August 10, 2020 | International, Naval
David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen, Postmedia News (dpugliese@ottawacitizen.com)
Published: Aug 07 at 6:31 p.m.
Updated: a day ago
The $60 billion price tag of Canada's proposed new fleet of warships will come under the scrutiny of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, who will also examine other less costly similar projects underway in other countries.
The House of Commons government operations committee requested that Parliamentary Budget Officer Yves Giroux examine the cost of the Canadian Surface Combatant project and take a look at the cost of two other types of warships: the FREMM and the Type 31.
PBO spokeswoman Sloane Mask said the analysis would be presented to the committee by Oct. 22. “The analytical work is currently underway,” she added.
Last year the Liberal government signed an initial deal that is expected to lead to the eventual construction of 15 warships in the largest single government purchase in Canadian history. Lockheed Martin offered Canada the Type 26 warship designed by BAE in the United Kingdom. Irving is the prime contractor and the vessels will be built at its east coast shipyard.
Construction of the first ship isn't expected to begin until the early 2020s.
But the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) program has already faced rising costs. In 2008, the then-Conservative government estimated the project would cost roughly $26 billion. But in 2015, Vice-Admiral Mark Norman, then commander of the navy, voiced concern that taxpayers may not have been given all the information about the program, publicly predicting the cost for the warships alone would approach $30 billion.
The overall project is currently estimated to cost around $60 billion. “Approximately one-half of the CSC build cost is comprised of labour in the (Irving) Halifax yard and materials,” according to federal government documents obtained by this newspaper through the Access to Information law.
But some members of parliament and industry representatives have privately questioned whether the CSC cost is too high. There have been suggestions that Canada could dump the Type 26 design and go for a cheaper alternative since the CSC project is still in early stages and costs to withdraw could be covered by savings from a less expensive ship.
Canada had already been pitched on alternatives. In December 2017, the French and Italian governments proposed a plan in which Canada could build the FREMM frigate at Irving. Those governments offered to guarantee the cost of the 15 ships at a fixed $30 billion, but that was rejected by the Canadian government.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Navy selected the FREMM design for its newest fleet of warships. The estimated cost is around $1.3 billion per ship.
The other type of warship the PBO will look at is the Type 31, which is to be built for the Royal Navy in the United Kingdom. Those ships are to cost less than $500 million each.
In 2017, then Parliamentary Budget Officer Jean-Denis Fréchette estimated the CSC program would cost $61.82 billion.
The entry of the BAE Type 26 warship in the Canadian competition was controversial from the start and sparked complaints that the procurement process was skewed to favour that vessel. Previously the Liberal government had said only mature existing designs or designs of ships already in service with other navies would be accepted on the grounds they could be built faster and would be less risky. Unproven designs can face challenges if problems are found once the vessel is in the water and operating.
But the criteria was changed and the government and Irving accepted the BAE design, though at the time it existed only on the drawing board. Construction began on the first Type 26 frigate in the summer of 2017 for Britain's Royal Navy.
Copyright Postmedia Network Inc., 2020
September 7, 2022 | International, Aerospace
St. Louis, September 6, 2022 — Boeing [NYSE: BA] has digitally demonstrated a new open autonomy architecture for MQ-25 that will allow the U.S. Navy to increase mission effectiveness by...
June 17, 2020 | International, Naval
Kiel, Germany – June 15, 2020 - thyssenkrupp Marine Systems, Germany's number three defence company and world market leader in conventional submarines, today presented the results of a pioneering research project on the feasibility, usability, construction and operation of large modular underwater vehicles. The focus was on the MUM project "Modifiable Underwater Mothership", which is funded by the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy and, designed in collaboration by industry and science since 2017, is intended to achieve market readiness in the upcoming years. The presentation was part of the "Maritime Research Programme" whereby the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy supports the development of innovative maritime technologies. Norbert Brackmann, German government coordinator for the maritime industry, was on the shipyard site of thyssenkrupp Marine Systems to experience the progress of the project and the technological innovations already available for further implementation. Norbert Brackmann: "The MUM project fits in very well with our aspiration to technological leadership. The project results show that individual commitment, teamwork, creativity and German engineering skills are an excellent combination for maintaining our technological lead in future markets. Given the challenging economic situation triggered by the Covid-19 pandemic, innovations and the further development of high-tech will pave the way to a successful future. Therefore, we have included provisions in the recently adopted economic stimulus package to provide additional funds for supporting innovation and the Maritime Research Programme." MUM is a modular unmanned underwater system for various applications in the civil maritime industry. Examples include the transport and deployment of payloads, applications in the offshore wind and oil & gas industries as well as the exploration of sea areas with difficult access, such as the Arctic ice regions. In order to meet these requirements, a modular structure is envisaged. The system will use electrical power as the main energy source, by implementing a state-of-the-art, emission-free fuel cell. Where necessary, the power supply system is supported by a safe and reliable Li-ion battery module. Independent of wind and weather, MUM can operate 24/7, 365 days a year. Dr. Rolf Wirtz, CEO of thyssenkrupp Marine Systems: "We are the only systems supplier in Germany to offer high-tech solutions for the future. The MUM project will benefit from our many years of expertise in fuel cell and battery technology, underwater vehicles as well as maritime sensors and autonomy software. Our project partners from science and industry complement us to an extraordinary degree!" MUM is to set the new standard for unmanned underwater