New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy

[FSTO]

I'm puzzled as to why Trudeau referred to the ice breaker as a Defence ship, isn't the Diefenbaker going to be a CGS, not a HMCS?

Because he and his handlers have no clue and are too lazy or just don't care to get their facts right.

 

[FSTO]

CTV News suggests, in a report that, at least, the surface combatant portion and, maybe, the entire shipbuilding strategy is very high risk in economic, industrial and capability terms.

And once again someone gave Mercedes a PPT presentation that outlines all the risks to the project and they cherry picked the worst case scenario.

Not too say there is no risk, but I doubt it is the all consuming dumpster fire that the media tries to portray it is.

 

[YZT580]

The report missed one key item:  The risk increases exponentially if Trudeau gets elected simply because he will delay it while reviewing it and reworking it so as to enable his people to benefit financially.  All projects have risk of failure that is why you have teams to assess the risks and plan around them. 

 

[The Bread Guy]

CTV News suggests, in a report that, at least, the surface combatant portion and, maybe, the entire shipbuilding strategy is very high risk in economic, industrial and capability terms.

The Info-machine responds (statement also attached in case link doesn't work)....

The Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces today released the following statement on recent media coverage on the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) program, which will renew the Royal Canadian Navy surface combat fleet by replacing the capabilities provided by the destroyers (Iroquois-class) and the multi-role patrol frigates (Halifax-class):

This project is currently in the definition phase, which means we are at the stage of firming up more of the detail, examining issues such as cost, schedule and requirements, and identifying any risks early so that they can be mitigated. The documents being referred to in some media reports are a management tool to help do exactly that.

As the project progresses through the definition phase, National Defence and the Royal Canadian Navy will continue to evaluate risks, adapt accordingly, and find efficiencies when and where possible. This is an ongoing process that will continue to evolve throughout the life of the project.

Through the design-then-build approach, the ship designs will be reviewed, refined and matured to get all of the production details right, and to factor in potential risks and finalize costs and schedule.

At this stage of a project, it is not unusual for some risks to be assessed as high. This may change over time as the project plan develops.

A key element of all warship design and construction programs is to develop requirements that will result in affordable solutions. In the case of the CSC, this process commenced with the early engagements with industry, the commencement of the initial requirements reconciliation with Irving Shipbuilding and will continue as the Government, with the expertise of the Warship Designer, the Combat Systems Integrator and Irving Shipbuilding, undertakes the work to finalize the requirements reconciliation, which will drive the design and construction of the CSC, with the project budget.

Capacity challenges are common as projects ramp up and various mitigation factors are at play within the project, including drawing expertise from across the Government of Canada, working with allies, and engagements with industry.

The CSC project is one that will span decades. There is constant attention to schedule with continual study to identify ways to reduce the time taken for various activities without jeopardizing performance. Such a focus is being applied to CSC to ensure the project progresses in a timely manner.”

 

[Lumber]

Why can't we just do à la Blohm + Voss and plan to build 30 CSCs and sell half of them to other countries?

 

[Edward Campbell]

We can't we just do à la Blohm + Voss and plan to build 30 CSCs and sell half of them to other countries?

We have one too many problems with off-shore sales: foreigners.

    We use a lot of foreign technology in out ships and we need (usually explicit) permissions from each foreign technology supplier to sell it to a third party; and

    The same foreign countries who supply us with bit and pieces are trying to sell their own ships to the same third party countries.

I remember when the Halifax class was very new, circa 1990, Canada sent one ship to the Gulf on a "goodwill" (sales) mission ... it was actually beaten to almost every port by a mix of British and US ships and followed, almost immediately, by ships from several other countries.

 

[quadrapiper]

We use a lot of foreign technology in out ships and we need (usually explicit) permissions from each foreign technology supplier to sell it to a third party...

I'm assuming that following the Mistral approach - proven hull of a certain pattern fitted with the buyer's choice of kit - would be too much of a nuisance to be worth it?

 

[Lumber]

    We use a lot of foreign technology in out ships and we need (usually explicit) permissions from each foreign technology supplier to sell it to a third party; and

What about becoming a sub-contractor for Blohm + Voss? We help build some ships for countries that they have already been selected to build for, and as a result we get out ships cheaper (from both insentives and economies of scale). We could use a modification of the Meko design. Canada then wouldn't have to buy the designs, just the ships.

 

[George Wallace]

What about becoming a sub-contractor for Blohm + Voss? We help build some ships for countries that they have already been selected to build for, and as a result we get out ships cheaper (from both insentives and economies of scale). We could use a modification of the Meko design. Canada then wouldn't have to buy the designs, just the ships.

If I remember correctly, Davies was saved from financial ruin when they were bought out by foreign interests.  Now they are solvent.

 

[Edward Campbell]

What about becoming a sub-contractor for Blohm + Voss? We help build some ships for countries that they have already been selected to build for, and as a result we get out ships cheaper (from both insentives and economies of scale). We could use a modification of the Meko design. Canada then wouldn't have to buy the designs, just the ships.

