# Standing Contingency Task Force: A Canadian Marine Unit?



## FSTO (5 Aug 2005)

Have you guys heard about it? Cause you'll be very much involved in it. 
Learn to love being at sea for long periods of time. 

This is the website for you who have access to the DIN

http://navy.dwan.dnd.ca/SCTF/


----------



## McG (5 Aug 2005)

It was part of the new defence policy, but I've never heard anyone suggest that we will see the army start living on boats like a MEU.  The Army's strategic reserve TF would likely be the land element to this.


----------



## FSTO (5 Aug 2005)

There has already been 3 meetings of the SCTF WG involving senior Army/Air Force/Navy personnel and more are scheduled. The Navy has had this concept in its hip pocket (and thinking that it would never get off the ground/in the field/out to sea) for years and now that a CDS with an Army background and a supportive MND/PM have mentioned it in public it looks like something is really starting to happen. The USMC and Royal Navy are standing by to support us in any way possible as in liaison positions, training and procurement advice. The CDS vision is for fairly rapid advancement of this concept, so hang on to your tin hats boys its going to be a heck of a ride!

Oh yes, here is the Army DIN site for more information:

http://lfdts.army.mil.ca/dglcd/files/14_SCTF/


----------



## BITTER PPLCI CPL (5 Aug 2005)

Is there a time frame or will I be warrant, or a crusty old cpl?


----------



## FSTO (7 Aug 2005)

BITTER PPCLI CPL said:
			
		

> Is there a time frame or will I be warrant, or a crusty old cpl?



Since I do not write your PER, I can't hazard a guess when you'll be a crusty old cpl.  ;D

But, as for the Task Force, they are very ambitious and they are planning for some interesting exercises in the very near future.
Royal Canadian Marine Corp, here we come!


----------



## Strike (7 Aug 2005)

Last I heard was that everything will be set to go by the summer of 2007.  This doesn't mean it won't be operational *before* then, just that this is when ALL the players will be operational.


----------



## FSTO (9 Aug 2005)

To those of you on the East Coast. Have you heard much about the Standing Contigency Task Force? What have you heard and is it achievable on the timeline of being IOC by 2008?

All the info is contained here:

http://navy.dwan.dnd.ca/SCTF/


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (9 Aug 2005)

I wish my account wasn't screwed up so I could see this


----------



## Chimo (9 Aug 2005)

FSTO,
Would you please place the salient points from the website for those of us occupying the outposts without DWAN access?


----------



## Sam69 (9 Aug 2005)

Chimo said:
			
		

> FSTO,
> Would you please place the salient points from the website for those of us occupying the outposts without DWAN access?



No - they are on the DWAN because they are not intended to be widely distributed. The DWAN is a controlled network, the Internet is not.

Sam


----------



## Chimo (10 Aug 2005)

Sam,
I am sure FTSO is quite capable to speak for himself/herself. I was not asking for a verbatim transcript just the salient points. Obviously, if it can be viewed by all that have DWAN access, it is unclassified. 

I thought the point of this forum was foster an open exchange of ideas. The SCTF and other TFs are a major transition in our military culture and I would like to be better informed. 

I was able to find this information, in an open source:

"According to the DPS, the SOTF will be joined by a Standing Contingency Task Force (SCTF), a larger high readiness force made up of designated land, air, maritime and special operations forces. This force will be based on a strategic sealift capability, centered on what Chief of Defence Staff General Rick Hillier has called a "big honking ship" (BHS). Little detail has been given on the BHS, though it will likely be an amphibious assault vessel similar to the 25,000-tonnes San Antonio-class LPD (Landing Platform Dock) used by the US Marine Corp. Such a vessel would be equipped with a flight deck for helicopters, as well as a well deck for a landing craft. 

The BHS would be combined with the strategic lift capability of the three proposed Joint Support Ships (JSS), of which â â€œ due to their likely placement on both our coasts â â€œ two JSS may be made available for use by the SCTF. These ships would be capable of carrying the fuel, stores and/or the equipment for the landing force and its accompanying Naval Task Force. 

This strategic sealift capability would be complemented by a tactical airlift capability, likely in the form of medium to heavy-lift helicopter platforms. Possible candidates include the CH-47 Chinook, the workhorse of the US Army since its introduction in the 1960s, or the CH-53 Sea Stallion, which has the added advantage of having a larger lift capacity and being shipboard compatible and designed for amphibious operations. The CH-53, it should be noted, is currently employed by US Marines. With this mixture of strategic and tactical lift , the SCTF should represent a relatively significant power projection capability for the Canadian Forces. 

On the other hand, the SCTF â â€œ aside from providing a more significant support for special forces operations â â€œ is clearly designed to deal with the threat posed by failed and failing states, which are seen as planting "the seeds of threats to regional and global security," whether in the form of terrorist sanctuaries or refugee flows. Such low to medium-intensity "stability operations" require a significant and reasonably robust "boots on the ground" presence, and this need will likely be fulfilled with the expeditionary and more manpower- intensive SCTF."

http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/mspa_news/news_issues_e.asp?category=6&title=36


----------



## Blakey (10 Aug 2005)

I cannot for the life of me remember what it said on the homepage for the SCTF site (it was even in big red lettering), but if I venture back into the office tonight ill have a look.


----------



## Sam69 (10 Aug 2005)

Chimo said:
			
		

> Sam,
> I am sure FTSO is quite capable to speak for himself/herself. I was not asking for a verbatim transcript just the salient points. Obviously, if it can be viewed by all that have DWAN access, it is unclassified.



I'm sure he can too - I'm merely filling in the common sense answer here for those who think that DWAN is a public resource. Just because information is unclassified that doesn't mean that it can be publically released without appropriate authority.

My comments are not meant to stifle debate and discussion on the SCTF - fire away. But the information on the SCTF DWAN site is specific and internal information not needed to discuss the broader concept of the SCTF, which is outlined in the DPS.


Sam


----------



## FSTO (10 Aug 2005)

This is the notice on the SCTF website:

This WEBSITE is UNCLASSIFIED. However if a document is printed from the TITAN mirror site, it is to be considered SECRET unless appropriately labelled. 

