• 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

Oldgateboatdriver said:
Colin is the one who is right here: Laser will always only be a supplementary combat system. You will still need all the other weapons system because nothing will ever replace kinetic ammunition where infliction of damages to an enemy is concerned and because lasers will always have two irremediable drawbacks: (1) you need good vis. Fog and rain will disperse and render ineffective; and, (2) it can be rendered useless with a simple parade: mirrors. Start painting your anti-ship missiles with mirror paint and voila - no more lasers to worry about.

Ahhh, but in fog and rain, how will the enemy get positive ID crit? If they're non-state actors who don't give a shit about ID crit, then they don't have long range surveillance and won't be able to find us in the fog at all. ASMs may be perfectly capable in rain and fog, but their human operators are not.

GAP said:
pffft !!!...............easy peasy.......go nuclear!....... ;D

I'm actually 100% behind this. Between rail guns and Laser Air Weapon Systems, Nuclear is the way.

Besides, it's better for the environment, and we won't have to RAS as often! :D
 
Oldgateboatdriver said:
But the R-Boats didn't have to evade detection by submarines. did they!  ;D

It would not surprise me that would make them do so in times of an emergency. While doing a seismic contract, using an old fishboat, i could not run the Lister diesel as the regular sound pulses from that old thumper showed up on the trace, which became a problem as the alternator on the main was not kicking in with the low rev's we were using.  :)
 
Some shipbuilding "strategy":

Sticker Shock for RCN: Aussies Getting Supply Ships for Quarter of What We’re Paying
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2016/05/06/mark-collins-sticker-shock-for-rcn-aussies-getting-supply-ships-for-quarter-of-what-were-paying/

Mark
Ottawa
 
MarkOttawa said:
Some shipbuilding "strategy":

Sticker Shock for RCN: Aussies Getting Supply Ships for Quarter of What We’re Paying
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2016/05/06/mark-collins-sticker-shock-for-rcn-aussies-getting-supply-ships-for-quarter-of-what-were-paying/

Mark
Ottawa

I bet if we did what the Aussie's are doing the navy might just get 15 CSC's with the extra cash. Just my  :2c: ;D
 
MarkOttawa said:
Some shipbuilding "strategy":

Sticker Shock for RCN: Aussies Getting Supply Ships for Quarter of What We’re Paying
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2016/05/06/mark-collins-sticker-shock-for-rcn-aussies-getting-supply-ships-for-quarter-of-what-were-paying/

Mark
Ottawa

Hey, an nonsensical strategy is still a strategy.
 
That's not a direct cost to cost comparison.  There are many costs to building a ship that don't avoid the shipyards or the hull, including and especially the loss of sending the skill and money elsewhere.

There's also the reality that countries don't count money the same. 
 
jmt:

Your point is well founded.

But the fact remains that the RAN will pay less than the RCN to acquire equivalent capability. If the Canadian Government wants the RCN to have that capability but wants it to use a higher price supply chain then it should fund the difference - either by increasing the RCN's budget or by funding the supply chain directly. 

If they fund the RCN for the additional cost then they will increase the defence budget - gaining NATO creds.  If they fund the supply chain they can maintain a low defence budget thereby maintaining good standing with the people that elected them.

 
I'm all for increasing the budget.  The original plan that the Conservatives put forward in ~2008 had enough money in it.  Both the Conservatives and now so far the Liberals have left us with less than enough for the plans that we have going forward.
 
jmt18325 said:
I'm all for increasing the budget.  The original plan that the Conservatives put forward in ~2008 had enough money in it.  Both the Conservatives and now so far the Liberals have left us with less than enough for the plans that we have going forward.

We have the opposite of Australia. They have all party support to ensure proper funding and equipped military, we have all party support to raid DND's budget whenever they want to fund some hairbrained scheme.
 
Speaking of Australia, they can come up with this kind of money for new submarines.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/france-wins-50b-submarine-contract-20160425-goeuxh.html
 
PuckChaser said:
We have the opposite of Australia. They have all party support to ensure proper funding and equipped military, we have all party support to raid DND's budget whenever they want to fund some hairbrained scheme.

Very true, and very unfortunate.  It's a recent trend in Australia - maybe one day? 

Since we're not getting a bigger budget right now, it's my contention that we should scale back our plans to fit that budget.
 
The Aussies paid the big price years ago to develop their national shipbuilding capability and are currently paying it now with the HOBART Class (3 billion AUS and counting for a single ship....).  They spent lots of money to create a domestic sub building capacity and let that lapse and now have to pay again to restart it.  They are hardly perfect however...

Spain is undergoing a serious economic transformation (read hard times) and I wouldn't be surprised if the gov't there kicked in some incentives to reduce the shipyards build costs so they could get more contracts.  Also Australia has so much building going on for their navy etc... I don't know if they have the spare capacity to build in Australia, not to mention are their shipyards big enough to handle an AOR size build. 

