959 replies to this topic

[Bingo]

After a six month deployment and taking on an important role in the New Zealand earthquake relief effort, the HMCS Vancouver is back home at CFB Esquimalt.

The HMCS Vancouver was on a 6 month tour in the Pacific region.

http://www.iheartrad...-tour-1.2276972

[VicHockeyFan]

Today's public tour of the Chinese navy boat has been cancelled.

[AllseeingEye]

Its about time and a few decades overdue, like everything else about upgrading the CAF, particularly the RCN. However as the man once said its always better late than never - 

 

http://www.timescolo...jetty-1.8760089

 

I just hope by the time both A and B jetty are both replaced we have, you know, actual naval ships to tie up to them.....

[Mike K.]

Trump could call up Trudeau and tell him he should get his act together and buy some ships. It's a disgrace for a navy to be strangled like this. If anyone can put pressure on the Feds, it's him.

[AllseeingEye]

In theory yes I agree. Problem is Mike successive federal government's have let the rot set in to such an extent the cost - never cheap at the best of times - becomes even more exorbitant. Makes the proposition of CAF upgrades very tough to square in tight fiscal times.

 

As Trudeau Jun-yah's administration accumulates more and deeper debt year over year military spending will only get pushed even further down the priority list. We all know very well even in 'sunny happy fiscal days', particularly with Liberals (but also with the Conservatives based on recent history, sadly) the military ranks somewhere in  importance between making old re-runs of "The Friendly Giant" mandatory grade school curriculum, and producing a Canada Post stamp featuring "Dudley Do-Right"....

 

To wit this snippet from the Huffington Post in spring 2016:

 

http://www.huffingto..._n_9525232.html

[spanky123]

The Libs are staring at a $200B deficit over the next 5 years and they haven't spent a dime yet on infrastructure or the military.

 

I agree with your assessment but fear that the price tag associated with any procurement will push this even further out. 

[AllseeingEye]

The Libs are staring at a $200B deficit over the next 5 years and they haven't spent a dime yet on infrastructure or the military.

 

I agree with your assessment but fear that the price tag associated with any procurement will push this even further out. 

Yup!

 

And as I mentioned elsewhere IMO when the results of the NSP do eventually see the light of day - and it will be years beyond the initial timeframe - I strongly suspect it will be little more than a shadow of what was originally conceived in terms of numbers of ships actually produced (which was hardly a grandiose vision to begin with). And of course the politicians will blame "escalating costs"....

[jonny]

Yeah Spanky, The challenge with major military purchases is they are easy to defer. Program spending is much more painful to cut back.

 

So, ASE, do I understand the intention of the Single Class Surface Combatant project correctly? The plan is to replace the 12 Halifax Class frigates and our 3 now retired Iroquois Class destroyers (OK the HMCS Athabaskan is still technically operational) with, basically, 15 frigates? Designs have not even been submitted yet for these 15 vessels, but the intention is that they are slightly larger than the Halifax Class vessels.

 

Question: Is that not a serious reduction in capability (losing the three destroyers)?

 

Then there are the Harry DeWolf class icebreaking warships (6 vessels planned in total). Two of which are currently under construction in Halifax. Sounds like this project is going OK in terms of GoC military projects.

 

Next is the Queenston Class Auxiliery/Replenishment vessels, which are essentially simple replacements of the Protecteur Class vessels. These are to be based on the Berlin Class vessels. After like 13 years, they are still somehow in contract negotiations with Seaspan. We could have built 35 of these in Germany in the time it has taken to get this one going. This sounds like the simplest military shipbuilding project imaginable, but somehow has been ongoing for 13 bloody years. This has taken so long that the CCG vessels that Seaspan is supposed to build have been pushed back like 10 years. Way to go guys!

 

Finally, there are several Coast Guard ships that are basically just replacing old ships that need to go. These are way into the future.

 

I guess my concern with the Surface Combatant project is that the whole thing gets shelved or rebooted and the Harry DeWolf class project gets neutered down to 2 or 3 ships.

[57WestHills]

IF the Navy gets 15 hulls to replace the Destroyers and Frigates capability, hypothetically, shouldn't be effected. A few would presumably be command ships and most would not be. Besides contemporary doctrine realistically holds that the RCN isn't doing full bore missions on its own, anyways.