From what I can glean from the website and talking to a few of my compatriots on the east coast, SCTF will be a fully intergrated amphibious force that will be able to handle tasks ranging from an exercise to disaster relief/NEO to forced entry of lightly held positions. This will be a permanent venture with Army/Air Force and Navy units training together on a continuous basis. 
You cannot conduct amphibious ops on an ad-hoc basis, you have to have troops who are used to being at sea and equipment that can operate in a saltwater environment. When I was in East Timor in the PROTECTEUR, the only time we were involved with the VanDoos was during Christmas when we had them over for turkey dinner. It was pretty pathetic watching the RAN and Aussie Army working together as a team while the Canadians couldn't even establish basic radio comms between the Army and Navy.
These are pretty heady times; we have a CDS with a vision and personality to get his vision working. We also have a government (and opposition) that seems to be supportive of the General. 
Now we have been promised the moon before and have been let down, so until I see ships in the water dis-embarking troops into landing craft I will still be sceptical. But at least it is a start.


----------



## Cloud Cover (11 Aug 2005)

Chimo said:
			
		

> This strategic sealift capability would be complemented by a tactical airlift capability, likely in the form of medium to heavy-lift helicopter platforms. Possible candidates include the CH-47 Chinook, the workhorse of the US Army since its introduction in the 1960s, or the CH-53 Sea Stallion, which has the added advantage of having a larger lift capacity and being shipboard compatible and designed for amphibious operations. The CH-53, it should be noted, is currently employed by US Marines. With this mixture of strategic and tactical lift , the SCTF should represent a relatively significant power projection capability for the Canadian Forces.



Although the equipment listed is all speculation, isn't this a mismatch of equipment? IIRC the LPD17 class can provide only limted support to the Chinook or the Sea Stallion for short periods of time [if at all], and is not suitable for detailed maintenance that may be required. Perhaps the JSS will carry these aircraft?


----------



## FSTO (11 Aug 2005)

Australia (unlike our country) doesn't screw around. Here is their announcement today regarding new ships

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/modele.pl?session=dae.15516957.1123761081.Qvs7ucOa9dUAADmWZWg&modele=jdc_34

I think it is a flat top. 

Are we scared of carriers? We talk of San Antonio, Rotterdamn, Sirrocco which all have a large flight deck on the stern but never mention something that you can park lots of stuff on and still launch aircraft of either the rotary or STVOL.


----------



## Sam69 (11 Aug 2005)

Neither is a "flat top" per se although the Spanish ship comes with a ski ramp (IIRC). However, none of the specs listed imply that the selected ship will be anymore capable in any meaningful way than what is required in the JSS SOR. 

And, even if we were to buy the Spanish ship we would not have a fast air capability that could operate off of it (and neither do the Aussies) until JSF comes along (if ever).

Sam


----------



## FSTO (11 Aug 2005)

I am not advocating the Spanish ship (although it is pretty nice) over any other, and by the way the JSS will complement the LHD/A/P what ever we buy.
In my opinion, any ship with an Island on the port side and a flight deck from the bow to the stern is a Flat-top and is fixed wing capable (STOVL).


----------



## Sam69 (11 Aug 2005)

Fair enough - and don't get me wrong: I'm a naval air type and I love the big boats. But, I don't think it has significant advantages in our context over the JSS (especially since we have no FW assets to fly off of it). You sure could put a lot of Chinooks on there for Duey though!


Sam


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (11 Aug 2005)

Is there any sort of chance that the CDS will get the BHS instead of us getting JSS? If so that will leave the navy without any form of reliable AOR support in a few years.....


----------



## Cloud Cover (11 Aug 2005)

Anybody else feel the Aussies seem a little over-optimistic with their proposed price for two units of that size , calibre and capability?  Or is there no such thing as regional appeasement in Australia?


----------



## Sam69 (11 Aug 2005)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Is there any sort of chance that the CDS will get the BHS instead of us getting JSS? If so that will leave the navy without any form of reliable AOR support in a few years.....



It is my understanding that it is the CDS's intent to get the BHS as well as the JSS.

Sam


----------



## FSTO (12 Aug 2005)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Is there any sort of chance that the CDS will get the BHS instead of us getting JSS? If so that will leave the navy without any form of reliable AOR support in a few years.....



The CDS said to me personally (Q&A at a public forum in Esquimalt  ;D) that the Amphib will complement not replace the JSS. A couple of other things make me optimistic, the Liberals have been absolutely silent when the CDS made his "we kill people" comment, due to the GST the feds are absolutely rolling in cash, and the three services are working together on this project.


----------



## Good2Golf (5 Sep 2005)

As Sam and others noted, I think it is consistent with the Chief's intent to operate a complementary amphib force that has a big amphib (along the lines of an LPD or Rotterdam or the Spanish ship) as well as a JSS to support the specialized SCTF package.  I do believe that a future variant of the EH-101 would be ideally suited for life as the SCTF heavy lifter (barring any requirement to support an MSTF or the SOG), having a "big flat ship" and a "big fat ship" and having rotary lift assets stay on the big fat ship until it's time to marshall over to the big flat ship to pick up the troops.  Think of kind of an "Atlantic Conveyor" sending HC.2 Mk2 Chinooks over to the troops ships (like Sir Galahad) to bring the Commandos and their eqpt into theatre...although less the Exocets that destroyed Atlantic Conveyor and 3 of the 4 Chinooks aboard and hitting the Sir Galahad with the RM 3 Cdo on board...etc...   (interesting anecdote about "BN", the sole surviving RAF Chinook in the Flakland War)

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## navyguy (7 Sep 2005)

With the chance these ships might come into being and the fact that the CF is trying to add 5000 new soldiers does anybody think we could see the creation of a CDN Marine REG or Battalion. 

It would be a cool  concept.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (7 Sep 2005)

navyguy said:
			
		

> With the chance these ships might come into being and the fact that the CF is trying to add 5000 new soldiers does anybody think we could see the creation of a CDN Marine REG or Battalion.


No


----------



## Cloud Cover (8 Nov 2005)

I read in the Toronto Star yesterday that the BHS will not come about until the 2012-2017 time frame. I am presuming this means new or used. If the reporting is accurate, is this a setback for the SCTF, or can we hitch a ride with someone?

Cheers


----------



## Allen (10 Nov 2005)

I read that as well, plus I read another story earlier that said DND wanted something by 2007. So maybe they're looking at an "interim" solution (e.g. transfer of some old steamer which is paying off) eventually to be replaced by a long-term one (i.e. new-build).

Hitch a ride? Why not? We've been doing it for 35 years, what's another decade?


----------



## Good2Golf (10 Nov 2005)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> I read in the Toronto Star yesterday that the BHS will not come about until the 2012-2017 time frame. I am presuming this means new or used. If the reporting is accurate, is this a setback for the SCTF, or can we hitch a ride with someone?
> 
> Cheers



S-calss conversion could happen a lot faster if there's gov't will...Maersk, Hapag-Lloyd, etc... all could put mod S-class on HMCS pay much sooner than 2012-2017, methinks...

