Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates

S

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
John Fedup said:
I am sure they would. I would expect any off-shore build would likely be a competitive bid. What do you think of the UK decision for building the 4 Tide class ships in S Korea? Seems like a very attractive package.
Click to expand...
Happy with that - we didn't have any yards with recent experience of anything of that size and shape, the ships are well overdue for order and the price was very right - we get to retain the fitting out work so some money is being spent doing things that support skilled trades locally.

My only reservation is that we're only ordering four not six.
 
S

swerve

Super Moderator
John Fedup said:
What do you think of the UK decision for building the 4 Tide class ships in S Korea? Seems like a very attractive package.
Click to expand...
I agree with the previous posts. Our own shipyards are no longer experienced in such ships, & didn't bid, no doubt recognising that. We get cheap, efficient, high-quality shipbuilding, & do the fitting-out (which our own yards can still cope with) here.
 
Anixtu

Anixtu

New Member
swerve said:
Our own shipyards are no longer experienced in such ships, & didn't bid, no doubt recognising that.
Click to expand...
Disagree. It was not lack of experience, it was lack of existing capacity. Such lack coming about because MARS should have been ordered mid-2000s when the capacity was available, having most recently been used to build Strategic ROROs and LSD(A)s.

At the time, it was a sensible decision by a new government, but let's not gloss over the failure of the previous government to keep that work in the UK.
 
V

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
Depending on how fast Australia moves in acquiring new replenishment ships the RCN may be able to lease/buy one or both of our current one's. Sure they showing there age but apparently by Canada's standard's (And I thought Australia's government and military brass was bad) they still have quite a bit of life in them...
 
t68

t68

Well-Known Member
vonnoobie said:
Depending on how fast Australia moves in acquiring new replenishment ships the RCN may be able to lease/buy one or both of our current one's. Sure they showing there age but apparently by Canada's standard's (And I thought Australia's government and military brass was bad) they still have quite a bit of life in them...
Click to expand...
From memory they are building a couple of Berlin class tanker in the next couple of years, think they might get new mil spec tankers before the RAN


Edit
Found a couple of reports that suggest a 2019 commission date, also this write up from defence industry daily gives a comparison on value for money between the UK -CAN deal

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...29b-joint-support-ship-project-updated-02392/
 
V

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
t68 said:
From memory they are building a couple of Berlin class tanker in the next couple of years, think they might get new mil spec tankers before the RAN


Edit
Found a couple of reports that suggest a 2019 commission date, also this write up from defence industry daily gives a comparison on value for money between the UK -CAN deal

Canada’s C$ 2.9B “Joint Support Ship” Project, Take 3
Click to expand...
Your correct, Our's wont be done till after the Canadian's have done there's.

Canada does have a 2019+ commissioning time table while the RAN has a 2023+, And Canada already looking at a few US ships to lease based on the link you posted.

But they making a bad choice to build the tanker's in Canada, paying a massive premium for it at a time when budget's are so tight.
 
John Newman

John Newman

The Bunker Group
vonnoobie said:
Your correct, Our's wont be done till after the Canadian's have done there's.

Canada does have a 2019+ commissioning time table while the RAN has a 2023+, And Canada already looking at a few US ships to lease based on the link you posted.

But they making a bad choice to build the tanker's in Canada, paying a massive premium for it at a time when budget's are so tight.
Click to expand...
If Canada actually get's a new built AOR in commission by 2019, I'll eat my hat! Isn't going to happen. The Berlin class design was selected two years ago (June 2013) and no steel has been cut yet, construction isn't scheduled to start till 2017, yes 2017!

Yes the basic Berlin class design is a proven design, but of course there will be Canadian specific mods and I'm sure there will be usual 'first of class' construction issues, not wishing ill of our Canadian cousins, but I wouldn't be holding my breath for 2019 or probably even 2020 and beyond.

As for Australia's two future AOR's, well I wouldn't mind betting that they will end up in service earlier than 2023.

