Continental Defence Corvette

[Halifax Tar]

At risk of going political, anything of this current military buildout that can't be executed by 2035 (or 2040 at latest) might as well be written in sand.

Our friend Vlady is 73.

Mulroney assumed office in 84. The Beattie White Paper came out in 87. By 93 the wall has fallen and Chretien is embarking on the decade of darkness/ implementing the peace dividend to balance the books. The grand vision for the Navy of 2050 better result in a viable force even if it isn't fully implemented

I don't believe much of this new "investment" in defence spending will survive the next American electoral cycle, if the Republicans are soundly trounced; which I expect.

Now only will elbows go down arms will go out to hug the Democrats.

 

[Czech_pivo]

At risk of going political, anything of this current military buildout that can't be executed by 2035 (or 2040 at latest) might as well be written in sand.

Our friend Vlady is 73.

Mulroney assumed office in 84. The Beattie White Paper came out in 87. By 93 the wall has fallen and Chretien is embarking on the decade of darkness/ implementing the peace dividend to balance the books. The grand vision for the Navy of 2050 better result in a viable force even if it isn't fully implemented

Fair points but Vlad's buddy - Dmitry Medvedev is only 60yrs old. No guarantee at all that he'll climb to the top of the heap that will be the competition to replace Vlad. But that guy definitely drinks from the same hose as Vlad does.

 

[Czech_pivo]

I don't believe much of this new "investment" in defence spending will survive the next American electoral cycle, if the Republicans are soundly trounced, which I expect.

Now only will elbows go down arms will go out to hug the Democrats.

The contract for the subs will be signed off and the initial timelines agreed upon. Yes, it could be the case that we don't get 12 but may 6 new subs, but the reality will be that subs will be delivered within the next 10yrs. The Rivers will fully in flight. It remains to be seen if the CDC will survive but its still a coin toss at this point.

 

[Halifax Tar]

The contract for the subs will be signed off and the initial timelines agreed upon. Yes, it could be the case that we don't get 12 but may 6 new subs, but the reality will be that subs will be delivered within the next 10yrs. The Rivers will fully in flight. It remains to be seen if the CDC will survive but its still a coin toss at this point.

I hope I'm wrong. I really do.

 

[Underway]

At risk of going political, any aspect of this current military buildout that can't be executed by 2035 (or 2040 at latest) might as well be written in sand.

The geostrategic situation may be different for sure. But I doubt you'll reverse the major trendline, where trade is used as a weapon (Russian gas to Europe, Chinese raer earths, US tariffs etc...), great power competition, ice sheet melting and so on.

With a breakdown in the international order the threat today may be Russia, the threat in the future might be anyone else, including non-state players (illegal activity like massive fishing fleets stealing protein).

 

[Halifax Tar]

With a breakdown in the international order the threat today may be Russia, the threat in the future might be anyone else, including non-state players (illegal activity like massive fishing fleets stealing protein).

Brian Tobin is in a glass case some where labeled: Break in Case of Fishing War

In all seriousness you're 100% correct. Canadians need to realize our resource riches make us targets.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Brian Tobin is in a glass case some where labeled: Break in Case of Fishing War

In all seriousness you're 100% correct. Canadians need to realize our resource riches make us targets.

Our fresh water puts a GIANT target on our forehead - never doubt this.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Our fresh water puts a GIANT target on our forehead - never doubt this.

As stated:

In all seriousness you're 100% correct. Canadians need to realize our resource riches make us targets.

 

[Czech_pivo]

As stated:

I saw that and agree. I was attempting to call out that fresh water is going to be front and centre, not something like our gravel or sand or lumber.

Examples:

Iran’s Capital Must Relocate Due to Dire Water Situation, President Insists​

Iran's capital must relocate due to dire water situation, president insists

Tehran's troubles are a red flag for thirsty cities around the globe.

www.motherjones.com

Johannesburg’s dry taps see G20 glamour overshadowed by daily struggles for clean water​

No expense spared for G20 elites, yet every excuse found not to fix Joburg’s water crisis | Daily Maverick

The G20 theme may be ‘Solidarity, Equality, Sustainability’, but for Johannesburg residents those words are empty if they do not start with water — Water Solidarity, Water Equality, Water Sustainability.

www.dailymaverick.co.za

 

[IKnowNothing]

The geostrategic situation may be different for sure. But I doubt you'll reverse the major trendline, where trade is used as a weapon (Russian gas to Europe, Chinese raer earths, US tariffs etc...), great power competition, ice sheet melting and so on.

With a breakdown in the international order the threat today may be Russia, the threat in the future might be anyone else, including non-state players (illegal activity like massive fishing fleets stealing protein).

Fair counter- I just can't see the current and project spend being maintained if we're not under persistent and serious threat.

