Canadian River Class Destroyer Megathread

[Colin Parkinson]

Some WWII inspired camouflage for the RCD's?

 

[Underway]

I alway thought Seafoam Blue was a paint colour choice that did not work particularly well in the Pacific Ocean, Indian Ocean or Arabian Sea.

I was terrible in the Black Sea and Med. Better in northern lattitudes.

I was doing research for a service paper on paint/coatings and their various signautures, so did some prelim research into the paint.

The current paint scheme was developed by research into North Atlantic Fog (which also looks like North Pacific Fog). The ships just vanish in fog, but given that we're not in the 1960's anymore and the ships missions are further afield than the North Atlantic, well changing things is a good idea.

I think honestly, if it isn't just a model builder choice, it will be a move towards a general purpose colour that works just as well in the Arctic or overseas.

 

[FSTO]

Are you referring to the RCD no longer being that annoying light grey that I always complain about because its so bright to air targets?

I was wondering if that was intentional or just a function of the ship model just using a stock paint colour. You got some inside info on the colour change there FSTO?

DCRN pointed out the colour change. So its happening AFAIK.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I was terrible in the Black Sea and Med. Better in northern lattitudes.

I was doing research for a service paper on paint/coatings and their various signautures, so did some prelim research into the paint.

The current paint scheme was developed by research into North Atlantic Fog (which also looks like North Pacific Fog). The ships just vanish in fog, but given that we're not in the 1960's anymore and the ships missions are further afield than the North Atlantic, well changing things is a good idea.

I think honestly, if it isn't just a model builder choice, it will be a move towards a general purpose colour that works just as well in the Arctic or overseas.

Under certain lighting conditions (first/last light) Canadian ships actually glowed…

 

[NavyShooter]

Redesign of the main mast to match 'sharkfin' has begun....and I see there's a 'step' on the funnel as well that I'm going to have to adjust for too.

 

[Underway]

Redesign of the main mast to match 'sharkfin' has begun....and I see there's a 'step' on the funnel as well that I'm going to have to adjust for too.

I also noticed the aft section where the funnel for the DG's likely is (and where the RAM is located) look wider than the other variants. Might be wrong on that, just might be an optical illusion after they installed different equipment there.

 

[Rainbow1910]

Are you referring to the RCD no longer being that annoying light grey that I always complain about because its so bright to air targets?

I was wondering if that was intentional or just a function of the ship model just using a stock paint colour. You got some inside info on the colour change there FSTO?

I would be immensely disappointed by switching to some generic haze gray paint scheme, given how Canada has its own very distinct paint colour not matched by anybody abroad. I'm also a bit skeptical due to the fact the exact shade of the paint seems to shift a lot to the eye in various lighting conditions, so it can look very different in different conditions and to different people.

 

[Underway]

I would be immensely disappointed by switching to some generic haze gray paint scheme, given how Canada has its own very distinct paint colour not matched by anybody abroad. I'm also a bit skeptical due to the fact the exact shade of the paint seems to shift a lot to the eye in various lighting conditions, so it can look very different in different conditions and to different people.

Its time to change things. That paint scheme in current drone warfare conditions is a danger. It was designed to hide from close range submarine observation in fog. We are now looking at long range IR/digital observation from air and surface. The colour needs to recognize that.

I do appreciate the uniqueness of the colour and place in history. The haze grey on US ships is darker than that one though. That colour looks closer to the UK grey.

 

[NavyShooter]

Item of note - I have realized that I don't actually need to re-print the entire ship to adjust the superstructure....I can reprint the superstructure alone and it'll fit to the existing hull.

I'm going to carry on with the current superstructure version to get this model in the pond, and will work in the background to get the superstructure looking more 'right' and then I can swap that onto the existing hull.

 

[Cloud Cover]

A useful (and apparently now battle proven) addition to the Mk 38 Mod 4 30 mm mount that can be fitted quickly if needed at a cost of approx 1.6M USD$ to modify the mount would be the LMM.

The LMM (Martlet Missile) can take out aerial and surface drones at a range beyond the 30mm, adding another extended short range defence without resorting to the much higher cost of a RAM or ESSM missile. (Approx 35K USD$).

The mount is both remote and local controlled. The Martlet missile can be guided in flight by the same FCS as the gun mount, switch targets, and follow new targets. If the missile misses a target, the same won’t will continue to track and engage with gunfire when target crosses into effective range.

