Treasury Bd to Consider CF Amphib Ship Buy

[ghazise]

The Tarawa is set for retirement in a couple of years, the other four LHA's will be going through extensive modifications (LHA(R)), 

theoritically, Canada puts the Tarawa through the LHA (R) program, that one ship will greatly increase the Canada's ability to project a forced entry capability anywhere in the world, "plus the Tarawa has alot of space for sea lift"

I think that would be interesting "cost assesment" picking up the Tarawa and funding the ship through modernization apposed to picking up two new San Antonios,

   

 

[geo]

Tarawa?....
You can't lump the tarawa in with the Upholders.... the Upholders never saw any real service and weere pretty much mothballed the minute they finished construction.

Am certain that the Tarawa would be a decent concept to persue - not clapped out, fully servicable.... interesting!

 

[Kirkhill]

2Ft Onion:

If we had the Tarawa - would we need the full capabilities of the San Antonios if we were to buy a pair of them as well?  In other words if we used the Tarawa as a command and helo support platform as well as a transport could be just use the San Antonios for transport alone?  If that was the case could we save on some of the gear and bodies on the San Antonios?

Trying to be a bit clearer - If the San Antonios were just floodable transports, like the Dutch Rotterdam, or even like the Brit Bays then a crew of 50 to 100 might be in order.  The San Antonios have a crew of 300-700? plus the marines.  What do all those bodies do and do we need them for our operations?

 

[ghazise]

I am talking about straight sea lift capabilities between the Tarawa and San Antonios, Sea lift being the primary reason to acquire amphibs, the expected couple of billions to acquire two new LPD's vs Tarawa / Tarawa w/minot refit / Tarawa with LHA(R), just off the top my head with having the the Tarawa being able to transport more equipment and troops, I think it would be cheaper to acquire the LHA than the 2 LPD's,   conditionally on acquistion price is extremely low considering the ship is paid off and it would be in interest of the US to remain to have that LHA capability with a close ally,   Sea Lift aside an LHA has so much more enabling capabilities than two LPD's,

Honestly considering the current manning/budget and especially political issues currently with the RCN, a joint purchase a couple of RORO dual use container ships, with a partnership with Canadain commercial shipping, would be cheaper than buying amphibs, because when you get down to it, the ships are only going to be used as sea lift, not amphibious assaults/raids or helo assualts,    

Re-configuring the Navy while the Navy Canada currently has needs modernization, doesn't make sense  

 

[canuck101]

The youngest of the Tarawa is the USS PELELIU it was Commissioned 3 May 1980.The second being USS Nassau it was Commissioned 28 july 1979.http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/lha-1.htm  If they did get a refit how long would they be service.

 

[ghazise]

I am not even close to a Naval Architect, but from the materials engineering classes I have taken, extensive (engineering assesments) hull inspections for structural stress and corrosions, with emphasive around the well deck/ballasts, mechanical, electrical and depending on where it's home port will be Victoria or Halifax, a secound round of structural inspections would be necessary to account to different climate, the USN intends to keep the LHA in service for twenty years after the LHA(R) program, so dependant on the engineering assesments and the extent of modifications with proper maintenance about 20 years of service life,  and of course having a third independant party conduct inspections to verify the inspections of the USN and RCN, might be a good idea,

Kirkhill:  "The San Antonios have a crew of 300-700? plus the marines.  What do all those bodies do and do we need them for our operations?"  Sailors tend to stay on the ship and the if any amphib acquistion goes through, I just see the army as being passengers on the way theatre, 

As I write and try to justify the acquistion of such a large ship, an LHA or even the San Antonios seem like overkill to meet a sea lift requirement. 

 

[geo]

Tend to agree with you 2ftOnion,
San Antonio class of ship is "waaaay" more than our current navy requires.
As far as I know, Canada is not looking to storm the beaches of ___________ (fill in blank) at this or any other time.
If we look at our deployment to East Timor or Sri Lanka, argument can be made for capability to deliver goods to locations that do not have port facilities.... conventional RORO construction would not be of much use in that case....

