Little Honking Ships......

[Privateer]

However, if we're not currently in the market for a Mistral-type vessel for the RCN then we shouldn't buy it. 

But...so shiny...

 

[Kirkhill]

Courtesy of Mark Collins

An amphib, that is–from Vanguard magazine, August/September 2012


…
Recent operations have also underscored a need for the Canadian Forces to consider the acquisition of a dedicated platform to support operations from the sea, including for humanitarian operations and disaster response scenarios.

Even in relatively permissive environments, such operations will typically unfold in manifestly chaotic conditions – often in the absence of, or hampered by extensively damaged transportation networks and infrastructure, where local medical and social services have been overwhelmed through the sheer number of injured and dispossessed. In such circumstances, nothing can match the flexibility, adaptability, logistics capacity and strategic effect of a purpose-built amphibious vessel to render assistance: with a capacity to embark personnel, vehicles, force logistics and humanitarian materiel in volume and get them where they’re needed throughout a theatre of operations; an ability to embark/disembark cargo without the need of shore-based infrastructure, as well as to transfer cargo to other vessels at sea; and the deck space and arrangements that permit it to accommodate or operate large landing craft, as well as medium or heavy lift aircraft, each of which is essential to project, sustain and support operations ashore.

In our view, such a vessel – and the joint sea-air-land capabilities that it would have embarked – could be among the most heavily utilized assets in the CF inventory. Equipped with the space and communications facilities to act as a floating civil-military coordination centre, such a ship would be an ideal platform for joint action from the sea -– a platform for the Canadian Forces to contribute meaningfully, decisively and strategically to operations ashore.

Moreover, such a vessel could readily emerge as the Canadian Forces’ principal defence diplomacy asset, deployed routinely to regions of strategic interest with a range of CF capabilities embarked to strengthen regional partnerships, or more broadly to conduct diplomatic goodwill missions with other federal agencies and non-governmental organizations and assets embarked…

Rear-Admiral Mark Normanis deputy commander of the Royal Canadian Navy. Previously, he commanded the Canadian Fleet Atlantic and has served in a variety of headquarters posts. This article is adapted from a presentation to the Naval Association of Canada [in June, see below].

 

[Colin Parkinson]

This sounds like a totally bass-ackward way to equip our military.  Wait and see what goes on sale and buy that capability because it might be useful?  This thought process totally highlights why we need a complete review of Canadian foreign and military policy.  We need to clearly define our foreign policy objectives and then determine what structure and assets will allow us to meet those goals.  If an opportunity then comes along to fill one of those defined needs with a bargain then of course we should go for it.  However, if we're not currently in the market for a Mistral-type vessel for the RCN then we shouldn't buy it.  The tail shouldn't wag the dog when it comes to our military capabilities.

:2c:

and the current system is so great it's only taken 15+ years to buy  helicopter. If we bought these, the need would find us. Canada will be involved in an expeditionary war/operation again and likely sooner than we think. Hell had I suggested in 2001 that we should lease tanks and Mi-17 helicopters, you would have said "your smoking crack" but it worked. If we (as in the nation) woke up and smelled the coffee, we would realize we need at least 1 of this type of ship and at least two tanker/resupply ships to meet the coming needs and we need them now, not hopefully in 5-7 years from now.

 

[GR66]

Don't confuse the fact that I think that buying a Mistral just because one becomes available is a silly approach to major equipment purchases with disagreement that such a ship would be highly useful to Canada.  However with limited budgets, throwing money at one now would certainly mean losing money gain/maintain other important capabilities.  That's no way to develop policy or manage an organization as important as the CF. 

Have the government clearly identify what it expects the CF to be able to do and then the CF in a planned, logical way can tell the government what it needs to perform those tasks.  If the government isn't willing to provide the money to fund the structure and equipment required then the CDS can tell the Minister what the consequences to CF's ability to perform those tasks will be.  I'm not saying that this is the way that things ARE done, but to my mind it's the way that things SHOULD be done.

