Author Topic: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy  (Read 917469 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Hamish Seggie

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 240,702
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,753
  • This is my son Michael, KIA Afghanistan 3 Sep 08
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3000 on: March 10, 2020, 14:36:17 »
I find it notable that the one ship not built by the yard visible is the one ship that's actually sailing...and is capable of sailing around a continent.

As for the Halifax Class - there was a LOT of steel returned by the RCN post MLR that ISI ran out of time/money to install on the hulls.  That was steel which was surveyed as requiring replacement before the ships went into the MLR...and wasn't done...so how much worse has it gotten since then? 

The MLR was not a re-fit, it was a combat-systems reconfiguration.  The MAR ENG world either had or let their major 'big ticket' items get pushed out of the MLR - DG replacement, Chiller replacements, etc.   Can't blame them.

Something rotten in the state of Denmark perhaps?
Freedom Isn't Free   "Never Shall I Fail My Brothers"

“Do everything that is necessary and nothing that is not".

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 83,815
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,025
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3001 on: March 10, 2020, 15:54:31 »
Yes, they are but the refit focused almost exclusively on updating the combat suite. The hull and marine systems were not updated.  Freddy's recent docking work period replaced almost 20m of steel amidships due to rust out and metal fatigue...

CP story:

Quote
Navy’s aging warships getting harder to repair: Defence report

The Royal Canadian Navy’s maintenance facilities are having an increasingly tougher time fixing Canada’s warships because of staff shortages, lack of spare parts and the age of the fleet, according to an internal Defence Department study.

The navy was also found to be critically short of sonar and sensor operators for its frigates while ongoing challenges in getting Canada’s submarines into the water are hurting the navy’s ability to train new submariners to crew them.

The study’s findings were written last year but only published by the Defence Department this week. The Canadian Press recently reported on navy and Canadian Coast Guard needing hundreds more sailors between them to get up to strength.

The study found the navy was able to conduct nearly all of its overseas missions despite the challenges, in part by moving people and equipment around to where they were needed most. The exception was Canada’s trouble-plagued submarines.

Navy officials also told those conducting the study that they were working on plans to address the underlying problems, including putting more money and staff into the fleet maintenance facilities in Victoria and Halifax.

The findings nonetheless reiterate the importance of addressing those personnel shortfalls both in terms of sailors and maintenance staff while underscoring the importance of preventing any further delays in the long-running effort to replace Canada’s warship fleets.

The difficulties facing the maintenance facilities figured prominently in the study findings, which said the facilities “have been increasingly challenged to sustain the aging platforms and increasingly obsolete systems of the Halifax-class frigates and Victoria-class submarines.”

The challenges were even found to extend to some systems only recently installed aboard the 1980s-era frigates as part of a major upgrade that is intended to keep them operating until new warships arrive, which is currently expected to happen in the late 2020s and early in the next decade.

In the meantime, “the obsolescence of certain parts and systems, including some recently installed (Halifax-class modernization) systems, and the growing age of the platforms themselves, remain significant issues,” the study found.

The maintenance facilities were also found to have lost about 10 per cent of their staff over the past few years even as the demand for repairs steadily increased. The study did not say why staff were leaving.

Complicating matters was availability of spare parts, again part due to the age of the ships. In some cases, parts had to be taken from one ship or submarine that was docked in extended maintenance periods and put in another needing less work to get it out the door faster...
https://www.mromagazine.com/2020/03/09/navys-aging-warships-getting-harder-to-repair-defence-report/

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

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 83,815
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,025
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3002 on: March 27, 2020, 14:07:03 »
While RCN and CCG wait and wait and wait for their fleets of new vessels, Aussies are now building first of 12 OPVs, based on PV80 design of Germany's Lürssen (https://www.luerssen-defence.com/opv-80/):

Quote
Australia officialy starts construction of first Arafura class Offshore Patrol Vessel

The Government’s $90 billion Continuous Naval Shipbuilding Program has reached a new milestone with construction on the first Offshore Patrol Vessel (OPV) to be built in Western Australia commencing.

This will be the third of twelve Arafura class OPVs, and the first to be built at the Civmec shipyard in Henderson, Western Australia. The twelve Australian vessels are based on the PV80 design with the first two vessels to be built at ASC's Osborne shipyard in South Australia before production moves to Civmec's Henderson shipyard in Western Australia.

The program will replace and improve upon the capability delivered by the Armidale Class and Cape Class Patrol Boats which entered service in 2005.

The Arafura class offshore patrol vessels (OPV) are being built for the Royal Australian Navy (RAN). The new OPVs are intended to replace the existing Armidale class and Cape class patrol boats, Huon class coastal minehunters, and Leeuwin class survey ships in service with the RAN.