MSI-DS SEAHAWK SIGMA - MSI Defence Systems US LLC

Based upon the proven SEAHAWK mounting, the SIGMA upgrade offers a unique enhancement to our family of 30mm weapon systems. SEAHAWK SIGMA integrates the Thales Lightweight Multi-role Missile (LMM) onto the mount, providing capability to defeat air and surface targets up to approximately 6km...

msi-defencesystemsus.com

Very interestingly this missile can launch from a ship, helicopter or ground vehicle and has been used the past month by British and other forces in Cyprus, Jordan, UAE and Kuwait.
Ukraine utilizes this missile with excellent results.

So could theoretically an RCD have 6 collapsing layers of hard kill self defence:

1. ESSM - range ~ 40km ++
2. 5”54 NG - range ~ 20 km
3. RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM)- range ~9 km +
4. LMM - range ~ 6 km
5. Mk 38 30mm ~ 3 km
6. NRWS .50 cal ~ 2 km

 

[Underway]

The best quote in the RCD today I read was that "this will likely be the best General Purpose Ship in NATO" given its current configuration. It won't be the best AAW ship, it won't be the best ASuW ship, it might be right up there with the UK T26 for the best ASW ship.

 

[suffolkowner]

The best quote in the RCD today I read was that "this will likely be the best General Purpose Ship in NATO" given its current configuration. It won't be the best AAW ship, it won't be the best ASuW ship, it might be right up there with the UK T26 for the best ASW ship.

Is there a reason for the three variants to differ on ASW? Thales vs Ultra mission kit?

 

[NavyShooter]

OK....here's a bit of puttering around in CAD. Gen 1, Gen 2 and Gen 3 - I'm reasonably OK with how #3 looks. Details to add, but I think I've got the essence of the 'shark fin'.

 

[Underway]

OK....here's a bit of puttering around in CAD. Gen 1, Gen 2 and Gen 3 - I'm reasonably OK with how #3 looks. Details to add, but I think I've got the essence of the 'shark fin'.


View attachment 99253

View attachment 99254

The top looks about the same beam as the post and about three times as long as the post. So more narrow is my recommendation. But its very very close.

I love your image of the successive generations of the mast. Mast design is the hardest part of a warship I think these days. I'm impressed that they managed to find essentially a combined mast design that looks like it will work.

 

[NavyShooter]

A bit shaved off - I think this one's almost good to go.

She's a bit more streamlined.

 

[Swampbuggy]

A useful (and apparently now battle proven) addition to the Mk 38 Mod 4 30 mm mount that can be fitted quickly if needed at a cost of approx 1.6M USD$ to modify the mount would be the LMM.

The LMM (Martlet Missile) can take out aerial and surface drones at a range beyond the 30mm, adding another extended short range defence without resorting to the much higher cost of a RAM or ESSM missile. (Approx 35K USD$).

The mount is both remote and local controlled. The Martlet missile can be guided in flight by the same FCS as the gun mount, switch targets, and follow new targets. If the missile misses a target, the same won’t will continue to track and engage with gunfire when target crosses into effective range.

MSI-DS SEAHAWK SIGMA - MSI Defence Systems US LLC

Based upon the proven SEAHAWK mounting, the SIGMA upgrade offers a unique enhancement to our family of 30mm weapon systems. SEAHAWK SIGMA integrates the Thales Lightweight Multi-role Missile (LMM) onto the mount, providing capability to defeat air and surface targets up to approximately 6km...

msi-defencesystemsus.com

Very interestingly this missile can launch from a ship, helicopter or ground vehicle and has been used the past month by British and other forces in Cyprus, Jordan, UAE and Kuwait.
Ukraine utilizes this missile with excellent results.

So could theoretically an RCD have 6 collapsing layers of hard kill self defence:

1. ESSM - range ~ 40km ++
2. 5”54 NG - range ~ 20 km
3. RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM)- range ~9 km +
4. LMM - range ~ 6 km
5. Mk 38 30mm ~ 3 km
6. NRWS .50 cal ~ 2 km

It gets me thinking about about how two platforms working together might deal with these kind of airborne threats. The first task force that an RCD might lead would likely have 2 HALIFAX class as well. How effective is the high fire rate 57 and the phalanx at dealing with drones? Could be that the two vessel classes complement each other well in these kinds of situations.

 

[IKnowNothing]

The best quote in the RCD today I read was that "this will likely be the best General Purpose Ship in NATO" given its current configuration. It won't be the best AAW ship, it won't be the best ASuW ship, it might be right up there with the UK T26 for the best ASW ship.

I'm going to struggle to articulate this and it might be silly- keep in mind- only naval exposure is TCU and this board.

