New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
- Thread starter GAP
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 7,380
- Points
- 1,160
"...At its root, it is about a procurement system that left the Royal Canadian Navy unable to operate freely overseas..."
Per Dr. Byers.
Refreshed
"...At its root, it is about a procurement system that left theRoyal Canadian Navy Government of Canada unable to operate freely overseas..."
The RCN offers the Government of Canada to ability to support its interests on the high seas and overseas. One way in which it does that is providing security for transiting vessels. And ultimately that security comes courtesy of the Navy's ability kill and destroy with the sanction of the only authority licensed to permit that: an internationally recognized national government.
But the Government needs more than just killing power to influence events. In wars of the people, in this era of hybrid warfare and insurgent political parties, it is more important than ever to make friends and making friends is not just about killing people. Champlain made friends with the Huron by killing Iroquois. His diplomatic efforts with the Iroquois were less successful.
A fleet of support vessels (or even a large flotilla), a combination of Asterix AORs and Point Class type RoRo conversions - owned by, or at least operated on behalf of, the Government of Canada - would leave the Government a much greater opportunity to influence events while winning friends.
The vessels could obviously put at the service of the RCN but also at the service of the DND, at the service of Other Government Departments, of the Provinces, of other nations armed forces or their civil authorities, or even the United Nations.
If a Government of Canada really wanted to engage with the world, to earn a seat on the UN Security Council, to influence debates, then it could consider taking a good portion of the 0.7% of GDP (or GNI) nominally committed to international aid and development and committing it to building such a support fleet. Given that the current DND budget is 1.2% of GDP then an increased allocation of 0.35% of GDP would be equivalent to a 25% increase in the Defence Budget and concurrently a 140% increase in Overseas Development Aid (ODA). That ODA increase would still leave us under the target of 0.7% by 0.1%. Even doing that we would be 14% short of our ODA target and 40% short of our NATO defence target.
And buying a flotilla like that would give the RCN more reasons to have capable ships --- to protect the support flotilla.
Per Dr. Byers.
Refreshed
"...At its root, it is about a procurement system that left the
The RCN offers the Government of Canada to ability to support its interests on the high seas and overseas. One way in which it does that is providing security for transiting vessels. And ultimately that security comes courtesy of the Navy's ability kill and destroy with the sanction of the only authority licensed to permit that: an internationally recognized national government.
But the Government needs more than just killing power to influence events. In wars of the people, in this era of hybrid warfare and insurgent political parties, it is more important than ever to make friends and making friends is not just about killing people. Champlain made friends with the Huron by killing Iroquois. His diplomatic efforts with the Iroquois were less successful.
A fleet of support vessels (or even a large flotilla), a combination of Asterix AORs and Point Class type RoRo conversions - owned by, or at least operated on behalf of, the Government of Canada - would leave the Government a much greater opportunity to influence events while winning friends.
The vessels could obviously put at the service of the RCN but also at the service of the DND, at the service of Other Government Departments, of the Provinces, of other nations armed forces or their civil authorities, or even the United Nations.
If a Government of Canada really wanted to engage with the world, to earn a seat on the UN Security Council, to influence debates, then it could consider taking a good portion of the 0.7% of GDP (or GNI) nominally committed to international aid and development and committing it to building such a support fleet. Given that the current DND budget is 1.2% of GDP then an increased allocation of 0.35% of GDP would be equivalent to a 25% increase in the Defence Budget and concurrently a 140% increase in Overseas Development Aid (ODA). That ODA increase would still leave us under the target of 0.7% by 0.1%. Even doing that we would be 14% short of our ODA target and 40% short of our NATO defence target.
