超级军网路透社-德国可能已经在澳洲潜艇案中出局（未经官方证实 ...
来源：百度文库 编辑：超级军网 时间：2024/04/30 01:11:03
简单地说，这则1月21日出来的路透社报导（未经官方证实）指出，德国TKMS没有货架上既成的大型潜艇方案，216提案也被视为现有214放大一倍（实际上差不多），被认为技术风险过高，濒临出局。报导甚至引述TKMS澳洲分部总监一些自己暗示情况不妙的发言，同时影射「最后都是政治决定」。
当然，澳洲官方与其他竞争者都不愿评论这类流言。
然而，这几天多的是媒体出现美国官员、智库私下支持澳洲选择日本潜艇、建立军事同盟，再明显也不过（而且早已知道）的事实就是──
重大军备案怎么可能与政治无关？
澳洲当然就是美国的场子，从柯林斯级换战斗系统案以来就跟澳洲建立了紧密而高阶的潜艇技术同盟。
这张图就是最简单粗暴的说明：
http://www.reuters.com/article/u ... ition-idUSKCN0UZ316
Australian submarine tender narrows to Japanese and French bids, Germans lose ground-sources
TOKYO/SYDNEY | By Tim Kelly and Matt Siegel
多项消息来源指出，这项总规模500亿澳币（345.5亿美元）的潜艇竞争中，德国TKMS的提案因为技术因素，已经濒临出局。
The competition for a A$50 billion ($34.55 billion) contract to build Australia's next submarine fleet is narrowing to a race between Japan and France as a bid from Germany's ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKAG.DE) (TKMS) loses ground over technical concerns, multiple sources said.
澳洲打算在接下来六个月内决定获胜者
Australia is expected to decide the winner of one of the world's most lucrative defense contracts within the next six months, ahead of a national election in which the deal and the jobs it will create is expected to be a key issue for the conservative government.
TKMS的提案基本是现成的2000吨214潜艇放大一倍成4000吨，而日本苍龙级则是衍生自现成的4000吨设计
TKMS is proposing to scale up its 2,000-tonne Type 214 class vessel, while Japan is offering a variant of its 4,000-tonne Soryu boats made by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (7011.T) and Kawasaki Heavy Industries (7012.T).
法国DCNS的提案是5000吨级梭鱼（Barracuda）核攻击潜艇衍生的常规动力版
France's state-controlled naval contractor DCNS has proposed a diesel-electric version of its 5,000-tonne Barracuda nuclear-powered submarine.
Australia has said it wants a boat in the 4,000-tonne class.
专家表示，德国把潜艇放大一倍的技术挑战过高
Scaling a submarine to twice its original size presents exponential technical challenges, experts say.
六个来自澳洲与亚洲的业界信息指出，这个因素让德国TKMS成为澳洲大型远洋潜艇竞标中最不利的一方。
That puts TKMS furthest from having the experience to offer what Australia wants in a large, long-range, stealthy submarine to replace its aging Collins-class fleet, said six industrial sources in Asia and Australia with knowledge of the situation.
一个信息来源指出，「德国潜艇是把现有较小的设计直接放大，这么做在技术上风险太高了」
"The German proposal is an enlarged version of a smaller existing submarine, and that technically is risky," said one source.
以下这段比较难翻，大致就是说，来自TKMS与一个澳洲、拥有数十年国际军工业界经验的信息渠道表示，各参赛者择一优胜的竞争，最后的选择都是出于政治因素。
TKMS and one of the sources in Australia, who has decades of experience in the global arms industry, cautioned against jumping to conclusions as each side jockeys for the best outcome in what may ultimately be a political decision.
TKMS澳洲分部总监 Jim Duncan表示：澳洲希望寻找伙伴设计建造新潜艇，这让没有现成大型潜艇实绩的TKMS失去先前业界的所有优势。
Australia wanted a partner to design and build a new submarine, which neutralizes any perceived advantage with existing bigger boats, said TKMS Australia Director Jim Duncan.
Jim Duncan表示：「这个谣言可能是正确的，谁知道呢？我唯一的建议是，道听涂说的完全不要信，亲眼看到的也只要相信一半。」
"The rumors could well be right. Who knows," Duncan told Reuters when asked to respond to what the industrial sources said. "My only advice, having spent many years in this environment is: believe nothing that you hear and only half of what you see."
澳洲国防部负责未来新潜艇的当局对这类流言目前没有回应。
Officials at the Future Submarine Program at the Australian Department of Defence did not respond to a request for comment.
DCNS澳洲总裁Sean Costello也拒绝评论竞争对手，只表示大型潜艇的设计经验在这个案子里至关重要。
DCNS Australia CEO Sean Costello declined to comment on his competitors, but said experience in large submarine design was critical for the Australian project.
