CTV: Billions more for defence ...

[jimmy742]

I must admit this idea of a single patrol vessel is somewhat baffling Why only one? Wouldn't you require two, as a minimum, be effective operations wise i.e one in port for maintenance etc...and the other deployed? To me, it's about as silly as having only one CPF or submarine.

 

[Kirkhill]

With regard to the one Patrol Vessel.

Might it not be an idea to buy one vessel, off the shelf so to speak, of a type that is currently in service, for something about 50-100 Million dollars, and find out how much it can do in terms of operating in the North?

Or should we do the Canadian thing?  Spend 10 years preparing an encyclopedia of specifications, another 5 years negotiating a contract for 20 vessels, ultimately buy 12 vessels from a favoured yard that hasn't built a vessel in 20 years, use a pattern that nobody else uses and ultimately discover that because of manufacturing defects and specification oversights and errors that the vessels need to come in for a Life Extension project as soon as the last one hits the water?

100 Million Dollars and 2 year delivery with more possible if the vessel proves practicable?
Or 5 Billion Dollars for vessels that will be delivered in 15 years and need to be extensively modified or reassigned?

I like the idea of one vessel.  Much like I like the idea of renting the Gunston Hall from the Yanks to figure out if it would be of use to us.

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

I know we have 18 CP140's, I included the CP140A's also.  I feel strongly that we have too few Maritime patrol assets, you should check out the boeing site, ref the P8.  I also know about the Naval reserve and their 12 vessels, sorry about forgetting them.  I read an interesting article recently about a proposal to give them to the Coast Guard as patrol cutters.  My whole point is that we should be a combat military, combat!!  Equip for it, train for it, be ready for it.  Does not mean we have to love it! 

I am not a warmonger, but wars happen, deal with it.  We need to deal with it, and I feel at least in the Airforce we are falling behind.  Just some of my thoughts, we often say there is no vision in the CF, here's mine, let me know what you think.  Small militaries can be effective, if they are lethal...

Here's a thought to throw out there ref SAR, why by SAR fixed wing, why not just outfit all SAR Sqns with Chinooks or more Cormorants, even in Yellowknife??  Thoughts.......

It would be crazy to give them to the Coast Guard. the Coast Guard is not a military or a police agency in this country. they maintain navigational aids, break ice in the north and in inland water ways. It's a unionized outfit that does not have the same mandate as the US Coast Guard unless they change that...but why?

 

[CrazyCanuck]

This may sound really naive but how much use are the Kingston's to the Navy anyway? They can't top 15 knots and are armed with a 60 yr old gun that is more likely to just annoy whoever you are shooting at. Wouldn't they be more use to the CCG because of their research potential? Plus they are steel hulled so they are more likely to be a minesweeper for only one mine.

 

[jimmy742]

With regard to the one Patrol Vessel.

Might it not be an idea to buy one vessel, off the shelf so to speak, of a type that is currently in service, for something about 50-100 Million dollars, and find out how much it can do in terms of operating in the North?

Or should we do the Canadian thing?  Spend 10 years preparing an encyclopedia of specifications, another 5 years negotiating a contract for 20 vessels, ultimately buy 12 vessels from a favoured yard that hasn't built a vessel in 20 years, use a pattern that nobody else uses and ultimately discover that because of manufacturing defects and specification oversights and errors that the vessels need to come in for a Life Extension project as soon as the last one hits the water?

100 Million Dollars and 2 year delivery with more possible if the vessel proves practicable?
Or 5 Billion Dollars for vessels that will be delivered in 15 years and need to be extensively modified or reassigned?

I like the idea of one vessel.  Much like I like the idea of renting the Gunston Hall from the Yanks to figure out if it would be of use to us.

In that context, it makes sense. If you are acquiring one vessel in order to determine it's suitability or to help design a new class, this would be the smart thing to do. Spending untold years and billions developing the one and only patrol vessel is just plain stupid. 

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

This may sound really naive but how much use are the Kingston's to the Navy anyway? They can't top 15 knots and are armed with a 60 yr old gun that is more likely to just annoy whoever you are shooting at. Wouldn't they be more use to the CCG because of their research potential? Plus they are steel hulled so they are more likely to be a minesweeper for only one mine.

I am sure the many naval and ex naval reservists here can more then adequately answer your view.