And buying a flotilla like that would give the RCN more reasons to have capable ships --- to protect the support flotilla.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,275
- Points
- 1,160
Look at timelines, when the new JSS is launched and deemed fit for service and the crew trained up, Asterix is going to need a major refit. If we ordered a 2nd Resolve class and continued with the JSS as well, you end up with 4 AOR's, which likley one will be in refit at any one time. Keeping the two Resolve class manned with a split crew reducing manning issues for the RCN, while doubling RAS ability. Beyond the navy needs, it means Canada can contribute an AOR to US or Allied missions around the world, which is a good way to earn those international brownie points with limited political risk. They also provide an excellent resource for training Canadian civilian deck officers, which means they can get deep sea time and experience to write higher tickets, becoming a source for Ship Pilots and other senior merchant marine jobs, all critical to Canada's trade.
I personally have no heartache with an incoming government reviewing an eleventh-hour sole-source contract by an outgoing government, and in a government-held riding threatened in an impending election, (and seemingly at odds with the oft-touted genius of the NSS). Certainly if / when the Liberals do exactly that in the next couple of months, we will be very quick to criticise, and will want those contracts to be reviewed by a Scheer government. But I am happy that review was a) short, and b) resulting in continuing the programme so that the RCN gets the ship. And I have no quibble with Byers on the need for supply ships, as I think we can all agree that we would rather have the Asterix in service than not.
But I will admit that I am very confused by all of this at the moment, and there are a few questions that have been gnawing at me for some time - particularly since the recent revelation that has "vindicated" Adm.Norman:
1. If the three former cabinet ministers have known all along that Norman had been operating under their direct orders, why did they wait until now to say so? Why didn't they tell everyone at the start of all this and not put Norman through it?
2. Does it not seem odd that a government would give orders to a subordinate officer and not to CDS?
3. Did CDS know that Norman was under such orders? If he did know, then he appears to be hanging Norman out to dry (that seems to be Byers' assertion). But if he didn't know, and Norman didn't tell him, then Norman would effectively be taking orders from outside his chain of command, and behind CDS's back.
4. We are all up in arms on this site about Irving's influence with the Liberal cabinet. But I am not sure I understand the difference between their influence to get the project reviewed, and Davies influence on the previous government to get the project started in the first place. My simple mind sees both of them as industry influence on cabinet. What am I missing?
I don't know the answers to those questions above, and the various reporting out there seems to very quickly line up with their particular partisan leanings, so of limited value. But either way, it seems to me that an egrigious failure of the chain of command has been committed - I just can't figure out by whom.
But I will admit that I am very confused by all of this at the moment, and there are a few questions that have been gnawing at me for some time - particularly since the recent revelation that has "vindicated" Adm.Norman:
1. If the three former cabinet ministers have known all along that Norman had been operating under their direct orders, why did they wait until now to say so? Why didn't they tell everyone at the start of all this and not put Norman through it?
2. Does it not seem odd that a government would give orders to a subordinate officer and not to CDS?
3. Did CDS know that Norman was under such orders? If he did know, then he appears to be hanging Norman out to dry (that seems to be Byers' assertion). But if he didn't know, and Norman didn't tell him, then Norman would effectively be taking orders from outside his chain of command, and behind CDS's back.
4. We are all up in arms on this site about Irving's influence with the Liberal cabinet. But I am not sure I understand the difference between their influence to get the project reviewed, and Davies influence on the previous government to get the project started in the first place. My simple mind sees both of them as industry influence on cabinet. What am I missing?
I don't know the answers to those questions above, and the various reporting out there seems to very quickly line up with their particular partisan leanings, so of limited value. But either way, it seems to me that an egrigious failure of the chain of command has been committed - I just can't figure out by whom.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,275
- Points
- 1,160
Well Micheal Byers is no friend of the CPC and the fact that this government is shedding Cabinet Ministers and MP's should be telling.
For #1, the former Ministers were likely unaware of the exact nature of the charge or the evidence for it. They may have not connected all of the dots. Also it would be the PCO, MND and RCMP to ensure there was enough evidence before requesting charges and laying them.
