• 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
A new HMCS Cormorant could be manned in a similar fashion as Asterix or the RFA model, reducing the strain on navy personal. Have it tasked with undersea infrastructure inspection/protection and sub rescue.
You mean at a 100M a year cost like Asterix?
 
A new HMCS Cormorant could be manned in a similar fashion as Asterix or the RFA model, reducing the strain on navy personal. Have it tasked with undersea infrastructure inspection/protection and sub rescue.
Since it's a non-combatant support vessel, would it be possible to integrate coast guard into the crew? Rescuing vessels is what the coast guard does.
 
You mean at a 100M a year cost like Asterix?

What do you reckon the annualized cost of a Halifax is?

It would be a useful exercise if every ship were costed on the same basis as the Asterix.

And for that matter, every Squadron and every Regiment and Battalion.
 
What do you reckon the annualized cost of a Halifax is?

It would be a useful exercise if every ship were costed on the same basis as the Asterix.

And for that matter, every Squadron and every Regiment and Battalion.
Yes but we own Halifax don't we. We don't own Asterix.
 
Yes but we own Halifax don't we. We don't own Asterix.
But it costs us to own, operate and replace the Halifaxes and that number gets buried in the Decence Estimates.

Try and find out how much it costs us every year to have a navy.

If we knew the actual cost of maintaining a ship annually, including capital amortization and manning, or the cost of maintaining a CF18 squadron or a M777 regiment, then the cost of replacing old worn out kit with new kit would not be such a political hot potato.

On the other hand it might show that buying services might be cheaper than operating the service ourselves.
 
Back
Top