I think the more substantial issue will be the number of ships, though. If I were a betting person the RCN won't be authorized a change in the number of sailors - so the new six DeWolf class will be used as a justification to reduce the number of major ship hulls.

[Mattjvd]

Yeah Spanky, The challenge with major military purchases is they are easy to defer. Program spending is much more painful to cut back.

So, ASE, do I understand the intention of the Single Class Surface Combatant project correctly? The plan is to replace the 12 Halifax Class frigates and our 3 now retired Iroquois Class destroyers (OK the HMCS Athabaskan is still technically operational) with, basically, 15 frigates? Designs have not even been submitted yet for these 15 vessels, but the intention is that they are slightly larger than the Halifax Class vessels.

Question: Is that not a serious reduction in capability (losing the three destroyers)?

Then there are the Harry DeWolf class icebreaking warships (6 vessels planned in total). Two of which are currently under construction in Halifax. Sounds like this project is going OK in terms of GoC military projects.

Next is the Queenston Class Auxiliery/Replenishment vessels, which are essentially simple replacements of the Protecteur Class vessels. These are to be based on the Berlin Class vessels. After like 13 years, they are still somehow in contract negotiations with Seaspan. We could have built 35 of these in Germany in the time it has taken to get this one going. This sounds like the simplest military shipbuilding project imaginable, but somehow has been ongoing for 13 bloody years. This has taken so long that the CCG vessels that Seaspan is supposed to build have been pushed back like 10 years. Way to go guys!

Finally, there are several Coast Guard ships that are basically just replacing old ships that need to go. These are way into the future.

I guess my concern with the Surface Combatant project is that the whole thing gets shelved or rebooted and the Harry DeWolf class project gets neutered down to 2 or 3 ships.

Regarding replacing 12 frigates and 3 destroyers with 15 frigates: Don't put too much into their classifcation. The Halifax class are in fact a few metres longer than the destroyers (though acouple hundred tonnes lighter). The Iroquois class really don't provide much a modern air defence frigate can't, the only noticable loss is the 2nd helocopter. But balance that with the Iroquos' nearly nonexistant surface ship fighting ability and the modern frigates are sure to be a capability upgrade.

[VANRIDERFAN]

Regarding replacing 12 frigates and 3 destroyers with 15 frigates: Don't put too much into their classifcation. The Halifax class are in fact a few metres longer than the destroyers (though acouple hundred tonnes lighter). The Iroquois class really don't provide much a modern air defence frigate can't, the only noticable loss is the 2nd helocopter. But balance that with the Iroquos' nearly nonexistant surface ship fighting ability and the modern frigates are sure to be a capability upgrade.

 

The Halifax class does not have an area air defence capability, it only has the ESSM for self defence. The Iroquois had the SM2 that has a much more range than the Sea Sparrow.

As to Ship to Ship, then the Halifax with the Harpoon has more capability than the Iroquois. 

[AllseeingEye]

Yup pretty all the posts above are accurate in terms of respective points made; ultimately it comes down to the role the new ship(s) are intended to fulfill.

 

"57W-H" makes a great point about authorized manpower - ultimately even if we had the $ - which we don't - and the national and political will - which we definitely don't - the number of hulls (or fighter planes, or main battle tanks etc.,) will be pegged not only to perceived operational need but also to the number of qualified people we have to operate them. Quite aside from the fact we don't have the budget, regardless we're not going to have 500 front line interceptors in the RCAF if we've only got 100 qualified trained fighter pilots, for example. In recent years there have been various stories about RCN assets, the Kingston-class ships especially, but also occasionally some of the frigates, that sat dockside right here in Esquimalt literally because we didn't enough naval officers and crew to man them.

 

Jonny hammers home a point that drives me up the wall, namely the ridiculous time it takes in this country to identify a CAF/military need, define the requirements for a replacement (ship, plane, SAR helicopter...doesn't matter what, the principle sadly applies to all of them apparently), issue the RFP, vet the responses, select a winning bid and build the &&^#%%#-ing thing.

 

Other nations do this in a space of a few years in order to get the new system into the field/air/water as expeditiously as possible. We do the same thing in decades in way too many instances. As I've mentioned before the procurement process in this country is busted, plain and simple. And I think unless we're very lucky the NSP program will illustrate this although it remains to be seen to what degree. How many years went by before we finally began to replace our vintage Sea King helicopters - those flying crates that even politicians admitted a generation ago should be in museums? And a helicopter is a heck of a lot less complicated than a front line interceptor or naval vessel....

