gral
Well-known member
As far as I know, there hasn't been a winner selected yet, so you might get your wish.Pity.We should buy from Sweden.
As far as I know, there hasn't been a winner selected yet, so you might get your wish.Pity.We should buy from Sweden.
Good,but since we are ruled by german agent,we probably choose german shit....As far as I know, there hasn't been a winner selected yet, so you might get your wish.
They have ordered only 2(!) of their new submarine class, A26, and they are still delayed. If you want to pay for bad economy of scale and bugfixing of new submarines, great idea.Pity.We should buy from Sweden.
You knew....this time i agree with you.End Times must be near,if that happened !They have ordered only 2(!) of their new submarine class, A26, and they are still delayed. If you want to pay for bad economy of scale and bugfixing of new submarines, great idea.
Best we can probably do is going with one of South Korean submarines, as those tend to be built in a more respectable number so economies of scale are good.
Ah yes, Babcock International Group. That firm is notorious, you know. The notorious B.I.G.A British Firm, Babcock (tee hee) International Group is set to support Poland's OKRA... sorry... ORKA... wait... really... Yes. Orka Submarine Program.
British firm aiming to support Polish submarine project
Babcock International Group has announced its readiness to contribute to Poland's emerging ORKA submarine programme, which is gaining momentum.ukdefencejournal.org.uk
Along with Babcock having over a half century of supporting the British Royal Navy's Submarine Fleet, they also have a history of supporting the submarine fleets and operations of Spain, Australia and Canada... not sure if the last two are worth bragging too much about but I digress.
And how many uboats do you think a country the size of Sweden can order? Yes, it has bad economies of scale because the fleet is small and operating in a quite specific body of water, but it does not have to rely on unreliable suppliers. And SwedishThey have ordered only 2(!) of their new submarine class, A26, and they are still delayed. If you want to pay for bad economy of scale and bugfixing of new submarines, great idea.
I don't think Swedish subs are truly built in that autarkic fashion. More likely, just like Gripen with its long list of European and American parts, it's just a scattering of multiple potential "unrelible supplier" problems hidden behind Swedish manufacturer.And how many uboats do you think a country the size of Sweden can order? Yes, it has bad economies of scale because the fleet is small and operating in a quite specific body of water, but it does not have to rely on unreliable suppliers. And SwedishPaganssubmarines are Baltic optimised, which for Poland alone is worth some extra money.
Koreans do have various sizes on offer, from 2k tons to well over 3k potentially. Poland is also still operating a Kilo which is similar to latter in size, much like Russian Baltic Fleet does, so it's not like Baltic optimal subs have to be smaller, it's just that many European countries consider them good enough for defensive purposes while being cheaper to run.Korean subs are not kawaii enough for the Baltic.
Apparently, NATO escorted a Russian bomber through Romania into Ukraine
Drona, in spatiul aerian national - Radio Bucuresti FM - Radio Muzica Live Online - Stiri Bucuresti
Sistemul de supraveghere radar a identificat şi urmărit, în noaptea de sâmbătă spre duminică, traseul unei drone care a evoluat în spaţiul aerian naţional şi care a părăsit teritoriul naţional spre Ucraina, aceasta fiind monitorizată şi de două avioane F-16, anunţă Ministerul Apărării Naţionale...www.bucurestifm.ro
Diffrence.USA let a Chinese spy baloon drift over its territory due to danger of debris falling on "build up areas" in Montana. Maybe comprable?
And they still push their agent Tusk in Poland to widraw from South Korea deals and buy from them.They arleady made poland abadonn production of 155mm ammo and buy from Rheinmetal instead.Germany just does not produce enough equipment quickly enough to compete on the arms market anymore IMO. South Korea really raised the bar in regards to that.
Probably something to do with havingwould be interested to know why they feel the need to invest in a tank force now.
Indeed.They should buy more artillery and drones for defensive action,they do not need tanks for that.Plus Lithuania is a pretty small country. You'd have to fit all of those tanks in your defensive battle plan somewhere without getting bonked. And 94 tanks is far more then what they had before, which was a number approaching zero IIRC.
I would be interested to know why they feel the need to invest in a tank force now. Clearly they must have some substantial and grounded reasons for wanting that new capability for their small armed forces which runs contrary to some of the tepid responses that tanks are obsolete (again).
Indeed.They should buy more artillery and drones for defensive action,they do not need tanks for that.
Maybe they plan to conqer Poland in 2030? if current goverment keep fucking us,they could even win....Tanks are an offensive weapon, yes.