• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

6 Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels being no longer Mothballed

In fact Petamocto, angled armour has been in use by navies well before MBT were even conceived. Dreadnaught, the first "battleship" incorporated a second angled plating system inside its armour belt and in between its double hull specifically for deflection and increase in thickness without added weight. The concept was included in just about every class of battleships and cruisers thereafter. For a more modern application, look up the Zumwalt class destroyer project of the USN.

However, as battle damage is concerned on mine warfare crafts, think about it: They are usually made of wood, plastic (GRP), aluminium or light steel. And they are all fairly small vessels. Anyone looking at the pictures saw the damage inflicted on a corvette by a single North Korean torpedo. You cannot expect a mine warfare craft to survive "battle damage". They rely on their signature control methods, sharp lookout and self protection forward looking mine-hunting sonars to stay out of trouble. Granted, it is not much protection against  submarines, surface warships or aircrafts, but in the mine warfare world, "c'est la vie". 
 
Loose lips sink ships for the Maritime Command
Article Link

The Navy – or more accurately Maritime Command – is a vital strategic asset with increasing relevance. Recent statements out of Ottawa, however, demonstrate confusion or political obfuscation – or both – rather than strategic clarity. The result threatens to undermine Canada's national interests.

On Friday the Chief of the Defence Staff, General Walter Natynczyk, took the highly unusual step of publicly rescinding an order from his top admiral, Dean McFadden, after an acrimonious debate in Parliament that embarrassed the government. When questioned by the opposition, Defence Minister Peter MacKay appeared unaware of Vice-Admiral McFadden's orders (issued on April 23) to mothball half of the Navy's maritime coastal defence vessels, place certain Canadian frigates in limited domestic and continental roles, and put modernization and upgrade programs for other elements of the fleet on hold. The admiral identified the reason for his decision as fiscal shortfall. In an odd reversal of roles, opposition parties were left calling for increased defence spending, including the NDP.

Gen. Natynczyk stepped forward to reassure the public that the Navy's needs will be met, not with additional government funding, but by reviewing “resource allocations.” These vague words leave two possibilities, neither of which would solve the Navy's problems. The first is that the CDS will override Vice-Adm. McFadden's priorities, reassigning resources within the Navy, likely to highly visible programs while cutting less popular ones such as submarines. The second option raises the spectre of destructive internal turf wars in which the Navy would be preserved at the expense of the Army or Air Force. With more than $1-billion in cuts slated for the defence budget next year, suggestions that one service may have to lose some of its funding to bail out another will create bitter rivalries, undermining broad strategic vision and collaboration.

The Navy faces serious challenges, the most basic of which cannot be fixed with an immediate funding injection – a personnel shortage of more than 1,000 people, especially in high-tech trades. Unlike ships and weapons, these sailors cannot be bought off the shelf.
More on link
 
ah yes, "adjust your priorities and reallocate resources" Hello the 90's are calling and want their decade of darkness back.....
 
GAP said:
The Navy faces serious challenges, the most basic of which cannot be fixed with an immediate funding injection – a personnel shortage of more than 1,000 people, especially in high-tech trades. Unlike ships and weapons, these sailors cannot be bought off the shelf.
More on link

So aside from tieing up ships, stopping upgrades, whatever else the CMS was *going* to do...what is his plan for better retention?  Recruiting?

If its true that you have to have the kit for the sailors to use, you also have to have the sailors to use the kit.

:2c:
 
a personnel shortage of more than 1,000 people

i know of around 30 on my ship who are thinking of pulling the plug now due to Commands insistence we do pre pre pre pre rep pre pre pre pre wups training. Sadly it will only get worse before it gets better.
 
Ex-Dragoon said:
i know of around 30 on my ship who are thinking of pulling the plug now due to Commands insistence we do pre pre pre pre rep pre pre pre pre wups training. Sadly it will only get worse before it gets better.

Sounds like the motnh and a half of pre-deployment for Afghanistan the Army strategically spreads over 9 months...
 
dapaterson said:
Sounds like the motnh and a half of pre-deployment for Afghanistan the Army strategically spreads over 9 months...

not the Navy...on some ships you prepare to deploy a couple of years in advance...depending on your CO
 
Ex-Dragoon said:
not the Navy...on some ships you prepare to deploy a couple of years in advance...depending on your CO

Yes, I have been on ship's that do workups before workups and end up burning out the crew. Right now we're still "hemorrhaging" personnel that are going CT. Looks like we may not have enough bodies to put 3 ship's out the door.
 
Stoker said:
Yes, I have been on ship's that do workups before workups and end up burning out the crew. Right now we're still "hemorrhaging" personnel that are going CT. Looks like we may not have enough bodies to put 3 ship's out the door.

But if they are going Reg force in the same MOC, isn't that better for the Navy in the end? 

IMO, its more important that the Reg Force billets are filled before the NavRes.  I know that doesn't help your position any as a Class C sailor but...
 
Eye In The Sky said:
But if they are going Reg force in the same MOC, isn't that better for the Navy in the end? 

IMO, its more important that the Reg Force billets are filled before the NavRes.  I know that doesn't help your position any as a Class C sailor but...

Sure it is, however I don't think our ship's will ever be taken over and manned by regular force personnel because of the manning problems the big ships are having. I don't want to see guys with mortgages, who have been on these ships for years be handed their hats.
 
Ex-Dragoon said:
not the Navy...on some ships you prepare to deploy a couple of years in advance...depending on your CO

Ex-Drag, am I going to see you soon?  I'm supposed to be hitting WUPS in Oct/Nov....is that your window too?

NS
 
I show up for work a Week monday, look me up and I'll buy you a coffee down in the mess.  ;D

 
Back
Top