# $115 million EW upgrade for frigates.



## Underway (19 Aug 2018)

Story at the link... Federal government announces over $115 million to Royal Canadian Navy



> The federal government announced a $115 million investment into the Royal Canadian Navy on Friday morning.
> 
> Defence Minister Harjit S. Sajjan was at the CFB Esquimalt in Greater Victoria to announce two separate investments into the navy’s missile systems.
> 
> ...



I was lucky enough to see some of the results of the MASS trail on VDQ.  I guess they saw something that they liked.  And the RAMSES overhaul was long overdue and in the works for a while.


----------



## winnipegoo7 (19 Aug 2018)

Underway said:
			
		

> I was lucky enough to see some of the results of the MASS trail on VDQ.  I guess they saw something that they liked...


 
Or perhaps they realized 2 launchers aren’t enough to protect a CPF. 

The navy purchased MASS years ago,  2 launchers per frigate. Now they are purchasing a 3rd launcher for every frigate in order to provide 360 degree protection - according to the article. 


Edited to add: German frigates have 4 MASS launchers per ship.


----------



## Underway (20 Aug 2018)

winnipegoo7 said:
			
		

> Or perhaps they realized 2 launchers aren’t enough to protect a CPF.
> 
> The navy purchased MASS years ago,  2 launchers per frigate. Now they are purchasing a 3rd launcher for every frigate in order to provide 360 degree protection - according to the article.
> 
> ...



There's more then just realizing they need more launchers.  There was a significant amount of trails/testing/research by NETE to ensure that a 3rd launcher was what was needed, instead of a different launch pattern or 4 launchers.


----------



## winnipegoo7 (20 Aug 2018)

Underway said:
			
		

> There's more then just realizing they need more launchers.  There was a significant amount of trails/testing/research by NETE to ensure that a 3rd launcher was what was needed, instead of a different launch pattern or 4 launchers.



It was widely believed that 2 launchers would not be enough before FELEX upgrades began. 

German frigates are similar in size to CPFs and they required 4 launchers. So how would 2 launchers be enough for Canada? EW is science, not magic. 

And it shouldn’t take 9 years to do these kinds of trials. MASS was purchase in 2009. When was your VDQ trial?

And isn’t this the kind of stuff the navy should know BEFORE it buys new equipment?


----------



## Underway (20 Aug 2018)

winnipegoo7 said:
			
		

> It was widely believed that 2 launchers would not be enough before FELEX upgrades began.
> 
> German frigates are similar in size to CPFs and they required 4 launchers. So how would 2 launchers be enough for Canada? EW is science, not magic.
> 
> ...



Oh I agree.  The rumour mill states that Rheinmetall recommended 4 launchers.  Someone in the FELEX project cut out two of them.  For cost or space or whatever reason.  The trial was to see if THREE worked properly, as Rheinmetall didn't know.  The system was designed for four.  And thus "science" as you pointed out.

Personal opinion warning///
I think that because the RCN at the time was terrible at showing whether a system works or not the decision for two launchers was made.  Instead of doing modeling to see or even a trial on a single ship with two initially we just said "that looks good".  Data/modeling and demonstrated performance is far more important now (until it isn't).  There are other examples from the FELEX that I could point too that are similar (just not as obvious), that are still getting the kinks worked out.


----------



## winnipegoo7 (20 Aug 2018)

In 2012 I worked in an office with a civilian engineer who programmed softkill systems and he was very opinionated on the 2 launcher purchase. 

His theory was that navy knew it needed 4 launchers, but couldn’t afford 4, so it only bought 2 knowing that they would need to buy more later. 

Ie. buy 2, do trials, “learn” that 2 isn’t enough, and then the gov would have to buy more. 



			
				Underway said:
			
		

> There are other examples from the FELEX that I could point too that are similar (just not as obvious), that are still getting the kinks worked out.



I’m definitely aware of a few.


----------



## Lumber (20 Aug 2018)

Underway said:
			
		

> There are other examples from the FELEX that I could point too that are similar (just not as obvious), that are still getting the kinks worked out.





			
				winnipegoo7 said:
			
		

> I’m definitely aware of a few.



You guys suck!

Share the stories! Inquiring minds needs to know!


----------



## SeaKingTacco (20 Aug 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> You guys suck!
> 
> Share the stories! Inquiring minds needs to know!



Umm. OPSEC?


----------



## winnipegoo7 (20 Aug 2018)

I think all military projects have problems. 

Military projects are often complex and as a result have many issues and teething problems. Some interesting cases are:

- canadianizing the Victoria class
- issues with the Cyclone helicopter
- and I’m sure many more. 

A good read on the complexity of FELEX can be found here:
http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/mdn-dnd/D12-21-82-eng.pdf

“For HCM/FELEX, the challenge of managing the Combat System Integration Performance Specification (CSIPS) was represented by the momentous task of initially synthesizing and consolidating upward of 10,000 requirements. Dedicated focus groups eventually brought this number down to a more manageable, but still substantial, 3680 requirements.”


----------

