Canadian River Class Destroyer Megathread

[KevinB]

Australia has sort of integrated Saab's 9LV system with Aegis already. I don't think the Hobarts have Aegis light, its a full meal deal there. I'm not entirely sure if the F-110's have an Aegis Light version, if so this is the first I've heard about it.

Some of LocMarts comments seem to suggest that non 5Y don’t get a full Aegis build. So the Aussies should while Spain then wouldn’t.

But I’m not in any position to know what that means, as Japan seems to have have the full system.

 

[FSTO]

Hartlen Point? I thought that was Assiniboine, but I haven't been paying much attention to that, so it's possible it's now Athabaskan?

Corrected above.

 

[Prairie canuck]

4 ships and then another 4 ships and then another 4 ships....

And concurrently 8 small ships and 8 small ships and 8 small ships....

And concurrently 2 subs and 2 subs and 2 subs ...

5 to 7 year intervals.

If there's a need to fill some gaps then limited builds such as a hydrographic survey ship for the arctic and 2 or 3 smaller LHD ice capable ships able to move vehicle and rotary assets are surely lacking.

 

[Cloud Cover]

4 ships and then another 4 ships and then another 4 ships....

And concurrently 8 small ships and 8 small ships and 8 small ships....

And concurrently 2 subs and 2 subs and 2 subs ...

5 to 7 year intervals.

The country that does that like clock work since the 1990's is called Japan. To my knowledge nobody else on the Western side of the equation does that anymore (maybe Italy), but 100 percent this is the way to go. But the Canadian government and the RCN itself would find a way to make that the most stratospherically expensive, soul defeating exercise in world shipbuilding history.

 

[Underway]

But the Canadian government and the RCN itself would find a way to make that the most stratospherically expensive, soul defeating exercise in world shipbuilding history.

Why the negativity. The current NSS is hitting its stride. Things are working as intended, particularly with Seaspan. Honestly you only have to look south of the border to see what a really F-up shipbuilding strategy looks like.

 

[dapaterson]

Why the negativity. The current NSS is hitting its stride. Things are working as intended, particularly with Seaspan. Honestly you only have to look south of the border to see what a really F-up shipbuilding strategy looks like.

Your optimism about NSS is entertaining, if misguided.

 

[Underway]

Your optimism about NSS is entertaining, if misguided.

Your negativity about everything RCN is entertaining, if misguided.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Your optimism about NSS is entertaining, if misguided.

The fact that we managed to get 2 shipyards selected and the process going in Canada, continues to astound me. I am sure if you got to see the details of other ship building programs around the world, you be shaking your head as well. Shipbuilding is always going to be a political football, the fact that we managed to score goal is impressive by itself.

 

[dapaterson]

Your negativity about everything RCN is entertaining, if misguided.

The transfer of all cost risk from the shipyards to the GoC is an abject failure of contracting and contract management.

 

[suffolkowner]

were a little late and behind the 8 ball. Should be putting the first River in the water this year instead of just starting construction. Not much we can do about it now.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The transfer of all cost risk from the shipyards to the GoC is an abject failure of contracting and contract management.

Well at least the government is consistent. They eff up all sorts of major projects, no need for this one to be different.

 

[Fabius]

Why the negativity. The current NSS is hitting its stride. Things are working as intended, particularly with Seaspan.

Is Seaspan still planning on laying off large elements of its naval design staff due to lack of follow on projects?

That capability was hard earned and built over the last decade. If NSS is going to be an actual strategic change to the Canadian boom and bust cycle, the Country needs to pay attention to maintaining the capability. That’s going to cost money and it needs strategic planning and commitment.

 

[Nvlgzr]

Is Seaspan still planning on laying off large elements of its naval design staff due to lack of follow on projects?

That capability was hard earned and built over the last decade. If NSS is going to be an actual strategic change to the Canadian boom and bust cycle, the Country needs to pay attention to maintaining the capability. That’s going to cost money and it needs strategic planning and commitment.

Seaspan’s next project is to build a minimum of 6 Mullt-Purpose Vessels. They will be 100meters , 9000 tons, PC4 Icebreakers. According to the Coast Guard website, the contract was announced March 2024. National Shipbuilding Strategy and the Canadian Coast Guard There could be up to 16 built. See the small vessels section; there may be a couple of vessels in their sights. I wouldn’t be surprised that after all of that, a requirement appears for AOR’s. Excuse me , Joint Support Ships. Somewhere on this forum , there was mention of Seaspan as a possibility for building the corvettes.

 

[Fabius]

As per the Seaspan CEO the design work for everything the GoC has ordered is largely done and winding down. It’s got nothing to do with how many ships are left to be built to the existing designs.

Due to cost of maintaining the large and highly capable design staff that they have built from scratch for Canada, it will begin to be disbanded in the next year unless there is new design work.
The fact that the welders etc. will still be busy is not the issue or a useful metric in relation to the design staff.

If Canada wants to maintain a sovereign shipbuilding capability it needs both the design staff and the workers to then build those designs. It’s the first half that have been really busy getting us to this point, but now the design work for Seaspan ship classes are winding down.

What’s next for the design staff? If the answer is nothing then I would consider NSS at risk of strategic collapse. Those engineers and naval architects will begin leaving to other countries or be laid off and we will need to start from scratch again in 10,15,20 years.

