Author Topic: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy  (Read 697610 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Czech_pivo

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 119
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2250 on: July 02, 2018, 13:21:44 »
Thanks for posting the article. Some majorly incorrect dates for the JSS delivery - off by 3yrs min - and for the new Def, at least 6yrs off on that. Crap analysis and research being done.

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 62,105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,992
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2251 on: July 02, 2018, 19:35:46 »
Meanwhile big Canadian shipping company Fednav (quoted in CBC story above) buys icebreaking bulk barriers in Japan, much cheaper than build-in-Canada:

Quote
...
Montreal-based Fednav has ordered a new icebreaking bulk carrier in Japan to sustain the year-round transportation requirements of Glencore’s Raglan nickel mine in northern Quebec, writes David Tinsley.

The 31,000dwt vessel has been contracted through trading house Sumitomo Corporation and will be built by Japan Marine United Corporation (JMU) at the Yokohama shipyard. The template for the project will be provided by Fednav’s 31,750dwt Nunavik, claimed to be the world’s most powerful icebreaking bulker when commissioned in 2014 from JMU’s Tsu yard. Nunavik is in turn similar in design to the company’s 32,000dwt Umiak 1, delivered in 2006 by JMU predecessor Universal Shipbuilding. Both existing vessels support northern mining operations.

The newbuild will be of Polar Class 4 standard and, as with Umiak 1 and Nunavik [emphasis added], will offer a broader cargo carrying capability than that of a pure bulker. While ensuring a southbound flow of high quality nickel concentrates, she will also be used to transport a variety of supplies to the mining complex on northbound voyages, including equipment, machinery and dry and liquid consumables...


http://www.motorship.com/news101/ships-and-shipyards/icebreaking-bulker-for-canadian-arctic-mine

More on Fednav from 2014:

Quote
The Great Canadian National Shipbuilding Procurement Screw-Up (aka NSPS), Icebreaker Section, Part 2
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2014/11/12/mark-collins-the-great-canadian-national-shipbuilding-procurement-screw-up-aka-nsps-icebreaker-section-part-2/

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 118,025
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,519
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2252 on: July 03, 2018, 16:49:17 »
Soviet Union had Finnish made icebreaking freighters coming to Vancouver regularly, nice looking ships https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SA-15_(ship)

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 62,105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,992
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2253 on: July 05, 2018, 14:09:24 »
More earlier on the three commercial icebreakers Davie to convert for CCG, built in Norway 2000:

Quote
Canada taps Davie for three AHTS-conversion medium icebreakers
...
These ships would provide interim capability for the Canadian Coast Guard, while replacement vessels are being built under the National Shipbuilding Strategy [what? only one, Seaspan's Diefenbaker, currently planned]. Icebreakers are essential to ensuring that Canadian ports remain open during Canada's ice seasons, ensuring goods such as fresh produce and fuel are delivered safely...

These ships will be used to backfill for Canadian Coast Guard vessels while they are undergoing maintenance, refit and vessel life extension.

These ships will conduct critical icebreaking duties for the Southern wintertime program and are to be deployed as needed in support of Arctic summertime programs.

The first ship will be put to immediate use for icebreaking during the upcoming 2018-2019 season...

[Davie's] Project Resolute proposed using the same leasing model for four icebreakers, including a polar icebreaker. The candidate ship for that conversion was Edison Chouest Offshore's Aiviq.

Today's Canadian Government announcement, however, makes no mention of Federal Fleet Services or leasing, and focuses only on the three medium icebreakers offered under Project Resolute. The three candidate ships proposed by Project Resolute for this role are the Viking Supply Ships AB vessels Tor Viking II, Balder Viking and Vidar Viking.
https://www.marinelog.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=29600:canada-taps-davie-for-three-ahts-conversion-medium-icebreakers&Itemid=231


Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Online Navy_Pete

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 14,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 566
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2254 on: July 05, 2018, 19:01:54 »
The Vidar Viking was in port in Bergen when we stopped in a few years ago; she's a good sized ship!

It sounds like we're buying these outright, and basically paying Davie to do some conversion work.  Good news for the CCG!

