CANADA

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by Timmymagic »

Lord Jim wrote:They could always try to redo the Arrow for the 21st century, or keep the CF-18s going for as long as or longer than they kept the CF-101s around and join up with the UK and see what comes out of "Tempest". Frequent trips to the "Bone yard" would provide many spares and a number of airframes will be coming available for stripping in the next few years. Being serious they need to avoid being pressured into a purchase of the F-35A
Hmmmm....interesting thought....

Get the Canadians involved in Tempest.
Problem is its too far away...so...
Let the Canadians squeeze all of the life out of the F-18C's they've got remaining and the Aussie ones....but....fill the gap in with ex RAF T1 Typhoons from 2025 onwards, there are lots of T1's and 2 seaters available. The UK could bring forward some F-35B orders to cover or do as the German's are doing and order a few more T3's (and keep the production line open longer..)

End result Canadians are covered for fighter cover to 2035, Boeing not involved, Canadian involvement in Tempest and a Canadian order locked in, UK either gets some F-35B's earlier or additional Typhoon T3's.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Timmymagic wrote:End result Canadians are covered for fighter cover to 2035
... and someone to pay for the conformals (already designed and wind-tunnel tested) :D . Big place, that Canada...

Germany getting rid of 33, what have we got? 160 minus 107 (minus 1 destroyed on landing, in the US)?
- enough to do a throrough inspection and reject a few (for spares, at a "kilo" price)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by Timmymagic »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Germany getting rid of 33, what have we got? 160 minus 107 (minus 1 destroyed on landing, in the US)?
- enough to do a throrough inspection and reject a few (for spares, at a "kilo" price)
I was avoiding Germany like the plague....thinking of the Italians who have some T1's....

UK, Italy, Sweden, Canada and Japan would be an interesting partnership, that would guarantee 400+ sales.....no France or Germany to avoid complications. Spain could be a candidate, they have T1's and F-18's that need replacing, but they're likely to go to F-35B at some point and are wedded to Airbus.

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 2006
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by Jake1992 »

Timmymagic wrote:
ArmChairCivvy wrote:Germany getting rid of 33, what have we got? 160 minus 107 (minus 1 destroyed on landing, in the US)?
- enough to do a throrough inspection and reject a few (for spares, at a "kilo" price)
I was avoiding Germany like the plague....thinking of the Italians who have some T1's....

UK, Italy, Sweden, Canada and Japan would be an interesting partnership, that would guarantee 400+ sales.....no France or Germany to avoid complications. Spain could be a candidate, they have T1's and F-18's that need replacing, but they're likely to go to F-35B at some point and are wedded to Airbus.
Sounds very good to me the only thing I have concerns over is making sure Japan doesn't share info and tech from tempest with the USA, as Japan is seen as just and extention of the US military arm.
I know they are major allies but I don't believe they should get it for free, I didn't seem them lining up to give us F22 tech or info let alone for free

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: CANADA

Post by R686 »

Jesus wept, this must be the most anti-defence government I’ve ever seen in Canada and another nail in the coffin of the CDF, I’m pretty skeptical that these boats will receive timely upgrades. The article suggest threat the last boats is ready for retirement late 2020’s


https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national ... capability

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 539
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
United States of America

Re: CANADA

Post by Halidon »

R686 wrote:Jesus wept, this must be the most anti-defence government I’ve ever seen in Canada and another nail in the coffin of the CDF, I’m pretty skeptical that these boats will receive timely upgrades. The article suggest threat the last boats is ready for retirement late 2020’s


https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national ... capability
While not commenting on the desires or wishes of people I don't know, the government's defense of the decision is sound if unappealing. They're in a midst of a massive surface fleet recapitalization that is sucking up a lot of resources, and unlike the phased program which allowed Australia to roll from program-to-program, they don't have a ton of budgetary or management flexibility to take on another large program.

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: CANADA

Post by R686 »

Halidon wrote: While not commenting on the desires or wishes of people I don't know, the government's defense of the decision is sound if unappealing. They're in a midst of a massive surface fleet recapitalization that is sucking up a lot of resources, and unlike the phased program which allowed Australia to roll from program-to-program, they don't have a ton of budgetary or management flexibility to take on another large program.