 

[MilEME09]

If i recall correctly the first of the Russian Mistrals started trials recently, if France cancels the deal, we may get a quick delivery once they repaint all the signs on the ship to English/French. I remember years ago a French news paper did say the RCN was very interested in the mistral, so maybe this forms with some long term plan of ours?

 

[MarkOttawa]

Nice idea, no reality.  Still need A/ORs which Mistrals can't replaace (oriiginal JSS supposed sort of to do both as does actual Dutch Karel Doorman
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/dutch-order-multi-purpose-support-ship-06113/ ).

Moreover no budget for new ship class and few Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!.  Complete non-starter.  Esp.  with this government.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[a_majoor]

This sounds like some of the arguments during the dying days of the Martin government. There was a desperate need identified for heavy airlift, but Boeing C-17's were out of the question at the time due to the astonishing price tag. There was some discussion back then in the press and various websites (including this one) where various options were being debated, even including Russian and Ukrainian jets (which would be very cheap, but of rather questionable utility unless totally rebuilt once in Canada to western standards).

The fact that the procurement system is broken and monies are not forthcoming puts *us* in a bind; we need some sort of capability, we need it quickly and cheaply but it does not seem possible to source this internally. Perhaps we will have to accept a solution that provides half a loaf rather than be totally without. It is at least worth looking at as a COA, and puts some pressure on various elements in Industry and the Bureaucracy to actually make a move since some alternatives exist offshore.

 

[Kirkhill]

Plan B?

On this day 9 May - another cutting out expedition
On the 9th of May 1795, the HMS Melampus, under the command of Richard Strachan, partook in an attack on a French convoy in Cartaret Bay. Having spotted the French vessels, the British 36-gun frigate and accompanying ships chased the convoy, which sought protection along the shore. The French attempted to fight off the British squadron with a shore battery and armed ships. Strachan dispatched a cutting out force, with the squadron providing cover fire. The French aborted their defense, leaving all of the convoy, but one, for the taking.

A good chunk of the RN was procured from the French in this manner.  Good ships.  Poor Sailors.  ;D

 

[Navy_Pete]

Why would we buy a helicopter carrier ship?  To make them effective, we would also need an AOR to support the other ships needed to protect it.

Also, buying a ship isn't like buying a tank; tanks carry a few folks onboard, but they don't live in it.  Sailors live in ships for weeks a time; it makes a huge difference to how much training you need to operate it properly.  You won't be very effective at projecting force if you have to limp into the nearest friendly port any time you need more then an oil change, so you need to be able to do a reasonable amount of maintenance, which requires equipment specific training.  Some of it is pretty easy as a diesel is a diesel is a diesel, but simple things like getting used to the maintenance routines, peculiarity with the equpment layout, part lists, etc takes time to learn and costs a lot of money.

Also, the Mistral class was designed for a well trained, senior group of sailors.  They may have modified it somewhat for the Russians, but remember from a briefing on the capabilties that the most juniour sailor onboard is a MS, so it would also mean a big shift in how we crew a vessel.  Not to mention that we wouldn't fill even one Mistral with all the functioning sea kings we have left....

Don't forget that everytime an AOR goes for a refit, the coast goes without the capability for 18 months or so.  Sure it sucks, and yes it'd be great to have three (with staggered DWPs, so two are normally at some readiness level), but such is life when you are sailing around a fleet when your "new" ships are over twenty years old, and your old ships are steam driven with oil boilers (not to mention most of the auxiliary boats, which are another 10-15 years older still).

We're probably lucky that the AORs have lasted this long, as they are well past their 30 year design life and never got a 'mid life refit'.  The fact that no one got killed on the PRO is a testament to the response from the crew.

But rushing off to buy something to put a hull in the water would just cost a huge chunk of money we don't have, and provide a new capability we haven't identified as being needed, while still not addressing the lack of an oiler, so it would just put the RCN further behind the eight ball.

