Author Topic: Little Honking Ships......  (Read 116420 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ex-Dragoon

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 46,342
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,995
  • dealing with life not that active here anymore
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #50 on: January 26, 2014, 14:17:31 »
Sadly I don't think myself or many of my peers are too optimistic we will see new and for that matter capable hulls hitting the water from Irving or Seaspan anytime soon.
I will leave your flesh on the mountains and fill the valleys with your carcasses. I will water the land with what flows from you, and the river beds shall be filled with your blood. When I snuff you out I will cover the heavens and all the stars will darken. Ezekiel 32:5-7
Tradition- Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid
Former RCN Sailor now Retired

Offline GR66

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 50,500
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 571
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #51 on: January 26, 2014, 14:46:44 »
Is the Canadian market big enough to support a shipbuilding industry with DND as it's major customer?  Realistically that's what we're looking at as far as I can see (at least in terms of military vessels).  The US and European countries (and South Korea for that matter) already have established industries and their governments aren't going to cut off their own companies by buying from Canadian shipyards.  Is it a good idea to try and build an industry that is dependent on DND's very occasional orders? 

Unless we have a miracle change of policy which sees a steady stream of ships coming off the lines to keep modernizing the RCN and CG on a regular basis then we will probably end up with an industry which will rely on government life support in order to produce over-priced ships for domestic use.  Is that the best way to spend our money?  Would we be better off paying less for foreign warships upfront and using those savings to support industries that might have better long-term export potential?  Or maybe there is a market for a niche subset of the shipbuilding industry where exports are a more likely possibility...like ice strengthened hulls?  No idea.  But this industrial strategy seems much more focused on short-term regional political gains than on real, viable, long-term industrial strategy.

Offline Ex-Dragoon

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 46,342
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,995
  • dealing with life not that active here anymore
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #52 on: January 26, 2014, 14:52:59 »
As much as I would like to support a Canadian shipbuilding industry, the sad fact is there are too many fingers in the pie to make it viable. Its a sad state of affair when it almost takes decades to get a hull designed, built and to the fleet when other countries it can take less then 5 years.
I will leave your flesh on the mountains and fill the valleys with your carcasses. I will water the land with what flows from you, and the river beds shall be filled with your blood. When I snuff you out I will cover the heavens and all the stars will darken. Ezekiel 32:5-7
Tradition- Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid
Former RCN Sailor now Retired

Offline Fabius

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 4,160
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 63
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #53 on: January 26, 2014, 14:59:04 »
In order for Canada to maintain a internationally competitive and viable naval ship building capacity we obviously need to constantly be building ships.
This is where I have little confidence in the new NSPS.  Like was pointed out by Oldgateboatdriver, we as a nation have not seen fit to actually maintain an ability to build warships.
There was a 16 year gap between the Cold War fleet ship programs and the Halifax Class. Currently there is a 17 year gap and growing between the Halifax and the CSC. In comparison The Netherlands primary ship yard, Damen Schelde Naval Shipbuilding has had a warship under construction almost constantly from 1975 onwards. They have only had two 5-6 year gaps, once in the late 80s and again in the late 90s.  During those gaps although they were not actively welding etc, they were busy in the design phase for the next class of major surface combatants.

My concern for the NSPS is that sure we build up our capabilities over the course of the CSC and related projects and then we do what Canada has historically done and cease any further warship development/building for another 2 decades.
Unless that historical trend changes NSPS is not going to succeed in actually creating a viable industry.

This problem has nothing to do with the Navy and everything to do with the Canadian public and our priorities for spending our tax dollars and then by extension the politicians we elect.
Heroes are often the most ordinary of men
            -Henry David Thoreau

Offline NavyShooter

    Boaty McBoatface!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 177,191
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,843
  • Death from a Bar.....one shot, one Tequilla
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #54 on: January 26, 2014, 22:02:07 »
I met the new 'Boss' at Irving just before Christmas at a Dinner. I think you (and others) might be surprised.

