Canadas JSS project in trouble

**Officer of Engineers** · 11 Jun 08,, 13:15

Sorry, I did not see this post until now.

I'm a bellycrawler, not boat people, so the best I can do is to understand their choices, not decide on what's best for them.

The JSS is a throw back to the Cold War days where being torpedoed by a Soviet shark was a necessary consideration. For what the Navy see itself doing and the most daunting of these are NEOs, they will have to expose the ships to a combat zone.

The most recent example is the Israeli-Hezbollah War. Hezbollah hit an Israeli warship with a missile. Ottawa had to send a civilian ship in that would not survive such a hit (as did others including the US). However, you can see the need for a better ship that can do these operations with a little more confidence in these conditions. We've also had two JTF-2 bricks in Lebanon trying to find Canadians to be evacuated. I would've prefered an mech recee platoon.

The JSS, along with ensuring no future KATIEs, provides NEOs with the above conditions.

**Prairie Canuck** · 13 Jun 08,, 05:45

I'm not familiar with the acronym NEO but take it to mean something along the lines of evacuating non-combatants.
You mention the concern with torpedoes during the cold war, with the increase in submarine purchases by world navies would that threat still not exist and even have increased?
Canada's focus right now is Afghanistan, as it should be, but should we consider a possibility in the future of a coastal "Afghanistan" where the CF would go ashore opposed. I don't want to get into all the "what if" scenarios but as little as 5 years ago most Canadians still viewed our Forces as under-equipped peacekeepers, that is till Rick came down from the rock.

I've read suggestions that the CF should have opted for regular oilers and LHD's in the 30,000 tonne (or ton?)range. Would any of your navy colleagues have the same opinion?

**lazimodo** · 27 Jul 08,, 00:55

As for building it in Canada, well there would be a saving by buying foreign built but developing and maintaining our own shipbuilding industry provides jobs, capabilities, and, even at a greater cost, sustains what would be considered a key industry on either coast. Governments keeping key industries afloat is quite the norm in Europe and Japan.
Just where would you find a Korean large vessel parts store when you needed one..[/QUOTE]

I agree. Besides, if my Chinese toaster that never actually toasted anything, before it sparked out on the kitchen counter and my Korean car that lasted 35 months before it became a lawn ornament are any indicators, I would say build it here and I will sail on it. I would be secure in the knowledge that its designed by canucks, built by canucks and sailed by canucks to serve canuck needs. Besides what if we have to read the owners manual... Think about it!

**~~GraniteForge~~** · 27 Jul 08,, 04:05

Originally Posted by Prairie Canuck

The US, UK, France, Italy, India, Spain, Netherlands,Thailand, Australia, Greece, Mexico, Japan, Brazil, Singapore, Taiwan, Korea, Ukraine, Russia, and even New Zealand all have the capability to transport troops and their equipment and then put them on shore to one degree or another. Does New Zealand know something Canada doesn't?

You can add Poland to the list.