Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

[Gorgo]

So we have some time to waste until then ?

ARes Restructuring or Dress conversation, anyone ?

Yes! We need more bling! We need more bling!

Seriously, though, given the pressure our friends in NATO are landing on Trudeau et al, it's about damn time that the government is getting off its collective keister to start really funding the military. Of course, with the serious personnel shortfalls across the board, putting the new kit to work is going to be quite the pain unless the people in the Recruiting Group basically goes to wartime recruitment rush to get new people into place.

Increases of pay and putting caps on things like civilian housing would do wonders as well, IMO.

Expanding the reserves in all aspects would do a lot of good as well. Given we're talking about the upcoming River-class ships (and I hope SAGUENAY will be revived as one of the active ship names in this class), the idea of expanding the Naval Reserve would do wonders when it comes to overall manning. I recently learned that STAR has a detached tender in Kitchener and have known for some time about BRUNSWICKER having its detachment in Moncton. I would propose that all the NRDs start this process to expand the NAVRES footprint to as many places as possible.

Using STAR for an example, we could put tenders in Saint Catharines (for Niagara region) and Oakville (for Halton region) atop the one in Kitchener-Waterloo. YORK in Toronto could put TWO tenders in Peel Region (Mississauga and Brampton), TWO in York Region (Markham and Newmarket), one in Simcoe County (Barrie or CFB Borden) and one in Durham Region (Oshawa). The others could go the same way; my idea is to take blocks of 500,000 total population and set up a NAVRES tender in the largest population centre there.

Of course, this would cost $$$$, but hey, if the Conservatives play ball next election, we might get somewhere...

Knock on wood.

 

[DBNSG]

Yes! We need more bling! We need more bling!

Seriously, though, given the pressure our friends in NATO are landing on Trudeau et al, it's about damn time that the government is getting off its collective keister to start really funding the military. Of course, with the serious personnel shortfalls across the board, putting the new kit to work is going to be quite the pain unless the people in the Recruiting Group basically goes to wartime recruitment rush to get new people into place.

Increases of pay and putting caps on things like civilian housing would do wonders as well, IMO.

Expanding the reserves in all aspects would do a lot of good as well. Given we're talking about the upcoming River-class ships (and I hope SAGUENAY will be revived as one of the active ship names in this class), the idea of expanding the Naval Reserve would do wonders when it comes to overall manning. I recently learned that STAR has a detached tender in Kitchener and have known for some time about BRUNSWICKER having its detachment in Moncton. I would propose that all the NRDs start this process to expand the NAVRES footprint to as many places as possible.

Using STAR for an example, we could put tenders in Saint Catharines (for Niagara region) and Oakville (for Halton region) atop the one in Kitchener-Waterloo. YORK in Toronto could put TWO tenders in Peel Region (Mississauga and Brampton), TWO in York Region (Markham and Newmarket), one in Simcoe County (Barrie or CFB Borden) and one in Durham Region (Oshawa). The others could go the same way; my idea is to take blocks of 500,000 total population and set up a NAVRES tender in the largest population centre there.

Of course, this would cost $$$$, but hey, if the Conservatives play ball next election, we might get somewhere...

Knock on wood.

More Orca's then?

 

[Navy_Pete]

Yes! We need more bling! We need more bling!

Seriously, though, given the pressure our friends in NATO are landing on Trudeau et al, it's about damn time that the government is getting off its collective keister to start really funding the military. Of course, with the serious personnel shortfalls across the board, putting the new kit to work is going to be quite the pain unless the people in the Recruiting Group basically goes to wartime recruitment rush to get new people into place.

Increases of pay and putting caps on things like civilian housing would do wonders as well, IMO.

Expanding the reserves in all aspects would do a lot of good as well. Given we're talking about the upcoming River-class ships (and I hope SAGUENAY will be revived as one of the active ship names in this class), the idea of expanding the Naval Reserve would do wonders when it comes to overall manning. I recently learned that STAR has a detached tender in Kitchener and have known for some time about BRUNSWICKER having its detachment in Moncton. I would propose that all the NRDs start this process to expand the NAVRES footprint to as many places as possible.

Using STAR for an example, we could put tenders in Saint Catharines (for Niagara region) and Oakville (for Halton region) atop the one in Kitchener-Waterloo. YORK in Toronto could put TWO tenders in Peel Region (Mississauga and Brampton), TWO in York Region (Markham and Newmarket), one in Simcoe County (Barrie or CFB Borden) and one in Durham Region (Oshawa). The others could go the same way; my idea is to take blocks of 500,000 total population and set up a NAVRES tender in the largest population centre there.

Of course, this would cost $$$$, but hey, if the Conservatives play ball next election, we might get somewhere...

Knock on wood.

Just for consideration, all of that needs a fair bit of 2nd and 3rd line support for the maintenance side of things, which is pretty well running at capacity at the moment, with not enough money or people to handle the current non-combatant fleet. I'm sure that would also have big implications for the NavRes personnel management side of things and not sure what they are doing for some of the previous nav res trades (like MESO) which would be critical to operate tenders at the Nav Res level

Not that it's a bad idea, just that it also needs the 'tail' to be beefed up to make it happen, and currently the tail side of things ate a billion dollar cuts to in service side of things (maintenance and support) as well as a hiring freeze for people, so all this 'future funding' is on paper with no actual plan to get the people needed to move the projects to actually spend the money, or some kind of plan to actually support/sustain the new capabilities.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I think the "tenders" Gorgo is talking about are secondary reserve units administered and reporting through a single central one. We used to call them detachments. I don't think she is talking about vessels.

Not that vessels at reserve units would be a bad decision, but they don't need to be of the scale of even Orca's. 20 to 25 meters launches - a bit like the British Archer class - would need little in terms of 2nd and 3rd line support (at least not much above what a large yacht owner would face). That would be a great opportunity for these reserve units to develop local waters knowledge. Such knowledge was quite critical when DONNACONA was called upon to do the river side work required during the Oka crisis - a time when a lot of reserve units had such tenders.

 

[Navy_Pete]

I think the "tenders" Gorgo is talking about are secondary reserve units administered and reporting through a single central one. We used to call them detachments. I don't think she is talking about vessels.

Not that vessels at reserve units would be a bad decision, but they don't need to be of the scale of even Orca's. 20 to 25 meters launches - a bit like the British Archer class - would need little in terms of 2nd and 3rd line support (at least not much above what a large yacht owner would face). That would be a great opportunity for these reserve units to develop local waters knowledge. Such knowledge was quite critical when DONNACONA was called upon to do the river side work required during the Oka crisis - a time when a lot of reserve units had such tenders.

I think the RCMP has some comparable boats now, with a small crew that can do some overnight patrols for the great lakes. Would be awesome for a change to get something straight COTs with zero changes, especially if it's in use by other departments. The maintenance support for that would still be a contract but something a single person could run with to coordinate with the units (and some kind of local service providers). Would need occasional dockings so a bit more than the RHIBs but something that wouldn't be much different then the existing aux and tenders on the coasts.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I think the RCMP has some comparable boats now, with a small crew that can do some overnight patrols for the great lakes. Would be awesome for a change to get something straight COTs with zero changes, especially if it's in use by other departments. The maintenance support for that would still be a contract but something a single person could run with to coordinate with the units (and some kind of local service providers). Would need occasional dockings so a bit more than the RHIBs but something that wouldn't be much different then the existing aux and tenders on the coasts.

RCMP fleet in the West has been gutted with 1-2 vessels year round and I think 1 more for the lakes in the summer.

I see one of the standard missions for Naval Reserve units on the coast is harbour protection and route clearance. Start off with a large RHIB with Cabin and MG mount. Have a backup open RHIB as well. As crews and mission profiles get developed, then perhaps then have 75' patrol boats built domestically and issued to select units. Have the vessels serviced and supported locally. Minimize high end gear on them that needs security and specialized repair.
Give them a ROV, have the 75's set up to take a remote .50cal weapon station, but perhaps not mount it. The 75' can also have dive compressor, tank racks and gear to support dive teams. Good fendering for coming alongside other vessels.

 

[Stoker]

RCMP fleet in the West has been gutted with 1-2 vessels year round and I think 1 more for the lakes in the summer.

I see one of the standard missions for Naval Reserve units on the coast is harbour protection and route clearance. Start off with a large RHIB with Cabin and MG mount. Have a backup open RHIB as well. As crews and mission profiles get developed, then perhaps then have 75' patrol boats built domestically and issued to select units. Have the vessels serviced and supported locally. Minimize high end gear on them that needs security and specialized repair.
Give them a ROV, have the 75's set up to take a remote .50cal weapon station, but perhaps not mount it. The 75' can also have dive compressor, tank racks and gear to support dive teams. Good fendering for coming alongside other vessels.

Units already had unit tenders of 75 feet and other sizes once before, too much upkeep. The Naval Reserves are a shadowof themselves when they supported the Kingston Class.

 

[Maxman1]

RCMP fleet in the West has been gutted with 1-2 vessels year round and I think 1 more for the lakes in the summer.