Pat,

To be honest, I fear that based on my personal experience*  that unless they raze the place to the ground, fire the lot of the useless sabotaging slugs that work there right now, and start from scratch, that there will be nothing good coming out of that yard.

*Experiences include things that I have personally seen, on my ship, since we got it back from a certain shipyard.  Unless the wire-snipper fairies have been at work, someone deliberately cut and hid wires/cables.  That, in my books, is sabotage.  We've all seen how we have to strip the brass fittings out of the ships to prevent someone in ISI from stealing it for the scrap value...We had 95% of the PA system on the ship working....until the day after they laid off 300 workers in the fall....the next day we had 65% of the speakers working....again, wire snipper fairies I guess.

This is what I personally have seen, and what I personally feel.

If they have some new guy at the top that can magically fix these saboteurs that work for him...well, more power to him.  I truly wish that a different yard had got the contract.

YMMV, but the new guy at the top has a long, uphill fight to gain any measure of respect back with those of us who have to work for months to get a ship finished and ready to sail even after an 18 month refit.  To put it in perspective, if you got a Leo back from the depot after refurbishment, would you expect to have to swap out the engine pack, finish installing (and wiring) all the radios, install and test the gun computer, then do all of the alignments to make sure it worked before taking it out for it's first test-drive...?

NS
Insert disclaimer statement here....

:panzer:

Offline Pat in Halifax

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 32,520
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 897
  • Jackwagon
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #55 on: January 27, 2014, 06:13:49 »
Oh, don't get me wrong-I too am familiar with some of the mysterious things that happen to systems/equipment and yet when they are reported, no one seems to listen. I know one person will not change things over night but it is a start. Like it or not, Irving has the lion's share of the NSPS (approx. $33.6 B I believe). One can only hope that the prevalent attitude behind those gates changes at some point. He did not change my opinion of the work quality coming out of there but listening to him, gave me a sliver of hope and without getting into it, we have seen the result once already of his no-nonsense approach to issues.
"No ******* ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making some other dumb ******* die for his"
George S. Patton

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #56 on: January 27, 2014, 06:49:12 »
Pat,

To be honest, I fear that based on my personal experience*  that unless they raze the place to the ground, fire the lot of the useless sabotaging slugs that work there right now, and start from scratch, that there will be nothing good coming out of that yard.

*Experiences include things that I have personally seen, on my ship, since we got it back from a certain shipyard.  Unless the wire-snipper fairies have been at work, someone deliberately cut and hid wires/cables.  That, in my books, is sabotage.  We've all seen how we have to strip the brass fittings out of the ships to prevent someone in ISI from stealing it for the scrap value...We had 95% of the PA system on the ship working....until the day after they laid off 300 workers in the fall....the next day we had 65% of the speakers working....again, wire snipper fairies I guess.

This is what I personally have seen, and what I personally feel.

If they have some new guy at the top that can magically fix these saboteurs that work for him...well, more power to him.  I truly wish that a different yard had got the contract.

YMMV, but the new guy at the top has a long, uphill fight to gain any measure of respect back with those of us who have to work for months to get a ship finished and ready to sail even after an 18 month refit.  To put it in perspective, if you got a Leo back from the depot after refurbishment, would you expect to have to swap out the engine pack, finish installing (and wiring) all the radios, install and test the gun computer, then do all of the alignments to make sure it worked before taking it out for it's first test-drive...?

NS

And we had our share of sabotage items too when we came out last year.  3 inch studs inserted into the black water lines, causing major blockages.  Expandable foam down drain scuppers... and on and on.

Offline NavyShooter

    Boaty McBoatface!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 177,191
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,843
  • Death from a Bar.....one shot, one Tequilla
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #57 on: January 27, 2014, 11:10:55 »
Like I said.  Raze it and start from scratch.  200 gallon internal fuel spill as a result of an ISI assembled transfer valve...

NS
Insert disclaimer statement here....

:panzer:

Offline recceguy

    A Usual Suspect.

