shark bait wrote:The River Class shit show continues, fantastic value for money!
Repulse wrote:Trip to Portsmouth today still shows HMS Forth under repair. The word from the harbour tour guide was that the generators overheat and they don’t know how to fix it.
EDIT: oh and HMS Tyne will be recommissioned whilst they sort it out.
1: There is no money Tax payer is paying regarding the HMS Forth's defects. Even HMS Tynes recommission is reported to be paid by BAE. Good value for money.jimthelad wrote:So BAe despite having been paid an exhorbitant sum for an OPV have even fucked that up?
2: Facing these issues right before T26 building goes on pace is very good. BAE must be reviewing their review process; why a sub-standard HV circuit was "allowed" to be purchased (leaking the reviews), why the bolt-head glueing happens (or who did the sabotage?) , and many other issues they see there.
River B2 program payed well for what it aimed at, securing the work force for T26 build. Imagine if the same thing happens in HMS Glasgow, the hull-1 of T26. The impact is much huge, and BAE may not be able to pay for all the countermeasures (say, T23 life extension etc...).
3: All these issues clears out that, TOBA is must = keeping the labor force active is really needed, and hence ordering OPVs to save the day was a good choice.
4: Why it is River B2 = Amazons-class corvette based OPV, and not Khareef/Cultass/Leander is totally RN's issue (fault).
RN sticked to (bet with "optimism" = always bad heritage) the hope of "keeping 13 frigates", and intentionally build OPV to replace River B1, which has a long life left.
Now, it is clear that they should have bet to "realism", and build 3 large OPV or corvettes, based on Khareef design, to replace 1 frigate, accepting the frigate to be 12. If prepared 2 years in advance, it could be possible and it would have been "T31e batch-1".