The OPVs in the class will be able to perform maritime patrol, response duties, and constabulary missions. The vessels can be customized to perform mine hunting, hydrographic survey, fisheries patrol, disaster relief, and unmanned aerial system (UAS) missions [emphasis added].

The new OPVs will be 80 meters in length with a displacement of 1700 tonnes [like many WW II destroyers] and a draught of 4 meters. They will be fitted with a 40 mm gun for self-protection, three 8.4 m sea boats, state of the art sensors as well as command and communication systems [top speed 22 knots].

The vessels are able to embark unmanned aerial (UAV), underwater (UUV) and surface vehicles (USV) and can operate larger sea boats which are essential for boarding operations.

The first two vessels are already under construction by Luerssen Australia and ASC in Adelaide [emphasis added].

The remaining ten vessels will be constructed by Luerssen Australia and Civmec at Henderson in Western Australia under the SEA1180 OPV program.


https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2020/march/8213-australia-officialy-starts-construction-of-first-arafura-class-offshore-patrol-vessel.html

Mark
Ottawa

« Last Edit: March 27, 2020, 17:15:10 by MarkOttawa »
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 214,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,933
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3003 on: March 27, 2020, 18:37:46 »


The Aussie's are a nation of chancers.  There is no Canadian equivalent of Two-Up.

Canadians want to know the outcome of the game before they'll place a bet.

The Aussie's are more willing to lose a dollar so they can move when there is a greater level of uncertainty and deliver projects faster.







"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

"If change isn’t allowed to be a process, it becomes an event." - Penny Mordaunt 10/10/2019

“Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards” ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Offline MTShaw

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • 3,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 65
  • Dont believe everything you say.
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3004 on: March 27, 2020, 18:42:24 »
While RCN and CCG wait and wait and wait for their fleets of new vessels, Aussies are now building first of 12 OPVs, based on PV80 design of Germany's Lürssen (https://www.luerssen-defence.com/opv-80/):

Mark
Ottawa

Thank you for bad mouthing all of the builders at Irving and Seaspan who, in your opinion, are not working fast enough.

Get a grip, Mark.

HMG of both parties have bungled the start of the shipbuilding process. However, that process is underway, and I will reserve judgement until we are well in to it.

Michael

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 160,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,129
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3005 on: March 27, 2020, 18:56:08 »
Warts and all I am in favour of the NSPS, I just wished they started 20 years earlier. Regardless of party, I don't see how they could not involve Irving.

Offline LoboCanada

  • Member
  • ****
  • 3,005
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 182
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3006 on: April 01, 2020, 11:41:19 »
I agree with you Colin. With the addition that specialized designs and classes be farmed out of Canada with partnerships between our yards and foreign yards. Maintenance of foreign built designs be used as a lesson-building in Canada.

I've been down a rabbit-hole of LPDs and LSDs, how useful they would be - especially in times like these. The French Navy has been using their Mistral Class (such a shame) to transport and treat virus patients in their overseas territories with much success. If the RCN had one, we could be using them to do the same in smaller coastal areas off the east or west coast and in short time northern communities as well. Use as medical treatment/hospital ships, HaDR, either overseas or off our own coasts, a light amphibious role, AOR or vehicular transport for our NATO missions and the ability to train on similar ships within NATO or RAN.

Procuring one of these ships should be added somewhere in the Policy. The need was already identified in the recent past as the purpose behind the Big Honkin' Ship and the entire JSS project - so gov't isn't entirely against the idea and need (or was convinced at some point). Building a ship of this size would be comparable in size (breadth, length and displacement) to the new Protecteur Class, so our yards are capable (complexity aside) of building the hulls. Newer designs like the HNLMS Karel Doorman and the RAN/RN Bay-Class (and other Enforcer-ship derivatives) provide the niche capability while being on the recently designed and built side.

On the existing and less-expensive side are many examples and possibilities. The USMC and USN move to smaller amphibious ship designs like the LX(R) class replacement to building the large, expensive, and highly capable San-Antonio classes allow for the possibility for Canada to join in the program. This continental program would allow us to learn from Huntington Ingalls Industries' experience in the design and building of these vessels, giving a boost to our industry in line with our own Policy, while splitting the costs and unknowns of building domestically. A diplomatic boon to any US gov't who can promote the export of a largely american design. With the first LX(R) coming online in approximately 2027, the chance to buy-in to the the line of ships is possible, as opposed to paying to restart a yards build of an existing class of ships. On the even-less expensive avenue of buying an LPD or LSD is available as early as 2027. The LX(R) will be replacing 2 classes of LSDs currently in service with the USN, the Harpers Ferry-class and Whidbey Island Class (12 total built), both of which share designs. The Harpers Ferry-class being the cargo-oriented version and the Whidbey Island class being the more amphibious. With the Whidbey Island-class USS Fort McHenry being the first ship to be replaced by the LX(R) in 2027 offer the possibility to cheaply procure a NATO allies LSD and Canadianize it. Although these classes were first commissioned in the late-80s, 8 of the 12 built will be refitted to remain in service until 2038. The class staying in service until such a time would secure parts-availability should at least one of them be purchased.



