Shipbuilding bonanza: We aren’t entitled; we have to earn it

[CPCFTW]

Name some? since we are talking war ships how many City class ships did we export, how many other warships were built by Irving yard after the completion of the Frig contract.

My piont was not to have the ships built in China, but rather the US, my example was Canadians think these ships should be built in a Canadian yard, and yet they fail to hold themselfs to the same standard, by purchasing goods from other countries, such as china....

I just did. We don't want our defense production to be in foreign lands. What if the US decides to annex its virtually defenseless "hat" to maintain its status as the world superpower?

[RNG]

I just did. We don't want our defense production to be in foreign lands. What if the US decides to annex its virtually defenseless "hat" to maintain its status as the world superpower?

Are you implying that by building a few ships that would reduce the ability of the US to stomp us if they decided they wanted to control our oilsands? Dream on.

[Army Guy]

The point of investing in our military is to ensure our nation's security and sovereignty and influence. Being able to produce our own military equipment, rather than relying on other nations, certainly furthers that goal.

I agree 100%.

For this reason, wherever Canadian producers have a realistic chance of making what we need, they should be given significant preferential consideration when it comes to the acquisition of military equipment by the federal government.

Here is were i disagree, unless they can produce the same quality, or better...After all we are not talking about a nut or bolt, but a major purchase of a piece of equipment that quality may be the difference between life and death for hundreds of Canadian sailors. not counting a major investment to Canadian tax payers nobody likes a lemon.

Canada has missed that boat , investing in military industry is not sexy in Canada, OK it gets sexy when you've got 35 bil to throw around....but why risk it , and while it would be nice to have a built in Canada solution, not many items in the CDN Military are home built, there is a reason for that.

It should also be noted that even a significantly more expensive contract, if spent in Canada, is less expensive for Canadian taxpayers than one that is filled by a foreign company. When we contract a Canadian shipyard, much of that money comes back in taxes to the government. If we instead spend the money in the US, that money exits Canada's economy. So, a contract to a Canadian manufacturer is cheaper for Canadian taxpayers than a foreign contract, even if the explicit dollar value of the contract is higher.

I do see your piont and agree with it. however when was the last time you checked the orgin of any goods and refused to buy it because it was not made in Canada....for the same reasons....my piont is why is military equipment the exception. when so many other things important things should take higher priority....

[CPCFTW]

Are you implying that by building a few ships that would reduce the ability of the US to stomp us if they decided they wanted to control our oilsands? Dream on.

Well this is pretty far out there in terms of hypotheticals, but what makes you think the rest of the world wouldn't come to the aid of Canada? Not relying on American production of weaponry would at least allow Canada to have a reasonable foundation for manufacturing the necessary weaponry in a prolonged war of attrition.

Furthermore, this type of war isn't imminent at all, so this is a hypothetical situation maybe a century from now. There is plenty of time to develop an entire robust defense industry and not just "a few ships".

[Army Guy]

just did. We don't want our defense production to be in foreign lands. What if the US decides to annex its virtually defenseless "hat" to maintain its status as the world superpower?

Other than the Navy what major piece of equipment is built in Canada...And i think you just answered your own question, with Defenceless hat comment.

[Remiel]

I do see your piont and agree with it. however when was the last time you checked the orgin of any goods and refused to buy it because it was not made in Canada....for the same reasons....my piont is why is military equipment the exception. when so many other things important things should take higher priority....

While you have a point, it is not as applicable as you might think. Canadians just cannot compete with China for junk. But high end equipment is an entire different ball game. The analogy you are making is like comparing baseball and cricket.

[fellowtraveller]

Have you seen some of the statements by the government ministers? They have told the shipyards not even to bother hiring lobbyists.

Does that mean lobbying will not be effective because nobody would ever make a non political procurement choice in Canada, or because they have already chosen their supplier?

It is hard to imagine a Minister of the Crown backtracking.......

[Smallc]

Your right they are in service, however the Navy does not have enough sailors to man all it's ships, and concetrate manning the newer Frigs, when was the last time we heard anything about our destroyers on a mission....being tied to the dock is hardly operational.

Haiti? The Navy is not operating at a high tempo right now in order to save money.

Again That's not how shipbuilding works under this plan. The destroyers and frigates will be phased out, one at a time, between 2015 and 2030.youseem that once we have the plans we could build anything, which is false, they don't have the experience that you need to build large ships , not the experience in modern warships....

So we should just let any chance of building an industry here die? Man, I'm glad you aren't in charge.

None, but if one added up all the good imported in from China, there would be no comparison in dollar value....so why do we insist our government gives out 35 bil dollar hand outs when we ourself can't maintain the same standards.

You're right. We buy far more within our own economy than we ever buy from China.

Really i thought the Arliegh Burke class or the ships viaing for the Destroyer X program were very impresive....

The AB require far more crew than any of the ships I listed. With the FREMM, you're looking at ships more capable than ours with less than half the crew. DDX is something $4B a ship, which is insane, and that's why the US is only ordering a few.

[Army Guy]

While you have a point, it is not as applicable as you might think. Canadians just cannot compete with China for junk. But high end equipment is an entire different ball game. The analogy you are making is like comparing baseball and cricket.

