# New Zealand warships get $300M Canadian upgrade



## Colin Parkinson (30 Apr 2018)

It's very good news that a Canadian yard can get this type of work.


_New Zealand Navy frigate Te Kaha was officially handed over to Seaspan’s Victoria Shipyards in a ceremony at CFB Esquimalt on Thursday.

On May 1, the 387-foot ship will move from the base to Victoria Shipyards and the federally owned Esquimalt Graving Dock for the start of a combat weapons system modernization.
_
rest on link http://www.timescolonist.com/business/new-zealand-warships-get-300m-canadian-upgrade-1.23282876


----------



## Underway (30 Apr 2018)

CMS330 was what did it for the Kiwi's.  Lockheed Martin Canada has a winner with that combat management system.  And Vic shipyards proved they can do a real good job on the refit from what I hear.  Good combination.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (30 Apr 2018)

Underway said:
			
		

> CMS330 was what did it for the Kiwi's.  Lockheed Martin Canada has a winner with that combat management system.  And Vic shipyards proved they can do a real good job on the refit from what I hear.  Good combination.



This is another, rare, good news story in the Canadian Defence industry. Well done!


----------



## Colin Parkinson (30 Apr 2018)

Lets hope it's a trend, I suspect currency rates may play a part as well.


----------



## Navy_Pete (30 Apr 2018)

Doubtful unfortunately! NZ is probably the only five eyes country with common sense in their military procurement; everyone else has a buy at home corporate welfare setup.  Maybe if someone came up with something with no ITAR or NATO restricted components that might work.

VSL does good work though, good for them!


----------



## dimsum (30 Apr 2018)

Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> Doubtful unfortunately! NZ is probably the only five eyes country with common sense in their military procurement; everyone else has a buy at home corporate welfare setup.  Maybe if someone came up with something with no ITAR or NATO restricted components that might work.
> 
> VSL does good work though, good for them!



Does NZ have a domestic military industrial infrastructure?  If they don't, then the whole "buy at home" idea isn't an option.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (30 Apr 2018)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Does NZ have a domestic military industrial infrastructure?  If they don't, then the whole "buy at home" idea isn't an option.



NZ does not have much of a defence industry. In my experience with them, they take what money they have and find the best deal they can, offshore.

Given how little they have to spend, they do pretty well.


----------



## jollyjacktar (30 Apr 2018)

Better than we do, I'm sure.


----------



## dimsum (1 May 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Better than we do, I'm sure.



Of course.  When your only options are overseas with no domestic interference for votes, jobs, etc then it makes it easier to purchase based on requirements, not what Riding X will get for jobs.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (1 May 2018)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Of course.  When your only options are overseas with no domestic interference for votes, jobs, etc then it makes it easier to purchase based on requirements, not what Riding X will get for jobs.



I agree. The Kiwis are pretty much in the situation where the contentious decision is "whether" to buy something- not where. Once the decision to procure has been taken by their government, it seems to go rather easily after that (at least by our standards).


----------



## RDBZ (1 May 2018)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> I agree. The Kiwis are pretty much in the situation where the contentious decision is "whether" to buy something- not where. Once the decision to procure has been taken by their government, it seems to go rather easily after that (at least by our standards).



Without a domestic defence industry though, that can be a _very _contentious question.  With no broader economic, social or industrial benefits accruing from defense expenditure, and no return to the treasury from taxation of a domestic industry and its workforce, only a broad political consensus on a strategic need will trigger expenditure.


----------



## FSTO (1 May 2018)

I have to wonder if Canada really has a defence "industry". Usually what happens is that we have a long and torturous process to decide what capability is foisted upon the military then another phase of torture to decide where to build the plant to produce said item. Once we have the piece of equipment built there is a phase of trying to export said items to other countries (which of course is never successful) then the final phase as the plant is converted to produce something else of dubious value or is just shut down all together. The amount of time, treasure and angst expended on these never ending farces never cease to amaze me.

I wonder if someone has ever done the research to see how much international military components are built in Canada. I have no idea but I would hazard to guess that if it is even a miniscule percentage of the US military budget, these smaller suppliers would still produce more long term employment and more R&D than when Canada tries to flop cock around on its own to build an airplane, tank or even a truck!

Here is my suggestion. Find out how much the total cost (not the cost of using the gear, just the cost of getting it) of procurement of a military item if we do it the normal Canadian way. Then find out how much for buying it right off the assembly line. Finally show the public how much Canadian defence companies produce already through components and replacement parts to foreign companies producing planes, tanks etc around the world. I wonder if there would be enough savings to allow the government to acquire more equipment (very unlikely) or have more money to pay for the vaunted social programs we love so much.


----------



## Spencer100 (1 May 2018)

Just one majpor system I can think of the LAV by GD in London.

