CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 29963
PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:31 pm
 


Title: Federal warship replacement cost swells to $62 billion, now more than twice the original budget: PBO
Category: Military
Posted By: DrCaleb
Date: 2017-06-01 10:40:45
Canadian


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14747
PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:31 pm
 


There is nothing worse than a missed opportunity, a fact we're seeing now. The cost for building these ships will limit our Navy to a coastal defense force and not a very capable one at that.

The Conservatives and now the Liberals by their inaction have ensured that the cost of building warships in Canada has become to expensive to even contemplate. So we lose that capability and now will have to buy off the shelf if they even want to come close to the original requirement.

Way to go gang. [B-o]


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15244
PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:34 pm
 


Canadian designed and built warships would be a nice-to-have but I understand why it would be cost-prohibitive for such a small Navy like Canada's. Surely we can partner with one or more of our allies to get the ships that meet our needs.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14747
PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 5:59 pm
 


BeaverFever BeaverFever:
Canadian designed and built warships would be a nice-to-have but I understand why it would be cost-prohibitive for such a small Navy like Canada's. Surely we can partner with one or more of our allies to get the ships that meet our needs.


I'd love to see us partner with Australia when it comes to building warships and submarines but given that every ship building decision in Canada is prefaced with the usual "it's about Canadian Jobs" I don't see that happening.

If we partnered with the Ausie's it's likely we could still build some of the ships in Canada and be part of the supply chain for tings like parts, steel and technology. Things that would allow us to keep our warship building capability alive. Whereas if we buy off the shelf we'll lose some if not most of that capability and in the end we'll have to modify weapons and engineering suites to ensure we have a Canadian content like we've done everytime we've purchased out of country since we started purchasing foreign A costly and mostly ineffective way to ensure Canadian Content and jobs.

So it's actually buy off the shelf at your own peril but still, if we do that we might get the amount of ships that are needed.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 13404
PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 6:14 pm
 


The Brits have the Type 26 Destroyer for export to places like Canada. It would probably
do a great job for us. Maybe, we can sign on as a subcontractor for all of their orders.
http://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-hopef ... 6-frigate/

There is a revolution in warship design going on, right now and finding a cutting edge design is a moving target. We only do this once a generation and there is way too much expertise to re-learn each time around. We probably can't design much more than coastal defence vessels, anymore.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
Profile
Posts: 2694
PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 6:47 pm
 


Thats probably your best bet. The type 26 has more firepower and a lower cost than the American frigate. If Canada can create a few jobs for themselves in the process than it sounds like a win win.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14747
PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 6:57 pm
 


rickc rickc:
Thats probably your best bet. The type 26 has more firepower and a lower cost than the American frigate. If Canada can create a few jobs for themselves in the process than it sounds like a win win.


Given that the Liberals hired a former RN Admiral as their expert on building warships I can see them going that way but just because you can buy off the shelf doesn't mean they won't fek it up and try and over Canadianize them.

Look at all the troubles the 280's had with weapons systems. The VLS was from the states and the main gun was gun from Italy all trying to be coordinated by a Canadian made software suite that they were never designed for and don't get me started on the German made diesels.

If they buy off the shelf they have to keep their main components operating with the systems they were designed for and stop this job creation program for Canadians because, it just doesn't work, takes years to correct and costs more than the initial equipment was worth.

But I'd stay as far away from the Type 26's as I could. They may have more firepower and be cheaper but that's a non starter when you can't use them to project policy around the globe.

$1:
Destroyers will break down if sent to Middle East, admits Royal Navy

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... royal-navy


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 13404
PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 7:28 pm
 


Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
rickc rickc:
Thats probably your best bet. The type 26 has more firepower and a lower cost than the American frigate. If Canada can create a few jobs for themselves in the process than it sounds like a win win.


Given that the Liberals hired a former RN Admiral as their expert on building warships I can see them going that way but just because you can buy off the shelf doesn't mean they won't fek it up and try and over Canadianize them.

Look at all the troubles the 280's had with weapons systems. The VLS was from the states and the main gun was gun from Italy all trying to be coordinated by a Canadian made software suite that they were never designed for and don't get me started on the German made diesels.

