Quote:
Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut
The problem seems to be that kicking the can down the road over and over again has led to Canada needing new warships and new ferries at the same time; once the current batch of icebreakers and destroyers are finished, Seaspan and Irving are back to twiddling their thumbs waiting for a new contract for large vessels.
Like it or not, there isn't really a reason for the feds to subsidize a bunch of new shipyards that'll just sit empty too. If overseas exports doubled suddenly, maybe.
|
With the ramp-up to the now-agreed upon NATO 5% of GDP (3.5% defense, 1.5% defensive-supportive infrastructure) over the next decade, I anticipate that there will be a follow-on program to the National Shipbuilding Strategy that will keep the shipyards busy. Moreover, the 1.5% defense-supportive infrastructure spend can help expand the capabilities of our shipyards so that it isn't a non-starter for Canadian shipyards to bid on projects like new ferries. Furthermore, additional graving docks and submersible dry docks will be needed for fleet maintenance and modernization. This will let the Navy expedite maintenance cycles, which improves readiness rates and permits Canada to play expanded role in NATO with longer duration naval missions and greater sensor-strike capabilities.
The River Class will represent our principal surface combatants, but I could see the Navy wanting additional River Class hulls and additional fleet support ships. These would be a straightforward point of departure for a National Shipbuilding Strategy extension.
Moreover, I could see value to complimenting the River Class with a class of frigates, itself split into air defense and anti-submarine (and uncrewed underwater vessels) specializations. This would result in a high-low fleet mix, with the River Class providing the sensor-rich, offensive-oriented command vessels and the frigates providing complimentary air defense and anti-submarine capabilities with more limited sensor and offensive capabilities. The frigates should truly be off-the shelf designs, such as the FREMM, that can be procured/licensed as part of the European rearmament initiative. And Canada
must resist the urge to revise the design.