Author Topic: Russia's Mistral class LHDs: updates  (Read 136482 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 89,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,743
Russia's Mistral class LHDs: updates
« on: August 26, 2009, 12:51:57 »
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20090826/155931865.html

ULAN BATOR, August 26 (RIA Novosti) - Russia is planning on signing by the end of 2009 a contractual agreement with France on the purchase of a Mistral class amphibious assault ship, the chief of the Russian General Staff said on Wednesday.

"We are planning to reach an agreement [with France] this year on the production and the purchase of a Mistral class vessel," Gen. Nikolai Makarov told a news conference in the Mongolian capital, Ulan Bator.

"We are negotiating the purchase of one ship at present, and later planning to acquire 3-4 ships [of the same class] to be jointly built in Russia," the general said.

A Mistral class ship is capable of transporting and deploying 16 helicopters, four landing barges, up to 70 vehicles including 13 main battle tanks, and 450 soldiers. The vessel is equipped with a 69-bed hospital and could be used as an amphibious command ship.

Makarov did not disclose the amount of the deal, but a high-ranking Russian source close to negotiations earlier said the ship could be worth between 300 and 400 million euros ($430-580 mln).

The purchase, if successful, would be the first large-scale arms import deal concluded by Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Russia first expressed an interest in bilateral cooperation with France in naval equipment and technology in 2008, when Navy chief Adm. Vladimir Vysotsky visited the Euronaval 2008 arms show in France.

The admiral said at the time that the Russian Navy was interested in "joint research and also direct purchases of French naval equipment."

According to other military sources, the possibility of buying a Mistral class amphibious assault ship was discussed at the naval show in St. Petersburg in June this year.

Russia's current weapons procurement program through 2015 does not envision construction or purchases of large combat ships, so the possible acquisition of a French Mistral class ship is most likely to happen under the new program for the years up to 2020, which is still in the development.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2014, 15:33:22 by milnews.ca »

Offline Ex-Dragoon

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 46,342
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,995
  • dealing with life not that active here anymore
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #1 on: August 28, 2009, 18:00:59 »
The Russians have also bought Israeli drones as well.
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 S.M.A.

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 132,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,515
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #2 on: November 23, 2009, 12:24:43 »
Seems someone convinced the French Admiralty to allow the ship to be rerouted for a product demonstration?

Quote
French ship Russia wants to buy in St Petersburg
AP


The Mistral French amphibious assault ship/helicopter carrier/hospital ship docks on the Neva River in downtown St. Petersburg, Russia, Monday, Nov. 23, 2009, with one of the city landmarks, St. Isaac's Cathedral, in the background. Russia is planning to buy a Mistral-class ship worth 400-500 million euros (around $600-$750 million) from France. Russian Navy and defense industry experts are expected to inspect the ship during the visit. (AP Photo/Dmitry Lovetsky)

By IRINA TITOVA, Associated Press Writer Irina Titova, Associated Press Writer – 2 hrs 52 mins ago

ST. PETERSBURG, Russia – A French amphibious assault ship like the one Russia hopes to buy arrived Monday in St. Petersburg, fueling concern in Georgia and other ex-Soviet nations that Russia is upgrading its navy to intimidate its neighbors.

The Mistral military ship, which can carry more than a dozen helicopters along with dozens of tanks and other armored vehicles, would certainly be a modern way to project Russian power.

It docked Monday on the Neva River, about 1 kilometer (.6 miles) from the Hermitage museum. Russian officials are considering buying a Mistral ship and a license to build several others — their first such purchase from a NATO country.

Media reports have said it would cost Russia up to euro500 million ($750 million) to buy a Mistral-class ship.

NATO officials in Brussels would not comment Monday on the possible French navy sale.

The Kremlin increasingly has sought in recent years to reaffirm Russia's global reach and prestige in world affairs. It has sent its warships to patrol pirate-infested waters off Somalia and dispatched a navy squadron to the Caribbean where it took part in joint maneuvers with the Venezuelan navy and made several port calls in 2008.

The Caribbean mission, aimed at flexing military muscles near the U.S. in the tense months after the war between Russia and Georgia in August 2008, was the most visible Russian navy deployment since Soviet times.

But despite the Kremlin's ambitions, the post-Soviet economic meltdown has left the Russian navy with only a handful of big ships in seaworthy condition and badly crippled the nation's shipbuilding industries.

