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

New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy

  • Thread starter Thread starter GAP
  • Start date Start date
I would literally cry tears of joy if something along the lines of a modern-day Canadian equivalent of an Iowa-class battleship was built. A modern, capable and distinctly Canadian large warship is quite suitable for the return of the RCN namesake. Something that shows the pride and history of the RCN while also being big and highly effective in combat would be such a feather in this nation's cap.
 
I predict that they will be looking for an amphibious carrier assault ship like this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_America_%28LHA-6%29

Then they will restructure the entire Canadian Forces so that all of our soldiers, sailors and air-people can be stationed in one convenient location, ready to move at a moment's notice to any part of the world.

And where, you ask, is that convenient location? Why Cambridge Bay Nunavut. This way we also address arctic sovereignty  issues as well.

 
How about we build something we truly need like new AORs and replacements for the 280s.  What good would a battleship be? They are crew and maintenance intensive. Something the RCN cannot afford. We need our ships at sea!
 
I watched a documentary about the American battleship USS Jersey,  each had a compliment of say 5-6000. I was amazed they were commissioned for WW2 and sailed for a couple of years. When the war entered they were stored, manpower issues. They were used for Korean war and mothballed again. Used for Viet Nam and moth balled again, used for Desert Storm and retired.  So I did a rough estimate and the 50 yr old ships sailed maybe 15. Talk about money pits.
That ship you featured has a compliment of over a thousand sailors, for ONE ship on one coast.  Just imagine what to do with the sailed when it goes into a refit or refurbish. 
And lastly sadly to mention if it was engaged and went down the loss of life is massive. Remember Pearl Harbour.
We need AOR or something similar. And at least 3, as it seems we are doing more disaster relief and for Haiti we sure could have used something.  Tsunami, Katrina etc etc.
I hope you were kidding about a central location as response time is important and Canada is huge.....
That USS New York looks real cool. 
 
Ex-Dragoon said:
How about we build something we truly need like new AORs and replacements for the 280s.  What good would a battleship be? They are crew and maintenance intensive. Something the RCN cannot afford. We need our ships at sea!

Bingo!  And the sooner the better.
 
Since when has the government made smart decisions?

I agree that AOR's are sorely needed. But there has been talk in the past about a multi-role vessel that could serve as an AOR, troop and equipment transport, and mission support.

What are the chances that they try and go the multi role route rather than the single purpose AOR.
 
cupper said:
Since when has the government made smart decisions?

I agree that AOR's are sorely needed. But there has been talk in the past about a multi-role vessel that could serve as an AOR, troop and equipment transport, and mission support.

What are the chances that they try and go the multi role route rather than the single purpose AOR.

Ummmm thats why they have been pushing the JSS for so long...
 
cupper said:
I predict that they will be looking for an amphibious carrier assault ship like this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_America_%28LHA-6%29

Then they will restructure the entire Canadian Forces so that all of our soldiers, sailors and air-people can be stationed in one convenient location, ready to move at a moment's notice to any part of the world.

And where, you ask, is that convenient location? Why Cambridge Bay Nunavut. This way we also address arctic sovereignty  issues as well.

Useless for the RCN as a battleship would be...start where we need to replace the ship types and maybe if we are looking at an amphib capability get an LPD as an LHA/LHD would be far too expensive four the Navy to use efficiently.
 
Ex-Dragoon said:
Useless for the RCN as a battleship would be...start where we need to replace the ship types and maybe if we are looking at an amphib capability get an LPD as an LHA/LHD would be far too expensive four the Navy to use efficiently.

Damn! I keep forgetting to put in the tongue in cheek HTML coding. ;D
 
Just speculating ... but are there any possible synergies with the "honken huge" ships that are needed for the Central Baffin Project (Iron Mine in Central Baffin) for ore haulage .. Could there be a common design for at least some elements ?
 
With a decision coming this week who do you think are the shipyards that should win and will win the contracts?
 
Irving in Halifax and Saint John should win, but the Quebec yards will will based on the results of the election, and the sudden pandering by Harper about adding seats for Quebec.

So essentially the same thing that has always happened.
 
Whoever wins means alot of pers are going to get out and go to work for the shipyards.
 
cupper said:
Irving in Halifax and Saint John should win, but the Quebec yards will will based on the results of the election, and the sudden pandering by Harper about adding seats for Quebec.

I know this isn't a politics thread, but Harper hasn't pandered to Quebec yet, why would he start now?

Whoever wins, hopefully the Navy can start building the new ships that are desperately needed.
 
Based upon what I've seen from (and heard about) the shipyards in question, it is my hope that Seaspan wins the primary contract, and Davies gets the 2ndary one.
 
Chief Stoker said:
Whoever wins means alot of pers are going to get out and go to work for the shipyards.

Please forgive what may seem like a stupid question, but I've seen a couple of comments now to the effect that the RCN is going to hemorrhage a lot of people if and when the building actually starts.

Why is this ?
 
Bass ackwards said:
Please forgive what may seem like a stupid question, but I've seen a couple of comments now to the effect that the RCN is going to hemorrhage a lot of people if and when the building actually starts.

Why is this ?

Its because the new shipbuilding contracts will guarantee many years of work and they'll need to expand their workforce. What better to hire than navy personnel who have dealt with the shipyards from time to time. Simply put many guys would rather work on the civi side.
Many are hanging on to see where the contracts are being awarded, we will lose people. Just like when the CPF's were being built.
 
gcclarke said:
Based upon what I've seen from (and heard about) the shipyards in question, it is my hope that Seaspan wins the primary contract, and Davies gets the 2ndary one.

Davies are not without a checkered past performance wise and have shit the bed on many's an occasion.  I hear good things about the West coast and Nfld contenders.  Irving?  Despise them as a whole.  Still all in all, I'll believe new ships when I see new ships.  We have been lead down the garden path too many times up to now.

Bass, that's because the short timers will step across and take their considerable skills and knowledge to the builders.  There will be generous offers of employment for some.  Who could blame them for looking after their futures over the next decade or so they would be working in the workforce.
 
jollyjacktar said:
Bass, that's because the short timers will step across and take their considerable skills and knowledge to the builders.  There will be generous offers of employment for some.  Who could blame them for looking after their futures over the next decade or so they would be working in the workforce.

We'll lose a lot of the guys with over 20 years in where they can draw a pension and work full time in the yard as well.
 
Chief Stoker said:
We'll lose a lot of the guys with over 20 years in where they can draw a pension and work full time in the yard as well.

If you mean FMF, you're right.  But with the cutbacks to the civil service that source is getting more dry.  From what I have been told from my former co-workers who came to FMF from Irving, I would not jump over to them without some serious contemplation.  Don't trust them with what I have heard on how they can treat employees.
 
Back
Top