Might have to ask the Russians for permission (or provide cash stuffed envelopes to certain people). As for Canada, no need. Can't maintain sovereignty when it is mostly ice covered with our pi$$-ant navy. If the polar cap melts, the patrol area would be massively increased. Denmark could do a better job.
There was an article in USNI that noted that the over Canada route is probably the only economically viable one for shipping, due to straits restrictions for Russian routes 9specifically 7m and 13m depth restrictions for two specific straits). And even still, "economically viable" is a relative question.
The UK never had territorial claims on canadas NW passage on the continental shelf argument - and the canadians were quite happy to accept UK transit etc as there was a common good.
Before commercial shipping happens it is likely adventure cruise ships that will be using the NW passage first, hopefully being escorted by icebreakers. Stuff happens though and if it is serious stuff the SAR operation will be a disaster as Canada has minimal assets in the Arctic. Additional rescue assets would have to be flown up from the south. Neither Canada or the US have sufficient icebreaker resources in the Arctic. Ships stuck in ice will reduce the bottom line for ship owners.
While you guys are towing ships from West to East via the Panama Canal, the RAN is offering ex FFG Sydney and ex LSL Tobruk to the various state governments to be sunk as dive sights.
A couple of RCN ships were sunk recently for recreational divers off the BC coast, one of the tribals I believe. The $39m is for both the Protecteur and Algonquin. As both ships were based in BC, it would only be financially viable if they were sunk there for dive sites. BC's environmental lobby likely would have raised all sorts of $hit over another wreck site. Although ocean territory is a federal matter, votes in BC are important for any federal party. I would think the environmental preparation, towing to location, and sinking of these two ships would be much cheaper than towing and scrapping in Halifax.
The short answer is that idea would require actually ordering something. Successive govts are constantly re-evaluating procurements so they don't have to actually commit to a purchase. This is how our massive recapitalization of defence crisis was created. Australia's AWD would be a good starting point, especially if we were to directly replace the tribals but that is not the plan. The future combatant surface ship program is for a common hull (i.e. frigate) and they will have different kit configurations for various roles. It is too bad OZ, the UK, NZ, and Canada couldn't be on the same page for a joint frigate build. The first three may be get there with the Type 26. Frankly having Canada involved would likely be a burden.
I am kind of sad to see an once proud little navy ended up like this (another one is the RNZN). But those ships (or soon to be rust buckets) will need a replacement someday. What are the RCN planning/going to do about the high-end capabilities?
The plan was for 15 new surface combatant ships to replace the 12 Halifax frigates and 4 Tribal class destroyers. These new surface combatant ships together with 8 AOPS (Arctic offshore patrol ships) have a budget of 26.5 billion Cdn (capital cost only). The first AOPS is being built by Irving now and the number ordered is 5 instead of 8. A sixth might be built if the budget allows it. The CSC ship design still has not been finalized but will be a modified MOTS frigate. Already there is talk the cost of these frigates is so high that the number will have to be reduced to 11 as junior has said the 26 billion budget will not change (that's likely a lie as he will probably reduce it).
Little? There was a time when Canada had a pretty damn big navy! .
The RCN was the the third largest navy in the world by the end of WW2 but I am not sure if either Germany or Japan had remaining naval assets that would have displaced us from number 3. The RCN was largely composed of corvettes and frigates with a few destroyers and was responsible for western North Atlantic.
Russia has 6 nuclear ice breakers and over 30 ocean going ice breakers. Of course Canada does not have the same needs as the same needs as the Russians but at least three Diefenbaker class ice breakers are probably needed to keep lanes open and a presence in the North. Keep ice breaking with the CCG where it belongs. If the Navy wants to cruise around up north they should be doing it right in an SSN.
Sounds like a great job for the Coast Guard to me.
