New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy

[RC]

As for AOPs, I'll believe it when I see it, and even then, I'll be sure to double check my glasses prescription.

AOPS is the only planned ship with a design that's evolved enough to start cutting steel within a couple of months of signing a contract.

Within the next two years though, I expect there will be at least three more types with designs ready including the CCG OOSV, FRV, and with any luck the JSS.  I'm crossing my fingers for the heavy ice breaker as well, but we'll see.

 

[RC]

I agree totally and speaking as a end user this is the way to go.  I will go further and say "screw waiting years for these ships.  Go offshore now and get the ships in a couple of years or less"  I saw a documentary where Hyundai for example can go from cutting steel to turnover in 10 months.

However, to play Devil's advocate, this (AORs and Phibs) would require more personnel in an already stressed and degrading numbers game, and of course this has to be a "Made in Canada" solution for the acquisition of the ships.

Hyundai can build a ship this size in 10 months, but their are a lot of conditions.  You have to accept that you can't make any changes to the original design (whatever it happens to be), you have no meaningful quality or safety oversight on construction, and you can forget about military standards like copper nickel piping systems.  It works great for commercial carriers who want to build series vessels for cheap with minimal to zero design changes from an existing design.  But good luck to you trying to build a prototype military vessel or get the Koreans to read a NATO RAS standard.  You'll be lucky to get it built in Hyundai at all, much less in 10 months.

 

[Lex Parsimoniae]

Hyundai can build a ship this size in 10 months, but their are a lot of conditions.  You have to accept that you can't make any changes to the original design (whatever it happens to be), you have no meaningful quality or safety oversight on construction, and you can forget about military standards like copper nickel piping systems.  It works great for commercial carriers who want to build series vessels for cheap with minimal to zero design changes from an existing design.  But good luck to you trying to build a prototype military vessel or get the Koreans to read a NATO RAS standard.  You'll be lucky to get it built in Hyundai at all, much less in 10 months.

The RAN are pretty happy with HMAS Sirius - built at Hyundai Mipo Dockyard in South Korea and then modified by Tenix Defence in Fremantle.  Not a full AOR for sure but cheap and effective.

 

[gcclarke]

AOPS is the only planned ship with a design that's evolved enough to start cutting steel within a couple of months of signing a contract.

Within the next two years though, I expect there will be at least three more types with designs ready including the CCG OOSV, FRV, and with any luck the JSS.  I'm crossing my fingers for the heavy ice breaker as well, but we'll see.

My concerns with the AOPs are not from a procument point of view. Rather, I question exactly how we're expected to be able to man them. I guess we'll see what happens the day after the CMS is forced to ask the Defence Minister which frigates he'd like to mothball in order to allow us to crew the AOPs.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

The RAN are pretty happy with HMAS Sirius - built at Hyundai Mipo Dockyard in South Korea and then modified by Tenix Defence in Fremantle.  Not a full AOR for sure but cheap and effective.

With one RAS station from the photographs I have seen and no hangar I can't see a ship like that in our Navy. Not sure how effective it is, if you have to refuel and relenish from the same station.

 

[Infanteer]

Although beyond the JSS/AOPs/SCSC no other naval ship type has been talked about, so I am think the 'big honking ship' dream of General Hillier might have been just that, a dream.

An interesting point - General Hillier's "BHS" was the centerpiece to his joint forces strategy.  All that died a quiet death when Afghanistan took center stage and demanded the lion's share of the CF's  time, attention and resources.

Will we revisit a Joint Amphibious Strategy when Afghanistan is drawn down?

 

[RC]

The RAN are pretty happy with HMAS Sirius - built at Hyundai Mipo Dockyard in South Korea and then modified by Tenix Defence in Fremantle.  Not a full AOR for sure but cheap and effective.

I'm glad to hear they are satisfied, but purchasing a conventional commercial tanker at 10 months build time and then converting it over 27 months is a 37 month build program, not a 10 month build program as was previously quoted.