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## Cloud Cover (19 Nov 2005)

Unfortunately, this POS is coming available for a bargain price. 

HMS Argus.

Crew ~80 + 140 aircrew.


----------



## Infanteer (19 Nov 2005)

Despite having a fascination with Russian equipment, CASR has a good article on the subject:

http://www.sfu.ca/casr/mp-sealift-rotterdam.htm


----------



## Cloud Cover (19 Nov 2005)

First we need a trainer to prove the "theory." HMS Argus was designed as a trainer for the FAA, plus a few other auxilliary roles. Mechanically, its a POS. We can pick it up dirt cheap i.e. next to nothing. 

Our future LPD or LHA will be built or converted domestically - anything else is politically untenable.

The main attractionof this ship to the Navy, besides costs, is that it can be crewed by civies and reservists with only marginal reg force participation while the Air Force and Army sort themselves out for this sort of thing. The Navy would also likely staff the ship with 3 and 4 ringers along with tactical development types to figure out what works and what doesn't for our own amphibious needs. It makes little difference to the FFG's and DDH right now what type of ship it is- they can practice protecting the thing even if the ship is not the final product.

If the ship wasn't so riddled with problems, it might actually be a good idea to seed the SCTF with it.

cheers


----------



## Good2Golf (20 Nov 2005)

Wowza, that is one ungainly piece of kit, W601!  Tell me that's not a smoke stack on the aft starboard quater! That thing truly has British design deep in its blood...  ;D

I think I'd happily wait 18 months to see Hapag-Lloyd's Shanghai Express have a well deck welded in and painted grey.  

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (20 Nov 2005)

Duey said:
			
		

> S-calss conversion could happen a lot faster if there's gov't will...Maersk, Hapag-Lloyd, etc... all could put mod S-class on HMCS pay much sooner than 2012-2017, methinks...
> 
> Cheers,
> Duey



Something was on the go with Maersk a couple of months ago...I don't know where it sits, though.  SCTF is supposed to reach Initial Operating Capability much sooner than 2012, so they'll need something.  I doubt, given the timelines, that new build is a viable option.

As for Argus...  In defence of the Royal Navy, it isn't a naval vessel.  Instead, Argus is a "Royal Fleet Auxillary" ship used for aviation training.  http://www.navynews.co.uk/ships/argus.asp


----------



## Cloud Cover (20 Nov 2005)

Yes it is a stack- likely the same deck/stack configuration as the JSS will have, although the JSS will have a much shorter flight deck. This ship was slated to be replaced by a dedicated and more modern design for it's secondary role as a casualty treatment ship. That project was shelved, and the ship was then supposed to stay in service until 2020. Now it turns out the Brits are looking at a fitting the casualty role into an LSD (aux) or perhaps even an RFA auxilliary ro-ro - perhaps by 2007/2008. [does that time frame sound familiar or what?]There is an RN project team looking at those options as of this past September.   

If the Brits come up with a plan to house/spread casualty treatment amongst other platforms, and if they decied they can do without the limited forward avaition support this ship provides [as it did during Op Telic], they will gladly ditch the thing for a song and dance. Given the fact that they are now looking at some more LPD's [maybe even another LPH] they could do without the flight deck space for the 5 or 6 year gap. Interesting the larger Scheldt design comes up as a possibility for the additional LPD's-   a design we might also consider for a more permanent solution around the same time.    

Keep in mind that this is just me "thinking out loud" - and nothing more. It's the crew size that makes it attractive, and the fact that it has already been militarized. 

Considering we would likely never take it anywhere for at least a few years [other than up North], in retrospect it might not be a bad temporary acquisition to train on- nothing more.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (20 Nov 2005)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Yes it is a stack- likely the same deck/stack configuration as the JSS will have, although the JSS will have a much shorter flight deck. This ship was slated to be replaced by a dedicated and more modern design for it's secondary role as a casualty treatment ship. That project was shelved, and the ship was then supposed to stay in service until 2020. Now it turns out the Brits are looking at a fitting the casualty role into an LSD (aux) or perhaps even an RFA auxilliary ro-ro - perhaps by 2007/2008. [does that time frame sound familiar or what?]There is an RN project team looking at those options as of this past September.
> 
> If the Brits come up with a plan to house/spread casualty treatment amongst other platforms, and if they decied they can do without the limited forward avaition support this ship provides [as it did during Op Telic], they will gladly ditch the thing for a song and dance. Given the fact that they are now looking at some more LPD's [maybe even another LPH] they could do without the flight deck space for the 5 or 6 year gap. Interesting the larger Scheldt design comes up as a possibility for the additional LPD's-   a design we might also consider for a more permanent solution around the same time.
> 
> ...



Very true - I wasn't aware of the plans for Argus...very interesting!  The RN appears to be proceeding down the "transformation" path very rapidly, so we may be able to pick up some valuable lessons as they proceed.   In the "thinking out loud" department, my guess is that we'll see the JSS as a new-build ship constructed here in Canada, partially as a sop to the regional development crowd.   The BHS, however, may well end up being a Maersk-ish container conversion - sooner rather than later - if only to get the SCTF up and running.


----------



## Cloud Cover (21 Nov 2005)

Incidentally, the ship can support 5 Chinooks or 5 Sea Kings and it has a ro-ro ramp that mexe floats could saunter up to. It can also supposedly accommodate 750 troops in emergency situations.

Mexe Floats- self powered calm water raft for the very brave. [also contemplated for JSS, I think]


----------



## armyvern (21 Nov 2005)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Mexe Floats- self powered calm water raft for the very brave. [also contemplated for JSS, I think]


I. hopefully, will not be stepping onto one one these contraptions anytime soon. I'm all for the current RAS. anybody?

http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/canada/photarch2/tribaor.jpg


----------



## Kirkhill (21 Nov 2005)

THIS Argus W601?

Navy League article Aug 2001



> The 20-year-old Royal Fleet Auxiliary RFA Argus, a converted container ship, is currently being refitted, and one of the options under consideration by the DPA is making her available as a 90-bed PCRS by using a modular hospital. There is some risk in extending the life of the Argus, which has already had to be stiffened to rectify major cracks in her hull.



http://www.navyleague.org/sea_power/aug_01_17.php

I remember seeing other reports about this but can't find the references just now.

Might be better if we waited a bit and got you a boat without patched over cracks.


----------



## Cloud Cover (21 Nov 2005)

Thats the one. They patched parts of the flight deck with up to 5' of concrete. It went into refit a while back [for the PCRS upgrade] but the treatment equipment can be removed and put into another ship [if necessary].  More a question of finding new space than preserving old space.

