fashion in which BAE Systems has welcomed us as their design partner. Through a commercial approach we will be able to provide a simple yet effective MARS fleet tanker”.
K W Cheong, director of DSME Special Ship Management said “This is an excellent opportunity for co-operation between our two countries; the UK being the home of naval shipbuilding and Korea as the hub of commercial shipbuilding. I think the combination of BAE Systems’ extensive naval domain knowledge with our own skills and resources will produce excellent results.”
The MARS programme will become part of the workload of the proposed maritime joint venture between BAE Systems and VT Group, to be called BVT Surface Fleet, upon its completion.
TurbiniaI think this is just a BAE halo exercise in possibilities rather than a serious proposal, it looks impressive initially but I’m with those who see it as offering little that can’t be achieved more effectively with a more conventional design. Personally I see the BMT F5 Frigate concept as a much more interesting study in possibilities for the future.
TurbiniaPersonally, I do think paramedics and fire fighters deserve equal pay with the Police, and I’m not anti-police but the other services make just as big and important a contribution to society and are also highly trained professionals who risk their lives for the rest of us.
On the problems with law and order, it is the mixed up law making process and government policies changing all of the time combined with a general sense of a lack of personal responsibility in society as a whole that is wrong, not the Police.
TurbiniaPersonally, I do think paramedics and fire fighters deserve equal pay with the Police, and I’m not anti-police but the other services make just as big and important a contribution to society and are also highly trained professionals who risk their lives for the rest of us.
On the problems with law and order, it is the mixed up law making process and government policies changing all of the time combined with a general sense of a lack of personal responsibility in society as a whole that is wrong, not the Police.
TurbiniaSo when is John Howard going to live like an Abo? Oh, sorry, that wave of immigration swamping indigenous culture doesn’t count in his argument…..:rolleyes:
TurbiniaSo when is John Howard going to live like an Abo? Oh, sorry, that wave of immigration swamping indigenous culture doesn’t count in his argument…..:rolleyes:
TurbiniaSo who takes on the burden of those reparations? Higher taxes on everyone? Do you make the people who voted for those who enacted the policies pay it?
That argument falls down on the simple fact that public funds are used for criminal injuries and state liability payments in many countries all the time.
Sign In