operations by 2024. Together with the project partners ATLAS ELEKTRONIK, EvoLogics, University of Rostock, TU Berlin, Fraunhofer Institute, German Aerospace Center the Institute for the Protection of Maritime Structures, thyssenkrupp Marine Systems will apply for funding for a MUM large-scale demonstrator as part of the Economic Ministry's Maritime Research Programme. About thyssenkrupp Marine Systems With around 6,000 employees, thyssenkrupp Marine Systems is one of the world's leading marine companies and a systems provider in submarine and surface shipbuilding as well as maritime electronics and security technology. Over 180 years of history and the constant pursuit of improvements are the basis for the company's success in constantly setting new standards. thyssenkrupp Marine Systems offers customized solutions for highly complex challenges in a changing world. The driving forces behind this are the employees of the company, who shape the future of thyssenkrupp Marine Systems with passion and commitment every day. More information at www.thyssenkrupp-marinesystems.com View source version on TKMS: https://www.thyssenkrupp-marinesystems.com/en/press-releases/d/uid-83d2fdf9-2be9-ff94-f057-680ff2ecf365.html
February 17, 2021 | International, Aerospace
By: Tom Kington ROME — First there was the video from Libya of a Turkish drone destroying a Russian Pantsir missile defense system. Next came the veteran S-300 air defense system — also Russian — being taken out in Nagorno-Karabakh by an Israeli-built Harop loitering munition. In the conflicts in Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh last year, unmanned platforms often made short work of the ground-based systems designed to neutralize them, paving the way for easy attacks on vulnerable troops. What is more, experts say, is that the balance of power between drones and air defense systems is shaping up to be a key to global wars in the near future. “Libya, Nagorno-Karabakh and also Syria have just showed us that if a fielded force cannot protect its airspace, then the large scale use of UAVs can make life extremely dangerous,” said Justin Bronk, an air force research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute in England. Turkey's Bayraktar TB2 armed drone grabbed the headlines during the Libya conflict last year, which saw Turkey deploy the platform to defend the U.N.-backed Tripoli government against strongman Khalifa Hifter, who relied on Russian Pantsir systems. Able to fire their Roketsan munitions from outside the range of the Russian systems, the TB2s scored hits, helping stop Hifter's advance. “Turkey also sent in engineers who improved the software of the drones on the fly, while there was no similar learning curve with the Chinese UAVs operated by the UAE to assist Hifter,” said Jalel Harchaoui at the Switzerland-based Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime. “The bold and effective use of TB2s in Nagorno-Karabakh in October was made possible by the previous success in Libya,” he added. An enclave belonging to Azerbaijan but governed by breakaway ethnic Armenians, Nagorno-Karabakh has been a flashpoint between Azerbaijan and Armenia for years. It exploded in a brief and bloody war between September and November. Turkey, which backed Azerbaijan, reportedly sent in UAV trainers ahead of the conflict. TB2s alongside Israeli loitering munitions were soon racking up successes, with Dutch warfare research group Oryx reporting 134 Armenian tanks destroyed compared to 22 lost by Azerbaijan. “Turkey built up its UAV expertise after leasing Israeli UAVs, then put that expertise to use building its own after frustrations over the limits placed on its use of the Israeli systems,” Bronk said. “The TB2 has a similar aerodynamic profile to the Heron, while the Turkish Anka UAV is similar to the Hermes 450.” Manufacturer Bayraktar has sold the TB2 to Qatar and Ukraine, while Serbia is eyeing a purchase, raising the TB2′s profile as a competitor to the Chinese Wing Loong II, 50 of which have been exported. “China and Turkey are vying for sales, which begs the question: Why doesn't Russia have the equivalent of a TB2 to sell? I am very surprised they are almost absent in this market,” Harchaoui said. The drone's contribution to the hostilities in Nagorno-Karabakh came with a price, as Canada suspended arms exports to Turkey amid claims the TB2 contained Canadian parts, while a U.K. firm supplying parts to the drone also canceled its contract. A number of nations, including the U.K., are meanwhile beefing up their defenses for ground forces, said Bronk. “In light of this threat, the British Army has recently ordered a short/medium-range [surface-to-air missile] system called Sky Sabre. If deployed forward in significant numbers, it should dramatically reduce the Army's vulnerability to both surveillance and attack by hostile UAVs in situations where friendly air cover is unavailable,” he said. Drones are not, however, invulnerable, he added. “U.S. and British Reapers and Predators in Syria had lots of problems with Russian electronic warfare. Since the Reaper can be targeted, you can imagine that less sophisticated platforms can be more easily affected,” he said. Bronk expects that more militaries will spend more money on air defense to balance out the drone threat — “particularly countries which don't have strong air forces.” “One option is the Russian SA-17 system, which has a 75-kilometer range compared to the 10 kilometers of TB2 missiles, or the cheaper and more contained SA-15 with a 10-kilometer range. Western products include the [National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System] NASAMS, which already helps to defend Washington, D.C., with a roughly 15-kilometer range and the NASAMS 2 with a 30- to 40-kilometer range,” he said. Peter Roberts, the director of military sciences at the Royal United Services Institute, said the world is waking up to the reality of modern warfare. “For a while there was the romantic view that either drones or tanks or missiles would win wars on their own,” he said. “There is no silver bullet on the battlefield, and this is an era which is rediscovering that.” Roberts added that urban warfare is also undergoing a revival, as is the art of deception in war. “Whether it's the Russians in Ukraine or the Iranians, the use of decoys is back — something we once knew about, then forgot in the 1990s.” The world is also returning to an era of proxy wars, he said, from Libya to Nagorno-Karabakh to Yemen. “That means wars fought on the edge of great powers using mercenaries and sponsored guerilla groups and insurgents,” he said. “It also means more sophisticated weapons in the hands of smaller, nonstate groups like the Houthis in Yemen using cruise and ballistic missiles and drones. It is potentially very nasty.” https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2021/02/15/the-drone-defense-dilemma-how-unmanned-aircraft-are-redrawing-battle-lines/