John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Yes, that would be a way to stick it to Irving! Davie should invite Admiral Normal to sail with her. He could give the one finger salute as they enter Halifax harbour.
Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates
- Thread starter stephen weist
- Start date
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Yet another response in the on going spat between Davie and Irving regarding the Resolve AOR. Frankly the criticism about the AOPS that Irving is building is well deserved.
Alex Vicefield Responds to Irving Shipbuilding - Canadian Defence Review | Canadian Defence Review
Alex Vicefield Responds to Irving Shipbuilding - Canadian Defence Review | Canadian Defence Review
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Although Davie seems to be doing a good job on project Resolve, there are reasons besides their bankruptcy several years ago that this yard was bypassed for Canada's national shipbuilding procurement project. The one thing Quebec excels at compared to all other provinces (although Ontario is trying hard to rival them) is corruption. The Mafia's (real-deal Italian version) influence in Quebec is significant and then add in Quebec's questionable commitment to Canada, is it any wonder why I can't get enthusiastic about giving further business to this company. Unfortunately, if the two yards awarded RCN business don't start showing some decent performance, Canada may have no choice and will have to start offering them some additional business.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...art-of-ferry-contract-review/article35121801/
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...art-of-ferry-contract-review/article35121801/
walter
Active Member
Hey John and others offcourse ,it seems like the PBO rapport is out,about the surface combatants.
Sjeez what are they buying 6(or is it 15) starships???
Quote
The Cost of Canada’s Surface Combatants
1 June 2017
Get the report
The Cost of Canada’s Surface Combatants.pdf
http://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/web/default/files/Documents/Reports/2017/CSC Costing/CSC_EN.pdf
Summary
The objective of this report is to provide a cost estimate of the CSC program. This estimate includes costs resulting from development, production, spare parts, ammunition, training, government program management and upgrades to existing facilities. It does not include costs associated with the operation, maintenance and mid-life refurbishment of the ships [emphasis added], other than the spare parts that will be purchased when the ships are built.
There are two primary cost drivers for surface combatants: the ship’s weight and the combat system. The weight of surface combatants has been increasing, while their combat systems have become more and more complex, both factors driving up their cost.
Assumptions which the PBO used for it estimation were:
Contract awarded in 2018
Construction starts in 2021
15th ship delivered in 2041
CSC based on an existing design with 5,400 tons used as the reference lightship weight [emphasis added]
Total program cost in FY2017 dollars is estimated to be $39.94 billion or $61.82 billion in then-year dollars. The original budget for the CSC was $26.2 billion (from 2008 and under review) [emphasis added] and it is estimated to buy six ships...
The Cost of Canada?s Surface Combatants
Sjeez what are they buying 6(or is it 15) starships???
Quote
The Cost of Canada’s Surface Combatants
1 June 2017
Get the report
The Cost of Canada’s Surface Combatants.pdf
http://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/web/default/files/Documents/Reports/2017/CSC Costing/CSC_EN.pdf
Summary
The objective of this report is to provide a cost estimate of the CSC program. This estimate includes costs resulting from development, production, spare parts, ammunition, training, government program management and upgrades to existing facilities. It does not include costs associated with the operation, maintenance and mid-life refurbishment of the ships [emphasis added], other than the spare parts that will be purchased when the ships are built.
There are two primary cost drivers for surface combatants: the ship’s weight and the combat system. The weight of surface combatants has been increasing, while their combat systems have become more and more complex, both factors driving up their cost.
Assumptions which the PBO used for it estimation were:
Contract awarded in 2018
Construction starts in 2021
15th ship delivered in 2041
CSC based on an existing design with 5,400 tons used as the reference lightship weight [emphasis added]
Total program cost in FY2017 dollars is estimated to be $39.94 billion or $61.82 billion in then-year dollars. The original budget for the CSC was $26.2 billion (from 2008 and under review) [emphasis added] and it is estimated to buy six ships...
The Cost of Canada?s Surface Combatants
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
If 61 billion is needed for 15 CSC then screw that. I am liking my all submarine RCN concept more and more. Unfortunately the chances of obtaining my sub choice are minimal (Virginia SSN). This PBO report will put a lot of pressure on Irving to get the AOPS right from the get-go. If they don't, I can envision the CSC program going down the drain along with a blue-water RCN.
t68
Well-Known Member
I'd suggest you get on the flight III Burkes for that sort of coin with BMD capabilty
I have just finished reading the report and to this novice, the report seems well considered, analyses and compares costs against similar projects in US and Australia and the result fares well against projects.
It is notoriously difficult to compare true costs between similar ships in different countries as has been illuminated here before. Inclusions such as building greenfield sight to build the ships in the Oz example may not be included in a Canadian project. Ammunition cost are included in the Canadian example, anywhere from $180 to $212 million per ship x 15 and probably weren't included in the Aust cost.
However, in macro terms $41b for 15 ships for the RCN is similar to the $35b for 9 ships for the RAN (given different inclusions) as both ships will have similar capabilities.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Hi Mate, sorry, but don't you mean $61b (not $41b) for the 15 ships? If so, then yes, agree, the costings are very similar to the Australian Future Frigate program costings for 9 ships.
Firstly, the exchange rate today is that the A$ and the C$ dollar are at parity, so we are comparing apples with apples in dollar terms at least.
The figures in Summary Table 2 is a pretty good guide to the 'similarities' in costings between the RCN and RAN projects.