 

The existing Halifax ("City")-class frigates - in the best Canadian tradition of trying to be as spendthrift as possible while getting as much bang of the buck as possible - combine our traditional anti-submarine capabilities and technological prowess with systems to deal with surface and, to a lesser extent, air threats as well. Can't be or do all things, all the time. Which is why the largest navies have all of destroyers, frigates, missile-cruisers etc., to perform specific roles within the larger fleet. We of course don't have the luxury of the massive budgets of the larger world players so we have to prioritize and build to whatever our perceived strength is, be it anti-submarine warfare, ship to ship combat, command and control...whatever.

 

And finally as VRF pointed out the RCN's older destroyers, while providing a symbolic boost no doubt, had virtually nil ship to ship war fighting capability, by design. Again they played a different, more specific role than do the frigates. The destroyers were (air) area defence and command and control assets originally designed and built in an era when it was assumed missiles - not guns - would be the predominate threat, and very likely in a nuclear environment to boot, hence their unique teardrop-design hull.

[Mattjvd]

The Halifax class does not have an area air defence capability, it only has the ESSM for self defence. The Iroquois had the SM2 that has a much more range than the Sea Sparrow.
As to Ship to Ship, then the Halifax with the Harpoon has more capability than the Iroquois.

Ah yes. When I say "than a modern air defence frigate" I mean a wide-area defence frigate, not the Halifax class. What I was getting at is the single class ships will be able to house all the required air/surface/sub-surface capabilities onto a "frigate" hull and we're not losing capabilty by not having a ship designated as a "destoyer".

[AllseeingEye]

Well someone at least gets it, not that the Selfie King in Ottawa will notice or care one iota: http://www.timescolo...etter-1.9711429

 

To be fair though the dire situation in which the RCN specifically finds itself, likewise the CAF in more broad terms, isn't solely a "Liberal" thing. Previous government's of all stripes share some if not equal responsibility.

 

And as usual, as much as many Canadians are in a froth about the US administration today, the reality is whenever the next major international crisis erupts, or a serious natural disaster like the Big One hits the west coast, we'll count mightily on Uncle Sam to carry the brunt of the burden and/or shoulder the load....

[jonny]

It's a shame. A damn shame. Our meager commitments to NATO are an embarrassment.

 

The Cyclones have been delayed to some future date (2018/19, maybe).

 

The entire Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy is on thin ice.  

 

The Submarines are due to retire in the 2020’s with no concrete or even visionary plans for replacement.

 

The Snowbirds are due to retire in the 2020’s with no concrete or even visionary plans for replacement.

 

The F18s are due to retire in the 2020’s with no concrete plans for replacement.

 

Yet the GoC is running $30B in deficits on programs and grants.

 

The only recently successful military procurements have been off the shelf purchases, yet we insist on Canadianizing everything like the Cyclones rather than purchasing a COTS solution. We have actually been able to purchase a significant amount of infrastructure and equipment in recent years, but almost to a rule it has been COTS stuff from vendors like Boeing. Anything we try to do on our own is a disaster.

[Bingo]

Are we still using Lee Enfields with no concrete plans for replacement?

 

The Canadian Forces' Rangers Arctic reserve unit still used Enfield No.4 rifles as of 2012, with plans announced to replace the weapons sometime in 2014 or 2015.^[8] 

Total production of all Lee–Enfields is estimated at over 17 million rifles.^[1]

 

https://en.wikipedia...iki/Lee–Enfield

 

[Mattjvd]

Are we still using Lee Enfields with no concrete plans for replacement?

Saco T3 (designated C17) is entering service this year as the replacement.
Keep in mind their rifle is used for predator defence, signaling, and hunting. Not combat. So the Enfield 303 fit the roll just fine.
Edit: I had the opportunity to test fire it (T3) in December 2015, great rifle.

Edited by Mattjvd, 03 February 2017 - 07:55 PM.

[LJ]

^I got a trophy using that rifle, although it was a few years ago.

[HB]

HMCS WINNIPEG and HMCS OTTAWA

Edited by HB, 05 March 2017 - 09:51 AM.

[VicHockeyFan]

HMCS WINNIPEG and HMCS OTTAWA

 

Leaving Esqumlat tomorrow, for a 6+ month deployment to Asia.