Cheers


----------



## FSTO (7 Apr 2006)

Things are moving ahead, the POC meetings will be held in Halifax sometime this month. There will be an exercise in the late fall to test out our ability to mount an over-the-shore landing of troops and supporting them from sea. The USN will be lending Canada the USS Nashville for the exercise. This should be interesting.


----------



## Navy_Blue (7 Apr 2006)

When you say lending you mean ship and sailors??  We supply the grunts??  :warstory:


----------



## FSTO (7 Apr 2006)

Navy_Blue said:
			
		

> When you say lending you mean ship and sailors??  We supply the grunts??  :warstory:



I assume so, but we'll have all sorts of Navy types on board because we have zero experience in amphib ops,


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (7 Apr 2006)

FSTO said:
			
		

> Things are moving ahead, the POC meetings will be held in Halifax sometime this month. There will be an exercise in the late fall to test out our ability to mount an over-the-shore landing of troops and supporting them from sea. The USN will be lending Canada the USS Nashville for the exercise. This should be interesting.



Wow....That's impressive.

Very cool indeed....


Matthew.


----------



## FSTO (7 Apr 2006)

gravyboat said:
			
		

> When should sailors start to see postings into SCTF/Amphib platform?



This summer they want to create the HQ and the 5 (3 Navy) Maritime Amphibious Unit (I've already asked, but it is already filled(GD Halifax, they still think that they are the be-all end-all of the Navy, they never even thought about asking somebody from the West Coast!!!!!!) Rant Off )

But regarding the actual ship, we have to actually get one first. : Sorry!!


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (8 Apr 2006)

Interesting read on the Amphibious Fleet procurement from the U.S. Congressional Budget Office....

Link:  http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=6003&sequence=2


Matthew.


----------



## Sub_Guy (31 May 2006)

The actual plan now involves the USS Gunston Hall................If we are going to procure an amphib vessel, and arctic patrol vessels, who is going to man them?  Also if arctic patrol vessels are ordered does anyone here think they will actually be based up North, or will their patrols start and end in Halifax?   :threat:


----------



## DELTADOG13 (31 May 2006)

Very interesting. 1 RCR Battle Gp used the USS Gunston Hall on Ex Unified Spirit in 2000. Brings back lots of memories of standing in long line ups for the chow. Over the horizen insertions by AAV and LCAC.
Cheers, should be interesting to see what comes out of the trials. Like to see what Landing Force is used from LFC.


----------



## Sub_Guy (31 May 2006)

DELTADOG13 said:
			
		

> Very interesting. 1 RCR Battle Gp used the USS Gunston Hall on Ex Unified Spirit in 2000. Brings back lots of memories of standing in long line ups for the chow. Over the horizen insertions by AAV and LCAC.
> Cheers, should be interesting to see what comes out of the trials. Like to see what Landing Force is used from LFC.



My brother got to experience that trip during his time in Petawawa, he also made mention of the crappers with no walls?  You can access all the documents pertaining to the SCTF on the din/web there is some interesting information there.


----------



## FSTO (2 Jun 2006)

CDS has given his approval to CMS to conduct the POC exercise this fall/winter. Things are moving ahead quite nicely. Should be an interesting exercise.


----------



## DELTADOG13 (5 Jun 2006)

It seems 2 RCR got the nod as the Landing Force contribution of SCTF. All aboard.


----------



## FSTO (6 Jun 2006)

DELTADOG13 said:
			
		

> It seems 2 RCR got the nod as the Landing Force contribution of SCTF. All aboard.


Press Ganged into the Canadian Marines?


----------



## big bad john (6 Jun 2006)

Haven't there been Canadian Observers on HMS Ocean?


----------



## Sub_Guy (7 Jul 2006)

OK what's the deal here with the SCTF, are they going have some army unit stood up in Halifax, or are we going to have to move the BHS to Montreal to load up?    Does this mean that the Vandoos/RCR will get all the amphib training?  Or are we going to have a dedicated unit.

I tried the search function on here, and I couldn't find anything


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (7 Jul 2006)

That's still all up for discussion.  I suspect we'll be waiting a while, as I understand that the Army and Navy have differing views as to how to generate the land-based component.  The upcoming trial may point the way...


----------



## ArmyRick (21 Jul 2006)

I can't see us keeping a battalion at sea but a company sized reaction force I could see.


----------



## GAP (21 Jul 2006)

Based on humanitarian situations and potential conflicts that have been in the news over, say, the last 10 years, would there be any immediate need for more than an company initially, so long as there was additional forces available with lift capacity on 48-72 hour notice?


----------



## George Wallace (21 Jul 2006)

I think all the Bdes rotate their Units through IRU.  The IRU would have a Coy strength Sub-Unit on 24 hrs notice to move, with the rest (Bn strength) on 24 to 48 hr NTM.  These, however, are not really set up for International Deployments, but Internal Deployments within the Bde AOR.  It would be good to set up a more enhanced DART, and actually permanently post a larger contingent to it.  As it sits now, most of the DART is pulled out of Pet, with only a few Sup Techs and others, permanently maintaining what little stores and equipment they have in Trenton.  

If all these ideas come to pass, then Trenton would not be large enough to house any or all of them.  The Government would have to expend Billions of Dollars on the purchase of land, construction of more runways, construction of hangars, construction of barracks and PMQs, infrastructure, roads, railheads, fuel dumps, etc.  (This is thinking of all the promises to put an Airborne Unit, C17s, Hercs, DART, JTFNBC, and whatever else in Trenton, besides the existing Air Force.  An awful lot of eggs in one basket.)


----------



## GAP (21 Jul 2006)

Not being familiar with the base and surrounding area, is there supplemental bases nearby where the overflow could go?
Is this even wise, concentrating all our capacity, with little alternative in just one place? I understand the urge to have them close at hand, but it may be counterproductive. 
DART seems to be coming into its own in the last couple of years, maybe it's time to reformat and rethink it's status and deployability on a more permanent basis.


----------



## FSTO (6 Oct 2006)

Bump, because of the article in the Chronicle Herald. And that the POC exercise is only a couple of months away.


----------



## Roadracer (31 Oct 2006)

Good day. 

The Integrated Tactics Experimental Exercise (ITEE) of the SCF is due to take place very soon. The USN has loaned an amphibious ship (and crew) to Maritime Command. This ship, loaded with a company of R22eR, vehicles, a truely 'joint' command element (navy, army, airforce) will be escorted by the Canadian Fleet Atlantic to a Marine base where an amphibious landing will take place.  

On the way, Marine mentors will teach the Vandoos about ships, and the command element about amphibious operations, etc. So, shortly Canada will have some resident expertise in all three services about amphibious operations. Then I guess, serious discussions can begin. 