LEADERSHIP CHANGE
东经方面一开始就被视为澳洲潜艇案的领先者，因为首相安倍晋三与澳洲前首相Tony Abbott的紧密结盟
Tokyo was initially seen as the frontrunner, partly due to close ties between Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and former Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, who was ousted in a government coup by Malcolm Turnbull last September.
等到澳洲新总理 Turnbull上台，日本推销的主轴转向建立坚实的美、日、澳军事同盟。美国官员已经表示，当中国正逐渐成为区域强权时，美国希望这事（美、日、澳结成紧密军事同盟）能够发生。
With Turnbull quiet on the matter, Japan is touting its offer as a way to build military ties between two allies in Asia, something U.S. officials have said they want to see as China emerges as a regional power.
东京方面，由于欠缺军备市场商业竞争经验（2年前才松绑长年的军备出口禁令）以及澳洲权力高层更迭，在澳洲潜艇案中一度跌跌撞撞。
But Tokyo, which until two years ago had a decades-long ban on arms exports, has been hobbled throughout the process by a lack of experience in managing overseas defense contracts and the shifting political tide in Canberra.
当澳洲面临经济衰退压力，创造就业机会成为澳洲政治当局首要考量
With Australia facing an economic slowdown, that has put job creation and innovation atop the political agenda.
日本只好慢慢地妥协，愿意在南澳当地建造潜艇；这是另外两个竞争对手（TKMS与DCNS）早就爽快承诺的。
Japan was slow to commit to build all vessels at South Australian shipyards, a politically significant pledge that both DCNS and TKMS made quickly.
同时，DCNS与TKMS早就同意对澳洲开放潜艇关键技术，并在方案中对澳洲承诺工业互惠包裹方案。
At the same time, DCNS and TKMS pledged to share sensitive technology with the Australian government and promised packages of economic incentives.
澳洲国防部正根据2015年11月底各竞标者提交的资料进行评估计算，并估计在3月提交内阁。
Australia's Defence Department is formulating a recommendation based on materials submitted by the bidders late last year and is expected to give that to cabinet as early as March.
s3.reutersmedia.net.jpg (73.89 KB, 下载次数: 28)
下载附件 保存到相册
简单地说，这则1月21日出来的路透社报导（未经官方证实）指出，德国TKMS没有货架上既成的大型潜艇方案，216提案也被视为现有214放大一倍（实际上差不多），被认为技术风险过高，濒临出局。报导甚至引述TKMS澳洲分部总监一些自己暗示情况不妙的发言，同时影射「最后都是政治决定」。
当然，澳洲官方与其他竞争者都不愿评论这类流言。
然而，这几天多的是媒体出现美国官员、智库私下支持澳洲选择日本潜艇、建立军事同盟，再明显也不过（而且早已知道）的事实就是──
重大军备案怎么可能与政治无关？
澳洲当然就是美国的场子，从柯林斯级换战斗系统案以来就跟澳洲建立了紧密而高阶的潜艇技术同盟。
这张图就是最简单粗暴的说明：
file_548e7ec9e91c9.jpg (148.29 KB, 下载次数: 28)
下载附件 保存到相册
http://www.reuters.com/article/u ... ition-idUSKCN0UZ316
Australian submarine tender narrows to Japanese and French bids, Germans lose ground-sources
TOKYO/SYDNEY | By Tim Kelly and Matt Siegel
多项消息来源指出，这项总规模500亿澳币（345.5亿美元）的潜艇竞争中，德国TKMS的提案因为技术因素，已经濒临出局。
The competition for a A$50 billion ($34.55 billion) contract to build Australia's next submarine fleet is narrowing to a race between Japan and France as a bid from Germany's ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKAG.DE) (TKMS) loses ground over technical concerns, multiple sources said.
澳洲打算在接下来六个月内决定获胜者
Australia is expected to decide the winner of one of the world's most lucrative defense contracts within the next six months, ahead of a national election in which the deal and the jobs it will create is expected to be a key issue for the conservative government.
TKMS的提案基本是现成的2000吨214潜艇放大一倍成4000吨，而日本苍龙级则是衍生自现成的4000吨设计
TKMS is proposing to scale up its 2,000-tonne Type 214 class vessel, while Japan is offering a variant of its 4,000-tonne Soryu boats made by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (7011.T) and Kawasaki Heavy Industries (7012.T).
法国DCNS的提案是5000吨级梭鱼（Barracuda）核攻击潜艇衍生的常规动力版
France's state-controlled naval contractor DCNS has proposed a diesel-electric version of its 5,000-tonne Barracuda nuclear-powered submarine.
Australia has said it wants a boat in the 4,000-tonne class.
专家表示，德国把潜艇放大一倍的技术挑战过高
Scaling a submarine to twice its original size presents exponential technical challenges, experts say.
