Pongoglo wrote:Poiuytrewq wrote:Agreed.Pongoglo wrote:...to my mind for a forward based 'stand alone' both Leander and the Meko are just too smallI don't think it's a problem as long as Babcock still has a lead yard for final assembly which of course it has with Rosyth.Pongoglo wrote:Question is if Babcock/Thales are still in the game whose yard are they going to use, thought they were teaming up with Harland & Wolfe and Ferguson but now seems theyve both been gobbled up by the Meko team ?
The rest of the yards currently affiliated to other bids could still bid for blocks when the winner is announced. I suspect the management of the competing yards won't care who wins as long as they get a slice of the action in the end.
Even Camell Laird ? Of course the pro Leander lobby will still argue that the RFI stated 4,000 ton so that's what the RN want, funny old thing not what you hear when propping up the Wardroom bar ! In any case there's a massive difference between 4,000 ton 'light' and 4,000 ton FLD , and at 3,600 FLD both Leander and the Meko are even smaller than that. To my mind one good thing ( and not the only) about the Meko bid is that it puts rest to the claim that Leander have it in the bag because theirs is the only true UK design, intellectual rights blah blah blah etc, perhaps now 'Team Meko' are on the pitch we might just have a level playing field once again?
Reads like you were leaning against said bar when you wrote this. And had been for a while.
a. Forward deployment has zero to do with ship size
b. The MoD RFI clearly states around 4,000 ton displacement
c. Leander remains the only UK design in the competition
d. No one thinks any one of the teams has it "in the bag"