Russia has only one Soviet-built aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznetsov, which is much smaller than the U.S. aircraft carriers and has been plagued by mechanical problems and accidents.

Russian shipbuilders have opposed the Mistral deal, saying the government should invest in domestic production instead. Navy officials have argued that license production of Mistral-class ships would help modernize Russia's aging industries.

The navy chief, Adm. Vladimir Vysotsky, has said a ship like Mistral would have allowed the Russian navy to mount a much more efficient operation in the Black Sea during the Russia-Georgia war. He said the French ship would take just 40 minutes to do the job that the Russian Black Sea Fleet vessels did in 26 hours, apparently referring to amphibious landing operations.

Georgia was clearly worried about the possible deal.

"We strongly oppose the sale of such ship to Russia," Nika Laliashvili of the Georgian parliament's defense affairs committee told The Associated Press. "It poses a serious danger to Georgia."

Since the 2008 war, Russia has declared the Georgian territory of Abkhazia an independent nation and sent thousands of troops there. Abkhazia has a coastline along the Black Sea that is next to Russia's coast.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091123/ap_on_...rance_navy_ship
   
Our Country
--------------------------------
"A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: We did it ourselves."   - Lao Zi (老子)
-------------------------------------------
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm."
- Winston Churchill

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 60,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,876
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Danjanou

  • Reporting from Goat Rodeo Central
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 92,779
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,375
  • Butt Party NCO on the 81mm Mortar Range
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #4 on: February 09, 2010, 12:07:05 »
Topics merged

D/S
NASA spent $12 Million designing a pen that could write in the zero gravity environment of space. The Russians went with pencils.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 110,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,287
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #5 on: February 10, 2010, 13:59:30 »
Stirng the pot  :nod:, we could always buy into the order as well, just think of the money we will save on not having to translate all of the documents to French... ;D

Offline VinceW

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,685
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 114
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #6 on: March 02, 2010, 18:55:24 »
 The deal is set Russia is going to buy 4 Mistrals,2 will be built in France the other 2 in Russia,France will get more natural gas from Russia because of this deal.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c18316c8-2599-11df-9bd3-00144feab49a.html?nclick_check=1
 
"You have two choices in life,be wise or be brave,always choose to be brave"

 Chinese Proverb

"Marxism is the Opiate of the Intellectuals"

Offline S.M.A.

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 132,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,515
Mistrals for Russia to have French technology
« Reply #7 on: July 06, 2010, 18:58:11 »
Russia to receive Mistral with French technologies

Quote

Last Updated: Jul 06, 2010

MOSCOW (BNS): Russia is all geared up to procure the Mistral-class assault ships from France with all technology and equipment on it, except the weaponry and helicopters.

According to a news report by RIA Novosti, Russia will equip the ships with its own weaponry and helicopters.

The guns, missiles, torpedoes and helicopters will be made in Russia. Russian shipbuilders will also reinforce the hull for withstanding Arctic ice.

Russia is negotiating the purchase of at least one French-built Mistral class amphibious assault ship and are also planning to build two or three more vessels of the same class in partnership with the French naval shipbuilder DCNS, the report added.

"We are buying the Mistral warship with all proper navigational and technological equipment, including the fire control systems," a defence industry source was quoted as saying in the news report.

The 21,300 tonne Mistral-class ships operate as helicopter carriers and amphibious assault transports, with secondary capabilities as command ships, and an on-board hospital. Propulsion comes from 2 electric-powered manoeuvrable thruster pods, similar to those used on cruise ships, with 2 more bow thrusters for added manoeuvrability in tight situations.

The 650-foot Mistral is capable of transporting and deploying 16 helicopters, four landing barges, up to 70 armoured vehicles including 13 battle tanks, and 450 personnel.

The Russian Mistral to be deployed by the Northern and Pacific Fleets will be armed with combat helicopters Ka-52.


The Mistral deal is expected to be completed by the end of the year 2010.

source

Mistral LHD


Ka-52
Our Country
--------------------------------
"A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: We did it ourselves."   - Lao Zi (老子)
-------------------------------------------
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm."
- Winston Churchill

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 118,265
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,273
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #8 on: July 07, 2010, 11:58:25 »
One of the beauty of the Mistrals, is that they only require a crew of 160. The rest of the space is then dedicated to the troop, air group and HQ staff as may be embarked. The flexibility is incredible:  You load the air group you need for the task at hand: A group of Griffons if you want to carry out air assault, a group of ASW helos for escort purposes, a group of "attack" helos for anti-piracy ops, etc. Any  landing force can be similarly tailored to the operation.

