Canada's new frigates to cost more than UK's new aircraft carriers

[Dougie93]

in terms of how the RCN operates, which is basically sending frigates to perform all roles

the Type 26 Flexible Mission Bay is ready made for Canada

you can mix & match to the mission

you can carry one, or two CH-148A Cyclone Maritime Helicopters

and various combinations of boats, USV's, UAV's, containerized stores, etcetera

for expeditionary operations

you could deploy a full NTOG element, or CSOR, or JTF2

you could deploy a Clearance Diver Team, Patrol Pathfinders, SAR Techs

you can land a CH-147F Chinook on the flight deck too

Edited October 31, 2022 by Dougie93

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

primarily for export

the Canadian defence industry could not survive on the DND budget

most arms produced in Canada are for export

I know, and it seems we sell much of it to the sort of assholes that cause the sort of instability that lead to bigger wars that need our or our allies intervention.

I think we should be taxing our military industries the way we tax tobacco and booze for the very same reason - to cover the public's cost of dealing with the harm these products cause.

[TreeBeard]

Quote

Canada's new frigates to cost more than …

Are you comparing the costs in the same currency?  Lifetime costs vs purchase price?

[Dougie93]

9 hours ago, eyeball said:

 

I think we should be taxing our military industries the way we tax tobacco and booze for the very same reason - to cover the public's cost of dealing with the harm these products cause.

the industries would just pick up and move to America and/or the UK to escape the Canadian nanny state

[Dougie93]

10 hours ago, eyeball said:

I know, and it seems we sell much of it to the sort of assholes that cause the sort of instability that lead to bigger wars that need our or our allies intervention.

Canada does not have its own foreign policy

the Hegemon in Washington directs Canada's foreign policy

the Type 26 is not really a Canadian program

it's Lockheed Martin & British Aerospace offering to build ships in Canada

Canada doesn't do anything on its own, Canada is entirely an Anglo-American client state

Canada's defence industry is niche

Canada manufactures components & subsystems as part of larger Anglo-American programs

so for example GDLS-C in London,  Ontario,  sells to Saudi Arabia

but General Dynamics is not a Canadian company

so if Canada refused that work, it would just shift to GDLS in Toledo, Ohio

Canada has not made itself a competitive place to do business

most of Canada's non resource related industries are fleeing offshore

Canada no longer contributes much to the Anglo-American Hegenomy, Canada is a free rider

so Canada is not in a position to dictate terms, Canada has no leverage

Edited November 1, 2022 by Dougie93

[Aristides]

18 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

the Destroyers & Cruisers have larger magazines, more missiles

a DDG-51 destroyer has 90 Mk.41 vertical launch cells

the Type 26 only has 32

Depends how the are configured, the Brit ships have 48.

[eyeball]

5 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

the industries would just pick up and move to America and/or the UK to escape the Canadian nanny state

Good.

[Dougie93]

5 hours ago, Aristides said:

Depends how the are configured, the Brit ships have 48.

the UK Type 26 has 24 Mk.41 VLS cells, 24 SeaCeptor CIADS

the RCN Type 26 has 32 Mk.41 VLS, and 24 SeaCeptpr CIADS as well

 

[Dougie93]

5 hours ago, eyeball said:

Good.

then you wouldn't be able to manufacture anything for the Canadian Forces in Canada,

everything would have to be bought offshore

the way it works is that DND buys from Canadian defence contractor foreign susidiaries

then keeps those defence jobs in Canada by exporting to shady clients like Saudi Arabia

[Army Guy]

21 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

Are you comparing the costs in the same currency?  Lifetime costs vs purchase price?

It truly does not matter at all, the government has changed the lifetime costs to encourage sticker shock to Canadians, so you don't feel bad when they cancel it, it was once at 25 to 30 years, now it is 65 years, name one piece of gear that DND has operated for 65 or more years ...maybe the le Enfield rifle for the rangers, 9 mm browning pistols ...  That is becasue there is other than those examples there is none, and here in Canada we are known throughout the free world as frugal, a nice word for cheap as F*** but 65 years is nothing more than politics...

The funny thing about this entire thing is it was the liberals that picked the Type 26, to get the ball rolling, they should have just kicked it down the road for someone else to solve...

[Dougie93]

the key difference between the UK Type 26 and the RCN Type 26 is the primary role

the UK Type 26 is configured for ASW/SUW/Land Attack

thus the UK Type 26 will load anti ship & cruise missiles in the Mk.41 VLS

but by selecting the American AN/SPY-7 radar,

that marks the primary role of the Canadian frigate as Air & Missile Defense

so most likely the RCN Type 26 will load the American Standard & Evolved Sea Sparrow missiles in the Mk.41 VLS

the reason is that the British already have an AAW Guided Missile Destroyer; Type 45

whereas Canada is fusing the two roles into a single platform

called the Canadian Surface Combatant

the CSC has the ASW capablity with the variable depth LFAPS sonar & CH-148 Cyclone

combined with the Area Air & Missile Defense capability

so the RCN Type 26 is much more capable than the UK version

this is a contributing factor to the expense of the RCN Type 26: it's all in one

Edited November 1, 2022 by Dougie93

[TreeBeard]

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

It truly does not matter at all

If someone is comparing the costs, then of course it matters. 