 

[YZT580]

Why would we buy a helicopter carrier ship?  To make them effective, we would also need an AOR to support the other ships needed to protect it.

Just trying to tie things together but wouldn't the Mistrals work very nicely as "that big honking ship" that was the dream not so many years ago?  They will work as a command centre, provide a stable platform for disaster relief, usable as troop transports as well as ferry a significant quantity of supplies.  What they won't do is carry fuel.  Well if you are freighting around special forces, equipment, and working as a hospital to boot you really don't want  tens of thousands of gallons of avgas or diesel  underfoot anyway.  Seems to me that a separate fleet oiler built to civil marine standards would be more suitable and they can be picked up for a whole lot less cash.  Total bill for 5 ships, two mistrals and 3 tankers would not be significantly higher than the two we are ordering.  The problem with the helicopters is another thing entirely. 

 

[MarkOttawa]

RN getting four 37,000 tonne oilers built in S. Korea by 542 million pounds:
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/britains-navy-supplies-are-from-mars-07313/

Or maybe 452 million pounds:
http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/News-and-Events/Latest-News/2012/February/22/120222-New-RFA

For four big vessels. For C$ 840 million or $210 million each.  And we'll be lucky to get two made-in-Vancouver Berlin-class ships for $2.6 billion or $1.3 billion.  Each.  Go figure.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/canada-issues-rfp-for-cdn-29b-joint-support-ship-project-updated-02392/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Kirkhill]

RN getting four 37,000 tonne oilers built in S. Korea by 542 million pounds:
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/britains-navy-supplies-are-from-mars-07313/

Or maybe 452 million pounds:
http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/News-and-Events/Latest-News/2012/February/22/120222-New-RFA

For four big vessels. For C$ 840 million or $210 million each.  And we'll be lucky to get two made-in-Vancouver Berlin-class ships for $2.6 billion or $1.3 billion.  Each.  Go figure.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/canada-issues-rfp-for-cdn-29b-joint-support-ship-project-updated-02392/

Mark
Ottawa

Indeed.

On the other hand the CFDS is well past its best before date and apparently was being rewritten in any event.  I can't help but wonder if another rewrite of the rewrite is in the works as we speak/text.

Any guesses on new UORs?  >

 

[Danjanou]

840.million for 4 Oilers vs $2.6 Billion for two. Hmm let me do the math, twice as many ships and save how much? And how much are the Mistrals going for again?

Yup this one is a no brainer, someone want to send this to the new Finance Minister.

Yes we'd have to figure out the Helios and the crewing/training issues. Mind knowing the mindset of some at Disneyland on the Rideau the most pressing issue if we did this would be to come up with four new War of 1812 Battle Honour names for the extra ships.  :

 

[Edward Campbell]

This is not about spending the defence budget wisely ... it is about the political Holy Grail: low skill/high pay jobs for men.

We, the taxpayers, and you, the CF, will get as much (as little?) combat power as Canadian wage rates permit.

UK voters are a wee bit more sophisticated, they understand that UK shipyards cannot build warships at anything like a competitive, sensible cost; Canadian voters are of a different mind.

 

[AlexanderM]

This is not about spending the defence budget wisely ... it is about the political Holy Grail: low skill/high pay jobs for men.

We, the taxpayers, and you, the CF, will get as much (as little?) combat power as Canadian wage rates permit.

UK voters are a wee bit more sophisticated, they understand that UK shipyards cannot build warships at anything like a competitive, sensible cost; Canadian voters are of a different mind.

I think the Canadian voters could be swayed, if the attempt were well thought out.

 

[suffolkowner]

I don't think this is a wage issue so much as that the contracts are issued to two yards without competition. It's a surprise that two yards without demonstrated ability to build the ships and without having to compete for individual ship contracts are coming in with extremely high estimates?