If they buy off the shelf they have to keep their main components operating with the systems they were designed for and stop this job creation program for Canadians because, it just doesn't work, takes years to correct and costs more than the initial equipment was worth.

But I'd stay as far away from the Type 26's as I could. They may have more firepower and be cheaper but that's a non starter when you can't use them to project policy around the globe.

$1:
Destroyers will break down if sent to Middle East, admits Royal Navy

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... royal-navy

The 330 Frigates have extraordinary range (at a slow cruising pace) that allows them to range the globe without an oiler nearby (a good thing, too) Whatever we build/buy should be similarly autonomous. Even if we do replace the AORs in my lifetime, you will never see more than one on each coast and, if there will a refit going on, we'll only ever have one available a lot of the time. Our Frigates need to be old fashioned cruisers in the original definition of "cruiser".

p.s. The Type 45 kipper destroyers have a really weird high voltage A.C. diesel-electric set-up that is not working out. Our Frigates are direct-to-shaft wth a clutch instead of diesel-electric and it is mechanically simpler. The advantage to the Brit system is that generating diesel-electric can be located in spaces all our the ship which spreads risk, allows smaller machine spaces and probably allows for better weight trim.


Last edited by Jabberwalker on Thu Jun 01, 2017 7:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 32010
PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 7:34 pm
 


The last time we bought British we ended up with a dead lieutenant killed in an electrical fire aboard one of the damn subs. And followed by about a decade of repairs and reconditioning to make them seaworthy, all at a monetary cost that was almost as high as if we'd bought brand-new from someone else. Don't suggest Britain again, please. They're the crooked used-car salesmen of military equipment.

Also merge please, because I was here first. :mrgreen:

current-events-f59/navy-ship-replacement-to-cost-62-billion-t119285.html


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 13404
PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 7:44 pm
 


Thanos Thanos:
The last time we bought British we ended up with a dead lieutenant killed in an electrical fire aboard one of the damn subs. And followed by about a decade of repairs and reconditioning to make them seaworthy, all at a monetary cost that was almost as high as if we'd bought brand-new from someone else. Don't suggest Britain again, please. They're the crooked used-car salesmen of military equipment.

Also merge please, because I was here first. :mrgreen:

current-events-f59/navy-ship-replacement-to-cost-62-billion-t119285.html

We're not talking about "used" nor about an orphan class of vessels that was mothballed for way too long before the initial design bugs were worked out of them. The RCN has sailed British-built vessels for most of our history. Some of them were spectacularly good, like the Tribal Class Destroyers. Except for a couple of American submarines, all of the US built warships that the RCN ever sailed were pure garbage.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 22438
PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2017 4:45 am
 


Oh FFS! How is a frigate or even a destroyer going to cost $4.1 billion each?!?

We should just get the plans for the Arleigh Burke from the US and build those - they cost $1.8 billion each according to Wikipedia. Even if we add 50% to 'Canadianize' them, they'd still be cheaper.

As for the frigates, the European multi-purpose frigate (FREMM) cost Italy and France only about $1 billion each, and the Aussies are looking at buying them too.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14747
PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2017 7:36 am
 


bootlegga bootlegga:
Oh FFS! How is a frigate or even a destroyer going to cost $4.1 billion each?!?

We should just get the plans for the Arleigh Burke from the US and build those - they cost $1.8 billion each according to Wikipedia. Even if we add 50% to 'Canadianize' them, they'd still be cheaper.

As for the frigates, the European multi-purpose frigate (FREMM) cost Italy and France only about $1 billion each, and the Aussies are looking at buying them too.



What. Buy them off the shelf and do the Irving family out of billions of dollars of income they could be sending to their offshore accounts in Bermuda.

This might be one good reason to buy from another country.

http://www.nationalobserver.com/2017/03 ... lfare-bums

But you're right. How the fuck they can quote $4.1 billion dollars to build a
frigate is beyond me. My guess is that the "experts" who did up the report didn't research the actual cost of building a warship and just put what St. Johns Ship building and MIL Davie quoted them which, of course would be at least double plus of the real price since it's always better to bid crazy high, get the contract and then shave a few bucks off to make it look like the buyer is getting a deal especially if he's stupid enough not to shop around.