Doesn't sound like it will be ask extensive a conversion if it will keep around 200-400 people working. Aside from maybe switching the domestic power runs to 110/60 hz (vice 220V 50 hz), new paint scheme and possibly some kind of update on the electronics, guessing it might be more of an baseline refit ? 

Offline Swampbuggy

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 1,490
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 64
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2255 on: July 05, 2018, 19:56:50 »
The Vidar Viking was in port in Bergen when we stopped in a few years ago; she's a good sized ship!

It sounds like we're buying these outright, and basically paying Davie to do some conversion work.  Good news for the CCG!

Doesn't sound like it will be ask extensive a conversion if it will keep around 200-400 people working. Aside from maybe switching the domestic power runs to 110/60 hz (vice 220V 50 hz), new paint scheme and possibly some kind of update on the electronics, guessing it might be more of an baseline refit ?

I believe they’re adding a hanger and probably davits/crane for RHIB’s too.

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 123,135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,384
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2256 on: July 05, 2018, 20:22:57 »
They are adding a flight deck, a hangar and, look at both pics carefully, an extra housing aft of the bridge  in the superstructure. This is likely to house extra personnel (CCG probably runs with more personnel that a civilian merchant ship) including scientists for summer Arctic deployments, lab space for same and extra shops, again for the same reason.

Offline Swampbuggy

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 1,490
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 64
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2257 on: July 05, 2018, 20:31:10 »
They are adding a flight deck, a hangar and, look at both pics carefully, an extra housing aft of the bridge  in the superstructure. This is likely to house extra personnel (CCG probably runs with more personnel that a civilian merchant ship) including scientists for summer Arctic deployments, lab space for same and extra shops, again for the same reason.

Interesting looking work boat, port side aft.  I wonder if that’s part of the package a la AOPS landing craft.

Online Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,440
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,392
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2258 on: July 06, 2018, 09:22:36 »
Interesting looking work boat, port side aft.  I wonder if that’s part of the package a la AOPS landing craft.

Looks like a Metalcraft Interceptor 11M, made in Kingston, ON.

G2G

Offline Patski

  • Guest
  • *
  • 320
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2259 on: July 06, 2018, 10:01:34 »
apparently, they will use one as is, this winter, while the other 2 are getting converted,  I guess they really need they urgently!

Offline Swampbuggy

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 1,490
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 64
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2260 on: July 06, 2018, 10:17:46 »
Looks like a Metalcraft Interceptor 11M, made in Kingston, ON.

G2G

Very cool! Thanks for the link.

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 62,105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,992
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2261 on: July 06, 2018, 16:24:53 »
Quebec gov't really behind Davie--message to feds:

Quote
Government of Québec joins JP Morgan and Anchorage Capital in financing syndicate for Resolve-Class Naval Support Ship

Today, Federal Fleet Services and Davie Shipbuilding announced that as part of its Maritime Strategy Fund through the Quebec Shipbuilding Support Program, the government of Québec joins JP Morgan and Anchorage Capital as part of the financing syndicate in the first Resolve-Class Naval Support Ship, m/v Asterix. The government of Quebec is investing $188m alongside another $300m from investment banks.

Spencer Fraser, CEO of Federal Fleet Services, said "We are very pleased to have the Government of Québec join our financing syndicate alongside our partners JP Morgan and Anchorage Capital, thereby reaffirming their commitment to the marine industry and to Canada's largest shipbuilder. This is a win-win transaction for Davie and the Government of Québec. It frees up some of the cash which was invested into building the ship and will be exclusively reinvested in the shipyard. It also allows the Government to make a profitable, risk-adjusted investment to bolster the province's marine industry which will be fully repaid."

James Davies, president of Davie Shipbuilding added, "The Resolve-Class Naval Support Ship has been a hugely successful program. After delivering on time and to budget, Federal Fleet Services is now operating the ship on a long-term lease to the Royal Canadian Navy. With a stable cashflow coming in from the lease to the Royal Canadian Navy, we have been able to free up the cash used during the construction in order to continue investing in the shipyard as we take on imminent, new projects such as the construction of icebreakers, ferries and the repair and refit of the naval fleet. It is a testament to the vision, forethought and competence of the Province that the Shipbuilding Support Program has been designed, implemented and successfully deployed. This low risk investment program allows Québec to propel its maritime industrial cluster back to the forefront of the shipbuilding industry in the Western hemisphere. We are proud to be part of this success and incredible achievement by the Province."