Major hurdles have been crossed to get this far, but in typical CF fashion, it's all coming together at the last minute


----------



## Roadracer (31 Oct 2006)

The landing force will be made up by the R22eR. The entire force sails shortly, trials in Halifax harbour then off to points south. On the way US Marines will mentor the army guysin shipboard life (Wadder Training) and amphibious operations. 

The entire plan is pretty ambitious, but on completion, all three services will have a core of people who should be able to talk amphibious operations with some background. Then the real discussions can begin!


----------



## PPCLI Guy (1 Nov 2006)

And should I be CDS some day, this experiment will be known as the genesis of the First Canadian Marine Expeditionary Force...formerly known as the Canadian Forces.

Fortunately for most, I will never be CDS.


----------



## plattypuss (1 Nov 2006)

One other small fly in the ointment is that the numbers of bodies we have available to fill the SCF posns.  If we are having difficulty manning the existing LAV and light Bns for rotation overseas then the SCF concept may have to slow down a bit - its a great idea but we need bodies to fill the posns and not just the new recruits coming in the door but also people to fill out the leadership posns. I know the exercise is still good to go but I will be curious when the Coy from the RCR actually officially moves over to fill the SCF...


----------



## TangoTwoBravo (1 Nov 2006)

Can these things portage?  There are some spots on the Arghandab that they might not be able to navigate.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (1 Nov 2006)

Red_Five said:
			
		

> Can these things portage?  There are some spots on the Arghandab that they might not be able to navigate.



Hmmm - very few landlocked countries in the world - and we should train, org and equip to fight *a* war, not necessarily *this* war....


----------



## Kirkhill (4 Nov 2006)

Red_Five said:
			
		

> Can these things portage?  There are some spots on the Arghandab that they might not be able to navigate.



Probably not but they might be able to get your heavy gear a little bit closer so that the Air Forces C-17s and C-130s can get it on the ground faster.  Rather than have it delivered over a period of weeks they might get your last set of wheels on the ground within days of the first set landing.


----------



## AIC_2K5 (18 Nov 2006)

"Canada's Amphibious Ambitions"
http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=40c3f325-cf58-44e3-9049-18ffc7d1e9a3

Very detailed; I'm beginning to like canada.com more and more...


----------



## Spooks (20 Nov 2006)

Can anyone PM me with details on this topic being I cannot access DIN info from home, and well, I am currecntly at home due to post-injury repairs?

Is it only being planned for the Atlantic because I heard it may start there, but will go to the Pacific as well. I am interested on this info and it should be good PD.


----------



## El Gerco (12 Dec 2006)

FSTO said:
			
		

> Have you guys heard about it? Cause you'll be very much involved in it.
> Learn to love being at sea for long periods of time.
> 
> This is the website for you who have access to the DIN
> ...



If the Canadian Army goes anywhere by Sea it will be on US ships , much like MARCOT 98, when the Canadian NAVY had no way to transport us and we had to travel on the USS Shreavport.


----------



## FSTO (12 Dec 2006)

MuddyoldSpr said:
			
		

> If the Canadian Army goes anywhere by Sea it will be on US ships , much like MARCOT 98, when the Canadian NAVY had no way to transport us and we had to travel on the USS Shreavport.



That is why we are going through this process. To get the capability to be able to do it ourselves.


----------



## Journeyman (12 Dec 2006)

I was just speaking with an Arty major who was involved. His comment was: 

"It was embarrasssing watching them tip-toeing through the surf trying to keep from getting wet. In hindsight though, it's just as well - - with the amount of hair gel in that Company, anyone falling down would have caused an environmental catastrophe" 
;D


----------



## FSTO (12 Dec 2006)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I was just speaking with an Arty major who was involved. His comment was:
> 
> "It was embarrasssing watching them tip-toeing through the surf trying to keep from getting wet. In hindsight though, it's just as well - - with the amount of hair gel in that Company, anyone falling down would have caused an environmental catastrophe"
> ;D



Ha! Ha!
There was also a huge language barrier between the USN LCVP coxswains and the Van Doo LAV drivers. 
But seriously, the ITE was geared toward learning, and you don't learn if you don't try.

For those of you on the DIN, here is the link to the Leasons Learned File; http://navy.dwan.dnd.ca/SCF/pages/ITEE06.asp


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (12 Dec 2006)

MuddyoldSpr said:
			
		

> If the Canadian Army goes anywhere by Sea it will be on US ships , much like MARCOT 98, when the Canadian NAVY had no way to transport us and we had to travel on the USS Shreavport.



Someone has not been keeping up with whats been going on.


----------



## El Gerco (13 Dec 2006)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Someone has not been keeping up with whats been going on.



 Trust me my friend I have been keeping up with the times, more then I care too @ times. It was sarcasm on my part. By the time this gets of the ground there will be an new Prime Minister "steering the ship" and this will probably get scraped.  I know they recently did some work on the proof of concept.  In Halifax, they've stood up the Maritime Amphibious Unit, which is mostly sailors at this point.  No doubt, they could use a good Army Sgt Major to sort them out! Know any.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (13 Dec 2006)

Not anymore....besides a good Cox'n has to be around so you army boys don't get your feet too wet.


----------



## El Gerco (13 Dec 2006)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Not anymore....besides a good Cox'n has to be around so you army boys don't get your feet too wet.



Roger that, or drop our hair gel. :crybaby: 

All kidding and sarcasm aside I believe in the concept, and would love to be part of it.  One can only dream .
Here is a question for all you "sailors" (not purple sailors either) in the Army elements, do you require to have Combat Engineers, or can Bosens carry out the task of destroying UXO's , Mines etc on beaches, if I'm not mistaken they already do this as part of the boarding parties,  or am I wrong on that account.


----------



## medaid (13 Dec 2006)

WOW....what are the chances that there'll be new uniforms to go along with this new amphibious unit? Canadian Marines? 'Royal' Canadian Marines? damn...I cant wait! any need for HCAs?


----------



## George Wallace (13 Dec 2006)

MedTech said:
			
		

> WOW....what are the chances that there'll be new uniforms to go along with this new amphibious unit? Canadian Marines? 'Royal' Canadian Marines? damn...I cant wait! any need for HCAs?



Following you around is like watching........a basket case trying to find a corner in a round room.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (13 Dec 2006)

I believe beach obstacles are in the realm of the clearance divers. Our bosuns are taught demolitions on their 5s.


----------



## medaid (13 Dec 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Following you around is like watching........a basket case trying to find a corner in a round room.




Following Me? That bad huh... 

