Author Topic: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?  (Read 16379 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 55,875
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,975
Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« on: March 11, 2007, 00:02:36 »
This is just my personal opinion but I really believe that the Navy should only refit the last 6 frigates and used the money saved on the first six towards building the first flight of the SCSC. If the Navy really had balls they would forego the refit entirely and go for another JSS, 2 LHD's and the first flight of SCSC (or something similar).

I know it is too late for JSS right now but they should have went for an AOR with a fully automated engineering section, enough boson's to run the RAS gear, NAVCOMMS for message tx and enough officers to run the bridge. These ships would be required to deliver fuel and stores to the fleet, have a RORO capability and are not required to do the extra things that our AORs do now.
The LHD's, SSKs, frigates and destroyers (or whatever replaces the frigates) would be the real warships.
All these ships would be designed for 25 year lifespan without a midlife refit.

This idea would require a government with a vision and long term defense plan that recognised that we are a maritime nation and should act as such.

Offline Terminator

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 50
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 95
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #1 on: March 11, 2007, 00:43:48 »
This idea would require a government with a vision and long term defense plan that recognised that we are a maritime nation and should act as such.

Key words... vision which needs leaders that can think... act implying that there is a need for leaders that can react to the changing world... are these to be our current politicians  :P that can't even agree on anything, and fear any change. With the way politics has been played here in Canada, its surprising that anything is done.  :cdn:
May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't. - General George Smith Patton, Jr.

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 26,410
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,648
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #2 on: March 11, 2007, 11:37:28 »
... I have no idea on the leadership of the Navy these days but, from a personal perspective, it would require the Grand Admiral of the Fleet (CMS?) to put his vision into words and speak up.

What is it he wants, now, in the short term, mid term & long term...

The CDS, the CLS and to a certain extent the CAS have all spoken up & had their peace but, I haven't heard from the sea lord...
Chimo!

aesop081

  • Guest
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #3 on: March 11, 2007, 11:43:18 »


The CDS, the CLS and to a certain extent the CAS have all spoken up & had their peace but, I haven't heard from the sea lord...

Geo...the Government is, rumour has it, going to get rid of AORs and DDHs, leaving the navy with only one type of fighting ship......i would bet that its pretty hard for the first sea lord of the admiralty (CMS) to come up with a meaningful vision to articulate.  I would at least think its drawing board time again.......

just my 0.02 though

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 26,410
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,648
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #4 on: March 11, 2007, 11:46:10 »
This may sound harsh but, here goes:

If the CMS objects to what has been proposed, shouldn't he speak out AND, if necessary, fall on his sword in protest......... or is he just punching his clock like many others have in the past?
Chimo!

Offline IN HOC SIGNO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • -180
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,382
  • Vocatio Ad Servitium
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #5 on: March 11, 2007, 12:22:05 »
I think it's pretty hard to be heard among the din from the current op in Afghanistan IMHO.
Navy's are very expensive and they take a long time to develop when you are committed to designing and building your ships in a country that doesn't sustain it's ship building capability from one contract to the next.

Offline Ex-Dragoon

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 46,392
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,007
  • dealing with life not that active here anymore
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #6 on: March 11, 2007, 12:36:09 »
The question is will half the funds that are destined to go to the first 6 Halifax be enough to help fund the SCSC?
I will leave your flesh on the mountains and fill the valleys with your carcasses. I will water the land with what flows from you, and the river beds shall be filled with your blood. When I snuff you out I will cover the heavens and all the stars will darken. Ezekiel 32:5-7
Tradition- Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid
Former RCN Sailor now Retired

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 26,410
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,648
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #7 on: March 11, 2007, 21:29:25 »
Instead of thinking about refitting 6 or 12 frigates and 2 or 3 tribals, we should be looking at dealing with shipyards to roll out a new ship every 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 years.
Having a periodic building blitz is ridiculous and there is no shipyard in the country that can maintain itself on that kind of business..... resulting in having to pay tons of money for each new ship - regardless of whether it is a domestic or foreign built vessel.

