Re: Navy ties up its fleet

[Drummy]

I know that all you army guys are joking. We all know that the Navy is the Senior Service.  ;D

I know that RN = Real Navy. What did  RCN  stand for.    ;D

Drummy   

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Is the coast guard patrolling on the atlantic right now?  I know this has probably come up before but why not arm the coastguard to do fishery patrols and some constabular duties-they are out there anyway.  Or is hiring a couple thousand rcmp officers to serve exclusively on coastguard ships a better idea? 

look up what the CCG does and their capabilities. There are several threads on it now.

 

[Nfld Sapper]

I know that RN = Real Navy. What did  RCN  stand for.    ;D

Drummy   

RCN = Real Cr**y Navy  ;D

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

I know.... but figuratively,  after having been beached, anything going out is a sortie of sorts.

Um just a point of order. We in the Navy don't like to use the term "beached" or "grounded" An Army officer said to me today" I hear you guys are grounded!" Those terms indicate that we are no longer floating but rather have run aground and court martials and keel haulings will ensue. "Tied up,"  is the preferred term. 

 

[geo]

Ahhhhhh
So... tie her up, lock her up and throw away the key?

 

[MarkOttawa]

Do you doubt there is an agenda?
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/01/do-you-doubt-there-is-agenda.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Cloud Cover]

Do you doubt there is an agenda?
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/01/do-you-doubt-there-is-agenda.html

Mark
Ottawa

Server error.

 

[FredDaHead]

Server error.

Working fine for me.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

RCN = Real Cr**y Navy  ;D

Do you have to be warned again?

 

[CrazyCanuck]

RCN = Real Cr**y Navy  Grin

The RCN was the navy before the merging of the armed forces, I fail to see anything "CR**y" about a navy that kept the lifeline to Britain open during WW2 and had many other accomplishments. Now as a person with a great interest in Canadian Military history I find that rather insulting, and frankly I know some vets that would too.

Edit: Don't mean to apply anything against todays navy, just to me speaking of the RCN is speaking about the navy before the merger

 

[portcullisguy]

Thanks for the information

The Canadian army is definetly older than the navy so maybe "Senior Service" is a carry over from the RN

Yep.

Britain has had a very long connection with the sea (think Drake's privateering, and the defeat of the Spanish Armada, for starters -- no nation could invade Britain without crossing water, no matter how powerful their army was).  Consequently, the navy was the only branch of the military that owed its allegience directly to the Sovereign (it is generally held that Henry VIII created the first serious English navy), whereas the army did not, as it was essentially taken over by Cromwell's parliament following the English Civil War (the "army" was actually made up of both royalist and parliamentary forces, many of them privately funded by wealthy peers of the realm).  This is a very oversimplified explanation, mind you.

So, the RN doesn't take an oath to the Queen (their allegience is assumed ), whereas the army (and since the 1900s, the air force) does.  Or something along those lines.

Following this several-hundred-year tradition, the Royal Navy is known as the "Senior Service" and holds precedence over the army, and the air force (who are last, because they are the most recent invention).

Since our navy was really started off by the Royal Navy, and we have carried on most of the RN's traditions, it is no surprise that the term "Senior Service" is used here, although technically, Canada had its own army before it had its own navy.  Plenty of regiments predate Confederation.  But the RCN, as it was then known as, didn't really get its feet off the ground (and into the water) until around the time of the South African war.

 

[Nfld Sapper]

Do you have to be warned again?

ushup:

 

[warspite]

So from what I've read the navy spends around 350 milion on operations a year (going on memory here). If the government can't budget 350 million for something as basic as operations where in the world is the navy going to get the money for modernization programs let alone for new ships?

 

[FredDaHead]

So from what I've read the navy spends around 350 milion on operations a year (going on memory here). If the government can't budget 350 million for something as basic as operations where in the world is the navy going to get the money for modernization programs let alone for new ships?

Simple: we'll stop going on operations. After all, the Navy isn't important and doesn't actually do anything, so why bother letting the fleet out? Let's just get a few new ships or modernize the ones we have and let them sit in port until we need them.  : Or better yet, let's give all the Navy's budget to the Army so they can buy shiny new things.. maybe make some gucci kit standard issue?

