How do we fix the royal canadian navy /k/? I think we need to

>>32993471
Stop trying to design and build our ships ourselves, and just contract existing designs from the S. Korean or Norwegian shipyards. Then retrofit them to 'Canadian' standards in Canada after they're built. Doing this we could easily afford (in terms of price) a fleet several times larger than we presently have.

>>32993515
I agree with careful research i think the sejong class ddg design is best for canada. We should order them and outfit it with a fuckton of vls and and ram.

>>32993515
>Stop trying to design and build our ships ourselves

The thing is we're not.

We're buying a design and modifying it to Canadian standards while paying out the ass for it to Irving who basically controls all the shipyards capable of any major projects to build the boats at 3x the cost of what others have made em for.

>>32993515
I say they go for those Norwegian frigates that have AEGIS installed on them.

>>32993515

No fuck you retard, this is exactly what causes this problem. YOU kill the native design and ship building skills by doing this.

>>32993471
>How do we fix the royal canadian navy /k/?

Stop electing governmenst that wants to see you left with PT boats and harsh language

>>32993471
Why do you need a larger Navy when you have no seaborne economic lifeline and only the odd fishery to protect? You just want your government to own cool toys YOU will never get to personally use.

No mission means no need to waste money.

>>32993471

Canada shouldn't have a navy at all. Canada should spend their entire military budget on ground forces which can be used to support operations by the USA.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (79KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 1280x720px

>>32994107

No, if you're looking for something to be deliver within cost and good capaiblity you'd pick the German yards.

Something along with the Sachsen-class for AAW and MKS 180 / F-126 for the frigate fleet.

>>32994177
Are those the new ones the Germany Navy is looking at, then I'd say yeah. Go for the new stuff, lord knows they need it.

>>32993471
Good luck with Prime Minister Buttboy in charge.

>>32994155
>encouraging other countries to continue dumping their defense responsibilities on America.
Fuck yourself phamalam
t. American taxpayer

>>32994296
Nigga America should cut its military too

>>32994177

What is the MKS even armed with? Not seen any concrete info.

Looks like a 127mm gun, 2 RAMs, 4 ASMs and a small section for anti-air missiles. Probably some torps.

Like, not bad and all...but not seeing the big deal? What radar is it getting? Does it have a towed sonar?

>>32994342

There's a good number of details here.

https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehrzweckkampfschiff_180&prev=search

But more than enough room for anything that's missing. Modularity is a key feature and not in the LCS way.

File: F313.jpg (47KB, 550x367px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 550x367px

>>32994107
Aren't those frigates spanish tho?

>>32994419

Looks like it's aiming to be a fairly midline ship. Light armament and aimed more at constabulary duties. 127mm, 2 RAM, some ESSM, 4 ASMs. No mentions of torpedoes or any ASW at all though. Kind of a general purpose light frigate but with a heavier tonnage for space, stores and centres of tasks inside it.

Not a bad concept. Kind of had been thinking these were meant to be high end warships though, given the F-125 became such a disappointment.

>>32993471
Australia doesn't have carriers
We have 2 HELICOPTER DOCKS

>>32993515
The frijof Nansen should be classified as destroyers

>>32994531

There really is no difference these days. There's no "ego" in what is and isn't a frigate or destroyer. The terms have mixed so much that they've become pointless in all but specific aids to specific navies.

>>32994508

They're a bit more than that. A very basic look, being able to fit 48 Mk41 puts it quite comfortability in the higher end of things.

Some more details.

https://www.aspi.org.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/26503/Kamerman-The-German-experience-slides.pdf

>>32994508
>given the F-125 became such a disappointment

People get disappointed in the F-125 because they don't understand its role. It's a super long endurance ship for support non-war tasking stuff.

>>32994603

But that very link proves it doesn't. It states that the 48 cell ship is a "no less than" 7,000 ton derivitive of the F-125 for Australia.

The MKS 180 is a ship only around 5,000 tons, and clearly a different design from the one listed as being able to fit 48 Mk41s.

>>32993471
We should have bought those French helicopter carriers meant for the Russians and gotten some F35b's.

>>32994723

Mistral can't use F-35s.

>>32994113
Except we already lost that. Decades of not designing and building our own ships has killed our military shipbuilding industry, trying to resurrect it at this point is about as stupid as trying to resurrect our military aviation industry.

>>32994747
Can't is such a harsh word anon

>>32994155
>Why have a navy at all when you have the longest ocean coastline in the world
Oh, I don't know anon.

>>32994168
Fuck you, if Canada wants to turn over more of their sovereign responsibility to the US then they should be willing to give up something in return....

Fishing rights or land