Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Navy & Maritime
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

MEDR_10_33_20_AM_10_33_20_AM_10_33_20_AM.jpg

Yuma_17_MV-22_6234-1.jpg

Yuma_17_AV-8B_6417-1.jpg

Yuma_17_F-35B_6266-1.jpg
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence







Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates

This is a discussion on Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by J_Can The Red Fleet will not be surging through the Atlantic any time soon. Yes the Russian ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old March 14th, 2017   #571
Junior Member
Private First Class
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Sydney Aust
Posts: 71
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Can View Post
The Red Fleet will not be surging through the Atlantic any time soon. Yes the Russian Northern Fleet is a problem but they would first have to get through the RN, the Danish, Norwegian, Dutch, and French navies first before we would have to worry about it. This is not even including the American Navy.

.
It seems to me that Russia and Canada will soon find themselves in direct competition in the Arctic (if they aren't already) and no other country stands in their way in that area. So saying that other countries stand in their way is not really thinking about the possibilities (let alone the lack of collective spirit in such an approach)

Any real competition in that area could soon spread into the Northern Pacific - sovereignty breeches and the like - as Russia takes advantage of the lack of Canadian assets to show they can't cover all bases sufficiently.

Really, with the length of Canadian coastline and its exposure to developing geo-political events I'm surprised the electorate is so complacent.
Boatteacher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2017   #572
Just Hatched
Private
J_Can's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Canada
Posts: 13
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boatteacher View Post
It seems to me that Russia and Canada will soon find themselves in direct competition in the Arctic (if they aren't already) and no other country stands in their way in that area. So saying that other countries stand in their way is not really thinking about the possibilities (let alone the lack of collective spirit in such an approach)

Any real competition in that area could soon spread into the Northern Pacific - sovereignty breeches and the like - as Russia takes advantage of the lack of Canadian assets to show they can't cover all bases sufficiently.

Really, with the length of Canadian coastline and its exposure to developing geo-political events I'm surprised the electorate is so complacent.
There complacent because "the good times will never end" unfortunately in their (the electorate and political class) minds. In regards to the Northern Pacific and Canada elector apathy towards collective spirit I totally agree.

However I don't see how there would be any direct military confrontation in the High North. I have done training up there twice, it can get so cold if you touch metal with bare skin you will get immediate frost bite. Weapons stop working, fuel loses such viscosity that generators won't work. Everything has to be flown or tracked in. Even under the most dire climate models the High North will still be very unpleasant. Your taking minus 20 in summer and negative 40 in winter, and summer only last about 4 months there. Taking all that into account and I can't personal see a massive shooting war occurring. Missile/ air strikes or the occasional sub sure, fleet actions I just do not see it. Even ice free is not ice free, it just means the average ice strengthened ship will be able navigate without ice breaker support in the summer. In the winter they will still need polar 2 or 3 ice breakers.
J_Can is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2017   #573
Just Hatched
Private
J_Can's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Canada
Posts: 13
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redlands18 View Post
Just one thing i would like to ask. How reliant is Canada on Sea trade out of Asia both in Imports & exports? With the growing tensions in the South China Sea area the RCN may be asked in the future to help keep these sea lanes open and that is going to rely on a strong Frigate/Destroyer Force.
Here in Australia we have a massive reliance on the Sea Lanes into Asia staying open. With either a lot of choke points via the direct route or a much longer route out into the Pacific Ocean. It's one of the things that is driving Australia towards a much larger Sub fleet and more capable Frigates.
You may not have the huge Soviet navy coming through the Greenland-UK gap anymore, but you may be faced with your Trade Routes being closed by a conflict in the South China Sea.
In short not a lot, something like 80 to 85 percent of our trade is through the USA. The vast majority oils flows from the Mid East westwards transiting either the Suez or Cape Horn, the remainder is produced here. Foodstuff is practically all North American (Canada, America, Mexico collectively) outside of speciality goods. Most trade through the Pacific/ Indian Oceans are commercial and household goods.

