Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates
- Thread starter stephen weist
- Start date
John Newman
The Bunker Group
What a stupid, stupid, stupid report.
Comparing T26, US FREMM and T31e, is not comparing apples, apples and apples, it’s comparing apples, oranges and bananas!
What is the point of this wasteful report? What can it achieve?
Is this the first step in ‘creating’ an excuse to ditch T26? Based on costings that simply can’t be accurately compared to each other?
Canada oh Canada, I just shake my head! (thankfully I’m here in Oz).
And the Chief of Defence Staff Admiral Art McDonald has just stepped aside and is under military police investigation for misconduct after less than 2 months on the job. The appointment of a navy officer was originally seen as a nod to the importance of the National Shipbuilding Strategy. The previous Chief of Defence Staff General Vance is also under investigation for misconduct. The lack of trust and stability in the leadership can't be good for morale in the ranks and leaves the military without an effective advocate which can't be good for military programs.
Ultra to provide Hull-Mounted Sonar for Canadian Surface Combatant - Naval News
Ultra is delighted to announce a contract award to commence work on the S2150-C Hull-Mounted Sonar (HMS) system for the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) program...
www.navalnews.com
In direct CSC news, after the contract for the towed array sonar was signed with Ultra a few weeks ago, the contract for the hull mounted sonar has now also been signed with Ultra for the S2150-C, a Canadianized version of the S2150 in the Type 26.
There's also an analysis of the CSC capabilities in which one of the authors was Vice-Admiral (Ret’d) Ron Lloyd who was Commander of the RCN until 2019 including when the Type 26 design was selected and who seems recent/reliable enough to make this an explanation rather than just commentary. Most of it is expected/known, but one interesting tidbit was the description of the Tomahawks as having anti-ship capability in addition to land-attack capability. This is the closest to official confirmation that the CSC will be getting the in development Block Va Maritime Strike Tomahawk variant which means that the CSC will have triple-layered long-range (MST missile), medium-range (NSM missile), and short-range (5-inch gun) anti-ship and land-attack capability.
Statement by the Department of National Defence on the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s Report on the Canadian Surface Combatant - Canada.ca
The Department of National Defence (DND) thanks the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) for its work, and welcomes its report on the Canadian Surface Combatant.
And the official government response to the PBO report on the CSC is that the cost difference in estimates is mainly due to the PBO including provincial sales taxes in the project budget whereas the government doesn't although that doesn't explain the full difference. The government says they will not pursue selecting a new CSC design and that they are still purchasing 15 vessels.
Welcome to the forum. We have some rules that we expect members to adhere to. One of them is the copying and pasting of posts without at least 2 lines of original text from the poster is not allowed. It tends to make the Moderators grumpy. You will find a link to the rules as part of my signature.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Don’t have the time at this moment to read into the report details but agree about the meaningless comparison. We still don’t really know how badly junior has &ucked up our deficit this year but if it is worse than the already horrible numbers being reported then I think the CSC is in big trouble, not that any change will improve things. The likely loss of a navy guy as CDS is more bad news and could be another opening for junior to screw with the CSC.
"and the additional emphasis PBO puts on weight-related costing", & the differences in prices between different designs it attributed to capability differences.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Based on a quick read, switching from T26 to FREMM doesn’t make much sense as the cost difference isn’t very significant considering this is a 30-40 year investment and there is capability advantage for the T26 as well. The bigger threat to the current choice is the political advantage the T31e offers junior. Although the likely cost is under estimated IMO, selling less capability in order to reduce costs by switching to the T31e may be accepted by our gullible electorate unless the geopolitical situation really starts to go downhill. A combination buy could end up with minimal savings and significant capability loss depending on the ratio of T26/T31e acquired and the overall total.
I think junior can’t degrade both the fighter replacement and the frigate replacement within the current election cycle. A miss step on the CSC will be more politically damaging.
