Author Topic: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy  (Read 719747 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Antoine

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 8,810
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 352
  • Achieving singularity and paradigm shifts
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #25 on: June 03, 2010, 23:49:42 »
From the point of view of an applicant for the NAVY (me), it is encouraging but , hey, I am still naive !
The Future Is Coming Sooner Then You Think - 2007 U.S. Congress study by the Joint Economic Committee
The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom - Isaac Asimov
We risk continuing to fight a 21st-century conflict with 20th-century rules - John Reid, British secretary of state for defence
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity

Offline RV

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,200
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 108
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #26 on: June 04, 2010, 05:26:53 »
The discussed level for cut off between "small" and "large" was 1000t.  The assessment of the requirements for the CCG and Navy fleets over the next 30 years, which other than a couple of exceptions is just replacement of existing assets, suggested that  to be a reasonably natural cut off point with relatively few ships falling into a grey area.

I find it alarming that they intend to take another 2 years to make a decision on the yards.  So they still don't intend to start construction on any ships for another 2 years?

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 63,345
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,093
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #27 on: June 04, 2010, 06:38:28 »
Note JSS is not/not considered "combat" vessel and will be built in civilian yard, 1,000 tonnes is cut-off for "large"--from DND:
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-eng.do;jsessionid=ac1b105430d891a768c0b48a471388a9bb629767dd3e.e34Rc3iMbx8Oai0Tbx0SaxiKbxz0?m=%2Findex&nid=537419

Quote
...
Two shipyards will be selected to build the large vessels (1000 tonnes displacement or more)...

One shipyard will be selected to build combat vessels. This will enable the procurement of the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) [15 planned:
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3778076 ]
and Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships (AOPS) [6-8]. The surface combatant project will renew the Navy's surface fleet by replacing various warfare capabilities of the destroyers (Iroquois-class) and multi-role patrol frigate (Halifax-class) ships. The primary tasks of the Arctic ships will be to: conduct sea-borne surveillance operations in Canada's Economic Exclusion Zones (EEZs), including the Arctic; provide awareness of activities and events to various departments; and cooperate with other elements of the Canadian Forces and other federal government departments to assert and enforce Canadian sovereignty, whenever and wherever necessary.

Another competitively selected shipyard will build non-combat vessels, such as the Joint Support Ships (JSS) [emphasis added, 3 planned]. The capabilities required of these ships are crucial to the Canadian Forces. The Joint Support Ship increases the range and sustainment of a Naval Task Group, permitting it to remain at sea for significant periods of time without going alongside for replenishment. These vessels will also provide capacity for sealift and support to troops ashore...

Meanwhile the CCG has 28 ships of 1,000 tonnes (some just under) or more; 15 soon will be over 30 years old with the youngest 25 years:
http://www.ccg-gcc.gc.ca/e0000459?todo=search&reg%3Bion_id=C&is_active=1

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

Offline GAP

  • Semper Fi
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 209,635
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,937
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #28 on: June 04, 2010, 07:15:30 »
This is not about building ships.

It is about a majority in the next election, which, coincidentally, will happen within the next 2 years. And, Glory Be!!, there's promise in them thar regions that they don't have many seats...(see Atlantic Canada, Quebec and BC).

They just pulled a Liberal....vague, grand promises with a far enough ahead date to change direction if necessary....
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I´m not so sure about the universe

Offline captloadie

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 36,723
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 596
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #29 on: June 04, 2010, 07:38:35 »
So, we are going to create invest in two national shipyards to build ships. Great. But who is going to design the ships? Are we going to have agreements that allow foreign designs to be built in Canada? If not, this will greatly limit the ability for the ministries involved (DND, Fisheries, etc.) from getting the ships that meet their needs. "Buy Canadian" is a great theme, but is it really practical, or economical? The story was rather thin on details.

Offline Monsoon

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 22,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 775
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #30 on: June 04, 2010, 08:53:57 »
It is about a majority in the next election, which, coincidentally, will happen within the next 2 years. And, Glory Be!!, there's promise in them thar regions that they don't have many seats...(see Atlantic Canada, Quebec and BC).