About Davie
Davie and Federal Fleet Services are part of the Inocea group [head office in Monaco http://www.inocea.com/ ]. While Davie focuses on shipbuilding, Federal Fleet concentrates on obtaining contracts and on vessel rental. Davie is Canada's largest and most experienced shipyard. It is also the highest capacity shipyard in Canada, with 50% of the country's total capacity [emphasis added]...
https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/government-of-quebec-joins-jp-morgan-and-anchorage-capital-in-financing-syndicate-for-resolve-class-naval-support-ship-687508751.html

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 62,105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,992
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2262 on: July 10, 2018, 16:31:02 »
Fednav wants to build ships in Norway to lease to CCG
( http://www.maritimemag.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=767:fednav-proposal-on-three-ice-breakers-for-canadian-coast-guard&catid=4:news&Itemid=6 )

vice buying the Davie conversions (those three ships built in Norway earlier! Polar icebreaker Aivik that Davie is also pushing for CCG, no deal yet, was built in US http://www.davie.ca/pdf/Aiviq.pdf ):

Quote
Politics at play in major shipbuilding contract that could land in Quebec

 The federal government is looking to a Quebec company for a major shipbuilding contract, but a competitor is questioning the backroom politics behind who gets the job.

The contract is to convert three used ships from Norway and the United States into icebreakers. Levis’ Davie Shipyards is vying for the contract.

“The only company in the world that can fit all these criteria is Davie,” said the company’s VP of Public Affairs Frederik Boisvert.

However, competing company Fednav, Canada’s largest ocean-going cargo shipper, said it wants to build several brand new icebreakers in Norway, where they said shipbuilding is more efficient.

“It’s about having built an assembly line effectively and perfecting something,” said Fednav CEO Paul Pathy.

Canada’s current fleet of icebreakers is aging and Pathy questioned the federal government’s practice of stretching the ships’ lifespan.

“Right now, there are no heavy icebreakers available because they’re all on layup because they’re so old,” he said. “They keep being renewed and renewed and renewed.”..
https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/politics-at-play-in-major-shipbuilding-contract-that-could-land-in-quebec-1.4005945

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Czech_pivo

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 119
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2263 on: July 10, 2018, 22:58:01 »
Sometimes I’m convinced that we live in a banana republic.

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 102,004
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,831
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2264 on: July 11, 2018, 07:21:08 »
Sometimes I’m convinced that we live in a banana republic.

It would be considered corruption if it wasn't an accepted practice by rank and file Canadians but it is so you can't call it corruption and it wouldn't be perceived as such by our politicans or constituents  8)

Offline Czech_pivo

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 119
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2265 on: July 11, 2018, 08:42:50 »
Let me ask this question, in all my layman's ignorance.  Why is it that its deemed a 'national security matter' for us to be able to retain our ability to build frigates and coastal defense vessels (and nothing larger than that) but its not a 'national security matter' for us to be able to build any sort of advanced fighter jet, military cargo or search and rescue plane?
I keep hearing again and again and again, how difficult it is to build a modern warship but yet I hear nothing, nothing about Canada being able to build a fighter jet and retaining (recreating is a better word) this 'ability' for our 'national security'.  I'm sure that if we poured as much money into our aerospace industry (Bombardier) as we are currently doing for Irving and Seaspan (and soon to be Davie), that we'd be able to build something comparable to what the Swedes, Brits and French are capable of. Is it because our aerospace industry is overwhelmingly based in Ontario and Quebec that we are not doing this?  Because these two provinces are the most populated, most developed and wealthiest? That they don't need the work, but the East Coast does?
Its a huge game of smoke and mirrors that is being played out.  On one hand building ships in Canada and overpaying for them and waiting decades and decades for them to be built here is deemed 'good for Canada'.  It means taxpayers dollars are kept in Canada, Canadian workers have jobs and Canada retains a 'national security' ability - but - on the other hand, being able to defend our skies, the approaches to our coasts and project Canadian 'power' (?) by building Canadian fighter jets or Canadian cargo planes or Canadian search and rescue planes, is not deemed a priority, not a 'national security' requirement. Who cares if Canadian taxpayers money is shipped off to the US, who cares if Canadian aerospace workers are lost, if their skills are shipped off down south.
I look forward to comments on this.  I look forward to being 'educated' on why building warships in Canada is good but building fighter jets or military cargo planes or search and rescue planes in Canada is bad.  I look forward to hearing from all of you. 
I love this country, but its so hard to do sometimes.

