Canada New AOPS HMCS Max Bernays out of action because of some problems 

Spout on--- The Harper government found their young squaddies driving and dying needlessly in wee ''jeeps''. The Canadians left with Leopards and LAVs. If you bothered you would soon find that under the Mulroney government they were consistently hitting 2.2% GDP. revamped the whole culture. ONE MORE YEAR....

sounds about right. Rather than gradually replace each frigate as it reaches retirement age over the last forty years or so, the money that should have been allocated (which is must less costly) was probably used instead for both parties' re-election funds. The Irving name isn't exactly equated with the word QUALITY in any sense of the word and that especially goes with their road-building operations. This latest debacle was brought to you by the Harper government, not the government of Canada, for the record.

Hit the nail on the head, a tradition that dates back to the Ross rifle debacle. And our WW2 destroyer program, where it basically took the whole war to build HMCS Micmac. The Bombardier Iltis, that cost about four times what the VW version sold for. The Western Star trucks built in Kim Campbell’s riding, that were lemons. The Kingston Class, which are essentially useless little ships. The submarines that decayed in the UK for years, while the government dragged its feet about bringing them to Canada. The CF-5 jet, a useless aircraft. The ridiculous infantry equipment of the 60’s that was made of flimsy webbing and ridiculous velcro, which resulted in soldiers repairing the equipment with green duct tape. The list goes on, the government is more concerned with padding the wallets of their pets (Irving, Bombardier, etc.) than procurement of quality equipment that gives the taxpayer good value for their money. And this applies to all parties. If the NDP ever get in, it’ll be even worse. Their plan is to eliminate the armed forces altogether, and use the money on social programs.

Where did you serve? Because if you didn’t you’re a fvckin idiot.

The mistake you make is think this kind of thing only ever happens to Canada. Look at defense / procurement chatter of any other country (at least those who are allowed to talk about it); same problems and same scandals. Most of them burn even more cash on their corruption bonfires, so whoever said "war is a racket" was onto something.

Embarrassment isn't really a relevant thing, as the word pride is not really a virtue worth worrying about, as it's more of an internalized word that means you care what people think of you. Functionality is more of a concern. We are not out to impress the world with our military but to fulfill a role in a frugal, responsible way. If we didn't have such a large trade deficit, and inefficient, antiquated political system, we'd probably have more funds to perfect our military equipment. I welcome the concept of a multi-party coalition system where the notion of a $40k box of rivets you'd pay $12 in a hardware store for just doesn't exist outside military spending.

Thanks to Harper's foolishness

​@lloydkuepfer1599 it's been going on for decades and decades. Liberals still blaming Harper have an IQ of 4.

I think it's a constant in the universe that most defense projects are always grossly over-inflated by the time something gets paid for. I can't think of a single country that had a purchase come in under or near-budget. It's the defense industry that drives up those costs without any sense of consequence that non-defense industries would have to adhere to under normal business operations in a civilian context.

@@lloydkuepfer1599What did Harper do?

@@lloydkuepfer1599Not any worse than Chretien’s 4 British junk submarines even the Pakistan navy rejected.

I agree. It should be Davies shipyard building them. Much better builders

If you think that is bad, you should see the poor quality paper-thin roads they build in NS and NB.

The military braintruet is now calling the type 26 a river class cruiser, they basically aiming to double its design weight, ...

@@philippelarabie9871 what capacity, it's a ship, lots of companies can crank them out, look at space x blasting off every three days , it didn't even exist 10 years ago...NASA couldn't build Lego tie fighter to save their life....the military industrial complex is a joke....

@@philippelarabie9871 isn't it more a matter of long term profitability? I mean if you're producing military assets, the idea is to sell your products to other countries as well based on the quality and functionality of such equipment. Just look at the current losses in future of exported Russian military equipment (like the Suhkoi helicopters we bought). IT's a business, and if you're going to set up a domestic industry, you have to make good enough products to make the business profitable, like any civilian business would have to abide by, rather than a corrupt system of lobbying we have today.

Copied and screwed up a proven design from the Danes. No relearning was required just do. Of course the Irving hand is firmly in taxpayers pockets with the military braintrust in charge and even cheerleading the waste..

Even calling this glorified coast guard cutter a warship is questionable. Too slow to even escort merchant ships and outgunned by a WW2 Flower class corvette the US admiral or whoever was in command at sea must have been wondering what am I going to do with it?

@@jamesjacobson3966 Okay. Why won't you pony up the money to build a better navy, then? You're quick with the complaints about your own creation Mr/Ms Taxpayer.

AS much as I can agree with you, I can't see that happening somehow. Why do defense companies get a pass on cost overruns where civilian industries have laws regarding safety standards to obey? If this was a car, or plane there would definitely be some major consequences for the manufacturer.

