Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates

Sender

Active Member
Canadian steel from Algoma in production for the Davie PolarMax heavy (PC2) icebreaker:


Given this ship is being built currently in Finland, the steel must be being transported somehow. That aspect is not covered in the article above.
 

Salinger

Member
Quite possibly though I think Japan's greater experience designing and building subs would make a near-term appearance of Japanese SSN's more likely.

Also given the location of perceived threats to S. Korea, there might not have been as much drive towards SSN's when compared to the US or UK.

In that regards it would also go some way to explaining why Japan has not developed one yet, despite having the industrial elements needed to do so for decades.
South Korea is currently prohibited from conducting its own uranium enrichment under the U.S.-ROK Nuclear Agreement and relies on imports from the United States and other countries for its power generation fuel. While seeking to secure highly enriched uranium for nuclear submarine development, it requires U.S. consent in principle for nuclear fuel reprocessing and enrichment.
 
Canadian steel from Algoma in production for the Davie PolarMax heavy (PC2) icebreaker:


Given this ship is being built currently in Finland, the steel must be being transported somehow. That aspect is not covered in the article above.
I'd like to see Davie actually start building ships in Canada and utilizing the hundreds of millions of taxpayers dollars dropped on upgrading their Levis shipyard instead of continually farming work out to their increasingly large group of international shipyards. They finally get accepted into the National Shipbuilding Strategy and the first major program they get is immediately sent overseas.
 
Agree, and furthermore any contracts should be for transport and CCG vessels only. No warships for a province constantly threatening separation.
Davie is unlikely to get any warship contracts anytime soon given the competition from Seaspan and the total lack of results from their Levis shipyard, there is a contract with Transport Canada for a pair of ferries that was awarded in 2019 but they have not even finished the Preliminary design phase.
 

BostonMartin

New Member
Agree, and furthermore any contracts should be for transport and CCG vessels only. No warships for a province constantly threatening separation.
What about war planes? I heard they will build the Gripens, accumulate 200 of them parked in Mirabel, QC. without sending any to Ukraine nor Canada then use them to conquer Ontario. Scary stuff, can't imagine what they would do with 12 Corvettes, Niagara is cooked.
Thanks god the subs will be build in Korea, a country pre-separated from Canada since always and much safer for our sovereignty.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
What about war planes? I heard they will build the Gripens, accumulate 200 of them parked in Mirabel, QC. without sending any to Ukraine nor Canada then use them to conquer Ontario. Scary stuff, can't imagine what they would do with 12 Corvettes, Niagara is cooked.
Thanks god the subs will be build in Korea, a country pre-separated from Canada since always and much safer for our sovereignty.
My view on fighter production would be the same. Frankly I don’t see much opportunity for Gripen production in Canada. With 16 F-35s ordered and commitment on long lead-time items for 14 more, how many Gripens would be needed to compliment 30 F-35s? IMHO, not enough to justify assembly or production in Canada….let alone Quebec.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
IIRC SAAB's production capacity is limited, & is an obstacle to selling new Gripens, so it wants to expand it partly by getting others to build Gripens. If Canada set up a production line, SAAB would hope to use it for supplying other customers., not only the RCAF. Whether that would happen as hoped is another matter.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
IIRC SAAB's production capacity is limited, & is an obstacle to selling new Gripens, so it wants to expand it partly by getting others to build Gripens. If Canada set up a production line, SAAB would hope to use it for supplying other customers., not only the RCAF. Whether that would happen as hoped is another matter.
Isn’t Brazil going to produce Gripens? Depending on how the Ukraine-Russia war ends, Ukraine would seem to be the best new production site, albeit risky.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Isn’t Brazil going to produce Gripens? Depending on how the Ukraine-Russia war ends, Ukraine would seem to be the best new production site, albeit risky.
Brazil is making Gripens right now. Production was very slow indeed to start, but the Brazilian line is about to deliver its first Gripen for Brazil & is scheduled to help build Gripens for Colombia. But a line able to help build 17 aircraft, & years late in delivering to its own air force doesn't sound as if it could scale up quickly for larger numbers. Embraer may be cautious about investing in more capacity, & I suspect SAAB is now wary of relying on it.

I agree, Ukraine would be ideal if the factory wasn't likely to be bombed.
 
Unlike shipbuilding which Canada has shown itself to be moderately successful in as of late, setting ourselves up for the Saab fighter "production" proposal domestically is a laughable waste of time. More relevant to the discussion here however, the adoption of a two tiered fleet has some potentially disastrous consequences for cross service interoperability between the RCAF and RCN. The AEGIS equipped River class destroyers are out of the box able to integrate themselves seamlessly with the MADL datalinks of the F-35A, permitting them to discretely share substantial amounts of data quickly to the point that you can create high quality targeting tracks able to gain weapons locks on targets. Gripen E/F only has NATO standard LINK datalinks which while adequate, offer nowhere near the fidelity, bandwidth, stealth and interoperability that the MADL offers from the F-35.

Yet another example of poor procurement decisions being weighed due to emotional, politically charged situations.
 

Sender

Active Member
RFPs for the CPSP were submitted today. Both TKMS and Hanwha submitted. Rumour is a decision will be made by June, so this is moving lighting fast.

 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Yep, the sub acquisition is really moving. Both bidders have made several agreements with Canadian suppliers. Here’s one from the German bidder.


One can only hope that new army kit acquisitions move as fast. As for the RCAF fighter acquisition, probably not and frankly I am not impressed with any combination of possible F-35/Gripen scenarios. Too bad Boeing &ucked up the SH deal as it could have been expanded and kept the RCAF relevant until better alternatives emerged 15-20 years from now.
 
One can only hope that new army kit acquisitions move as fast. As for the RCAF fighter acquisition, probably not and frankly I am not impressed with any combination of possible F-35/Gripen scenarios. Too bad Boeing &ucked up the SH deal as it could have been expanded and kept the RCAF relevant until better alternatives emerged 15-20 years from now.
The Super Hornet failed the final round of competition within the fighter program, and was also shown to be uncompetitive on price given the insane sticker shock for a limited interim fleet proposed years before. While the US Navy will continue operating them for quite sometime, the production line is also shutting down and they are not a great even medium term solution when you have offerings like the F-35 available. It is a better aircraft than the Gripen E/F for sure however, I think fundamentally buying any 4th generation fighter in 2026 is a losing proposition entirely.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
The Super Hornet failed the final round of competition within the fighter program, and was also shown to be uncompetitive on price given the insane sticker shock for a limited interim fleet proposed years before. While the US Navy will continue operating them for quite sometime, the production line is also shutting down and they are not a great even medium term solution when you have offerings like the F-35 available. It is a better aircraft than the Gripen E/F for sure however, I think fundamentally buying any 4th generation fighter in 2026 is a losing proposition entirely.
The interim SH plan made more sense than used Hornets from Australia. The 18 planned would likely have become at least 40 or more given the current political environment. F-35s ordered from 2030 onwards, say 30-40 would get us to 2050-60 at which time 6th Gen could be an option. Gen 4+ jets like the F-15EX or SH combined with the F-35 is a decent CYA approach given LM’s performance with the F-35 program. The current conflict could show how well the F-35 holds up if it continues for another 1-2 months.
 
Top