Was Admiral Robertson that bad at raising the Navy's profile?

[ltmaverick25]

You have to have the ships ready for when the troops get there.... else they won't have anything to work with.
You can't wait 5 or 10 years before you start the process..... from concepts to design to laying of the keel to delivery of new ships takes a long, long time

I agree with you Geo, but with that said, we do have ships available right now that are desperate for more sailors.  At the end of the day, a heavy and successful recruiting campaign needs to take place effective immediately.  Building new ships also has to move beyond the governments expressed desire to action on the ground, because it does indeed take time.  Im certain we can and should do both at the same time!

 

[geo]

Are the present suite of ships undermaned... yes
do we need more hands on board ... yes

However - do we decide to "make do" with things like our AORs (Preserver/Protecteur) for another 10 years and only then resume discussinos on maybe replacing the ships at that time ?

Do we maintain status quo for the destroyers, that are +/- at the end of their lifespan, until the new hands are enrolled & trained for another 10 years and only then resume discussinos on maybe replacing the ships at that time ?

You must do both things at the same time.  You can't just say we are shortstaffed and sit idle for another 5 to 10 years..... you do that, you might as well contract our maritime security to the US, Russian or Chinese navy

 

[ltmaverick25]

Thats basically what I just said.  We need to do both simultaneously.  When you see sailors post here saying "but we cant even man our existing ships as it is" I dont think they mean to say, lets not build any new ships until we can.  I think they are just expressing their frustration towards a growing problem in the Navy that does not appear to be getting addressed.  You would be hard pressed to find any of us not wanting new toys to play with  ;D

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

What we need to decide is what new toys we need for the navy.

 

[Lard of the Dance]

After reading some of the posts, I must say no, he didn't do a bad job. The Navy's profile is where it belongs. How can people be crying for ship's when on any given day you'll find several of the ships tied up along side. The Navy's dilema with personel shortages is not a profile problem, it's a systematic problem. Will it ever be addressed? To quote a friend "magic 8 ball says outlook not so good" So I'll satnd behind what I say, the Navy's profile is not high because it does not have the need to be, and as for the personel shortages, that mess is in their own front yard.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

After reading some of the posts, I must say no, he didn't do a bad job.

Really ? You based this on reading 'some posts'? Have you served in this mans command?

The Navy's profile is where it belongs. How can people be crying for ship's when on any given day you'll find several of the ships tied up along side.

There is a difference of ships being tied up due to maintenance and personnel issues and wanting ships that are up to date.

 

[dapaterson]

The most important job of the three service commanders (CMS, CLS and CAS) is to ensure the future readiness of their command.  That means planning for people - getting them the experience and training they will require for the future, and planning for equipment - launching long-term acquisition programs to make sure the platforms requried in the future will be available.

This makes it awkward, at times to evaluate the stewardship of senior leaders - their key impacts will not be felt for a decade or more after their tenure.

So the current service commanders have to focus on platform replacements - you can't go to Wal-Mart and buy a bulk pack of frigates.  Lead times for a warship are years at best, so if the DDHs expire in 2015 (I do not know the actual plan), we're behind the power curve to have a replacement available in time.  Those new ships will need crews; if we lack sufficient PO2s today, those new ships will lack CPO2s in 2015.

The three environmental chiefs often get caught in "today" issues.  Those are important, and require resolution.  But ideally their time should be spent steering a course towards the far horizon, with their subordinates making minor course corrections to avoid local obstacles.

 

[ltmaverick25]

After reading some of the posts, I must say no, he didn't do a bad job. The Navy's profile is where it belongs. How can people be crying for ship's when on any given day you'll find several of the ships tied up along side. The Navy's dilema with personel shortages is not a profile problem, it's a systematic problem. Will it ever be addressed? To quote a friend "magic 8 ball says outlook not so good" So I'll satnd behind what I say, the Navy's profile is not high because it does not have the need to be, and as for the personel shortages, that mess is in their own front yard.

This is Canada, if you dont have a high profile you get forgotten and dismantled.  So does the Navy need a high profile?  Absolutely.  We arent in direct action combat like the army is right now, and we havent lost a sailor to combat in a long time thankfully, but that does not mean that the work the Navy does is not important.  Escorting food to the hungry, interdicting terrorists at sea (have you seen the workload in this area alone the Navy carried in recent years?), fisheries and drug patrols, sovereignty missions...