The last DCP to be published (2012), stated that IOC for SEA1654 would be between 2018-19 to 2022-23, yes a pretty wide margin for IOC, and from memory the 2013 DWP was talking of 'bringing forward' the replacement of Success and Sirius, and tie that in with the current Government putting the tender out to the Spanish and South Koreans for overseas construction, well I wouldn't mind betting that IOC for at least the first new AOR will be sooner than the later date of 2022-23 mentioned back in the 2012 DCP.

Of course we will have to wait a bit longer for the new DWP and DCP to be published to get some clarity on that, so I wouldn't mind betting that the IOC date of the first new Canadian AOR and the first new Australian AOR won't be as wide as people may think, just my opinion, but we will just have to wait and see!!


Anyway, back to Canada, what I think is really crazy is the fact that it has taken this long to look at procuring an 'interim commercial' based solution, (I've been following a Canadian Defence blog for many years and the debate on replacing the Canadian AOR's has been a long running sore).

Even though the Canadian Government only 'officially' announced the retirement of both Protecteur and Preserver in September last year, Protecteur was effectively out of service after the major engine room fire in February 2014 and I believe that Preserver hadn't been to sea for a while due to issues including major corrosion problems, (sound familiar? Manoora and Kanimbla for example).

The obvious interim 'commercial' based ship solution, until the new AOR's eventually enter service, would be for Canada to do a 'HMAS Sirius' type solution, obtain an appropriately sized POL tanker, such as MV Delos that became HMAS Sirius and do a similar modification (I believe that the actually modifications only took around 12 months to perform), It won't be a perfect capability solution, but it will be more than sufficient especially as at the moment they have ZERO capability!!
 
V

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
Actually I believe Canada realized they needed to look at replacement's going back to the 90's when they started to have issues with the HMCS Provider and the Protecteur class. Officially though the plan was announced in 2004
 
John Newman

John Newman

The Bunker Group
vonnoobie said:
Actually I believe Canada realized they needed to look at replacement's going back to the 90's when they started to have issues with the HMCS Provider and the Protecteur class. Officially though the plan was announced in 2004
Click to expand...
Yes I am aware that the JSS project does date back that far, and that's what makes it even more ridiculous that the Canadian Government didn't have a 'plan B' in place just in case the two very elderly AOR's didn't make it far enough so there wasn't a capability gap, as it's turned out, a large capability gap too!

Anyway if they do proceed with this commercial based interim solution, following the same path the RAN did with acquiring MV Delos and converting her into HMAS Sirius will probably be the way to go.
 
Todjaeger

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
John Newman said:
Yes I am aware that the JSS project does date back that far, and that's what makes it even more ridiculous that the Canadian Government didn't have a 'plan B' in place just in case the two very elderly AOR's didn't make it far enough so there wasn't a capability gap, as it's turned out, a large capability gap too!

Anyway if they do proceed with this commercial based interim solution, following the same path the RAN did with acquiring MV Delos and converting her into HMAS Sirius will probably be the way to go.
Click to expand...
Preferably without the mod that gave HMAS Sirius the junk in the trunk.

Glad that the RCN is supposed to be getting something. Just wish the selection and funding process was not so torturous. One recurring fear of mine is that a situation will arise, or perhaps just be on the horizon, that will have a costly impact on the end-users, which could have been avoided had Gov't and other involved groups not made getting kit so difficult for Canada.
 
t68

t68

Well-Known Member
What ever happened to the USN tankers Rainier & Bridge that they were going to retire, ready made interim capabilty
 
John Newman

John Newman

The Bunker Group
Todjaeger said:
Preferably without the mod that gave HMAS Sirius the junk in the trunk.

Glad that the RCN is supposed to be getting something. Just wish the selection and funding process was not so torturous. One recurring fear of mine is that a situation will arise, or perhaps just be on the horizon, that will have a costly impact on the end-users, which could have been avoided had Gov't and other involved groups not made getting kit so difficult for Canada.
Click to expand...
Yes the 'junk in the trunk' hanging off the back of Sirius, makes a good sun deck or a place to practice your golf shots!!

Seriously though, from what I understand the problem with the deck is not so much the deck itself, it's more to do with the ship producing an 'unpredictable' role, and since then the deck has only been used for VERTREP only. Anyway, back to our Canadian cousins........

