Karel Doorman
Member
- Reaction score
- 16
- Points
- 180
So the things are heating up(Walrus replacement)this is from the dutch defence forum in wich we discussed the subject;From the Volkskrant part on is my reaction on the matter.
Opposition fears' second JSF to purchase submarines [/ b]
The intention of Defence to allocate at least 2.5 billion euros for the purchase of four submarines meets with skepticism by several opposition parties in parliament. They fear a repeat of the problems that occurred previously when purchasing the JSF fighter and emphasize that it regards them 'no done deal yet. " But the coalition seems to already.
Defence Spokesman Van Dijk of the SP says a 'déjà vu' burden by having the JSF, "Even when the submarines you see that as a Lower House fait accompli likely to be placed, and also now that you experience the power of the defense lobby . Who first picks up the minister and then the government parties. Formally, the Chamber has it to say, but can you serious doubts put into practice. " His party is still against buying "expensive submarines.
Scepticism also can be heard at the PVV, "You look at these kinds of projects always that the costs of failure in the long run much higher than originally budgeted. It involves a lot of money, but what we get in return? "Asks the spokesperson Roon himself. At GroenLinks spokesman Grashoff lives not only the fear of high costs (a JSF 2 here lies in wait), but also the conviction that the defense money could be better spent than on submarines. He sees Defence prefer to purchase equipment that can be deployed in UN peacekeeping missions, "Then you have very little of this type of toy. D66 assumes a neutral position - spokesman Belhaj insists above all on "the great importance" of early involvement of the Court and the Ministry of Finance. Purpose: To keep the costs under control.
Positive state CDA MP Raymond Knops, once worked in the Air Force, facing the purchase. He is convinced that submarines have "absolutely positive value. Yet he also thinks it is still too early to give all green light, "First is to determine whether there is a real need for it and what the consequences are for the total defense budget.
For Knops is still far from that Dutch companies should get the billion order. "If this is going to cost a billion extra because we allow it to Dutch companies, I think we should not do it." established the need to purchase, the industry must respect him in the waiting room.
The government parties PvdA and VVD is already talk of green light. Labour spokesman Eijsink speaks of a 'good investment' and points to the ability of the boats' operate unnoticed by the coast, for example, to gather information or to enforce an arms embargo. The VVD, which supports in this regard the plans of their own Minister Hennis was not available for comment Friday.
Volkskrant, March 4 2016, 21:24
These reactions were to be expected from the relevant parties. : Glare:
For Mr. Van Dijk:
-deja vu is nonsense, no foreign project (I hope, I think) so you have better control on the whole,.
No Lockheed Martin who at every turn will tell you that the delivery date is postponed, because (again unexpected) problems that can be solved in the next "block" upgrade which carry an extra charge,again: hrmph:
Besides (and my mind)this aircraft is still not up to expectations (demands) that were made by all partners in its development (which were promised so, simply put)
Pepper price is also nonsense (ever so) however pepper now costs next to nothing: devil: you have to take anyway about 800-1Billion each it is just a "normal" price if you want the "Best" (we have/had the best , the Walrus, but my opinion is disputed abroad
) and we should want the same again (in which a small country can be in BIG, shipbuilding).
For Mr. De Roon:
-We Get employment / job security in return, outside the fact that we remain in the top of the undersea area in the world (SSK) in terms of range, stealth and intelligense gathering, just to name a few. : P
Plus of course we remain a valued partner in these areas (there are more) for our allies. (You want to play at 't highest level then you got to have something to put on the table, simple)
For Mr. Grashoff
-On what are we going to spend this money (again to care?)
What material for peacekeeping flags for the schools crossing patrols(ok I exaggerate: big-smile
? But what is used in peacekeeping missions, military equipment so I see no problem.
Besides if, for example (as already often mentioned) shipping To secure route or the ports to the other, it 's very useful if you will have boats (alone' t fact that he / or anyone who wants to disrupt the peace process knows / thinks there may be boats somewhere, ours or someone else will make sure that some plans will not be implemented or at least differently)
For Mr. Knops;
-You're not Going to have vessels of this type being build by someone else, if you're able to "do it yourself (I really hope) outside 's security, I mean you might as well say what you can do and can not do (will be all on the site of the foreign company, "look what we have built") Let's keep this particular a netherlands built(as much as possible), outside the fact that if you do this you give a clear signal in terms of capabillety (most difficult branch of "sport", build submarines)
For my fellow forum mate Seaweed, idd I meant so(this was an answer to replace "real" boats with drones)
Cable on a (very) large role, then a Dutch ship somewhere off the coast (we pretend nothing happened); D
-Dropt From a Hercules ( we flew here by chance: big-smile outside 't whether the thing survived the fall
Oh crap another submarine now what? Oh wait, we still have Walrus let's just send these boats, (assuming that they are not replaced by the "real" boats).
