Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates

[40 deg south]

I would also be interested to see the mission profile of the Coast Guard versions and any changes that are required that will inflate the price. If our politicians were smart they would be paying attention to the Kiwi's and offering up a spot on the line for a De Wolfe at a decent price, from my understanding they are already looking at something similar if not the same already.

To be honest, nobody knows what we are looking for at present. The previous government wanted a 'southern OPV' with ice strengthening capable of patrolling the sub-antarctic waters south of New Zealand. The current 85m OPVs go down there each year, but take a beating if the weather turns bad.

The current government promised an updated Defence Capability Plan by the end of 2018. Then early 2019. Then (from memory) April 2019. When it will appear, and what will be in it, are anyone's guess. The proposed southern OPV is unlikely to strike any real political opposition, but the government may simply be unwilling to spend the money. The annual budget is being released next week - it is possible some news will emerge then.

 

[John Fedup]

Well your Justin and our Jacinda have a crush on each other, so maybe Justin should make Jacinda an offer she couldn't refuse on an AOPS/V. Just saying.

Well junior may be out of a job by Oct so perhaps he might immigrate to NZ and Jacinda can put him charge of a local build of big friggin OPVs. They will be about 3 billion a copy so no guns and no firm delivery date other than before 2100.

 

[Calculus]

Well your Justin and our Jacinda have a crush on each other, so maybe Justin should make Jacinda an offer she couldn't refuse on an AOPS/V. Just saying.

AOPV capabilities would seem to meet the RNZN's requirements, at least as we know them, so getting a few would not be a bad outcome. This link shows some of the capabilities from a systems perspective: Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ships

If you do, please put on a bigger gun!

 

[Calculus]

Canada to buy two more AOPS

Looks like Canada will be getting more offshore patrol vessels to fill the gap. Not sure if this is the best option. Considering that most of the machinery spaces of the Type 26 are unlikely to change, I don't see why they don't bring the start of the CSC forward.

I posted this originally in the RNZN thread (post 6844). It is an interesting take on giving these to the Coast Guard: Ice-capable Canadian Coast Guard ships could be both ‘a blessing and a curse’: expert

 

[John Fedup]

Maybe junior sees these ships as icebreaker alternatives as global warming will continue and there will be no need for real icebreakers due to his carbon tax. Can't see the need for demilitarization of these two ships for the coast guard. It would probably end up with minimal savings. Where the money comes from is the real question. Politically and realistically Canada needs a new heavy icebreaker, probably two so they will get built. Screwing with the CSC build number will result in political and cost issues. In the unfortunate chance his government survives the Oct election, he will take money from the RCAF as it suits his political agenda and the electorate will tolerate this if there is a continued investment in protecting our coastlines with more Canadian built ships. This capital renewal of both the RCN and RCAF at the same time is unfortunate and is due to 20 years of neglect by both political parties and our pathetic military procurement operation. The apathetic Canadian electorate makes this all possible.

 

[Calculus]

Looks like our PM just opened NSS to a "third" shipyard. Realistically, this means Davie.

 

[Mattshel]

Looks like our PM just opened NSS to a "third" shipyard. Realistically, this means Davie.

Don't want to get into politicking too much but 16 new vessels is quite substantive. I think a large buy like that was required to placate Seaspan and Irving into allowing the 3rd Shipyard into the program.

The gut feeling I am getting from this is that some of the work originally set to go to Seaspan may actually go to Davie and in the place of that work Seaspan will get additional Coast Guard vessels.

 

[Calculus]

Agreed. This is actually a logical decision, given both Seaspan and Irving are fully tasked for the next 15 + years.

I wonder if Davie will now commit to the same level of modernization the other two yards undertook when they were selected?

 

[Black Jack Shellac]

Maybe junior sees these ships as icebreaker alternatives as global warming will continue and there will be no need for real icebreakers due to his carbon tax. Can't see the need for demilitarization of these two ships for the coast guard. It would probably end up with minimal savings. Where the money comes from is the real question. Politically and realistically Canada needs a new heavy icebreaker, probably two so they will get built. Screwing with the CSC build number will result in political and cost issues. In the unfortunate chance his government survives the Oct election, he will take money from the RCAF as it suits his political agenda and the electorate will tolerate this if there is a continued investment in protecting our coastlines with more Canadian built ships. This capital renewal of both the RCN and RCAF at the same time is unfortunate and is due to 20 years of neglect by both political parties and our pathetic military procurement operation. The apathetic Canadian electorate makes this all possible.

I suspect if they demilitarized them, Irving would find a way to charge more for them (redesign costs at $250M ). Better to leave them as is, and just put a small Navy contingent on them to operate the weapons system and CMS - after all, it is only one gun.

 

[Calculus]

Here's Irving's mock-up of the Coast Guard's version of the AOPV. No gun, and there don't seem to be as many antennae up top.

 

[Mattshel]

Does anyone have any idea on the timeframe for the CSC builds as of yet, I had read mention somewhere that they may not even be cutting steel until 2030...

 

[Black Jack Shellac]

Does anyone have any idea on the timeframe for the CSC builds as of yet, I had read mention somewhere that they may not even be cutting steel until 2030...

I saw a govt of canada page on the AOPS which shows steel cutting and delivery dates spaced 1 year apart ( I will try to relocate it and post when I have a chance ). The final date given on AOPV 435 was steel cut 2020 and delivery 2024. So assuming one per year for the two additional ones, the CSC would be cutting steel in ~ 2023.