#2 & #3 The CDS has a military to run, Norman was the senior Naval Officer and this was a crisis for the navy. Harper was aware of the mess that is our procurement system and the critical need of an AOR for the RCN. Therefore likely he directed Norman to spearhead the replacement. i don't doubt that Vance and Norman discussed the direction from the PM and since it was a direct order from the PM (as I recall) Vance would have said "Carry on".
#4 Irving influence over everything in Eastern Canada is a major concern for a democracy and the CPC have no love for them. Plus Irving Shipyards had their hands full. Davie had pulled up their socks by themselves and it was an opportunity. Harper had already seen the value of single source contracts that actually deliver and had a history of unorthodox (for Canada) solution to military crisis needs (leased Leos and Mi17 helicopters). So likely the Davie solution appealed to him and also likely had some political benefit.
For #1, the former Ministers were likely unaware of the exact nature of the charge or the evidence for it. They may have not connected all of the dots. Also it would be the PCO, MND and RCMP to ensure there was enough evidence before requesting charges and laying them.
#2 & #3 The CDS has a military to run, Norman was the senior Naval Officer and this was a crisis for the navy. Harper was aware of the mess that is our procurement system and the critical need of an AOR for the RCN. Therefore likely he directed Norman to spearhead the replacement. i don't doubt that Vance and Norman discussed the direction from the PM and since it was a direct order from the PM (as I recall) Vance would have said "Carry on".
#4 Irving influence over everything in Eastern Canada is a major concern for a democracy and the CPC have no love for them. Plus Irving Shipyards had their hands full. Davie had pulled up their socks by themselves and it was an opportunity. Harper had already seen the value of single source contracts that actually deliver and had a history of unorthodox (for Canada) solution to military crisis needs (leased Leos and Mi17 helicopters). So likely the Davie solution appealed to him and also likely had some political benefit.
I am not sure I buy the argument that its all just a happy coincidence....
On #1 - I find it hard to believe that three former cabinet ministers didn't understand the nature of the charge against Norman, particularly if they knew the background. And surely when Norman's name was being dragged into the mud, they would have been happy to have offered up the information to the RCMP to put things straight. But they waited over two years, despite it being a very highly visible (and coincidentally politically advantageous) story.
On #2 & #3 - I don't recall the government in 2015 admitting that the NSS was a mess, and that it wasn't going to deliver what was promised, so suggesting that this was all just a noble endeavour that just happened to have "some political benefit" is a bit of a leap of faith is it not? Would we be so glib if (when) the Liberals do it? And what of the clear circumvention of the chain of command? While you are certain Vance and Norman discussed this direction from the PM (or at least, from cabinet ministers) and were both ok with it, Vance's firing of Norman would seem to suggest that was not the case.
On #4 - Irving/McCain in Eastern Canada, Hydro-Quebec/Powercorp/Quebecor/SNC-Lavalin in Quebec, Mosaic in Saskatchewan, Oil Companies in Alberta, etc etc. No differences there - if it is major concern for democracy, they are ALL a major concern for democracy..... Does the fact that Irving does have a lot of influence in Atlantic Canada justify circumventing the procurement process?
I apologise if it just looks like I am out to shoot down any response. It it not intended to be that way. I am very happy that we have an extra AOR. But the analysis of this whole mess cannot be as simplistic as CPC=Good, Liberal=Bad, as much as many of us on the site wish it were so. The procurement process is fairly clearly laid out. If you or I are ordered by our CO to circumvent financial and/or procurement regulations - which are in place specifically to halt corruption and fraud - I would hope we would tell the CO to pound sand. (I know I have had to do exactly that in the past). So what makes this different? Is it OK if the PM orders it? Would it be OK if Trudeau ordered it?
In a way, I think that the media frenzy over the political damage this issue is doing to the Liberals (not undeserved) is obscuring some bigger underlying issues around how things were done in the waning days of the previous government and the early days of the current one. Of course, that suits some just fine.
On #1 - I find it hard to believe that three former cabinet ministers didn't understand the nature of the charge against Norman, particularly if they knew the background. And surely when Norman's name was being dragged into the mud, they would have been happy to have offered up the information to the RCMP to put things straight. But they waited over two years, despite it being a very highly visible (and coincidentally politically advantageous) story.