Following along with the recent pages of this thread, and the emphasis on (relatively) close in defense in both soft and hard kill systems. Say we got the LMM upgrade.
12x SM-2's + 48xESSM's + 21 RAMs + 10 LMM's, not counting the 5" and 30mm's, or soft kill systems and ECM, that's 91 missile based defensive hard kill opportunities.

Scale that to a TG of 3 Rivers, that's 273. That same task group has only 24 NSM's. That's a crazy ratio. Even at a 25% defensive success rate that suggests you need an offensive ratio of 3:1 to reasonably expect hits. (again ignoring guns, softkill and ECM)

Am I out to lunch inferring that the defensive evolution in response to land based swarming is effectively turning conventional open water Peer vs. Peer ASuW into a complete non factor, ditto conventional long range aerial maritime interdiction?

(Edit- i suppose with the aerial assets you could leverage multiple successive sorties to empty magazines and degrade that defensive capability)

 

[Cloud Cover]

“IKnowNothing” - happy to be corrected, but I’m pretty sure all of the T26 variant ships have plans to potentially use ship launched aerial, surface and underwater drones to loiter, carry munition systems and deliver strikes on surface ships and in some cases other targets such as piers, jetty’s, docks, barges, lighters, work platforms, warehouses, barracks, HQs, fuel tanks, ammunition bunkers and the like. (The proverbial “mission bay” warship).

We’ll probably not know much in terms of specifics about those programs for security reasons at least initially, but I gather that is the future. We do know the RCN has tested such machines of war.
Summary: Conduct strikes by remote means, defend against similar strikes delivered by opposing forces.

 

[Underway]

I'm going to struggle to articulate this and it might be silly- keep in mind- only naval exposure is TCU and this board.

Following along with the recent pages of this thread, and the emphasis on (relatively) close in defense in both soft and hard kill systems. Say we got the LMM upgrade.
12x SM-2's + 48xESSM's + 21 RAMs + 10 LMM's, not counting the 5" and 30mm's, or soft kill systems and ECM, that's 91 missile based defensive hard kill opportunities.

Scale that to a TG of 3 Rivers, that's 273. That same task group has only 24 NSM's. That's a crazy ratio. Even at a 25% defensive success rate that suggests you need an offensive ratio of 3:1 to reasonably expect hits. (again ignoring guns, softkill and ECM)

The doctrine on ASM usage refers to specific salvo weights when planning engagements that are required to penetrate enemy AAW defences. You need X NSM/Harpoon/whatever per enemy ship you are attacking to ensure a hit.

Am I out to lunch inferring that the defensive evolution in response to land based swarming is effectively turning conventional open water Peer vs. Peer ASuW into a complete non factor, ditto conventional long range aerial maritime interdiction?

(Edit- i suppose with the aerial assets you could leverage multiple successive sorties to empty magazines and degrade that defensive capability)

"A ships a fool to fight a fort." ~Nelson

Peer vs Peer ASuW is a rarity honestly since more modern thinking on the use of navies has evolved. The fleet is more valuable just existing than it is fighting other navies in a lot of cases. Read up on the "Fleet in Being" theories.

 

[Kirkhill]

I'm going to struggle to articulate this and it might be silly- keep in mind- only naval exposure is TCU and this board.

Following along with the recent pages of this thread, and the emphasis on (relatively) close in defense in both soft and hard kill systems. Say we got the LMM upgrade.
12x SM-2's + 48xESSM's + 21 RAMs + 10 LMM's, not counting the 5" and 30mm's, or soft kill systems and ECM, that's 91 missile based defensive hard kill opportunities.

Scale that to a TG of 3 Rivers, that's 273. That same task group has only 24 NSM's. That's a crazy ratio. Even at a 25% defensive success rate that suggests you need an offensive ratio of 3:1 to reasonably expect hits. (again ignoring guns, softkill and ECM)

Am I out to lunch inferring that the defensive evolution in response to land based swarming is effectively turning conventional open water Peer vs. Peer ASuW into a complete non factor, ditto conventional long range aerial maritime interdiction?

(Edit- i suppose with the aerial assets you could leverage multiple successive sorties to empty magazines and degrade that defensive capability)

Swap your 12 SM2s for 12 SM6s.
Then you can add them to your 24 NSMs if the situation warrants.

The SM6 range seems to be highly Trumpian. Some place in the 200 to 1000 km range depending on sources and assumptions.

And if you still think the SAM:SSM ratio is still wrong you can always swap some of those ESSMs for a few 1600 km MST Tomahawks.