Everyone is short of tankers these days. Definitely a market. These two hulls are very capable, and I wonder what INOCEA has in mind for the platforms. They are four steps above Asterix. However Victoria/Upholder has taught us that mothballed British hulls may not be the deal that we think they are. Be nice though if we get a ready made four ship replenishment fleet. We’d lose our shirts though in the contract.
I don't think this was driven by Canada. This seems to be a private initiative aimed at NATO and allies writ large and Canada may be an occasional customer.
Ok, I know INOCEA owns Davies, so I wasnt sure how much this was Canada related. I mean good for them, I'm glad the capability is being preserved, but the way Noah phrased it, it sounded like maybe they did this with the Canadian federal gov in mind. That would have been interesting...
Could it be that the RCN is saying that what we really need is 4 JSS, but barring that, a minimum of 4 RAS ships is needed. Let’s face it, 2 JSS don’t cut the mustard, not with 3 oceans to cover. With just two JSS, we know that over their lifespan, we’ll routinely have just one of them available, and Murphy’s Law says that it’ll be on the wrong coast at the wrong time.
Many years ago I can remember a conversation with a fairly senior naval officer. And it was considered opinion that that what then Marcom really need was a minimum of four AORs and best case was six .
The fiscal state in the UK must be dire if they “mothballed” the two auxiliary vessels. Yes, INOCEA group intent for utilizing these vessels will be interesting.
Everyone is short of tankers these days. Definitely a market. These two hulls are very capable, and I wonder what INOCEA has in mind for the platforms. They are four steps above Asterix. However Victoria/Upholder has taught us that mothballed British hulls may not be the deal that we think they are. Be nice though if we get a ready made four ship replenishment fleet. We’d lose our shirts though in the contract.
Wait, are you saying that INOCEA has purchased these for use for Canada? Or are these going to be hired out to NATO forces in general?
I don't think this was driven by Canada. This seems to be a private initiative aimed at NATO and allies writ large and Canada may be an occasional customer.
Ok, I know INOCEA owns Davies, so I wasnt sure how much this was Canada related. I mean good for them, I'm glad the capability is being preserved, but the way Noah phrased it, it sounded like maybe they did this with the Canadian federal gov in mind. That would have been interesting...
Could it be that the RCN is saying that what we really need is 4 JSS, but barring that, a minimum of 4 RAS ships is needed. Let’s face it, 2 JSS don’t cut the mustard, not with 3 oceans to cover. With just two JSS, we know that over their lifespan, we’ll routinely have just one of them available, and Murphy’s Law says that it’ll be on the wrong coast at the wrong time.
I think it is Inocea/Davie/Federal saying that, not RCN. Granted, this would benefit a lot of navies, not just Canada.
Many years ago I can remember a conversation with a fairly senior naval officer. And it was considered opinion that that what then Marcom really need was a minimum of four AORs and best case was six .
My concern is that Inocea will prevent Canada from forming a real Fleet Auxiliary, so we will be tied to their model of fiscal piracy.
The fiscal state in the UK must be dire if they “mothballed” the two auxiliary vessels. Yes, INOCEA group intent for utilizing these vessels will be interesting.
USN is desperately short of Tankers, so I suspect that is their main target.
Please be for the RCN!