And may be the LM CM330 combat system


----------



## ModlrMike (1 May 2018)

FSTO said:
			
		

> Here is my suggestion. Find out how much the total cost (not the cost of using the gear, just the cost of getting it) of procurement of a military item if we do it the normal Canadian way. Then find out how much for buying it right off the assembly line. Finally show the public how much Canadian defence companies produce already through components and replacement parts to foreign companies producing planes, tanks etc around the world. I wonder if there would be enough savings to allow the government to acquire more equipment (very unlikely) or have more money to pay for the vaunted social programs we love so much.



You may be able to do that for Army and Air systems, but the ship builders of this country would never allow us to buy hulls offshore. Notwithstanding the virtual stranglehold the Liberals have in the maritimes, no party would propose such a measure.


----------



## FSTO (1 May 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> You may be able to do that for Army and Air systems, but the ship builders of this country would never allow us to buy hulls offshore. Notwithstanding the virtual stranglehold the Liberals have in the maritimes, no party would propose such a measure.



True, but in defence of an organic shipbuilding industry, there is enough government work (RCN, Coast Guard, DFO) to warrant full time work for up to 3 yards for years if we follow the continuous build program that may or may not be in the works today.

Yes I know I'm being a bit of a hypocrite here. I'm a Naval Officer after all.


----------



## MarkOttawa (1 May 2018)

Spencer100:



> Just one majpor system I can think of the LAV by GD in London.



But note the LAV design itself of Swiss origin--2000 story:



> GM launches assault on global armoured vehicle market
> ...
> The London, Ont.-based division of General Motors of Canada Ltd. just finalized the last phase of a contract with Canada's Department of National Defence for a total of 651 eight-wheel armoured vehicles...
> 
> ...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Underway (1 May 2018)

FSTO said:
			
		

> I have to wonder if Canada really has a defence "industry". Usually what happens is that we have a long and torturous process to decide what capability is foisted upon the military then another phase of torture to decide where to build the plant to produce said item. Once we have the piece of equipment built there is a phase of trying to export said items to other countries (which of course is never successful) then the final phase as the plant is converted to produce something else of dubious value or is just shut down all together. The amount of time, treasure and angst expended on these never ending farces never cease to amaze me.
> 
> I wonder if someone has ever done the research to see how much international military components are built in Canada. I have no idea but I would hazard to guess that if it is even a miniscule percentage of the US military budget, these smaller suppliers would still produce more long term employment and more R&D than when Canada tries to flop **** around on its own to build an airplane, tank or even a truck!
> 
> Here is my suggestion. Find out how much the total cost (not the cost of using the gear, just the cost of getting it) of procurement of a military item if we do it the normal Canadian way. Then find out how much for buying it right off the assembly line. Finally show the public how much Canadian defence companies produce already through components and replacement parts to foreign companies producing planes, tanks etc around the world. I wonder if there would be enough savings to allow the government to acquire more equipment (very unlikely) or have more money to pay for the vaunted social programs we love so much.



Our defence industry is fairly robust.  Often we don't make fully finished systems however, but parts for other systems.  Off the top of my head, CAE does flight sims for just about everyone in the world, L3 MAPPS makes great navigation systems, L3 Wescam does amazing EO/IR systems for many aircraft and ships (all the Reaper/Predator drones), SHINCOM 3100 is the world standard for internal ship communications now in use by the US, AUS and UK navies (and Italian now as they were bought by Leonardo).  Colt Canada C7-C8 designs are used by the Dutch, UK (and Norway I think, others??).

Up-armour packages for the Strikers are made in Ontario; Canada is a world leader in armoured car manufacturing with about 7 companies in Ontario.  Many NATO radars use transmit/receive modules (TRMs) provided by Sanmina (Ontario) who are one of the world leaders in GaN production.  Magellan aerospace makes the best rocket pods in the world (CRV-7) in Winnipeg.  Not to mention the massive aerospace industry of Quebec which makes wings, propellor blades etc...  Pratt and Whitney make engines for many combat aircraft.

It's much bigger than most people realize.


----------



## FSTO (1 May 2018)

Underway said:
			
		

> Our defence industry is fairly robust.  Often we don't make fully finished systems however, but parts for other systems.  Off the top of my head, CAE does flight sims for just about everyone in the world, L3 MAPPS makes great navigation systems, L3 Wescam does amazing EO/IR systems for many aircraft and ships (all the Reaper/Predator drones), SHINCOM 3100 is the world standard for internal ship communications now in use by the US, AUS and UK navies (and Italian now as they were bought by Leonardo).  Colt Canada C7-C8 designs are used by the Dutch, UK (and Norway I think, others??).
> 
> Up-armour packages for the Strikers are made in Ontario; Canada is a world leader in armoured car manufacturing with about 7 companies in Ontario.  Many NATO radars use transmit/receive modules (TRMs) provided by Sanmina (Ontario) who are one of the world leaders in GaN production.  Magellan aerospace makes the best rocket pods in the world (CRV-7) in Winnipeg.  Not to mention the massive aerospace industry of Quebec which makes wings, propellor blades etc...  Pratt and Whitney make engines for many combat aircraft.
> 
> It's much bigger than most people realize.



As I said, our industry does very well making components for complete systems. Its when we decide we want to do the whole shebang is when things go south.


----------

