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

AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

Uzlu

Full Member
Reaction score
98
Points
380
Statement by Davie Shipbuilding regarding a second interim supply ship - MV Obelix

LÉVIS, QC, Jan. 28, 2019 /CNW Telbec/ - Last Friday, the Right Honourable Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau told an audience in Quebec City that the Canadian Armed Forces did an assessment and concluded that there was no need for the second supply ship proposed by Davie Shipbuilding. Based on media reports, this assessment was conducted in 2014, when the delivery date for the Joint Supply Ships was still 2019.

Davie Shipbuilding thanks the Prime Minister for his continued support for Davie workers and his commitment to making decisions based on facts and evidence.

To that end, we note that on 30 May 2018, the Acting Vice Chief of Defence Staff told a Parliamentary Committee, "We never really looked at the need for or validated the need for a second interim AOR."
https://sencanada.ca/en/Content/Sen/Committee/421/NFFN/68ev-54120-e

Additionally, the requirement for a second supply ship for the Royal Canadian Navy was studied by both the Senate and House of Commons permanent defence committees in 2017 and both committees unanimously concluded that Canada should procure a second interim supply ship from Davie to meet the operational requirements of the navy.

Given the statement from the Acting Vice Chief of Defence Staff, two parliamentary reports and documents provided by the Department of National Defence which confirm that the Joint Supply Ships will not achieve Full Operational Capabilities until 2025, there clearly remains a need for Obelix.
http://forces.gc.ca/en/about-reports-pubs-report-plan-priorities/2018-status-report-transformational-crown-projects.page#jointsupportship

To that end, we would request that the Prime Minister conduct an independent third-party analysis of the utilization rate of the current supply ship, MV Asterix, and the exact time when the Joint Support Ships to be delivered from the Vancouver shipyard will achieve Full Operational Capability. This analysis should be concluded in an expedited timeframe (30 days) so that we can get on with providing the women and men of the Royal Canadian Navy the equipment it needs to carry out the job the government asks them to do, both in Canada and abroad.
https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/statement-by-davie-shipbuilding-regarding-a-second-interim-supply-ship-mv-obelix-859714699.html
 

Rifleman62

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
70
Points
530
To that end, we would request that the Prime Minister conduct an independent third-party analysis of the utilization rate of the current supply ship, MV Asterix, and the exact time when the Joint Support Ships to be delivered from the Vancouver shipyard will achieve Full Operational Capability. This analysis should be concluded in an expedited timeframe (30 days) so that we can get on with providing the women and men of the Royal Canadian Navy the equipment it needs to carry out the job the government asks them to do, both in Canada and abroad.

Dream on. An independent third-party analysis by any government would take months just to define the aim. Then months to find the
independent third-party, months to hire, staff, find accommodations, acquire eqpt, etc, etc, etc.
 

Stoker

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
283
Points
880
Rifleman62 said:
Dream on. An independent third-party analysis by any government would take months just to define the aim. Then months to find the
independent third-party, months to hire, staff, find accommodations, acquire eqpt, etc, etc, etc.


Just as I predicted Davie is pulling out all the stops to control the narrative on this. They must be getting pretty desperate.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,630
Points
990
True.  Unlike Irving or Seaspan, they don't have guaranteed money even if they deliver nothing.
 

Cloud Cover

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
30
Points
530
dapaterson said:
True.  Unlike Irving or Seaspan, they don't have guaranteed money even if they deliver nothing.

To witt: this thread was started 15 years ago, and the only AOR ship delivered has been Asterix. And that happened only by circumstance and political miscalculation.
 

Oldgateboatdriver

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
308
Points
880
Chief Engineer said:
Just as I predicted Davie is pulling out all the stops to control the narrative on this. They must be getting pretty desperate.

While you are constantly harping negative comments on Davie at the drop of a hat, you have (that I can recall, and I follow this thread pretty closely) never predicted anything involving "control of the narrative" by Davie (or anybody else for that matter) before.

If by control of the narrative you mean actually pointing out facts, such as statements of the VCDS to a parliamentary committee, complete with neutral reference to the actual parliamentary committee website, or that two committees on National defence, at the house of commons and Senate level reached the conclusion Obelix is needed, another fact easy to verify independently of the government, then yeah! Sure! Davie is controlling the narrative.