I see one of the standard missions for Naval Reserve units on the coast is harbour protection and route clearance. Start off with a large RHIB with Cabin and MG mount. Have a backup open RHIB as well. As crews and mission profiles get developed, then perhaps then have 75' patrol boats built domestically and issued to select units. Have the vessels serviced and supported locally. Minimize high end gear on them that needs security and specialized repair.
Give them a ROV, have the 75's set up to take a remote .50cal weapon station, but perhaps not mount it. The 75' can also have dive compressor, tank racks and gear to support dive teams. Good fendering for coming alongside other vessels.

Or fiberglass powerboats, like this:

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Units already had unit tenders of 75 feet and other sizes once before, too much upkeep.

No they were not too much upkeep. I doubt you were around in the 70's and 80's when we had them. They barely required any maintenance, and it was done by the Reg Force stoker at the reserve unit - generally requiring less than half a day a week even during heavy usage - with more complex work (if any) done during the winter season when they were out of the water at small shipyards that regularly dealt with fishing vessels and small tugs .

 

[Navy_Pete]

Or fiberglass powerboats, like this:

What if we just fixed this beauty up?

S.S. Minnow

 

[DBNSG]

What if we just fixed this beauty up?

S.S. Minnow

Only if it comes with Ginger and Maryanne.

 

[Good2Golf]

Or fiberglass air-deployable powerboats, like this:

 

[Stoker]

So we had a 75 ft patrol boat ex RCMP Marine Service boat at Cabot right up until 92 or 93. Every few years they went into an expensive refit and the reg force stoker certainly did not do all that much maintenance and they required an increasing amount of mainteance given their age. I was an engineer on one for 3 or 4 years. Took it as far as Quebec City, around Newfoundland, PEI, Halifax for MARCOT as the senior engineer. So yes there was a cost of maintaining it and operating it and it wssnt insignificant. Some units had smaller unit tenders but they all came with a cost. They were replaced as the costs were increasing and the Kingston Class was starting up. Sorry I'm assuming you are misremembering and must of experienced it differently.

No they were not too much upkeep. I doubt you were around in the 70's and 80's when we had them. They barely required any maintenance, and it was done by the Reg Force stoker at the reserve unit - generally requiring less than half a day a week even during heavy usage - with more complex work (if any) done during the winter season when they were out of the water at small shipyards that regularly dealt with fishing vessels and small tugs .

 

[Maxman1]

How about modernized steel, aluminum or fiberglass Elco 80 PT Boats?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

So we had a 75 ft patrol boat ex RCMP Marine Service boat at Cabot right up until 92 or 93. Every few years they went into an expensive refit and the reg force stoker certainly did not do all that much maintenance and they required an increasing amount of mainteance given their age. I was an engineer on one for 3 or 4 years. Took it as far as Quebec City, around Newfoundland, PEI, Halifax for MARCOT as the senior engineer. So yes there was a cost of maintaining it and operating it and it wssnt insignificant. Some units had smaller unit tenders but they all came with a cost. They were replaced as the costs were increasing and the Kingston Class was starting up. Sorry I'm assuming you are misremembering and must of experienced it differently.

This?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

No they were not too much upkeep. I doubt you were around in the 70's and 80's when we had them. They barely required any maintenance, and it was done by the Reg Force stoker at the reserve unit - generally requiring less than half a day a week even during heavy usage - with more complex work (if any) done during the winter season when they were out of the water at small shipyards that regularly dealt with fishing vessels and small tugs .

No boat/vessel is going to be maintenance free, just less or more. If a Federal organization can't maintain a small fleet of small patrol boats in civilian harbours with the supporting infrastructure, then you really have to question how the organization is run.

 

[Maxman1]

Edit: duplicate post.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

That Colin, is one of the 65 footers. And, yes, I drove both the Captor (Montcalm) and the Acadian (Donnacona). And I don't know what Stoker is on about - they were all retired well before the MCDV's came on line, I would say a good 5 years - and it had nothing to do with the MCDV's coming online or the cost of "maintaining" them, but was rather (for once) the planned life time for them. The Harbour Defense vessels (expected to be akin to the Coast Guard R-boats for size) that were supposed to replace them, however, were never acquired as it was decide that RhiB's would do fine.

 

[Stoker]

On about? Really? Like I said Standoff was on the go at least until 93 or 94 so all the tenders werent all gone 5 years before. It was gotten rid of due to cost of a aging platform and the impending MCDV project. Many of these unit tenders were used many years after as well by civilians. Why have sailors on unit tenders when they can sail on an actual ship. I also sailed Sydney and Adversus. Sorry you are not the only one that has experience with reserve tenders.

 

[Stoker]

PB Standoff. Stopped operating in 94. Divested in 97.