@chamiltonart3319 threatened them with finding another supplier . The only reason they have the contract is they are in Canada and employ many Canadians

@@chamiltonart3319 Because defense contractors can draw that "national security" veil over anything they do, so nobody can say if what you get is fair value or not (unless it is an obvious disaster once in battle). Plus many of the military procurement officers who are sent to assess the worthiness of these proposed systems mysteriously end up with lucrative post-military careers working for those came companies. Crony capitalism, in the business of defending itself.

Ah yes, speaking of jokes, such was the legacy of the most corrupt government in Cdn history, the Harpo, er HArper government. We are still paying dearly to this day for major blunders and corruption under that dear leader's tenure, especially that sneaky trade deal he's shafted us with for 32 years with Chyna, that is a major factor in the inflation rate to this very day. The Chrstien government might be a close 2nd, perhaps, but at least its legacy wasn't producing poor quality military procurements.

Irving seems to be the sponsor of any NS politicians, be they Cons or Libs, because clearly they have their hooks in both. Kind of like how any AB politician must worship at the altar of Big Oil, and contradicting it is the kind of heresy that ends your political career.

@@philippelarabie9871 I could almost agree with you, along with your other posts herein, but .... a setback is one thing, such as a slight delay because of procurement issues during building. The errors, omissions and general incompetent (imho) engineering errors (mentioned in the video) can be hardly called 'setbacks'. We were fortunate that the ship was close to land, and not in the middle of a North Atlantic storm, or frigate in the process of hunting an adversary in a real conflict. One would think that if Canadian industry was trying to 'rebuild their capability' they would put a greater effort in ensuring that their products met or exceeded the specification. That could even engender foreign contracts and sales. Furthermore, regardless of what comes out of Canadian industry, and any associated mistakes and errors that may be found, Canadian industry will not suffer the consequences. They will just keep getting contracts to 'rebuild' their capability, at taxpayer cost. You are absolutely correct in that we lost the capability decades ago, and we will never again be self-sufficient.

Those subs were made in UK, FYI.

omg you should see the roads they build. Total s h y t e. Quality has never been their forte.

Same ones built by Irving back in the late 80's... shake your head.

Are you confused??? What i said is i would expecte our older ships. the Frigates to brake down, not the new ones. Yes they are both built by Irving. 28 year RCN vetern here. You appear to be the one that needs to shake their head/

Well, you see there is an EASTERN Arctic and a WESTERN Arctic. Don't believe me? You think that I'm telling you lies? Look at a map of North America and think about what you see there.

@@PeterLorimer-ji5ut correction South Pacific

We have nothing else to send and that's all they're good for

@@lloydkuepfer1599 if you don't like the Canadian Navy, YOU Canadian Taxpayer is 100% guilty and to blame for the state of it. Thank you for not supporting them with your tax money through the decades, for never making Defence an election issue and thank you Canadian civilian public for not giving a crap ... fast with the criticism, though. Thank you for your non-service

@@PeterS-u3p correction... Hawaii is mid Pacific

Actually, it should be the other way around. We should buy proven off-the-shelf equipment from other countries. Those work. It is when we come up with Canadian only specs that everything turns to a nightmare. I should know, I was an engineer in the Air Force for 35 years and involved in many acquisition projects.

@@stephane8305 So your the cause, invest in your own economy and not the US/Mexican/Chinese! You can buy it when the war does break out.

How dare you equate the word Maritime-Canada to the Irvings. This is simply a corrupt deal from the very corrupt Harpo government. Where would you have us build these ships, in Alberta or something? Give me a break, skippy. You just can't trust a conservative government to make anything right or just.

Agreed. I mean those who aren't Canadian-friendly nations will thrive on this information. *cough. Such is the downside to full transparency.

For those of us who don't speak in acronyms, could you kindly enlighten us to what DEI stands for?

@@chamiltonart3319 no, your to rude

Both the parties that have ever governed have gladly bought into this arcane & entrenched procurement scam, and their record in power is equally sketchy. The blue "tough guy party" and the red "worldly reasonable party" are just STEREOTYPES, and voters should never believe in one or the other. I bet even the orange "care bear" party would be no different if they ever got into power, not that they ever will. The manufactured outrage is part of the politics game, which by the way the CAF military brass are experts at playing. They know every dirty trick for pushing their own agendas, and ultimately getting what they want even when elected leaders tell them "no" - so people should not look at the CAF leaders like they are apolitical innocent little lambs.

Korea is, indeed for a fact, one of the world's finest shipbuilders after all. Unfortunetely if we bought south of the border, the cost overruns would probably be twice as much as the Irvings fleecing us on the price. IT's really got more to do with past governments passing the buck on future procurements and a system of constant, gradual replacement over the last 50 yrs. When you lose domestic shipbuilding industry and have to start over again from scratch, the skilled labourers just don't exist in reality anymore. When you have to import those makers, that drives up the costs immensely!

Income tax revenue from building military equipment should stay in Canada not purchased abroad to no benefit to Canadians.

LOL, I hear those Littoral Combat Ships can be bought second-hand at a price that is almost sane.