Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates

stephen weist said:

The tribals will have to be replaced in the near future, anyone have any thoughts on possible replacements. I think the replacements should be slightly larger to accomodate the CnC task and also for future upgrades. I think the anti air/missile capability should be enhanced as the city class frigates could handle the ASW component of any taskforce. Would six be enough, this would leave on avail on each coast at all times.

Click to expand...

As I understand the current plan (national ship building project), the current 12 frigates and three tribal class destroyers will be replaced by 15 surface combat naval vessels, single design, based on modified existing frigate design. Thus Canada will lose its destroyers and within 10 years our sub capability will also be gone the way things are going with the Victoria class. Instead of these naval assets, we are going to build 8 Arctic patrol vessels which will be hard pressed to operate for 5-6 months per year in Canada's Arctic. This plan is beyond stupid.

Yesterday's Cdn govt budget introduces another delay to the ship building program. The Cdn navy might as well close down.

The HMCS Protecteur has been seriously damaged by fire. This leaves the Navy with no replenishment ship for the West coast. The only other vessel, HMCS Preserver, is on the East coast. The new Berlin class replacements are years away and based on recent DND procurements perhaps never. Simply pathetic.

John Fedup said:

The HMCS Protecteur has been seriously damaged by fire. This leaves the Navy with no replenishment ship for the West coast. The only other vessel, HMCS Preserver, is on the East coast. The new Berlin class replacements are years away and based on recent DND procurements perhaps never. Simply pathetic.

Click to expand...

That’s not good at all, you could always do a deal like the RAN did with the Spanish and lease the SPS Cantabria (A15)

t68 said:

That’s not good at all, you could always do a deal like the RAN did with the Spanish and lease the SPS Cantabria (A15)

Click to expand...

A good idea but arranging this lease would likely take at least a year or more the way our procurement process has been working lately.

John Fedup said:

The HMCS Protecteur has been seriously damaged by fire. This leaves the Navy with no replenishment ship for the West coast. The only other vessel, HMCS Preserver, is on the East coast. The new Berlin class replacements are years away and based on recent DND procurements perhaps never. Simply pathetic.

Click to expand...

Slight update, she's apparently being towed back to Pearl Harbo(u)r by USS CHOSIN (CG-65), with USNS SIOUX (T-ATF 171) standing by to assist if necessary. USS MICHAEL MURPHY (DDG 112) took off family members from PROTECTEUR.

t68 said:

That’s not good at all, you could always do a deal like the RAN did with the Spanish and lease the SPS Cantabria (A15)

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the Aussies appear ready to lease her again next year, so she isn't available. They may have better luck leasing a US replenishment ship, the US is downsizing its armed forces. They have a gold mine digging up the Alberta oil sands, but have no money to spend on defense or build a four lane divided highway linking western Canada with eastern Canada. All of their money goes to provide free health care, and it will be hell for the politicians if they consider any fee for doctor visits. Yet there is a huge toll to cross the old decaying bridge to Detroit. In the same manner as replacing the old Cabot strait ferries, a constitutional guaranteed duty for Newfoundland, Canada may have to lease ships already built. But Canada was going to strike both replenishment ships next year anyway without replacements until 2019-20, so striking one one year early isn't going to be a big deal.

Sea Toby said:

Unfortunately, the Aussies appear ready to lease her again next year, so she isn't available. .

Click to expand...

haven't heard that one, have you got source on that by chance?

t68 said:

haven't heard that one, have you got source on that by chance?

Click to expand...

Some time ago, as Cantabria arrived home, I posted an article from a Ferrol newspaper which suggested this will happen. I have seen nothing since.

ASSAIL said:

Some time ago, as Cantabria arrived home, I posted an article from a Ferrol newspaper which suggested this will happen. I have seen nothing since.

Click to expand...

cheers thanks for the heads up, things are not to good on the support side of things.

its time for the RAN time to cut our loses and just get on with the replacement project

The lease was to cover the refit an remediation work on Success as well as to give RAN technical sailors the chance to play with some of the ship systems that are very similar (if not identical) to some of those on the AWDs and LHDs. So basically Success is back in service and the sailors who did the sea rides and training are off to there new postings, mission completed.

But Canada was going to strike both replenishment ships next year anyway without replacements until 2019-20, so striking one one year early isn't going to be a big deal.

Click to expand...

The infrastructure and trained personnel to build these ships is way off. The RCN will never see these ships this decade. A ship needs to be outsourced offshore now.

John Fedup said:

The infrastructure and trained personnel to build these ships is way off. The RCN will never see these ships this decade. A ship needs to be outsourced offshore now.

Click to expand...