Also regards to everyone else much appreciated insight, I guess I was taking everyone's commentary from the wrong angle. Its not there is a disagreement with idea the RCN needs more "tools", just there needs to a baseline capability that has to be provided for at all costs (funding wise) and then everything else comes.
J_Can is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2017   #574
Senior Member
Brigadier General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,836
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Todjaeger View Post
A point you seem to keep missing is that a fleet of 15 frigates/destroyers is not especially large. Particularly when you factor in the maritime area and approaches to Canada, and then include maintenance and training cycles in addition to the operational cycles.
Indeed, and lets not forget the rule of three and Canada's treaty obligations. Ships will be deployed overseas, some will be protecting Canada, and others will be in maintenance. A fleet of 15 surface combatants is a bare minimum, insufficient really.
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2017   #575
Senior Member
Brigadier General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,836
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redlands18 View Post
Just one thing i would like to ask. How reliant is Canada on Sea trade out of Asia both in Imports & exports? With the growing tensions in the South China Sea area the RCN may be asked in the future to help keep these sea lanes open and that is going to rely on a strong Frigate/Destroyer Force.
Canada's trade with Asia is much too low because of our over reliance on US/Mexico trade. It is a huge missed opportunity. If we were developing trade relations properly in Asia, absolutely a more robust RCN would be needed.


Quote:
Here in Australia we have a massive reliance on the Sea Lanes into Asia staying open. It's one of the things that is driving Australia towards a much larger Sub fleet and more capable Frigates.
You may not have the huge Soviet navy coming through the Greenland-UK gap anymore, but you may be faced with your Trade Routes being closed by a conflict in the South China Sea.
Couldn't agree more.
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2017   #576
Senior Member
Brigadier General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,836
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boatteacher View Post
Really, with the length of Canadian coastline and its exposure to developing geo-political events I'm surprised the electorate is so complacent.
Two points, one the complacency comes from being next to a superpower. Two, if you have a strong enough stomach, read some Canadian media defence articles and then the read comments from our electorate on those articles. It will be very apparent how FU this country really is.
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2017   #577
Senior Member
Brigadier General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,836
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Can View Post
There complacent because "the good times will never end" unfortunately in their (the electorate and political class) minds. In regards to the Northern Pacific and Canada elector apathy towards collective spirit I totally agree.
Me too.

Quote:
However I don't see how there would be any direct military confrontation in the High North. I have done training up there twice, it can get so cold if you touch metal with bare skin you will get immediate frost bite. Weapons stop working, fuel loses such viscosity that generators won't work. Everything has to be flown or tracked in. Even under the most dire climate models the High North will still be very unpleasant.
All very true but that hasn't stopped the Russians from holding extensive exercises in the Arctic. They are expanding bases and introducing Arctic specific kit.


Quote:
Even ice free is not ice free, it just means the average ice strengthened ship will be able navigate without ice breaker support in the summer. In the winter they will still need polar 2 or 3 ice breakers.
For now yes, but there worrying signs that polar melting could accelerate beyond current predications. An Arctic that is ice free for 5-8 months is a huge opportunity for resource starved or greedy competitors. With our minimal presence, the Canadian Arctic is up for grabs and it isn't only China and Russia (think south).
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2017   #578
New Member
Private
Delta204's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 38
Threads:
J_Can, I can understand your frustration but the reality is that unless the govt. significantly increases defense spending the RCN will NOT be acquiring the type of naval assets you are hoping for. The main piece of wisdom I've been able to learn from this forum is that you cannot make a procurement wish list without fully understanding the established CONOPS - and what gives you the most value per dollar to meet these requirements.

The Halifax class frigates I would argue are the most versatile, flexible and valuable military asset that the entire CAF possess. They can be deployed anywhere in the world, in virtually any naval theatre; they can go from hunting pirates off the coast of Africa to staring down the Russians in the Baltic in a matter of a few days (which they did not too long ago!); they have the most global reach of any element of the CAF - working/visiting with allies (and non-allies) in every single continent. They are world class ASW vessels which goes beyond just hardware and builds off of skills the RCN has taken many years (decades) to develop. They operate seamlessly with the USN including their CSG's- perhaps better than anyone else. And as others have pointed out all of these abilities are only possible if there are sufficient numbers available to meet domestic and global commitments.

On paper it might be tempting to cut frigate numbers in order to go out and buy some shiny new toys; but in reality this would require a complete and fundamental change to the CONOPS of the RCN. All of this would be for what is essentially a boutique naval capability. The complexity and expense of this type of capability probably comes close to that of fixed wing carrier operations!

