CKA Forums
http://www.canadaka.net/forums/

Navy looks into buying fuel tankers
http://www.canadaka.net/forums/current-events-f59/navy-looks-into-buying-fuel-tankers-t67161-15.html
Page 2 of 2

Author:  Streaker [ Thu Aug 28, 2008 3:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

PENATRATOR wrote:
Streaker wrote:
PENATRATOR wrote:

HYPOCRITE

What happened to your Anti USA stance at every venture?


Wouldn't buying from them below cost be consistent with my anti-Americanism?


We should screw 'em whenever we can.


well you twist your hate to suite your adgenda man, whatever floats your boat. As soon as a sale like this was announced, you would be the first one on here complaining and you Know it.


Not at all, so long as the price was suitable.

You make all kinds of silly assumptions.

Author:  Freakinoldguy [ Thu Aug 28, 2008 3:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Navy looks into buying fuel tankers

Quote:
Ken Bowering, an official with the Navy League of Canada, said it is critical the navy be allowed to replace HMCS Preserver and Protecteur, the two vessels now used to resupply warships at sea.


Anybody else pick up on who their expert is on new ship acquisitions.

Just because his title has Navy in it, they must have assumed he's an expert in the field. He's likely some guy with a nine to five job who did a couple of week Officer indoctrination course so he could volunteer with the kids. I wonder in what capacity he's working with the DND aquisitions program as?

When they have a whole cadre of people and programs in Ottawa to deal with these things, you'd think they'd ask them about it?

This is pretty much like asking your butcher why you constantly have migrane headaches.

ROTFL ROTFL ROTFL

Author:  Arctic_Menace [ Thu Aug 28, 2008 4:29 pm ]
Post subject: 

Man, getting some San Antonio class would be sweeeet... 8)

Author:  Gunnair [ Thu Aug 28, 2008 4:59 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:

saturn_656 wrote:
Streaker wrote:
No such danger if we can get the stuff at below cost. :idea:


Canada isn't the kind of country the USA typically supplies military hardware at below cost too.

So we don't get a repeat of the Upholder mess, we should look at any used military hardware with a very critical eye.


It is also possible that civilian pattern tankers and transport could be bought offshore at lower cost and faster turn around time. They could also look at coverting existing ships, which was done with the AOR HMCS Provider, or the dive ship HMCS Cormorant. Being as they are not front line combat vessels, they could look at cheaper Lloyds of London specs as opposed to more expensive mil spec.

Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB ©