691 replies to this topic

[spanky123]

That's pretty embarrasing, get it together. What on Earth could, on a Coast Guard ship, cost anywhere near that much?

 

The Canadian shipbuilding industry is firmly in bed with Navy procurement.  Half of their executive ranks are ex-military. Not tat it will ever happen but the Feds need to step in an force alignment with contracts even if it means that both Irving and Seaspan fail. Otherwise it will only ever get worse.

[Mattjvd]

The Canadian shipbuilding industry is firmly in bed with Navy procurement. Half of their executive ranks are ex-military. Not tat it will ever happen but the Feds need to step in an force alignment with contracts even if it means that both Irving and Seaspan fail. Otherwise it will only ever get worse.

Right, but this isn't a Navy ship. It will belong to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

[AllseeingEye]

The bigger issue as it always is in this country when it comes to DND-CCG or any large procurement destined specifically for the military including in this case more broadly the maritime civilian/scientific realm, are the hyper competing priorities of economics, intra-provincial politics and operational (military) imperatives.

 

Canada being a proverbial wet noodle when it comes to projecting power or maritime/military strength, or even being seen to project such capability (never a priority for Canadian political parties especially the Liberals cuz frankly its an icky subject for any good Liberal), invariably elevates economic considerations to the very top of the procurement priority list, meaning regardless whether the new equipment is a warplane, a tank or a ship, purely military applicability more often than not slides right down to the very bottom of the list - usually to the detriment of the poor SOB in uniform expected ultimately to fly or sail it into harm's way.

 

The result is that winning bids will almost always be those with the highest emphasis on creating jobs. And even better politically if those jobs are in Quebec don't ya know <wink, nudge> - hence the re-opening the NSP to the "third" shipyard which just conveniently happened to be the Davie facility - in Quebec, after that province howled and wailed loud and long after the original combatant and non-combatant ship contracts were awarded to Irving and Seaspan, respectively.

 

On top of all that political pablum is the fact we insist typically on "Canadian-izing" those platforms because apparently COTS (commercial off the shelf) systems aren't suitable for <cough> the "uniquely" Canadian needs and conditions under which they will operate - in spite of the fact many of those very same aircraft or ships are frequently perfectly fine as-is by the standards of other nations that also happen to purchase them. Canadianization...as it happens....also results in more jobs. A very_good thing from a Liberal standpoint! It also, by happenstance, tends to drag out frequently by YEARS the design, build and ultimate delivery of the platform. Not to mention it jacks the final "final" costs into the fiscal stratosphere, which is precisely what we are seeing now.....

Edited by AllseeingEye, 22 February 2021 - 08:22 PM.

[Mike K.]

Sounds like we need an audit.

The Europeans said they could deliver a battle hardened frigate to the RCN for $125M, which could then be customized for a little more.

Is Canada becoming demilitarized? Is that what’s happening? The disastrous executions of the last 20-years leave little else but a quiet pursuit of demilitarization, or an inevitable extension of US military into Canadian bases.

[Mike K.]

The US Navy is selling a fleet of relatively new ships. Maybe we should buy them?

[Mattjvd]

Sounds like we need an audit.

The Europeans said they could deliver a battle hardened frigate to the RCN for $125M, which could then be customized for a little more.

Is Canada becoming demilitarized? Is that what’s happening? The disastrous executions of the last 20-years leave little else but a quiet pursuit of demilitarization, or an inevitable extension of US military into Canadian bases.

I'm not familiar with the bid you're referring to with this. Fincantieri (Italians) said they could build our new frigates for a fixed price contract of $1.5 billion per ship, with no transfer of technology and not including project management or ammunition.

Edited by Mattjvd, 23 February 2021 - 08:28 AM.

[spanky123]

Sounds like we need an audit.

The Europeans said they could deliver a battle hardened frigate to the RCN for $125M, which could then be customized for a little more.

Is Canada becoming demilitarized? Is that what’s happening? The disastrous executions of the last 20-years leave little else but a quiet pursuit of demilitarization, or an inevitable extension of US military into Canadian bases.