Anybody else remember what happened with the Patrol Frigate program? They were supposed to be built for Canada's navy but also for export to other countries. The problem was that they were extremely cost prohibitive and when they'd wined and dined all the potential suitors they told them that none of the electronics software and systems would be included in the purchase price. Can anyone guess how many ships we sold to other countries? :roll:

We had our shot at being an exporter of warships and failed miserably. So maybe it is time to take the blinders off and stop trying to build something that we know will cost a small fortune because of Canadian patriotism and make an honest effort to find a cost effective alternativve to keep our Navy relevant.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 65472
PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2017 8:28 am
 


I've long suggested that Canada would do well to partner with the US and build your ships in US shipyards with US designs. Then the ships can be serviced in the US and you get the added advantage of easy integration with US Navy logistics when fulfilling roles that require your ships to operate at a distance.

Seriously, if a furball sets off and your kit integrates with our kit we'll just give you what you need to deal with the crisis and worry about settling accounts later...if ever.

Otherwise when a furball sets off and your ships are on the other side of the planet and they break down they're going to be abandoned or scuttled when the US Navy can't get them operational again.

Now I do not mean to be insulting here. I'm just pointing out that your navy is always lacking and with the retirement of the Preserver and Protecteur it has no legs of its own. You MUST rely on the US Navy or the Royal Navy for logistical support. And the Royal Navy isn't doing all that great either.

While there are plans to build the JSS ships at Vancouver the contracts are still in the air and nothing's been laid down yet. It would not surprise me in the least if Trudeau never signs off on these ships.

* * *

Of course, the other option for Canada is to simply get out of the business of having a military. Just implement a coastal police force like many of the Latin American countries have and commit to it.

Wasting endless millions on plans and plans that never get implemented is absurd. The sad fact is that your government (Liberal or Conservative) isn't interested in doing what it takes to maintain a functional military and they'd rather buy votes with social programs.

That said, embrace it and commit to it and stop with this wasteful and ridiculous theatre of spending on the military you only plan on having.


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 334
PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2017 11:48 am
 


bootlegga bootlegga:
Oh FFS! How is a frigate or even a destroyer going to cost $4.1 billion each?!?

We should just get the plans for the Arleigh Burke from the US and build those - they cost $1.8 billion each according to Wikipedia. Even if we add 50% to 'Canadianize' them, they'd still be cheaper.

As for the frigates, the European multi-purpose frigate (FREMM) cost Italy and France only about $1 billion each, and the Aussies are looking at buying them too.


Because it won't. This will be the cost to build, operate and maintain.


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 334
PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2017 11:49 am
 


BartSimpson BartSimpson:
I've long suggested that Canada would do well to partner with the US and build your ships in US shipyards with US designs. Then the ships can be serviced in the US and you get the added advantage of easy integration with US Navy logistics when fulfilling roles that require your ships to operate at a distance.

Seriously, if a furball sets off and your kit integrates with our kit we'll just give you what you need to deal with the crisis and worry about settling accounts later...if ever.

Otherwise when a furball sets off and your ships are on the other side of the planet and they break down they're going to be abandoned or scuttled when the US Navy can't get them operational again.

Now I do not mean to be insulting here. I'm just pointing out that your navy is always lacking and with the retirement of the Preserver and Protecteur it has no legs of its own. You MUST rely on the US Navy or the Royal Navy for logistical support. And the Royal Navy isn't doing all that great either.

While there are plans to build the JSS ships at Vancouver the contracts are still in the air and nothing's been laid down yet. It would not surprise me in the least if Trudeau never signs off on these ships.

* * *

Of course, the other option for Canada is to simply get out of the business of having a military. Just implement a coastal police force like many of the Latin American countries have and commit to it.

Wasting endless millions on plans and plans that never get implemented is absurd. The sad fact is that your government (Liberal or Conservative) isn't interested in doing what it takes to maintain a functional military and they'd rather buy votes with social programs.

That said, embrace it and commit to it and stop with this wasteful and ridiculous theatre of spending on the military you only plan on having.


No thanks, and our current ships interoperate with the USN just fine right now.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  1  2  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: raydan and 14 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.