New RFA's to be built in South Korea

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Infiltrator, Feb 22, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. BBC reports that the contract for the new MARS ships has gone to Daewoo.

    Now, does this really make sense? I understand about value for money etc, but if they were built in the UK then wouldn't a significant proportion of the cost come back into the governments coffers via income tax the wages of the workers, company taxes on the firms and VAT on the goods purchased by those who build the ships? Is this not taken into account?

    BBC News - South Korea wins Royal Navy tanker deal worth £452m
     
  2. "Chief of Defence Materiel, Bernard Gray, said: "The MARS tanker is an exceptionally versatile platform; able to simultaneously refuel an aircraft carrier and destroyer whilst undertaking helicopter resupply of other vessels".

    So what's new or exceptional about that?
     
  3. what about a frigate and a destroyer combo.
     
  4. It's suggestive of a multi-tasking capability, so far the only Naval sucesses in this area have involved holding periscope bukakka parties whilst at the same time running submarines aground.
     
  5. So we're ordering some supply boats from the biggest ship building nation, from one of the biggest ship builders.

    Somebodies in for a bollocking, where's the bungs and knighthoods?
     
  6. Bloody hell! It'll be delivered on time, on budget and fit for purpose. Can't have that.
     
    • Like Like x 4

  7. Could be even worse. It could arrive "fitted and with", followed by "fully tested and reliable".
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Nothing new at all, hifer and fuel RAS from ship to ship is done all the time on fort vic class RFA's. The reason for MARS is that our current RFA tankers are only single hulled which is now illegal.
     
  9. "…Shadow defence secretary Jim Murphy said the move was "more bad news for British industry" …"

    Yes, it will be bloody bad news for British Industry.

    Why? Because 'British Industry' is about to be shown for the shysters they are when as usual, with Korean built ships, these ones turn up on time, on budget and 100% fit for service.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. To be fair, they've been illegal for years. Give CDM a break - he's a commercial suit who wouldn't know a MARS tanker if he fell overboard from one.
     
  11. Got to agree with a previous poster, we were doiong multiple ship RAS from RFA's in the 1960's . Nothing new about that.
     
  12. If I'd had a say in it, I would have given the contract to a North Korean shipbuilder. It would have given Kim Jong-un something new to look at.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. In a way I can sympathise with your little knock at the British ship building industry. No doubt you won't complain when you see all those fellahs who were previously employed in our ship building industry on the dole on your dime?

    Talking of a dime, how many American ships are built in Korea or anywhere else in the world other than America itself?
     
    • Like Like x 1


  14. The Yanks have a big enough defence industry to support (just about) domestic shipbuilding. We don't. Ask yourself how many civil-flagged vessels are built in the US. Not very bloody many.
     
  15. Well here's four 200 metre RFA ships that will be essential to our maritime defence capability that won't be built here and nearly half a billion quid that won't be coming to British industry.

    I'm amazed we didn't place the construction of our new aircraft carriers with a foreign builder...... Oh sorry, different government. My bad!