Last edited by Delta204; March 14th, 2017 at 09:32 PM.
Delta204 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2017   #579
Defense Enthusiast
Captain
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 692
Threads:
J_Can, while at the moment the Russian navy isn't that great of a threat you can't look at today and now and make that assessment, You need to look at the future and guesstimate what they could become while also allowing for any falling out with current allies or current allies becoming less powerful.

On the topic of pacific trade through the Vancouver port authority trade isn't thatsmall with 2016 having 3,105 foreign ship's visit picking up or dropping off 135,538,055 tons of cargo 81% of which was Bulk and Break bulk cargo, And based off of 2014 figures (slightly more traded that year but inflation to account for) would be worth roughly $187 billion up from $43 billion in 2004 and it's growing. The Pacific is no side note but a key area of concern that should have appropriate resources put towards.
vonnoobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 Weeks Ago   #580
Senior Member
Brigadier General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,836
Threads:
I wonder if the Halifax frigates will still be operational by the time our military procurement decide on this latest RCN request. Hopefully so as the progress on CSC is minimal.

Royal Canadian Navy interested in unmanned aerial system for Halifax-class frigate | Ottawa Citizen
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 Weeks Ago   #581
Senior Member
Brigadier General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,836
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by vonnoobie View Post
J_Can, while at the moment the Russian navy isn't that great of a threat you can't look at today and now and make that assessment, You need to look at the future and guesstimate what they could become while also allowing for any falling out with current allies or current allies becoming less powerful.
Agreed but the Canadian government is under no pressure by our electorate to do this.

Quote:
On the topic of pacific trade through the Vancouver port authority trade isn't thatsmall with 2016 having 3,105 foreign ship's visit picking up or dropping off 135,538,055 tons of cargo 81% of which was Bulk and Break bulk cargo, And based off of 2014 figures (slightly more traded that year but inflation to account for) would be worth roughly $187 billion up from $43 billion in 2004 and it's growing. The Pacific is no side note but a key area of concern that should have appropriate resources put towards.
With Vancouver's moron mayor and the cost of doing business in Vancouver, I see a bright future for the Port of Prince Rupert. Shorter route to Asia and less expensive. Still, the government won't be doing much to enhance freedom of the Seas anytime soon.
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 Weeks Ago   #582
Senior Member
Brigadier General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,836
Threads:
This link discusses the latest stuff about Adm. Norman's situation. A desperate need by the RCN for a new AOR, a Quebec company once again at the plate after bankruptcy, pissed off shipyards in Halifax and Vancouver (SeaSpan, whose endless delays gave the Quebec yard the opportunity), and leak that junior wanted to cancel the deal. Good luck finding the leak if it came from th RCN side, only hundreds that would have been appalled if the RCN has to go for 3-4 years minimum without an AOR. Of course someone would have leaked this! Piss on junior, frigging wanker POS.

RCMP probe that led to Vice-Admiral Mark Norman’s removal is focused on $700 million supply ship
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #583
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 260
Threads:
John

I along with many many others are appalled decade after decade how governments of all colours have opennly praised the efforts of our serving men and women only to scuttle those very individuals abilities by so ineptly spending money greasing friends and lobbiests.

I have spent my entire adult life in the "If" business. If I was needed as a firefighter or industrial emergency responder it was then that all my training and that of my teams would have to be brought to bear along with the equipment we had. As a fire chief I made certain that I fought for the best of equipment from my elected board. It was their duty to ensure we were safe and that the equipment was proper for the task. That is the same duty our national elected members have. It's not to waste money. It's not to provide jobs to ridings that voted in these tards. It's to provide a service.

Our defence force is there for the times it's needed not when it's politically beneficial to those in the House of Commons.

Our navy has been crippled by a failure of all parties in Ottawa to work on a common vision for our premier national asset. It's been the navy at the sharp end of the spear since day one. Today our ability to deploy a national task force is gone.

The beureaucrats have played an equally destructive part in this as well. Dithering over plans and capabilities instead of just getting on with it. Spasmatic building programs instead of continuos build and product improvement to me is the main reason why we no longer have the capabilities offered by the Tribal destroyers.

There was no reason why a stretched and up armed Halifax class platform couldn't have taken over the tribals in the mid 2000's. When Provider was paid off that should have started the build program for new and improved AOR's. Some type of transport capability should have been built in the last 15 years to move army resources and provide and inherent national HADR capability.

