AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

[Oldgateboatdriver]

We are not at the stage yet to really appreciate the benefits of the idea behind the Shipbuilding strategy, which is continual build of government vessels.

If the various government of the day stick with the strategy, one would hope, nay - expect - that we will not repeat the 8 dockings and 40 years careers of serving vessels, but that instead, they would go through three or four dockings and be replaced by the time they reach 22-25 years of service.

That should cut down greatly the in-service support costs as you (1) wouldn't need the extensive hull work required after 20-25 year of service to extend the life of the ship's envelope and (2) wouldn't have to spend the large sums in the last 10 to 15 years of service required for vessels over 25 because everything is at its end of life and replacement parts don't exist anymore - so you have to custom build replacements all the time.

 

[dapaterson]

Profiteering by ISI and SeaSpan will not stop. They have Bermudian bank accounts and luxury yachts to pay for; they will continue to extract well beyond value from taxpayers indefinitely.

 

[FSTO]

We are not at the stage yet to really appreciate the benefits of the idea behind the Shipbuilding strategy, which is continual build of government vessels.

If the various government of the day stick with the strategy, one would hope, nay - expect - that we will not repeat the 8 dockings and 40 years careers of serving vessels, but that instead, they would go through three or four dockings and be replaced by the time they reach 22-25 years of service.

That should cut down greatly the in-service support costs as you (1) wouldn't need the extensive hull work required after 20-25 year of service to extend the life of the ship's envelope and (2) wouldn't have to spend the large sums in the last 10 to 15 years of service required for vessels over 25 because everything is at its end of life and replacement parts don't exist anymore - so you have to custom build replacements all the time.

Don’t waste your bandwidth because DA P will come up with some witty retort that this is all wasted funds.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Profiteering by ISI and SeaSpan will not stop. They have Bermudian bank accounts and luxury yachts to pay for; they will continue to extract well beyond value from taxpayers indefinitely.

As things begin to stabilize on the ship building front, my guess is future governments will start looking harder at costs. Right now the government is in ship crisis mode and for both RCN and CCG.

 

[Navy_Pete]

We are not at the stage yet to really appreciate the benefits of the idea behind the Shipbuilding strategy, which is continual build of government vessels.

If the various government of the day stick with the strategy, one would hope, nay - expect - that we will not repeat the 8 dockings and 40 years careers of serving vessels, but that instead, they would go through three or four dockings and be replaced by the time they reach 22-25 years of service.

That should cut down greatly the in-service support costs as you (1) wouldn't need the extensive hull work required after 20-25 year of service to extend the life of the ship's envelope and (2) wouldn't have to spend the large sums in the last 10 to 15 years of service required for vessels over 25 because everything is at its end of life and replacement parts don't exist anymore - so you have to custom build replacements all the time.

I think that would get support if people saw the cost for DWPs; the subs are in hundreds of millions, but the upcoming CPF ones are at $500, 000, 000+, which is mind blowing any way you slice it. That's almost all repairs and very little in the way of capability insertion.

For context compared to other classes, they are starting at about 4 times the number of hours in the known work package compared to the last 280 refit and now over 1 million labour hours, plus all the arisings that come up.

A lot of that is the butchers bill for not doing progressively more repairs in the 10-20 year range, so now things are right foxed, but they also have a lot less life in them because they had much less margins built into the structure and plating to allow for wastage to save weight. I really can't see them making it out until CSC delivery.

 

[dapaterson]

Don’t waste your bandwidth because DA P will come up with some witty retort that this is all wasted funds.

Building and maintaining a modern navy is a necessity.

Paying extortionate amounts to Irving is not.

 

[FSTO]

Paying extortionate amounts to Irving is not.

Yep,. But their tentacles reach deeply into our governments pockets no matter the colour of the team. Who has the guts to stand up to them?

 

[dapaterson]

Yep,. But their tentacles reach deeply into our governments pockets no matter the colour of the team. Who has the guts to stand up to them?

