Could see an argument for a few federally-owned Pickups of the Sea LSTs, or something akin to the West Coast-standard coastal freighters with landing ramps. Not necessarily CAF (maybe CFAV, maybe CCG, maybe someone breaks out all the CCG roles into separate fleets, whatever) but available to shift a bunch of GoC wheeled/tracked stuff around the Arctic archipelago.
I agree we have lot on our plate right now, but I disagree that we can only rely upon the AOP's alone to protect our sovereignty in the Arctic. Landing a company in something like the BvS 10 does not seem like much, but doing it on a regular basis throughout the archipelago is a bit like a dog going through their "territory" and pissing on the corners. It's very much a use it or lose scenario in my mind.
Or the Italian carrier Cavour.
I wonder how that would work for blue water vs. brown water situations. A modern version of a LST for artic unit movements could be great but I wonder about keel depth for use on something like the Churchill or Mackenzie rivers. Even the movement of fuel might require a shallow draft tender to a river/coast supply depot...I agree we have lot on our plate right now, but I disagree that we can only rely upon the AOP's alone to protect our sovereignty in the Arctic. Landing a company in something like the BvS 10 does not seem like much, but doing it on a regular basis throughout the archipelago is a bit like a dog going through their "territory" and pissing on the corners. It's very much a use it or lose scenario in my mind.
Getting a couple of ship similar to these built with ice strengthening, will provide a lot of capability, with very little impact on crewing or budget
get them to build two and you can sell them to the public as dual use for domestic emergency and fleet ships
Would it be easier to rework our current Protecteur class design and make the main deck a helicopter deck with an elevator to lower deck and maybe a ramp on the side just asking it?I agree we have lot on our plate right now, but I disagree that we can only rely upon the AOP's alone to protect our sovereignty in the Arctic. Landing a company in something like the BvS 10 does not seem like much, but doing it on a regular basis throughout the archipelago is a bit like a dog going through their "territory" and pissing on the corners. It's very much a use it or lose scenario in my mind.
Getting a couple of ship similar to these built with ice strengthening, will provide a lot of capability, with very little impact on crewing or budget
Apparently 18 man crew. You could layup an AOP's for the season and use that crew.
The Moskva Class has already been built, used and discarded due to its unstable seakeeping characteristics. You should see the even bigger piece of crap they replaced it with.
Something like the Cavour or the Trieste would be perfect.
As yourself which G7 countries don’t have any form of a carrier and why?
If the Italians have shipyard space why would we build it here in Canada. I would get them to build one to Canadian ship standards.
Hahahaha. It’s not about ships it’s about jobs.
Realistically the current three large shipyards are going to be busy with building ships for the next 20 years so getting it built overseas seems to be the only option.
Following up on previous thinking:
commercialboats.com.au
www.seaboats.net
Seen and this is good thinking. How to fit helo decks, fuel stores and accommodation for transit though. And support ships to sustain the effort. The 2 JSS will be run off their feet as it is. Crew arrangements- like an RFA? Release the ship to the civi side when not being used by CAF.
It's the last leg ashore is the issue. It could be done but slowly and the crew could/will refuse to go anywhere there is any risk.