You're asking the wrong guy ... I really don't know enough about the shipbuilding industry, neither here, in Canada, nor globally, to offer any sensible ideas. Some countries: Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, South Korea and Spain seem to do it very well and to compete, also very well, with the USA. The UK used to be a major shipbuilder and still is, I think, for small warships and some specialized types, but we must note that it is having the hull of its new aircraft carrier built in France.

We do have some people here to whose opinion I listen, though ... people with good knowledge and experience in naval/shipping/ship building matters. (I understand some trade/political issues, that's all ...)

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Just a small correction AJC: The Queen Elizabeth are entirely built in the UK by BAE Systems Naval Ships division, at their Glasgow and Portsmouth yards (some at Filton too? Not sure here). The French yards would have been involved had the French agreed to buy a third one as their "PA2", the back up carrier to the Charles de Gaulle. They pulled out of the plans and as a result did not get any work.

 

[Kirkhill]

I am given to believe, by articles that have appeared in the national press that the RCN is considering a procurement strategy of recycling existing weapons systems to the new CSC platforms.

I suggest that my friends the Danes, advisers to and participants in the Irving team, pioneered this approach to their advantage.

While it is true that the cost of the actual "launcher" (gun, missile/mortar/torpedo tube) constitutes a marginal savings I offer this:

"Worked for the Danes - Their Stanflex system reduces the capital cost of building ships by separating their weapons systems from the hull.  It takes away the price of the launcher, minimal, but also sensors and sensor upgrades, the logistics and maintenance package for the weapons, the supply of the ammunition, the maintenance and QC of the ammunition, the upgrade of the ammunition....

It actually is the reason that the Huitfeldts and the Absolons were built for only $300,000,000 apiece.

If you lifted the VLS from the Iroquois Class you could transfer them and their missiles at zero cost to the new boats.

The weapons can then be upgraded on their own budget and timeline. 

The 57s on the Halifax class could also be made available to the AOPS - again justifying keeping the weapons budget separate from the $26,000,000,000 budget ( and adding the advantage of upgunning the AOPS if so desired). 

Good plan all around."

I suggested this rationale to an acquaintance.

Edit:  The rationale for severing the weapons from the ships would be enhanced if the GBAD-CRAM system were found to be common to both the RCN and the Royal Regiment of Canadian Artillery.  It can be fun confusing accountants.

Fatta la legge trovato l'inganno ("No sooner is a law made than someone will find a way around it.") - My new motto.

 

[suffolkowner]

Is 11 as low as it's going to go?

http://thechronicleherald.ca/federal-election-2015/1314651-ship-numbers-may-decline-kenney

 

[Kirkhill]

I am sure that 10 to 15 years from now, if a new needs assessment is conducted and additional hulls are required the options available will be:

Add more money to the budgets
Deliver some/all of the later ships with reduced capabilities
Deliver a new class of ships entirely with a different balance of capabilities.

To build ships in 2030 based on a 25 year old needs assessment was never a realistic plan for fleet management.  It was a plan to allow industry to make decisions to build an industry.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Trouble is, is that the lead time for a new class of ship is almost out of the question that late in the game.  It would be similar to the EH101 for example.  Planned in the late 80's, killed early 90's and here in the mid 10's still on going, years over due and so much money wasted.  Hell's bells the AOR's are another prime example of things going pear shaped.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Meanwhile Petronas can order and have delivered a large LNG carrier in 18 months. If the will is there.....

 

[jollyjacktar]

The will might be there, but in the hurry to be all things to all voters, we've lost the way.

 

[Kirkhill]

UK Type 21 Amazon Class entered service in 1974 - Total of 8 built
Batch 1 = 8

UK Type 22 Broadsword entered service in 1979 - Total of 14 built
Batch 1 = 4
Batch 2 = 6
Batch 3 = 4

UK Type 23 Duke Class entered service in 1987 - Total of 16 built
UK Batch = 13
Chile Batch = 3

Last vessel built in 1999

....Peace Dividend In Effect.....

UK Type 26 Global Combat Ship 13 planned to enter service from 2020 in three separate variants with the Type 27 possibly due from 2030.

http://www.baesystems.com/en/product/global-combat-ship

Prior to the Peace Dividend Era 38 hulls were built to 6 designs in 25 years.

I know you Canucks are at least as good as us Brits were....

St-Laurent Class entered service in 1955 total of 7 built

MacKenzie Class entered service in 1962 total of 4 built

Annapolis Class entered service in 1964 total of 2 built

Iroquois Class entered service in 1972 total of 4 built

Halifax Class entered service in 1992 total of 12 built
2 Batches planned

....Peace Dividend In Effect.....

 

[Bearpaw]

I have a question for those of you involved in this program:

"What is a reasonable estimated cost of the Bofors 57mm Mk 3 gun and fittings in a STANFLEX module?"

Also, is it possible and/or advisable to upgrade the MCDV to this gun?

Thanks in advance,

Bearpaw

 

[Stoker]

I have a question for those of you involved in this program:

"What is a reasonable estimated cost of the Bofors 57mm Mk 3 gun and fittings in a STANFLEX module?"

Also, is it possible and/or advisable to upgrade the MCDV to this gun?

Thanks in advance,

Bearpaw

The gun is too large and the magazine too small. The 40MM will most likely be replaced with a remote operated .50 cal already in inventory.