We might genuinely think our procurement processes are far from perfect here in Australia, but compared to what happens in Canada, well they are near enough to perfect!!

I'm a regular reader (and sometimes contributor) to the 'Defence Watch' blog on the Ottawa Citizen online newspaper website and it gets a bit depressing seeing the absolute and total frustration that seems to pervade the attitude of the Canadian contributors about the decisions (or should I more accurately say, the lack of decisions) by the Canadian Government when it comes to defence procurement and defence matters in general. Especially lately with all the ships that have been 'officially' decommissioned without replacements anywhere within sight and I also understand that a considerable part of the crews from all those decommissioned ships are all now 'land based' sailors too!!

Hopefully at least a reasonably quick solution can be found to provide an interim tanker capability, though realistically that process should have started and most probably been completed a long time ago!!!
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
John Newman said:
If Canada actually get's a new built AOR in commission by 2019, I'll eat my hat! Isn't going to happen. The Berlin class design was selected two years ago (June 2013) and no steel has been cut yet, construction isn't scheduled to start till 2017, yes 2017!

Yes the basic Berlin class design is a proven design, but of course there will be Canadian specific mods and I'm sure there will be usual 'first of class' construction issues, not wishing ill of our Canadian cousins, but I wouldn't be holding my breath for 2019 or probably even 2020 and beyond.

As for Australia's two future AOR's, well I wouldn't mind betting that they will end up in service earlier than 2023.



The last DCP to be published (2012), stated that IOC for SEA1654 would be between 2018-19 to 2022-23, yes a pretty wide margin for IOC, and from memory the 2013 DWP was talking of 'bringing forward' the replacement of Success and Sirius, and tie that in with the current Government putting the tender out to the Spanish and South Koreans for overseas construction, well I wouldn't mind betting that IOC for at least the first new AOR will be sooner than the later date of 2022-23 mentioned back in the 2012 DCP.

Of course we will have to wait a bit longer for the new DWP and DCP to be published to get some clarity on that, so I wouldn't mind betting that the IOC date of the first new Canadian AOR and the first new Australian AOR won't be as wide as people may think, just my opinion, but we will just have to wait and see!!


Anyway, back to Canada, what I think is really crazy is the fact that it has taken this long to look at procuring an 'interim commercial' based solution, (I've been following a Canadian Defence blog for many years and the debate on replacing the Canadian AOR's has been a long running sore).

Even though the Canadian Government only 'officially' announced the retirement of both Protecteur and Preserver in September last year, Protecteur was effectively out of service after the major engine room fire in February 2014 and I believe that Preserver hadn't been to sea for a while due to issues including major corrosion problems, (sound familiar? Manoora and Kanimbla for example).

The obvious interim 'commercial' based ship solution, until the new AOR's eventually enter service, would be for Canada to do a 'HMAS Sirius' type solution, obtain an appropriately sized POL tanker, such as MV Delos that became HMAS Sirius and do a similar modification (I believe that the actually modifications only took around 12 months to perform), It won't be a perfect capability solution, but it will be more than sufficient especially as at the moment they have ZERO capability!!
Click to expand...
Agreed, neither of these AORs will ever be completed by 2019. In fact we will be lucky if steel is being cut by then!:(
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
t68 said:
What ever happened to the USN tankers Rainier & Bridge that they were going to retire, ready made interim capabilty
Click to expand...
I believe the RCN rejected them, likely fearing the government would delay or cancel new builds but I am not sure.
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
t68 said:
From memory they are building a couple of Berlin class tanker in the next couple of years, think they might get new mil spec tankers before the RAN


Edit
Found a couple of reports that suggest a 2019 commission date, also this write up from defence industry daily gives a comparison on value for money between the UK -CAN deal

Canada’s C$ 2.9B “Joint Support Ship” Project, Take 3
Click to expand...
There is no better example to show Canada's fluster cuck procurement system than a comparison of the UK's Tide deal and our Berlin deal. Certain ships ships should be built off shore, simply better value for money. The same applies to the single polar class icebreaker Canada plans to build, likely to be completed sometime after the polar ice cap disappears.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top