At present, the Navy does not appear to have come up with a public strategy that everyone can wrap their heads around.
Chimo!

aesop081

  • Guest
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #8 on: March 11, 2007, 21:48:21 »
Instead of thinking about refitting 6 or 12 frigates and 2 or 3 tribals, we should be looking at dealing with shipyards to roll out a new ship every 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 years.
Having a periodic building blitz is ridiculous and there is no shipyard in the country that can maintain itself on that kind of business..... resulting in having to pay tons of money for each new ship - regardless of whether it is a domestic or foreign built vessel.

You're not exactly preaching anything new here........

Quote
At present, the Navy does not appear to have come up with a public strategy that everyone can wrap their heads around.

The government...........

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 26,410
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,648
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #9 on: March 11, 2007, 22:17:34 »
should the Navy be telling the Gov't what they need or should it be the Gov't telling the navy what it needs?

The army (thanks to the CDS) was able to go out and get what was needed, right this second - with a fair bit of hoopla and a fair bit of contreversy .... but there are C17s on the production line, M777s are deployed (with more on the way), Chinooks and Hercs are coming up next.....
Chimo!

Online FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 55,875
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,975
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #10 on: March 11, 2007, 22:19:41 »
If the Navy doesn't watch out it will become irrelevant in the defence of this country. As witnessed by the shifting to the right of SCF (which I fear is the first step to outright cancellation) the Navy is now going full speed ahead on FELEX and damn the torpedoes on anything (including JSS) that will make us able to bring the full spectrum of warfare from the sea. The missile shooters and gunners have won the battle to keep their precious frigates alive but where have we (the Navy) won our spurs? Not firing Harpoons and SM2's. We have won them with NBP, MIO and inshore patrols. The Littoral is where it is at and we should be positioning ourselves to be able to work in this area. Because like it or not my fellow brethern in Dark Blue, the Army is the big dog in these parts and we have to be able to justify our ability to support them.


Offline Not_So_Arty_Newbie

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 2,055
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 700
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #11 on: March 11, 2007, 22:55:43 »
I think it's pretty hard to be heard among the din from the current op in Afghanistan IMHO.
Navy's are very expensive and they take a long time to develop when you are committed to designing and building your ships in a country that doesn't sustain it's ship building capability from one contract to the next.

Perhaps its time to do as the historian Jack Granastein proposed in his book "Who Killed the Canadian Military" with a twist, take the "old" spruance class destroyers the US keeps offering and forget the whole "Canadianization Garbage" or even better the recently decommissioned Ticonderogas iot increase the fleet size with "principal Warships" the destoryers the most in need of replacement, I can say this I sold my soul to a tribal for 7 years, the next step is to build 1 warship per year per coast, that solves a couple of problems, 1. it keeps the fleet up to strength vessel wise and increases/maintains warship building skills at home, that also goes hand in hand with his theory of increasing troop strengh by at least 15000 in one fell swoop, we need to remember this country was build on warfare, and we need to be ready and equiped to fight on land in the air and sea when called to do so, as Canadians we have yet to back down from a fight. my penny and a half for what its worth

Offline Ex-Dragoon

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 46,392
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,007
  • dealing with life not that active here anymore
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #12 on: March 11, 2007, 23:25:57 »
And why buy 20-30 year old warships? We would still be in the same situation we are now only we would spend most of our money of maintenance of the Spruance class hulls....
I will leave your flesh on the mountains and fill the valleys with your carcasses. I will water the land with what flows from you, and the river beds shall be filled with your blood. When I snuff you out I will cover the heavens and all the stars will darken. Ezekiel 32:5-7
Tradition- Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid
Former RCN Sailor now Retired

aesop081

  • Guest
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #13 on: March 11, 2007, 23:36:58 »
even better the recently decommissioned Ticonderogas iot increase the fleet size with "principal Warships" the destoryers 

Let me get this straight.......

we have hard enough a time having crews to sail Frigate and destroyer size warships...you want to buy cruisers ?

