- Reaction score
- 17,249
- Points
- 1,160
Oh it sucks, but lets say a couple of Halifax's are deemed unsafe to go to sea, then suddenly the idea sucks less.
Canadian River Class Destroyer Megathread
- Thread starter jmt18325
- Start date
Where do you get off suggesting I am talking about doing something half-assed? If there aren't people who have been sitting at desks for years now trying to imagine the future Canadian fleet I would be very much surprised. They may need to contract the blueprints but they probably have a good idea of what they want to see. If they haven't done any homework there are any number of frigate designs out there to chose from. But we won't because we are too afraid to be wrong. Or are we afraid to have the wherewithal to actually take a stand somewhere. 29 years ago we joined the F35 development programme. The first squadron is supposed to be operational in 2029 so 32 years from day 1 but day 1 was only after considerable discussion so add another couple of years and even then it'll be another 4 years after that before we could afford to send a 6 pack on mission. And we still haven't made a decision on how many we will eventually order. In the meantime the aircraft we are flying look great at an airshow and they have been significantly improved but they are well past their best before date. By the time the first River Class is commissioned the last Iroquois will have been gone for at least 15 years. That's a long time to operate without a major naval combatant for a country fronting on 3 oceans. From the plans that I have read as each ship is commissioned a Halifax will be retired so our net gain will be zero.
- Reaction score
- 1,818
- Points
- 1,160
That's why were spending over 500M to refit each ship so that won't happen. Makes lots of sense hey? Your solution is not really a solution that they would consider. If it were we would would buy the whole lot overseas.
- Reaction score
- 17,249
- Points
- 1,160
That was what the RN was doing until they drydocked their ships and realized how bad they were.
- Reaction score
- 1,818
- Points
- 1,160
Good for them
- Reaction score
- 1,818
- Points
- 1,160
You are conflating having smart people think about the future fleet with having a mature, affordable, buildable and supportable program ready to go, and those are not the same thing. Of course the RCN and NDHQ have spent years thinking about what they want, but wanting a ship and actually fielding one inside Canadian industrial, budgetary, crewing and infrastructure constraints are two very different matters. Saying there are lots of frigate designs out there misses the point, because buying something off the shelf is easy on paper and much harder once you start integrating Canadian weapons, combat systems, standards, training, maintenance and long term support.
The F-35 mess is a fair example of political delay, but it does not prove every procurement problem comes down to fear or a refusal to decide. More often it is governments changing priorities, stretching spending, piling on requirements and then acting surprised when timelines slip. The same applies to the River class. Yes, losing the Iroquois without a direct replacement for so long was a strategic failure, but that does not mean a major combatant can simply be rushed into service without risk. The first ship was always going to take the longest as the yard, workforce, suppliers and integration process mature, just as happened with AOPV, and later hulls should move faster. And no, replacing each Halifax with a River does not mean zero gain, because a modern River-class destroyer brings far more combat power, survivability and relevance than a worn out Halifax at the end of its life. A flat hull count is not ideal, but recapitalization with a much more capable ship is not the same thing as standing still.