Some of those tasks may not be as sexy as kicking down a door and going in with guns blazing, but they are just as important, if not more so in the long term strategic view of our nations security.

Canada does not have a maritime identity outside of the maritime provinces.  Since the bulk of our population lies in the rest of the country that poses massive recruiting challenges.  A high profile is required to offset this.

The massive recruiting challenges, and the huge cutbacks of the 90s have contributed to huge attrition problems too.  We are losing too many guys out the back door because they are getting burnt out at sea.  Why?  Because even during routine peacetime sailors are working damn hard.  The Navy is operational all year round, every year, no matter what.  After breaking your ass like that, getting burnt out, and getting little to no recognition by your country its no wonder that alot of these guys are inspired to quit.  Yes, the Navy DOES need a higher public profile...

 

[geo]

personnel shortage should sort itself out as new people come in and serving members have second thoughts about leaving for greener pastures on civy street.  Amaazing what a recession/depression can do to staffing.... budget permiting

 

[CountDC]

They are sitting behind closed doors trying to figure out how to break it to the people of Canada that they are going to by from another country....

they are busily reworking the proposal, taking a look to see what can be changed in order for at least one of the competitors be able to submit a good bid.  One item they are looking at is what work can be cut from the proposal and done by DND staff instead of as part of the contract.

 

[ltmaverick25]

they are busily reworking the proposal, taking a look to see what can be changed in order for at least one of the competitors be able to submit a good bid.  One item they are looking at is what work can be cut from the proposal and done by DND staff instead of as part of the contract.

Any word on an ETA for the decision?

 

[Navy_Blue]

After reading some of the posts, I must say no, he didn't do a bad job. The Navy's profile is where it belongs. How can people be crying for ship's when on any given day you'll find several of the ships tied up along side.

I can't think of any ship on the east coast tied up because of manning.  We are making do with what we have I think for the most part.  As a ship goes into a SWP or an EDWP the able bodies in the past (still to a point now) are slowly being burned out with attach postings and critical manning messages.  The Commador has told us the ships are going to have to learn to make do but I can't see how  ???  Another menacing problem is our complete lack of maintenance personnel in FMF Cape Scott.  If you can't maintain it they wont leave the wall either.  Those people by the way are civies.

 

 

[CountDC]

Any word on an ETA for the decision?

Last I heard they were hoping to put it back out for tender before the change of command with the new specs.  Of course this means they have to go through the bid process again.  Hopefully they would get a good bite with the new specs so some real work can be done.  I was told that this is actually verily normal with such large projects just that it normally doesn't get all the press coverage.

 

[Lard of the Dance]

Yes Ex-Dragoon, I was under his command.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Yes Ex-Dragoon, I was under his command.

Just curious from your post it looked like you were basing your view on him based on the posts in this thread.

 

[Sub_Guy]

they are busily reworking the proposal, taking a look to see what can be changed in order for at least one of the competitors be able to submit a good bid.  One item they are looking at is what work can be cut from the proposal and done by DND staff instead of as part of the contract.

Super, so it will be close to a decade before we see any new ships.  I seriously hope they have kicked the JSS idea to the curb, because if they did you would think the contract would be cheaper and not need any reworking to allow for our shoddy shipyards to bid. 

It sill sounds like they want the JSS Swiss army knife ship, when we need dedicated tankers!

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Super, so it will be close to a decade before we see any new ships.  I seriously hope they have kicked the JSS idea to the curb, because if they did you would think the contract would be cheaper and not need any reworking to allow for our shoddy shipyards to bid. 

It sill sounds like they want the JSS Swiss army knife ship, when we need dedicated tankers!

I have to wonder if the Navy is being pressured by other elements to have some sort of a sealift capability no matter the cost?

 

[CountDC]

I have to wonder if the Navy is being pressured by other elements to have some sort of a sealift capability no matter the cost?

I would wager the pressure is not just from the other elements but is also from above and internal as the more we can do the more value we have.

edit: forgot - shouldn't the subject read IS instead of WAS - the man is still here for another 4 months.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

But there is a point were too much capability makes a platform uneffective.

 

[CountDC]

true  and as I am not hard sea, merely a tourist,  I could be way out on this.  From the little I have read and the few officers I have talked to this seems a good plan.  It does not appear to be taking the platform over the line - merely bringing it the next stage of usefullness.  Haven't heard anyone here giving a negative to it yet.  Mind you I also think for some it is the "new toy syndrome" that is driving them and they are hoping to be the first to Captain one.