Robert Farley of Information Dissemination is doing his GvG thing (meaning giving info on the European naval defense industry) and passing this startling bit of news...
Canada has expressed a "strong interest" for the purchase of two vessels of the Manufacturer's DCNS Mistral class, read The Tribune Friday.Read his whole post here but if they are buying the Mistral then the US shipbuilding industry along with the US Navy/Marine Corps missed an opportunity to get a close ally to buy our latest and greatest amphibs...
LPD-17 was high on their list, but just too expensive (or so I'm told).
ReplyDeleteAnd of course the LPD-17 construction troubles didn't exactly help.
France is willing to invest heavily in Canadian ship-building/industry (as they do regularly, see their dealings with Brasil and Russia) and that is something the US just cannot match (Congress would go ape).
Weird thing is that Canada was offered the plans for a Rotterdam LPD/Bay LSD(A) hybrid, or to buy the Dutch JSS design and build it locally.
All that was rejected on cost grounds, and now they are buying a more expensive ship(s).
wow...a Rotterdam LPD was turned down? that's just ...weird!
ReplyDeletei wonder if this is form over function...my guess is that they want into the power projection craze and the only way to do that is with an LHA...
lets face it...aircraft carriers should be reclassed as force projection, lha's as power (meaning that an aircraft carrier can bomb the hell outta ya but only an lha can put boots on the ground)...
LPD is too expensive and still too problematic for export:
ReplyDelete"early three years after commissioning, problems persist with this first-in-class vessel. On 27 January 2006, a contract worth over $6 million was awarded to Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding , for the Post-Shakedown Availability of USS San Antonio. Work was expected to be completed by April 2007. On 22 June 2007, Secretary of the Navy Donald C. Winter sent a letter to Northrop Grumman outlining problems with the ship, from leaks to steerage issues, stating, "Twenty-three months after commissioning of LPD 17, the Navy still does not have a mission-capable ship."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_San_Antonio_(LPD-17)?wasRedirected=true#Problems_and_incidents
yeah but the other ships appear to be doing fine. it was first in class and suffered growing pains.
ReplyDeletei know its fashionable to be a critic but they've worked out the issues with these ships.
a little credit to the Navy and the maker might be warranted.
Fair enough. LPD18 seems to have similar issues during INSURV though; not sure if they are isolated events or not.
ReplyDeletethe LPD17 was far to expensive and besides did NOT have enought POL capacity (that's a new gator thing).
ReplyDeleteThe other part is they wanted a design which could be built in Canadian yars but that was a dream too along with no funding for anything north of a used Bay class.
LPS17s are going to be problems for decades to come IMHO
just outta curiosity is their one modern weapons program going on in the US (major weapons program...don't name SDB's or a rifle or some such thing) that you like Leesea?
ReplyDeleteoh and that POL capacity is the stuff of fiction....that was born out of a Canadian fiction for a JSS...
not one other country has bought into that kinda crap and doubt any will.
a dedicated tanker will be far more economical than some adhoc Tanker/Assault Ship/Command Ship
F/A-18EFG
ReplyDeleteF/A-18EFG???
ReplyDeletereally?
in light of the appearance of the J-20? aren't we pouring good money after bad by buying that airplane? is it survivable against the SU-35, SU-30, and MIG-35?
while i think it can easily hold its own against the legacy threats, others aren't so sure....
so do you really want to point that out as a successful program? and why that airplane and not the F-16 block 60? especially if we're talking about legacy aircraft....
Why can't Canadian consider French ship while remaining "Canadian" in your book?
ReplyDeleteWhat a dummy.
ReplyDeleteNot even F15 or F35 can level with latest Sukhoi.
Arguing only for argument's sake
ReplyDeletewhile clinging onto a twisted sense of nationalism,
you have turned into such a blogger version of media personality Sarah Palin.... What a shame.
ooh anonymous.
ReplyDeletehow ya doing buddy.
a simple question was asked of Leesea. i know being a critic is fashionable but you take the cake!
what exactly are you bitter about? oh and clinging to a 'twisted sense of nationalism'????
thats a clownish phrase if i ever heard one. if a person is a citizen of their country then they should be proud. the post simply said that it was a missed opportunity from the US side...i didn't say a thing about the Canadians not being Canadians because they were considering buying the Mistral...
take a chill pill dude. or better yet see a psychiatrist. you need serious help!
P.S I have been discussing such things civily with CASR for years
ReplyDeleteDoes Canada have the littoral/amphib doctrine to use this? Somewhat overkill for humanitarian missions.
ReplyDelete