Jeez I think it’s a bit of A piss poor excuse it’s called government mis-management, there maybe times when budget has to be reduced for whatever reason but that does not mean programs should be put off not considering the dangers that the submarine fleet themselves in every time they go to sea. Submarines do not have an infinite life

I would rather they just came out and said we will no longer be in the submarine business after Victoria class and place an added emphasis on the surface fleet

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 539
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
United States of America

Re: CANADA

Post by Halidon »

I'd argue that they're barely in the Submarine business with the Vickys, any program to introduce a new and more functional sub class would have to include wrestling with a lot more than just buying some boats.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Halidon wrote:any program to introduce a new and more functional sub class
An interesting point. With the Oberons in service with the RN and the navies of both Canada and Australia (and with a lot of shared training), things started to go awry in 2000 when the latter two navies both decommissioned their Oberons and moved on, to successor classes
- neither has managed to have more than 2 or 3 operational (at the best of times)
- in Oz (officially) this has been down to crew availability. Unofficially, Saab has received a lot of 'flak' for their part in the Collins class saga
- reports from Canada vary, but the fact that the boats were moored between their UK and Canada service may have been the start of the problems (was there also a "modernisation" that did not go to plan?)

Anyway, buying subs creates a strong dependency - as Australia is just finding out with DCNS/ Naval Group. Trying to blend suppliers and build at home - like Oz tried in the previous round - did not go well. Spain tried a different route: partnering with France first and then going solo. That went so badly that the first in class has been a long time 'coming'
- perhaps the Canadian decision to stay clear is a sound one?
- and how could they build 'at home' anyway as the capacity (for such complex builds) is taken up for 'yonks' already?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: CANADA

Post by R686 »

A interesting article on the RCAF capability cap,


https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/mi ... t-purchase

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

As there was none such
" a $5-billion program to buy new Super Hornet jets, a deal since scuttled, and later a $500-million program to purchase used F-18 planes from Australia."

Sounds like good news, though, spend half a bn and see what you need for 2032
... call LockMart out on their (what can I say :wtf: )?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by Lord Jim »

As time passes Canada is going to put under increasing pressure to purchase the F-35A. They will need four squadrons worth, including the training unit, plus a number of attrition/maintenance replacements. so could get away with purchasing as few as sixty in total. The only plus side to their situation is that when they finally order the plane it will be a mature platform and the price should have come down a reasonable amount relatively speaking.

I am not surprised the RCAF is now saying the CF-18 fleet is in much better condition than originally believed. The number of airframes in use is substantially lower than the number purchased and if they have rotated the airframes to conserve their hours, with modest updates they could keep going for quite a while longer.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Lord Jim wrote:I am not surprised the RCAF is now saying the CF-18 fleet is in much better condition than originally believed.
Funny how this repeats across nations that get "the sticker shock" from calculating the all in cost of f-35s
- suddenly Belgium's f-16s were in great shape,too (but they did go ahead, in the end)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: CANADA

Post by R686 »

Auditor General exposes major flaws in Trudeau government’s fighter jet plans




https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national ... -jet-plans

chinook88
Member
Posts: 47
Joined: 15 Jan 2017, 06:31
Chile

Re: CANADA

Post by chinook88 »

Failed Canadian Warship Bidder Takes Legal Action

BY MAREX 2018-11-22 15:33:22

Alion Science and Technology has launched a Federal Court appeal in an attempt to overturn the Canadian Government's decision to select Lockheed Martin as the preferred bidder for the nation's new fleet of warships.

Alion Canada, a subsidiary of U.S.-based Alion Science and Technology, filed an application on Friday aimed at preventing Irving Shipbuilding from entering into a contract with Lockheed Martin for the $60-billion dollar project on the grounds that Lockheed Martin’s bid was non-compliant. Alion says the BAE Systems Type 26 combat ship proposed by Lockheed Martin does not meet the mandatory requirements set by the government' request for proposal (RFP) regarding vessel speed and the number of crew berths.

The RFP was released to 12 companies that had been pre-qualified to participate in the procurement by Irving Shipbuilding in October 2016. Irving is the prime contractor for the construction of the 15 warships at its Halifax shipyard.

