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

[I am Groot]

Really like to know how we are paying $5 billion apiece for some frigates

. For comparison purposes the US is building 20 new missile frigates for $20 billion.

How much of this money is going to the actual building of the frigates and equipment as opposed to going into the Swiss bank accounts of the Irving clan?

Canada's budget watchdog estimates it will cost taxpayers over $306 billion to buy, own, operate and eventually dispose of the navy's new frigates.

That eye-popping price tag for the 15 surface combatants, contained in a new report released Thursday, is spread out over 65 years — the anticipated lifespan of the warships.

Parliamentary Budget Officer Yves Giroux now forecasts that construction costs could hit $84.5 billion — a nine per cent increase over the watchdog's last estimate in 2021.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/frigates-pbo-canadian-armed-forces-1.6631702

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2021/04/07/the-us-navy-is-about-to-buy-a-whole-lot-of-frigates-it-matters-who-builds-them/?sh=70f5531f347c

[WestCanMan]

TBH, as a former sailor on a frigate, I don't think it's a particularly useful purchase.

I could see a small fleet on each coast, like 4 maybe, but we'd be better off spending the rest of that money on nuclear subs or stealth fighters imo. 

Frigates are like chew toys for subs, bigger ships, missiles, torpedoes, etc. Kind of at the bottom of the food chain from every direction. 

[Dougie93]

I would expect this program to be cancelled in the end

the UK has a cheaper option, the Type 31 Frigate, Canada might be able to afford that instead

[Dougie93]

51 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

TBH, as a former sailor on a frigate, I don't think it's a particularly useful purchase.

I could see a small fleet on each coast, like 4 maybe, but we'd be better off spending the rest of that money on nuclear subs or stealth fighters imo. 

Frigates are like chew toys for subs, bigger ships, missiles, torpedoes, etc. Kind of at the bottom of the food chain from every direction. 

a frigate is not and never was an arm of a decision

the purpose of a frigate by definition is simply to conduct patrol & escort duties

at minimum, every navy requires frigates, as the basic all purpose warship

the submarine battle would have to be fought & won before you sent frigates into the area of operations

Canada is never going to have nuclear submarines

never mind that Canada could simply not afford them on the Canadian budget

but the Americans will not allow Canada to have nuclear submarines

the last time Canada even toyed with the idea, the Americans flat out told Canada that they couldn't have them

the main reason being, America is using Canadian claimed waters for SSN operations in the Arctic

the Americans don't want Canadian submarines up there snooping on what they are doing

Canada is not a trusted partner at the that level of strategic operations

and America disputes Canada's claim to the Northwest Passage, invoking Freedom of Navigation therein

F-35 Lightning II is Canada's best option, the 5th Generation fighter is the most bang Canada can get for the buck

it's a turnkey solution, designed to be plug & play for allies, so ready made for Canada

and aerial bombing is actually Canada's forte

since the Second World War, Canada has sought to bomb the enemy,

in order to keep Canadian boots off the ground for as long as possible

since Canadian Confederation cannot actually withstand the strain of heavy casualties

Sic Itur Ad Astra

Edited October 28, 2022 by Dougie93

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

Really like to know how we are paying $5 billion apiece for some frigates

. For comparison purposes the US is building 20 new missile frigates for $20 billion.

How much of this money is going to the actual building of the frigates and equipment as opposed to going into the Swiss bank accounts of the Irving clan?

Canada's budget watchdog estimates it will cost taxpayers over $306 billion to buy, own, operate and eventually dispose of the navy's new frigates.

That eye-popping price tag for the 15 surface combatants, contained in a new report released Thursday, is spread out over 65 years — the anticipated lifespan of the warships.

Parliamentary Budget Officer Yves Giroux now forecasts that construction costs could hit $84.5 billion — a nine per cent increase over the watchdog's last estimate in 2021.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/frigates-pbo-canadian-armed-forces-1.6631702

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2021/04/07/the-us-navy-is-about-to-buy-a-whole-lot-of-frigates-it-matters-who-builds-them/?sh=70f5531f347c

Typical BS. Does the price of those carriers included operating and disposal costs to operate them for 65 years. This is the typical apples and oranges comparisons Canadian politicians keep trying to pedal. The air wing a carrier operates will cost more to buy and operate than the ship itself.

This is what happens when you have to buy jack of all trades equipment like frigates and fighters instead of more than one type. Yes the Type 31 is cheaper but the RN will be operating Type 31 and Type 26 frigates plus Type 45 destroyers. We want to use a single ship to do the job of all three. Australia which is also using a single all purpose ship is also going with the Type 26.

Edited October 28, 2022 by Aristides

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

We want to use a single ship to do the job of all three. Australia which is also using a single all purpose ship is also going with the Type 26.

no, Australia has the Hobart class guided missile destroyers as their premiere surface combatant

the Australian Type 26 is only an ASW escort, the RAN Hunter class is scaled down compared to the Canadian version

[Dougie93]

the problem is really quite simple

defence procurement in Canada is really only about boondoggles handed out to Canadian companies

the company in this case, Irving Shipbuilding in Halifax, simply lacks the capacity to do it

that tiny shipyard in Halifax cannot handle the job

they simply don't have the economies of scale to handle the contract

so at some point the politicians in Ottawa will admit defeat and cancel this program

at which point Canada will have to explore more affordable options, such as buying Type 31's made in the UK

[Aristides]

5 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

no, Australia has the Hobart class guided missile destroyers as their premiere surface combatant

the Australian Type 26 is only an ASW escort, the RAN Hunter class is scaled down compared to the Canadian version

The Hobarts cost over 3 billion each and that is just for the ships. How much do you think they will cost to operate and dispose of after 65 years? I'm really sick of Canadian politicians who use numbers that include operating costs for decades and compare them to the cost on the day of delivery. It's just political bullshit that does nothing positive.