  • At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child – miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats. -P.J. O’Rouke-
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 259,802
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 17,959
  • doddering docent to the museum of misanthropy
    • Army.ca
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #58 on: January 27, 2014, 11:17:23 »
Watch the tangent fellas. ;)

---Staff---
“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.”

John G. Diefenbaker

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 192,030
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,132
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #59 on: January 27, 2014, 11:35:09 »
Tangent Break Recceguy - How about "Managing Quality - RCN Style"?

This article is about the USN but directly applies to Pat, JJT and Ex-D's concerns'

Quote
   Navy Shipbuilding: Opportunities Exist to Improve Practices Affecting Quality
   
   
Source: Government Accountability Office
   
   
Ref: GAO-14-122
   
   
Issued Nov 19, 2013
   
   
106 PDF pages


The US Navy has experienced significant quality problems with several ship classes over the past several years. It has focused on reducing the number of serious deficiencies at the time of delivery, and GAO’s analysis shows that the number of deficiencies—particularly “starred” deficiencies designated as the most serious for operational or safety reasons—has generally dropped.

Nonetheless, the Navy continues to accept ships with large numbers of open deficiencies (see figure below as an example; although total deficiencies have declined for this ship class, the last ship still had about 1,000 deficiencies that the shipbuilder was responsible for correcting).

Accepting ships with large numbers of uncorrected deficiencies is a standard practice and GAO found that there are varying interpretations of Navy policy with regard to when the defects should be resolved. In 2009, the Navy organization that oversees ship construction launched the Back to Basics initiative to improve Navy oversight of ship construction. However, a key output of the initiative promoting consistent and adequate quality requirements in Navy contracts has yet to be implemented.

Although the environment in which leading commercial ship buyers and builders operate differs in many ways from the Navy’s, some commercial practices aimed at helping to ensure that ships are delivered with a minimum number of deficiencies may be informative for the Navy. Throughout the course of commercial shipbuilding projects, significant numbers of quality defects and instances of non-conforming work are identified. However, leading commercial ship buyers and shipbuilders make great efforts to ensure that these issues are resolved prior to delivery. Further, commercial ship buyers establish clear lines of accountability and hold their personnel responsible for ensuring the shipbuilder delivers a quality vessel.

While commercial ship buyers focus on regularly witnessing in-process work through roaming patrols and impromptu inspections, Navy processes at the shipyards place less emphasis on in-process work. Moreover, leading commercial shipbuilders have strong quality management processes that track quality problems to the worker or supervisor level. Navy shipbuilding contractors have historically experienced difficulties in holding production workers and supervisors accountable for their work, but some of the shipyards reported they are making progress on increasing worker accountabilit
y.

Perhaps you should be buying commercial after all.....

There's a greater chance that the ship keeping you out of the water actually adheres to the standards set.   At least you would know the capabilities of the vessel rather than trusting that you know the capabilities of the vessel.


PS.  I see this on a lot of projects, especially government ones.

People cheap-out on on-site management.  Rather than having their representatives on-site and looking over the shoulders of the contractors so that they can correct deficiencies and conflicts on the spot they rely on an occasional visit by engineers and milestone testing.

The net effect is that problems go unobserved and remediation becomes costly and a matter of dispute.  If your rep is on-site and part of the supervisory team you get to bring the project back on plan, and make necessary compromises, in a timely, cost-effective manner.

No plan survives contact with the enemy?  No plan survives contact with the contractors....
« Last Edit: January 27, 2014, 11:42:09 by Kirkhill »
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline mad dog 2020

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,880
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 152
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #60 on: January 28, 2014, 09:48:26 »
so we wander?
Interesting about quality and work ethic?
I just read several articles in the Jan 20th edition of the CFB Esquimalt newspaper "Lookout" that had praise for the work done on the Winnipeg's  refit.
They even gave a plaque.
 If this was a sincere gesture for real quality, it would be a refreshing thought.   

