By David Dunlop, 28 June 2022
This concept has been bantered about before but deserves a second look for the acquisition of Canadian Polar-class icebreakers and Strategic Sealift Capabilities. The use of the South Korean Christophe De Margerie Arc 7 Ice Class LNG Carrier as a blueprint to build Canada’s CCG John G. Diefenbaker Polar-class icebreakers and possible RCN Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) “Big Honkin’ Ships” has merit and should at least be seriously considered. This class is well suited for high Arctic icebreaking duties and humanitarian assistance/disaster relief response The class has a tonnage of 80,000t with a length of 299m, a beam of 50m and a draft of 11.1m. They can be built in South Korea by DMSE and could be shortened in length by approximately 70 to 140m to meet RCN and CCG requirements and would be built in South Korea at a price of approximately $600M CAD each at 2022 prices. If acquired 'as is' by Canada, these vessels could then be shortened and retrofitted to CCG Polar 7 and RCN Strategic Sealift specifications at Davie Shipyard. These vessels however are only single-screwed and would have to be retrofitted either in South Korea by DMSE or in Davie shipyard to be fitted with two shafts. It would however solve a huge number of issues facing Canada’s CCG and the RCN for polar icebreaker and possible strategic sealift capabilities. We would have to acquire at least 5 of these ice class LNG carriers (2 CCG Polar John G. Diefenbaker-class icebreakers and at least 3 Strategic Sealift LHDs for the RCN). Outfitting them for polar icebreaking and Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD)/HA/DR responses would be challenging however, perhaps not so much with the Polar-class icebreakers, but the LHDs would take a much larger effort ($$). Davie would have to give the LHDs stern-wells and well-decks for landing craft, hovercraft and vehicle-A/C storage along with RO-RO capabilities not to mention a strengthened flight deck and island for helicopter and fixed-wing aircraft operations. Improved engine power generation would also be a requirement, especially for the LHDs (25+kts). But, as we have seen with MV Asterix, this could be done and at considerably lower costs than the CCG John G. Diefenbaker-class (approximately $7.25B CAD at 2021 take-away prices thus far, and Juan Carlos Class LHDs at approximately $6-7B CAD for 3 ships at 2021 take-away prices. Davie Shipyard could easily convert the Christophe De Margerie ice class LNG carriers to facilitate the CCG Polar-class icebreakers and invest in at least 3 LHDs (1 operational unit per coast and one in periodic maintenance). Even at $600M CAD for each Christophe De Margerie Arc 7 ice class LNG carrier, it would still be several times more cost effective than what we are doing or may do in the future. The only concern would be RCN manning of the LHDs. CAF strength would have to increase by at least 3-4,000 personnel in order to make this possible. An interesting concept though for Canada!
6 thoughts on “CCG Polar Icebreaker and Strategic Sealift Concept for Canada: Something to Consider”
I wish people would research these so called “concepts”. While interesting, they are up with the good ideas club that wanted the Minstrel class of ships for the RCN that ignored the cost in maintenance, personnel and ignored the immediate needs of the RCN. In a time when the RCN is watching its pennies for fuel budgets, this concept is not needed or wanted.
Practically speaking, you just can’t chop off a section of an existing design or add a shaftline after the fact without unintentional consequences in ships’ characteristics. Other than Asterix which leveraged an outside shipyard to build a major part of the conversion Davie haven’t done so well in the CG conversions that still aren’t done and over time and budget.
Furthermore if we built these LHDs we would have to buy all the hovercraft, aircraft and like you said have all the trained personnel to crew them, not to mention berth them and eventually dock them. Not to mention building them offshore is not in the spirit of the NSS.
Let’s be concerned about maintaining what we have, growing the RCN of personnel especially technicians, replace aging infrastructure before our future ships are built. When all that’s said and done entertain, this concept and perhaps by then have the doctrine to use these concepts.
Yes, unfortunately in the current environment we may need to look at maintaining the current fleet and capabilities. Another immediate priority is replacing the submarines. However, with Sweden and Finland joining NATO, that could place pressure on us as both are meeting their 2 percent of GDP for defence. I feel we will only see change here with a potential change in government.
David, in your research did you come across the South Korean Dokdo class amphibious assault ship (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dokdo-class_amphibious_assault_ship)? I note it is relatively cheap in comparison to similar type ships. However, I don’t know if the South Koreans are looking to export it.
Yes I have Justin. Another interestiing concept that could work for a Canadian Strategic Sealift Capability (to be built in Canada of course). Cheers!
Your opinion Ted and you are entitled to it however building 2 CCG Polar 7 Icebreakers at $7.25B (and growing at 2021 prices from the PBO) is just insane. Even before the CCG ship build process starts, they will probably reach over $10B. They are getting to be more expensive than the CSC Type 26 Frigate boon-doggle! This article was just my own concept opinion and nothing more. We can’t keep building everything in Canada to entertain “the spirit of the NSS” for everything we do, although that would be nice in a perfect Canadian world, but not very realistic. Davie and/or Seaspan could build these vessels in Canada, once we bought the rights from DMSE and at $600M a copy, not a bad investment. Just something to consider.
I think HMNZS Aotearoa is an interesting option for Canada. It’s too late to ditch the JSS, but a third AOR with better ice capabilities (and ideally a well deck under the flight deck, making it more than just an AOR) could support AOPS and CCG vessels throughout the navigable season.
Hello Andrew. HMNZS Aotearoa looks very much like the MV Asterix that Davie Shipyard re-configured for the RCN as a temporary AOR. Even at 598 ft and a beam of 82 ft 8”, still not at Canada’s LHD requirements. Don’t know if it could be re-configured as an LHD Carrier though by adding another deck plus a top-deck and island for A/C operations. This would probably make her just a bit too top-heavy as well. She might not be long enough though at 568 ft for LHD operations and her beam is only 80 ft with an almost 28 ft draft. She has 2 X Bergen Diesel Engines which indicates she has two shafts (so twin-screwed). Most LHDs have a minimum length of at least 650-750 ft as with the ROC Dokdo class and the Spanish Juan Carlos I Class with beams of well over 100 ft but she does have an “ice-strengthened” hull (a definite + for Arctic Operations). Overall in my opinion not quite what Canada will need for Strategic Sealift and HA/DR Operations. I like your thinking though.