六个来自澳洲与亚洲的业界信息指出，这个因素让德国TKMS成为澳洲大型远洋潜艇竞标中最不利的一方。
That puts TKMS furthest from having the experience to offer what Australia wants in a large, long-range, stealthy submarine to replace its aging Collins-class fleet, said six industrial sources in Asia and Australia with knowledge of the situation.
一个信息来源指出，「德国潜艇是把现有较小的设计直接放大，这么做在技术上风险太高了」
"The German proposal is an enlarged version of a smaller existing submarine, and that technically is risky," said one source.
以下这段比较难翻，大致就是说，来自TKMS与一个澳洲、拥有数十年国际军工业界经验的信息渠道表示，各参赛者择一优胜的竞争，最后的选择都是出于政治因素。
TKMS and one of the sources in Australia, who has decades of experience in the global arms industry, cautioned against jumping to conclusions as each side jockeys for the best outcome in what may ultimately be a political decision.
TKMS澳洲分部总监 Jim Duncan表示：澳洲希望寻找伙伴设计建造新潜艇，这让没有现成大型潜艇实绩的TKMS失去先前业界的所有优势。
Australia wanted a partner to design and build a new submarine, which neutralizes any perceived advantage with existing bigger boats, said TKMS Australia Director Jim Duncan.
Jim Duncan表示：「这个谣言可能是正确的，谁知道呢？我唯一的建议是，道听涂说的完全不要信，亲眼看到的也只要相信一半。」
"The rumors could well be right. Who knows," Duncan told Reuters when asked to respond to what the industrial sources said. "My only advice, having spent many years in this environment is: believe nothing that you hear and only half of what you see."
澳洲国防部负责未来新潜艇的当局对这类流言目前没有回应。
Officials at the Future Submarine Program at the Australian Department of Defence did not respond to a request for comment.
DCNS澳洲总裁Sean Costello也拒绝评论竞争对手，只表示大型潜艇的设计经验在这个案子里至关重要。
DCNS Australia CEO Sean Costello declined to comment on his competitors, but said experience in large submarine design was critical for the Australian project.
LEADERSHIP CHANGE
东经方面一开始就被视为澳洲潜艇案的领先者，因为首相安倍晋三与澳洲前首相Tony Abbott的紧密结盟
Tokyo was initially seen as the frontrunner, partly due to close ties between Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and former Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, who was ousted in a government coup by Malcolm Turnbull last September.
等到澳洲新总理 Turnbull上台，日本推销的主轴转向建立坚实的美、日、澳军事同盟。美国官员已经表示，当中国正逐渐成为区域强权时，美国希望这事（美、日、澳结成紧密军事同盟）能够发生。
With Turnbull quiet on the matter, Japan is touting its offer as a way to build military ties between two allies in Asia, something U.S. officials have said they want to see as China emerges as a regional power.
东京方面，由于欠缺军备市场商业竞争经验（2年前才松绑长年的军备出口禁令）以及澳洲权力高层更迭，在澳洲潜艇案中一度跌跌撞撞。
But Tokyo, which until two years ago had a decades-long ban on arms exports, has been hobbled throughout the process by a lack of experience in managing overseas defense contracts and the shifting political tide in Canberra.
当澳洲面临经济衰退压力，创造就业机会成为澳洲政治当局首要考量
With Australia facing an economic slowdown, that has put job creation and innovation atop the political agenda.
日本只好慢慢地妥协，愿意在南澳当地建造潜艇；这是另外两个竞争对手（TKMS与DCNS）早就爽快承诺的。
Japan was slow to commit to build all vessels at South Australian shipyards, a politically significant pledge that both DCNS and TKMS made quickly.
同时，DCNS与TKMS早就同意对澳洲开放潜艇关键技术，并在方案中对澳洲承诺工业互惠包裹方案。
At the same time, DCNS and TKMS pledged to share sensitive technology with the Australian government and promised packages of economic incentives.
澳洲国防部正根据2015年11月底各竞标者提交的资料进行评估计算，并估计在3月提交内阁。
Australia's Defence Department is formulating a recommendation based on materials submitted by the bidders late last year and is expected to give that to cabinet as early as March.
另一则内容大同小异的信息，是一个个人的文章，我只翻一些比较有趣的
http://thediplomat.com/2016/01/h ... ustralias-new-subs/
Has Germany Lost the Bid to Build Australia’s New Subs?
A German bid is reportedly losing ground over technical concerns.
L1001025
By Franz-Stefan Gady
January 23, 2016
In the competitive bidding process for a $50 billion ($38.8 billion) contract to build Australia’s new submarine fleet in partnership with Australian industry, Germany appears to be losing over technical concerns, according to industry sources interviewed by Reuters.
