• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS

Good story at Global News, whole thing seems to have been terribly rushed for election purposes and not thought out--with new Seaspan vessels to be delivered in some 2030s never never land:

Trudeau pledges billions for new coast guard fleet but mum on how he plans to circumvent delays

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is pledging billions of dollars towards revamping the fleet of the Canadian Coast Guard.

But when it comes to how that plan will actually work, the proposal may raise more questions than answers about whether it can overcome the consistent delays that have plagued the National Shipbuilding Strategy since its start, and some shipyard sources are already raising concerns about how long the plan will take.

In a press conference on Wednesday, Trudeau announced the government will spend $15.7 billion to order 18 new ships for the coast guard: two of those will be additional Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ships from Irving Shipyard in Halifax while the other 16 will be multi-purpose vessels from Seaspan in Vancouver.

The National Shipbuilding Strategy was launched by the former Conservative government as a means to stabilize the boom-bust cycle of shipbuilding in Canada.

The work allocated under the program has seen repeated delays from both Irving and Seaspan, though, prompting reporters to ask Trudeau how the government expects the shipyards to get the additional work done and what kind of time frame they will be facing.

Trudeau refused to answer, saying only that he is confident in the skills of the people who work in the shipyards.

“I have tremendous confidence in the men and women who work in our shipyards across the country and their capacity to deliver the excellent ships that our coast guard needs and, quite frankly, that Canadians need,” he said.

Federal officials also provided conflicting answers on how the timeline will work: for example, will the newly ordered ships go to the back of the line of commissioned work, or will they jump the queue?

One government official said it will be up to the shipyards themselves to determine how they can best tackle the workloads.

Another said time frames will be sorted out later.

READ MORE: Quebec’s Davie shipyard in line for contract to build 2 ferries

“Delivery dates for the new vessels will be identified as the project gets underway,” said Ashley Michnowski, press secretary to Public Services and Procurement Minister Carla Qualtrough.

She also declined to provide specific details about how long it will take to allow a third shipyard to qualify for work under the National Shipbuilding Strategy.

Trudeau had also announced that a third firm will be allowed to go through a competitive process to qualify.

But there is only one other Canadian shipyard: Chantier Davie in Levis, Que.

That raises questions about why the firm would need to go through a competition if there is no one else for it to be competing against.

“The government of Canada is committed to ensuring a fair and transparent process to add a third Canadian shipyard as a strategic source of supply to the National Shipbuilding Strategy,” Michnowski wrote in an email. “Details about this process will be released in the coming weeks.”

One source in the shipbuilding industry told Global News it’s not only officials who appear to still be trying to figure out the details.

Chantier Davie, who Trudeau acknowledged in his press conference could find “opportunity” in the proposal, apparently had no advance knowledge it would be allowed to move through a new competitive process to try to get more shipbuilding work
[emphasis added].

The individual noted that while the renewal is welcome news, “there’s still gaping holes” in the plan around the timeline for the competitive process and when Irving and Seaspan will be expected to get the additional work done on top of the existing work they have on their plates.

Fred Boisvert, vice president of communications for Chantier Davie, also said the news is welcome but acknowledged while the firm has few details, it is confident.

“The third shipyard that they keep alluding to — there’s no one else but Davie,” he said.

“We just need to make sure this novel intention is being followed up by concrete action and that is having Davie helping the two other shipyards get their commitments delivered on time and on budget because for the last seven years, unfortunately, that hasn’t happened.”

Boisvert said he wants to see the competitive process wrapped up quickly given there is no other firm in a position to compete.

Under the terms of the National Shipbuilding Strategy, Irving is expected to do the bulk of the work building combat ships.

Seaspan, on the other hand, is expected to focus on smaller research vessels and the permanent replacement for the navy’s supply ships.

Talks between the government and Davie are slated to start tomorrow.
https://globalnews.ca/news/5302516/justin-trudea-canadian-coast-guard-renewal/

The FUBAR and hideously expensive lunacy of insisting on building in Canada.

Remember in 2013 the Conservatives promised Seaspan to build up to 5 Offshore Patrol Vessels and up to 5 Medium-Endurance Multi-Tasked Vessels--will the former become part of the up to 16 Multi-Purpose Vessels for Seaspan now, with the latter going the Davie as the new Mid-Shore Multi-Mission Ships?