Not the only defence contractor in the HRM like that...

 

[FSTO]

I think that would get support if people saw the cost for DWPs; the subs are in hundreds of millions, but the upcoming CPF ones are at $500, 000, 000+, which is mind blowing any way you slice it. That's almost all repairs and very little in the way of capability insertion.

For context compared to other classes, they are starting at about 4 times the number of hours in the known work package compared to the last 280 refit and now over 1 million labour hours, plus all the arisings that come up.

A lot of that is the butchers bill for not doing progressively more repairs in the 10-20 year range, so now things are right foxed, but they also have a lot less life in them because they had much less margins built into the structure and plating to allow for wastage to save weight. I really can't see them making it out until CSC delivery.

I think I said in a previous post that the steamers were structurally sound but sensors and weapons were beyond obsolete. The reverse is true (for the most part) today and the issue then is that you could FG with ships that can still sail, but you can’t FG now with ships that are dangerously close to being unseaworthy.

 

[dapaterson]

I think I said in a previous post that the steamers were structurally sound but sensors and weapons were beyond obsolete. The reverse is true (for the most part) today and the issue then is that you could FG with ships that can still sail, but you can’t FG now with ships that are dangerously close to being unseaworthy.

That ship has sailed.

 

[dimsum]

Yep,. But their tentacles reach deeply into our governments pockets no matter the colour of the team. Who has the guts to stand up to them?

I’d suggest the one running on “common sense” platform should take a stab, but let’s be serious here…

 

[FSTO]

That ship has sailed.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Building and maintaining a modern navy is a necessity.

Paying extortionate amounts to Irving is not.

Great. Point us to the ship building firm that won’t do that to us.

I’ll wait.

As you have pointed out in other threads, waiting until there is a crisis to buy defence products is expensive.

ISI absolutely does need to have their necks reeled in but I am not sure how that plays out in practice.

 

[Underway]

Was listening to an interesting podcast from US Naval Institute speaking about shipbuilding and that they regret trying to save money in the 90's, (and then there is the debacle of LCS and Zumwalt) and their behind in shipbuilding technology, trained pers and yards.

With three shipyards now and perhaps a fourth coming up, once the current glut of ships are through you'll see a bit more competition I think.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Yes there is very little spare capacity for warship building, certainly not in the US or UK

 

[Halifax Tar]

South Korea ?

 

[Navy_Pete]

South Korea ?

I remember a Dept of Finance guy suggesting that option, and fully expecting they would agree to the same terms as the NSS (like 100% Canadian equivalent). I was unable to stop from laughing in his face a bit, while one of the DGs calmy explained that they didn't think they would agree to anything other than a standard commercial contract.

We could do something like that, if we realized no one cares what Canada wants in a contract for something like that, and we have no real barganing power. They probably also wouldn't want to consider design changes or schedule delays because we can't get our shit together.

I think one of the RFA ships was built in SK, and they actually had to pay a huge premium to get the yard to slow down, because they couldn't get a crew ready in time.

 

[dapaterson]

Great. Point us to the ship building firm that won’t do that to us.

I’ll wait.

As you have pointed out in other threads, waiting until there is a crisis to buy defence products is expensive.

ISI absolutely does need to have their necks reeled in but I am not sure how that plays out in practice.

Canada's defence industry is unfortunately more concerned with their own margins than with the defence of Canada. But yes, the GoC has done no favours to the industry to encourage a sustainable model.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Canada's defence industry is unfortunately more concerned with their own margins than with the defence of Canada. But yes, the GoC has done no favours to the industry to encourage a sustainable model.

Everybody’s Defence Industry is more interested in margins than the defence of “x”.

I am absolutely no fan of Irving, but here we are. Time to keep dancing with what we brung…

 

[dapaterson]

Everybody’s Defence Industry is more interested in margins than the defence of “x”.

I am absolutely no fan of Irving, but here we are.

Imagine who you'd complain about if you were from the other maritime air community