National Economy

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Armchair Admiral

If this is the sort of business model you want to see more of, then there's no better place to focus on right now than the defense industry, particularly ships!

Why should we send 12 subs worth of our tax money to another country when those billions could be spent expanding our shipbuilding industry and providing high skill jobs to more Canadians? Better to keep that money flowing within the Canadian economy instead.

I try to imagine Canada attempting to build 12 submarines that actually work. It's not a pretty scenario and would probably bankrupt the country. Of course by the time we customize whatever the South Koreans of Germans or whatever can build for us, the cost difference may be less of a factor ...

[Truenorth00]

Yeah. If we had the capability to do it, that would be great. But I don't think there is a shipyard that is capable or could develop the capability in a reasonable amount of time.

[lio45]

FYI, unlike football quarterbacks, real admirals ARE in armchairs when doing their jobs!

Quick sample
https://www.history.navy.mil/our-col...-G-430079.html

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by lio45

FYI, unlike football quarterbacks, real admirals ARE in armchairs when doing their jobs!

Quick sample
https://www.history.navy.mil/our-col...-G-430079.html

Like him:

https://youtu.be/6Y_nuURKCBg?t=76

[Armchair Admiral]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

I try to imagine Canada attempting to build 12 submarines that actually work. It's not a pretty scenario and would probably bankrupt the country. Of course by the time we customize whatever the South Koreans of Germans or whatever can build for us, the cost difference may be less of a factor ...

Well I'm certainly not suggesting that Canada re-invent the wheel as far as designs go, working with an experienced builder would be essential for a successful domestic program. I'm not sure what the navy would want customized, a long range diesel-electric with an ice grade hull should do the trick. That may not be a COTS design, but not too complex either. Nuclear simply can't be done quick enough, and I don't think is really needed in Canada's case.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Yeah. If we had the capability to do it, that would be great. But I don't think there is a shipyard that is capable or could develop the capability in a reasonable amount of time.

Most subs aren't all that big, a coastal shipyard wouldn't even be needed for construction, somewhere near the great lakes could work too. Even a new purpose built facility shouldn't be too difficult, dry-docks aren't all that high tech, it's proximity to support industries, etc that would be more important.

The first subs could be built with co-op crews at the partner country's facilities while Canada's gets setup and then takes over construction and maintenance.

I don't think anyone expects to get 12 subs from anyone all at the same time, they'll likely come in batches like the F35s. So by the time the 12th sub is received, the first few will probably be due for some extensive maintenance.

If sized correctly, a sub yard it could provide near perpetual employment, and having the construction and maintenance in country allows for quicker feedback from the navy and easier implementation of design corrections or changes between builds.

It also helps ensure the institutional knowledge of the program isn't lost, which should result in better QA over time, maybe even lower costs as construction becomes more streamlined.

That's my pie in the sky dream anyways.. Then repeat the process for some amphib ships!

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Armchair Admiral

Most subs aren't all that big...

The ones being considered are 3000t. I don't know if I consider something like this small:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.p...-III_submarine

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taigei-class_submarine

And that's what the RCN believes it needs to go under the ice regularly.

[Armchair Admiral]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The ones being considered are 3000t. I don't know if I consider something like this small:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.p...-III_submarine

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taigei-class_submarine

And that's what the RCN believes it needs to go under the ice regularly.

Well the Taigei class is just too wide for seawaymax, but the slimer Korean sub could still clear the locks fine.

Those subs are still a third of the size of the new destroyers under construction, and we found a place to build those domestically..

Much more difficult (but not impossible) to find a spot to build ships the size of a wasp or san-antonio class, which IMO should be next on the RCN's shopping list.

[MonctonRad]

If we are truly looking at a 12 ship sub fleet, then this is enough boats that a domestic yard makes sense,

With maintenance, and ongoing procurement, a made in Canada strategy could make sense. I know that South Korea would be amenable to this type of arrangement if they win the contract.

The city of Saint John NB says "hi"..........

They are still smarting that they lost the current Irving shipyard to Halifax for the CSC and AOPS contracts. The shipyard however still exists, and could be retrofitted for the submarine program. I don't know however if this makes fiscal sense, and will defer to the experts in this regard, but, a domestic submarine shipyard might make sense when looking at a substantial fleet of 12 boats or so,

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

If we are truly looking at a 12 ship sub fleet, then this is enough boats that a domestic yard makes sense,

With maintenance, and ongoing procurement, a made in Canada strategy could make sense. I know that South Korea would be amenable to this type of arrangement if they win the contract.

The city of Saint John NB says "hi"..........