Alion states that its proposed design, based on a Dutch frigate, met all of the RFP’s requirements. A bid was also received from Navantia/Saab/CEA Technologies with their proposal was based on the Spanish Navy F-105 frigate.

The new warships will replace Canada’s 12 aging Halifax-class frigates and already-retired Iroquois-class destroyers. The choice of preferred bidder was announced in October this year, and construction of the 150-meter (492-foot) vessels is expected to start in the early 2020s.

The procurement has been the subject of bid-rigging allegations including that a number of amendments were made to the RFP to suit Lockheed Martin's bid. The company's proposed design, whilst under construction for the Royal Navy and selected for the Royal Australia Navy, is seen to be inconsistent with Canada's National Shipbuilding Strategy that calls for a proven, off-the-shelf design to cut costs and mitigate risks.

The Canadian Surface Combatant project is the largest, most complex procurement ever undertaken by the Government of Canada.

https://www.maritime-executive.com/arti ... gal-action

chinook88
Member
Posts: 47
Joined: 15 Jan 2017, 06:31
Chile

Re: CANADA

Post by chinook88 »

Canadian Type 26 Frigate order back on track
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/canadia ... -on-track/

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

A sign of things to come: economic warfare raising its ugly head
"Chinese importers have now said shipments of Canadian canola - a type of rapeseed used for oil or animal feed that Canada is the world's largest exporter of - are taking longer to clear customs."
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: CANADA

Post by xav »

Canada’s Combat Ship Team awarded CSC design contract
Image
Canada's Combat Ship Team has been awarded the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) design contract by Irving Shipbuilding. Irving Shipbuilding is the Canadian Surface Combatant prime contractor and will build all 15 ships at Halifax Shipyard.
https://www.navalnews.com/news/2019/02/ ... -contract/

--

Canada’ supply ship MV Asterix Starts Year-Long Deployment
Canada's only Naval Support Ship departed for a year-long deployment which will see Federal Fleet Services' Asterix take part in a series of international exercises and security operations throughout the Pacific Ocean, Asia, Middle East and East Africa.
https://www.navalnews.com/news/2019/02/ ... eployment/

--

Lockheed Martin Canada’s CMS 330 Selected for RCN Joint Support Ships
This milestone places CMS 330 on five classes of ships across three different navies – six classes when also including the future Canadian Surface Combatant. The CMS 330 features advanced technology that will offer critical commonality for the Royal Canadian Navy’s AOPS, CSC, and JSS missions.
https://www.navalnews.com/news/2019/02/ ... ort-ships/

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Hi xav, a pity tour staff writer did not follow up with this as to which 3 navies (it is in the running for the Finnish corvettes, but I have no idea where that selection process is at).
"Joint Support Ships. This now places our Canadian-developed CMS 330 on five classes of ships across three different navies – six classes when including the future Canadian Surface Combatant for which we are the preferred bidder. This is great momentum and we look forward to expanding our support to the Royal Canadian Navy,”
Gary Fudge, vice president and general manager, Lockheed Martin Canada Rotary and Mission Systems"
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by abc123 »

xav wrote: Canada’s Combat Ship Team awarded CSC design contract
Image
Canada's Combat Ship Team has been awarded the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) design contract by Irving Shipbuilding. Irving Shipbuilding is the Canadian Surface Combatant prime contractor and will build all 15 ships at Halifax Shipyard.
https://www.navalnews.com/news/2019/02/ ... -contract/

--

Canada’ supply ship MV Asterix Starts Year-Long Deployment
Canada's only Naval Support Ship departed for a year-long deployment which will see Federal Fleet Services' Asterix take part in a series of international exercises and security operations throughout the Pacific Ocean, Asia, Middle East and East Africa.
https://www.navalnews.com/news/2019/02/ ... eployment/

--

Lockheed Martin Canada’s CMS 330 Selected for RCN Joint Support Ships
This milestone places CMS 330 on five classes of ships across three different navies – six classes when also including the future Canadian Surface Combatant. The CMS 330 features advanced technology that will offer critical commonality for the Royal Canadian Navy’s AOPS, CSC, and JSS missions.
https://www.navalnews.com/news/2019/02/ ... ort-ships/
So they might put another 2 Mk41 vls there in front? To have 48 cells total?
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 2006
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by Jake1992 »

abc123 wrote:
xav wrote: Canada’s Combat Ship Team awarded CSC design contract
Image
Canada's Combat Ship Team has been awarded the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) design contract by Irving Shipbuilding. Irving Shipbuilding is the Canadian Surface Combatant prime contractor and will build all 15 ships at Halifax Shipyard.
https://www.navalnews.com/news/2019/02/ ... -contract/