Damn!


----------



## FSTO (14 Dec 2006)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> I believe beach obstacles are in the realm of the clearance divers. Our bosn's are taught demolitions on their 5s.



Underwater mines and other obstacles within the surf (20 metre depth line) are the clearance diver responsibilities. Bosn's are responsible for the beach area (I don't think it has been decided how far inland the bosn's will be responsible for). But I would think that the Boatswains and Combat Engineers will share that responsibility within the SCF for the foreseeable future.

As for demolition training, the bosn's get their first exposure on their QL3's and receive more training at each QL level. On another note we are negotiating with the CE for them to come out to Bentinck Island to build some structures for us to take down ;D. Make the training a little more realistic.


----------



## Journeyman (14 Dec 2006)

FSTO said:
			
		

> Underwater mines and other obstacles within the surf (20 metre depth line) are the clearance diver responsibilities. Bosn's are responsible for the beach area (I don't think it has been decided how far inland the bosn's will be responsible for). But I would think that the Boatswains and Combat Engineers will share that responsibility within the SCF for the foreseeable future.



For what it's worth, the current edition of the _Maple Leaf_   (p. 3) has a pic captioned "Clearance Divers take up position after securing beach. I've learned to put little faith in what appears in popular media, but there's the implication that the Clearance Divers were responsible for securing the beach.

And it may have been a posed pic, but with them sailors all snuggled together like that, a bad guy would just need one itsy-bitsy grenade


----------



## FSTO (14 Dec 2006)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> For what it's worth, the current edition of the _Maple Leaf_   (p. 3) has a pic captioned "Clearance Divers take up position after securing beach. I've learned to put little faith in what appears in popular media, but there's the implication that the Clearance Divers were responsible for securing the beach.
> 
> And it may have been a posed pic, but with them sailors all snuggled together like that, a bad guy would just need one itsy-bitsy grenade



Its all in the experimental stage.


----------



## daftandbarmy (14 Dec 2006)

As with any amphibious operation, the actual micro-task, obstacle clearance in this case, is only a tiny part of the overall strategic and operational requirements for success. NGS, CAS and other types of air support, surface and sub-surface naval support, foreign affairs etc etc are all part of the equation leading up to a demo team successfully messing around at the tide line in a foreign country. If we're going this way as a military, it's definately a go big or go home type of scenario. I trust we'll focus on getting the big picture right before committing people to these kind of tasks in an actual operational scenario.


----------



## Bobbyoreo (15 Mar 2007)

I know I saw something about this on the DIN a month or two ago about making a new SF unit out west. I don't recall the name of it. Something along the lines of Reconnaissance...something something. I tried the search on this site and on the din and have got nothing. I know the clip talked about using Pathfinders and clearance divers and using them for beachhead landings and such. All I'm looking for is the clip or the name of this unit...if I'm way out to lunch and I might be....or maybe I just dream about units like this I don't know but any help is good help. Thanks


----------



## muffin (15 Mar 2007)

Not a lot of info yet - but here is an article on it from the CBC

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/03/06/military-force.html


Canadian military creating amphibious force
Last Updated: Wednesday, March 7, 2007 | 12:02 AM ET
CBC News

The Canadian military is about to create a special forces unit unlike anything it has had before, CBC News has learned.

The force, which will include 800 soldiers, sailors and air force personnel, will be mainly focused on maritime operations, but will also focus on areas such as counter-terrorism, sources said.

The force will be equipped with helicopters, submarines and possibly a leased amphibious assault ship — a vessel that can bring ashore and support ground troops.

"Think of it as something like a mini United States Marine Corps," the CBC's Rob Gordon reported Tuesday from New Glasgow, N.S.

The marines, with about 200,000 troops, is a branch of the U.S. Navy that operates on land, sea and in the air.

Canada has studied the possibility of having a special force for a year, and sources told Gordon the military is now ready to move ahead with plans. No details were available about when the force will be operational.

The force will be able to work within Canada, assisting with coastal disasters where civilians are at risk.

The force will also be able to assist the Canadian military in its operations around the world. The military hopes the force will increase its global presence, Gordon reported.


----------



## muffin (15 Mar 2007)

Further to my last ... guess it is on hold


http://thechronicleherald.ca/NovaScotia/563433.html

Assault ship plans on hold

By CHRIS LAMBIE Staff Reporter

ADVERTISEMENT

Gen. Rick Hillier is putting off plans to acquire a big honking ship until after the 2010 Olympics.

The chief of the defence staff’s idea of creating a rapid reaction force that could travel in an amphibious assault ship to intervene in failed or failing states around the world has been shelved for at least three years.

The reasons: pressures stemming from Canada’s mission in Afghanistan as well as the military’s role to provide security for the upcoming Vancouver games.

"I’ve had to take a bit of an appetite suppressant," Gen. Hillier told the Ottawa Citizen in a recent interview.

Two years ago, under a Liberal government, the charismatic general released a plan to acquire a navy amphibious assault ship that defence analysts say could cost $1 billion.

The ambitious blueprint included building a rapid response task force by 2010 that could carry 800 soldiers, with their equipment and weapons and helicopters, to hot spots.

But those plans appear to have largely been put on hold.

A list of senior military appointments released this week shows Commodore Paul Maddison, who was commander of the military’s standing contingency force, will be appointed assistant chief of military personnel at National Defence headquarters in Ottawa.

"He is posted into a new job without replacement," said Cmdr. Jeff Agnew of navy public affairs.

Canada borrowed an American amphibious ship last fall to practice landings in North Carolina. And at its height, about 50 people were working on developing the standing contingency force concept, Cmdr. Agnew said.

A $2-million headquarters for the force the military is planning to build at Shearwater will be used for other purposes.

But the idea of creating the force isn’t finished, Cmdr. Agnew said. A "small cadre of people" will be transferred to the military’s experimentation centre in Ottawa and the maritime warfare centre in Halifax, where they will continue to look at ways to better integrate the military’s land, sea and air forces, he said.

Money isn’t the reason for the changes, Cmdr. Agnew said.

"We find ourselves with Afghanistan," he said. "We’re getting ready for the 2010 Olympics. We’re introducing new equipment. We’re doing a lot of recruiting right now and when you recruit people, you have to train people.

"Basically, we do not have enough time and people to do everything we want to do. . . . After the Olympics is done in 2010, we will be able to revisit in earnest the development of (the standing contingency force)."

Putting the plan on hold for three years raises questions about the military’s ability to transform itself into a highly mobile force, said Eric Lerhe, a retired commodore living in Dartmouth.