 


Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 83,815
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,025
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3007 on: April 01, 2020, 13:06:06 »
With the stupendous costs and debts stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic one wonders how much stomach our government (whatever party) will have for continuing apace with the planned very large defence expenditures, e.g. new RCAF fighter, new RCN CSC frigates.

Heck, they've also got a whole fleet of almost ancient CCG large vessels to replace.

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

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 160,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,129
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3008 on: April 01, 2020, 13:09:14 »
I am fully onboard with that, the Mistrals could be built in France with cooperation from one of our yards and finally fitting out over here for minor stuff and landing craft for them built here. Base crew is less than a 280 had and had we got the two Russian ones they could have been taken over by the stranded crews of the 280 and AOR's who had been left without ships. Plus as they were ice strengthened , with support they could operate in the summer Arctic. It would take some interesting out of the box thinking to maximise their potentiel within the current forces framework, but I think that such a thing would actually invigorate a lot of people, not to mention a chance to serve on a new and new type of ship for the Forces.


Mark
I can sees the AOPS, AOR's and CSC continuing as they mean a lot of jobs. I foresee the fighter replacement getting kicked down the road for at least two more election cycles.

Offline reverse_engineer

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 62,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,583
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3009 on: April 01, 2020, 13:18:04 »
I will be surprised if 15 capable CSC hit the water. I'd expect either numbers cut to 12, or 15 hulls with watered down capabilities. Anyone want to place a friendly wager?

Offline MTShaw

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • 3,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 65
  • Dont believe everything you say.
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3010 on: April 01, 2020, 13:28:34 »
I will be surprised if 15 capable CSC hit the water. I'd expect either numbers cut to 12, or 15 hulls with watered down capabilities. Anyone want to place a friendly wager?

The government will be borrowing money for quite some time.  They may have to raise taxes.  It would be political suicide in those regions were the Grits on Tories decide to gut high paying jobs.

Just a thought.

Michael

Offline reverse_engineer

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 62,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,583
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3011 on: April 01, 2020, 13:37:48 »
True, but it's not political suicide to gut military capabilities. 

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 244,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,820
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3012 on: April 01, 2020, 13:57:09 »
True, but it's not political suicide to gut military capabilities.

Since military capabilities only rate secondary (or tertiary) consideration, the prime factor remains jobs in favourable constituencies.

[/cynicism]

Offline dapaterson

    Halfway to being an idiot-savant.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 508,015
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 17,818
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3013 on: April 01, 2020, 14:00:57 »
Since military capabilities only rate secondary (or tertiary) consideration, the prime factor remains jobs in favourable constituencies.

[/cynicism]

I'm sorry, I can't make out your message on the TCCCS radio I have here...
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 45,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,049
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3014 on: April 01, 2020, 14:09:08 »
If anything I say this is an opportunity to use defense projects to get the country back to work, bring back canadian steel foundries, involve smaller ship builders to get jobs going, massive infrastructure building not just for the navy but the whole CAF, sure buy a mistral from the french or two. This is a chance for our capabilities to be greatly expanded and generate thousands of high paying jobs while we are at it.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline Navy_Pete

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 41,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,026
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3015 on: April 01, 2020, 14:48:57 »
I am fully onboard with that, the Mistrals could be built in France with cooperation from one of our yards and finally fitting out over here for minor stuff and landing craft for them built here. Base crew is less than a 280 had and had we got the two Russian ones they could have been taken over by the stranded crews of the 280 and AOR's who had been left without ships. Plus as they were ice strengthened , with support they could operate in the summer Arctic. It would take some interesting out of the box thinking to maximise their potentiel within the current forces framework, but I think that such a thing would actually invigorate a lot of people, not to mention a chance to serve on a new and new type of ship for the Forces.


Mark
I can sees the AOPS, AOR's and CSC continuing as they mean a lot of jobs. I foresee the fighter replacement getting kicked down the road for at least two more election cycles.

The 280 and AOR crews went over to the frigates and MCDVs, and we're also taking on the crewing of the AOPS. We don't have enough folks for the current fleet, the Mistrals would be another great big gap to fill.

I'm all for the NSPS, but it should have included a recruitment program that brought in the hard sea trades that you need to get off the wall.  Even with the reduced crewing on the new ships, we're still short a lot of bodies, and doing things like shutting down the METTP program in St. Johns didn't help.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 160,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,129
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3016 on: April 01, 2020, 15:54:22 »
I be guessing the Mistals would actually be a favourable posting, interesting deployments and enough room to get away from each other for a bit. I think the AOP's will also provide some favorable accommodation as well. You won't have the mould issues or the close quarters, higher tempo ops of the Halifax's. I think the MCDV will be doing fewer overseas patrols as well.   