--

Canada’ supply ship MV Asterix Starts Year-Long Deployment
Canada's only Naval Support Ship departed for a year-long deployment which will see Federal Fleet Services' Asterix take part in a series of international exercises and security operations throughout the Pacific Ocean, Asia, Middle East and East Africa.
https://www.navalnews.com/news/2019/02/ ... eployment/

--

Lockheed Martin Canada’s CMS 330 Selected for RCN Joint Support Ships
This milestone places CMS 330 on five classes of ships across three different navies – six classes when also including the future Canadian Surface Combatant. The CMS 330 features advanced technology that will offer critical commonality for the Royal Canadian Navy’s AOPS, CSC, and JSS missions.
https://www.navalnews.com/news/2019/02/ ... ort-ships/
So they might put another 2 Mk41 vls there in front? To have 48 cells total?
This shows what could me done with the City class, having 48 mk41s up front instead of 24 and 24 mushrooms would be so much better, that coupled with replace the mid ship 24 mushrooms with 12-15 ExLS would allow us to keep 48+ CAMM/CAMM-ER on aswell as 48mk41s.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by abc123 »

Jake1992 wrote:
abc123 wrote:
xav wrote: Canada’s Combat Ship Team awarded CSC design contract
Image
Canada's Combat Ship Team has been awarded the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) design contract by Irving Shipbuilding. Irving Shipbuilding is the Canadian Surface Combatant prime contractor and will build all 15 ships at Halifax Shipyard.
https://www.navalnews.com/news/2019/02/ ... -contract/

--

Canada’ supply ship MV Asterix Starts Year-Long Deployment
Canada's only Naval Support Ship departed for a year-long deployment which will see Federal Fleet Services' Asterix take part in a series of international exercises and security operations throughout the Pacific Ocean, Asia, Middle East and East Africa.
https://www.navalnews.com/news/2019/02/ ... eployment/

--

Lockheed Martin Canada’s CMS 330 Selected for RCN Joint Support Ships
This milestone places CMS 330 on five classes of ships across three different navies – six classes when also including the future Canadian Surface Combatant. The CMS 330 features advanced technology that will offer critical commonality for the Royal Canadian Navy’s AOPS, CSC, and JSS missions.
https://www.navalnews.com/news/2019/02/ ... ort-ships/
So they might put another 2 Mk41 vls there in front? To have 48 cells total?
This shows what could me done with the City class, having 48 mk41s up front instead of 24 and 24 mushrooms would be so much better, that coupled with replace the mid ship 24 mushrooms with 12-15 ExLS would allow us to keep 48+ CAMM/CAMM-ER on aswell as 48mk41s.
Yep, and then, with forward cells full of Standard missiles ( say 24 ), Tomahawks ( say 16 ) and ASROCs ( say 8 ) and aft cells with CAMMs ( say 36+ ), you would have powerful surface combattant. Yes, a bit pricey, but very good.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: CANADA

Post by xav »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Hi xav, a pity tour staff writer did not follow up with this as to which 3 navies
On top of my head:
Royal new zealand navy Anzac class upgrade
Chilean Navy Type 23 upgrade
And RCN of course

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by Lord Jim »

Yep the City class is looking more and more like the "Budget" variant of the design. It is also interesting that given the size of our defence budget compared to Canada and Australia how we are buying the fewest and least capable.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: CANADA

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

xav wrote:
ArmChairCivvy wrote:Hi xav, a pity tour staff writer did not follow up with this as to which 3 navies
On top of my head:
Royal new zealand navy Anzac class upgrade
Chilean Navy Type 23 upgrade
And RCN of course
Thx xav, so more bids in the pipeline.
- how the product came about is also interesting as a lot of Saab elements were absorbed, and now the two are being bid against each other
- Saab probably won't mind (even when losing) too much (if they can still supply key components?)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Post Reply