- Reaction score
- 22,370
- Points
- 1,260
You and your logic...It sounds like that would be a good question to be answered within the context of some kind of well developed, and supported, national defence focused strategic plan.
If we had one
UOR new equipment
- Thread starter Spencer100
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 1,771
- Points
- 1,060
I think the deciding factor was the fact French subs use low enriched uranium that must be refueled every ten years which requires a nuclear industry that Australia doesn't have, whereas American subs use weapons grade uranium that lasts the life of the sub. Presumably they decided it was more sensible to go with a clean sheet design instead of putting a British reactor in a French hull.
It seems it was announced just last week that Australia will purchase three Virginia class subs as an interim until the new design is ready, which will be the same used by the Royal Navy and will reportedly have VLS tubes, something the Barracudas lack (possibly another reason they chose a different design).
Britain's New Attack Submarine To Be First With VLS - Naval News
The future British attack submarine, the SSNR, will feature a vertical launch system (VLS). This is a first for the Royal Navy and will increase interoperability with American allies. This can be seen as a smart move, as the Ukraine War reinforces the importance of supply chains.www.navalnews.com
Does anyone know what the design differences are between reactors that use high or low enriched uranium or can you plug whatever fuel you want into them?
GR66
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,270
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 22,370
- Points
- 1,260
They are purpose built.
A reactor needs its specific fuel or eland things happen.
USN cores are replaced as well during vessel lifespan. They are cut out and a new one added.
GR66
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,270
- Points
- 1,160
On a more serious note, there was a proposal in the Canadian Naval Review a couple of years ago to build a hybrid nuclear/AIP submarine for Canada using our own SLOWPOKE-2 reactor design to continuously recharge the batteries of a conventional submarine.
- Reaction score
- 1,771
- Points
- 1,060
I dont know how you guys have things like that ready.
Yeah slowpoke the Canadian AIP, probably not enough jobs in it for Irving or Washington to get it on the frontburner
- Reaction score
- 22,370
- Points
- 1,260
No but mine had glitched a few times with links to different threads.
GR66
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,270
- Points
- 1,160
Welcome to Army.ca!
Coming up next...."Army Reserve Reorganization", "1001 ways that Trump/Trudeau/Pollievre Suck", "How the RCN/RCAF need to know how to dig slit trenches" and "Another new uniform change"
McG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,302
- Points
- 1,160
Assuming the UORs are buying the right equipment for enduring needs (no compromises for expediency or because it will never be used in Canada), you are still proposing a sole source contract. The system is highly resistant to such things. It tends to increase prices of the quantities purchased under sole-source.
This idea could also draw complaints from industry (the companies that don’t get a contract) that we disadvantaged them by not disclosing our true intent at the initial (UOR) competition … and with the existence of trade tribunals, giving industry cause to complain can be a real impediment to completing a project.
Also, for the scale of instituting major capabilities, there need to be cabinet member support to sole source the whole thing.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 33,577
- Points
- 1,160
Wait, you're saying there's another new uniform change?
(What a great way to start a rumour
)
- Reaction score
- 8,472
- Points
- 1,160
I don't know where to put this thought. Every thread seems to circle around to "broken procurement system".
And then I found myself confronted with this:
Tanks, Planes, Pipelines ..... Paychecks, Passports, Baggage....
And in every case the solution is "more bureaucrats".
Or maybe not!
And then I found myself confronted with this:
Hire more bureaucrats! That'll speed up the process....
Liberals promise to speed up regulatory process on critical minerals mines, green power projects
Ottawa plans to spend $1.3 billion over the next six years to improve the impact assessment process.nationalpost.com
Tanks, Planes, Pipelines ..... Paychecks, Passports, Baggage....
And in every case the solution is "more bureaucrats".
Or maybe not!
GK .Dundas
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,663
- Points
- 960
Actually the problem seems to be not too many bureaucrats but not enough at the coal face and too many at mid to upper level management.
- Reaction score
- 8,472
- Points
- 1,160
Or too few at the coal face with sufficient time in to benefit from their mistakes?
GK .Dundas
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,663
- Points
- 960
That can also be a problem. We've discussed corporate memory in other threads .
Every place I've worked every time I've seen somebody leave or retire I realise that not only are taking their memories of the work place with them.
They're also taking with them a part of how and why things are done at that work place.
In short if too many people leave in too short a period important bits of information are lost and you run the risk of reaching critical limits as to what needs to be done while attempting to performing certain tasks .
And no, you can't use a manual for a lot of stuff. Some stuff never gets written down .
Hopefully long winded as this is I'm hoping it makes some sort of sense .
Every place I've worked every time I've seen somebody leave or retire I realise that not only are taking their memories of the work place with them.
They're also taking with them a part of how and why things are done at that work place.
In short if too many people leave in too short a period important bits of information are lost and you run the risk of reaching critical limits as to what needs to be done while attempting to performing certain tasks .
And no, you can't use a manual for a lot of stuff. Some stuff never gets written down .
Hopefully long winded as this is I'm hoping it makes some sort of sense .
- Reaction score
- 1,771
- Points
- 1,060
This can be a big problem especially if the management does not understand what their business actually does. If the management is capable of taking on that work it is much easier to deal with turnover. Ive seen it with management chasing solutions to problems that were solved long ago and just wasting everyones time and at the end we are back where we started just in time for them to move onto another job/posting. The people left just go into survival mode and wait out the next guys term and churn.
- Reaction score
- 4,379
- Points
- 1,260
The problem is the "say" ------ "do" gap. This government, and increasingly the entire PS have come to believe that saying something makes it so. All the energy is spent on finessing the "say".. No time or energy, little leader attention, and absolute no opposition or voter attention is paid to the do part of the equation.
Note that the blame lies not just with the government and the PS.
It lies equally with the Opposition and the voters. Because none of those players are serious about anything, in a country that is anything but serious.
We are all complicit in the completely avoidable decline of a once great country into complete irrelevance.
As Kurt V once said: So it goes
- Reaction score
- 8,472
- Points
- 1,160
The world of spin-meisters and deliverability experts.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 16,095
- Points
- 1,260
AH corporate memory - tis a very good thing. Long serving corporals, sergeants and WOs are just that.
IKnowNothing
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,216
- Points
- 990
PAXM update/award soon?
Similar threads
