• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

It seems that our Aussie cousins realy have their siht together.  Probably been covered by upteen threads already, but i wonder what the catalyst was that has them taking defense seriously, as opposed to us.

Incidentally, i served with a new Naval Cadet undergoing OJT out of Esquimalt over ten years ago.  He had written a service paper on the need for a Canadian marine battalion.  A really good read.  He was originally from HK.  His old man had been the first oriental Wessex pilot in RN and had spent much of the mid sixties inserting RM's and 22 SAS into Borneo.
 
It seems that our Aussie cousins realy have their siht together.  Probably been covered by upteen threads already, but i wonder what the catalyst was that has them taking defense seriously, as opposed to us.

I'm betting it is having Indonesia sitting just off their Northern Coast with a bunch of Muslim fundamentalists in the country and China not very far away.

But you're dead right.  They do have a sense of urgency and practicality that we lack and need to develop in a hurry.
 
Come to think of it:

-They avoided Amalgamation like the plague
-Where involved in Korea like us, plus Malaya, Borneo, Vietnam, GW 1 and 2 on the ground (unlike us)
-have avoided the morale sappin', boyscout with guns, higher Moral standard bull shit that our government purveys.
 
Good read, although they missed mentioning Protecteur's contribution and the company of Vandoos.
 
They missed a lot more: there were 20 countries in INTERFET. The paper is about Aus and NZ capacity to defend themselves, not other's.
 
From the National Post

Canada's top general says he needs a big amphibious expeditionary warship to realize his plans for a Canadian task force to take our navy, army and air force anywhere in the world for everything from humanitarian missions to all-out wars.

General Rick Hillier outlined his ambitious plan for the Canadian Forces in an interview with the National Post yesterday, a plan that will require a top-to-bottom reorganization of all three services and an infusion of new soldiers and equipment.

"We're talking about taking army task forces, navy task groups and air capability ... and have it ready to deploy either in Canada or around the world as an entity that says 'Canadian' on it -- a Task Force Maple Leaf if you will," Gen. Hillier said, adding with a smile: "I like that name."

Gen. Hillier, who was sworn in as Chief of Defence Staff less than two weeks ago, said he will need a big, new vessel to carry up to 1,500 troops, heavy equipment and new air force heavy lift helicopters to international hot spots, and he will need it soon.

"What we're going to clearly need is the ability to project our men and women and the capabilities that they bring with them around the world," said Gen. Hillier. "We'll have to find something different that allows us to do that. We're still looking, all the options are out there."

The General said his staff is considering expanding the navy's Joint Support Ship program to fill that role, but is also looking at larger and more expensive vessels to become the flagships of a future Canadian expeditionary force.

"What we need is something that is going to allow us to project power across the shore, from here to our next theatre of operations, whether that's in the north part of Canada or on the coast of Canada or around the world," he said.

"Whether our Joint Support Ships can be shaped to give us that capability is the first question we will ask."

The Joint Support Ship program, a $2.1-billion plan to build three or more vessels by 2011, will combine the roles of a tanker for refuelling other warships at sea, a transport for ground troops and their equipment and an offshore command post or hospital.

But each of the vessels, which are still on the drawing board, will be able to carry only 200 soldiers and a limited amount of equipment. Their flight decks would be able to accommodate only four medium-sized helicopters.

So Gen. Hillier said Canada may have to acquire a ship like the Royal Navy's HMS Albion, an 18,500-tonne, 176-metre-long amphibious assault ship that can carry up to 700 Royal Marines and their equipment and armoured vehicles.

Another possibility is the U.S. Navy's San Antonio class, an even larger troopship and helicopter carrier, but the General said those vessels might be out of Canada's price range.

"Those U.S. ships are enormously powerful, capable ships without question," he said. "They're also enormously expensive."

Gen. Hillier said his envisioned task force will also need new heavy transport helicopters to replace the air force's Chinook helicopters that were sold to the Netherlands in the 1990s. "We'll need that medium or heavy lift to move around that theatre of operations," he said.

Gen. Hillier would not say how much money his over-burdened troops will need from this month's federal budget to begin making his planned expeditionary force a reality, but in his first speech as head of the Canadian Forces last week he was pointedly critical of military underfunding.