“The German proposal is an enlarged version of a smaller existing submarine, and that technically is risky,” one source told Reuters. German defense contractor Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems (TKMS) is offering Australia a scaled-up version of its 2,000-ton diesel-electric Type 214 submarine, equipped with lithium-ion battery technology. As I reported previously, TKMS is offering the 4,000-ton HDW class 216, specifically designed to meet Australia’s needs.
In February 2015, the Australian government asked Germany, France, and Japan to bid for the country’s largest defense procurement program (the so-called SEA-1000 acquisition project)—a contract to build up to 12 new submarines for the Australian Royal Navy, replacing the six Collins-class submarines currently in service.
The requirements outlined in the bid including a 4,000-ton displacement, a range and endurance similar to the Collins-class submarines, sensor performance and stealth abilities better than the Collins, and a combat system and heavyweight torpedo developed jointly by the U.S. and Australia as the preferred combat system and armament, makes an off-the-shelf solution not an option.
All three contenders–TKMS, Japan’s Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Kawasaki Heavy Industries, and French defense contractors DCNS –have agreed to build the submarines in Adelaide, the home base of the Australian Submarine Corporation (ASC).
As The Diplomat reported previously, DCNS is offering a 4,000-ton version of the French Navy’s Barracuda-class nuclear powered attack submarine, dubbed the Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A.
日本以苍龙为基础加上锂电池的设计依旧在竞争中领跑。然而依照我（原文作者）各人意见，日本潜艇未必是澳洲最佳选项
Japan, with its brand new 4,000-ton Soryu-class stealth submarines outfitted with a new lithium-ion battery propulsion system, appears to still be the frontrunner, however, as I pointed out previously, the submarine may not be the best option for Australia:
一般而言日本潜艇服役周期只有19年，但澳洲潜艇需要30年。
日本潜艇的起居空间远低于柯林斯级的水平（先前报导已经提过这点，日本厂商会进行修改）
[O]n average Japanese subs are constructed to last for around 19 years, whereas the Australian governments expects at least a 30-year active service life span. The Japanese boats also have much less accommodation space than Collins-class submarines.
此外，外界提到苍龙的AIP实际上是瑞典产品。然而，澳洲政府目前并未对AIP显示任何兴趣（关于澳洲海军从柯林斯开始就对AIP兴趣不大的原因，我先前的文章提过很多次，这里暂略），而偏好锂电池（水下高速性能较佳）。即便如此，苍龙改进型的锂电池是日本军事机密之一，似乎不太可能向澳洲转移技术。
Additionally, the much talked about air-independent propulsion (AIP) system is actually Swedish technology. However, the Australian government has so far not shown any interest in AIP, preferring a lithium-ion battery option, which will be built into the next batch of Soryu-class subs. Nevertheless, advanced lithium-ion batteries are one of Japan’s top military secrets and it seems unlikely that Tokyo has agreed to share this sensitive technology with Canberra despite media reports.
日本苍龙级的续航力远低于柯林斯级。另一个考量是苍龙级能否集成美制战系以及美澳合作的MK48Mod7 CBASS鱼雷（然而这只是作者个人观点，和其他德法方案相比，苍龙级相容美制系统无论技术或政治上都是最没问题的；而柯林斯特殊的超常续航力，本来也远超过任何货架上的常规潜艇）
The Japanese subs also allegedly have less range than the current Collins-class submarines in service. Furthermore, another concern is the integration of a U.S. combat system and weapons ( Mk 48 Mod 7 CBASS heavyweight torpedoes) into the Japanese hull.
In fact, in November 2014, Australia’s Senate Economics Legislation References Committee, rejected the Japanese submarine as an option.
When asked about Germany losing the bid, TKMS Australia Director Jim Duncan told Reuters that “[t]he rumors could well be right. Who knows. My only advice, having spent many years in this environment is: believe nothing that you hear and only half of what you see.” Like with most major defense deals, at the end, the decision will be political and only partially influenced by technical considerations.
本文作者总结，影响竞标的因素中，最大的还是政治，而不是技术。
http://thediplomat.com/2016/01/h ... ustralias-new-subs/
Has Germany Lost the Bid to Build Australia’s New Subs?
A German bid is reportedly losing ground over technical concerns.
L1001025
By Franz-Stefan Gady
January 23, 2016
In the competitive bidding process for a $50 billion ($38.8 billion) contract to build Australia’s new submarine fleet in partnership with Australian industry, Germany appears to be losing over technical concerns, according to industry sources interviewed by Reuters.
“The German proposal is an enlarged version of a smaller existing submarine, and that technically is risky,” one source told Reuters. German defense contractor Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems (TKMS) is offering Australia a scaled-up version of its 2,000-ton diesel-electric Type 214 submarine, equipped with lithium-ion battery technology. As I reported previously, TKMS is offering the 4,000-ton HDW class 216, specifically designed to meet Australia’s needs.
