Author Topic: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)  (Read 4993 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jollyjacktar

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 118,202
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,013
  • My uncle F/Sgt W.H.S. Buckwell KIA 14/05/43 22YOA
Re: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)
« Reply #75 on: April 01, 2017, 23:26:58 »
tsk, tsk, NS, you're wearing the wrong type of flash gear.  Naughty boy  ;)

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 455,285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,624
Re: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)
« Reply #76 on: April 02, 2017, 08:35:27 »
...and 1970 phoned; they want Tom Selleck's moustache back.   ;)
I even read works I disagree with;  life outside  an ideological echo chamber.

Offline NavyShooter

    Boaty McBoatface!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 168,286
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,607
  • Death from a Bar.....one shot, one Tequilla
Re: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)
« Reply #77 on: April 02, 2017, 12:29:18 »
It's only gotten tackier as it's gotten longer...

Insert disclaimer statement here....

:panzer:

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 35,434
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,389
Re: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)
« Reply #78 on: April 04, 2017, 11:08:42 »
Sorry to be so contrary, but again, I think someone's blowing smoke at you.

NS

In addition, those 11 rounds were fired outside effective range at targets that weren't attacking CHA, weren't closing CHA, and I don't believe even knew CHA was there.

Source: The person who fired these 11 rounds told me all about it multiple times (but, they might not have had a full appreciation of the tactical situation).
“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower


Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline NavyShooter

    Boaty McBoatface!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 168,286
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,607
  • Death from a Bar.....one shot, one Tequilla
Re: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)
« Reply #79 on: April 04, 2017, 11:33:10 »
Ah yes, that person has since been promoted to LS and I believe is now married?

I do believe that they did have a proper appreciation for the 'warning shots' that they fired.  From a range of several miles.

Insert disclaimer statement here....

:panzer:

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 170,295
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,338
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)
« Reply #80 on: April 04, 2017, 12:30:50 »
Careful Gents! This is starting to get entertaining. 

 ;D :pop:
Over, Under, Around or Through.
Anticipating the triumph of Thomas Reid.

"One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don’t know it.”  - James Lovelock

Conservative, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others. [Ambrose Bierce, 1911]

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Let me check my Giveashitometer. Nope, nothing.
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 168,990
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,122
    • Airborne Electronic Sensor Operators - AES OP
Re: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)
« Reply #81 on: April 05, 2017, 16:28:13 »
The Wave glider would be useless without the ability to get sensors below the sonic layer depth.

Then that data has to be transmitted back, which is quite significant.   Who monitors it?  Do we get auto detect software?

People don't like it when you inject stuff like this into conversations! 
The only time you have too much gas is when you're on fire.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 170,295
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,338
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)
« Reply #82 on: April 12, 2017, 15:00:10 »
At various times I have inferred that I am seen as situating the estimate in order to justify consideration of an alternative course of action based on a piece of new kit.

It was with interest that I read this line in the Maritime Engineering Journal edition posted here.

http://navy.ca/forums/index.php/topic,76442.msg1483531.html#msg1483531

Quote
As the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) Project
moves toward implementation, a key criterion
being assessed for selection of a design reference
point is accommodation. While the original Statement of
Requirement (SOR) called for 255 core crew and mission
personnel
, it is now widely accepted that the available hull
designs cannot accommodate this number
. The RCN and
PMO are going through a detailed analysis of assessing
what operational impacts are felt when you start shaving
down the number of personnel in the Watch and
Station Bill.

Bodies 1
Duties 2
Ship 3

It seems peculiar.

Meanwhile, having discovered that nobody is building ships in the 4000 to 6000 tonne range with "core crews" that size, a rethink is/was required - which, I am guessing, led to the Montreal X-Ship Trials

http://www.navy-marine.forces.gc.ca/en/news-operations/news-view.page?doc=hmcs-montreal-begins-first-deployment-as-x-ship/iv3fd860




Over, Under, Around or Through.
Anticipating the triumph of Thomas Reid.

