Rebuilding a smaller mid sized Navy

[Todjaeger]

I know SSNs are around 2.5 billion and the odds of getting them are nil but AIP can only sustain for a month at max and I'm pretty sure that means not moving around. An SSK on AIP means running at a max speed of 5 knots. Not great for intercepting.

I thought maybe a snorkel alone could punch through the ice somehow at least as a backup to AIP in case it fails.

A non-nuclear submarine is not particularly good at intercepting anything, AIP or not. The generally published max speed of current diesel-electric subs is ~20 kts submerged, however that is not a speed which can be sustained for any length of time.

Depending on the design, AIP can provide sufficient power for 2-3 weeks of operation at low speeds. IIRC that was sufficient for a Germany sub to transit from the North Sea into the Med remaining submerged, which took approximately three weeks. Looking at the numbers, that would suggest an average speed of ~4 kts.

What people again seem to be over looking is that while AIP is all nice and everything, just how much power can it generate when needed?

Part of the reason why the RAN trialed AIP Stirling engines, but did not adopt them on the Collins-class SSG is that they would have added too much weight, and occupied too much space for the amount of air independent power generation they would have provided. The space, weight and internal volume that AIP and their fuel systems take up typically reduce the amount of available space and weight for batteries, diesel generators, and fuel bunkerage. Having the ability to run a 2-3 week trickle charge is nice, but also useless if frequent large power spikes are required. Those requirements are dictated by a sub's sensor and combat data system fitout.

-Cheers

 

[gf0012-aust]

Its official - my eyes are bleeding.

Someone needs to do a bang up job of getting this back to reality or I'm going to trigger a countdown on it.

24hrs for sanity to prevail or either myself or another mod will feel free to lance the boil.

 

[Future Fleet]

Its official - my eyes are bleeding.

Someone needs to do a bang up job of getting this back to reality or I'm going to trigger a countdown on it.

24hrs for sanity to prevail or either myself or another mod will feel free to lance the boil.

New at this so don't take this as a veiled insult but I do not understand your post. Aren't we supposed to be discussing building a new navy for Canada? It seems to be that some of us look at this topic more conceptually and others take a ridged view under the confines of the current mandates and role constraints. How are we supposed to be discussing this topic to the standards of this website. Do you think only referenced ideas should be mentioned? No concept talk?

 

[Todjaeger]

New at this so don't take this as a veiled insult but I do not understand your post. Aren't we supposed to be discussing building a new navy for Canada? It seems to be that some of us look at this topic more conceptually and others take a ridged view under the confines of the current mandates and role constraints. How are we supposed to be discussing this topic to the standards of this website. Do you think only referenced ideas should be mentioned? No concept talk?

The discussion of concept is generally fine, but it does need to have a dose of reality in it.

This is where putting forward that an agency like the CCG should have a more active constabulary role needs to be weighed with the reality that there is no provision currently within Canadian law for it to do so.

There is also the reality of what and how submarines operate, what they are capable of and what they are not, advocating for something which a sub cannot do, or not do particularly well, gets unrealistic very quickly.

Speaking more generally, suggesting that a whole shopping list of equipment should be purchased, while ignoring limitations like defence budgets and/or in service timeframes, never mind sustainability costs... All such activities reduce the quality of debate as it moves discussion away from what is possible and moves it into the realms of fanstasy (or perhaps science fiction).

-Cheers

 

[salthorse]

That is a really good link but you know guided missile frigates can not be considered obsolete yet.
"The frigate beats the mothership in shore bombardment, but do you really want a large warship so close to shore and inshore threats from missiles, aircraft, subs, mines, etc. for only 10 minutes of sustained firing?"
With long range missiles they can bombard shores from pretty safe distances.

Is this based on the assumption of no ASW threat out wide? If thier ASW sensors and weapons systems are not up to speed they might have to cling to the 20 metre contour anyway.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

New at this so don't take this as a veiled insult but I do not understand your post. Aren't we supposed to be discussing building a new navy for Canada? It seems to be that some of us look at this topic more conceptually and others take a ridged view under the confines of the current mandates and role constraints. How are we supposed to be discussing this topic to the standards of this website. Do you think only referenced ideas should be mentioned? No concept talk?