Some, however, would conclude that it is the Trudeau government that is trying to control the narrative when it states, without any supporting facts, the opposite. Especially when that same government is currently refusing to confirm to Parliament, upon repeated demands, the actual expected date of delivery of the two AORs to be built at Seaspan, ignoring the reports from those two Parliament defence committees and more likely than not, pressuring somehow a currently serving admiral into stating an absence of need for Obelix when everybody who has a clue states the opposite.

Just sayin!
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,807
Points
1,260
Chief Engineer said:
Just as I predicted Davie is pulling out all the stops to control the narrative on this. They must be getting pretty desperate.

Chief we see eye to eye on lots of stuff, but your perceived dislike of Davie's product is perplexing. 
 

Stoker

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
283
Points
880
Halifax Tar said:
Chief we see eye to eye on lots of stuff, but your perceived dislike of Davie's product is perplexing.

Yes I don't like them, but I don't preclude they shouldn't be getting more work though if the government deems it a need. I also know plenty about the Davie product that influences my attitude towards them.
 

Stoker

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
283
Points
880
Oldgateboatdriver said:
While you are constantly harping negative comments on Davie at the drop of a hat, you have (that I can recall, and I follow this thread pretty closely) never predicted anything involving "control of the narrative" by Davie (or anybody else for that matter) before.

If by control of the narrative you mean actually pointing out facts, such as statements of the VCDS to a parliamentary committee, complete with neutral reference to the actual parliamentary committee website, or that two committees on National defence, at the house of commons and Senate level reached the conclusion Obelix is needed, another fact easy to verify independently of the government, then yeah! Sure! Davie is controlling the narrative.

Some, however, would conclude that it is the Trudeau government that is trying to control the narrative when it states, without any supporting facts, the opposite. Especially when that same government is currently refusing to confirm to Parliament, upon repeated demands, the actual expected date of delivery of the two AORs to be built at Seaspan, ignoring the reports from those two Parliament defence committees and more likely than not, pressuring somehow a currently serving admiral into stating an absence of need for Obelix when everybody who has a clue states the opposite.

Just sayin!


I didn't say it on this thread at all but on another concerning Davie. Just as some people on here are not Irving fans, I'm not a Davie fan but acknowledge they should still get more work however I don't like their constant maneuvering and publically asking whining how they're not getting Quebec's fair share.

As for controlling the narrative absolutely they are as they are often the source of the story and are continuously making claims in the media to keep the focus on them to garner more work and at this point as predicted seems to have backfired on them for now. The theme for this narrative is either how good they are and how they should get more work, or how Irving and Seaspan are bad and how good a deal they can get the government.

As for the comments by the VCDS who is still before the courts , we have the transport minister, the prime minister and head of the navy recently saying we don't have the requirement for a second Asterix type ship. These comments are in response to comments made by Davie on how they want to provide an unsolicited ship or other unsolicited work to the RCN. If the government and RCN is comfortable with an interim AOR lease with a military rental AOR on the opposite coast out that's their choice. Perhaps there's a reason other than political although I'm sure that that's part of it the RCN don't see a need for another Asterix type ship. They may also be getting tired for the unsolicited bids as I know if I was the government I would be.
 

Oldgateboatdriver

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
308
Points
880
Seen, Chief. And acknowledged. Thanks for the explanation.

Just a few small points: I certainly don't count the PM or the current Transport Minister as knowledgeable on the needs of the Navy. BTW, minister Garneau ceased to have any relations with the RCN before the Navy ever got it's first Halifax frigate. He is "steamer" era, an era when we had three AOR's and a single focus on ASW in the Atlantic, with few overseas deployment outside NATO.

Also, the VCDS who made the original point before the Senate committee was not the one in court, but his relief - an Army general.

Also, if any one here is interested in pushing the "oversea's yards are so much better" mantra, I suggest you follow the story of the Quebec ferry F. A. Gauthier. It is a brand new (launched in 2015) build from Fincantierri, in Italy, and has never worked properly from the start, with constant engine/gearing/control systems breakdowns. It has now been removed from service indefinitely in order to figure out what is wrong and try and fix it. The government of Quebec had to make an urgent acquisition of an old, smaller ferry from Nfld. And BTW, it had been certified for service by Lloyd's surveyors.  ;)
 

Stoker

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
283
Points
880
Oldgateboatdriver said:
Seen, Chief. And acknowledged. Thanks for the explanation.

