Canadian Surface Combatant

[JA Boomer]

Good article here: https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news...-csc-frigates/

My thoughts:

-I was concerned when they moved from a two-class program (with a high-end command/AAW destroyer and a low-end ASW frigate) to a single class program, that they would be essentially scrapping the high-end combatant. It seems they have actually struck a very nice balance between anti-air, -surface, -sub-surface, and strike capability in this design, and a single class program is the way to go.

-Tomahawk is interesting, could prove useful.

-I hope SM-2 is carried, although why not SM-6?

-Sea Ceptor missile as the CIWS is interesting, I would have thought RAM launchers give you precious additional seconds to intercept being forward firing, and have a useful anti-surface capability.

Overall I'm impressed at this stage of design/procurement of how this class is looking.

[Albany Rifles]

Regarding SM-2 & SM-6....aren't they intended to be used in a mix? And does that further complicate ship board FCS?

[JA Boomer]

Regarding SM-2 & SM-6....aren't they intended to be used in a mix? And does that further complicate ship board FCS?

That's a fair comment. The SM-6 has active guidance, longer range, and is more expensive compared to the SM-2. The longer range wouldn't be required in our case.

So the CSC will have the following umbrellas:

SM-2: 120 km
ESSM: 50km
CAMM: 25km

[Albany Rifles]

That's a fair comment.

I try!

[looking4NSFS]

The SM-6 is gaining an interesting Curriculum Vitae.

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/11/...ange-missiles/


Here the Army is working the SM-6 and Tomahawk together for its MRC.

"...the Army has chosen to mix two very different Navy weapons together in its prototype MRC (Mid-Range Capability) unit: the new, supersonic, high-altitude SM-6 and the venerable, subsonic, low-flying Tomahawk."

http://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/20...not-joint.html

[Albany Rifles]

looking4NSFS....key word there is "prototype". They ae looking for various hardware solutions to meet an operational need. They are somewhere in the pre-Milestone B process of their system lifecycle. Milestone C is when you get permission to go to low rate production.

[JA Boomer]

The parliamentary budget officer released a report saying:

-CSC likely to reach $82.1 billion as a program.
-We could save money by buying two different ship types - FREMM or the Type 31.
-Switching to the Type 31 would save the most money.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/fri...cost-1.5926000

I struggle to understand how they came up with cost savings with a split buy, even with the cheaper Type 31 included. Design and sustainment of two types would be much more expensive than any construction savings.

You have to really appreciate military procurement in this county, no decision is final. We can and will change our minds several times, and make damn sure it costs more than it has to before a piece of equipment enters service.

[Officer of Engineers]

You have to really appreciate military procurement in this county, no decision is final. We can and will change our minds several times, and make damn sure it costs more than it has to before a piece of equipment enters service.

There's the mission creep but the main difference between us and the Americans is that we can't change our minds once the production line is set up. So, all our mind changing headaches and heartaches are done up front.

At this stage, there's a hell of a lot of backdoor horse trading that has nothing to do with military requirements. You can bet your bottom dollar that the US, Germany, France, and the UK are lobbying Canadian shipyards to see what kind of work they can do. The more the Canadian shipyards can do, the more the chances of a successful bid, even if the higher price and not exactly what the RCN wants.

Frankly, you won't believe the bellyaching Canadian industries scream at if they felt short change.

Back in the 1990s, the CDS made a command decision to use Mircosoft Office at something like $80 per station. Ottawa based COREL screamed bloody murder and pushed for a competition with its own WORDPERFECT OFFICE. One year later and we still didn't have any Office suites DND wide and each indidividual Directorate made their own little purchases. Some went MS Office. Some went WORDPERFECT. Others needed both so that they can communicate with others.

And all the uniform membership said was, just make a goddamn decision. It's not life or death. But nope.

[JA Boomer]

You don't know whether to laugh or cry when reading this article.

https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/its-...-warships/amp/

Highlights:

This week the parliamentary budget officer, Yves Giroux, went through the annual ritual of revealing that the Royal Canadian Navy’s badly needed frigates will now cost more money, and will arrive later than expected. What began as a $26-billion project 13 years ago will now take an extra decade, and will likely cost $77 billion. And, spoiler alert, Giroux added that the final price tag may (read: most certainly will) exceed $82 billion. How many thousands of ships will we get in return? 15.

Canada could buy similar frigates from the Americans, French or even Australians. Our current price tag is between four and five times more expensive than theirs.

Let’s accept the fact, proven repeatedly for decades, that Canada is simply incapable of building ships for our navy. And then, let’s just buy the damn things from the French, get them years earlier, and save ourselves $66 billion.

According to the government of Canada’s own figures, only 11,100 people are employed in Canada’s shipbuilding industry (we have more massage therapists). If we were to add on those indirectly employed, that number creeps up to 15,200. Now, let’s pretend the Canadian frigate contract is the only shipbuilding job out there, and buying from France would mean every one of those 15,200 people would be out of work. If we were to give each of them $1 million in compensation, Canada would still save over $50 billion (in addition to getting the ships faster).

[Officer of Engineers]

What's the life cycle cost of buying from France?

[Albany Rifles]

What's the life cycle cost of buying from France?

Good question.

And 2 different models is in no way cheaper.

If for no other reason than you have to have redundancy in repair parts, training, and a whole host of little bits which will jump up and bite one in the ass.

[thebard]

If it makes you Canadians feel any better, here's how we do it in the US.
1- Declare our existing equipment to be obsolete. That means that we decide it can't fulfill the assigned mission and can't be upgraded economically.
2- Decide on a suitable replacement. This is mostly determined by which congressional district has the most sway.
3- Procure said replacement.
4- Declare the project to be overbudget before production starts. This usually means that everything will cost at least twice as much as forecast.
5- Scrap the existing equipment before the replacements are deployed. Sometimes we actually sell the obsolete stuff to other countries who continue to operate it for decades.
6- Declare the replacement equipment is deficient and costly redesign and rework will be necessary.
7- Point fingers at each other.
8- Deploy new equipment years or decades behind schedule.
9- Realize afterward that the assigned mission is no longer relevant (B-1 bomber is a great example).
10- Return to #1