They are still smarting that they lost the current Irving shipyard to Halifax for the CSC and AOPS contracts. The shipyard however still exists, and could be retrofitted for the submarine program. I don't know however if this makes fiscal sense, and will defer to the experts in this regard, but, a domestic submarine shipyard might make sense when looking at a substantial fleet of 12 boats or so,

What domestic sub building experience does Canada have? That sounds like a recipe for disaster, just buy from someone with the established expertise.

[SFUVancouver]

I hope that the RCN selects a diesel sub class with air-independent propulsion (AIP) in use by NATO allies. This would squarely focus the class on its true purpose: littoral sovereignty operations and continental defense if things go kinetic, plus the capability for sustained operations with NATO allies operating the same class if forward deployed, and/or seconded as one-for-one replacement for allies' lost hulls in a shooting war limited to European waters.

So basically the Type 212A/CD class.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Not against it per se but there are a number of environmental hoops to jump through, and mining practices in the past have ruined groundwater and poisoned the local environment.

Apart from that, extracting ore is a positive and valuable endeavor. Metals can be used and reused.

Where I live has had some environmental disasters in the past and the current regulations are very reasonable and many who live in Timmins today would argue that they could be stricter.

A good example in Timmins of a mine with no environmental regulations was the Kam Kotia copper mine that only operated for a year or two during World War II but has cost millions and millions in tax dollars for cleanup which is still ongoing today.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

If we are truly looking at a 12 ship sub fleet, then this is enough boats that a domestic yard makes sense,

With maintenance, and ongoing procurement, a made in Canada strategy could make sense. I know that South Korea would be amenable to this type of arrangement if they win the contract.

The city of Saint John NB says "hi"..........

They are still smarting that they lost the current Irving shipyard to Halifax for the CSC and AOPS contracts. The shipyard however still exists, and could be retrofitted for the submarine program. I don't know however if this makes fiscal sense, and will defer to the experts in this regard, but, a domestic submarine shipyard might make sense when looking at a substantial fleet of 12 boats or so,

I'm all for it. As I mentioned before, we need to increase defence spending immediately and build things at home that benefit our economy. Saint John should be highly considered for subs.

As for defence spending, we should also look at having infrastructure improvements as part of it such as having a freeway across Canada and some alternate routes in some areas. And I could add a bunch of other things that could double for defence and economics and even safety during disasters.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Armchair Admiral

Well I'm certainly not suggesting that Canada re-invent the wheel as far as designs go, working with an experienced builder would be essential for a successful domestic program. I'm not sure what the navy would want customized, a long range diesel-electric with an ice grade hull should do the trick. That may not be a COTS design, but not too complex either. Nuclear simply can't be done quick enough, and I don't think is really needed in Canada's case.



Most subs aren't all that big, a coastal shipyard wouldn't even be needed for construction, somewhere near the great lakes could work too. Even a new purpose built facility shouldn't be too difficult, dry-docks aren't all that high tech, it's proximity to support industries, etc that would be more important.

The first subs could be built with co-op crews at the partner country's facilities while Canada's gets setup and then takes over construction and maintenance.

I don't think anyone expects to get 12 subs from anyone all at the same time, they'll likely come in batches like the F35s. So by the time the 12th sub is received, the first few will probably be due for some extensive maintenance.

If sized correctly, a sub yard it could provide near perpetual employment, and having the construction and maintenance in country allows for quicker feedback from the navy and easier implementation of design corrections or changes between builds.

It also helps ensure the institutional knowledge of the program isn't lost, which should result in better QA over time, maybe even lower costs as construction becomes more streamlined.

That's my pie in the sky dream anyways.. Then repeat the process for some amphib ships!

Hamilton enters the fray!

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Loco101

I'm all for it. As I mentioned before, we need to increase defence spending immediately and build things at home that benefit our economy. Saint John should be highly considered for subs.

I get the feeling that some of you think building military equipment is just bashing metal together. Building a 3000t AIP sub is probably about as technically difficult as building a nuclear power plant. And I doubt you'd throw out random cities to simply build a nuclear power industry at.

Originally Posted by Loco101

As for defence spending, we should also look at having infrastructure improvements as part of it such as having a freeway across Canada and some alternate routes in some areas. And I could add a bunch of other things that could double for defence and economics and even safety during disasters.

Defence spending isn't just whatever you want to call defence spending. The NATO definition was specifically designed to exclude antics like this.

Originally Posted by whatnext

What domestic sub building experience does Canada have? That sounds like a recipe for disaster, just buy from someone with the established expertise.