South Korea will be more than happy to build a same size or smaller size replenishment ship/s as the British new replenishment ships for less than a quarter of the price of any Canadian built replenishment ship. Or maybe the Germans will sell or lease one of their Berlin class replenishment ships. We may think Canada has no choice in the matter now, but I wouldn't trust the Canadian government to pave a smooth road.

South Korea are building the same design (but smaller tonnage) for Norway too.

First steel cut in 2014, ISD of first ship in 2016 for ~£500mn for 4. Bargain.

Sea Toby said:

Unfortunately, the Aussies appear ready to lease her again next year, so she isn't available. They may have better luck leasing a US replenishment ship, the US is downsizing its armed forces. They have a gold mine digging up the Alberta oil sands, but have no money to spend on defense or build a four lane divided highway linking western Canada with eastern Canada. All of their money goes to provide free health care, and it will be hell for the politicians if they consider any fee for doctor visits. ....

Click to expand...

US government spending on health care is higher than in Canada, both per head of population & as a percentage of GDP (8.46% vs 7.88% in 2011 - source - OECD Health Data). The myth of unaffordable state health care in Canada & Europe vs private health care in the USA is just that, a myth.

swerve said:

US government spending on health care is higher than in Canada, both per head of population & as a percentage of GDP (8.46% vs 7.88% in 2011 - source - OECD Health Data). The myth of unaffordable state health care in Canada & Europe vs private health care in the USA is just that, a myth.

Click to expand...

You get what you pay for. From a government spending point of view, the US and state governments spend less. Thus governments in the US can afford to spend more on highways. Watch any Canadian video blogs, their truckers know of the better and safer highways in the US.

Well in Australia there is compulsory health insurance set at 1.5% of your salary, it increases to 2.5% over a certain income unless you elect to purchase private cover. There is also a tax rebate that tax payers who elect to have private cover. Basically if you are seriously injured or ill they will fix you first and sort out payment latter. There is also complusory motor vehicle accident personal injury insurance and workers compensation insurance in each state, both systems look after the person and then may recupe their losses from negligent parties at a latter date.

When you are young healthy and lucky you resent all this money going to other people, when you are flat on your back in a hospital bed like I am at the moment, with private insurers diving for cover and denying cover, you thank god for government intervention and all the years you paid forward into the public system.

Total US expenditure on health is much more than government expenditure because it is a heavily privatised system. The total is a very unhealthy 16+% of GDP (and rising), partly due to it being privatised and run as a profit making business, ie the 'wealth care' industry. Nearly every other OECD country health system cost less than around 11% of GDP, and quite frankly you don't want to spend much more than that, it's the law of diminishing returns. Also the US gets very poor returns for it's health dollar, by most parameters of 'health measurement' the US is in the bottom half of the table for OECD countries. (except for access to scanners, where the US is number one). So the US spends way more and seemingly get a lot less.

Having some sort of 'universal health insurance/cover' is sensible and a feature of a civilised country. To an outsider the way 'Obamacare' gets vilified is amazing, the outright lies and deception. Got to be a lot of 'Big Pharma' (an other beneficiaries) dollars behind a huge project like that.

Volkodav, sad to hear your stuck in hospital, nothing more boring than that. Hope all is well soon.

Sea Toby said:

You get what you pay for. From a government spending point of view, the US and state governments spend less. Thus governments in the US can afford to spend more on highways. Watch any Canadian video blogs, their truckers know of the better and safer highways in the US.

Click to expand...

No, that is not correct. I just gave you the figures. Although government funding covers 48% of total health care spending in the USA, & Canadian government health care spending is 70% of the total, overall US spending is so much higher than the Canadian level that US government health spending is still higher per head, as a share of national output, & as a share of government spending, than in Canada.

The figures are public. I gave you one source where they're collected together. They can also be found in national government published data. You can check them yourself. You will find that I am right. The oft-made claims that US government health spending is less than that of other rich countries is false.

Why don't you check the figures, instead of making unsupported assertions? Truckers comments on roads aren't a good source for health spending data.

Thanks cdxbow heading home now, docs have done their poking an proding and have said I can return to work next week part time. In the states I would probably still off work waiting for my first appointment, not very productive.

It could be argued that the high price of health care in the US discourages pre-emptive and early intervention in health problems meaning a greater percentage of cases become chronic or acute than if the health system was proactive rather than reactionary.

That said, each to their own but realistically health, like everything, the more you invest up front towards a planned out come the less it will cost you in the long run. Unfortnately when you have a distorting factor such as high profit margins and a very well serviced and powerful minority the necessary overheads to provide universal healthcare can not be adequately funded. This in turn leads to a downward spiral of worsening outcomes and more money being diverted from preventitative care to chronic and acute care.