Spruances are being used as targets and Ticos are far from being retired

Offline Not_So_Arty_Newbie

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 2,055
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 700
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #14 on: March 11, 2007, 23:49:21 »
Let me get this straight.......

we have hard enough a time having crews to sail Frigate and destroyer size warships...you want to buy cruisers ?

Spruances are being used as targets and Ticos are far from being retired

Indeed but that also goes hand in hand with the increase in troop strength, and nobody wants to know my solution to that one (its more than a little outside the box) but you are right the ticos are far from being retired but the flight 1 ticos have all but been decommisioned (the namesake for the class in 2004) as far as floating targets go Huron is due to be toatsed in a gunex/torpex god knows when, wouldn't it be odd for Algonquin to do the shooting, same class of ship.

aesop081

  • Guest
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #15 on: March 11, 2007, 23:52:52 »
Indeed but that also goes hand in hand with the increase in troop strength, and nobody wants to know my solution to that one (its more than a little outside the box) but you are right the ticos are far from being retired but the flight 1 ticos have all but been decommisioned (the namesake for the class in 2004) as far as floating targets go Huron is due to be toatsed in a gunex/torpex god knows when, wouldn't it be odd for Algonquin to do the shooting, same class of ship.

A dramatic troop level increase is, IMHO, a pipedream considering the state of recruiting and our ability to train the recruits we do get.

Even if the Spruance DDG were purchassed without "Canadianization", they would still require massive upgrading....after all, they were retired for a reason.  Same can be said about any Ticonderoga CGs that have been decomissioned.

Offline Ex-Dragoon

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 46,392
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,007
  • dealing with life not that active here anymore
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #16 on: March 11, 2007, 23:54:52 »
Beyond 76 mm I doubt the Alq would be involved. Its a good chance to prove the Harpoons on the CPFs.
I will leave your flesh on the mountains and fill the valleys with your carcasses. I will water the land with what flows from you, and the river beds shall be filled with your blood. When I snuff you out I will cover the heavens and all the stars will darken. Ezekiel 32:5-7
Tradition- Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid
Former RCN Sailor now Retired

Offline Not_So_Arty_Newbie

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 2,055
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 700
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #17 on: March 12, 2007, 00:03:47 »
This is true, but we (the US and CDA) proved that missiles alone won't do the trick against the former USS Belleau Wood, 5 Direct Missile hits and it still took a Torp to do it in, but I was just going for the Irony a 280 taking out another lol

As for the recruiting issue, and this is a stretch, way outside the box, ge t a big green bus with Canadian Forced painted on the side and sit outside the welfare office, as they come out with thier welfare check, through them on the bus and say, you're working for your piece of the pie now, alternatively pick up everyone on Government and Dogulass streets with a cardboard sign that says helpe help myself (leaving out the so I can hit the liquor store) and start detailing (infantry, artillery, signals, nci op, navcomm and so on,) solves 2 issues at the same time, but not neccesarrily the kind of high value recruit we are looking for.

aesop081

  • Guest
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #18 on: March 12, 2007, 00:06:21 »
This is true, but we (the US and CDA) proved that missiles alone won't do the trick against the former USS Belleau Wood, 5 Direct Missile hits and it still took a Torp to do it in, but I was just going for the Irony a 280 taking out another lol

yes it would be something to see....

Quote

As for the recruiting issue, and this is a stretch, way outside the box, ge t a big green bus with Canadian Forced painted on the side and sit outside the welfare office, as they come out with thier welfare check, through them on the bus and say, you're working for your piece of the pie now, alternatively pick up everyone on Government and Dogulass streets with a cardboard sign that says helpe help myself (leaving out the so I can hit the liquor store) and start detailing (infantry, artillery, signals, nci op, navcomm and so on,) solves 2 issues at the same time, but not neccesarrily the kind of high value recruit we are looking for.