Posts from 2013:

Canadian Coast Guard Shocker – Ten (maybe) New Serious Vessels
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2013/10/07/mark-collins-canadian-coast-guard-shocker-ten-maybe-new-serious-vessels/

Just Announced New Canadian Coast Guard Vessels Overpriced by Factor of Five
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2013/10/09/mark-collin-just-announced-new-canadian-coast-guard-vessels-overpriced-by-factor-of-five/

Mark
Ottawa
 
How useful would the AOPS be to the Coast Guard?  Could they replace a number of the planned different ships they have under the current strategy?

Would it make sense to transfer ALL of the AOPS to the CCG?  If this reduced the number of ships in Seaspan's production queue they could move up construction of the JSS and reduce the urgency for stop-gap measure like Obelisk.  The reduced number of ships being produced by Seaspan could be offset by adding a 3rd JSS (giving the RCN the desired "spare") and an additional Polar Class Icebreaker for the CCG.

Davie as the new, 3rd shipyard could take on the CCG multi-mission boats to start and planning could begin for a replacement for the Kingston-Class to follow.

Just a thought.
 
dapaterson said:
"To support future shipbuilding needs and attract more talent and good jobs to our communities, the Government of Canada intends to add a third Canadian shipyard as a partner under the NSS. The Government of Canada will move forward with a competitive process to select the third shipyard in the coming months."

Just in time for the election. 

Billions for new coast guard ships no one bats an eye.  Billions for a new fighter jet and everyone loses their mind.
 
Dolphin_Hunter:

Billions for new coast guard ships no one bats an eye.  Billions for a new fighter jet and everyone loses their mind.

Basically because all parties support shipbuilding in Canada, regardless of ridiculous costs and endless delays, and because CCG is not politically controversial--unlike frequently CAF--so media pay little attention and know very little.

Mark
Ottawa
 
Lumber said:
I'm still hearing rumors of 1st steel cut for CSC in 2030... so... yea...

So an in service date of apx 2035??? That would be almost 20 years without an AAW component in the Navy. That cannot be allowed to happen. There had better be a plan B for that.
 
Swampbuggy said:
So an in service date of apx 2035??? That would be almost 20 years without an AAW component in the Navy. That cannot be allowed to happen. There had better be a plan B for that.

Haha welcome to the new CAF, where a LAV Company in Latvia is now called a "Battlegroup" and a frigate with ESSM is an AAW capable warship.
 
Note: CSC had initial project approval in 2012 (gov still saying first delivery mid-2020s, impossible https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/corporate/reports-publications/departmental-plans/departmental-plan-2019-20-index/supplementary-information-index/report-crown-projects.html#CSC ) and Type 26 selected in Oct. 2018 ( https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/canada-chooses-bae-type-26-for-next-generation-warships )--so, after extra two A/OPS for CCG, will be close to 18 years until first ship in water. FUBAR shipbuilding.

Mark
Ottawa
 
This brings me back to a post I made in December.


https://army.ca/forums/threads/90990/post-1555804.html#msg1555804

CSC will be cancelled due to the delays, court-cases, and excessive costs (not including any space for overruns)
GOC will contract with ISI to instead build an additional 15 modified AOPS
AOPS design will be modified for last 15 ships to include the new SG-180 upgrade that we just bought for the Halifax class, a slightly upgraded OPS room with a better DLPS (Digital Link) system and an improved armament suite to include a 40mm or 57mm deck gun (preferably 57mm with no ammo hoist - you get the 120 rounds in the mount then have to manually reload) and a set of triple Torp Tubes on each side.  For ASW, they'd add the ability to mount a containerized ASW towed array system.

Presto.  We have a simplified fleet of 21 ships - all of the same type.  It lets them throw a bunch of money at LM as a 'sympathy' response for losing the CSC to enable the redesign of the OPS room and tie in the SG-180. 

From the perspective of the RCN - horrible loss of capability.
From the perspective of the GOC - we get the same number of ships, but a lot less cost
From the perspective of the Public - they don't know what we do anyhow, so it's a win win.