On #2 & #3 - I don't recall the government in 2015 admitting that the NSS was a mess, and that it wasn't going to deliver what was promised, so suggesting that this was all just a noble endeavour that just happened to have "some political benefit" is a bit of a leap of faith is it not? Would we be so glib if (when) the Liberals do it? And what of the clear circumvention of the chain of command? While you are certain Vance and Norman discussed this direction from the PM (or at least, from cabinet ministers) and were both ok with it, Vance's firing of Norman would seem to suggest that was not the case.
On #4 - Irving/McCain in Eastern Canada, Hydro-Quebec/Powercorp/Quebecor/SNC-Lavalin in Quebec, Mosaic in Saskatchewan, Oil Companies in Alberta, etc etc. No differences there - if it is major concern for democracy, they are ALL a major concern for democracy..... Does the fact that Irving does have a lot of influence in Atlantic Canada justify circumventing the procurement process?
I apologise if it just looks like I am out to shoot down any response. It it not intended to be that way. I am very happy that we have an extra AOR. But the analysis of this whole mess cannot be as simplistic as CPC=Good, Liberal=Bad, as much as many of us on the site wish it were so. The procurement process is fairly clearly laid out. If you or I are ordered by our CO to circumvent financial and/or procurement regulations - which are in place specifically to halt corruption and fraud - I would hope we would tell the CO to pound sand. (I know I have had to do exactly that in the past). So what makes this different? Is it OK if the PM orders it? Would it be OK if Trudeau ordered it?
In a way, I think that the media frenzy over the political damage this issue is doing to the Liberals (not undeserved) is obscuring some bigger underlying issues around how things were done in the waning days of the previous government and the early days of the current one. Of course, that suits some just fine.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,275
- Points
- 1,160
I can't think of any company out west that has the influence Irving has back East, not even in the days of Mac-Blo. The two shipyards at the time had their hands full, Seaspan was busy creating a new yard and planning 4 vessels. Irving was busy upgrading it's yard, busy completing a bunch of smaller vessels and planning the AOPS. There was no way they could deliver as fast as Davie could, who already had a almost new ship in their hands to convert.
It's very possible they let Norman swing for political purposes, but it's also possible they didn't understand the information that led to the charge, for all we now they might have assumed that the PCO was aware of Normans role with the previous government and that the charge was based on something else. Had a proper review been done prior to laying the charges, likely Normans orders would have come to light and no charges would have been made. This government rushed to find a head for a stake that the PM wanted and they picked the wrong man.
It's very possible they let Norman swing for political purposes, but it's also possible they didn't understand the information that led to the charge, for all we now they might have assumed that the PCO was aware of Normans role with the previous government and that the charge was based on something else. Had a proper review been done prior to laying the charges, likely Normans orders would have come to light and no charges would have been made. This government rushed to find a head for a stake that the PM wanted and they picked the wrong man.
FSTO
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,761
- Points
- 1,210
The latest lean from Liberal Operatives on Twitter is now to bring out the "circumvention of procurement process rules" as a reason why Norman was charged. This loops back to the idea from some in government that procurement rules are sacrosanct and came down from the mount etched in stone. That is complete baloney, rules and procedures are constantly in flux because nothing is perfect and an entity that is married to dogma is doomed to failure.
Also there is no bloody way in hell that Vance (nor Lawson before him) was in the dark about CRCN dealing directly with Davie (allegedly) under orders from the PM. If Ottawa is as leaky as everyone says it is (and it is!) then he would have heard about it. But the process of acquiring the iAOR would have been part of the briefing package the CDS routinely reviews.
Also there is no bloody way in hell that Vance (nor Lawson before him) was in the dark about CRCN dealing directly with Davie (allegedly) under orders from the PM. If Ottawa is as leaky as everyone says it is (and it is!) then he would have heard about it. But the process of acquiring the iAOR would have been part of the briefing package the CDS routinely reviews.