Not many seats? Let's see: in BC they have 22 out of 36 seats, in the Maritimes they have 9 out of 25, and the shipbuilding strategy seems to be geared towards dockyards in Esquimalt and Halifax to the exclusion of the Davie yard in Quebec. I guess they could try to build ships in Alberta and Manitoba...

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #31 on: June 04, 2010, 08:56:21 »
I'll be dead and buried  before this comes to pass in full, if at all. :2c:

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 63,345
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,093
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #32 on: June 04, 2010, 09:31:27 »
Trying to pull it all together at The Torch:

Government's "National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy": Numbers don't make sense, esp. for Coast Guard
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2010/06/governments-national-shipbuilding.html

Quote
More sound and fury, smoke and mirrors, from the government--and our media bought it hook, line and sinker...

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

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 128,610
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,444
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #33 on: June 04, 2010, 10:13:53 »
Is this going to be a "plus ça change, plus c'est pareil" situation? I do not know.

However, I would not sell Davies in Quebec city short for the large non-combat vessels: It still has the largest facility in Canada and the only one (unless they built a new one in BC recently) that can take ships the size of the "planned" JSS. Davies is also currently under ownership of a Danish shipyard and as a result has managers that know what they are doing.

I also agree with MarkOttawa on the probable breakdown of the 28 "large" ships.

As for the JSS (and I will digress here), I am getting desperate: Other than the fact already well discussed in other threads that such type of ships do not exist and for technical reason are then extremely complex and expensive to build, can anybody make the Minister (and for that matter, the geniuses at HQ that came up with this) see the fundamental military reason for not building such ship. Someone please show them WWII footage of what happens to a tanker hit by a single bomb or torpedo. AOR's are floating bombs. That is fine when you are fully manned with seaman only who know what they are getting into and you stay more or less out of the most dangerous areas. If you are sunk, this creates a logistical nightmare for the ships you support, but that is  it. If, however, you then add a lot of army gear, some soldiers, the ground force logistical support and command staff, you have to stand closer to danger and your loss is mission critical. Since you are a "single shot" target, this means that there is no margin for any leakers whatsoever. A real amphibious ships have the resilience to take multiple hits before they become too disabled to operate.

So further to this digression, here is the topic relevant question: What is more important to the government's shipbuilding strategy, the overall monetary figure, or the number of hulls that keep the shipyards busy continually? If the later is the answer (and in my view, it should), then forgo the three JSS and build four AOR's and two amphibious ships (À la "French "Mistral" or, better yet, à la South-Korean " Dodko" style) for the same price. 

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 122,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,753
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #34 on: June 04, 2010, 10:45:14 »
Trying to pull it all together at The Torch:

Government's "National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy": Numbers don't make sense, esp. for Coast Guard
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2010/06/governments-national-shipbuilding.html

Mark
Ottawa

Good job by the way on the blog. I would have preferred a bipartisan committee made up of all parties to determine the ship building strategy so there is buy in from whoever is in government. Having two major shipbuilders is better than one, so you can sort of keep them from getting to cocky.

Semi off topic, shipyards here in N. Van are surviving by building component for Hydro power plants.

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 82,555
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,824
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #35 on: June 04, 2010, 10:48:59 »
Question. I believe US Navy replenishment ships (POL, Ammo, General, etc) are crewed with Department of Defence civilian employees with a small Navy augmentation.

Is this an option for the JSS?
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline GAP

  • Semper Fi
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 209,635
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,937
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #36 on: June 04, 2010, 10:52:15 »
Not many seats? Let's see: in BC they have 22 out of 36 seats, in the Maritimes they have 9 out of 25, and the shipbuilding strategy seems to be geared towards dockyards in Esquimalt and Halifax to the exclusion of the Davie yard in Quebec. I guess they could try to build ships in Alberta and Manitoba...

That may be, but do they have seats in the shipbuilding ridings and adjoining ones where the people are going to be drawn from? Even if they do, it never hurts to feather you own nest.   :)

I'm not saying they don't mean well, but things don't add up as far as what they're saying we're going to get and how, and reality. This is a political promise with no cost for at least 3-5 years.....they all do it...anyone remember the RED BOOK(S) and the removal of the GST?  The Liberals were masters of the big promise....
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I´m not so sure about the universe

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #37 on: June 04, 2010, 11:03:16 »
OGBD, I am, you could call me a "Tanker Wanker".  Yeah, they do have the potential to go "Bam".  But you get used to the thought of it and frankly it is a small comfort that the end might be very fast and final.  Would prefer that end to say the USS Indianappolis and crew.