With ice reinforced hulls, they would be your perfect base of operation for the Arctic, greatly simplifying logistics. And they could be used for disaster relief anywhere fairly easily, and be a lot better at it that n AOR's and DDH/FFH.

Just dreaming - but IMO (I've said it in other threads) scrap the JSS: buy separate AOR's and some LHA's (Mistral style) as Hellyer's "Big Honking Ships".

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 60,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,876
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #9 on: July 07, 2010, 14:41:09 »
 Oldgateboatdriver: Agree on general idea, but Hillier vice Hellyer I think.

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 118,265
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,273
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #10 on: July 07, 2010, 15:01:10 »
OOOOUPS!!!

After all these years, still traumatized by what "HELLYER" did to the Navy. :)

Sorry!

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 60,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,876
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #11 on: September 29, 2010, 08:15:45 »
Deal done (via J.M. Heinrichs):

Russia And France Make The Deal
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htamph/articles/20100928.aspx

Quote
September 28, 2010: After over a year of negotiations with France, Russia has agreed to buy four Mistral amphibious ships. Two will be built in France, and licensed production of two more will take place in Russia. This licensing aspect of the deal is most important to Russia, as they are demanding the transfer of shipbuilding technology to Russian yards. France was willing to do this, it was mainly a matter of arriving at a mutually acceptable price. Currently, the deal is expected to cost Russia over a billion dollars. Before World War I, Russia often bought French naval technology, and much other military technology. Russia is currently looking beyond its own failing defense industries for new equipment, and ideas.

The French navy received the first of the 21,500 ton Mistrals in 2006, with the second one arriving in 2007. Both were ordered in 2001. These two ships replaced two older amphibious landing ships. This gave France a force of four amphibious ships. The two Mistrals are also equipped to serve as command vessels for amphibious operations. The French have been very happy with how the Mistrals have performed.

The Mistrals are similar in design to the U.S. LPD 17 (San Antonio) class. Both classes are about 200 meters/620 feet long, but the LPD 17s displace 25,000 tons. The French ships are more highly automated, requiring a crew of only 180, versus 396 on the LPD 17. On long voyages on the open ocean, the Mistrals require as few as nine sailors and officers on duty ("standing watch") to keep the ship going.

The Mistrals carry 450 marines, compared to 700 on the LPD 17s. Both have about the same room for helicopters, landing craft and vehicles (2,650 square meters for the Mistrals, room for nearly a hundred trucks, or 60 armored vehicles). Both have hospitals on board, with the Mistrals being larger (69 beds). The American ships, however have more sensors installed, and larger engines (and thus higher speed.) The LPD 17 can also handle vertical takeoff jets like the Harrier or F-35. The French believe that the smaller complement of marines, who are very capable troops, are sufficient for most missions. And the smaller number of people on the ship makes it possible to provide better living and working conditions. This is good for morale and readiness...

The third and fourth Mistrals for the French Navy are being built using more commercial techniques, and are expected to cost closer to $500 million each [emphasis added, cheap compared to our planned JSS]. Russia says it plans to base some of its Mistrals in the Far East, where there is an ongoing dispute with Japan over Japanese islands Russia occupied after World War II, and never gave back.


Mark
Ottawa
« Last Edit: September 29, 2010, 08:35:59 by MarkOttawa »
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 110,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,287
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #12 on: September 30, 2010, 14:49:34 »
One of the beauty of the Mistrals, is that they only require a crew of 160. The rest of the space is then dedicated to the troop, air group and HQ staff as may be embarked. The flexibility is incredible:  You load the air group you need for the task at hand: A group of Griffons if you want to carry out air assault, a group of ASW helos for escort purposes, a group of "attack" helos for anti-piracy ops, etc. Any  landing force can be similarly tailored to the operation.

With ice reinforced hulls, they would be your perfect base of operation for the Arctic, greatly simplifying logistics. And they could be used for disaster relief anywhere fairly easily, and be a lot better at it that n AOR's and DDH/FFH.

Just dreaming - but IMO (I've said it in other threads) scrap the JSS: buy separate AOR's and some LHA's (Mistral style) as Hellyer's "Big Honking Ships".