- Reaction score
- 7,380
- Points
- 1,160
I would be fine with Trudeau ordering the circumvention of the procurement rules if it resulted in new frigates, new support ships, new transport ships, new coast guard ships, new helicopters, new trucks, new flight suits, new boots....
- Reaction score
- 13,141
- Points
- 1,010
I too, am fine with the PM (any PM) circumventing contracting and procurement rules. At the end of the day, he is the final arbtrar of those rules and wears the results- good or bad.
Spencer100
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,179
- Points
- 1,040
As posted in the A/OPS thread. Irving should get on the marketing and sell one to New Zeeland and then tell them they have a good deal on T-26's to replace their ANZAC's. Lockheed Canada did sell them them the CMS330 and upgraded their ships.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,275
- Points
- 1,160
JT Stated today that Seasspan gets 16 new CCG vessels to build and Davie is also going to get contracts.
https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/vancouvers-seaspan-to-build-up-to-16-new-coast-guard-ships-trudeau-announces?fbclid=IwAR3Rw4d16rB0XnOoyPDBKPDIlp9x80taS4MbDXuX9bP3whQnHLy2mkulQY0
Meanwhile, this is the first news on the OOSV I have heard of in a while.
https://twitter.com/MoreThanShips/status/1116778596050378752
https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/vancouvers-seaspan-to-build-up-to-16-new-coast-guard-ships-trudeau-announces?fbclid=IwAR3Rw4d16rB0XnOoyPDBKPDIlp9x80taS4MbDXuX9bP3whQnHLy2mkulQY0
Meanwhile, this is the first news on the OOSV I have heard of in a while.
https://twitter.com/MoreThanShips/status/1116778596050378752
From my point of view the best part of PM's statement yesterday is the open door for Davie to come into the NSS. With both Seaspan and Irving busy on their allocated vessels for two or three decades, I dare to foresee the replacement for MCDVs would come from Davie. That might be done within the next decade, I mean, deliveries might be planned to start from about 2026 onwards, to replace the old ones at their thirties. Or should we expect to replace them at the age of 40?
No need to say, as for what i have learnt here, the MCDVs are precious tools for the RCN and their replacement should be already taken into consideration by the NSS planning.
No need to say, as for what i have learnt here, the MCDVs are precious tools for the RCN and their replacement should be already taken into consideration by the NSS planning.
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
Oh the irony--Seaspan understands realities, buys vessels abroad for its ferry line while building them at Vancouver for stupid Canadian gov't:
Mark
Ottawa
Seaspan Orders Two LNG Battery Hybrids
Canada's Seaspan Ferries will add two new Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) - battery hybrid ferries to its fleet in 2021.
The vessels will be constructed by Damen Shipyards Gorinchem B.V. at their Mangalia Shipyard in Romania, said a press release from the marine transportation services provider.
With construction scheduled to begin in 2019, the vessels are expected to go into operation in 2021 [emphasis added]. They will join the Seaspan Swift and the Seaspan Reliant, the company’s first hybrid ferries, commissioned just over two years ago.
Since introducing these vessels to their fleet, Seaspan Ferries has been able to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions, while maintaining a high level of performance and reliability for its drop-trailer service between its Mainland terminals and Vancouver Island.
Damen Shipyards won the bid to build the new ferries thanks to their excellent reputation, commitment to quality, and proven infrastructure at the Mangalia Shipyard.
The two companies have been working closely to ensure that the new vessels meet the strict safety, performance and operational standards required to provide optimal service to Seaspan Ferries’ customers.
Frank Butzelaar, CEO Seaspan Marine Transportation said: "Within their first two years of service, our existing LNG hybrid vessels have operated with emission reductions of over 50% compared to traditional vessels; a large part of which is directly linked to the use of LNG fuel. These types of results truly reflect Seaspan’s commitment to our core value of Care for the Environment."