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 128,610
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,444
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #38 on: June 04, 2010, 11:16:36 »
You are correct R62.

In the US Navy today, more and more of the at sea logistics support ships are manned by  the Military Sealift Command personnel, which is made of merchant seaman, with small naval logistics cell embarked as necessary. It was not so only a decade ago. This was a (successful) experiment they learned from the British, where at sea support is carried out by the Royal Fleet Auxiliaries, similarly crewed by merchant seaman. However, none of the US amphibious ships are so crewed.

To answer your question, If the JSS only transported army gear from one harbour to another and resupplied the ships at sea, the concept could work, and we already have the organization that could do it: the CFAV's (Canadian Forces Auxiliary Vessels organization), which encompasses all the merchant mariners that crews the fleet of support vessels (tugs, ferries, research vessels, etc.) in our two harbours. They are extremely competent seaman and could easily take over then.

If, however, the JSS are expected to carry some form of expeditionary  personnel, landing command staff, helicopters for landed troops support, etc, then it would be unfair to expect merchant seaman to agree to go in harms way (and we might even then be in breach of Geneva Convention for operating what would then be considered a "combatant" with  non-combatant personnel).

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 128,610
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,444
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #39 on: June 04, 2010, 11:22:51 »
Jollyjacktar, I have served my fair share on Protecteur also, but you make my point: We seaman know and sign up for that. I do not think the army does. And if we have to get them close to shore, we greatly increase the chances that an asset that is mission critical will be disposed of with a single lucky shot. It is just not what  AOR's are designed for, as opposed to Phibs.

I am also with you on the concept of having a quick end.

Offline RV

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,200
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 108
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #40 on: June 04, 2010, 11:29:57 »
So, we are going to create invest in two national shipyards to build ships. Great. But who is going to design the ships? Are we going to have agreements that allow foreign designs to be built in Canada? If not, this will greatly limit the ability for the ministries involved (DND, Fisheries, etc.) from getting the ships that meet their needs. "Buy Canadian" is a great theme, but is it really practical, or economical? The story was rather thin on details.

Canada has several internationally competitive naval architecture firms.  They can quite readily address the needs of the non-combatant ship designs, including AOPS (which technically is a non-combattant despite the work split described).  Aside from the frigates, there is currently more capability to design the ships in Canada than to build them.

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 82,555
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,824
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #41 on: June 04, 2010, 11:30:33 »
Thanks for the answer.

The last:
Quote
then it would be unfair to expect merchant seaman to agree to go in harms way (and we might even then be in breach of Geneva Convention for operating what would then be considered a "combatant" with  non-combatant personnel).
I tend to disagree.

After WWII, the Merchant Navy lobbied successfully for Veteran's benefits and service medals. Many merchant ships were armed for anti surface raiders/submarines and anti aircraft. The on-board naval gun crews were augmented by civilian gun numbers.

They did go in harms way. No question, and were paid a lot more than their military counterparts. A premium if on ships that would blow up quickly when hit.

The Merchant Navy lobbied and were successful. The HK vets were not so lucky.
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline RV

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,200
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 108
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #42 on: June 04, 2010, 11:34:15 »
This is not about building ships.

It is about a majority in the next election, which, coincidentally, will happen within the next 2 years. And, Glory Be!!, there's promise in them thar regions that they don't have many seats...(see Atlantic Canada, Quebec and BC).

They just pulled a Liberal....vague, grand promises with a far enough ahead date to change direction if necessary....

This initiative is primarily driven by the civil servant lifers.  They have recognized that something has to be done, and quick, or we are not going to have the ships we need.  Yes, of course the politicians have to buy into it and will spin it whichever way they can to their political advantage, but this plan has some real legs to it and has been in the works for a long time.

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 128,610
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,444
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #43 on: June 04, 2010, 11:41:57 »
They did go in harms way. No question, and were paid a lot more than their military counterparts. A premium if on ships that would blow up quickly when hit.

