More in-depth view of proposed Conservative Defence Policy

[Matt_Fisher]

In addition to the link that was posted to the Conservative overall policy .pdf this one deals specifically with defence:
http://conservative.ca/documents/pp_d_en.pdf

One interesting point they raise is the purchase of a "modest" number of MBTs from surplus allied NATO stocks, ie. Australian buy of M1s.

On the subject of the Joint Support Ship, I think that this is a white elephant that needs to be rethought by DND/NDHQ and parliament (both government and opposition).

For $2.1 billion dollars Canada will get 3 ships.  When you consider the average deployment/maintenance cycle of naval vessels you will end up with a situation like this: 
1 JSS vessel will almost always be in drydock or maintenance of some sort and unable to deploy in a timely fashion to support the sealift needs of the Army.
1 vessel will almost always be deployed somewhere with a naval group and is charged with supporting them and is unable to committ to Army sealift
1 vessel will be able for Army sealift.  However, what will this one vessel be capable of carrying? 

I think that a better option would be to purchase dedicated fleet support ships and separate Roll-On/Roll-Off vessels for Army sealift.
CASR has an interesting proposal for the support ships based on availability of 2 surplus US vessels:
http://www.sfu.ca/casr/mp-alsckaiser.htm
http://www.sfu.ca/casr/mp-alsc.htm

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Hi Matt the problem with the Kaisers are they are dedicated oilers and while we could refuel we would be out of luck for food and munitions. Well they could be modifed we would run into the age issue in a few years and then they would need to be replaced.
I agree that we would be better off buying sealift and AORs but fiscal reality prevails as does crewing for the two different types. JSS is a compromise for both what the navy needs and the army wants. I am sure there will be problems but thats life.

 

[Matt_Fisher]

I do take note of your points, but think that they could be resolved at much less the cost than the proposed JSS program at $2.1 Billion.

1.  Dedicated Oiler: 

The Kaiser is not actually a dedicted oiler.  While most of its capacity is POL, it does have dry cargo capacity.

" These ships have a capacity for small quantities of fresh and frozen provisions, stores, and other materials which will permit full replenishment of some of their customers. With a dry cargo carrying capacity of 7,400 square feet and refrigerated deck vans that can hold up to 128 pallets of chilled food, they can deliver fleet cargo, mail, and provisions via CONREP (connected replenishment) from two dry cargo rigs or via VERTREP (vertical replenishment) on the helo deck. "
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/tao-187.htm

During the initial refit, the vessel could be reconfigured to best suit Canadian needs.

2.  Crewing:  Ideally an increase in the size of the Canadian Navy to crew all the vessels in service, or do as the US has done with its fleet of Kaisers and crew them with merchantmen as needed.

"The crews of these ships consist primarily of Civilian Mariners, who work under industry-standard rules regarding hours of work and compensation. The Mariners draw "base pay " for a forty hour workweek (with a few exceptions), but outside normal working hours are entitled to overtime pay. In a nutshell, any evolution during normal working days, and between 0800 and 1700, incurs no overtime. Weekends and holidays incur overtime costs, as do evolutions between 1700 and 0800. The cost involved is in the neighborhood of $20/hour [USD] per Mariner involved in the evolution."
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/tao-187.htm

3.  Age:  These vessels were launched in the late 80's and would require a serious refit in order to be serviceable for Canadian use.  However, with that said, they've still got several decades of use ahead of them as they have never been used.  These ships would be in service far before the JSS would, considering that JSS isn't planned to come into service until 2012.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Hey Matt... might be something we could look into more....I was basing a lot of my opinion on what a crewmen from the Big Horn told me about them.

 

[Danjanou]

So let's see if this ole broke down grunt can understand this.

Looking at Matt's links we could have 2 fairly good, never used, supply ships that would last 20-30 yrs and could be ready to roll in a few months or at best a year after refiits

and 3 high speed troop transports of a proven design, again almost new and never used, each fromk the looks of things capable of dropping a battlegroup with all it's toys on just about any ocast in  the world and ready at the same time as the resupply ships.

Want to bet we could get all five up and running and within a year of someone saying do it ( aside form a possible crewing issue, but that's another matter). Cost for all this, probably better than what has been budgeted for the  3 "new" ships which may or may not show up in 2010.

Sounds like a no brainer to me.

What's that mean, the Gov't and the mouth breathers at Sodom on the Rideau will never go for it.

 

[devil39]

What's that mean, the Gov't and the mouth breathers at Sodom on the Rideau will never go for it.

