Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cost to build navy's new warships more than doubles to $30B

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by moahunter View Post
    ^if second hand warships were readily available and good quality / safe, why would any of our allies who also need such ships, be willing to sell them? You aren't making sense, typically the only time you get something second hand military wise, is its something somebody else thinks isn't good enough anymore for their soldiers (there are some rare short term exceptions, like the Leopard tanks from the Dutch, which was more to fill an immediate need, but that's costly, and some were just purchased for spares). Canada operates a NATO capable fleet, it doesn't operate just in costal waters, it performs sophisticated deep water operations in hot spots all over the place, often monitored by the best that Russia and China have.

    I would be open to the government looking at the Mistral ships France is building for Russia. The issue there though, is the political implications on spending billions on a ship that was built in a shipyard in France, not in Canada where the dollars and tax on all those workers salaries cycles through our economy. That's not a second hand ship though, and even so, because it wasn't designed to Canadian spec, would still need a lot of money to be spent on it for our forces:

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cana...tion-1.3235816

    The Mistrals could potentially sell for $1.2 billion to $1.6 billion, according to published reports overseas, and if Canada did bid, they would require hundreds of millions of dollars worth of modifications to bring them in line with Canadian military standards.
    You may be right. However, selling a technologically dated ships might enable countries like the US to upgrade their fleets more frequently and somewhat cost effectively. We take the budget route and enable them to go the luxury route. We lag and let them lead.

    As for the economic impact, Canada could always buy made in Canada oil and let those billions circulate...

    ...I wonder how our military standards are so different that those of Russia. Seems to be more of a swapping out and in issue to me. Substitution, not enhancement.


    Ever Wanted to Buy an Actual Naval Warship? Good News, They’re on Sale - The Boeing Company (NYSE:BA) - 24/7 Wall St.
    http://247wallst.com/aerospace-defen...heyre-on-sale/




    Warship Developments:
    To Buy New or Used?
    Doug thomas

    http://www.navalreview.ca/wp-content...6num3art10.pdf


    What $13 billion buys new...

    This is the US' new $13 billion warship - Business Insider
    http://www.businessinsider.com/this-...warship-2015-6

    Last edited by KC; 13-02-2016, 01:40 AM.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by moahunter View Post
      I would be open to the government looking at the Mistral ships France is building for Russia. The issue there though, is the political implications on spending billions on a ship that was built in a shipyard in France, not in Canada where the dollars and tax on all those workers salaries cycles through our economy. That's not a second hand ship though, and even so, because it wasn't designed to Canadian spec, would still need a lot of money to be spent on it for our forces:

      http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cana...tion-1.3235816

      The Mistrals could potentially sell for $1.2 billion to $1.6 billion, according to published reports overseas, and if Canada did bid, they would require hundreds of millions of dollars worth of modifications to bring them in line with Canadian military standards.
      I can't see how Canada would have a need for helicopter carriers. It's never been identified as a need by any defence review, so why go and buy them? Because they're on sale? The only possible reason we'd get them is to be helpful in disaster assistance. But any disaster assistance that we can respond to quick enough is going to be in the caribbean. And there's a huge navy on the way down there that has far more capacity to do something like that.

      Comment


      • #48
        ^there is a need for a troop transport ship for missions like Afghanistan, and also training missions. This is just that, on steroids. If you can get it for the cost of such, its a pretty powerful upgrade.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by moahunter View Post
          ^there is a need for a troop transport ship for missions like Afghanistan, and also training missions. This is just that, on steroids. If you can get it for the cost of such, its a pretty powerful upgrade.
          We're going to send troops across the world on a boat? In this day and age?
          No, they'll take the plane.

          So a billion$ trainer (plus how many billion extra to 'refit')

          Comment


          • #50
            ^its also to carry the tanks and equipment. Have a look this, its been thought about before these mistrals came available for a bargain price that we might build one, take the supply ship and enhance it a bit, and you get something much more useful. Rick Hillier was a big fan of this idea.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphib...t_Ship_Project

            The Amphibious Assault Ship Project is a proposed procurement project by the Government of Canada for the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN). However, no such project has been announced by the Canadian Government and cost challenges with other naval procurement projects under the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy had led to no movement on the idea.

            This idea came about as part of the development of the Joint Support Ship Project of the Royal Canadian Navy and the need to improve the strategic sealift and amphibious assault capability of the Canadian Forces.[1] Many of the capabilities required for strategic sealift were to be included in the Joint Support Ship Project, however, a dedicated amphibious assault ship was favoured by some, such as then Chief of the Defence Staff Rick Hillier.[2]

            By Late 2008, the project appeared to have been placed on hold, if not canceled.[3] In 2012 the Canadian Forces announced that they continue to regret not purchasing the landing ship Largs Bay. By 2013 the project received a green light for the design and contractor selection phase. The Thales (DCNS) Mistral-class amphibious assault ship design was chosen. In mid-2014, DCNS & SNC Lavalin offered three ships for CAD$2.6 Billion (2 Billion euro). SNC Lavalin will construct the vessel, while DCNS will design it and STX France will consolidate the hull for arctic operations. [4][5] The Canadian Navy also trained with the French Navy on a Thales built amphibious assault ship.[6]
            That's no trainer, that's a fleet command and control flag ship that would perform multiple humanitarian and military roles.
            Last edited by moahunter; 16-02-2016, 03:31 PM.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by nobleea View Post
              Originally posted by moahunter View Post
              I would be open to the government looking at the Mistral ships France is building for Russia. The issue there though, is the political implications on spending billions on a ship that was built in a shipyard in France, not in Canada where the dollars and tax on all those workers salaries cycles through our economy. That's not a second hand ship though, and even so, because it wasn't designed to Canadian spec, would still need a lot of money to be spent on it for our forces:

              http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cana...tion-1.3235816

              The Mistrals could potentially sell for $1.2 billion to $1.6 billion, according to published reports overseas, and if Canada did bid, they would require hundreds of millions of dollars worth of modifications to bring them in line with Canadian military standards.
              I can't see how Canada would have a need for helicopter carriers. It's never been identified as a need by any defence review, so why go and buy them? Because they're on sale? The only possible reason we'd get them is to be helpful in disaster assistance. But any disaster assistance that we can respond to quick enough is going to be in the caribbean. And there's a huge navy on the way down there that has far more capacity to do something like that.
              It seems that our military standards are a major impediment to upgrading our standard military.

              Comment

              Working...
              X