gone are the days when the majority rather than a minority of journos had ethics
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
The shrinkage in morals across the industry was probably in direct proportion to the rise of news limited and Rupert's personal ethics. When the bloke who appoints the editors has a personal preference for fluff over substance what hope does the journo have?
The blame is industry wide. There was a time when I followed the ABC news and current affairs to the exclusion of all else and their reporting followed their charter to a tee.
I refuse to listen to them now. News and current affairs at the national broadcaster has been hijacked by a cabal of overpaid, self important "progressives" led by Tony Jones, Sarah Ferguson et al whose total interest is returning a Labor administration. It really has been perverted and that's a great shame because most of us have great fondness for most of their programmes.
Interestingly the latest SSAA newsletter reported that their complaint to ABC about the bias of one of their producers had been upheld and a retraction and apology made. I do understand where you are coming from though some of the left wing loonies there are unbelievable. Reminds me of something an old naval surgeon, you might know him, told me when I was in my teens "you haven't lived unless you have been a communist, but if you are still one in your early twenties, you are better off dead". There are quite a few out there who fit the latter.
Competitive Evaluation
Looks like the CEP is moving along nicely with BAE Systems posting this article, It also mentions at the end that similar contracts have been signed with Fincantieri and Navantia. How long until we might get a Winner? Early 2017?
http://www.baesystems.com/en-aus/ar...te-design-contract-with-australian-government
Looks like the CEP is moving along nicely with BAE Systems posting this article, It also mentions at the end that similar contracts have been signed with Fincantieri and Navantia. How long until we might get a Winner? Early 2017?
http://www.baesystems.com/en-aus/ar...te-design-contract-with-australian-government
Last edited:
Joe Black
Active Member
End of 2017. It is a 1 year study.
Skills crisis threatens to sink subs program
We are down to one naval architect, well possibly one employed with others on contract. Touches on issues with Bill and Ben, sustainment of surface fleet etc.
Makes me wonder how dependant we will be on french expertise.
We are down to one naval architect, well possibly one employed with others on contract. Touches on issues with Bill and Ben, sustainment of surface fleet etc.
Makes me wonder how dependant we will be on french expertise.
I thought the piece was unnecessarily pessimistic and an advocate for the union. The in house naval architects don't design the ships, what they do is ensure that alterations and additions to them comply with various criteria; stability, safety etc. with new vessels being constructed to Class and with the Rizzo changes on seaworthiness these roles will be taken up by contracted class surveyors. In fact most naval vessels have a reasonably stable configuration which only changes with major mods once or twice in their lives
What would be more worrying to me would be a loss of skilled technical/engineering personnel capable of proffering advice.
Most commercial operations have a relationship with one of the many commercial naval architect firms operating independently and the RAN should be no different in my view.
Yep, completely overlooks navy tech regs and the levels of delegation from chief of naval engineering (level1) down. Each project and SPO (System Project Office, i.e. PBSPO, COLSPO etc.) has a level 2, and multiple level 3 and 4 etc. covering off the different areas of expertise. The holders of these delegated authorities have to attend interviews etc. to assess their competence to hold that particular level of delegation in that field. There are other requirements for particular delegations, such as minimum qualifications and/or chartered status, i.e. chartered engineer, technologist, or technical officer.
With this structure it doesn't matter whose payroll the individual is on as they are all assessed to the same criteria and are in effect interchangeable. For example my replacement on one project, including for my delegation, was a senior private industry electrical engineer and his replacement a DMO Naval Architect. Three completely different backgrounds but individually assessed as competent by the relevant chief engineer and granted the appropriate delegation under the chief engineers own delegation.
Australia's navy fleet gets a crucial upgrade - Network Ten
ASMD upgrade completed on another ship. Billing overseas interest in the upgrade.
Looks like everyone will be pretty happy with the evolved version going into the future frigate project.
I assume that is HMAS Sydney next to hmas toowoomba?
ASMD upgrade completed on another ship. Billing overseas interest in the upgrade.
Looks like everyone will be pretty happy with the evolved version going into the future frigate project.
I assume that is HMAS Sydney next to hmas toowoomba?
Joe Black
Active Member
You meant HMAS Stuart?
Redrighthand
New Member
To be fair, there's understandably a bias for keeping their jobs - given that the Libs have consistently dropped ABC budgets as much as they can get away with. Who would you support under such circumstances? The guys who are prepared to pay you, or the guys who won't? The conservatives reap what they sow on this, imo.
Trackmaster
Member
Well if the above is the case, I would be an advocate of "sowing" much more extensively and aggressively. There is no such thing as limited war.
Personally, I wouldn't,t bat an eyelid if the ABC, and its P.C, one sided, opinionated programs were axed complexly, and their funding used more constructively, like health,education or defence.
One typical example is the programme "back to where you come from" on SBS. The programme is as bias as a greens propagenda, it keep mentioning those refugees suffering and should let them stay, but not questioning why there are so many neighbour countries they can go to, but risking their lives and sail thousands miles on a junk? Many refugees risked their life on that dangerous trip simply because they suppose reaching Australia water (or picked up by RAN vessels) will be granted a resettlement in Australia.
Many of us may not like tony abbot or the management of the refugee camps, but the offshore processing is the right decision. Doing the greens way will simply encourage more boats, risking more life and more burden to our navy. Did the programme mention that? Not at all.
So for ABC job cut, I concur with that, and I would like to put many public service (such as SBS and CSIRO) and government owned business in the kill bill as well.
Yes, may be some businesse channels are pro- liberal/pro business or right winged. But if labor and the left wants to have a voice of there own, would they please fund their own TV channel rather than making a taxpayer funded, suppose to be neutral public media as your propaganda enclave?
-
Finally, our navy is mentioned!
cdxbow
Well-Known Member
This is all off topic and reflecting your strong political bias, but nonetheless I am interested why you want to destroy the CSIRO?
No please don't ask as I think I know the answer and another climate change debate will do my head in. Ignore everything they do for medicine, primary industry, manufacturing technology, just to name a few, and demonize them because climate data contradicts a particular belief.
Now that we've all aired our views about the MSM how about we get back on topic.
Agreed. That's pretty daft considering that they provide a LOT of input into Defence research as well as agriculture, medicine etc. And, being scientists, tend to use measurable criteria, not feelings and personal opinion.
oldsig
- Status