Indeed. Great example of the quality that Irving gives us.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/cana...king-on-water/

[MonctonRad]

If we are going to have a ~50 ship navy, and a coast guard with another 40-50 ships or so, that should be enough to support at least three shipyards across the country on an ongoing basis (ship life ~25 years, ongoing maintenance and refits).

Wherever possible we should be building these things at home in order to support homegrown industry and develop our own capacity to do the work. Ships are perfect for this. We should also be developing capacity for general duty military vehicles, munitions, drones and small arms.

Sure, there are some things we should buy from international partners (planes, helicopters, heavy armour etc), but, if we want to be a self sufficient military power, we should learn to build more on our own.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Armchair Admiral

If this is the sort of business model you want to see more of, then there's no better place to focus on right now than the defense industry, particularly ships!

Why should we send 12 subs worth of our tax money to another country when those billions could be spent expanding our shipbuilding industry and providing high skill jobs to more Canadians? Better to keep that money flowing within the Canadian economy instead.

Um, because we have virtually no experience in building submarines? Why waste time and money trying to build a submarine when other countries can already do it faster and cheaper? Plus it’s never going to create a long term submarine industry. Why do we keep thinking we need to throw money at a couple of shipyards to build naval craft. We don’t build our own container ships.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I get the feeling that some of you think building military equipment is just bashing metal together. Building a 3000t AIP sub is probably about as technically difficult as building a nuclear power plant. And I doubt you'd throw out random cities to simply build a nuclear power industry at.

Well, we actually have a strong nuclear manufacturing industry in Canada. The problem with that industry (and ship building as well) is it is hard to sustain when you stop building.

Canada was building and exporting nuclear power plants until the late 90s. Many of those companies had to diversify as new plants stopped being built and the needs of an industry for replacement/maintenance is diminished. Now Ontario is trying to rebuild its nuclear industry.

As for building subs. Canada drydock capability for the current subs is based out of Victoria. That is where the supply chain is centered, with some capacity in Halifax. That is the logical place to build new subs if Canada want to get into building its own subs. That it is a big if.

None of our navy ships are clean-sheet designs. They have all started with designs from major allies that are then modified to specific Canadian needs. When one of our allies comes along wanting to do a similar project, they will likely do the same.

Unless we can come up with a plan where the ship yard that builds these has work after the project is done I don't see it being built in Canada. Would love to be proven wrong.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by whatnext

I’m, because we have virtually no experience in building submarines? Why waste time and money trying to build a submarine when other countries can already do it faster and cheaper? Plus it’s never going to create a long term submarine industry. Why do we keep thinking we need to throw money at a couple of shipyards to build naval craft. We don’t build our own container ships.

If we have a fleet of 12 submarines, and these subs have a life expectancy of 25 years, and it takes two years to build each sub, then a Canadian submarine shipyard would have continual work, especially if you factor in maintenance and refit activities as well.

Learning to build your own damned stuff is an act of nation building. Canada used to be good at building things. Now we are just a client state. I prefer for us to be self sufficient.

South Korea would be an excellent partner. They would help to get our submarine shipyard up and running, and, would continue to assist with supervision and quality control (for a licensing fee). Meanwhile, Canada learns the process, and hundreds of high quality jobs are created.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

If we have a fleet of 12 submarines, and these subs have a life expectancy of 25 years, and it takes two years to build each sub, then a Canadian submarine shipyard would have continual work, especially if you factor in maintenance and refit activities as well.

Learning to build your own damned stuff is an act of nation building. Canada used to be good at building things. Now we are just a client state. I prefer for us to be self sufficient.

South Korea would be an excellent partner. They would help to get our submarine shipyard up and running, and, would continue to assist with supervision and quality control (for a licensing fee). Meanwhile, Canada learns the process, and hundreds of high quality jobs are created.

If we are doing defence spending to make others happy rather than produce actual defence this is certainly the aproach we should and will take. Otherwise we might be better off spending half as much even if there is less economic impact.

[casper]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

If we are doing defence spending to make others happy rather than produce actual defence this is certainly the aproach we should and will take. Otherwise we might be better off spending half as much even if there is less economic impact.

Part of the argument for building critical defence infrastructure domestically is its continued operation, maintenance and replacement is under our control and we are not constrained by another countries strings on its use. From an industrial policy perspective the military tends to be picky and demanding. They push the limits harder than many comparable civilian products. It is good for Canadian industry to do that work from a capacity building perspective.

The more pragmatic aspect is that under free trade agreements defence is typically a carve out. We can play favourites. The government when buying almost anything else is requirements to treat suppliers equally if they are domestic or from a country we have a free trade agreement with.

We are not unique. Belgium, UK, US, Japan,... it does not matter everyone tries to the extent possible to restrict defence procurement to being domestic.