Note that nearly 2/3rds of the construction time and I can guarantee that most of the construction cost occurred in Australia, performed by an Australian yard.

 

[mikhar1]

Help get one of Canada's new navy ships named HMCS Barrie

Now that the Government of Canada plans to triple the size of our Navy fleet this is a perfect time to have one of the new ships named after the great city of Barrie On.

With Barrie’s long proud heritage in supporting the Armed Forces and its location to Base Borden Canada’s largest training base the naming of one of these new ships with the cities name would bring great pride to it’s residents.

Join the page on Facebook under " Help get one of Canada's new navy ships named HMCS Barrie "

Also under discussions you will be able to discuss topics like what will the new ship be ( LCS like in the U.S.) or will Lockheed Martin or General Dynamics get a chance to bid.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Help-get-one-of-Canadas-new-navy-ships-named-HMCS-Barrie/122462914457951?v=app_2373072738&ref=ts#!/pages/Help-get-one-of-Canadas-new-navy-ships-named-HMCS-Barrie/122462914457951

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

: Lets wait till we actually get the ships before we worry what we are going to call them...

 

[northernboy_24]

Now that the Government of Canada plans to triple the size of our Navy fleet this is a perfect time to have one of the new ships named after the great city of Barrie On.

I am a little confused where the government of Canada has said it will triple our fleet size.  Perhaps it is my ignorance.

 

[gcclarke]

Apparently announcing that you're going to be building a whole boat-load of ships, pardon the pun, leads some people to assume that we're not going to be disposing of the ships that will be rusting out in the meantime.

 

[blacktriangle]

It's Orwellian in nature.

Decreasing the fleet but saying it is being tripled!

Double Plus Good!  ;D

 

[mikhar1]

I hear what you are saying but I did read somewhere ( of course now I can't find ) that with the money being put into this effort will basically triple the size of the current fleet when combined with large and small ships over a period of time.

As soon as I find the article I will post it here.  :nod:

 

[ekpiper]

WRT naming, I really think Canada needs better names.  There's no real lustre or power in the names, just a place.  It's not inventive, and it's not alluring.  I actually think that better  ship names might actually be good for recruiting, as it stirs up emotions in people, showing qualities that the navy has, daring, audacious, dauntless. 

Good Names:  HMCS Puncher, HMS Daring, HMS Invincible, HMS Audacity, HMS Atlantis, HMS Dauntless

My  :2c:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Don't forget the Flower class, HMS Pansy  :nod:

 

[Edward Campbell]

There was an old joke about German U Boat captains being terrified of the flower class corvettes - who would ever want to admit that he'd been defeated by the Pansy or the Periwinkle?

 

[Kat Stevens]

Or even a Compass Rose?

 

[Edward Campbell]

If names really matter then there is a good list here. The hull numbers of the lost MTBs could be preserved on the hulls of the Orca class vessels. I know, I know, there's some international naval regulation re: hull numbers: our admirals could act like real senior officers and turn a blind eye to regulations and orders with which they take issue.

 

[MARS]

WRT naming, I really think Canada needs better names.  There's no real lustre or power in the names, just a place.  It's not inventive, and it's not alluring.  I actually think that better  ship names might actually be good for recruiting, as it stirs up emotions in people, showing qualities that the navy has, daring, audacious, dauntless. 

There was an old joke about German U Boat captains being terrified of the flower class corvettes - who would ever want to admit that he'd been defeated by the Pansy or the Periwinkle?

Good points.  I tend to agree myself.  Years ago I read an artile by a Lt j.g. in US Naval Proceedings about the semblance of obscurity that certain US Ship's names had.  He was proposing that a ship be named the USS John Wayne.  A fictional character, but one who inspires some, maybe even a lot, of US folks. 

However, I doubt the Ship's Company of this ship feel any thing less than masters of their universe, regardless of the name of their ship.  I doubt their enemy will be laughing at the name either, not for very long, at least.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

We named our hovercrafts with Natives name, the slang versions are See ya and the Sea Poo  :


I suggest we call the first AOR; HMCS Never built.