I think junior can’t degrade both the fighter replacement and the frigate replacement within the current election cycle. A miss step on the CSC will be more politically damaging.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
This link has DND’s response to the PBO report on the CSC. Decent response which unfortunately few Canadians will take notice of.
defence.frontline.online
FRONTLINE COMMENTARY | FrontLine Defence
defence.frontline.online
Yeah, where things are just great:
Government submarine contract sunk and unlikely to resurface
Australian-French submarine contract on verge of being abandoned
The submarine deal France proudly calledthe contract of the Centuryappears to have collapsed reportsAlan Austin IF THERE W
www.bignewsnetwork.com
Last edited:
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
I don’t know much about the status of Australia’s submarine program but I am pretty sure their media is like ours, really good at hyping any perceived problem as doomsday. My first suspicion about this article is equating the number of submarine with population....WTF does that have to do with the number of subs required? A nation’s estimate of threat to sovereignty, their naval CONOPS, economic and technological resources are all what decides how many.
Who the hell is Alan Austin? And what is this "news source"? A very brief perusal shows that he has at best a tenuous grasp of the project, submarines and reality.Yeah, where things are just great:
Government submarine contract sunk and unlikely to resurface
Australian-French submarine contract on verge of being abandoned
The submarine deal France proudly calledthe contract of the Centuryappears to have collapsed reportsAlan Austin IF THERE W
(Edit...Alan Austin is an Australian journalist living in Nimes, France. His specialities are politics, religion and social issues. A search of his published articles reveals he never writes a positive word about his country of birth. Checking the "Independent Australia" and we find a "progressive journal" which reads slightly to the left of the Guardian without the journalistic chops. Clearly the correct place for his writing. My interpretation...bollocks)
oldsig
Last edited:
Just making a point. It's not all sunshine and lollipops in Australia either. Both Hunter and Attack are under assault in the Australian press, for budget and technical reasons.
Here are a few other pics of her during her ongoing ice trials. (Courtesy Cpl David Veldman, Canadian Forces Combat Camera)
.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Fair enough. WRT Hunter and CSC, questionable media arguments in both countries but the cost issue is Canada’s hot button issue because our current and previous governments couldn’t offer consistent expansions of what was included (capital cost, spares, weapons and life cycle cost). The BS FREMM offer of $30 billion was never properly savaged by the government. After all it had the first three ships being built in Europe and it did not include life cycle costs and who knows what else. The average Canadian only sees $77 billion minus $30 billion and comes up with the $47 billion difference with zero consideration to capability and the benefit of a local supply chain and workforce that can sustain this investment for 35 plus years. There was little mention in our media about the cost difference between the unsolicited FREMM bid and the PBO report for a 15 ship build of FREMMs should the government change course. A course change would be a disaster.
Well the JSS project has been chugging along despite the brief headlines when the JSS PBO report was released a few months ago that suggested it'd be much cheaper to rent/buy converted tankers in Asterix and Obelix than building the JSS. Construction on the future HMCS Protecteur has now reached 40% of its length with 90% of blocks in production. Admittedly the JSS project has the advantage of being under active construction which makes major changes or cancellation unlikely, nonetheless the CSC project too needs to just carry on, albeit with more oversight particularly over cost and schedule. It's a terrible way to get cover, but news of CDS Admiral McDonald being under investigation and stepping aside coming out at the same seems to have largely overshadowed the PBO CSC report and the CSC project needs to make as much progress as possible during this reprieve from the spotlight.
The Australian media attacks on the Attack class submarine build are mostly by Murdoch media outlets and are politically motivated, tied up with factions within the ruling Australian government coalition.
Secondly, Aussie media is woefully ignorant of things defence related, and would be lucky to know which end of a rifle, the round exited from when the pew lever was pulled. They would probably be looking down the hole to see what was happening at the time, and that would be a terrible waste of a perfectly serviceable 1 oz lead pill.
Thirdly, it is the media's right and responsibility to hold the government to account, however ipso facto the media should be knowledgeable about the topic that it is discussing. Unfortunately in today's world SME within MSM has become a very rare commodity.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Québécois Liberals.