In February 2015, the Australian government asked Germany, France, and Japan to bid for the country’s largest defense procurement program (the so-called SEA-1000 acquisition project)—a contract to build up to 12 new submarines for the Australian Royal Navy, replacing the six Collins-class submarines currently in service.
The requirements outlined in the bid including a 4,000-ton displacement, a range and endurance similar to the Collins-class submarines, sensor performance and stealth abilities better than the Collins, and a combat system and heavyweight torpedo developed jointly by the U.S. and Australia as the preferred combat system and armament, makes an off-the-shelf solution not an option.
All three contenders–TKMS, Japan’s Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Kawasaki Heavy Industries, and French defense contractors DCNS –have agreed to build the submarines in Adelaide, the home base of the Australian Submarine Corporation (ASC).
As The Diplomat reported previously, DCNS is offering a 4,000-ton version of the French Navy’s Barracuda-class nuclear powered attack submarine, dubbed the Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A.
日本以苍龙为基础加上锂电池的设计依旧在竞争中领跑。然而依照我（原文作者）各人意见，日本潜艇未必是澳洲最佳选项
Japan, with its brand new 4,000-ton Soryu-class stealth submarines outfitted with a new lithium-ion battery propulsion system, appears to still be the frontrunner, however, as I pointed out previously, the submarine may not be the best option for Australia:
一般而言日本潜艇服役周期只有19年，但澳洲潜艇需要30年。
日本潜艇的起居空间远低于柯林斯级的水平（先前报导已经提过这点，日本厂商会进行修改）
[O]n average Japanese subs are constructed to last for around 19 years, whereas the Australian governments expects at least a 30-year active service life span. The Japanese boats also have much less accommodation space than Collins-class submarines.
此外，外界提到苍龙的AIP实际上是瑞典产品。然而，澳洲政府目前并未对AIP显示任何兴趣（关于澳洲海军从柯林斯开始就对AIP兴趣不大的原因，我先前的文章提过很多次，这里暂略），而偏好锂电池（水下高速性能较佳）。即便如此，苍龙改进型的锂电池是日本军事机密之一，似乎不太可能向澳洲转移技术。
Additionally, the much talked about air-independent propulsion (AIP) system is actually Swedish technology. However, the Australian government has so far not shown any interest in AIP, preferring a lithium-ion battery option, which will be built into the next batch of Soryu-class subs. Nevertheless, advanced lithium-ion batteries are one of Japan’s top military secrets and it seems unlikely that Tokyo has agreed to share this sensitive technology with Canberra despite media reports.
日本苍龙级的续航力远低于柯林斯级。另一个考量是苍龙级能否集成美制战系以及美澳合作的MK48Mod7 CBASS鱼雷（然而这只是作者个人观点，和其他德法方案相比，苍龙级相容美制系统无论技术或政治上都是最没问题的；而柯林斯特殊的超常续航力，本来也远超过任何货架上的常规潜艇）
The Japanese subs also allegedly have less range than the current Collins-class submarines in service. Furthermore, another concern is the integration of a U.S. combat system and weapons ( Mk 48 Mod 7 CBASS heavyweight torpedoes) into the Japanese hull.
In fact, in November 2014, Australia’s Senate Economics Legislation References Committee, rejected the Japanese submarine as an option.
When asked about Germany losing the bid, TKMS Australia Director Jim Duncan told Reuters that “[t]he rumors could well be right. Who knows. My only advice, having spent many years in this environment is: believe nothing that you hear and only half of what you see.” Like with most major defense deals, at the end, the decision will be political and only partially influenced by technical considerations.
本文作者总结，影响竞标的因素中，最大的还是政治，而不是技术。
重复编辑掉
重复编辑掉
有现成的 不用 再搞不是烧钱
还不如搞核潜艇
正常，美帝支持日本，澳大利亚军方也中意日本潜艇，美、日、澳军事同盟关系必须建立。澳大利亚搞招标，估计只是为了压价、多转让技术、国产化、就业。德国潜艇可能类似于我们的红9，被甲方拿来当了压价工具。
正常，美帝支持日本，澳大利亚军方也中意日本潜艇，美、日、澳军事同盟关系必须建立。澳大利亚搞招标，估计只是为了压价、多转让技术、国产化、就业。德国潜艇可能类似于我们的红9，被甲方拿来当了压价工具。
钦定了小日本的东东，大家演演戏就好了。
苍龙的可能性极大
袋鼠造这些东西对于本国完全没有任何好处，唯一作用就是给美帝交差吧。
ehnd20 发表于 2016-1-30 17:56
正常，美帝支持日本，澳大利亚军方也中意日本潜艇，美、日、澳军事同盟关系必须建立。澳大利亚搞招标，估计 ...
