Canada moves to 2% GDP end of FY25/26 - PMMC

[Navy_Pete]

When I hear they are surprised piping and hulls are paper thin, surprised that corrosion, rust and or wear was found unexpectedly. I doubt much NDT is being done except alongside. Only in easily accessible areas. During the maintenance period and or the reports are being ignored completely until almost failure.
Yes I have friends who work in the yards who have not seen some of the NDT I mentioned performed. But maybe they were not aware of all the happenings. Hopefully they will figure things out for the better.
Now to start up a company to inspect the hulls, piping and structure of the ship while at sea. For reports as they come alongside. Mmmmmm Need a Quebec and or Nova Scotia address.

There is the occasional article in the MEJ, but there is a lot more being tried and used that doesn't make articles. It's done during the operational cycle as it's too late to do it in the DWP to plan the work, so once in a while they go onto the synchrolift for pre-docking surveys.

https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/dnd-mdn/documents/mej/44-088-maritimeJournal-109.pdf#page=9

Everyone on the ships, and people who regularly do work on the ships, but the photo of the hammer through the hull made it pretty hard for the BGHs to ignore that they are in really bad shape. That defect was actually found from NDT scanning with a little robot, then was verified by a DND SME.

 

[Czech_pivo]

There is the occasional article in the MEJ, but there is a lot more being tried and used that doesn't make articles. It's done during the operational cycle as it's too late to do it in the DWP to plan the work, so once in a while they go onto the synchrolift for pre-docking surveys.

https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/dnd-mdn/documents/mej/44-088-maritimeJournal-109.pdf#page=9

Everyone on the ships, and people who regularly do work on the ships, but the photo of the hammer through the hull made it pretty hard for the BGHs to ignore that they are in really bad shape. That defect was actually found from NDT scanning with a little robot, then was verified by a DND SME.

What is sad is that this sort of information is not picked up by the media and the opposition parties to hammering the government on ensuring that repairs are properly funded and accommodated.

 

[Kirkhill]

That works in some cases, but not when you need a certain level of skills to be going along with a platform.

The reduced crewing model on warships and subs actually demands either more individual skills, or acceptance that you're more likely to lose a multi billion dollar strategic asset by expediting your training.

We've already cut heavily into the baseline level of combat recoverability on the CPFs by not maintaining it a lot, as well as trimming training, getting rid of consolidation time, and generally having a lot less real experience in the crew (at the institutional level, not with the crew), we just pretend that stuff away (even when the ships are sailing below SOLAS standards, which you should legally meet to sail a cargo ship or fishing trawler, and has zero combat recoverability).

I'm sure if I poked into the army and air force would figure out the same thing, but at the end of the day sticking in the fight can matter a lot more than getting to the fight if you are just a glass cannon or target practice.

I am a big fan of the reduced crewing model. Not because I have anything against sailors but because it seems to me that all ships, merchant and naval, around the world are having difficulty recruiting sailors.

Having said that it makes no sense to me to try and reduce the crew in an old ship. The designers of those ships made a bunch of assumptions on materials, maintenance, access and a bunch of other stuff. One of those sets of assumptions would have related to crew size and skills.

Another would have been life expectancy.

And midlife refits are as likely to create problems as solve them. Lipstick and sow's ears and some such.

....

Ships with reduced crews need to be designed from the keel up with that in mind (first assumption - does it need a keel).

And if, regardless of efforts, smaller crews mean shorter ship lifes then we need to plan to replace the ship more often. And perhaps that means cheaper ships.

Perhaps that means treating the fighting systems as cargo that can be moved from ship to ship or that can be replaced with more modern or more relevant systems.

And that, to me, sounds like the direction of travel for modern ships.

Lego concepts, like Stanflex, Mission Bays and Meko, all seem to be inherent in the current builds.

....

The best thing Canada could do is get patrol ships in the water, regardless of fighting ability and speed up delivery of the Rivers so that the CPFs can be retired.

And modularize the old Hfx systems so that they can be cross decked to the patrol ships.

 

[YZT580]

What is sad is that this sort of information is not picked up by the media and the opposition parties to hammering the government on ensuring that repairs are properly funded and accommodated.

that would be treading on eggs as the opposition, and I write as a confirmed conservative, were just as complicit in limiting the budget for maintenance and avoiding necessary acquisitions.

 

[Czech_pivo]

that would be treading on eggs as the opposition, and I write as a confirmed conservative, were just as complicit in limiting the budget for maintenance and avoiding necessary acquisitions.

Both sets of ba$tards need to be held accountable.
The 30yrs of rot are squarely on both of them.

 

[PrairieFella]

Im betting GM will win LUV phase 1 with Milcot 2.0, Roshel will likely get phase 2 with the senator. Both would then be built in canada, be manufactured quickly, and if we buy at significant scale we can replace our crippled fleets fast

Exactly.