NEDERLANDS

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
Dahedd
Member
Posts: 640
Joined: 06 May 2015, 11:18
Has liked: 135 times
Been liked: 16 times

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by Dahedd »

How's about 4 + for the RAF to replace the retired BAE 146.
These users liked the author Dahedd for the post:
wargame_insomniac

serge750
Member
Posts: 883
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34
Has liked: 350 times
Been liked: 25 times
United Kingdom

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by serge750 »

maybe useful 4 special forces when A400 r2 big....
These users liked the author serge750 for the post (total 2):
wargame_insomniacDahedd

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7286
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 317 times
Been liked: 351 times
United Kingdom

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by Lord Jim »

Personally I would prefer another eight to twelve A400s. This has a lot more to offer if its capabilities are continually expanded, something the Germans and French seem much more interested in doing and far faster then the RAF.

wargame_insomniac
Member
Posts: 585
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Has liked: 812 times
Been liked: 93 times
United Kingdom

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by wargame_insomniac »

Lord Jim wrote: 19 Jun 2022, 02:14 Personally I would prefer another eight to twelve A400s. This has a lot more to offer if its capabilities are continually expanded, something the Germans and French seem much more interested in doing and far faster then the RAF.
I think the issue is that we need UK to have a variety of transport aircraft of different sizes and for different purposes. If we are to embrace the required mobility needed for Future Soldier programme, then we do need additional strategic and tactical transports. So I do thik we need more A400's.

But we do need to have SOME smaller transport aircraft, especially those that can land/take off from shorter runways or rough airstrips that an A400 would be unable to do. Especially for special forces missions as mentioned earlier.
These users liked the author wargame_insomniac for the post:
Dahedd

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 3621
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 132 times
Been liked: 319 times
United Kingdom

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by SW1 »

wargame_insomniac wrote: 19 Jun 2022, 14:59
Lord Jim wrote: 19 Jun 2022, 02:14 Personally I would prefer another eight to twelve A400s. This has a lot more to offer if its capabilities are continually expanded, something the Germans and French seem much more interested in doing and far faster then the RAF.
I think the issue is that we need UK to have a variety of transport aircraft of different sizes and for different purposes. If we are to embrace the required mobility needed for Future Soldier programme, then we do need additional strategic and tactical transports. So I do thik we need more A400's.

But we do need to have SOME smaller transport aircraft, especially those that can land/take off from shorter runways or rough airstrips that an A400 would be unable to do. Especially for special forces missions as mentioned earlier.

And which smaller transports would u be thinking off?

Considering the French airforce have already cleared there a400 for there small strips in the pacific and a400m’s rough field performance is better than Hercules?

wargame_insomniac
Member
Posts: 585
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Has liked: 812 times
Been liked: 93 times
United Kingdom

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by wargame_insomniac »

SW1 wrote: 19 Jun 2022, 15:04
wargame_insomniac wrote: 19 Jun 2022, 14:59
Lord Jim wrote: 19 Jun 2022, 02:14 Personally I would prefer another eight to twelve A400s. This has a lot more to offer if its capabilities are continually expanded, something the Germans and French seem much more interested in doing and far faster then the RAF.
I think the issue is that we need UK to have a variety of transport aircraft of different sizes and for different purposes. If we are to embrace the required mobility needed for Future Soldier programme, then we do need additional strategic and tactical transports. So I do thik we need more A400's.

But we do need to have SOME smaller transport aircraft, especially those that can land/take off from shorter runways or rough airstrips that an A400 would be unable to do. Especially for special forces missions as mentioned earlier.

And which smaller transports would u be thinking off?

Considering the French airforce have already cleared there a400 for there small strips in the pacific and a400m’s rough field performance is better than Hercules?
OK - thanks for that clarification. I was not aware of that. Do you have some links that discuss this, as I am happy to learn more to correct any gaps in my knowledge?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7286
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 317 times
Been liked: 351 times
United Kingdom

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by Lord Jim »

If you want a platform just for SF usage you might as well follow the US and buy a number of the Twin engines Polish transport aircraft.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3837
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Has liked: 62 times
Been liked: 227 times
France

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by Tempest414 »

the other is a buy of 10 C-295's 4 in MPA and 6 in the SF role

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7286
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 317 times
Been liked: 351 times
United Kingdom

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by Lord Jim »

Or ask to join the Franco/German C-130 equipped SF Squadron.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
ArmChairCivvy

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16310
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 77 times
Been liked: 73 times
United Kingdom

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

NOT RESPECTING THE HEADLINE BUT AT LEAST THE DEVELOPING NARRATIVE:

Sweden, Germany & France launching a project for that 'mid-mkt' soft spot... which will be BIG
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1561
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 76 times

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by xav »

I interviewed the head of the Dutch DMO (defense materiel organization) on:
- Future submarines
- ASWF frigates
- rMCM
- Impact of war in Ukraine

These users liked the author xav for the post:
Halidon

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1561
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 76 times

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by xav »

Future Dutch Submarine: Naval Group's Conventional Barracuda
Interview with Naval Group on their proposal for the Walrus-class submarine replacement program. The French shipbuilder is proposing a conventional submarine based on the Barracuda type nuclear-powered submarine (in service with the French Navy and known as Suffren-class).