I've never worked at the so called "Sodom on Rideau".   However, none of the people I know who have fit into the "mouth breather" category.   Most of those I know who work (or have worked) there are intelligent, dedicated professionals, who given the choice would rather be at the pointy end in a line unit.

For some reason I usually expect moderators to be a little more "moderate", mature and professional.  

Perhaps I am missing the smiley here.

 

[ags281]

It's been a while since I first read it, but being from BC and all I still get a kick out of the idea with the fast cats.  

 

[Spr.Earl]

In addition to the link that was posted to the Conservative overall policy .pdf this one deals specifically with defence:
http://conservative.ca/documents/pp_d_en.pdf

One interesting point they raise is the purchase of a "modest" number of MBTs from surplus allied NATO stocks, ie. Australian buy of M1s.

On the subject of the Joint Support Ship, I think that this is a white elephant that needs to be rethought by DND/NDHQ and parliament (both government and opposition).

For $2.1 billion dollars Canada will get 3 ships.   When you consider the average deployment/maintenance cycle of naval vessels you will end up with a situation like this:  
1 JSS vessel will almost always be in drydock or maintenance of some sort and unable to deploy in a timely fashion to support the sealift needs of the Army.
1 vessel will almost always be deployed somewhere with a naval group and is charged with supporting them and is unable to committ to Army sealift
1 vessel will be able for Army sealift.   However, what will this one vessel be capable of carrying?  

I think that a better option would be to purchase dedicated fleet support ships and separate Roll-On/Roll-Off vessels for Army sealift.
CASR has an interesting proposal for the support ships based on availability of 2 surplus US vessels:
http://www.sfu.ca/casr/mp-alsckaiser.htm
http://www.sfu.ca/casr/mp-alsc.htm

#-1How do you figure 1 ship will always be in Dry Dock?
In the Civie world depending on the type of Ship,yes that does happen because they are at Sea all the time where as with the Navy it's not so.

#-2 Yes 1 would be deployed but in a Emergency could be called back to home port for deployment.

#-3 One Ship would be enough to deploy a small Battle Group or larger if designed right and if not 1 of the other ships would be  also assigned to the deployment.

Remember we are a small Military emphemphasis on the SMALL,also many must remember that we have champagne taste's but we are on a beer budget.

I think it's a smart move but like I said if designed properly to meet our needs.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Matt,

I agree with you wholeheartedly that dedicated solutions (AOR's and Ro-Ro's or LPD's)
are superiour to the "Jack-of-All Trades but Master of None" JSS.

Keep it simple:  
Buy the Kaisers and refit for dry goods and cargo handling.
Preferential Lease on (2) commercial Ro-Ro's until we can build proper LPD-17 or Albion/Bulwark equivalents.

Cheers,



Matthew.    

P.S.   I would pass on the Pacificats due to limited range and apparently some severe operational issues.
Note - There are still no buyers for the damned things...

P.P.S.   I would add that I would look at withdrawing our contribution of an Auxilliary to the NATO fleet.
It is no shock to anyone that we are strapped for resources and need to ensure we are getting the
maximum return on investment for every single dollar.   Ergo if you can spend $700 million to buy a JSS
specifically acquired to support NATO doing God knows what OR you can buy (2) brand new C-17's to
take the heavy lifting off our aging Herc's and suddenly provide us with the capability to....dare I say
it....Self-Deploy to landlocked nations....to me the choice seems pretty clear.    

 

[Spr.Earl]

My last comment on what our Politicians are promising us.

I have heard it all before,since 76 when I first joined our Militia and many of our Reg. Force Member's of the my age have also heard the same promises over the years,but our Politicians keep saying our country is the best in the World to live in,well I and those still serving   have paid and are still paying  our rent by serving our Country and  still do, it's time the rest of Canada starts paying the rent to live here because if not we will end up in the same predicament as we were in 1939 when we are called up on and we had nothing to respond with then.

 

[RCD]

One way for a quick fixed. Is to see what is on the exiting  used surpluses.
In both the military & civilian markets.
It would be a lot cheaper.
An we wouldn't be so depended on our so called friends.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Cdn Blackshirt if you even knew anything about the navy you would realize that all of our ships are "jack of all trades master of none" thats the beauty of a multirole platform that it can do each function with some degree of competence.
Also part of the reason why we have an Auxillary on call in the Atlantic is because shockingly NATO does operate in the Atlantic, unless you feel we should honour one less of our NATO commitments.
BTW what is your naval background?