Even still, that's a huge price difference.  It goes back to the what are we really paying for question.  Building a shipyard or building ships. (or votes)
 
Underway said:
Ding! Ding! Ding! Winner!
of course it's votes, and jobs turn into votes. This is why Trudeau is doing an about face on pipelines... he realizes that they will create more jobs at less taxpayer expense, and that big numbers of east coast jobs are not going to be created by the shipbuilding program.  How much of east coast economy is suffering due to the fire in the real capital of NFLD (Fort Mac). Quite bit. They will be able to employ more people on pipelines and refineries than they ever will through building ships. The capital spending program is not about the Navy, never was, and I would not be surprised to see the whole thing scrapped in favour of some sort of lighter, less costly alternative-like investing in bribes to first nations and Quebec to facilitate pipeline construction.
 
Now consider Aussies' new Antarctic semi-icebreaker (pretty big ship) to built by Dutch firm Damen in Romania:

Australia Orders Antarctic Supply Research Vessel

ASRV_on_ice_shelf-59025.jpg


Australian icebreaker operated by DMS Maritime to be constructed by Damen

The Australian Government has signed a deal with DMS Maritime, a wholly owned subsidiary of Serco, for the delivery, operation and maintenance of an Antarctic Supply Research Vessel (ASRV) with icebreaking capabilities.

The vessel, to be built by the Damen Shipyards Group, will form an integral part of the Australian Antarctic Division (AAD) program in the coming years.

The April 28 signing ceremony in Hobart Tasmania was attended by Australia’s Minister for Foreign Affairs, Julia Bishop and Minister for the Environment, Greg Hunt.

The total investment is over $1.912 billion (AUD), with $529 million being invested in the capital cost of the icebreaker, and $1.38 billion to be spent on operations and maintenance over its 30 year lifespan, according to the Australian Antarctic Division.

Explaining the decision to subcontract Damen for the design and building of the vessel, Serco CEO Asia Pacific Mark Irwin said, “Damen is a leading international shipyards group with a strong international presence. As well as building a broad portfolio of standardized vessels in series, Damen has produced a range of bespoke vessels including scientific, hydrographic, naval and ice ships. Damen and Serco have a strong partnership and over the last 10 years, Damen has supplied over 40 vessels used by Serco to support naval operations in the U.K. and Australia.”

The realization of this vessel will draw upon a number of companies within the Damen Shipyards Group and Damen’s wider network. Denmark-based KNUD E. HANSEN executed the concept and tender designs, whilst engineering and project management is being delivered by Damen Schelde Naval Shipbuilding (DSNS) in Vlissingen, the Netherlands. Construction and outfitting of the vessel will be carried out at Damen Shipyards Galati, Romania.

Damen Sales Director Asia Pacific, Roland Briene, said, “Drawing on the diverse skills found across our organization, we are able to connect up all the dots in order to deliver a cohesive, full scope project execution. An icebreaking research and supply vessel such as this represents a new market entry for Damen and we are very pleased to be working with AAD and DMS on this exciting project.”

The ASRV represents a state-of-the-art solution which will facilitate Australia’s wider exploration of the Southern Ocean and Antarctica. The vessel will be 156 meters in length, with a beam of 25.6 meters. She will be able to break ice up 1.65 meters at speeds of 3 knots and will supply Australia’s permanent research stations in Antarctica and Macquarie Island with cargo, equipment and personnel. Designed with 500 m2 on board laboratory and office facilities, the vessel will also serve to conduct research activities. The ASRV will host up to 32 DMS Maritime crew and as many as 116 AAD scientific personnel as well as a doctor, in climate controlled accommodation.

After completion at Damen’s yard in Galati, the ASRV will sail to DSNS in the Netherlands for handover to the client, scheduled for April 2020 [emphasis added--that's four years].
http://www.marinelink.com/news/australia-antarctic409454.aspx

In 2008 PM Harper announced the CGG would get its (one only) new icebreaker (the "Diefenbreaker") in 2017:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/powerful-new-icebreaker-to-be-named-after-diefenbaker-harper-announces/article955156/

Now, hah, we see "Delivery of Polar Icebreaker: 2021-22":
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/rpp/2015-16/SupplementaryTables/mcp-eng.html#s1.4

And cost has doubled from $720 million (seeGlobe story above) to $!.3 billion (DFO link above).  Nice work if you can get it--and if it ever gets done.

Damen:
http://www.damen.com/

Damen design was used for CCG mid-shore patrol vessels built by Irving:
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2013/05/01/mark-collins-new-canadian-coast-guard-vessel-type-enters-service/

But:

The Curse of Irving, Canadian Coast Guard Vessels Section
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2016/01/28/mark-collins-the-curse-of-irving-canadian-coast-guard-vessels-section/

Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!

Mark
Ottawa
 
If it costs $530 to build this "semi-icebreaker" in Romania today, then 1.3 b$ for a full Arctic icebreaker built in Canada five years from now is not so bad.
 
Another article on NSS procurement flaws.  This time with a fancy chart.  Though it brings up industries biggest worries.  No SOR leading to an Irving controlled process that freezes out companies that are not their best friends.

Edit:  Newer article addressing some of the concerns brought up in the first one I posted.  Things seem to be moving but I'm not sure what direction....
 
Apparently irving is trying to pitch some kind of "maritime support ship" for humanitarian operations to the goverment. To be revealed at CANSEC on wednesday.

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

 
Dare one ask what a "Maritime Support Ship" is? ???

An NJSS? (non-Joint Support Ship) :dunno:
 
Back
Top