-And Idd drones should be used in conjunction with real boats (if possible)
g, walter
ps Netherlands should build such a boat again as the Walrus of which the Americans (again) think "DAMN" We should have build this thing (or be able to) This is not a nonsense remark the US was charmed / impressed with the Walrus ( still are ) and you hear / read on foreign sites, the idea of "we should build them again (ssk) by Rickover put away as" redundant "
Opposition fears' second JSF to purchase submarines [/ b]
The intention of Defence to allocate at least 2.5 billion euros for the purchase of four submarines meets with skepticism by several opposition parties in parliament. They fear a repeat of the problems that occurred previously when purchasing the JSF fighter and emphasize that it regards them 'no done deal yet. " But the coalition seems to already.
Defence Spokesman Van Dijk of the SP says a 'déjà vu' burden by having the JSF, "Even when the submarines you see that as a Lower House fait accompli likely to be placed, and also now that you experience the power of the defense lobby . Who first picks up the minister and then the government parties. Formally, the Chamber has it to say, but can you serious doubts put into practice. " His party is still against buying "expensive submarines.
Scepticism also can be heard at the PVV, "You look at these kinds of projects always that the costs of failure in the long run much higher than originally budgeted. It involves a lot of money, but what we get in return? "Asks the spokesperson Roon himself. At GroenLinks spokesman Grashoff lives not only the fear of high costs (a JSF 2 here lies in wait), but also the conviction that the defense money could be better spent than on submarines. He sees Defence prefer to purchase equipment that can be deployed in UN peacekeeping missions, "Then you have very little of this type of toy. D66 assumes a neutral position - spokesman Belhaj insists above all on "the great importance" of early involvement of the Court and the Ministry of Finance. Purpose: To keep the costs under control.
Positive state CDA MP Raymond Knops, once worked in the Air Force, facing the purchase. He is convinced that submarines have "absolutely positive value. Yet he also thinks it is still too early to give all green light, "First is to determine whether there is a real need for it and what the consequences are for the total defense budget.
For Knops is still far from that Dutch companies should get the billion order. "If this is going to cost a billion extra because we allow it to Dutch companies, I think we should not do it." established the need to purchase, the industry must respect him in the waiting room.
The government parties PvdA and VVD is already talk of green light. Labour spokesman Eijsink speaks of a 'good investment' and points to the ability of the boats' operate unnoticed by the coast, for example, to gather information or to enforce an arms embargo. The VVD, which supports in this regard the plans of their own Minister Hennis was not available for comment Friday.
Volkskrant, March 4 2016, 21:24
These reactions were to be expected from the relevant parties. : Glare:
For Mr. Van Dijk:
-deja vu is nonsense, no foreign project (I hope, I think) so you have better control on the whole,.
No Lockheed Martin who at every turn will tell you that the delivery date is postponed, because (again unexpected) problems that can be solved in the next "block" upgrade which carry an extra charge,again: hrmph:
Besides (and my mind)this aircraft is still not up to expectations (demands) that were made by all partners in its development (which were promised so, simply put)
Pepper price is also nonsense (ever so) however pepper now costs next to nothing: devil: you have to take anyway about 800-1Billion each it is just a "normal" price if you want the "Best" (we have/had the best , the Walrus, but my opinion is disputed abroad
) and we should want the same again (in which a small country can be in BIG, shipbuilding).For Mr. De Roon:
-We Get employment / job security in return, outside the fact that we remain in the top of the undersea area in the world (SSK) in terms of range, stealth and intelligense gathering, just to name a few. : P
Plus of course we remain a valued partner in these areas (there are more) for our allies. (You want to play at 't highest level then you got to have something to put on the table, simple)
For Mr. Grashoff
-On what are we going to spend this money (again to care?)
What material for peacekeeping flags for the schools crossing patrols(ok I exaggerate: big-smile
? But what is used in peacekeeping missions, military equipment so I see no problem.Besides if, for example (as already often mentioned) shipping To secure route or the ports to the other, it 's very useful if you will have boats (alone' t fact that he / or anyone who wants to disrupt the peace process knows / thinks there may be boats somewhere, ours or someone else will make sure that some plans will not be implemented or at least differently)
For Mr. Knops;
-You're not Going to have vessels of this type being build by someone else, if you're able to "do it yourself (I really hope) outside 's security, I mean you might as well say what you can do and can not do (will be all on the site of the foreign company, "look what we have built") Let's keep this particular a netherlands built(as much as possible), outside the fact that if you do this you give a clear signal in terms of capabillety (most difficult branch of "sport", build submarines)
For my fellow forum mate Seaweed, idd I meant so(this was an answer to replace "real" boats with drones)
Cable on a (very) large role, then a Dutch ship somewhere off the coast (we pretend nothing happened); D
-Dropt From a Hercules ( we flew here by chance: big-smile
outside 't whether the thing survived the fallOh crap another submarine now what? Oh wait, we still have Walrus let's just send these boats, (assuming that they are not replaced by the "real" boats).
-And Idd drones should be used in conjunction with real boats (if possible)
g, walter
ps Netherlands should build such a boat again as the Walrus of which the Americans (again) think "DAMN" We should have build this thing (or be able to) This is not a nonsense remark the US was charmed / impressed with the Walrus ( still are ) and you hear / read on foreign sites, the idea of "we should build them again (ssk) by Rickover put away as" redundant "
(with the hope of mine that maybe there will be 2 extra)
(in dutch)