These users liked the author xav for the post:
Halidon

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1561
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 76 times

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by xav »

Future Dutch Submarine: TKMS Type 212CD E
Interview with ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS) on their proposal for the Walrus-class submarine replacement program. The German shipbuilder is proposing a submarine based on the future Type 212CD (already ordered by the German Navy and Royal Norwegian Navy).


User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7655
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Has liked: 80 times
Been liked: 218 times
England

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by SKB »

* BAE/AUKUS enters chat * :twisted:
These users liked the author SKB for the post:
Scimitar54

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1561
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 76 times

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by xav »

Future Dutch Submarine: Saab C71 Submarine (based on A26)
Interview with Saab and Damen on their proposal for the Walrus-class submarine replacement program. The Swedish shipbuilder is proposing the C71 submarine which is based on the future A26 Blekinge-class (two of which are under production for the Royal Swedish Navy).

These users liked the author xav for the post (total 2):
SW1Halidon

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2808
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 1 time

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by abc123 »

IMHO, they should just join Type 212CD consortium and that's it. If it's good enough for Norway and Germany, it should be good enough for Netherlands too.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

wargame_insomniac
Member
Posts: 585
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Has liked: 812 times
Been liked: 93 times
United Kingdom

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by wargame_insomniac »

abc123 wrote: 27 Nov 2022, 14:09 IMHO, they should just join Type 212CD consortium and that's it. If it's good enough for Norway and Germany, it should be good enough for Netherlands too.
Like many recent discussions in Royal Navy threads, there are many considerations involved in major shipbuilding in deciding between various proposals:
-Best technical proposal
-Best financial proposal
-Best proposal for local shipbuilding
etc

I have listened to all three of Xavier's interviews. I am not sure how the three proposals compare to each other. But I did note that the Saab proposal was in partnership with Dutch shipbuilder Damen, and the video makes clear that it is a genuine partnership of designing, constructing and then subsequent servicing of the submarines. It makes a big difference if there is a transfer of knowledge to Dutch shipbuilders and key suppliers.

It is possible that there might be some local Dutch involvement in either the German ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS) Type 212CD E or the French Naval Group conventional version of their Barracuda. And of course they might win on the basis of lowest cost or best technical proposal.....

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2808
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 1 time

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by abc123 »

wargame_insomniac wrote: 27 Nov 2022, 16:07
abc123 wrote: 27 Nov 2022, 14:09 IMHO, they should just join Type 212CD consortium and that's it. If it's good enough for Norway and Germany, it should be good enough for Netherlands too.
Like many recent discussions in Royal Navy threads, there are many considerations involved in major shipbuilding in deciding between various proposals:
-Best technical proposal
-Best financial proposal
-Best proposal for local shipbuilding
etc

I have listened to all three of Xavier's interviews. I am not sure how the three proposals compare to each other. But I did note that the Saab proposal was in partnership with Dutch shipbuilder Damen, and the video makes clear that it is a genuine partnership of designing, constructing and then subsequent servicing of the submarines. It makes a big difference if there is a transfer of knowledge to Dutch shipbuilders and key suppliers.

It is possible that there might be some local Dutch involvement in either the German ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS) Type 212CD E or the French Naval Group conventional version of their Barracuda. And of course they might win on the basis of lowest cost or best technical proposal.....
I think that there's no possibility to have them built in Netherlands. That ship sailed 30 years ago when the shipyard bankrupted. Trying to again get that would be too expencive IMHO. Servicing them maybe.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

wargame_insomniac
Member
Posts: 585
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Has liked: 812 times
Been liked: 93 times
United Kingdom

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by wargame_insomniac »

I thought Damen has shipyards both in the Netherlands and Romania?

From Saab interview, it was nt clar as to what work would be done in Sweden and what in Netherlands.
It maybe some initial construction work done in the Netherlands and then final assembly in Sweden?

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 516
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
Has liked: 19 times
Been liked: 5 times
United States of America

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by Halidon »

abc123 wrote: 27 Nov 2022, 14:09 IMHO, they should just join Type 212CD consortium and that's it. If it's good enough for Norway and Germany, it should be good enough for Netherlands too.
I think they should study all available options and pick the proposal best suited to their requirements. The Dutch are serious shipbuilders and sub drivers, they have little reason to jump at "good enough."

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2808
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 1 time

Re: NEDERLANDS

Post by abc123 »

Halidon wrote: 28 Nov 2022, 05:27
abc123 wrote: 27 Nov 2022, 14:09 IMHO, they should just join Type 212CD consortium and that's it. If it's good enough for Norway and Germany, it should be good enough for Netherlands too.
I think they should study all available options and pick the proposal best suited to their requirements. The Dutch are serious shipbuilders and sub drivers, they have little reason to jump at "good enough."
I know they are. But, they should have allready started to build replacement boats. They are becoming old- Walrus is 30 years old allready.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Post Reply