[Newsbot]

Title: Navy supply ships set to join F-35 as political lightning rod in 2013
Category: Military
Posted By: BeaverFever
Date: 2013-01-06 16:48:35
Canadian

[bootlegga]

Another defence failure by this government...when will it end?

[BartSimpson]

That's a totally absurd price for three supply ships. There's literally hundreds of perfectly fine surplus cargo ships and tankers around the world that can be had for far less money and then refit to perform most tasks at least adequately. Maybe that's not a perfect solution, but that's a buttload cheaper than building a cargo hull from scratch that costs more than most countries destroyers.

[saturn_656]

JSS was an abortion of an idea from the beginning.

Build resupply vessels now, build dedicated LPD/LHD ships later.

[Gunnair]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

That's a totally absurd price for three supply ships. There's literally hundreds of perfectly fine surplus cargo ships and tankers around the world that can be had for far less money and then refit to perform most tasks at least adequately. Maybe that's not a perfect solution, but that's a buttload cheaper than building a cargo hull from scratch that costs more than most countries destroyers.

Used... we've done well by that.

[BartSimpson]

I'm talking about near-new, unused, surplus hulls. Not cast-offs that are overdue for the breakers.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive ... apore.html

[andyt]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Another defence failure by this government...when will it end?

It won't. When have they (as in any govt) ever got it right? I read an interesting article about how bidding for govt contracts works. The bureaucrats put out a call for tender that has a lot of CYA clauses in it but doesn't actually reflect what's needed. The companies then post bids that are totally not profitable for them, knowing that if they get the bid, the contract will be re-opened to be modified more to what's actually needed. Since there is no bidding on this, the company is then free to charge whatever it wants so it can make a profit (and a juicy one) on the deal. Look at the Sikorsky debacle - we still haven't got them, there are penalty clauses for late delivery, but the govt won't enforce those because they've kept moving the goalposts on the design.

This article recommended doing away with the tendering system. Forget what it recommended instead - maybe just delivering wheelbarrows full of cash to a chosen contractor - would probably cost less.

[Gunnair]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

I'm talking about near-new, unused, surplus hulls. Not cast-offs that are overdue for the breakers.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive ... apore.html

They weren't cast offs meant for the breakers when we began looking at them.

[bootlegga]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

That's a totally absurd price for three supply ships. There's literally hundreds of perfectly fine surplus cargo ships and tankers around the world that can be had for far less money and then refit to perform most tasks at least adequately. Maybe that's not a perfect solution, but that's a buttload cheaper than building a cargo hull from scratch that costs more than most countries destroyers.

The difference is that the RCN is far smaller than the USN and can't afford 2-3 oilers, 2-3 replenishment ships, and 1-2 LCDs - the ALSC/JSS was designed to be a jack of all trades. Had it been built in a timely fashion, we probably could have gotten it for the original pricetag, but 7 years of pooch-screwing means we can't.

Someone - CASR perhaps - suggested building a cargo ship and getting in on one of the USN's LCD builds, but that's likely a no go as the government wants most - if not all - of the money spent here in Canada.

It has also been suggested we buy a ship modelled on the Dutch JSS;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karel_Door ... pport_ship

That plan too is likely a no-go, because we'd probably have to build it there.

[saturn_656]

Gunnair Gunnair:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

I'm talking about near-new, unused, surplus hulls. Not cast-offs that are overdue for the breakers.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive ... apore.html

They weren't cast offs meant for the breakers when we began looking at them.

From what I read the RN never properly prepared the Upholders for long term inactivity. And we never properly inspected them prior to buying them.

Plenty of blame to go around.

[Gunnair]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

Gunnair Gunnair:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

I'm talking about near-new, unused, surplus hulls. Not cast-offs that are overdue for the breakers.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive ... apore.html

They weren't cast offs meant for the breakers when we began looking at them.

From what I read the RN never properly prepared the Upholders for long term inactivity. And we never properly inspected them prior to buying them.

Plenty of blame to go around.

Yep.

[Gunnair]

bootlegga bootlegga:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

That's a totally absurd price for three supply ships. There's literally hundreds of perfectly fine surplus cargo ships and tankers around the world that can be had for far less money and then refit to perform most tasks at least adequately. Maybe that's not a perfect solution, but that's a buttload cheaper than building a cargo hull from scratch that costs more than most countries destroyers.

The difference is that the RCN is far smaller than the USN and can't afford 2-3 oilers, 2-3 replenishment ships, and 1-2 LCDs - the ALSC/JSS was designed to be a jack of all trades. Had it been built in a timely fashion, we probably could have gotten it for the original pricetag, but 7 years of pooch-screwing means we can't.

Someone - CASR perhaps - suggested building a cargo ship and getting in on one of the USN's LCD builds, but that's likely a no go as the government wants most - if not all - of the money spent here in Canada.

It has also been suggested we buy a ship modelled on the Dutch JSS;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karel_Door ... pport_ship

That plan too is likely a no-go, because we'd probably have to build it there.

There was some chatter coming out of RCN Command about those. Wishful thinking, I agree.

[saturn_656]

bootlegga bootlegga:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

That's a totally absurd price for three supply ships. There's literally hundreds of perfectly fine surplus cargo ships and tankers around the world that can be had for far less money and then refit to perform most tasks at least adequately. Maybe that's not a perfect solution, but that's a buttload cheaper than building a cargo hull from scratch that costs more than most countries destroyers.

The difference is that the RCN is far smaller than the USN and can't afford 2-3 oilers, 2-3 replenishment ships, and 1-2 LCDs - the ALSC/JSS was designed to be a jack of all trades.

2-3 resupply ships and 1-2 LHD's.

The Australians can do it. We have no excuse.

[Gunnair]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

bootlegga bootlegga:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

That's a totally absurd price for three supply ships. There's literally hundreds of perfectly fine surplus cargo ships and tankers around the world that can be had for far less money and then refit to perform most tasks at least adequately. Maybe that's not a perfect solution, but that's a buttload cheaper than building a cargo hull from scratch that costs more than most countries destroyers.

The difference is that the RCN is far smaller than the USN and can't afford 2-3 oilers, 2-3 replenishment ships, and 1-2 LCDs - the ALSC/JSS was designed to be a jack of all trades.

2-3 resupply ships and 1-2 LHD's.

The Australians can do it. We have no excuse.

We don't have the manpower.

[bootlegga]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

JSS was an abortion of an idea from the beginning.

Build resupply vessels now, build dedicated LPD/LHD ships later.

Way too expensive given our needs - especially when we need new destroyers, fighters, SAR planes and other major platforms.