News   Apr 03, 2020
Pastel Morning
 7K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.6K     5 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Soon to be Gone
 5.1K     0 

Calgary & Alberta Economy

darwink said:
If it wouldn't delay things by 10 years, sure. But having subs faster is important. Australia built a domestic sub industry, it was very very expensive.
Click to expand...
Subs and ships are a low volume, high mix business. The world likely can't support more than a handful of yards
 
InfrastructureEnthusiast said:
There doesn't need to be a delay if the first few are made in Korea while the Canada yards are setup. Big picture it's in Hanwha's interests to have some of their production and human capital away from the danger zone anyways.
Click to expand...
It would be more like 8 in Korea, 4 Canada, if we were lucky. At a much higher cost. If we wanted to follow on with a sub every 3 years forever, now that would be a very different conversation. Co-develop the follow on class.

I don't think there is an opportunity there.
 
zzkwilliamcanada said:
i only care about if they could give us a direct flight from YYC to China .. pls
www.change.org

Sign the Petition

Reinstate Calgary (YYC) – Beijing (PEK) Nonstop Flights
www.change.org www.change.org
Click to expand...
Currently Beijing doesn't make sense due to not being able to fly over Russian air space. Westjet has an announcement Monday about a new destination though, so could be Shanghai
 
1768617959150.png
 
In theory it would be nice for Chinese manufacturers to build some vehicles in Canada, but it wouldn't really make sense for them to do that. Canada is too small of a market alone to justify building plants, they would need to rely on some being exported to the US as well - and I don't see Trump allowing Chinese EVs into the US any time soon. In addition to that, being built in Canada would increase costs, which would defeat one of the major advantages of buying a Chinese EV to begin with: they're cheap.
 
blue12 said:
In addition to that, being built in Canada would increase costs, which would defeat one of the major advantages of buying a Chinese EV to begin with: they're cheap.
Click to expand...
They're really cheap, though. So much so that they might still be price competitive even if they're built here.
 
It would be nice to get those Chinese EVs built here but I don't see it as the end of the world if they aren't. Most of the cars on the road these days aren't built in Canada. The North American big three are focused on Trucks, and most foreign made SUVs are built in the US. I don't believe the Chinese EVs are directly competing against any Canadian equivalents, but maybe someone with better auto industry knowledge can clarify? As far as I tell see the, the Rav 4 and Civic hybrid are the only cars that would be remotely competing with he Chinese EVs.
 
darwink said:
It would be more like 8 in Korea, 4 Canada, if we were lucky. At a much higher cost. If we wanted to follow on with a sub every 3 years forever, now that would be a very different conversation. Co-develop the follow on class.
Click to expand...

Well, let's have that conversation!

12 subs sounds like a lot at first, but rule of thumb with warships is only a third are typically deployable at any given time. The rest will be in training or off in maintenance.

4 subs out in the wild for a country with three ocean coasts isn't really a lot.. I think if Canada is serious about getting into the sub game, the fleet could be doubled, or even tripled. A larger fleet, combined with the maintenance work should be able to keep a yard steadily busy long term.

Unit costs of the subs are a fraction of the River destroyers, as are the crew requirements. The SLBM capability of the Korean models is a big capability upgrade too.

For nations that are located near far greater powers, that sort of thing can be viewed as a sort of 'sovereignty maintainer'..

Overall, they just seems like a good value investment for the RCN, and even better for Canada if we get new industry from them too!
 
Last edited:
InfrastructureEnthusiast said:
Blowback from the China deal?
Feds need to walk a fine line right now, if the EU caves on Greenland that doesn't leave Canada with a lot of cards on the trade table..
Click to expand...
They’ve made their ‘risk’ money, and now can reduce debt while a utility type player buys the project. The sellers are maintaining a supply and off take arrangement. A pension fund will love it.
 
InfrastructureEnthusiast said:
Blowback from the China deal?
Feds need to walk a fine line right now, if the EU caves on Greenland that doesn't leave Canada with a lot of cards on the trade table..
Click to expand...
Is there anyone anywhere who thinks the EU/NATO might cave on Greenland?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top