My heart warmth over on this, Build the hull and main systems there, bring it over here and let the yards finish off the smaller stuff.

Offline Oh No a Canadian

  • Member
  • ****
  • 54,208
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 159
  • Civvy looking to enlist in the near future
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #13 on: September 30, 2010, 15:12:13 »

My heart warmth over on this, Build the hull and main systems there, bring it over here and let the yards finish off the smaller stuff.
Not with Harper in power...

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 110,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,287
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #14 on: September 30, 2010, 16:26:43 »
That's right because Iggy and friends really do care about the military. The CPC may have mucked up the bidding process but we also have Chinooks, C17's and Leopard 2's because of them. I will take the CPC on a bad day over Libs on a good day. Now in my fantasy world the 3 main parties sit down and hash out a defense policy they can all live with or at least the 2 main parties do and agree on what needs to be bought and when. So when government change, the policy and purchasing does not.

Offline Oh No a Canadian

  • Member
  • ****
  • 54,208
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 159
  • Civvy looking to enlist in the near future
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #15 on: September 30, 2010, 16:31:07 »
True, but Harper only seems to be buying those things for the economic benefits, or he just wants people to think that.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 110,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,287
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #16 on: October 01, 2010, 12:32:32 »
Every politician who approves a large defense purchase want to make it seem like a great economic deal for the country. It’s a lot of money being spent and they try to find ways to sweeten the pot. There was no real economic benefit to buying the Leo2’s, the Chinooks and the C17’s may have spinoff benefits from subcontractors getting support contracts.
Economic politics demand that ships be built here, operational, needs, experience, shipyard capacity, costs may indicate that better value is achieved by buying overseas. But the politics may win out if the better decision is going to cost the politicians votes. Welcome to democracy.   

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 60,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,876
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #17 on: October 02, 2010, 16:36:36 »
This government is logically shameless--or challenged:

Canadian shipyards can’t competitively build large civilian vessels–but the government insists they build naval ones
http://unambig.com/canadian-shipyards-cant-competitively-build-large-civilian-vessels-but-the-government-insists-they-build-naval-ones/

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 466,805
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,210
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #18 on: October 02, 2010, 19:25:26 »
This government is logically shameless--or challenged:

Canadian shipyards can’t competitively build large civilian vessels–but the government insists they build naval ones
http://unambig.com/canadian-shipyards-cant-competitively-build-large-civilian-vessels-but-the-government-insists-they-build-naval-ones/

Mark
Ottawa


This is very simple, very, very old fashioned pork barrelling and vote buying. They used to set up beer stalls by the voting booths, now they are a wee tiny bit more subtle, albeit a lot more expensive.

Canadians yards can build first rate, modern, sophisticated ships, including warships - they just cannot do it without buying a whole boat load of technology and expertise, at enormous cost. But, hey, a job's a job, right? Gotta keep those Canadian workers on the job and shopping at WalMart. Wouldn't do to let the market decide; this is Canada!
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 Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 110,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,287
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #19 on: October 04, 2010, 16:20:51 »
This is why I opposed buying ferries from overseas for BC Ferries. It is the new builds that finance the purchase of new capital equipment and infrastructure. Our yards out here have a good rep for fast and good quality ship repairs. In order to maintain that edge we need a certain number of new build so the industry can renew itself periodically.

Offline RV

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,200
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 108
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #20 on: December 02, 2010, 17:31:52 »

This is very simple, very, very old fashioned pork barrelling and vote buying. They used to set up beer stalls by the voting booths, now they are a wee tiny bit more subtle, albeit a lot more expensive.

Canadians yards can build first rate, modern, sophisticated ships, including warships - they just cannot do it without buying a whole boat load of technology and expertise, at enormous cost. But, hey, a job's a job, right? Gotta keep those Canadian workers on the job and shopping at WalMart. Wouldn't do to let the market decide; this is Canada!

Let's test your theory against one of the core policies of the world champion of free market economics.  Have you ever asked yourself why, in this day and age of the United States sending any and every job off to foreign shores in the name of free enterprise, the Jones Act continues to exist?  The free market, if it had been allowed to run amock on US shipbuilding, would have killed all but one or two of the smaller, lean and mean US yards, and with good reason.   US yards are completely incapable of competitively building large vessels.