Don't know - I'm a green guy..... I only use the blue stuff to wash (when I have to)

 

[ghazise]

Once you have a sealift capability, design your deployment with your resources,  When we deployed to A-stan in 2001, we used our amphibs for ship shore to Pasni, Pakistan and used inter-theatre air transport to reach kandahar province, our retro-grade from theatre was using theatre air transport to Kuwait city,,,  a combination of RORO sea lift (to theatre) and C-130's (within theatre) this combination will be able to overcome every situation besides a forced-entry capability;

 

 

[Jungle]

As far as I know, Canada is not looking to storm the beaches of ___________ (fill in blank) at this or any other time.

Read this passage in the article:

"We're looking at being more engaged on a global scale," said Capt. Peter Ellis.

"I think it's a critical requirement, especially if we're going to conduct operations at short notice."

The acquisition of the ships, that can resemble small aircraft carriers, are in addition to the navy's $2.1-billion project to build three regular supply ships.

As yet, the navy has not come up with a price tag for the landing ships.

Ellis said the amphibious ships and supply boats serve different purposes.

The transports, complete with a detachment of attack helicopters and landing craft, give the army an ability to land on an empty or partially defended beach anywhere in the world.

Seems pretty clear to me: the CF want the ability to land troops even with light opposition. What's the point of deploying hundreds of Troops and millions worth of kit if a dozen kids with guns are going to prevent them from landing ?? If you are the first Troops to arrive in theater, how do you ensure the beach is secure ? Will you wait until someone else secures the area before deploying ?
Again, I believe we need to have both the RO-RO and the amphibious assault capabilities in low-to-medium intensity conflict areas.

 

[54/102 CEF]

I read through all the posts on this thread and one thing that keeps coming out is how well balanced the comments are -

I note that many ask what will this ASSET do? How will it be employed? etc I believe we need a full white paper on defence,
not a quasi-strategy

Simultaneous to this another emailer sent me these questions which I pass on below for all of us on the border of the Transformation Zone which I maintain have been obscured by the big machine at 101 Col By Drive

I suspect its all an adhoc program to pour major $$$$$$$ into sea base facilities on the East Coast

All that said - I was in Chapters Yesterday and skimmed through a new book by StephenClarkson on the LIBERALS! (google search here http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=The+Big+Red+Machine+Liberal+Party) -- one of the points I picked up is that the voters are ignoring all parties and so although this may be a shine up DND ploy for the next election - there is a real gap in expectations and delivery on the part of our rulers - aka the one party of the one party state.

Maybe the long march of the men in Suits is ending???????

Anyway -- on to the Check list

******************* Questions to test the info we seem to get from DND *******************

- Canada's military role in the world.
- Requirements for the defence of Canada.
- Requirements for responding to natural disasters within Canada and externally.
- Interrelationship of air/land/sea branches and associated command structure.
- Interrelationship and role of regulars and reserve forces (who does what and how does it fit together.
- Required staffing levels for regulars and reserves.
- Interrelationship between quasi-military forces (Coast Guard, RCMP, regional police, etc.) and CF.
- HR and compensation strategy.
- Requirement for a littoral (marine assault) capability.
- Deployability requirements (airlift / sealift).
- Interoperability with partners (US, NATO, etc.).
- Long term staffing requirements and strategy.
- Long term equipment requirements and strategy. --------------------------->ie consider ships last - or is the ship really a foil for C17s which can be used to complement/assist our provincial requirements/ friends and allies in all weather in all parts of the world.......

 

[edadian]

I believe the ships are to complement the strategic lift aircraft. We need both.

The C-17 is its own foil. It isn't a strategic lift aircraft it is a large tactical according to the company. The C-5 is Americas latest strategic lift plane and it has less capacity to the Ukraine/ Russian AN124-100M. Stick a Canadian avionics package on the Antonov and it would be perfect.

For tactical we just buy new Hercs or second hand US ones. The Americans hardly break them in before replacing them. Getting the British extension package could be feasible.

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/#Transport_/_Tanker_Aircraft

 

[54/102 CEF]

Good last post

Its ALL needed - but the past being our only guide to the future - with a government not really DND friendly, its really a trip to Vegas Gambling Casino!

 

[ghazise]

Interesting paper;

http://www.navyleague.ca/eng/ma/papers/Canadian_Amphibious_Capabilities%20_PHaydon.pdf