[Dougie93]

13 hours ago, Army Guy said:

It truly does not matter at all, the government has changed the lifetime costs to encourage sticker shock to Canadians, so you don't feel bad when they cancel it, it was once at 25 to 30 years, now it is 65 years, name one piece of gear that DND has operated for 65 or more years ...maybe the le Enfield rifle for the rangers, 9 mm browning pistols ...  That is becasue there is other than those examples there is none, and here in Canada we are known throughout the free world as frugal, a nice word for cheap as F*** but 65 years is nothing more than politics...

The funny thing about this entire thing is it was the liberals that picked the Type 26, to get the ball rolling, they should have just kicked it down the road for someone else to solve...

the other factor not being considered,

is that the RCN will simply not have the sailors to crew & support these ships

the CF just announced that is in a "manpower crisis"

the military is collapsing in terms of recruitment & retention

I can't see how they will even be able to operate 12-15 large frigates, plus all the shore based logistics required

DND says that it has to pay more to recruit, but that will come out of the capital budget

so they can either have new ships or new sailors, but not both

thus it does seem very likely the FFH-330 is going to be another one of those weapons

that will have to serve for many decades past its planned retirement date

never mind something as complex & expensive as Type 26

DND has trouble even issuing new uniforms, like CADPAT-MT

only Mike Company 3 RCR has them, how many years will it be until they are general issue ?

furthermore, the AOPS built by Irving are reportedly already breaking down

the AOPS is a very simple design, using civilian rather military grade technology

yet even brand new, they are already having technical failures, being forced back to shore

so its entirely plausible that even if some Type 26's were to be built, they could end up being lemons

like the SSK-876 submarines or the CH-148 Cyclone

whenever Canada tries to do things "on the cheap"; it ends up backfiring into overpriced junk

Edited November 2, 2022 by Dougie93

[Moonbox]

13 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

If someone is comparing the costs, then of course it matters. 

Most of the cost comparisons are done in equivalent dollars.  That’s too easy to chip at so critics will make less obvious apples to oranges comparisons.  

[Aristides]

17 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

the UK Type 26 has 24 Mk.41 VLS cells, 24 SeaCeptor CIADS

the RCN Type 26 has 32 Mk.41 VLS, and 24 SeaCeptpr CIADS as well

 

Brit  Type 26

Anti-air missiles:

2 x 24-cell VLS for 48 Sea Ceptor anti-air missiles

Anti-ship and anti-surface missiles:

1 x 24-cell Mark 41 VLS for various missiles including Future Cruise/Anti-Ship Weapon.

Edited November 2, 2022 by Aristides

[Army Guy]

19 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

If someone is comparing the costs, then of course it matters. 

The only cost that is somewhat accurate is the cost to build, all other costs are best guesses, and are political to induce sticker shock to Civilians/ taxpayers.

Please tell me the reason why we need to cost something out to 65 years? Then tell me what major naval ship have we kept for 65 years or more?

Besides the cheapest bid is never the winner, it is the bid that has the most offsets, that is the winner, offsets that have nothing to do with the ship itself, but rather what the bidder company can offer Canada has whole.

 

Edited November 2, 2022 by Army Guy

[Army Guy]

9 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

the other factor not being considered,

is that the RCN will simply not have the sailors to crew & support these ships

the CF just announced that is in a "manpower crisis"

the military is collapsing in terms of recruitment & retention

I can't see how they will even be able to operate 12-15 large frigates, plus all the shore based logistics required

DND says that it has to pay more to recruit, but that will come out of the capital budget

so they can either have new ships or new sailors, but not both

thus it does seem very likely the FFH-330 is going to be another one of those weapons

that will have to serve for many decades past its planned retirement date

never mind something as complex & expensive as Type 26

DND has trouble even issuing new uniforms, like CADPAT-MT

only Mike Company 3 RCR has them, how many years will it be until they are general issue ?

furthermore, the AOPS built by Irving are reportedly already breaking down

the AOPS is a very simple design, using civilian rather military grade technology

yet even brand new, they are already having technical failures, being forced back to shore

so its entirely plausible that even if some Type 26's were to be built, they could end up being lemons

like the SSK-876 submarines or the CH-148 Cyclone

whenever Canada tries to do things "on the cheap"; it ends up backfiring into overpriced junk

We are in a manpower crisis, today and into the future, but the first type 26 is not due until 2030 something, enough time for one political party to take some meaningful action and reset todays woke military, and their policies. What is it they say build it and they will come. 

We are already in the top one or two nations that pay the highest wage, perhaps if they decided to give back the bonues we used to have then perhaps, you would attract more people, new equipment, new challenges, new postings, better training would do more for recruiting than just pay raises. 