"It’s not saying much about our capacity, or it’s saying a whole bunch about the extent to which Afghanistan is really limiting our ability to transform our armed forces and to do anything beyond a support to the Olympics," said Mr. Lerhe, a research fellow at Dalhousie University’s Centre for Foreign Policy Studies.

"I find that kind of worrying. What if a major problem occurred in the world?"

Gen. Hillier has also said he wishes the Forces would grow faster. The Conservative government has promised to add 13,000 soldiers to the regular force and another 10,000 reservists.

No deadline has been given for that expansion, said Capt. Holly Brown of Canadian Forces Recruiting Group.

"It’s going to take longer than five years," Capt. Brown said.

In the last fiscal year, the recruiting target was 5,500 people for the regular force, she said.

"We actually recruited close to 5,900 last year," Capt. Brown said. "And then this year, our targets are about 6,400. We’re going to hit that."

The military has "found ways to speed things up a bit," she said, pointing to last fall’s move to relax fitness standards for new recruits.

"If there’s no complications, you meet all the entrance requirements (and) everything’s tickety-boo, you could get an offer within a week," she said.

The military is especially keen to recruit naval and air force electronics technicians and crew for armoured vehicles, she said.


----------



## Bobbyoreo (15 Mar 2007)

Thanks for the info


----------



## bdog (18 Mar 2007)

$1 Billion that seems a little high. The HMS Ocean cost about $352.19 million in 1998 so a like ship could be had for around $500 million at the most fro a billion we could have two wich would be better one on each coast. Indeed what Hiller is asking for is basicly and Ocean class  Landing Platform heck we could cut cost though buying the HMS Invincible and re-fitting her to the Ocean class (the Ocean class is a moded Invincble class anyways)


----------



## ArmyRick (20 Mar 2007)

Yeah but the canadian approach would probably be to put out a request for bids, do a million hours of research on something (when the research is already done), evaluate it, change it (Canadianize it), make sure the project doesn't upset anybody, By now the government has changed so now the dynamics of the project changes, re-evaluate it, make more changes, finally get on with awarding the contract and build it.

So big honking ships in......2020?

Like Bdog said, just buy off the shelf already. (Reference Ocean)


----------



## bdog (20 Mar 2007)

the sad thing is a lot of people whining about this are the same people who all mad about how hard it was for us to get our citizens out of Lebanonduring the hostilities between Israel and the terrorists this summer. I was thinking at that time that ship like HMS  Ocean would have been perfect for that operation or any other operation were rapid deployment of humanitarian response is needed.  But oh nobut when you talk about mobile landing ships and Marine Corpssome will start thinking Team America World Police:the Canadian edition, we have no idea  that a such as this fits so perfectly within there certain view of Canadian military operations.


----------



## wade.w (12 Oct 2007)

If I was an American, I think I would have joined the Marines or Navy, instead of the Army... I would be interested ot learn more about the Canadian version...


----------



## Armymedic (12 Oct 2007)

Don't hold your breath. This project has been put so far behind the backburner, it is no longer on the stove top.


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Oct 2007)

But can they see the Territorial Defense Bns from there?


----------



## Kirkhill (12 Oct 2007)

Yep.  They are the ones carrying the fire-extinguishers.


----------



## aesop081 (12 Oct 2007)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> But can they see the Territorial Defense Bns from there?



....or Trenton's airborne battalion


----------



## tomahawk6 (12 Oct 2007)

The smart move would be to expand JTF2 and create an airborne regiment. They could deploy in 96 hours from Canada and it would be alot cheaper than some kind of naval based task force.


----------



## aesop081 (12 Oct 2007)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> The smart move would be to expand JTF2 and create an airborne regiment.



We expanded JTF and created CSOR............i beleive that covers what you are proposing


----------



## Jammer (12 Oct 2007)

hehehehe...CSOR...riiiiiiiiiiight!


----------



## tomahawk6 (12 Oct 2007)

Its certainly is a step in the right direction but I advocate a 3 battalion airborne regiment.


----------



## aesop081 (12 Oct 2007)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> but I advocate a 3 battalion airborne regiment.



With our dollar higher than yours we should be able to recuit americans to man this unit.....about the only way we could get enough people for that.... ;D


----------



## Jammer (12 Oct 2007)

To do what???
I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but the days of the massed airborne drop are a faded memory. IIRC Panama was the last time a drop occurred. Even that was a Bn - gig.


----------



## tomahawk6 (12 Oct 2007)

Recruit Gurhka's but I find it hard to believe that Canada cant recruit a 2000 man regiment. The Army is too small as it is and needs more trigger pullers and I am sure there are wasteful personnel practices with folks. We had the same problem in the late 90's early 2000. People were moved out of staff,school house and other places they were hiding and manned our combat units to 104%.

The reality for me is that a Canadian naval contingency force could not arrive in time to be useful, so that just leaves a force that can be deployed by air. Instead of an LPHD type ship buy a couple more C-17's.

If there was the will to fully man the CF,by will I mean money, you could offer bonus' to bring in more recruits and offer other types of incentives. We know it works, we're doing it.


----------



## aesop081 (12 Oct 2007)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> People were moved out of staff,school house and other places they were hiding and manned our combat units to 104%.



And after we do that, who is left to train people to go into the units ?


----------



## Jammer (12 Oct 2007)

I hear Blackwater might be looking for a contract after they get booted out of Iraq...


----------



## Garett (12 Oct 2007)

Jammer said:
			
		

> To do what???
> I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but the days of the massed airborne drop are a faded memory. IIRC Panama was the last time a drop occurred. Even that was a Bn - gig.



What about the jump by the Rangers into Kandahar and the jump by the 173rd Airborne Brigade into Northern Iraq?  That wasn't too long ago.


----------



## tomahawk6 (12 Oct 2007)

Not sure of your manning practices,but we got rid of some of the fat and still were able to function. This was at a time when were borrowing soldiers so that a unit could deploy to Europe, much like you guys are manning your Afghanistan rotations. Its not a criticism just an observation that we were in the same boat at one time not so long ago.


----------



## Armymedic (12 Oct 2007)

One thing we do not have an excess of is middle age NCOs (6-14 yrs in), esp in the cbt arms. That is the demographic that CANSOF wants for thier units, and everyone else wants to keep inside of thiers. The recruiting cuts from the early/mid 90's is kicking the CF in the nuts right now.


----------



## GAP (12 Oct 2007)

St. Micheals Medical Team said:
			
		

> One thing we do not have an excess of is middle age NCOs (6-14 yrs in), esp in the cbt arms. That is the demographic that CANSOF wants for thier units, and everyone else wants to keep inside of thiers



These are some of the most valuable personnel out there....they hit their peak around 6 years and for the next 6-8 years they pass on so much information as well as accomplish so much...