Offline AlexanderM

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 8,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 439
  • Resident George Constanza
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2266 on: July 11, 2018, 10:46:20 »
Let me ask this question, in all my layman's ignorance.  Why is it that its deemed a 'national security matter' for us to be able to retain our ability to build frigates and coastal defense vessels (and nothing larger than that) but its not a 'national security matter' for us to be able to build any sort of advanced fighter jet, military cargo or search and rescue plane?
It's my understanding that after the Arrow was cancelled the American president made an arrangement with the Canadian Prime Minister which essentially lead to the formation of the North American Defense Industry. We stopped building fighters and Canadian companies were then able to bid on US defense contracts, as the US wanted to project one unified industry for North America. I used to be able to find a source for this, and am not strong on the details, so if anyone has a source please provide a link. In my mind it would have been better if we had built the Arrow and not gone down this road.

Offline LoboCanada

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 790
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 58
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2267 on: July 11, 2018, 11:32:32 »
First, your love wavers depending on how many planes we build?

Don't forget the love that Bombardier got in federal and provincial $ all of these years. But no, they haven't received the blank chq to build a fighter, something that we haven't built in...I can't even remember. Consider how competitive the fighter/aircraft market is now, between knowledgeable and capable companies. Griffons were built here, whose to say some other non-advanced aircraft variant won't be built under licence here (fingers crossed for Venoms)? The Avro era is dead, how many industries can we afford to rebuild? 60 C-Series were just sold today, the industry seems just capable enough and not as dead as the shipbuilding industry was before NSPS.

The NSPS (of whatever it's called now) is a great idea for Canada, considering our short-sighted history of procurement. Imagine if it only called for the cheapest building practices, and we built most of everything offshore. The same people who advocate for that now would be advocating building and keeping the money here if reversed. Its a long-term strategy to rebuild the RCN and CCG, expensive yes, but long term its smarter.

Can a taxpayer remember how much it cost to build the expensive Halifax's, Tribals in Canada? Will they remember better that we spent so much extra on building an entire industry here or that we could've spent money on ships built in Europe and outfitted here? Or would we remember how much better for the local communities it would've been to build at home, and not in Romania?

Offline whiskey601

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 23,265
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,558
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2268 on: July 11, 2018, 13:44:57 »
I'm pretty certain some assembly of the CF-18 was done in Toronto (MD plant in Malton). A whack of CF5 were built in Quebec in the 1970's.  I think the larger issue is military aircraft design, research and development. Other than throwing money at the F35,  the country seems to be largely absent from that since the Arrow in terms of fighter aircraft.

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 102,004
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,831
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2269 on: July 11, 2018, 16:14:24 »
Let me ask this question, in all my layman's ignorance.  Why is it that its deemed a 'national security matter' for us to be able to retain our ability to build frigates and coastal defense vessels (and nothing larger than that) but its not a 'national security matter' for us to be able to build any sort of advanced fighter jet, military cargo or search and rescue plane?
I keep hearing again and again and again, how difficult it is to build a modern warship but yet I hear nothing, nothing about Canada being able to build a fighter jet and retaining (recreating is a better word) this 'ability' for our 'national security'.  I'm sure that if we poured as much money into our aerospace industry (Bombardier) as we are currently doing for Irving and Seaspan (and soon to be Davie), that we'd be able to build something comparable to what the Swedes, Brits and French are capable of. Is it because our aerospace industry is overwhelmingly based in Ontario and Quebec that we are not doing this?  Because these two provinces are the most populated, most developed and wealthiest? That they don't need the work, but the East Coast does?
Its a huge game of smoke and mirrors that is being played out.  On one hand building ships in Canada and overpaying for them and waiting decades and decades for them to be built here is deemed 'good for Canada'.  It means taxpayers dollars are kept in Canada, Canadian workers have jobs and Canada retains a 'national security' ability - but - on the other hand, being able to defend our skies, the approaches to our coasts and project Canadian 'power' (?) by building Canadian fighter jets or Canadian cargo planes or Canadian search and rescue planes, is not deemed a priority, not a 'national security' requirement. Who cares if Canadian taxpayers money is shipped off to the US, who cares if Canadian aerospace workers are lost, if their skills are shipped off down south.
I look forward to comments on this.  I look forward to being 'educated' on why building warships in Canada is good but building fighter jets or military cargo planes or search and rescue planes in Canada is bad.  I look forward to hearing from all of you. 
I love this country, but its so hard to do sometimes.

