Out of necessity, Davie got some F&O vessels (oil- off shore commercial conversions) along with the container commercial ship conversion for the RCN for a replacement replenishment ship due to delays procuring JSS. Davie may get a heavy icebreaker contract but SeaSpan should also do a heavy icebreaker as well. A third JSS might mitigate SeaSpan’s disappointment losing the second heavy icebreaker to Davie. In any event, CMMCs, two heavy icebreakers, and a third JSS, especially if all have a modest defence fit-out, will slow down the IOTUS’s whining. If not, his impending tariffs likely will screw any significant potential defence procurement, even with a new government.
Davie is getting one Polar icebreaker contract, alongside the planned 6 Program Icebreakers as well. Seaspan is going to be incredibly busy building up to 16 Multi-Purpose Vessels for the Canadian Coast Guard after the two JSS, Polar icebreaker and misc other Coast Guard orders. These MPV's are going to be substantial vessels which will take many, many years to ultimately complete. It's fairly clear POTUS doesn't actually have any legitimate gripes with Canada and is just inflicting this economic pain largely to extract random concessions.
Quick and seemingly silly question from the other side of a massive pond, but why does Canada need a fleet of coastal defence ships?
If its more constabulary, where is the threat (fisheries?), if so why do you need VLS etc. If it's not then why wouldn't you just go to a small frigate from an established line (like a basic Mogami or ROK FFX etc) as boutique designs lead to risk and $$$?
I note the Kingston class really just had a 40mm cannon. Based upon the above, arent you experiencing some mission bracket creep going on, which screams to me (as an outsider) of trying to please everyone (politicians and accountants esp) but in the end pleasing no one (real world impact).
What about maybe buying the LCS' off the USN ... assuming they're ok to sell them (arent they decommissioning them early??) Again from a limited perspective/ POV on paper, wouldn't they be fine if you actually want a Costal defense vessel replacement or are happy to sit in that upgraded vessel mission set?
Just my 2 cents looking as an outsider, but from my observations Canadian politics seem to make defense procurement very scary and messy and I wonder are you seeing more of the same?
The CMMC program originally seems to have began as a 1:1 replacement of the Kingston class with a proper ocean-going OPV, something similar to the Royal Navy's Batch II River class. The Navy wanted a vessel that can do the same roles as the aforementioned vessel, alongside taking on MCM duties from the Kingston. This was taken under consideration at a time when the RCN was seeing most of its effort and funds go into the CSC program, so the ideas were kept very economical and unambitious to stay in their own lane. Role was constabulary work, mine warfare, counter-narcotics, etc.
As CSC had its cells cut back, world tensions increased and the RCN was seemingly looking at more budget in the future, there was a push to have some sort of increased combatant capability within the fleet. The Kingston replacement as seemingly morphed into some kind of smaller combatant to fill the Kingston's roles AND take on some limited combatant roles for the fleet as well. The role has seemingly evolved to something that can accompany the CSC as/be used as some kind of combatant escort while also undertaking more dangerous solo deployments (counter-terrorism, grey zone warfare) as well. These ships are not entirely for coastal protection and would very likely be deployed abroad to Europe, Africa, Indo-Pac, etc where the RCN operates now.
Procuring proper frigates puts the CSC program at risk of cut backs and cancelations by unaware politicians, the requirements for low manning levels, low cost and a built in Canada procurement ultimately kicks out any proper frigate or larger corvette. Outsourcing the build is largely impossible and there is no Canadian shipyards available or approved to build such large combatants. The National Shipbuilding Strategy requires all vessels above 1000t and are combatants to be built by Irving Shipbuilding, which is busy for the foreseeable future with the CSC program. The NSS program would need to be amended to allow another yard to build combatants/over 1000t ships, or the CMMC must be under 1000t.
Nobody wants LCS, they are troublesome and unsuitable for what we want with regards to cost in manpower and funds.
TLDR: RCN wants more combat capability on more ships but politics and manpower issues hamstring traditional options.
www.navalnews.com
www.navalreview.ca
www.facebook.com