That last part is exactly what i was thinking............

Offline Not_So_Arty_Newbie

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 2,055
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 700
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #19 on: March 12, 2007, 00:14:02 »
or theres the other way, the one nobody wants (almost) mandatory service age 18-20 like a fair number of european countries (Sweden Comes to mind) of course the normal exemptions for academic studies, ilness, police and fire services and the like, employ these people in Garrison and put the carrer soldiers (sailors, Airtypes) "boots on the ground" so to speak, some of them might even take to service life and stick around,

aesop081

  • Guest
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #20 on: March 12, 2007, 00:19:14 »
or theres the other way, the one nobody wants (almost) mandatory service age 18-20 like a fair number of european countries

And you will note that some of those same countries are moving away from conscripts.  Bad idea altogether, IMHO, to employ people who have no desire to be there.....

Offline Not_So_Arty_Newbie

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 2,055
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 700
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #21 on: March 12, 2007, 00:32:24 »
no contest there

Offline CloudCover

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 51,560
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,473
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #22 on: March 12, 2007, 00:44:56 »
There seems to be a general state of confusion in many navies about how to proceed so FELEX is actually a good fit within that state of confusion. Even the Type 45 Daring is now being produced with the weapons fit seeming to be a shifting package all the time. The USN LCS program is in some disarray due to cost and a fair bit of mission confusion. DDX, on the other hand, seems pretty much squared away. There's a reason for that with DDX- a large powerful warship is required to project real sea power in a hostile world. Canada is not going to be in that game from a naval perspective, both for reasons of cost and politics.  

Totally wild prediction for Canadian Navy over next 10-15 years

- cancellation of SCTF and BHS in late 2007;
- reduction in JSS from 3 to 2 in 2008;
- reduction in MCDV from 12 to 7 in 2009;

-2009 will bring a liberal majority government and will be a bad year for the armed forces, particularly the Navy:
- scrapping of SSK's by 2011;
- pay off of remaining DDH's without replacement;
- reduction of FFH from 12 to 8 no later than 2011;  
- 2011 RFP for new build fleet proposal for large sized, small crew, multi-purpose, lightly armed warship;
- vessels will probably be along the lines of the cancelled RN Type 45 global mini cruiser at around 9000t, with some mild arctic weather capabilities; very limited basic defensive weapons fit; some Ro-Ro sealift capability; large flight deck; room to comfortably transport rescued evacuee's short distances;      
- 2013 first JSS commissions
- 2015 second JSS commissions
-2017, the first steel will be cut for new large surface warship as the remains of the FFH and MCDV fleet start to pay off;
- 2024 the Canadian Navy will consist of just 5 of these newer ships and 2 JSS.  

It will be a Navy capable of transporting marine commando's and baby formula to the arctic; delivering aid and rescuing/removing civilians from trouble spots and disaster areas under limited threat environments; and doing nothing more without the USN/RN/ RAN providing cover.  It will be a Navy more relevant to Canadians because Canadians will be told this is what they need. It will also be a Navy less relevant to our real enemies, who will be thankful for what Canadians have been told.
... Move!! ...

aesop081

  • Guest
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #23 on: March 12, 2007, 00:58:10 »
Rather dark prediction but, IMHO, not far off the mark......

Offline Ex-Dragoon

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 46,392
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,007
  • dealing with life not that active here anymore
Re: Are we going to spending too much money on FELEX?
« Reply #24 on: March 12, 2007, 05:28:59 »
I hope its far off the mark....
I will leave your flesh on the mountains and fill the valleys with your carcasses. I will water the land with what flows from you, and the river beds shall be filled with your blood. When I snuff you out I will cover the heavens and all the stars will darken. Ezekiel 32:5-7
Tradition- Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid
Former RCN Sailor now Retired