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 34,945
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,527
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #61 on: February 06, 2014, 09:28:06 »
There has been little complaints about the work done by Vic Ships. Since they do not "own" the graving dock they have to get ships in an out in a timely manner. They cannot afford to have ship's come back due to shoddy work. They must be doing decent work because there is a constant stream of vessels (BC Ferries, Cruise ships, fishing vessels etc) in and out of the dock. I understand that CRCN had a rep from Vic Ships go to ISL to try to improve the culture there. I have no idea if it was successful or not.
They work they did on WIN after the allission (in conjunction with FMF Cape Breton) was done over in the dry dock in Esquimalt. WIN sails this week, so we shall see how the repairs really turned out.

Offline AirDet

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 8,025
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 327
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #62 on: February 06, 2014, 18:22:12 »
I'd like to get back to the "little honking ships" idea. I came across this link while reading Janes today: http://www.huntingtoningalls.com/flight2/

It looks like a practical solution to the little honking ship conundrum. It's bases on the proven and modern LPD17 but at 30% cheaper. The manufacturer claims it can fulfill several of the roles we've identified such as Humanitarian, Hospital, Task Force Command and Control, Amphibious Warfare, etc.

While I'm not qualified to say this is what we need, it certainly looks interesting to this old Sea King magician.
Just because an opinion differs doesn't make it any less valid. Remember those who gave their ALL to guarantee freedom of speech.

Offline whiskey601

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 21,665
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,517
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #63 on: February 06, 2014, 20:17:10 »
Just my opinion: Little honking ships should not be on the bucket list right now. 

With destroyers approaching 55 years service or more before replacement, and frigates probably more than 32 years old before replacement, the priority needs to be a much scaled down CSC that is very inexpensive and uncomplicated to build very quickly.

LeadMark is long dead, and anyone can read the tea leaves and see that the government will NEVER purchase 15 or 16 high technology, high cost ships )>> Let's all be realists and pragmaticly understand that the politics in shipbuilding has basically ensured that major capital warship construction programs consisting of vessels of warfighting design are forever done in Canada. The APS and maybe one or 2 second hand but still fairly modern US built frigates is all that is could materialize after FELEX is completed, but even that is a stretch of the imagination. At that point the DDG's will be long gone and then FFG's just rusting away anyway.

We can, however, build in-shore or mid shore patrol vessels (possibly light weight Corvettes) quickly and inexpensively. They are cheap, harmless [in the sense that they would have virtually no heavy armament), not generally globally deployable and so politically very safe, and thus also dispensing with the need for expensive tankers etc.
 
I think that is the future of the Navy unless they start cutting steel and placing machinery and equipment orders for several CSC within the next 10 months, and certainly well before the next election.     

And if that Algerian LPD approaches Hibernia or any part of the Rock, we can always take them to Sanctimony Court (:)) , because we are just that much more civilized than the rest of the world....
     

Offline YZT580

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 19,480
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 588
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #64 on: February 06, 2014, 21:14:46 »
The Flight 11 has eliminated the hanger space and a/c maintenance facilities.  Makes it suitable for staging a/c but certainly not for embarking any for any type of extended cruise.  Salt water is hell on airframes and you certainly can't leave 'em tied down on the deck during any kind of rough weather and winter ops. 

Offline Sailorwest

  • Member
  • ****
  • 7,540
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 147
  • IN PACE BELLUM PARA
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #65 on: February 07, 2014, 10:21:20 »
Not quite sure if Whiskey 601 was being facetious or not but I'm pretty sure that replacing the frigates and destroyers with low capability corvettes actually doesn't do anything useful for the navy. It puts us into the third world level of maritime capability. There is a fair argument to be made that we need a class of ship larger, faster and more capable than the KIN class but smaller than a frigate or CSC.

No doubt that there is plenty of political dithering on moving forward on ship replacement and I suspect there always will be. Ultimately, retaining our role as a middle level naval power will be seen as important. The importance of ensuring west coast maritime trade and security is only going to grow with the expansion of energy product exports to the Far East.


Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 471,420
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,244
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #66 on: February 07, 2014, 10:37:38 »
Not quite sure if Whiskey 601 was being facetious or not but I'm pretty sure that replacing the frigates and destroyers with low capability corvettes actually doesn't do anything useful for the navy. It puts us into the third world level of maritime capability. There is a fair argument to be made that we need a class of ship larger, faster and more capable than the KIN class but smaller than a frigate or CSC.

No doubt that there is plenty of political dithering on moving forward on ship replacement and I suspect there always will be. Ultimately, retaining our role as a middle level naval power will be seen as important. The importance of ensuring west coast maritime trade and security is only going to grow with the expansion of energy product exports to the Far East.


I think whiskey601 is telling a fiscal truth. The old Canada First Defence Strategy promised to reduce defence spending, measured as a percentage of GDP, over a thirty year period. There is a new CFDS in the mill, I hear, and I really doubt that it will promise more money.

We are almost clear of Afghanistan and the Conservatives have other priorities ~and so do the Liberal and NDP, by the way, so don't look to the opposition benches for anything except deeper and deeper cuts. It has been this way for 60 years.

Put simply, I believe that we, Canada, cannot afford are unwilling to pay for a full blown, general purpose, combat capable military with new, first rate destroyers and frigates, three mechanized brigades and an Air Force with F-35s. I have no idea which we are not going to get: my gut says that the government may decide to get new ships and new combat aircraft and allow the army to wither on the vine, collapsing it into something affordable.

It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 192,030
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,132
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #67 on: February 07, 2014, 11:17:45 »
Hey, if we can't afford mukluks we can't afford rowboats let alone "honking" ships of any size.

 >:D ::) ;D :'(
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 471,420
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,244
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #68 on: February 07, 2014, 12:40:04 »
There is, at the policy level, and absolute, overarching requirement to balance the federal budget in 2015. There is nothing, anywhere in the Government of Canada, that comes anywhere near that single, political imperative. The budget will be balanced.

No one gives a sweet rat's *** about the Department of National Defence or the Canadian Forces or ships or mukluks ... except that you may have ships and mukluks after you have paid your full and fair share (and then some) towards balancing the budget. We went through this in the 1990s, during Prime Minister Chrétien's decade of darkness ~ his wasn't the first; that came, for me, in the Pearson/Diefenbaker era and was followed by real pain in the Trudeau years ~ and these "lean years" will not be the last ones, and nothing that people of my age endured compared, even remotely, to the 1930s. So: get used to it ~ this is what is meant by "the horrors of peacetime soldiering." You will, eventually, get new kit: possibly, even probably not what you want or what you said you needed; you will get what the people of Canada are prepared to buy, nothing more ... until Canadian Forces members start dying, in fairly large numbers, on "some corner of a foreign field."

I will repeat, over and over again: all the "support the troops" stuff, the red T-shirts and yellow ribbons and so on, may be a mile wide but it is, barely, an inch deep.

 
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline whiskey601

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 21,665
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,517
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #69 on: February 07, 2014, 13:12:24 »
Sailorwest:I was not being facetious, even more I do not agree that Canada is a middle power currently except in the minds of dreamers, and i would go further to suggest that possibly Canada never was a middle with the exception of 1944-1960, and even then only in some marginal circumstances (5 divisions in Europe followed by a whopping big but temporary period as an air power in NATO in the fifties)  or events such as Suez.

I think Australia is rising to be a lower middle power ( in a military sense) while Canada is rapidly heading in the other direction. Germany, India, and Turkey are middle powers because they have military capability, real economic and political influence and are not very willing to do anything, anywhere, unless it is in their own best interest.