德国的潜艇更适合北海，波罗的海等小海的环境；在太平洋上真不见得合适，把2000吨放大到4000吨确实风险太大。
正常，美帝支持日本，澳大利亚军方也中意日本潜艇，美、日、澳军事同盟关系必须建立。澳大利亚搞招标，估计 ...
德国的潜艇更适合北海，波罗的海等小海的环境；在太平洋上真不见得合适，把2000吨放大到4000吨确实风险太大。
99%的可能性是买日本潜艇了~~
seraphzjs 发表于 2016-1-30 20:14
99%的可能性是买日本潜艇了~~
看到99%笑了，当年阿三也是99%地买了两百架阵风，结果呢
99%的可能性是买日本潜艇了~~
看到99%笑了，当年阿三也是99%地买了两百架阵风，结果呢
问题是澳大利亚有钱么
中国会送的啊，贸易赚呀
本子无疑
人家可是负利率的
人家可是负利率的
和美国勾肩搭背就算了 还想和日本狼狈为奸 围堵中国
我们应该把澳大利亚 赶下车 不让他搭顺风车 看他还有没有钱买潜艇
中国应该进行节约型经济改革 提高所有原材料的利用率 还有回收利用比例
砍掉澳大利亚的订单 这样可以让原材料市场 价格回落 有利于中国制造业
原材料的成本持续上涨 已经危害了中国制造业 作为最大的原材料需求国 我们应该获得定价权 降低自身的成本 为了制造业的持续领先地位
我们应该把澳大利亚 赶下车 不让他搭顺风车 看他还有没有钱买潜艇
中国应该进行节约型经济改革 提高所有原材料的利用率 还有回收利用比例
砍掉澳大利亚的订单 这样可以让原材料市场 价格回落 有利于中国制造业
原材料的成本持续上涨 已经危害了中国制造业 作为最大的原材料需求国 我们应该获得定价权 降低自身的成本 为了制造业的持续领先地位
没有说要钦定，没有任何这个意思。但是你一定要问我支不支持，他是我们美日澳同盟我怎么能不支持？招投标也要按照程序走，当然美爹的决定权也是很重要的，澳大利亚是属于美利坚合众国联邦政府的。。。总之到时候我们会表态的！将来媒体报道上如果有偏差你们要负责。。。不要说是已经内定日本了，就想搞个大新闻，来把我批判一番！
买几艘破潜艇就结成军事同盟了，同盟二字也太廉价了，世界上那么多军火交易怎么破，就算买了日本潜艇也只是政治意义大于实际意义，经济上澳洲白皮还得依靠中国，白皮不傻比本子聪明多了，美澳本来就是同盟关系，美日也是，日美澳或者日韩美澳三角、四角联盟很不现实，美国希望这种联盟建立，但大多是日本的一厢情愿意淫多点，韩澳对中国的依赖远大于美国，这是一个楔子，有很多复杂的原因。
澳大利亚干嘛不搞核潜艇
柯林斯级就是西约特兰级的基础上放大改进过来的嘛，结果给澳大利亚海军坑坏了。话说当下世界只有2款常规潜艇适合澳洲，一款是中国039B/C，一款是日本苍龙级，都是装斯特林的大型常规潜艇。当然中国不会卖，澳洲也不会买，只剩下苍龙了呗
bjskyhorse 发表于 2016-1-30 19:56
德国的潜艇更适合北海，波罗的海等小海的环境；在太平洋上真不见得合适，把2000吨放大到4000吨确实风险太 ...
西约特兰级放大的柯林斯级就是最好的例子，20多年前给澳大利亚坑惨了
德国的潜艇更适合北海，波罗的海等小海的环境；在太平洋上真不见得合适，把2000吨放大到4000吨确实风险太 ...
西约特兰级放大的柯林斯级就是最好的例子，20多年前给澳大利亚坑惨了
苍龙基本已经可以确定中标了
买几艘破潜艇就结成军事同盟了，同盟二字也太廉价了，世界上那么多军火交易怎么破，就算买了日本潜艇也只是 ...
