For those who want to read about the Conservative's Military Plan....

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Can you guys put the following link into context.  

http://www.defenselink.mil/contracts/2004/ct20040130.html

I read it to mean that (4) full Aeges systems including the AN/SPY-1 Radars were being
acquired and would be installed for $258,000,000 (or $65m per copy).

Thanks in advance gentlemen.   I really do appreciate your help.



Matthew.    

 

[DJL]

Can you guys put the following link into context. 

http://www.defenselink.mil/contracts/2004/ct20040130.html

I read it to mean that (4) full Aegis systems including the AN/SPY-1 Radars were being
acquired and would be installed for $258,000,000 (or $65m per copy).

Thanks in advance gentlemen.  I really do appreciate your help.

I'm not too sure what you want to know? After reading the first couple of lines:

Lockheed Martin, Maritime Systems & Sensors, Moorestown, N.J., is being awarded a $258,675,871 fixed-price incentive modification to previously awarded contract  (N00024-01-C-5168) for three Navy fiscal year 2004 Aegis Weapons Systems (AWS) and one AWS for DDG 2318 Japanese Kongo class destroyer under the Foreign Military Sales Program.

I tend to lean towards this being a contract modification, to a previously awarded contract  I'm not sure what your looking for?

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Sorry, I'll clarify....

I read it as there is an existing contract.
They are adding to said contract an additional (4) systems at a cost of $268m (basically executing a purchase option).

Bottom Line:  Does the number $70m/copy sound right for an Aegis system installed?

Merci,



Matthew. 

 

[DJL]

I honestly don't know. IMHO, if you look at the price the Americans are paying for a Flight IIA Burke (just under a billion dollars a copy), I'd guess that 70-100 million for Aegis sounds reasonable......I wouldn't quote it as gospel though.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Just re: CADRE....why is we're trying to create a uniquely Canadian Solution
when we could have teamed with the Australians on the Sea 4000 project,
or for that matter bought off-the-shelf Arleigh Burke's Flight II's?

Our politicians love to talk about our multi-lateralism, yet we don't seem to
take advantage of it in terms of military procurement.

Is there any one specific incident in the past where we did a group buy with
another nation and it bit us in the fanny?

Thanks again,



Matthew.  

 

[DJL]

Even though I agree that teaming up with the Australians or buying Burkes straight form Northrop Grumman would be the best option, you have to look at it from a political point of view......Australians and Americans don't pay taxes and don't vote in Canadian elections.......

With that said, I was supprised when Martin announced the JSS project , that he didn't rule out purchasing from a foreign company.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

....which is strange because I thought I had read that we're definitely buying the JSS from a foreign builder.

I found this just baffling as I also recall reading something to the effect that through ACOA the Federal
Government has been paying Irving to close (or keep closed) their shipyards.

Has anyone else heard this?

Additionally:

RE:   The SEA 4000 project - If you go the nationalistic route, you could simply share the cost of the design
and blueprinting and then build them domestically.   (of note, these ships are getting spec'd out as costing
between $1.5b - $2.0b AUD per copy which is not cheap....)

RE:   Arleigh Burkes - We get preferential treatment as an arms supplier to the USA, so it wouldn't bother
me to reciprocate and buy preferentially from them if we're not going to make a homegrown solution.
I would also be willing to bet if you played the political card in Washington we could swap the purchase
of Arleigh Burkes for those surplus Kaiser AOR's that we would then re-fit in Canada for the JSS role.

Either that or tanks.   Tanks are good too....




Matthew.     ;D

 

[DJL]

Perhaps a deal on tanks........I wouldn't want single hulled tankers though, I'd rather a more conventional (and cheaper) AOR design though.

 

[Infanteer]

Arrggg....

 

[DJL]

That would be perfect......and look.........it has a Pongo climbing up to the Crows nest on the mizzen 

 

[ags281]

AGS281>>>>well thought out. I will convert you to the darkside yet.

I'd be happy to work with the navy. I'm too ugly to be scared of going to sea   . My one condition though is that I get to fly the helicopter. I guess that kind of rules out joining the darkside. Wait, they could always bring back flying fishies. I have to admit that them dark uniforms look spiffy, and girls dig the whites   ;D


On another note:

Crap... Infanteer's navy could kick our butts. They have both sabres AND monkeys. We're screwed!!! What we REALLY need is more swords. I'd say about $40 million to get one for every member of the forces, then another $20 million or so for the brass and associated staff to argue and produce paper about how many of each pattern (infantry, air, navy, artillery etc) swords we get. Do we still have the Oriole? If so, then Infanteer's going down!   >

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

The only problem with going the Arleigh Burke route is the ship is the size of a World War1 battleship...realistically it should be a cruiser. In comparison to the 290s the AB complement is 380 while the 280s is 285....length you have the ABs coming in at 510' and the 280s at 432'. In one package though we have it all but a lot of modifications I understand would have to go into it to make them command/flagships.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Ex-dragoon,

Do you ever see the day when Canada will acquire a Tomahawk-equivalent?

I'm hoping your answer is yes, but I don't enough about the politics associated with it....

Thanks,



Matthew. 

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

The next surface combatants are suppose to have a land attack capability, what that means your guess is as good as mine but Tomahawks have a negative connotation here in Canada which could prove disastrous to the party that decided to purchase them.

 

[DJL]

The only problem with going the Arleigh Burke route is the ship is the size of a World War1 battleship...realistically it should be a cruiser. In comparison to the 290s the AB complement is 380 while the 280s is 285....length you have the ABs coming in at 510' and the 280s at 432'. In one package though we have it all but a lot of modifications I understand would have to go into it to make them command/flagships.

I guess that other thing would the hanger(s).......not a hope in hell you could get a EH-101/S-92 into on of them.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

What happens if you decide that the Canadian Industry component of an Arleigh Burke purchase would be the
developing and installation a proper hanger system?   In essence, you would have Northrop Grumman deliver
the vessels with an unfinished stern?

Based on this photo it looks as though there would be adequate room if you removed the quad-harpoon launcher
and relocated the Phalanx on top of the new structure.

Thanks again gentlemen,



Matthew.  

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Thats a Flight1 or the first batch of ABs to get built...the second batch have a hangar for the 2 Seahawks so they are a little diferent.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Check out this websute...in particular the USS Winston Churchill and you will see the difference between the first and later batches.

http://gwardnet.d2g.com/mac/maccdale/index2.html

 

[DJL]

What happens if you decide that the Canadian Industry component of an Arleigh Burke purchase would be the
developing and installation a proper hanger system?  In essence, you would have Northrop Grumman deliver
the vessels with an unfinished stern?

Based on this photo it looks as though there would be adequate room if you removed the quad-harpoon launcher
and relocated the Phalanx on top of the new structure.

Aft of the Harpoon/CIWS is also 64 Mk 41s........It would be kinda pointless IMV to go that far in removing "parts" off a Burke.....Probably be cheaper to buy a small order of SeaHawks or just go without a helicopter (don't like that option)

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Nor would the Task Froce commander like that idea either... for no Helicopter