My main concern with all this talk about ships is that we are bombarded with fanciful and outrageously optimistic plans, repetitive words of little meaning, and the bilges overfilled with political BS. Until steel is being cut there is no truth to any of it and that will be the case today, next month or likely even in the next years. After that, the process is simply pointless. Bottom line is that No political document like a new CFDS will be able to overcome the lack of desire to defend the country properly. Unfortunately it will take a serious blood letting at all levels (civilian and military) and loss of a meaningful chunk of sovereign land to change that.....
« Last Edit: February 07, 2014, 13:17:32 by whiskey601 »

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #70 on: February 07, 2014, 18:31:34 »
ER, I hate it when you're right like this.

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 506,370
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,400
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #71 on: February 07, 2014, 18:35:21 »
ER, I hate it when you're right like this.
I've found he can be like that quite often when discussing things where government and military..... collide. 

Why, you'd almost think he'd "been there, done that"  :nod:

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 187,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,434
  • Freespeecher
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #72 on: February 08, 2014, 13:29:38 »
From a conceptual level, the LPD "Flight II" idea is very appealing, and adding back the hanger and AC facilities provides a means of creating a CSC. The CSC built on that platform will be larger and probably slower than many of its counterparts in other navies, but a hull that can be used as a BMD platform is large enough to do several upgrade cycles and add on a great many extra capabilities over the years. (Indeed, with the right sensor suite and the ability to carry a really large number of rounds on board, a CSC built on that platform will actually be closer to an Arleigh Burke class Aegis cruiser). And as an added bonus, since the ships would be built on an assembly line basis, there would be the ability to gain economies of scale as well.

Sadly, since it seems virtually impossible to get even a simple procurement program like new boots or replacement trucks done in a timely manner internally, and external budget pressures and lack of political support deny us resources anyway, this is interesting speculation and nothing more.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline AlexanderM

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 8,590
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 438
  • Resident George Constanza
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #73 on: February 08, 2014, 14:02:42 »
All we have to do is move past this idea of an outrageously expensive building program and it can all make sense.  I also would argue that capable and deployable corvettes would be an option, but in combination with a fewer number of frigates/destroyers.  Say purchase 10 of the Iver Class with as much value added for Canadian companies as possible and then build 12-16 very capable Corvettes that can handle coastal patrols, as well as escort/anti-piracy/anti-sub duties.  Spend $10 billion on the frigates/destroyers, $5-6 billion on the Corvettes, $2 billion on the AOP's and $2 billion on the AOR's, and it's all in for $20 billion.  Tweak the numbers a bit and it can be everything in for $20 billion, icebreakers, etc, included.

Also, it would likely be possible to build the Ivers and the Corvettes for less if it was necessary.  I don't buy the idea that it can't be done this way, it's an issue of pitching it the right way to Canadians.  One, we simply don't have money for this building program, so we either do it differently or the military may not be able to remain functional.  Two, if we buy some of the ships from other countries here's all the contracts we can get for Canadian companies which will build up Canadian industry. 

I'd still build some ships with Seaspan as I do have some confidence in them.  I'd cancell the program as a whole then give the contract for the Corvettes to Davie becuase they seem to have a production mentality.  You come up with a realistic plan and sell it.  In my mind, right now, that building program seems pretty much dead, isn't it??  Is it realistic to beleive that it's really going to go forward?


Offline Navy_Pete

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 14,220
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 554
Re: Little Honking Ships......
« Reply #74 on: February 08, 2014, 23:06:39 »
I'm sure canceling the program would end up costing us as nearly as much as just building the ships, as I'm sure there are large cancellation penalties built in.

Maybe we could just focus on maintaining the few ships we have left first, then working on replacing key requirements, like being able to refuel.  The AORs are at the end of their life support, and the 280s are winding down over the next few years before they become razor blades and I-beams, and cost a fortune to put to sea anyway.  Get rid of those, focus on what is left, and then when we have a few properly maintained and capable vessels, plus the critical auxiliary ships (tugs, fire boats, fuel barges, etc), see what's left to build new.

I seriously doubt we will have much of a real blue boat navy capability left within 10 years due to the costs.  Even if we do, they are looking at diesel powered ships, which is kind of shortsighted given that oil will become increasingly (possibly prohibitively) expensive over the 40 year lifespan.