Just a few small points: I certainly don't count the PM or the current Transport Minister as knowledgeable on the needs of the Navy. BTW, minister Garneau ceased to have any relations with the RCN before the Navy ever got it's first Halifax frigate. He is "steamer" era, an era when we had three AOR's and a single focus on ASW in the Atlantic, with few overseas deployment outside NATO.

Also, the VCDS who made the original point before the Senate committee was not the one in court, but his relief - an Army general.

Also, if any one here is interested in pushing the "oversea's yards are so much better" mantra, I suggest you follow the story of the Quebec ferry F. A. Gauthier. It is a brand new (launched in 2015) build from Fincantierri, in Italy, and has never worked properly from the start, with constant engine/gearing/control systems breakdowns. It has now been removed from service indefinitely in order to figure out what is wrong and try and fix it. The government of Quebec had to make an urgent acquisition of an old, smaller ferry from Nfld. And BTW, it had been certified for service by Lloyd's surveyors.  ;)

You know you may be surprised but I do think personally we do have the need for a second AOR right now.  Regardless of my opinion, I follow what the RCN and government sets as our requirement's. I know Marc Garneau's knowledge as a CSE on HMCS Algonquin in 74 and his retirement from the Navy in 89 is from another era and he's a politician but still knows more about the subject than most.

As you have brought up overseas yards subject, Newfoundland has also bought offshore and has had problems with their ferries very similar to what you have mentioned. I think any yard could have the potential of having problems with designs and that goes for naval vessels as well as we often don't hear about those problems. I still like the offshore option that even though there probably will be issues to be addressed, its still cheaper and faster. As for the Lloyd's surveyors comment its interesting to note that the CCG is moving away from using them and are moving towards ABS to do their surveys.

 

FSTO

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,033
Points
1,090
I may get into some trouble over this comment but whatever.

Our military leaders are good tactical thinkers but since our military history has been one of subservience to our colonial masters (France, then the UK and now the USA) we have left the hard work of strategic thinking to them. Coupled with a civilian political culture of providing the barest minimum of funding to stop the Americans from setting up bases in Canada its no wonder we turn ourselves into pretzels debating about having an AOR constantly available on each coast. Coasts that are separated by a couple of weeks of sailing! 

A mature, strategically thinking nation would have long ago decided that at a minimum we would have 6 AOR's in order to have one at sea or ready to sail on each coast. I could go on and on but everyone here knows my feelings about our defence needs.

Garneau and Leslie have both sold their souls to the political gods of Butts and Tedford (PMO office leaders who really run this government) so I really discount any public statements those two have towards defence. In defence of CRCN, I have a feeling that he was told in no uncertain terms to tow the Government line or the RCN will suffer the consequences.

Finally, events with China, India, UN (Mali) have proved to me that this PMO is so over their head when it comes to international relations that I'm surprised that any country's leaders answer the phone when they see Canada on the call display.
 

NavyShooter

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,007
Points
1,090
I saw the (still unfinished) Davie Product when it arrived in Halifax.  I was concerned about the public 'it's done and ready to sail' vs the visible to me 'holy cow there seems like a lot of work to do still'.

That said, the work got finished, the ship left the wall, and from what I've seen and heard, seems to have done OK. 

Looking at the other side of the coin, I have personal experience with ISI's standard of work having taken several ships through their 'tender' care, and based on things I have seen with my own eyes, I use the words 'wilful and deliberate' in describing some of their output.  I will also note that we have to strip pretty much every piece of visible brass off the ships we send in, otherwise it 'disappears' - fire hoses with ends cut off, bulkheads with talley plates missing, etc. 

I have very little faith in ISI products. 

I have slightly more faith in the limited products I have seen from Davie.

In my opinion, both are out looking for the dollars...it's all about the money.  *shrug*  they are both businesses, and that's what they do.  Nature of the beast I guess.