Offline Spencer100

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 15,025
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 597
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3017 on: April 01, 2020, 15:56:59 »
There will be a lot cheap cruise ships coming up for sale!  Lol.  Some of them are over 100,000 tons and have room for 6000.  Paint it gray. Slap a helicopter pad over the pool. Instant very big honking ship!   

Offline MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 45,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,049
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3018 on: April 01, 2020, 16:02:34 »
There will be a lot cheap cruise ships coming up for sale!  Lol.  Some of them are over 100,000 tons and have room for 6000.  Paint it gray. Slap a helicopter pad over the pool. Instant very big honking ship!

You really think they will give up the pool? ;)
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline Navy_Pete

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 41,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,026
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3019 on: April 01, 2020, 16:03:08 »
I be guessing the Mistals would actually be a favourable posting, interesting deployments and enough room to get away from each other for a bit. I think the AOP's will also provide some favorable accommodation as well. You won't have the mould issues or the close quarters, higher tempo ops of the Halifax's. I think the MCDV will be doing fewer overseas patrols as well.

Okay but if it creates more jetty hopping that's the kind of thing that drives people out. It's been happening for years and will only get worse as you add more ships. If we don't have enough people currently, you can't add more ships without sorting the crewing out first.  Stupid to buy ships for billions and then tie them up alongside because you are short bodies.

One challenge for the Mistrals is the French Navy crewing concept they are designed to has a higher baseline of training and experience for the crew (ie mostly MS and up). USN ships are similarly challenging, as they have a lot of bodies to do basic/specialized tasks. Makes a massive difference when you are looking at buying an off the shelf design, but why RN, RNZN, RAN and some other NATO navy ships work well.

Agree it would be useful, but it's not as easy as just picking up a ship when we are already stretched for qualified, experience crews.

Offline MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 45,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,049
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3020 on: April 01, 2020, 16:08:07 »

Agree it would be useful, but it's not as easy as just picking up a ship when we are already stretched for qualified, experience crews.

Well coincidentally there seems to be a growing population of job seekers in this country, if I was working recruiting right now I would be figuring out how to pull bodies in once we start up again. I fully believe we can do it, but I can honestly say I haven't seen anything for recruiting in years, perhaps a more aggressive approach is in order?

Edit to fix quote syntax.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2020, 16:24:37 by garb811 »
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 160,745
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,129
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3021 on: April 01, 2020, 16:19:10 »
Okay but if it creates more jetty hopping that's the kind of thing that drives people out. It's been happening for years and will only get worse as you add more ships. If we don't have enough people currently, you can't add more ships without sorting the crewing out first.  Stupid to buy ships for billions and then tie them up alongside because you are short bodies.

One challenge for the Mistrals is the French Navy crewing concept they are designed to has a higher baseline of training and experience for the crew (ie mostly MS and up). USN ships are similarly challenging, as they have a lot of bodies to do basic/specialized tasks. Makes a massive difference when you are looking at buying an off the shelf design, but why RN, RNZN, RAN and some other NATO navy ships work well.

Agree it would be useful, but it's not as easy as just picking up a ship when we are already stretched for qualified, experience crews.

So what your saying is the crew stays longer on the same ship in the French navy? Jetty hooping I assume means come back from deployment, a few days off and then back to sea again? Yes that would suck. It sounds like the senior staff says yes to more things than the ships and crews can handle. I wonder if the dual crew system would work for the navy, say 48 days at sea/onboard and 48 off? You need about 2.5 crews for that per ship though, to allow for training, extended leave, medical, family etc.

Offline garb811

  • MP/MPO Question Answerer
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 111,425
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,877
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3022 on: April 01, 2020, 16:26:17 »
Well coincidentally there seems to be a growing population of job seekers in this country, if I was working recruiting right now I would be figuring out how to pull bodies in once we start up again. I fully believe we can do it, but I can honestly say I haven't seen anything for recruiting in years, perhaps a more aggressive approach is in order?

Edit to fix quote syntax.
Recruiting isn't the problem (for the vast majority of MOS), the problem is throughput of the schools and retaining trained pers.
He's old enough to know what's right
And young enough not to choose it

Offline quadrapiper

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 11,790
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 367
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3023 on: April 01, 2020, 16:58:48 »
Recruiting isn't the problem (for the vast majority of MOS), the problem is throughput of the schools and retaining trained pers.
Are the hard-sea-trade schools operating at physical capacity - i.e., is it "just" a matter of funding more instructors and consumables?

Offline MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 45,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,049
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #3024 on: April 01, 2020, 19:24:18 »
Recruiting isn't the problem (for the vast majority of MOS), the problem is throughput of the schools and retaining trained pers.

Do we need to slow our operational tempo so more people can be diverted to be instructors?
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"