I know I've said this before in other threads, but it bears repeating:  a national shipbuilding strategy, while it is good politics, is not about politics.  It's about strategic national security and sovereignty.  What chance does a nation with well over three quarters of its border made up of coastline have if it is incapable of independently defending it?  The US government knows that.  The Canadian government seems to have recently realized it after forgetting for a few decades.

Our shipyards have fallen into decay and disuse in the new build market.  There is no denying it.  It will cost a lot to get them back up to speed.  But it is simply not an option to be incapable of doing this ourselves.  They should never have have been allowed to get to this condition in the first place.

I was working with a Commander recently who spelled it out for me in very simple terms.  He said something along the lines of "The modern, full scale naval battle will last six minutes.  After that, you limp along with whatever you have left floating and you hope that you can build the next fleet quicker than your enemy."  The speech was a bit longer and there were some references to the days of Nelson thrown in for colour, but that was the gist of it.  If you happen to have bought your first fleet from that enemy or a good friend of his... well, you may as well not have bothered; a war time is no time to start from scratch.

I find this attitude of buying overseas simply because it's cheaper disheartening and shortsighted, particularly given that it's being expressed by conservative minded people in a military forum, who of anyone, should understand issues of national security.  Even nations like Bangladesh and Indonesia keep GOCO naval yards operating to mitigate this threat.  It's particularly disheartening because we all know that we can do it.  Canada has architects and engineers that design naval ships for other country's navies.  We have shipyards that have built naval vessels in the past, build small vessels and repair vessels in the present, and could build naval vessels again in the future.  We have a supply chain that's rusty, but serviceable.  All we need to do is knock the rust off, sweep out the hangars, and scare up the talent to get the machinery clanking again.  Actually, we don't even need to do that; it's already done.  All we need to do is say "Tag, you're it.  Start cutting steel."

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 118,265
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,273
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #21 on: December 04, 2010, 08:42:31 »
I agree that it is critically important for a maritime nation, such as Canada, to be able to build its own ships especially in time of heightened tension and war. So to that extent, I must disagree with the view of ERC and MarkOttawa that we should always seek the cheapest solution even if it means building abroad (The Type 45 destroyers are built in England and cost twice as much as an Arleigh Burke for half the fighting power: You go tell the Brits they should close their yards and buy in the USA and see what happens).

On the other hand, while I agree with RC, I must seriously question the knowledge of the Commander he refers too. I hope it is an engineering officer, because if it is a MARS officer of that rank, he should seriously be sent back down for requal.

First of all, there will not be a "modern full scale naval battle" in any foreseeable future. These are not WW1 days we do not have two sides with large fleets of battleships waiting for the other to come out for a single all deciding engagement. We do not fight naval wars that way anymore and the possibility of a nation's whole fleet coming out to fight another one's in single battle is nil. Even at the end of the cold war, when building up to Reagan's 600 ships Navy with 15 Carrier Battle Groups and SecNAv saying that he could see no war scenario with the USSR that would not involve putting at least two CBG's in harms way in the North sea, there would have been no such single all determining engagement. There would have been a series of smaller localized ones, each of a single nature or at most single nature (either air or submarine or surface) with small coordinated adjuncts. The least likely of those engagements would have been (still is) surface ship on surface ship engagement (which is why anti-ship missiles are the ones we carry the least of and we can get by with smaller calibre guns nowadays).

On the other hand, modern warhips are now so much more than a hull with engines and some guns that this portion of the job now has much less overall importance. The two most important aspects of warships are the C4SI systems - including highly complex and sophisticated software and computers and the high end technological weapons (torpedoes, missiles). Unless you can also build those yourself, you cannot be said to be capable of building warships "at home".

At this point, I would say Canada is capable of the first two. We have shipyards, and yes they can competently build warships once they get back up to speed. As for electronic systems, we have some electronics companies left in country that can do this level of sophisticated work if switched back to war production and Montreal, for instance, is one the world's three top center for video game production and thus, is awash with coders and software engineers that can produce the most sophisticated software. The rub is we do not have the third aspect: we do not build or even have a basic knowledge base for the construction of  missiles and such modern weapons: we buy them whole from other countries. This should militate in favour of stockpiling large "war stocks" of missiles even if we end up not using them in their usefull lifetime. Unfortunately its an expensive proposition that is difficult to explain to Canadians and therefore politically unpalatable.