Gen. Hillier acknowledged his plans are "a little bit pre-emptive" of the government's defence policy review, expected to be unveiled this spring to outline the future direction of the military.

But he does not want to wait before acting and intends to start putting his proposed task force together almost immediately. "We'll build one task force as soon as we possibly can," he said. "I want to get there sooner rather than later, I'll tell you that."

Gen. Hillier, a 30-year career army officer and veteran of missions in Bosnia and Afghanistan, stepped into the limelight within minutes of being sworn in as the head of the Canadian Forces.

The General, whose reputation for bluntness has made him a favourite among the rank-and-file members of the military, said yesterday he has no plans to tone down his language or lower his public profile.

"Canadians realize that the armed forces have a fundamental and valuable role to play -- sometimes they just need to have that articulated a little bit more clearly for them," he said. "As Chief of Defence Staff, part of that role is mine."

Gen. Hillier denied published reports last month suggesting the army would become the pre-eminent service under his leadership, at the expense of the air force and navy.

"There are three legs to the stool. You pull one of them away and the stool will tumble: It doesn't work," he said. "There is a role for air force; there is a role for the navy; there is a role for the army, but the best role is when all three are working together and the three-legged stool sits upright nicely."

And he dismissed concerns in naval circles that Canada's trouble-prone new submarines, including HMCS Chicoutimi, damaged in a fire last year that killed one crew member, could be scrapped.

"We've got those submarines, they're enormously capable ... and there is an incredible use that we can make of them. So I would say simply, let's get on with it."

Gen. Hillier admitted that the Canadian Forces' top generals have "a lot of work to do" before his expeditionary force becomes a reality and said the details of his plan have yet to be fleshed out.

"I have a vision of where we need to go here, but to be able to describe it in specific detail, I'm not quite ready to do that yet," he said.

But he said he is optimistic that there is more public and political support for the military now than at any time in the past two decades. "I think there's opportunity here, I really do ... I think Canadians have been much better informed and educated about their Canadian Forces; I think our own government committees have laid out very clearly the investment required for the Canadian Forces; [and] I think there's enormous support across our country.

"We're at the point right now where we can make significant change."
 
Yeah I agree it is interesting maybe canada will do something along the lines of HMS ocean ,built with commercial building methods ,who knows .
 
Our MCDVs were built to commercial standards and they are a mess. Pay the extra money and get it done right the first time.
 
HMS ocean is ok for the royal navy ,and a good ship sorry if I upset you it was only a suggestion .
 
No upset was given thomas, just relaying our experience with warships built to commercial standards.
 
Please don't start another carrier debate.   Last time Ex-dragoon tried to kick me in the nuts right through the computer.




Matthew.     ;D

P.S.   Personally, I like the Rotterdam-class as unlike the Albion, it has a proper helicopter hangar which could accommodate (4) Cyclones in addition to carrying a battalion-sized group.   See link for information:   http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/rotterdam/

 
I agree with you Canadian Blackshirt. We need two  Rotterdam class Landing Platform Dock (LPD)
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/rotterdam/

I also think we should get the licence to build three Patino auxiliary oiler and multi-product replenishment ships. Instead of building those three JSS ships
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/patino/
 
canuck202 said:
I agree with you Canadian Blackshirt. We need two   Rotterdam class Landing Platform Dock (LPD)
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/rotterdam/

I also think we should get the licence to build three Patino auxiliary oiler and multi-product replenishment ships. Instead of building those three JSS ships
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/patino/

I'd make that 4, 2 on each coast.
 
Quote from: canuck202 on Today at 17:39:27
I agree with you Canadian Blackshirt. We need two  Rotterdam class Landing Platform Dock (LPD)
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/rotterdam/

I also think we should get the licence to build three Patino auxiliary oiler and multi-product replenishment ships. Instead of building those three JSS ships
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/patino/


I'd make that 4, 2 on each coast.

All in favour say "Aye".

Aye.
 
Aye... aye... aye-aye-ayyyye...!?!?
OK, the Navy can have 4 AORs, but I want 3 LPDs for the Army. We need to be able to deploy 2 at a time: one to support an ongoing mission, and one on high readiness for unforeseen needs. The third one will either be in workup or in dry dock.
 
Back
Top