----------



## ArmyRick (13 Oct 2007)

I am currently involved in the training of regular force infantry and beleive me tomahawk, we CAN'T spare people. As it is I taught my last course starting off with 16 candidates in my section (48 in the platoon), and there is a continious flow of these courses. Our training system is VERY busy right now. I am hoping that the number of people we have produced in the last two years pays off for the infantry (I beleive it will).


----------



## TCBF (13 Oct 2007)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Recruit Gurhka's but I find it hard to believe that Canada cant recruit a 2000 man regiment. The Army is too small as it is and needs more trigger pullers and I am sure there are wasteful personnel practices with folks. We had the same problem in the late 90's early 2000. People were moved out of staff,school house and other places they were hiding and manned our combat units to 104%.



- Who will wield the knife?  One man's oxygen thief is another man's sacred cow.  We always seem to cut the very people we so desparately need two years later.  Military Human Resources is to Human Resources the way Military Music is to Music...



			
				tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> The reality for me is that a Canadian naval contingency force could not arrive in time to be useful, so that just leaves a force that can be deployed by air. Instead of an LPHD type ship buy a couple more C-17's.



- Airheads are an expensive and very tenous way to go.  Without sealift, rail and/or road, the force you can project (and the missions it can undertake) are limited.



			
				tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> If there was the will to fully man the CF,by will I mean money, you could offer bonus' to bring in more recruits and offer other types of incentives. We know it works, we're doing it.



- We sold our soul to the devil in the late sixties when we tied our structure to the public service.  This was done so retiring officers could move laterally into the PS and keep their seniority and pension.  Eventually, women discovered a 'glass ceiling' imposed by all of the retiring male officers taking the executive positions the women had hacked and clawed their way up to compete for.  That ended that - but we are still stapled to the PS for our pay and benefits envelope.  No flexibility there.


----------



## N.Grundle (23 Nov 2007)

Just wondering' I've searched everywhere and can't seem to find any "hard" evidence if the Marine Commando Regiment really exists/is currently being made or is it just a media rumour? Don't freak on me if its been answered already, cause i checked a lot of places...


----------



## Armymedic (23 Nov 2007)

You can't find any evidence cause it don't exist.


----------



## N.Grundle (23 Nov 2007)

but there was an article about the JTF2 moving to trenton and they mentioned a Marine Commando Regiment.


----------



## PO2FinClk (23 Nov 2007)

N.Grundle said:
			
		

> but there was an article


Media rumour, we have no Marines. Besides, that same article said it was included in the "Canada First" defence paper ... which has yet to be released. In fact, the CDS issued a CANFORGEN dispelling these very same rumours which also stated to wait until it is officially released. Who knows when though.


----------



## Armymedic (24 Nov 2007)

N.Grundle said:
			
		

> but there was an article about the JTF2 moving to trenton and they mentioned a Marine Commando Regiment.



There was once an article in a very reputable newspaper that told a young girl named Virgina that there is a Santa Clus too....


----------



## George Wallace (24 Nov 2007)

Are you insinuating that you don't believe it to be true?


----------



## Armymedic (24 Nov 2007)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Are you insinuating that you don't believe it to be true?



Uhm....no. I mean yes. No, I mean no.

Or how about just because an idea or concept is printed, does not mean it is physically real.

But you got to like the sarcasm. No?


----------



## George Wallace (24 Nov 2007)

Yes!  .....or is that No?    ???


----------



## dapaterson (24 Nov 2007)

How about this for an answer:

Are there people paid to think about this?  Yes.

Is there a plan to build this thing?  Not right now.


----------



## THINKBIG (23 Feb 2011)

Hello I'm just new in the forum... But I can tell you some few friends have been on the expirimental MAU and the shut it down because of $$$$. They waithing more money for the MAU but it fact JTF2 are still doing the diving side.  They need  more expertise in EOD for beaching special ops team. sory for my english...


----------



## aesop081 (23 Feb 2011)

THINKBIG said:
			
		

> the shut it down because of $$$$.



I'm shocked.


----------



## THINKBIG (23 Feb 2011)

WHY? You should not be shock .... At some point we will need that. MAU will be back soon...


----------



## aesop081 (23 Feb 2011)

THINKBIG said:
			
		

> WHY?



I'm sorry, i mistakenly thought my use of sarcasm was obvious.


----------



## PMedMoe (23 Feb 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I'm sorry, i mistakenly thought my use of sarcasm was obvious.



For future use:  [sarcasm][/sarcasm]


----------



## MedCorps (23 Feb 2011)

Yeah... it looks like this project is pretty much dead.

Everything was going so well.  This past summer all was a good and everything looked like it was falling into alignment.  Then the death notice was issued with the Nov 2010 announcement by the PMO that ALSC / JSS project will die and we will go with a less expensive AOR project. The AOR Advance Contract Award Notices have already gone out I am told.   

It is interesting to note that there is a small shop of five senior Navy officers in Ottawa who are still working on the JSS project. hmmm... 

MC


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (24 Feb 2011)

Well thank gawd the Navy will be getting something less bastardized for its RAS needs.  I wonder if we could though build an LPD using the AOR hull we select.....


----------



## LittleMagellan (2 Jun 2013)

Anybody think this project will be revived now that they've decided on a JSS? http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/berlin-class-fleet-auxiliary-vessels/


----------



## SeaKingTacco (2 Jun 2013)

A new class of auxiliary replenishment ships for the RCN has nothing to do with someone's fantasy for an amphibious capability for the CF.


----------



## Loachman (2 Jun 2013)

I obviously haven't looked at this thread for a while.

When I clicked on "New", this was the post that greeted me:



			
				PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> And should I be CDS some day, this experiment will be known as the genesis of the First Canadian Marine Expeditionary Force...formerly known as the Canadian Forces.
> 
> Fortunately for most, I will never be CDS.



Hmmmm.......

The odds have increased a smidgen since then.

Should we start worrying yet?


----------



## LittleMagellan (2 Jun 2013)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> A new class of auxiliary replenishment ships for the RCN has nothing to do with someone's fantasy for an amphibious capability for the CF.



I mostly agree, I just happened to read MedCorps' comment that "This past summer all was a good and everything looked like it was falling into alignment.  Then the death notice was issued with the Nov 2010 announcement by the PMO that ALSC / JSS project will die..." and then I found out that they finally made a decision on a JSS Design... so I was curious what people thought. I didn't even know such a capability was in the works back then... although at the time I was in the army and didn't give two shits about the Navy and maritime warfare...


----------