Offline Cdn Blackshirt

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 12,995
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,395
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #22 on: December 04, 2010, 15:20:12 »

This is very simple, very, very old fashioned pork barrelling and vote buying. They used to set up beer stalls by the voting booths, now they are a wee tiny bit more subtle, albeit a lot more expensive.

Canadians yards can build first rate, modern, sophisticated ships, including warships - they just cannot do it without buying a whole boat load of technology and expertise, at enormous cost. But, hey, a job's a job, right? Gotta keep those Canadian workers on the job and shopping at WalMart. Wouldn't do to let the market decide; this is Canada!

Define "market"?  I hope you're not contending that the primary players now all got to where they are in free market/unsubsidized manner.

How much money have the Finns, South Koreans and Americans spent subsidizing their companies to now be able to produce ships at lower costs?

Tens of Billions for the Finns & South Koreans and Hundreds of Billions by the Americans.

Also, don't doubt for one second that each of these countries is smart enough enough to do the 'net cost calculation for domestic production' which at times some here choose to overlook (they're rather look at sticker price vs sticker price).

Net Cost = Gross Cost (Sticker Price) - Direct Personal Income Taxes Collected - Direct Corporate Taxes Collected - EI Savings - Direct VAT Collected - Indirect Personal Income Taxes Collected - Indirect VAT Collected, etc., etc., etc.

The key issue being our govenment appears reticent to publicly discuss such a calculation as its existence undermines the world objective of "Global Free Trade".

Specific to the argument of whether Canada should have a subsidized shipbuilding industry, I would say yes, with a but. 

If Canada is to invest in these shipyards, than it should not be grants.  It should be common equity infusions so that the taxpayers are buying part of these companies rather than just handing them a cheque.  And if they're not interested in such an investment, than we pick a shipyard that is.  Build that condition into the Terms so it's non-negotiable.

The final component to this process is that our government has to stop listening to lobbyists who are trying to obtain what's best for the private corporations and instead be smart enough to do what is best for our country, and lobbyists be damned.  If it were me, I'd look at targeting a retired CEO to spearhead this who knows how to get things done.  Either the Nigel Wright (formerly of Onex) or Gywn Morgan (formerly of Encana) seem ideally suited to the task.  Both are both individually wealthy and have made both statements and actions that they'd like to do some public service in the best interests of Canada which makes them less likely to be corrupted (which I believe should be the overriding concern given the amount of money we're talking about and how important the initial design of this program is).
IMPORTANT - 'Blackshirt' is a reference to Nebraska Cornhuskers Football and not naziism.   National Champions '70, '71, '94, '95 and '97.    Go Huskers!!!!

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 466,805
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,210
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #23 on: December 04, 2010, 16:29:22 »
I am happy to stipulate that shipbuilding is, or can be, more than just uneconomic pork barrel politics. It might be a strategic industry – even a required strategic industry for an aspiring leading middle power. If that's the case then it deserves ongoing public support by, say, a national ship building strategy and programme. Since successive Conservative and Liberal governments, ever since 1961, have renounced such programmes I can only conclude that we, Canada, have rejected the idea that ship building is or needs to be any thing more than ineffective job creation.

Prime Minister St Laurent's government conceived and implemented a national ship building strategy. It ended in 1960 and 61 with the laying of the keels for the Annapolis class of destroyers. The St Laurent programme involved building 20 destroyers and 20 more minesweepers in a coherent building programme scheduled to last for 10+ years. We have attempted 12 ship programmes in the 1980s/90s (Halifax class frigates) and 1990s (Kingston class maritime coastal defence vessels) but both programmes had major pork barrel components in them – greater, by far, than in the 1950s.

In other words, I think actions speak louder than words and I think we, as a nation, have decided that shipbuilding is not a strategic industry, it is, rather, a political industry that gets fed, as necessary, to generate votes, not ships.
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!"

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 60,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,876
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Russia May Buy French Mistral
« Reply #24 on: December 04, 2010, 16:49:50 »
It's also worth noting that the government has given up on protecting a major segment of the civilian shipbuilding industry, so why not for Navy and CCG vessels--other than pure por(c)k?

Canadian shipyards can’t competitively build large civilian vessels–but the government insists they build naval ones
http://unambig.com/canadian-shipyards-cant-competitively-build-large-civilian-vessels-but-the-government-insists-they-build-naval-ones/

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.