I'm not a naval engineer nor have I deep ocean sea time but by god I could have made sure we had replacements in a timely manner. We had shipyards. We still have the shipyards. The biggest dry dock at one time on the North American east coast was in Saint John NB and after the frigate build the federal government paid Saint John Shipbuilding, aka IRVING, to shutter the site and get out of the ship building business. That site should have been the centre of excellence for a continuous build of frigates and destroyers. There would have been more than enough work for Davie and Port Weller and a west coast yard for large vessels if only the petty politics hadn't gotten in the way.

I am afraid of what is going to happen on the international stage. Our navy is a ghost of itself. As is the Royal Navy for similar incredulous decisions.

We have allowed our defences to wither and now the defence of our nations is at risk.

It's no wonder our service people are leaving in droves. So so sad.
Novascotiaboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #584
Moderator
General
ngatimozart's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 3,882
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Fedup View Post
This link discusses the latest stuff about Adm. Norman's situation. A desperate need by the RCN for a new AOR, a Quebec company once again at the plate after bankruptcy, pissed off shipyards in Halifax and Vancouver (SeaSpan, whose endless delays gave the Quebec yard the opportunity), and leak that junior wanted to cancel the deal. Good luck finding the leak if it came from th RCN side, only hundreds that would have been appalled if the RCN has to go for 3-4 years minimum without an AOR. Of course someone would have leaked this! Piss on junior, frigging wanker POS.

RCMP probe that led to Vice-Admiral Mark Norman’s removal is focused on $700 million supply ship
No need for the bad language. You have been here long enough to know that. The Moderators do not want to see a repeat of this.
________________
The Rules - read them. Ignorance of them is not an excuse.
The Introduction thread for new members to tell the rest of us something about you.
ngatimozart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #585
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: NYC
Posts: 5
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novascotiaboy View Post
John

I along with many many others are appalled decade after decade how governments of all colours have opennly praised the efforts of our serving men and women only to scuttle those very individuals abilities by so ineptly spending money greasing friends and lobbiests.

I have spent my entire adult life in the "If" business. If I was needed as a firefighter or industrial emergency responder it was then that all my training and that of my teams would have to be brought to bear along with the equipment we had. As a fire chief I made certain that I fought for the best of equipment from my elected board. It was their duty to ensure we were safe and that the equipment was proper for the task. That is the same duty our national elected members have. It's not to waste money. It's not to provide jobs to ridings that voted in these tards. It's to provide a service.

Our defence force is there for the times it's needed not when it's politically beneficial to those in the House of Commons.

Our navy has been crippled by a failure of all parties in Ottawa to work on a common vision for our premier national asset. It's been the navy at the sharp end of the spear since day one. Today our ability to deploy a national task force is gone.

The beureaucrats have played an equally destructive part in this as well. Dithering over plans and capabilities instead of just getting on with it. Spasmatic building programs instead of continuos build and product improvement to me is the main reason why we no longer have the capabilities offered by the Tribal destroyers.

There was no reason why a stretched and up armed Halifax class platform couldn't have taken over the tribals in the mid 2000's. When Provider was paid off that should have started the build program for new and improved AOR's. Some type of transport capability should have been built in the last 15 years to move army resources and provide and inherent national HADR capability.

I'm not a naval engineer nor have I deep ocean sea time but by god I could have made sure we had replacements in a timely manner. We had shipyards. We still have the shipyards. The biggest dry dock at one time on the North American east coast was in Saint John NB and after the frigate build the federal government paid Saint John Shipbuilding, aka IRVING, to shutter the site and get out of the ship building business. That site should have been the centre of excellence for a continuous build of frigates and destroyers. There would have been more than enough work for Davie and Port Weller and a west coast yard for large vessels if only the petty politics hadn't gotten in the way.

I am afraid of what is going to happen on the international stage. Our navy is a ghost of itself. As is the Royal Navy for similar incredulous decisions.

We have allowed our defences to wither and now the defence of our nations is at risk.

It's no wonder our service people are leaving in droves. So so sad.
On the subject of continuous build. Does any of the more knowledgeable forumers know at what size (budget, inventory, etc) economy of scale kicks in?


I mean comparing Canada to the only other G7 nation that spends 1% GDP on defense, shouldn't it theoretically have around a third of JMSDF inventory? I mean I doubt the Japanese themselves are without some pork spending, given how expensive their F-2s became, or how expensive their service rifles are.
byronicasian is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:31 PM.