 

I think the reality is that most strategists don't envision a conflict that has a bunch of frigates bobbing around in the oceans deciding the fate of nations. The next world war between China and the US will have hackers shutting down power grids, poisoning drinking water and sending nuclear reactors into meltdown. By the time a ship even gets out to sea it will be over.

[AllseeingEye]

I think the reality is that most strategists don't envision a conflict that has a bunch of frigates bobbing around in the oceans deciding the fate of nations. The next world war between China and the US will have hackers shutting down power grids, poisoning drinking water and sending nuclear reactors into meltdown. By the time a ship even gets out to sea it will be over.

 

Don't disagree with that broader premise however the problem in the meantime is we do need to have capable naval assets to protect and secure our coasts and especially maintain a presence and ability to conduct sovereignty patrols in the Arctic as it becomes increasingly important. The Russians are updating and expanding and beefing up all their old Soviet-era bases in that region and the Chinese have made very plain their intention to send military and commercial vessels through the north - literally right through our back yard.

 

In addition we are treaty-bound to contribute naval assets to NATO as and when required, all of which are typically best performed with frigates (or destroyers, assuming we ever actually get the Type-26's). Historically for political reasons Canadian and especially Liberal governments did spend money on surface ships for that NATO function because they were a visible reminder that Canada had that ability, limited as it always was because of our small numbers, but at least they looked good...

 

Of course submarines are great platforms for the surveillance/attack role (if it came to that) but given the sad-sack state of the Victoria-class subs I'm not too sure I'd place much if any faith in them conducting patrols in the Arctic - I don't know offhand if their hulls are even capable of working and operating under or through the ice. 

[Mattjvd]

Don't disagree with that broader premise however the problem in the meantime is we do need to have capable naval assets to protect and secure our coasts and especially maintain a presence and ability to conduct sovereignty patrols in the Arctic as it becomes increasingly important. The Russians are updating and expanding and beefing up all their old Soviet-era bases in that region and the Chinese have made very plain their intention to send military and commercial vessels through the north - literally right through our back yard.

In addition we are treaty-bound to contribute naval assets to NATO as and when required, all of which are typically best performed with frigates (or destroyers, assuming we ever actually get the Type-26's). Historically for political reasons Canadian and especially Liberal governments did spend money on surface ships for that NATO function because they were a visible reminder that Canada had that ability, limited as it always was because of our small numbers, but at least they looked good...

Of course submarines are great platforms for the surveillance/attack role (if it came to that) but given the sad-sack state of the Victoria-class subs I'm not too sure I'd place much if any faith in them conducting patrols in the Arctic - I don't know offhand if their hulls are even capable of working and operating under or through the ice.

They are not capable of sustained under-ice performance. At least, they can't go more than a day's sail away from open water while under the ice. Relying on surfacing through the ice is risky, ice conditions need to be just right and it might take a day or more to find a good spot. With just 3 days of submerged endurance, the Victorias just don't have time to look.

I suppose a land element on snowmobiles or a maritime patrol aircraft with the right sensors could find good spots ahead of time and plot waypoints for the sub. But that assumes the ice conditions don't change.

Edited by Mattjvd, 23 February 2021 - 10:00 AM.

[AllseeingEye]

Yeah, as expected. I know the RCAF has a few drones purchased from the US for Arctic surveillance but when the rubber meets the pavement we need surface ship capability. And while its great after 50 years the country got it in gear to replace the bulk of the sad sack CCG fleet - finally! - last I checked our CG vessels aren't armed even with a machine gun so its a mystery to me what they're supposed to do in the event there was in incident and the Russians or Chinese got serious up there. Hence the Navy, hence capable frigates or - please God - the Type-26's.....

[Mike K.]

I'm not familiar with the bid you're referring to with this. Fincantieri (Italians) said they could build our new frigates for a fixed price contract of $1.5 billion per ship, with no transfer of technology and not including project management or ammunition.

Sorry about that, I’m way off base.

The Danes are pushing their frigates for under $340M USD, c 2017, for the US Navy: https://breakingdefe...hats-real-cost/ Then there are pretty substantial costs on top for tech.

[Mattjvd]

Sorry about that, I’m way off base.

The Danes are pushing their frigates for under $340M USD, c 2017, for the US Navy: https://breakingdefe...hats-real-cost/ Then there are pretty substantial costs on top for tech.

Yeah, it can get hard to compare prices when each country includes different line items in their project costs. I don't know what the estimate is for the hull and non-military specific mechanical systems (engines, water, etc) is for our frigate project. Likely a good bit more than $340 million, but no where near the full project cost.

For example, the frigate construction is expected to go until ~2040, so the budget includes a 2% inflation increase per year.

Edited by Mattjvd, 24 February 2021 - 09:46 AM.

[spanky123]

PBO says cost estimate up $17B (over last estimate a month ago) to $77B.  PBO's latest estimate puts says warships will cost $77B as estimated price jumps $17B (msn.com)

 

Used to be a saying in Ottawa that the worse you did in procurement, the better you did in your subsequent industry role!

[Victoria Watcher]

A promised external probe into Gen. Jonathan Vance is being expanded to what sources described as “unprecedented” levels to investigate the allegations of inappropriate behaviour from the former military chief, as well as to root out those who were complicit.

 

According to the sources, the terms of the probe will also deal with rising concerns that the issue of sexual misconduct by the senior ranks could be a systemic issue in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and that such an investigation can now only be handled by a large, independent human resources firm or prominent Canadian, such as a former Supreme Court judge.

 

 

 

https://globalnews.c...-unprecedented/

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 24 February 2021 - 10:41 AM.

[Victoria Watcher]

Canada's new defence chief Admiral Art McDonald steps aside amid investigation

 

McDonald was appointed just over 2 months ago

 

https://www.cbc.ca/n...-eyre-1.5927355

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 25 February 2021 - 06:37 AM.

[Rob Randall]

My initiative to make 2021 the year of Keep Yo Dick In Yo Pants is failing miserably.

[Mike K.]

[spanky123]

My initiative to make 2021 the year of Keep Yo Dick In Yo Pants is failing miserably.

 

In fairness to Vance, there is an allegation that he denies. He admits to having a consensual relationship with a women 20 years ago and at that time he was not a general nor in all likelihood even a senior officer. Will wait to see the full report before judgement is passed. We don't know anything about McDonald yet.

 

As I said previously, relationships in the military are not uncommon. IIRC, something like 75%+ of all military women in relationships are in relationships with military men. Makes perfect sense if you want to have a life together as the military works to support couples and families. A crackdown on relationships would have a great impact on the military's ability to recruit, promote and retain couples in my opinion.

 

Having said that, nothing excuses improper behavior and the rules are well defined. 

 

A point worth mentioning and something that most people outside of the military don't think about is that most roles in the military may at some point require that you kill another person. Pushing a button can have just as big an impact as pulling a trigger. That drives a very inwardly focused culture. 

Edited by spanky123, 25 February 2021 - 08:10 AM.

[AllseeingEye]

In fairness to Vance, there is an allegation that he denies. He admits to having a consensual relationship with a women 20 years ago and at that time he was not a general nor in all likelihood even a senior officer. Will wait to see the full report before judgement is passed. We don't know anything about McDonald yet.

 

As I said previously, relationships in the military are not uncommon. IIRC, something like 75%+ of all military women in relationships are in relationships with military men. Makes perfect sense if you want to have a life together as the military works to support couples and families. A crackdown on relationships would have a great impact on the military's ability to recruit, promote and retain couples in my opinion.

 

Having said that, nothing excuses improper behavior and the rules are well defined. 

 

A point worth mentioning and something that most people outside of the military don't think about is that most roles in the military may at some point require that you kill another person. Pushing a button can have just as big an impact as pulling a trigger. That drives a very inwardly focused culture. 

 

 

Excellent points all of them; and be it in the military or otherwise at this point these are allegations only - nothing has been proven in court. Yet.

[spanky123]

^ ASE maybe you know this. At one point adultery was consider conduct unbecoming for an officer. Is that still the case?