There needs to be concrete funded design and development work for the sovereign design capabilities in the next year likely to prevent that.
At this point Canada can’t afford to spend 4-6 years discussing a corvette or a JSS etc. the design teams need work now.

 

[YZT580]

As per the Seaspan CEO the design work for everything the GoC has ordered is largely done and winding down. It’s got nothing to do with how many ships are left to be built to the existing designs.

Due to cost of maintaining the large and highly capable design staff that they have built from scratch for Canada, it will begin to be disbanded in the next year unless there is new design work.
The fact that the welders etc. will still be busy is not the issue or a useful metric in relation to the design staff.

If Canada wants to maintain a sovereign shipbuilding capability it needs both the design staff and the workers to then build those designs. It’s the first half that have been really busy getting us to this point, but now the design work for Seaspan ship classes are winding down.

What’s next for the design staff? If the answer is nothing then I would consider NSS at risk of strategic collapse. Those engineers and naval architects will begin leaving to other countries or be laid off and we will need to start from scratch again in 10,15,20 years.

There needs to be concrete funded design and development work for the sovereign design capabilities in the next year likely to prevent that.
At this point Canada can’t afford to spend 4-6 years discussing a corvette or a JSS etc. the design teams need work now.

has Irving developed the same type of design expertise? Because if they haven't, even though Seaspan is the non-combatant specialist it doesn't mean the design team can't broaden their horizons and work on the future combatant designs or does it?

 

[Cloud Cover]

The transfer of all cost risk from the shipyards to the GoC is an abject failure of contracting and contract management.

Good lawyering though.

 

[Nvlgzr]

As per the Seaspan CEO the design work for everything the GoC has ordered is largely done and winding down. It’s got nothing to do with how many ships are left to be built to the existing designs.

Due to cost of maintaining the large and highly capable design staff that they have built from scratch for Canada, it will begin to be disbanded in the next year unless there is new design work.
The fact that the welders etc. will still be busy is not the issue or a useful metric in relation to the design staff.

If Canada wants to maintain a sovereign shipbuilding capability it needs both the design staff and the workers to then build those designs. It’s the first half that have been really busy getting us to this point, but now the design work for Seaspan ship classes are winding down.

What’s next for the design staff? If the answer is nothing then I would consider NSS at risk of strategic collapse. Those engineers and naval architects will begin leaving to other countries or be laid off and we will need to start from scratch again in 10,15,20 years.

There needs to be concrete funded design and development work for the sovereign design capabilities in the next year likely to prevent that.
At this point Canada can’t afford to spend 4-6 years discussing a corvette or a JSS etc. the design teams need work now.

Maybe Davie can make use of these people for their “Program Icebreakers “

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Is Seaspan still planning on laying off large elements of its naval design staff due to lack of follow on projects?

That capability was hard earned and built over the last decade. If NSS is going to be an actual strategic change to the Canadian boom and bust cycle, the Country needs to pay attention to maintaining the capability. That’s going to cost money and it needs strategic planning and commitment.

You keep a core group that covers all the areas of expertise, who are kept busy with training and designing new versions based on what we have, getting and what would be nice. The USN/RN kept large teams of BB designers working drawing up designs. in-between actual builds.

 

[Underway]

As per the Seaspan CEO the design work for everything the GoC has ordered is largely done and winding down. It’s got nothing to do with how many ships are left to be built to the existing designs.

Due to cost of maintaining the large and highly capable design staff that they have built from scratch for Canada, it will begin to be disbanded in the next year unless there is new design work.
The fact that the welders etc. will still be busy is not the issue or a useful metric in relation to the design staff.

If Canada wants to maintain a sovereign shipbuilding capability it needs both the design staff and the workers to then build those designs. It’s the first half that have been really busy getting us to this point, but now the design work for Seaspan ship classes are winding down.

What’s next for the design staff? If the answer is nothing then I would consider NSS at risk of strategic collapse. Those engineers and naval architects will begin leaving to other countries or be laid off and we will need to start from scratch again in 10,15,20 years.

There needs to be concrete funded design and development work for the sovereign design capabilities in the next year likely to prevent that.
At this point Canada can’t afford to spend 4-6 years discussing a corvette or a JSS etc. the design teams need work now.

We are a 12 to 15 months away from losing design staff. There is still plenty of work finalizing designs right now. As well there are rumblings of more JSS's (either USN buy or RCN buy). The Continental Defence Corvette (CDC) is an option Seaspan is angling for as well.

The transfer of all cost risk from the shipyards to the GoC is an abject failure of contracting and contract management.

Its a feature not a bug. When developing an industry basically from scratch governments do this. They assume all the risk. The GoC is not in the business of driving companies that provide strategic capability into the ground.

Though there is an argument that if we are going to be going this way just nationalize the shipyards instead.

And of course once established there should be more risk/incentives placed on the shipyards for follow on projects/blocks of the same vessel.

Established companies (see Phoenix Pay shenanigans... ) should assume more risk.

 

[suffolkowner]

on the design front it seems that should be taken in house. Maybe we cant support 3 design teams working for 3 shipyards but 1 working for all 3?