澳大利亚铁矿石出口最大的贸易目的地就是中国，而澳大利亚经济很大一块依赖这类矿业资源出口贸易。
澳大利亚铁矿石出口最大的贸易目的地就是中国，而澳大利亚经济很大一块依赖这类矿业资源出口贸易。
路透社也收了脚盆鸡的钱了？
嘿嘿！没有说要钦定，没有任何这个意思。但是你一定要问我支不支持，他是我们美日澳同盟我怎么能不支持？招投标也要按照程序走，当然美爹的决定权也是很重要的，澳大利亚是属于美利坚合众国联邦政府的。。。总之到时候我们会表态的！将来媒体报道上如果有偏差你们要负责。。。不要说是已经内定日本了，就想搞个大新闻，来把我批判一番！
有500亿美金足够买一大堆阿库拉和雅森了，世界上傻逼国家真多
有500亿美金足够买一大堆阿库拉和雅森了，世界上傻逼国家真多
俄联邦总统你好，俄联邦总统再见
来自: 手机APP客户端
武力统一 发表于 2016-1-31 13:28
有500亿美金足够买一大堆阿库拉和雅森了，世界上傻逼国家真多
前提是肯卖呀
有500亿美金足够买一大堆阿库拉和雅森了，世界上傻逼国家真多
前提是肯卖呀
武力统一 发表于 2016-1-31 13:28
有500亿美金足够买一大堆阿库拉和雅森了，世界上傻逼国家真多
题外话，如果俄毛愿意卖，澳大利亚肯定买，美帝肯定愿意赞助澳大利亚买，买来送给美帝研究研究。。。问题是，俄毛敢卖嘛。。。
再说点题外话，如果俄毛愿意卖，中方估计也会愿意买，问题是，俄毛敢卖不。。。前苏联末期、俄早期，破落到了那样，也没有把阿库拉卖给中国啊。。。普大帝上台之后，倒是以判国罪抓了几个俄毛。。。
武力统一 发表于 2016-1-31 13:28
有500亿美金足够买一大堆阿库拉和雅森了，世界上傻逼国家真多
题外话，如果俄毛愿意卖，澳大利亚肯定买，美帝肯定愿意赞助澳大利亚买，买来送给美帝研究研究。。。问题是，俄毛敢卖嘛。。。
再说点题外话，如果俄毛愿意卖，中方估计也会愿意买，问题是，俄毛敢卖不。。。前苏联末期、俄早期，破落到了那样，也没有把阿库拉卖给中国啊。。。普大帝上台之后，倒是以判国罪抓了几个俄毛。。。
陪太子读书。
ehnd20 发表于 2016-1-30 17:56
正常，美帝支持日本，澳大利亚军方也中意日本潜艇，美、日、澳军事同盟关系必须建立。澳大利亚搞招标，估计 ...
美日澳军事同盟对澳大利亚来说是负担。
澳大利亚需要明白自己在这个同盟中的定位：送死者2号。日本是1号，想拉一个分担火力的，澳大利亚要是加入就是蠢不可及。
正常，美帝支持日本，澳大利亚军方也中意日本潜艇，美、日、澳军事同盟关系必须建立。澳大利亚搞招标，估计 ...
美日澳军事同盟对澳大利亚来说是负担。
澳大利亚需要明白自己在这个同盟中的定位：送死者2号。日本是1号，想拉一个分担火力的，澳大利亚要是加入就是蠢不可及。
liebingjia 发表于 2016-1-31 17:50
美日澳军事同盟对澳大利亚来说是负担。
澳大利亚需要明白自己在这个同盟中的定位：送死者2号。日本是1 ...
澳大利亚从来都是抱粗腿，以前抱紧英帝，现在抱紧美帝，而且，澳大利亚不打嘴炮，不做样子，是真的跟着去打硬仗，战斗力也不错，看起来，澳大利亚的策略得当，日子过得很不错，怎么也算是发达国家。。。
不要对澳大利亚抱有不切实际的幻想。。。
PS，日本紧跟美帝只是策略而已，发动2次世界大战，还是发达国家。。。日本迟早还是要做全球老大的，不要对日本抱有不切实际的幻想。。。
liebingjia 发表于 2016-1-31 17:50
美日澳军事同盟对澳大利亚来说是负担。
澳大利亚需要明白自己在这个同盟中的定位：送死者2号。日本是1 ...
澳大利亚从来都是抱粗腿，以前抱紧英帝，现在抱紧美帝，而且，澳大利亚不打嘴炮，不做样子，是真的跟着去打硬仗，战斗力也不错，看起来，澳大利亚的策略得当，日子过得很不错，怎么也算是发达国家。。。
不要对澳大利亚抱有不切实际的幻想。。。
PS，日本紧跟美帝只是策略而已，发动2次世界大战，还是发达国家。。。日本迟早还是要做全球老大的，不要对日本抱有不切实际的幻想。。。
ehnd20 发表于 2016-1-31 18:03
澳大利亚从来都是抱粗腿，以前抱紧英帝，现在抱紧美帝，而且，澳大利亚不打嘴炮，不做样子，是真的跟着 ...
那么， 让这两货在阴曹地府里做鬼王鬼帝，也是极好的。
澳大利亚从来都是抱粗腿，以前抱紧英帝，现在抱紧美帝，而且，澳大利亚不打嘴炮，不做样子，是真的跟着 ...