Fair enough but you have a couple of typos in there. In place of “conceptual” you meant to write “fantasy” and in place of “ridged” (which I assume you meant to write “rigid”) you should have written “realistic”.

What you consider conceptual FutureFleet is just total nonsense. You don’t understand enough about the capabilities in question to be conceptual. Now there are many places on the internet where you can be comfortable and embraced making such statements but this is not one of them.

 

[StevoJH]

Developing the Canadian Coast Guard into a force along the lines of the US Coast Guard would appear to be an error if what my look at the CCG website is true.

The CCG currently appears to consist of a large number of search and rescue lifeboats, plus a small number of Ice breakers and research ships in a supporting role. There appears to be little provision for a law enforcement role.

Which agency in Canada has responsibility for customs duties at sea in Canada, I was unable to find this out, is the Navy currently responsible for this?

One thing that people appear to forget when suggesting the setting up of a Coast Guard with enforcement roles similar to the USCG is that they have a Budget larger then that of most Navies. The FY 2013 budget for the USCG is 9.97 Billion USD, i think you will find this is more then the RCN gets allotted each year, let alone any enlarged CCG.

Link for USCG Budget: http://www.uscg.mil/posturestatement/docs/FY_2013_Budget_Fact_Sheet.pdf

Canada does not need light weight Corvettes to make up its Navy, they do not have the Utility of Frigates, and as stated above by Todjaeger, they do not have the endurance or durability to operate outside the continental shelf for any significant period of time.

A frigate can do everything one of those oversized FAC's can do (a little bit slower), plus much more. Fast Lightweight corvettes are more suited to a small Carribean Country after a green water navy or either a Baltic or Mediterranean Country where the ranges are short and the weather is less of an issue.

 

[Todjaeger]

Developing the Canadian Coast Guard into a force along the lines of the US Coast Guard would appear to be an error if what my look at the CCG website is true.

The CCG currently appears to consist of a large number of search and rescue lifeboats, plus a small number of Ice breakers and research ships in a supporting role. There appears to be little provision for a law enforcement role.

Which agency in Canada has responsibility for customs duties at sea in Canada, I was unable to find this out, is the Navy currently responsible for this?

One thing that people appear to forget when suggesting the setting up of a Coast Guard with enforcement roles similar to the USCG is that they have a Budget larger then that of most Navies. The FY 2013 budget for the USCG is 9.97 Billion USD, i think you will find this is more then the RCN gets allotted each year, let alone any enlarged CCG.

Link for USCG Budget: http://www.uscg.mil/posturestatement/docs/FY_2013_Budget_Fact_Sheet.pdf

Canada does not need light weight Corvettes to make up its Navy, they do not have the Utility of Frigates, and as stated above by Todjaeger, they do not have the endurance or durability to operate outside the continental shelf for any significant period of time.

A frigate can do everything one of those oversized FAC's can do (a little bit slower), plus much more. Fast Lightweight corvettes are more suited to a small Carribean Country after a green water navy or either a Baltic or Mediterranean Country where the ranges are short and the weather is less of an issue.

From what I read of the CCG site, as well as the relevant Canadian acts, there appears to be virtually no provision for the CCG to perform law enforcement duties. The CCG does appear to be tasked with providing support/transport for other Canadian agencies (like the RCMP...) which can then perform their respective roles.

Now with respect to other countries replicating the role and capabilities of the USCG, there are a few things I think are key to point out. As Stevo already mentioned, the budget of the USCG is quite large, relative to what might be available to other, non-US services. Something else also worth mentioning, the USCG has ~46,000 active personnel, which is approximately the same size as the entire regular ADF (~53,000 IIRC) or Canadian Defence Force (~42,500). With the sort of budget the USCG has, and the number of personnel, quite a bit can be accomplished.

It is also IMO worth noting that while the US has a number of different agencies and forces which perform different roles, and that there are specific reasons why some agencies or branches of the military have certain roles, that does not mean that other nations' could or even should replicate the structure the US uses.