"One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don’t know it.”  - James Lovelock

Conservative, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others. [Ambrose Bierce, 1911]

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Let me check my Giveashitometer. Nope, nothing.
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 168,990
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,122
    • Airborne Electronic Sensor Operators - AES OP
Re: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)
« Reply #83 on: April 13, 2017, 07:47:00 »
Maybe cut some of the fat out of RCN HQs and use those savings and pers for operational billets.  We always seem to be cutting muscle, not fat. 
The only time you have too much gas is when you're on fire.

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 100,145
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,181
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)
« Reply #84 on: April 13, 2017, 08:41:58 »
Compared to everyone else, the RCN HQs are modest.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Let me check my Giveashitometer. Nope, nothing.
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 168,990
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,122
    • Airborne Electronic Sensor Operators - AES OP
Re: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)
« Reply #85 on: April 13, 2017, 09:23:16 »
I didn't realize that, so that's nice to know.  However, if there is any fat, I still think that should be trimmed first.

I know...day dreaming like that is never really productive.   ;D
The only time you have too much gas is when you're on fire.

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 35,434
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,389
Re: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)
« Reply #86 on: April 13, 2017, 09:39:33 »
Compared to everyone else, the RCN HQs are modest.

You're talking about the metaphorical fat right? Not the literal fat?
“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower


Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 100,145
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,181
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)
« Reply #87 on: April 13, 2017, 09:42:03 »
You're talking about the metaphorical fat right? Not the literal fat?

OK- you have me there.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 177,185
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,978
  • Freespeecher
Re: The swarm navy (split from: The Defence Budget)
« Reply #88 on: April 13, 2017, 22:00:26 »
This one's for Chris. The idea of a pykrete carrier may not jell with the "Swarm" idea, but commenter "Goat Guy" suggests that building ships out of cheap materials like ferroconcrete would be just as plausible, and probably much more feasible.

http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2015/04/churchill-pykrete-carrier-would-have.html

Quote
There's something really awesome about the idea of building a gargantuan super-carrier out of a synthetic iceberg. Just kind of breathtaking. Thank, Brian Wang… whilst this may not be “the next big future”, it certainly was “the last big boondoggle”.

Or, to put it differently, when you think about it, what exactly was the big savings that an immense hull made out of iced paper pulp supposed to be? Even in 1942, we were making “ferro-concrete”⁴ out of a common sedimentary rock¹, left-over iron smelting slag² and endless streams of rebar³. It was cheap. Durable. Didn't melt. Did I mention cheap?

 I guess in WW2, there being lots of paper pulp and not so much iron, lots of water, and not so much oil to make cement⁵, big ideas and even bigger budgets, such a contemplation could be explored. All the rest of the iron, concrete, cement, was going into building weapons, roadways, airports, conventional carriers, battleships, destroyers and the endless stream of PT-boats.

 Ice, wood. Lordy.

GoatGuy
 _______
¹ limestone - hydrated calcium carbonate CaCO₂ and dolomite MgCO₂
 ² smelting slag - was found to be remarkably durable for salt-water ferroconcrete.
³ rebar - reinforcement steel circular bar. Made from low-quality steel, but is dirt cheap.
⁴ ferro-concrete - concrete copiously reinforced on all shear axes with rebar³
⁵ cement-making fuel - is almost always either low-sulfur crude oil, nat gas or coke

… because higher levels of sulfur in the burning-fuel exhaust gasses (which for efficiency pass directly thru the clinker-bed of limestone and dolomite) markedly decrease strength of the portland cement thus roasted. Gotta keep the sulphur out.

If one of the main issues with modern military forces is the enormous cost of the actual hardware, then perhaps looking at alternatives to traditional building methods might be another focus of where we can go to increase the numbers of platforms. While casting hulls out of concrete is probably not the way to go, we do live in an age where material science and technology are changing the way we are able to get the job done.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.