I actually wrote up a 'modest proposal' on line of thinking...I'm pondering adding it here...
 
Swampbuggy said:
So an in service date of apx 2035??? That would be almost 20 years without an AAW component in the Navy. That cannot be allowed to happen. There had better be a plan B for that.

I'm pretty confident from my rumour mill that this won't be the case.  I expect steel to be cut starting in the 2023 timeframe as that's the AOPV build schedule as per 8 AOPV's.  I expect the supplying companies will be building stuff well before this to make sure it gets to Irving on time.  Long lead items need to be ordered and built.  Radars need to be manufactured.  Etc.. etc..  I'm not sure how long that takes but as soon as that ink is dry on the deal phone calls are going to be made to start building kit that goes into the ship.
 
They likley start on modules that won't change from the Type 26, such as bow, double bottom keel components, allowing them to say "started".
 
Further to this post,
https://milnet.ca/forums/threads/64037/post-1572468.html#msg1572468

18 years time for new RCN frigate to hit water--that's about as long as Canada's involvement in WW I, WW II, Korean War and combat in Afghanistan, 2002 and then 2006-2011, combined!!!

Afghanistan and Fact-Challenged Canadian Media
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2014/03/24/mark-collins-afghanistan-and-fact-challenged-canadian-media/

Mark
Ottawa
 
Underway said:
I'm pretty confident from my rumour mill that this won't be the case.  I expect steel to be cut starting in the 2023 timeframe as that's the AOPV build schedule as per 8 AOPV's.  I expect the supplying companies will be building stuff well before this to make sure it gets to Irving on time.  Long lead items need to be ordered and built.  Radars need to be manufactured.  Etc.. etc..  I'm not sure how long that takes but as soon as that ink is dry on the deal phone calls are going to be made to start building kit that goes into the ship.

That’s much more realistic, to my way of thinking. I can’t imagine an 11 year lead time on eqpt for the CSC, given it’d be obsolete before it was wet at that point.
 
GR66 said:
How useful would the AOPS be to the Coast Guard?  Could they replace a number of the planned different ships they have under the current strategy?

Would it make sense to transfer ALL of the AOPS to the CCG?  If this reduced the number of ships in Seaspan's production queue they could move up construction of the JSS and reduce the urgency for stop-gap measure like Obelisk.  The reduced number of ships being produced by Seaspan could be offset by adding a 3rd JSS (giving the RCN the desired "spare") and an additional Polar Class Icebreaker for the CCG.

Davie as the new, 3rd shipyard could take on the CCG multi-mission boats to start and planning could begin for a replacement for the Kingston-Class to follow.

Just a thought.

It’d be interesting if there was a community of interest between the CCG multi mission vessel and an MDDV replacement. Sort of like the AOPS being used between RCN and CCG. It would be hard to see how that might work for mine related missions, though.
 
NavyShooter said:
This brings me back to a post I made in December.


https://army.ca/forums/threads/90990/post-1555804.html#msg1555804


I actually wrote up a 'modest proposal' on line of thinking...I'm pondering adding it here...

Post it. I agree the CSC is becoming a fleeting dream. The equipment they are contracting to buy can be installed on other ships under construction.
 
Are all these ships possible? Even adding Davie into the mix we will have three yards building non stop for 30 years at current rate.
 
MilEME09 said:
Are all these ships possible? Even adding Davie into the mix we will have three yards building non stop for 30 years at current rate.

don't question the boss..
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2019-05-22 at 9.53.08 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2019-05-22 at 9.53.08 PM.png
    188.7 KB · Views: 145
With Seaspan wrapped up with their current work load of the 3 OFSV, the 2 JSS and 1 OOSV ships, added into the mix the up to 16 other CCGS ships just announced.  I think that its safe to say that Davie will get the contract for the Dief, as well as any other vessels for the CCG and they'll most likely get the Kingston replacements once that's decided upon.
Neither Irving nor Seaspan will have any capacity left to build anything over the next 25+yrs.

Also looks like the Thales contract to maintain the AOPS's just got a bit bigger as I assume (a mistake to do so?) they will get the maintenance for the 2 CCG AOPS's as well.
 
Back
Top