If a particular nation has its navy or a national police force tasked with performing EEZ patrolling, and/or other constabulary roles, that is fine. What matters is whether or not the allocation of assets, budgetary funding and personnel is appropriate for the roles required by Gov't, and if the roles mandated by Gov't are appropriate and realistic for a given nation's security situation.

-Cheers

 

[Zhaow]

Question, How many can name a country that has the same size as the US Coast Guard and operates in similar fashion like the US Coast Guard. You have to remember, the US Coast Guard is about the same size as the NYPD/FDNY spread all over the United States and territories.

 

[Dodger67]

The USCG is also larger and more heavily armed than the majority of the world's naval forces.

 

[Cadredave]

Question, How many can name a country that has the same size as the US Coast Guard and operates in similar fashion like the US Coast Guard. You have to remember, the US Coast Guard is about the same size as the NYPD/FDNY spread all over the United States and territories.

There is no country with a CG with the size, capabilities, budget, or enforcement role as the USCG if you read Tod post you would see that the UCG is larger than most over Countries Defence Forces

Oringinally posted by TOD
Now with respect to other countries replicating the role and capabilities of the USCG, there are a few things I think are key to point out. As Stevo already mentioned, the budget of the USCG is quite large, relative to what might be available to other, non-US services. Something else also worth mentioning, the USCG has ~46,000 active personnel, which is approximately the same size as the entire regular ADF (~53,000 IIRC) or Canadian Defence Force (~42,500). With the sort of budget the USCG has, and the number of personnel, quite a bit can be accomplished.

Most Countries Naval Forces and budgets come no where close to the USCG budget, They IMO are unique to the US only. RNZN Patrol Force has to carry the following Government agencies to carry out the same role as the USCG, NZ Police, Ministry of Fisheries, Customs, etc we are not alone in that respect having to carry other Government agecies to enforce our EEZ.

 

[Zhaow]

Then what navy around the world comes close to size, composition, role and mission of the USCG. What navy around the world would come close to the US Coast Guard

 

[Zhaow]

From what I read of the CCG site, as well as the relevant Canadian acts, there appears to be virtually no provision for the CCG to perform law enforcement duties. The CCG does appear to be tasked with providing support/transport for other Canadian agencies (like the RCMP...) which can then perform their respective roles.

Now with respect to other countries replicating the role and capabilities of the USCG, there are a few things I think are key to point out. As Stevo already mentioned, the budget of the USCG is quite large, relative to what might be available to other, non-US services. Something else also worth mentioning, the USCG has ~46,000 active personnel, which is approximately the same size as the entire regular ADF (~53,000 IIRC) or Canadian Defence Force (~42,500). With the sort of budget the USCG has, and the number of personnel, quite a bit can be accomplished.

It is also IMO worth noting that while the US has a number of different agencies and forces which perform different roles, and that there are specific reasons why some agencies or branches of the military have certain roles, that does not mean that other nations' could or even should replicate the structure the US uses.

If a particular nation has its navy or a national police force tasked with performing EEZ patrolling, and/or other constabulary roles, that is fine. What matters is whether or not the allocation of assets, budgetary funding and personnel is appropriate for the roles required by Gov't, and if the roles mandated by Gov't are appropriate and realistic for a given nation's security situation.

-Cheers

Being that I am a member of the US Coast Guard as an Auxiliarist, Here's the current size:
Civilian employees: 7,057
Active duty personnel: 41,873
Selected Reservists: 8,100
Auxiliary: 30,000

If you add the numbers, it would total 87,030 people in the US Coast Guard as of right now. Now, what navy around the world could possibly come close to the size of the US Coast Guard.

Here's a current snapshot of the US Coast Guard
http://www.uscg.mil/top/about/doc/uscg_snapshot.pdf

 

[gf0012-aust]

What navy around the world would come close to the US Coast Guard

service scale has no relationship to combat effectiveness against a countries combat requirements.

the japanese for example can outpunch the majority - and take away some countries nukes and they could also more than adequately clean their clocks

 

[Abraham Gubler]

service scale has no relationship to combat effectiveness against a countries combat requirements.