But my overall point was that the ability to crew and sustain the BHAG Navy of 2050 (15+12+12 combatants) should not be allowed to impede improving the absolutely crucial transition Navy of 2035-2040.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Fair counter- I just can't see the current and project spend being maintained if we're not under persistent and serious threat.

But my overall point was that the ability to crew and sustain the BHAG Navy of 2050 (15+12+12 combatants) should not be allowed to impede improving the absolutely crucial transition Navy of 2035-2040.

The threat has been there since at least 2014. Its only since this iteration of DJT as Prez that we have suddenly changed course.

This has nothing to do with a realization of the actual threat environment, and it has everything to do with appeasing the great giant next door.

 

[Czech_pivo]

The threat has been there since at least 2014. Its only since this iteration of DJT as Prez that we have suddenly changed course.

This has nothing to do with a realization of the actual threat environment, and it has everything to do with appeasing the great giant next door.

I have no issues with Trump or any other American President calling us out loudly on our lacking of funding and direction on the CAF. I hope that it continues to be just as loud after Trump is gone, regardless of which party is in power in the US. We need another 3 administrations after this one to keep the pressure on us.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I have no issues with Trump or any other American President calling us out loudly on our lacking of funding and direction on the CAF. I hope that it continues to be just as loud after Trump is gone, regardless of which party is in power in the US. We need another 3 administrations after this one to keep the pressure on us.

We've been getting called out for at least the last decade and a half.

Again, its only since DJT came back; and now our complacency and laziness isn't getting rewarded that we've suddenly changed tack. I don't believe our sudden commitment to defence is genuine or sincere. I think its just buying time in the hopes that the USA rights itself. I think the LPC is hoping the US changes Gov before they are actually expected to deliver on their announcements.

If we keep this up with a Biden or an Obama as Prez I will be tickled pink.

 

[IKnowNothing]

The threat has been there since at least 2014. Its only since this iteration of DJT as Prez that we have suddenly changed course.

This has nothing to do with a realization of the actual threat environment, and it has everything to do with appeasing the great giant next door.

I'd argue that this iteration of DJT as Prez fundamentally changed the threat environment, but this isn't the thread to argue the political motivations, or their staying power- the focus is primarily the 2nd line.

"But my overall point was that the ability to crew and sustain the BHAG Navy of 2050 (15+12+12 combatants) should not be allowed to impede improving the absolutely crucial transition Navy of 2035-2040."

The Navy of 2035 is set to have either 1 or 4 subs (depending on who wins the bid) plus 1-3 RCD's (depending on how closely we stick to schedule), and what's left of the CPF's (taped together).

Get the CDC's coming. Worry out how to/ if we can handle a fleet larger than 6 RCD + 12 CDC + 8 CPS later. (Well start figuring it out now, but in the background not as a vocal worry point against near/mid term expansion)

 

[KevinB]

I'd argue that this iteration of DJT as Prez fundamentally changed the threat environment,

No but it is being used to great affect.

but this isn't the thread to argue the political motivations, or their staying power- the focus is primarily the 2nd line.

"But my overall point was that the ability to crew and sustain the BHAG Navy of 2050 (15+12+12 combatants) should not be allowed to impede improving the absolutely crucial transition Navy of 2035-2040."

The Navy of 2035 is set to have either 1 or 4 subs (depending on who wins the bid) plus 1-3 RCD's (depending on how closely we stick to schedule), and what's left of the CPF's (taped together).

RCN 2035 is looking shaky depending upon what can get done - you may be zero subs, 1 River, 2 JSS and the AOPs.

Get the CDC's coming. Worry out how to/ if we can handle a fleet larger than 6 RCD + 12 CDC + 8 CPS later. (Well start figuring it out now, but in the background not as a vocal worry point against near/mid term expansion)

You need at least 12 Rivers, and more JSS.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I'd argue that this iteration of DJT as Prez fundamentally changed the threat environment, but this isn't the thread to argue the political motivations, or their staying power- the focus is primarily the 2nd line.

"But my overall point was that the ability to crew and sustain the BHAG Navy of 2050 (15+12+12 combatants) should not be allowed to impede improving the absolutely crucial transition Navy of 2035-2040."

The Navy of 2035 is set to have either 1 or 4 subs (depending on who wins the bid) plus 1-3 RCD's (depending on how closely we stick to schedule), and what's left of the CPF's (taped together).

Get the CDC's coming. Worry out how to/ if we can handle a fleet larger than 6 RCD + 12 CDC + 8 CPS later. (Well start figuring it out now, but in the background not as a vocal worry point against near/mid term expansion)

I hope the problem you are concerned about is the one we are working on come 2035; because if its is it means I'm wrong and Canada actually gives a shit.

 

[Stoker]

So with the CPS, and the RCN projects on the go, do we have the personnel to actually run a CDC project? Is the CDC even funded? The CRCN is posted this summer, no official word of where he's going unless its the VCDS. Dependent on who comes in, will these lofty ideas still move forward?