Frank added: "Expanding our fleet of LNG vessels will allow us to further expand our service offering and reduce emissions at the same time. It’s the right decision for the business and for the environment.”
“We’ve been very happy with the construction and performance of our LNG vessels and are excited to welcome the new ferries to our fleet in 2021. The entire Seaspan Ferries team has been extremely dedicated to the integration of the LNG vessels over the past two years, and we are excited to be working with Damen Shipyards in Romania to continue to grow our fleet,” said Harly Penner, Director, Fleet Engineering & Vessel Development.
https://www.marinelink.com/news/seaspan-orders-two-lng-battery-hybrids-466526
Mark
Ottawa
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,275
- Points
- 1,160
Currently Seaspan does not have a work gap, if they did i would be happy to point out that they should look closer to home for customers.
- Reaction score
- 5,306
- Points
- 1,040
MarkOttawa said:
The ferries are too large for them to build at the VSY location. They couldn't build them there if they wanted to (which they don't because the order books are full anyway). Get this looks bad, but makes perfect sense if you understand the context.
Modern shipyards are set up like car plants, and specialized for specific types of cars. There is usually a hard size limit, but may vary between the size of the modules, size of the launch, weight limits etc. Ferry modules are really big, have some tricky construction and can have some other oddities, so you need to have a shipyard built for it and it's a steep learning curve. There are shipyards that specialize in that kind of thing, and just makes no sense to make the massive infrastructure investments required in upgrades to build a one off. Would take at least 4-6 to get over the learning curve, so just makes no sense.
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,454
- Points
- 1,010
Actually, Navy_Pete, I disagree with a good deal of your post.
First, the part I agree with: Seaspan's books are full.
That's it.
IMHO, the rest is wrong. Seaspan is building AOR's (or JSS, call it what you may) and an Arctic ice breaker which are both much larger and with larger size block that he contemplated ferries, so there is no size problem at the shipyard. And while some shipyard specialize for cost reasons, they do so simply because their books are sufficiently full to go that route. Otherwise, like most shipyards, they would take whatever comes their way.
There is one aspect overlooked here, however: The vessels are to be LNG-Battery hybrids. That is a very specialized and complex recent technology. And there is only one shipyard in Canada with experience with that technology - but Seaspan is not about to mandate its competitor Davie with building ships for it, isn't it?.
Even then, Davie has built one such ferry for the Government of Quebec, and is in the process of building a second one (mired in a court case), and has experienced all the teething problems associated with delivering such a new product. It does make Davie one of the few yards in North America with that technological knowledge and, if and when the court case is over and the early problems are resolved, it may well pay off and generate more local sales - especially as G.H.G emissions standards become tighter and tighter. Only the future will tell.
First, the part I agree with: Seaspan's books are full.
That's it.
IMHO, the rest is wrong. Seaspan is building AOR's (or JSS, call it what you may) and an Arctic ice breaker which are both much larger and with larger size block that he contemplated ferries, so there is no size problem at the shipyard. And while some shipyard specialize for cost reasons, they do so simply because their books are sufficiently full to go that route. Otherwise, like most shipyards, they would take whatever comes their way.
There is one aspect overlooked here, however: The vessels are to be LNG-Battery hybrids. That is a very specialized and complex recent technology. And there is only one shipyard in Canada with experience with that technology - but Seaspan is not about to mandate its competitor Davie with building ships for it, isn't it?.
Even then, Davie has built one such ferry for the Government of Quebec, and is in the process of building a second one (mired in a court case), and has experienced all the teething problems associated with delivering such a new product. It does make Davie one of the few yards in North America with that technological knowledge and, if and when the court case is over and the early problems are resolved, it may well pay off and generate more local sales - especially as G.H.G emissions standards become tighter and tighter. Only the future will tell.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,275
- Points
- 1,160
Size is the not the issue, the Spirit Class were built out here by several shipyards doing different modules and then combining them. Part of the issue is that other yards can undercut Canadian labour cost.
Similar threads