Exactly. How many world navies maintain local posts around their coastline to rescue people lost at sea? The USCG maintains 12 odd frigate/destroyer sized ships and 24 odd corvette sized ships, which is medium level naval capability but without any of the enablers from weapon systems to submarines and fleet replenishment. The size of the USCG is more indicative of the level of use of American coastal waters than any other measure.

the japanese for example can outpunch the majority - and take away some countries nukes and they could also more than adequately clean their clocks

The Japanese could have nuclear weapons and quite literally MX ICBM capability within weeks if not days. They are the most nuclear latent country in the world. Give them a year and they would easily out bang China and Russia.

 

[Todjaeger]

Then what navy around the world comes close to size, composition, role and mission of the USCG. What navy around the world would come close to the US Coast Guard

In short, none. There are other naval services around the world which are similar in size to the USCG, but they are naval services, which means their respective roles and missions would be a bit different. By extension, their composition and force structure would also be different, since the role and mission requirements which are primary drivers of force structure.

At this point I get the sense that people cannot see for the forest due to all the trees, or since this is a naval thread, people cannot see the water, due to all the waves.

What the US can afford to budget on a military branch like the USCG, or what the US chooses to task the USCG with, has no relevance in dictating the platforms or force structure of a nation roughly a tenth the population.

Since this thread was started to discuss the force structure and platforms of use to the RCN/Canada, how about we stick to that, hmm?

 

[DrewUSA]

I'm sorry, i never understood why some countries, especially Canada, doesn't just sit out of having a true military, besides land forces, and pay the US to defend the air. We have the bases, treaties, radar, communication between both set up anyway... This also brings up another question i have... when you destroy an incoming ICBM anywhere over land or space, wont it emit an EMP, and or poss disperse whatever chemical, bio or nuclear device it has in the atmosphere and with that being said, why don't we strive to sit outside Iran, (well positioned for that already) and North Korea and when they test a missile, we shoot it out of the sky. win win for both.... They loose their rights to test missiles. or Until Martyrdom is not apart of their national security policys' anymore and want to talk like civilized people.

 

[Bonza]

I'm sorry, i never understood why some countries, especially Canada, doesn't just sit out of having a true military, besides land forces, and pay the US to defend the air. We have the bases, treaties, radar, communication between both set up anyway... This also brings up another question i have... when you destroy an incoming ICBM anywhere over land or space, wont it emit an EMP, and or poss disperse whatever chemical, bio or nuclear device it has in the atmosphere and with that being said, why don't we strive to sit outside Iran, (well positioned for that already) and North Korea and when they test a missile, we shoot it out of the sky. win win for both.... They loose their rights to test missiles. or Until Martyrdom is not apart of their national security policys' anymore and want to talk like civilized people.

Okay, this is getting ridiculous... I've already closed one of your threads, and this post has nothing to do with the thread topic... I understand you're new, but please, you must keep your posts relevant to the thread and abide by the forum rules. Thanks.

 

[DrewUSA]

Okay, this is getting ridiculous... I've already closed one of your threads, and this post has nothing to do with the thread topic... I understand you're new, but please, you must keep your posts relevant to the thread and abide by the forum rules. Thanks.

I dot understand what i said. Is it not true we have been working with the canadans since early 1950s?
Also, if we took over their naval avtivities wouldnt that rekate directly to the thread. I just would like to know what you took wrong. Sorry if i made a mistake. If uncan please let me know what i am doing i wrong. I would appreciate it. thanks

 

[Cadredave]

I dot understand what i said. Is it not true we have been working with the canadans since early 1950s?
Also, if we took over their naval avtivities wouldnt that rekate directly to the thread. I just would like to know what you took wrong. Sorry if i made a mistake. If uncan please let me know what i am doing i wrong. I would appreciate it. thanks

Drew your posts make no sense they dont contribute to the discussion at hand, unfortunately your post on how to rebuild a smaller mid sized navy did not add any value ref Canada needs, for example what has a ICBM and EMP got to do with the topic at hand, nothing is the answer. Canada is a Sovereign Nation so it has the right to Defend its borders how it see fit with the taxes it gathers to do the task at hand no country is going to contract out its right to defend its borders to another country if you cant understand that basic right then you have no business being on a serious Defence Forum.

Your post are so random to make me think you are very very young or are here as a troll, mate think before you post and your stay will be long and fruitful.

CD