Royal Canadian Navy to retire Destroyers, AOR
You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site to submit news links.- #1 Benn: "it's unclear when work will start on the vessels or when they'll begin entering service.'
That wording is bothersome. Sad to see these ships go. - #2 saturn_656: Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck
- #3 saturn_656: TorStar gives a slightly different list of ships. They say both damaged destroyers with be retired (Athabaskan stays on) while both AOR's will be paid off.
- #4 DrCaleb: I hear from a friend in Jasper that they are thinking on restarting the HMS Habbakuk project.
(No, not really.
) - #5 bootlegga: Sadly, it's not much of a surprise.
In a few months, it'll be nine years in office for Harper and still not a single hull laid...talk about shameful! - #6 saturn_656: Getting sick of the lack of government action myself. The navy is falling apart and all we're getting is "no comment".
- #7 saturn_656: The PMO made a "feel good" naval announcement yesterday.
http://pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2014/09/18/pm- ... trol-ships
Somehow I feel that the loss of AAW and Command and Control assets will be a bigger story than the name of the first AOPS. Keel yet to be laid. - #8 BartSimpson: At this rate Canada will soon have no more than a gunboat navy.
Hmph, does Canada even have decent gunboats?
- #9 saturn_656: "BartSimpson" said
At this rate Canada will soon have no more than a gunboat navy.
Hmph, does Canada even have decent gunboats?
Without replenishment ships (or AAW/C&C destroyers) we have nil ability to operate independently.
The state of the navy hasn't been this piss poor since the 30's. - #10 saturn_656: Looks like TorStar had it right.
Athabaskan is staying, and AOR 509 and 510 and the rest of the 280's are going. Without replacement. - #11 Jabberwalker: They retired themselves.
I guess it's because Canadian sailors don't take proper care of their gear, eh Winnipegger? ... all of that nonsense about "metal fatigue" and "obsolescence". Why, old Dad's Studebaker is still running just fine, thank you very much, just as it was when you directed the moon landings. - #12 Jabberwalker: "saturn_656" said
At this rate Canada will soon have no more than a gunboat navy.
Hmph, does Canada even have decent gunboats?
Without replenishment ships (or AAW/C&C destroyers) we have nil ability to operate independently.
The state of the navy hasn't been this piss poor since the 30's.
What an ominous analogy. - #13 bootlegga: "saturn_656" said
The PMO made a "feel good" naval announcement yesterday.
http://pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2014/09/18/pm- ... trol-ships
Somehow I feel that the loss of AAW and Command and Control assets will be a bigger story than the name of the first AOPS. Keel yet to be laid.
Who gives a crap what something is named? What a waste of time and effort...
These guys are getting to be at least as bad as the Liberals used to be, announcing and re-announcing crap over and over for years without actually building anything. - #14 saturn_656: "Jabberwalker" said
At this rate Canada will soon have no more than a gunboat navy.
Hmph, does Canada even have decent gunboats?
Without replenishment ships (or AAW/C&C destroyers) we have nil ability to operate independently.
The state of the navy hasn't been this piss poor since the 30's.
What an ominous analogy.
That's not the only thing analogous between now and the 1930's.
We're down to one destroyer, 12 frigates (in varying levels of readiness with some stuck in refit) and 1 maybe 2 combat capable submarines. - #15 Jabberwalker: The current government has been in power long enough to have had replacements on the ways right now. They have truly dropped the ball. There is no excuse for this but incompetent political leadership.
... and I am a Conservative ... a very unhappy one. Maybe I and a few million others like me can become convinced to fire those guys next year.