那么， 让这两货在阴曹地府里做鬼王鬼帝，也是极好的。
liebingjia 发表于 2016-1-31 18:09
那么， 让这两货在阴曹地府里做鬼王鬼帝，也是极好的。
客观的说，曾经伤亡最重的，不是祸首日本，所以，不要有不切实际的幻想。。。
美日澳军事同盟，能够建立澳大利亚在亚洲的重要，甚至是主导地位，所以，澳大利亚积极响应，应该也是必然的。
澳大利亚很富裕，有钱了就扩军，追求国际ZZ地位，买潜艇、买飞机，甚至将来买航母，都没有什么可奇怪的。人家不打嘴炮，所以嘴炮神马的，都没用。。。
那么， 让这两货在阴曹地府里做鬼王鬼帝，也是极好的。
客观的说，曾经伤亡最重的，不是祸首日本，所以，不要有不切实际的幻想。。。
美日澳军事同盟，能够建立澳大利亚在亚洲的重要，甚至是主导地位，所以，澳大利亚积极响应，应该也是必然的。
澳大利亚很富裕，有钱了就扩军，追求国际ZZ地位，买潜艇、买飞机，甚至将来买航母，都没有什么可奇怪的。人家不打嘴炮，所以嘴炮神马的，都没用。。。
ehnd20 发表于 2016-1-31 18:15
客观的说，曾经伤亡最重的，不是祸首日本，所以，不要有不切实际的幻想。。。
美日澳军事同盟，能够 ...
主导地位？ 美日军事同盟让日本做亚洲老大了吗？
一个小小的韩国都不鸟它。俄罗斯的飞机天天围着它转。中国的海监船一年几十次进出它自认为的国土。可以说全亚洲最没有尊严的国家就是日本。
总之，你能不能清醒点？
客观的说，曾经伤亡最重的，不是祸首日本，所以，不要有不切实际的幻想。。。
美日澳军事同盟，能够 ...
主导地位？ 美日军事同盟让日本做亚洲老大了吗？
一个小小的韩国都不鸟它。俄罗斯的飞机天天围着它转。中国的海监船一年几十次进出它自认为的国土。可以说全亚洲最没有尊严的国家就是日本。
总之，你能不能清醒点？
liebingjia 发表于 2016-1-31 18:18
主导地位？ 美日军事同盟让日本做亚洲老大了吗？
一个小小的韩国都不鸟它。俄罗斯的飞机天天围着它转 ...
“可以说全亚洲最没有尊严的国家就是日本。”？
这大概是你从某地各种宣传中得到的，我也没什么可说的了。。。
主导地位？ 美日军事同盟让日本做亚洲老大了吗？
一个小小的韩国都不鸟它。俄罗斯的飞机天天围着它转 ...
“可以说全亚洲最没有尊严的国家就是日本。”？
这大概是你从某地各种宣传中得到的，我也没什么可说的了。。。
ehnd20 发表于 2016-1-31 18:25
“可以说全亚洲最没有尊严的国家就是日本。”？
这大概是你从某地各种宣传中得到的，我也没什么可说的 ...
这还需要宣传吗？！是个人就能看到这个政治侏儒今天被这位抽嘴，明天被那位打脸。
“可以说全亚洲最没有尊严的国家就是日本。”？
这大概是你从某地各种宣传中得到的，我也没什么可说的 ...
这还需要宣传吗？！是个人就能看到这个政治侏儒今天被这位抽嘴，明天被那位打脸。
纳尼？汗死的216只是214的放大？怪不得袋鼠不敢要，放大潜艇当年一个科林斯就把袋鼠坑怕了。
ehnd20 发表于 2016-1-30 17:56
正常，美帝支持日本，澳大利亚军方也中意日本潜艇，美、日、澳军事同盟关系必须建立。澳大利亚搞招标，估计 ...
直接上弗吉尼亚，然后在外围岛屿搞个单独的基地全部搞定，战力高又便宜
正常，美帝支持日本，澳大利亚军方也中意日本潜艇，美、日、澳军事同盟关系必须建立。澳大利亚搞招标，估计 ...
直接上弗吉尼亚，然后在外围岛屿搞个单独的基地全部搞定，战力高又便宜ehnd20 发表于 2016-1-31 15:51
题外话，如果俄毛愿意卖，澳大利亚肯定买，美帝肯定愿意赞助澳大利亚买，买来送给美帝研究研究。。。问 ...
他没想开，他不卖，自己没钱花，早晚完蛋。他卖了，又不是自己造不出，别人就算有，也不能用，除非大家都不过了。
题外话，如果俄毛愿意卖，澳大利亚肯定买，美帝肯定愿意赞助澳大利亚买，买来送给美帝研究研究。。。问 ...
他没想开，他不卖，自己没钱花，早晚完蛋。他卖了，又不是自己造不出，别人就算有，也不能用，除非大家都不过了。