To consider, I was offered a job at ISI a couple of years back....they came looking for me...I responded with "I have too much pride in myself to have my name on the same business card as the word Irving."

Your individual opinions may vary based upon your own experiences and knowledge, however, I have my own based upon my experience.  I suspect we won't see eye to eye, and that's OK.  I'm not looking to change your mind.

NS
 

Czech_pivo

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,503
Points
1,140
FSTO said:
I may get into some trouble over this comment but whatever.

Our military leaders are good tactical thinkers but since our military history has been one of subservience to our colonial masters (France, then the UK and now the USA) we have left the hard work of strategic thinking to them. Coupled with a civilian political culture of providing the barest minimum of funding to stop the Americans from setting up bases in Canada its no wonder we turn ourselves into pretzels debating about having an AOR constantly available on each coast. Coasts that are separated by a couple of weeks of sailing! 

A mature, strategically thinking nation would have long ago decided that at a minimum we would have 6 AOR's in order to have one at sea or ready to sail on each coast. I could go on and on but everyone here knows my feelings about our defence needs.

Garneau and Leslie have both sold their souls to the political gods of Butts and Tedford (PMO office leaders who really run this government) so I really discount any public statements those two have towards defence. In defence of CRCN, I have a feeling that he was told in no uncertain terms to tow the Government line or the RCN will suffer the consequences.

Finally, events with China, India, UN (Mali) have proved to me that this PMO is so over their head when it comes to international relations that I'm surprised that any country's leaders answer the phone when they see Canada on the call display.

Spot on - now just remember all of this when it comes time to vote later this year.....
 

Dale Denton

Full Member
Reaction score
123
Points
580
I'm curious as to the reason of 'why not' buy another interim AOR. Trying to think bigger picture.

There seems to be a shift of thoughts around potential future conflicts towards them being state v. state. I.E the building threat of Russia and China vs the talk of terrorism in the recent past, Correct?

These 2 countries (among many others) are capable of sinking naval ships, Correct?

So what happens when you build the absolute minimum (or just below it in this matter), and just 1 of our 3 AORs (assuming all 3 will be in service at the same time) is sunk?

We lack the capability to build another as fast as we did in WW2, and a replacement would cost hundreds of millions and require a complete re-prioritization of any build schedule.

Or is there a thought somewhere that this is not possible?
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
945
Points
1,090
Not only that, but in any future state vs state conflict, just being able to provide an AOR to allied ships would be a good start in showing support for our allies.  Similar to the air force providing tanker support in a conflict where we don't have any fighters - a useful contribution that enables the assets in theatre to function.

That, and the fact that the RCN effectively has 2 fleets - one on each coast - means one of those fleets doesn't have an AOR as it currently stands.  An interim AOR would ensure both fleets have tanker support, and the RCN has one available if one needs repairs/refits.


With the exception of seeing a contract signed for FWSAR, and I don't see the current government really doing much of anything substantial in the defense portfolio.  The only reason we have a SINGLE AOR now is because a true former leader in the RCN pushed ahead & made sure the contract signed by the previous government didn't get cancelled, and he's been thrown to the wolves for it.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,153
Points
1,060
Exactly, offering AOR's seems to be a perfect fit for the Liberal world concept, high value, low political risk, along with the ability to support peacekeeping, humanitarian and disaster relief. It's a PR bonanza and using merchant sailors actually strengthens our whole maritime system and adds to the career stream for ships pilots and Deck/Engineering officers.

Incredibly short sighted   
 

FSTO

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,033
Points
1,090
Colin P said:
Exactly, offering AOR's seems to be a perfect fit for the Liberal world concept, high value, low political risk, along with the ability to support peacekeeping, humanitarian and disaster relief. It's a PR bonanza and using merchant sailors actually strengthens our whole maritime system and adds to the career stream for ships pilots and Deck/Engineering officers.

Incredibly short sighted 

LPC sight of eye ends at the Lachine Rapids to the east and the Niagara escarpment to the west.
 

FSTO

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,033
Points
1,090
Oldgateboatdriver said:
Two spots where water abounds ... yet they don't get that Canada is a maritime nation.  :deadhorse:
I shouldn't single out the Liberals. The Tories, NDP, Greens, PPC and pretty much all of our media don't get it either.
 
Top