Granted. However, they were doing their basic job only: driving cargo  or people from point A to point B. It just so happened that in "total war" they were the primary target of the opponent. This is different from actually  asking them to serve on a ship whose purpose is to actually go in a combat situation to participate actively in the fight. The difference would be the same as between soldiers and police officers. Police officers do get shot and can potentially get harmed in what they do, but they do not have an "unlimited liability" clause to their contract and no one has the authority to order them to do something that WILL result in their death (i.e. to sacrifice themselves for the mission).

Should we start another thread here?

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 128,610
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,444
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #44 on: June 04, 2010, 11:50:31 »
Interesting RC. But can you expand on the lifers?

Which ones would have realized that  we need ships?

The DND ones, or the DOT's, or both (which would be extraordinary as in my experience, these two dept have a hard time talking to one another)?

Or could it have been the Dep. of Industry  and Commerce lifers, not realizing that we need ships but that they needed to save their friends in the shipbuilding industry?

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 122,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,753
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #45 on: June 04, 2010, 12:00:55 »
Shipyards need new builds to recapitalize their equipment and upgrade to stay competitive. Our West Coast yards have a good rep in the Pacific for doing good and fast repairs on commercial ships. We can’t compete with the Asian market in new builds, hence the failed attempt to build fast cats. Shipyards that don’t get new builds will likely eventual fail as they will not have the capital to replace large equipment. The problem is that shipyards provide very good paying jobs, and create a lot of downstream economic effects supporting many small local businesses, providing, pumps, switches, wiring, valves, small machine works and small fabrications, etc. hence the reason regions fight hard to keep their slice of the pie. Sadly there is more shipyards than money for the pie. As Mark pointed out there is more hulls needed than budgeted for, so the need and capacity is there. The real questions are how much money do you have to spend and when can we start?

Offline RV

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,200
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 108
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #46 on: June 04, 2010, 12:03:27 »
The senior bureaucrats in DND, DFO / CCG, and Industry were all working together on this, seemingly in harmony.  I'm in the industry, not in the government, so naturally, I'm not seeing behind the scenes, but when you can get hundreds of senior civil servants from four departments and their four MPs all in the same room and they are all telling the same story, I think there is more than just smoke there.

Particularly when they subsequently put something out that is at least reasonably close to what they discussed and what was recommended to them by industry.

The goal is to eliminate the boom/bust cycle independent of changing politics.  Let's hope they get the mechanics right, but at least they are getting the ideology right so far.  My biggest beef with it so far is the timeline of another 2 years before they start an AOPS or a JSS.

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 82,555
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,824
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #47 on: June 04, 2010, 12:35:23 »
Why would Canada want to committ strategically to a long term ship building programme in Quebec?

Whatever Quebec gets, it is never enough. The hand is always out for more. Quebec is not happy in Canada, as evidenced by how it's citizens vote nationally. The CPC will not get any more votes in Quebec if the contract is let there. They may down home and in BC.

Let Davie build ships for Quebec's own navy.
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Ex-Dragoon

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 46,342
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,003
  • dealing with life not that active here anymore
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #48 on: June 04, 2010, 12:56:37 »
Quote
So further to this digression, here is the topic relevant question: What is more important to the government's shipbuilding strategy, the overall monetary figure, or the number of hulls that keep the shipyards busy continually? If the later is the answer (and in my view, it should), then forgo the three JSS and build four AOR's and two amphibious ships (À la "French "Mistral" or, better yet, à la South-Korean " Dodko" style) for the same price.

You're reading my mind.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2010, 13:07:48 by Ex-Dragoon »
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 Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 128,610
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,444
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #49 on: June 04, 2010, 14:51:31 »
R62, I was not advocating anything political. I merely point out that it would be foolhardy to rule out in advance a "win" by the largest facility in the country.

To correct you on CPC politics however, Davies is located at Quebec city, the area where the CPC have made their greatest breaktrough in Quebec. B$ of shipbuiding there would go a long towards creating a "stronghold " in the province of Quebec from which to make inroads into the rural ridings by completely bypassing the overly left leaning Montreal. So you see, one can always come up with a valid political reason to do something. ;)