I think if you carry it alittle further it will become clearer, If you compare ships coming out of US ship yards right now to any possiable ones coming out of say Irving ship yards....I think the benifits would over shadow the fact of job creation and tax benifits.

Like speed in which they could be built, quality of product atleast in the first ships delivered, tech availability, and while we may purchase any design we want, thats the hull, what about the wpns systems the heart of the ship....do we need to purchase access to that, were is it being built....

[Smallc]

Does that mean lobbying will not be effective because nobody would ever make a non political procurement choice in Canada, or because they have already chosen their supplier?

It is hard to imagine a Minister of the Crown backtracking.......

No, it means that politicians have nothing to do with this decision.

[RNG]

Well this is pretty far out there in terms of hypotheticals, but what makes you think the rest of the world wouldn't come to the aid of Canada? Not relying on American production of weaponry would at least allow Canada to have a reasonable foundation for manufacturing the necessary weaponry in a prolonged war of attrition.

Furthermore, this type of war isn't imminent at all, so this is a hypothetical situation maybe a century from now. There is plenty of time to develop an entire robust defense industry and not just "a few ships".

I was trying to fathom your post. I can see the economic advantages of giving the contract to a Canadian firm. I can see the purpose driven advantage of giving the contract to the most skilled and experienced firm But I don't think giving the contract to a Canadian firm would change the relative position of 1/10th Canada vs the US.

[Remiel]

Like speed in which they could be built, quality of product atleast in the first ships delivered, tech availability, and while we may purchase any design we want, thats the hull, what about the wpns systems the heart of the ship....do we need to purchase access to that, were is it being built....

If we are concerned about these things, perhaps we would be best advised to do some poaching. With a $35 Billion dollar budget, I can only imagine you could do a LOT of poaching.

[Battletoads]

Other countries have ship building industries because the local governments sunk money into said industries.

Fuck, it saddens me to think the next 4 years of Con rule are going to be like this.

[Smallc]

Fuck, it saddens me to think the next 4 years of Con rule are going to be like this.

Like what, exactly?

[Guest Derek L]

Yes they're are plenty of designs out there, but my piont is why trust 35 bil to a yard with no experience in building them....

Nail.Head.Hammer

Anyone who believes that Canadian shipbuilders can just pluck a foreign design and build in Canadian yards is misinformed and would do themselves well with reading about the Australian Chuck Adams replacement program…….3 Spanish F100s for the low easy price of $8 billion (AUS)………..

Replace the 280s with three Flight IIA/III Burkes…..they’re being spat out for around $1.5-2 Billion US and with the SMART ship technology, they’ve reduced crew size to 340ish….they’re proven and could be in service a few years after the word is given……..It would also buy some time in the replacement for the 330s……Perhaps a international design effort with Australia and/or the United Kingdom might be worth further investigating.

[Guest Derek L]

Other than the Navy what major piece of equipment is built in Canada...And i think you just answered your own question, with Defenceless hat comment.

*cough* Lav III *cough*

[Smallc]

they’re being spat out for around $1.5-2 Billion US and with the SMART ship technology, they’ve reduced crew size to 340ish

That's far too many crew. The FREMM is a far better design.

[Guest Derek L]

The AB require far more crew than any of the ships I listed. With the FREMM, you're looking at ships more capable than ours with less than half the crew. DDX is something $4B a ship, which is insane, and that's why the US is only ordering a few.

Reduced manning might sound appealing on a commercial vessel, not so much with a warship that has to contend with the possibility of battle damage……most of those ships you mentioned would have had a 50-50 chance with a Cole style bombing……Automated systems tend to fail with shock damage

[Smallc]

The entire world is moving to automated systems. The government has announced their intention to go there as well. We can crew more ships with fewer crew on each ship. We have a manning problem right now, and going to to the AB isn't going to help that.

Edited June 7, 2011 by Smallc

[Guest Derek L]

That's far too many crew. The FREMM is a far better design.

They're ~+50 compared to a 280 with double the Heli Det.....

[Smallc]

They're ~+50 compared to a 280 with double the Heli Det.....

Yes, and the FREMM has just over 100 people on board. The FM 400 has even less. We don't have enough crew for the ships we have.

[Guest Derek L]

The entire world is moving to automated systems. The government has announced their intention to go there as well. We can crew more ships with fewer crew on each ship. We have a manning problem right now, and going to to the AB isn't going to help that.

What happend with DDX & CGX?

[Smallc]

What happend with DDX & CGX?

I didn't realize we were talking about the US Navy.

[Guest Derek L]

I didn't realize we were talking about the US Navy.

You said:

"The entire world is moving to automated systems"

The ships you mentioned we're designed prior to the Cole Bombing, the cancelation of the DGX & CGX programs is a reflection of design changes meant to incorporate lessons learned and changes in technology......decades ago, it was thought that building warships out of aluminum was a good idea…..the Falklands changed that.

[Smallc]

The DDX class hasn't been cancelled, it's been scaled back in order to cut costs. Other nations aren't cancelling their ships, and it's likely that we'll follow their example.