[Aristides]

3 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

the problem is really quite simple

defence procurement in Canada is really only about boondoggles handed out to Canadian companies

the company in this case, Irving Shipbuilding in Halifax, simply lacks the capacity to do it

that tiny shipyard in Halifax cannot handle the job

they simply don't have the economies of scale to handle the contract

so at some point the politicians in Ottawa will admit defeat and cancel this program

at which point Canada will have to explore more affordable options, such as buying Type 31's made in the UK

Why not Type 26's built in the UK or in Australia. BAE has an Australia division, Canada doesn't.

If you are going to use it for 65 years, buy the right goddamn equipment in the first place.

Edited October 28, 2022 by Aristides

[Dougie93]

Just now, Aristides said:

The Hobarts cost over 3 billion each and that is just for the ships. How much do you think they will cost to operate and dispose of after 65 years? I'm really sick of Canadian politicians who use numbers that include operating costs for decades and compare them to the cost on the day of delivery. It's just political bullshit that does nothing positive.

DND larded the Canadian Type 26 up with the same type of equipment as on the Hobart

the Canadian Type 26 is supposed to mount the Raytheon AN/SPY-7 Air & Missile Defense Radar

that's the same radar as on the Hobart, the American AEGIS radar

the Australians are vastly more efficient than Canada

the Canadian Type 26 will cost exponentially more than the ones being built in Australia

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Why not Type 26's built in the UK or in Australia. BAE has an Australia division, Canada doesn't.

If you are going to use it for 65 years, buy the right goddamn equipment in the first place.

the British yard will be occupied building Type 26 for the Royal Navy

once this Canadian Type 26 program implodes under its own weight, Type 31 will be one of the few available options

[Aristides]

4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

DND larded the Canadian Type 26 up with the same type of equipment as on the Hobart

the Canadian Type 26 is supposed to mount the Raytheon AN/SPY-7 Air & Missile Defense Radar

that's the same radar as on the Hobart, the American AEGIS radar

the Australians are vastly more efficient than Canada

the Canadian Type 26 will cost exponentially more than the ones being built in Australia

So are you making a case for new destroyers as well as new frigates?

[Aristides]

3 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

the British yard will be occupied building Type 26 for the Royal Navy

once this Canadian Type 26 program implodes under its own weight, Type 31 will be one of the few available options

So who with build the 31's, they are also being built for the RN and Poland.

[Dougie93]

Just now, Aristides said:

So are you making a case for new destroyers as well as new frigates?

no, I favour disbanding the entire Canadian Forces

Canada totally relies on America for its national defence

Canada should stop wasting $20 billion a year on the pretense that it actually defends itself

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

So who with build the 31's, they are also being built for the RN and Poland.

the RN is only building five of them, so the yard will be available for Type 31 exports sooner

the Type 26 yard will not be available in time to replace the FFH-330's

[Aristides]

13 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

the RN is only building five of them, so the yard will be available for Type 31 exports sooner

the Type 26 yard will not be available in time to replace the FFH-330's

They are also building them for Poland and Indonesia. Greece is also a potential customer for the 31.

Edited October 28, 2022 by Aristides

[Aristides]

15 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

no, I favour disbanding the entire Canadian Forces

Canada totally relies on America for its national defence

Canada should stop wasting $20 billion a year on the pretense that it actually defends itself

Of course, the US will only defend Canada's interests if it is in US interests. The idea that a country that has coasts on three oceans doesn't need a navy is ludicrous.

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

They are also building them for Poland and Indonesia.

those are being built under licence in Poland & Indonesia by local yards

 

 

[Aristides]

Just now, Dougie93 said:

those are being built under licence in Poland & Indonesia by local yards

 

 

Just like us and the 26's

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

Of course, the US will only defend Canada's interests if it is in US interests. The idea that a country that has coasts on three oceans doesn't need a navy is ludicrous.

Canada is ludicrous then, since the RCN isn't actually capable of doing the job

12 minimally equipped frigates is nowhere near enough to defend Canada's vast maritime approaches

those are defended by the Americans

stop pretending that the Canadian Forces are for anything other than boondoggles to buy votes

[Dougie93]

4 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Just like us and the 26's

except the Canadian shipyards can't do it

both Poland & Indonesia are exponentially more capable of defence procurement than pathetic Canada is

Edited October 28, 2022 by Dougie93

[Aristides]

Just now, Dougie93 said:

Canada is ludicrous then, since the RCN isn't actually capable of doing the job

12 minimally equipped frigates is nowhere near enough to defend Canada's vast maritime approaches

those are defended by the Americans

stop pretending that the Canadian Forces are for anything other than boondoggles to buy votes

So why  shouldn't every other NATO country leave their defence to the US? Why should American servicemen put their lives on the line for Canada if Canadians can't be bothered?

[Aristides]

You have to be pretty naive to think Canada is the only country that uses its military to buy votes.

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

So why  shouldn't every other NATO country leave their defence to the US? Why should American servicemen put their lives on the line for Canada if Canadians can't be bothered?

Canada is uniquely protected within the perimeter of fortress America

hence why Canada doesn't actually defend itself

hence why the fake Canadian defence department is an international laughing stock

American servicemen defend the approaches to the CONUS, Canada is simply part of that by default

[Dougie93]

Just now, Aristides said:

You have to be pretty naive to think Canada is the only country that uses its military to buy votes.

Canada is the only one which can't actually run a procurement program while doing so

are you not aware that Canada has the worst run defence department in the world ?

third world countries run better defence departments than utterly inept Canada does