* Program cost for 9 ships - $37.07b - (RAN 9 Future Frigates project cost is $35b)
* Program cost for 12 ships - $48.91b - (RAN 9 Future Frigates $35b, 'plus' 3 x AWDs project cost of $9.2b, gives a total of $44.2b)
* Program cost for 15 ships - $61.82b - (no RAN comparable)
The program cost for 9 and 12 ships for the RCN is pretty comparable to the RAN's cost for either 9 Future Frigates or 9 Frigates + 3 AWD's.
The report appears to be pretty well thought out and presented too.
The 'bigger' problem for the RCN is, will the current Canadian Government (or future Governments) actually commit to spending approx. $61b for a fleet of 15 new Destroyers and Frigates to be built between 2021 and 2041? I suspect not.
I suspect the Canadian Government will come up with a dollar figure to allocate to the project and announced an 'initial' commitment, for say 12 ships (enough to replace the current 12 Frigates), and let a future government deal with the eventual question of a total fleet of 15 ships.
Hope I'm wrong, but I suspect I'm not (we only have to have watched the Canadian F-35 saga).
The problem I found was the "then year" modelling. I took the $41b from the 2017 dollar modelling which I believe is how the SEA 5000 costs are described. Once again the difficulty of comparing like with like is apparent.
But the tenor of the article was that the costs for Canada are comparable with ours and they referred to the Australian RAND report.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Yes hard to compare like with like, the report does get a big confusing with talking about the 'original' estimate of $26.2b (2008 dollars), then talking about $39.94b (2017 dollars) and finally talking about $61.82b 'then year dollars', which I assume is the total cost of the project in 2041.
As for the budget for SEA5000 of A$35b, I thought that was the 'total' cost of the project, not just in 'today' dollars, but the total dollar spend between now and the late 2030s, early 2040s, eg, not A$35b (plus inflation for the next 20ish years).
Anyway, putting confusion over now and then dollars aside, it does appear that the Canadian report is pretty 'realistic' in it's overall cost assessment.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The bid deadline has now been extended for a second time on the CSC program. The date is now pushed out to August which means no decision until 2018. The government claims this won't delay the actual construction start.:rolling
Bids for Canadian Surface Combatant delayed until mid-August | Ottawa Citizen
Bids for Canadian Surface Combatant delayed until mid-August | Ottawa Citizen
Course it won't. It will be some other reason that pushes it back to 2 governments from now... if your lucky
Should just bite the bullet and hand over control of the Canadian forces and the budget to some one else. Will be better managed by any one but the Canadian government.
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
In twelve hours the Canadian government will release its defence review. Media here has been reporting on comments in today's foreign policy speech that point to an increase in the defence budget and specifically the navy is to receive a boost.
What could this mean? Another converted container ship from Davie to act as a sea base? A real amphibious ship? The senate recommended 12 pack of submarines?
I wait with baited breath that Canada will step up and take a global role as a world policeman as an alternative to the US.
What could this mean? Another converted container ship from Davie to act as a sea base? A real amphibious ship? The senate recommended 12 pack of submarines?
I wait with baited breath that Canada will step up and take a global role as a world policeman as an alternative to the US.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
I think I will have a few pints instead. I think the best we can hope for is the RCN will get "some CSCs", an actual number will be a range whereby the low number will be the real number that will be built....assuming they ever get around to selecting a design!
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
Nothing really new unfortunately. At least a commitment to 15 Surface Combatants, upgrading the Victoria class subs plus the two Queenstons and 5 or six AOPS.
At least the Resolve has new capabilities but I personally would have liked to see a second one.
At least the navy didn't loose anything.
At least the Resolve has new capabilities but I personally would have liked to see a second one.
At least the navy didn't loose anything.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
As per my comment on the Canada NATO thread, haven't been able to download the PDF. Your comment above offers only one positive note, 15 CSC ships. IMHO, that will never happen if junior wins a second term. Interesting fighter number, 88. It seems to roughly match our current classic Hornet fleet so perhaps junior wants to add SHs to his interim "18" SHs.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Just saw defence minister Sajan on CBC NewsWorld confirm the 15 CSC ships. Easy for him, the design selection hasn't been selected yet and the procurement operation still sucks big time. Awaiting comments from the Conservative opposition.
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
The government website gives an overview of each service branch. The commitment to a four combatant task group supported by a support ship is the central focus to maintain a worldwide blue water naval capability. That unto itself is a very good thing. The problem I see is still the lack of naval transport capacity for big bulky Army centric material. I realize that Resolve has some capacity but it needs a functional port to offload. A steel beach or a well dock would allow mobilization in areas without port facilities. I am not advocating an opposed landing. Just a capability that has uses both militarily and during HADR operations both away and here at home.
This fall will be a good time for the Navy. Resolve in the training mode and a design for CSC.
This fall will be a good time for the Navy. Resolve in the training mode and a design for CSC.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Show me the money. This is a circle jerk confirming some of the previous defence programs with stuff happening after the next election. Trump will count this as a win (forced Canada to increase defence spending) but junior knows the Canadian electorate's attention span can be measured in minutes and the Donald's in nanoseconds. Sweet ?uck all will happen short of Putin invading!:flaming
I see that there is a promise to boost spending to 1.4% by 2025. Still less than the NATO target but still an improvement on 1%.
I also notice that there is a commitment to 88 new fighters.
It all looks good on paper of course ... but as they say "Show me the money"