DND has always had issues with purchases new equipment, because it is tied to so many outside DND agencies, each with their own needs and wants to be satisfied, if we could take politics out of purchasing, we might be able to buy stuff in 5 years' time instead of 20 years. 

Cadpat has like everything, been a nightmare to start with, at one point in time we were just going to go with NATO multi cam, like CSOR, but some general has got to have their pet projects... and complicate things even more. 

AOPs are another reason to cut Canadian ship builders out altogether and start looking at overseas shipyards. Brits would build us the same ships for a lot cheaper. but then again it is not about ships, it is all about Canadian manufacturing welfare, and job creation platforms. 

Type 26 is touted as the best ASW ship on the planet, and for some reason we think that is our naval specialty ASW, but like everything we do in the military we know whatever it is we pick it will be ours for 30 to 40 years. So the military wants to jam it full of everything they might need. Since we are not going to be operating on our own, we should have asked the US navy what their shortfalls was and purchased something like that. Frigates are one of those shortfalls, perhaps we don't need 15 maybe we need 12 and some destroyers, or subs...i will say this i know sweet F*** all about the navy except this, you should know how to tread water...

 

[I am Groot]

21 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

If someone is comparing the costs, then of course it matters. 

It is a cost comparison. Over $5 billion to build each ship. Which is less than the Brits spent building their aircraft carriers.

[I am Groot]

55 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

We are in a manpower crisis, today and into the future, but the first type 26 is not due until 2030

... at the earliest.

[Dougie93]

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

...i will say this i know sweet F*** all about the navy except this, you should know how to tread water...

I used to be so keen

since I was a little boy, I studied every aspect of the CF down to smallest details

I was a Canadian Forces fanboi

but that wasn't enough, I needed to serve in the ranks to truly understand

[Dougie93]

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

 and for some reason we think that is our naval specialty ASW,

that's the Cold War mission

delivering 1 CMBG & 5 CMBG to Europe to reinforce 4 CMBG

forming the 1st Canadian Division ( Mechanized )

the primary role of "Maritime Command" was ASW escort of convoys to the Inner German Border

World War Three was going to be World War Two all over again

the CF is always just trying recreate itself along the Cold War mission parameters

there is no particular doctrine other than that, DND clings to what it knows

[Dougie93]

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

Cadpat has like everything, been a nightmare to start with, at one point in time we were just going to go with NATO multi cam, like CSOR, but some general has got to have their pet projects... and complicate things even more.

CANSOFCOM is highly integrated with American SOF

but the GoC wants Canada to have a distinct made in Canada pattern for the CF in general

it's definitely an improvement on the "relish cam", CADPAT-TW is only effective if you are hiding up in a tree

but like everything else, the Canadian contractors can't deliver, because they lack the economies of scale

[Dougie93]

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

AOPs are another reason to cut Canadian ship builders out altogether and start looking at overseas shipyards. Brits would build us the same ships for a lot cheaper. but then again it is not about ships, it is all about Canadian manufacturing welfare, and job creation platforms.

AOPS makes sense for defending the Northwest Passage

because you don't have to launch torpedoes to defend sovereignty

you just have to challenge intruders under UNCLOSS

it's actually Lawfare

this is what the Chinese do in the China Seas for the same reason

the only problem for Canada is, who are the challengers ?

it's the Americans

the Americans are the ones challenging Canada's sovereignty over the NWP

Canada doesn't stand a chance against that, rendering this "Arctic Sovereignty" mission a fools errand

mind you, AOPS is a big upgrade on the MM700 Kingston class MCDV's

they will end up doing counter narcotics missions in the Caribbean & whatnot

it's basically a coast guard platform, being operated by a navy, since in Canada, the Coast Guard are civilians

[Dougie93]

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

We are already in the top one or two nations that pay the highest wage

I never had any complaints

I always had enough money to go partying in Ottawa & Hull

the food at the Normandy Mess was great

Y-101 was brand new, the Death Star was very impressive back then

G-101 was great, I was very comfortable at G-101, even my girlfriend didn't mind coming there

it's not like I was stuck with the dregs over at 0-19

then Trenton was even fancier, my wife to be thought my room in Trenton was fancy

wood panelled walls, a wooden desk, and the mess at Trenton had a pizza bar and beer on tap

the Americans thought we were pampered

it's a harsh realm in ultra expensive Toronto,

I always thought the CF was a good gig, $115 a month for room & board : great deal

[Army Guy]

33 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

CANSOFCOM is highly integrated with American SOF

but the GoC wants Canada to have a distinct made in Canada pattern for the CF in general

it's definitely an improvement on the "relish cam", CADPAT-TW is only effective if you are hiding up in a tree

but like everything else, the Canadian contractors can't deliver, because they lack the economies of scale

Every private in the Military knows this, and yet we blaze the same path with every piece of clothing or equipment, when there are many contracts by foreign militaries we could have jumped on and had plenty of uniforms forever. leaving the Truely Canadian needs for home manufactures, like say Sleeping bags, winter kit, and increase these contracts by 1000 % then maybe we would have stuff for more than 5 years at a time.