 

[Mattshel]

I saw a govt of canada page on the AOPS which shows steel cutting and delivery dates spaced 1 year apart ( I will try to relocate it and post when I have a chance ). The final date given on AOPV 435 was steel cut 2020 and delivery 2024. So assuming one per year for the two additional ones, the CSC would be cutting steel in ~ 2023.

This is what I had hoped, by this time the first UK Type 26 should be delivered as well.

 

[Mattshel]

Can anyone on here provide some clarity on the costs for the additional 2 CCG DeWolfe vessels, I had read mention of $1.5 Billion for the 2 ships. Would that be $1.5 Billion construction cost or construction costs including additional lifecycle costs like they are assuming with the CSC project?

 

[ngatimozart]

Can anyone on here provide some clarity on the costs for the additional 2 CCG DeWolfe vessels, I had read mention of $1.5 Billion for the 2 ships. Would that be $1.5 Billion construction cost or construction costs including additional lifecycle costs like they are assuming with the CSC project?

Depends upon how the Canadian govt does their sums. Some govts will cite a sail-away cost whilst others include the sail-away cost plus spares, training, manuals, weapons, infrastructure etc. Some include the WOLC (Whole Of Life Costs) which covers everything. Now when you look at the the sail-away cost plus spares, training, manuals, weapons, infrastructure etc., all govts are different in how they do their sums for this. For example the NZ Govt doesn't include weapons in their capability acquisitions, because in their infinite wisdom many moons back it was decided that weapons will come out of operation expenditure (OPEX) not capital expenditure (CAPEX). Probably a Treasury methodology for being stingy and avoiding paying for advanced (hence expensive) weaponry.

Therefore to get an idea of how the announced costs are structured, would be to ask the DND or the DEFMIN, or see if a breakdown of the project budget is published. Maybe such material could be acquired under the Canadian equivalent of a Freedom Of Information Request.

 

[Calculus]

Can anyone on here provide some clarity on the costs for the additional 2 CCG DeWolfe vessels, I had read mention of $1.5 Billion for the 2 ships. Would that be $1.5 Billion construction cost or construction costs including additional lifecycle costs like they are assuming with the CSC project?

According to the link posted by @Black Jack Shellac, the total project cost is $4.3 billion (see below, description of project costs).

• The Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ship project acquisition budget is $4.3 billion (excluding taxes). This includes ship design, project management, materials and labour needed to build all the ships, initial spare parts, technical data, training of crew, contingency, amongst other items. The Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ship project will also acquire integrated logistics support products, jetty infrastructures in Halifax and Esquimalt, and a berthing and fueling facility in Nanisivik, Nunavut.

The cost of the ships themselves is not broken out, but reputed to be around $400Mil for the RCN versions, which do contain a fair bit of high-end kit (https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-ca/aops.html).

I would assume the CCG versions would be less, but we may not know for a while as the word is the government is still negotiating terms with Irving. The $1.5 billion would be a placeholder estimate only at this point.

 

[Calculus]

Further to the above, according to this report, the AOPS builds are achieving significant efficiencies with regards to labour hours, with a 40% reduction in the amount of labour required to build AOPS2 (vice AOPS1), and a further 15% reduction from AOPS2 to AOPS3: Challenges—Canada’s National Shipbuilding Strategy: 2018 annual report - National Shipbuilding Strategy reports - National Shipbuilding Strategy - Sea - Defence Procurement - Buying and Selling - PSPC

Based on this, it is difficult to understand how the Coast Guard vessels will cost $750 Million each. So, that cost must be the through life cost.

 

[Black Jack Shellac]

Does anyone have any idea on the timeframe for the CSC builds as of yet, I had read mention somewhere that they may not even be cutting steel until 2030...

This press release from Irving confirms the construction start date of 2023 for the CSC

On another note, thinking on the $1.5B price tag for the additional two ships.

The current total for the AOPS budget is $4.3B (page 17). The build costs for the AOPS to date were ~ $400 M each except for the last (#6) ordered, which was said to cost $800M (the excuse for this one was they were dragging out the construction to fill in the shipbuilding gap). So the op cost should be $250M each ($4.3B-$2B-$0.8B divided by 6 ships). So the typical life cycle cost for an AOPS should be $400M +$250M = $650M.

The budget for the two new ones is $1.5B or $750M each. Seems a bit steep since we should now be getting a discount on the 6th one, as the gap in construction has been eliminated, and the Coast Guard ships will not have the gun or CMS 330.

Likely we are getting hosed here, but hopefully there will be an announcement that they are now reducing the cost of the 6th AOPS. One can only hope.

 

[Mattshel]

Further to the above, according to this report, the AOPS builds are achieving significant efficiencies with regards to labour hours, with a 40% reduction in the amount of labour required to build AOPS2 (vice AOPS1), and a further 15% reduction from AOPS2 to AOPS3: Challenges—Canada’s National Shipbuilding Strategy: 2018 annual report - National Shipbuilding Strategy reports - National Shipbuilding Strategy - Sea - Defence Procurement - Buying and Selling - PSPC

Based on this, it is difficult to understand how the Coast Guard vessels will cost $750 Million each. So, that cost must be the through life cost.

You would think someone at PSPC would be intelligent enough to break it down so it makes sense for the public, they have a habitual habit of making theirselves look like fools not explaining their costing structure on these programs.

How difficult is it to say $XX of Construction Cost, $XX of Maintenance, $XX of Spares, Etc.. The public who are the people they are releasing the costing information to are not used to buying a car and having a spare engine included in the cost of the thing, it would help them with the sticker shock they get on their programs every time they release numbers.

I may be mistaken and this information may be readily available somewhere but I cannot seem to find any of it.

 

[John Fedup]

Standard Government MO, baffle the public with BS.