 

[Spartan]

Air Force speaks up as well - O'Connor denies.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/01/18/military-money.html

Canadian air force also faces cash crunch
Last Updated: Thursday, January 18, 2007 | 9:36 PM ET
CBC News
A money crunch in the Canadian military that temporarily suspended a navy mission is also affecting the air force and forcing it to look for places to trim the budget, CBC News has learned.

As the end of fiscal year approaches, the air force faces a shortfall of $28.1 million. It will balance the books by lowering its fuel stocks and putting off what it calls minor projects.

"But I want to emphasize that no aircraft operations will be affected. There'll be no reduction in flying hours. And aircraft will certainly not be sitting on the ground as a result of the over-programming," Capt. Jim Hutcheson, an air force spokesman, said Thursday.

On Wednesday, the navy said it didn't have the money to send HMCS Halifax on a scheduled sovereignty mission off the East Cast.


Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor later announced the Canadian Forces would reallocate up to $5 million so HMCS Halifax could set sail. It is set to head to sea on Monday. That money will come from somewhere else in the Armed Forces' existing budget.

Continue Article

Some military analysts say the root cause of this cash crunch is the mission in Afghanistan, where Canada currently has more than 2,000 troops. Inside the military, some commanders also say the army's commitment in Afghanistan is putting pressure on the other branches of the Armed Forces.

"With the commitment to Afghanistan, Iraq, … we're seeing countries, not only just Canada, but Great Britain, the Americans also, having to make very hard decisions within where they're spending their military bucks," said Rob Huebert of the Institute for Military and Strategic Studies.

But O'Connor rejected that argument.

"The Afghan mission is budgeted quite separately. The air force, army, navy and other elements of the Armed Forces have their budgets each year," he said.

"Afghanistan is managed separately."

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

So from what I've read the navy spends around 350 milion on operations a year (going on memory here). If the government can't budget 350 million for something as basic as operations where in the world is the navy going to get the money for modernization programs let alone for new ships?

Whats your source?

 

[Good2Golf]

Follow the money....and the Business Plans (Level 1s through Level 3s at least.)  This clamouring is actually very hollow.  The variation in monies to which lack of Sea Days and YFR are being attributed is very minor compared to allocated Vote 1 and Vote 5 funding lines from the budget estimates released shortly after last years budget to conduct training and operations.  Frankly, both the Navy and Air Force talking about the lack of monies to conduct operations seems thin at best.  If there was a serious enough lack of money to stop operations, it would have either been A) identified at the previous quarterly cyclical resource reviews for those two services and reported to the VCDS group with plenty of forewarning, or B) the ships would STILL NOT be sailing, and aircraft would be grounded.  Folks who have done ATI's in the past have seen evidence of the Department return funds at fiscal year's end.  That's generally life with business planning for a non-profit organization...in the case of DND, when the fiscal year-end comes, what you didn't spend by 31 March is necessarily returned to the Government coffers.  I would not be surprised to see this occur again, albeit in much smaller quantity than has occurred in the past.  The last three sentences by the Navy's spokeperson seem incredibly contradictory....

Lieut. Gagne said it is common for the navy to plan exercises and patrols whose total cost could exceed the money the navy is allotted at the start of the fiscal year. Additional funding usually rolls in throughout the year, she said.

For example, the Canadian navy's proposed budget for the 2005-2006 fiscal year was approximately $241-million; by year's end, however, the navy had received a total of about $315-million.

"I'm feeling that this is being overblown because it's a process that takes place every year and funding still continues to come in," she said.

"We still have 2? months to juggle funds. Actually, we might not even have to cancel anything."

....well, do you have a problem or not...apparently not.

This should never have been a story, as evidenced by the fact that the ships are sailing.  As the Minister noted, and those who see this happen year after year, deployed operations are funded separately though incremental estimates from TB.

G2G

 

[warspite]

Whats your source?

Article posted by airmich on previous page....
http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=b9c2f53e-fdf7-4c49-afca-27576da42822

And also quoted by Good2Golf in the post prior to this one...

For example, the Canadian navy's proposed budget for the 2005-2006 fiscal year was approximately $241-million; by year's end, however, the navy had received a total of about $315-million.

So the Navy does have money it's just the media blowing this out of proportion? I should have picked up on that :brickwall:

 

[retiredgrunt45]

What a bunch of media "HOGWASH", It must of a been a very slow news day.

Goes to show they'll print anything
 

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I am sure the Navy will have all the fuel tanks topped up prior to March 31st.