You basically just answered your own question.  What do I mean by this?

The aerospace industry in Canada is sustainable because it has a large commercial upside to it that makes it viable with or without government contracts.  The shipbuilding industry is not the same and Canadian Shipbuilding would wither and die without government contracts. 

It's a National Security Issue because Canada is essentially an island whose security is dependent on our ability to project power in to the Maritime Domain.  There is a large logistical aspect to this that is overlooked because the vast majority of Canadians don't live on the ocean and don't see the effects first hand but these pictures should tell you all you need to know:





There are limits to airpower, even with modern jets.  The ocean is very big and even with modern air power, you can't cover convoys trying to cross the ocean indefinitely.

Not to mention, most commercial shipping is owned by foreign companies, who builds our logistic tail for us if we have no shipbuilding industry?

Offline Czech_pivo

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 119
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2270 on: July 11, 2018, 17:52:12 »
So you are saying that the right choice is being made, retaining ship building over fighter/cargo/search & rescue planes ability.
If that is the case, that we are an island and must have the ability to defend our island, then why so few ships? Why less than Australia? Less than Spain and Italy, which are not islands?

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 102,004
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,831
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2271 on: July 11, 2018, 18:50:48 »
So you are saying that the right choice is being made, retaining ship building over fighter/cargo/search & rescue planes ability.
If that is the case, that we are an island and must have the ability to defend our island, then why so few ships? Why less than Australia? Less than Spain and Italy, which are not islands?

The purpose of the National Shipbuilding Strategy is to have the capacity to build ships, the fact we get some warships out of that is a plus but not the fundamental purpose of the Program it self. 

You are conflating two issues.  Military ships and the industry of shipbuilding itself.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2018, 20:01:46 by Humphrey Bogart »

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 62,105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,992
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2272 on: July 11, 2018, 19:12:26 »
Humphrey Bogart:

Quote
You are conflating two issues. Military ships and the industry of shipbuilding itself.

Hardly. In terms of building large ships Canadian shipyards are completely uncompetitive; so naval/coast guard contracts are all there is.  From 2010:

Quote
Shipping industry gets tariff break

Imported cargo ships, tankers and large ferries will no longer be subject to a 25 per cent tariff, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty announced Friday.

The measure is aimed at making it cheaper for Canadian shipowners to replace aging fleets with more modern and more efficient vessels.

Waiving the tariff will save the industry $25 million a year for the next 10 years, the government estimates.

"These were tariffs that don't serve any purpose because … the ships to which they apply are not capable of being made competitively in Canada [emphasis added]," Flaherty told reporters in St. Catharines, Ont.

"There's a big business … in refitting ships and a lot of that happens here and that is not affected by this tariff," he said. "This is one of those tariffs that had outlived its usefulness."

The tariff removal will be retroactive to the start of the year. The measure applies to all general cargo vessels, tankers, and ferries longer than 129 metres...
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/shipping-industry-gets-tariff-break-1.902798

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 102,004
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,831
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2273 on: July 11, 2018, 20:10:51 »
Humphrey Bogart:

Hardly. In terms of building large ships Canadian shipyards are completely uncompetitive; so naval/coast guard contracts are all there is.  From 2010:

Mark
Ottawa

And you also completely miss my point  :nod:

The important thing is having the industrial capacity to build ships, not the ships themselves.

Offline whiskey601

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 23,265
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,558
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2274 on: July 11, 2018, 21:24:09 »
Seems to me the industrial capacity needs as much work as the political capacity. Example: this thread is nearly 10 years old- first ship yet to be launched. The JSS AOR thread is 14 years old, no new AOR except for a lease.  There are many things dysfunctional in Canada, this must be near the top?