Having said that, I am willing to pay a premium for Canadian made ships, but 7x might be an issue, 3x would be more acceptable considering the tax return.

I think two issues standout the need for platforms now, and the question of how many ships the government is going to fund.

The first point with respect to the AOR's could be handled by making other arrangements (US Fast Supply Class-my preferred).

The second is real interesting. From a military observer as long as the kit is supplied I don't car about the cost as a taxpayer though I do. If the CSC comes in at 4-5x world prices and the government doesn't provide any more money the RCN is looking at only 6 ships to replace the current 15.

I would think that the UK's Bay Class would be more in our price range. Perhaps we could purchase their Bay Class ships and the British could replace them with the French Mistrals

 

[MilEME09]

I don't think this is a wage issue so much as that the contracts are issued to two yards without competition. It's a surprise that two yards without demonstrated ability to build the ships and without having to compete for individual ship contracts are coming in with extremely high estimates?

Having said that, I am willing to pay a premium for Canadian made ships, but 7x might be an issue, 3x would be more acceptable considering the tax return.

I think two issues standout the need for platforms now, and the question of how many ships the government is going to fund.

The first point with respect to the AOR's could be handled by making other arrangements (US Fast Supply Class-my preferred).

The second is real interesting. From a military observer as long as the kit is supplied I don't car about the cost as a taxpayer though I do. If the CSC comes in at 4-5x world prices and the government doesn't provide any more money the RCN is looking at only 6 ships to replace the current 15.

I would think that the UK's Bay Class would be more in our price range. Perhaps we could purchase their Bay Class ships and the British could replace them with the French Mistrals

Another issue is that our shipyards arent equipped for large scale ship building projects such as this, if the AOR's and the ice breaker could be built at the same time, and atleast 2 or 3 CSC at once we would be golden. Cost? if its really costing us 7x the going rate we should be looking at why that is, and how to bring it down.

 

[suffolkowner]

Another issue is that our shipyards arent equipped for large scale ship building projects such as this, if the AOR's and the ice breaker could be built at the same time, and atleast 2 or 3 CSC at once we would be golden. Cost? if its really costing us 7x the going rate we should be looking at why that is, and how to bring it down.

I had earlier suggested to the Minister that the AOR's be built at Irving while the AOPS/Icebreaker be built at Seaspan, his reply was that the respective shipyards do not/will not have the capability to build designs that have not already been planned (scary-yes, believable-I don't know).

the 7x is just the straight math rounded up of the UK ships versus our planned AOR's.

I wonder what it will cost us to renegotiate with Irving/Seaspan which is surely inevitable

 

[MarkOttawa]

And, if one thought the F-35 was a big cost, the RCN shipbuilding expense will kill the whole CF budget if anything like planned numbers/capabilities are actually bought.  Which cannot realistically be done.  Fairyland and someone in the government (pols), bureaucracy and forces--if anyone had any honesty--should 'fess up fairly soon.  But I hae me doots.  'Tis Canada and none dare say "acquisition malpractice":
https://www.google.ca/search?q=+%22acquisition+malpractice%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a&channel=sb&gfe_rd=ctrl&ei=c4IrU-XOJqyC8Qe12IEg&gws_rd=cr

By the way neither Irving nor Seaspan yet have an actual contract to build ships for the RCN.  The yards were merely selected in a bizarre process to determine those least incapable of building the ships.  Or something.  Imagine selecting a factory to build aircraft and then relying on the company to figure out how actually to make them.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Aircraft bootcamps anyone (end at link)?

…
The Western Canadian Shipbuilding Summit was a major step in the implementation of Western Canada’s Shipbuilding Action Plan, highlighted in the government’s Economic Action Plan of 2012. Western Economic Development Diversification Canada will host upcoming Shipbuilding Bootcamps to help business navigate government procurement policy, as well as Supplier Development Tours to educate and connect businesses with the shipbuilding industry.”
http://www.canadiansailings.ca/?p=4288

Mark
Ottawa