Army.ca Forums

Navy.ca => Ships & Vessels => Topic started by: Karel Doorman on January 09, 2016, 15:32:23

Title: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on January 09, 2016, 15:32:23
First and foremost a good evening to everyone here,i'm new here on the forum(so excuse me if this has been asked earlier)

I!used to be in the RNLAF but not anymore(that was a long time ago,used to be with 3GGW(Guided  Weapons Group)327 sq based in Blomberg Germany(patriots)and was a Stinger shooter)First as Inlisted later(4 yrs)professional,went to the Gulf(Dessert Storm)

My interest always lied with the Navy,howecome?my family(father and uncles where  marines(divers,elitetroopes,etc),so far for introducing myself.  [:D

Here's my question:

Since Canada and us did co develop (or wanted to)a few things ,what i can't understand is why Canada didn't buy the same kit as us(or the Germans for that matter),i mean we worked together on the developement of the APAR,JSS and neither are availeble now for the Canadians,seems weird to me(because we have a same sort of nay(small,with not a lot of money,but sort of similar demands)

What also always surprised me was when you bought the Oberon replacements noone looked at our Walrus(strange because it was considered the most advanced conventional submarine when they came out)great range,stealthy and i might add looked perfect for the Canadian Navy aswell.

So in short you could've had :

-Walrus class subs(that worked,first time right)
-Zeven Provincien Class Frigates/F124 Sachens
-A JSS(or maybe more),Karel Doorman Class
-and for OPV's the Hollands
-Enforcer LPD'S

I mean you started to do things together with us and could have had a very modern(not big) navy

And could've worked together with the replacements(comming ahead)

Hope i didn't offend anyone,just wanted to know why(since Canada has allways been more "european" orientatet then f.i. the USA.(sorry for my spelling in advance. [:p

gr,Walter

Subject title changed ( to be more descriptive of topic ), as per OP. - mm
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: jollyjacktar on January 09, 2016, 15:37:35
Hello and welcome, Walter.

The short answer is political will and it must be built in Canada doctrine.  I agree, no cooperation was opportunity lost for both sides and we will be poorer for it in the long run.
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on January 09, 2016, 15:44:04
Well first let me say th Jolly to your quick respond,Built in Canada ,maybe that was possible(don't know working in tandem with f.i. Damen,Schelde,etc) and for the poorer part i agree we could've worked closely together and "reaped" the benefits.


walter

ps we now face a bow wave in investments(due to postponing new projects here in the Netherlands)for example replacement Walrus,M class,Alkmaaar Class,a new LPD/JSS,etc(so the the "political will"to invest in defence is as "great" or even less over here(i'm actally concerned about the KM,since we were allways a great seafaring nation,now an in the past equall might i add to England,France,Spain,certainly in the past we seem to loose all that)
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: jollyjacktar on January 09, 2016, 15:53:18
There is always hope, Walter, that as doors of opportunity open up we will walk through and take advantage of them.
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Blackadder1916 on January 09, 2016, 16:42:15


What also always surprised me was when you bought the Oberon replacements noone looked at our Walrus(strange because it was considered the most advanced conventional submarine when they came out)great range,stealthy and i might add looked perfect for the Canadian Navy aswell.


We did look at the Walrus class.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/content/hoc/Committee/381/NDDN/Reports/RP1773092/nddnrp01/nddnrp01-e.pdf
Quote
Thus, in the early 1990s, the Navy again found itself looking for a
replacement for its old Oberons. Vice-Admiral (Retired) Peter Cairns, who was the
commander of Maritime Forces Pacific and later commander of the Navy prior to his
retirement in 1994, confirmed in his testimony to the Committee that between 1989
and 1993, the Navy examined many types of conventionally powered submarines
as possible replacements for the Oberons. The candidates included the Walrus
class submarine produced in the Netherlands, the German Type 209 and the
British-made Upholder class then entering service with the Royal Navy. The Navy
favoured submarines with enough range and other capabilities to operate in the
oceans far from their home port rather than those designed more for coastal
defence.

Why did Canada go the route that it did for replacement of the O-boats?  Money.

Quote
The supporters of the acquisition point out that the significant submarine
capability provided by the Upholders was obtained at a fraction of the costs Canada
would have incurred if it had purchased new submarines from a foreign shipyard or
had contracted a Canadian company or a consortium of companies to construct
them in this country. The option chosen by Australia which involved the selection of
a foreign hull design, in this case Swedish, the construction of the new vessels in
Australia, and the design and manufacture by Australian companies of the
electronic and other equipment installed in the submarine, with all the integration
problems this entailed, has often been cited during the Committee’s meetings on the
acquisition. As in Canada, Australia’s acquisition of submarines is very
controversial, but for different reasons. Australia has constructed six new Collins
class submarines at a total cost of over A$5 billion, but the planned expenditures for
2003-2004 included another A$773.7 million for additional work to correct the
shortcomings identified in initial trials and in an Australian government report.36
Indeed, Australia is also receiving help from the U.S. Navy to rectify some of the
problems. Thus, Australia has acquired six new submarines at a cost of almost
A$1 billion each while Canada acquired four relatively new vessels for
$800 million.37 For the advocates of the Upholder acquisition, the low costs of the
purchase compared to the significant sums being paid by Australia and other
countries to build new submarines from scratch highlights the advantages of this
purchase. The problems encountered by the Australians have also been used to
illustrate the potential pitfalls of constructing new submarines and the complexity of
submarine technology, if only to show that Canada’s submarine problems are not
unique.

It is only hindsight that shows the obstacles that resulted from this decision.  At the time, the options were probably either cheap subs or no subs.

Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on January 09, 2016, 17:16:14
Thanks Blackadder,for your response?

All is offcourse in hindsight. 8)

Nobody new at the time that these "things" would be as good as they've shown to be.(Walrus),but on the other hand someone must have known(we've operated subs for more than 100 years now,so(without sounding to proud)we've must have known how to built these things.(remember snorkel?)

gr,walter
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Underway on January 10, 2016, 14:06:00
The APAR window is still open and with the new shipbuilding strategy going on we will most likely pick that for our new main radar (fingers crossed).  As for other things Canada has worked closely with the Dutch in the past for many things regarding military procurement,  you bought our old Chinooks, we bought your old tanks and both armies use the C-7 and C-9, with a few local mods.

But at the end of the day its a political decision regarding purchases for many things.
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: AlexanderM on January 10, 2016, 16:06:38
The APAR window is still open and with the new shipbuilding strategy going on we will most likely pick that for our new main radar (fingers crossed).  As for other things Canada has worked closely with the Dutch in the past for many things regarding military procurement,  you bought our old Chinooks, we bought your old tanks and both armies use the C-7 and C-9, with a few local mods.

But at the end of the day its a political decision regarding purchases for many things.
I would hope so, as we've been a partner on APAR since day one. Also, when they complete the upgrade on the Smart-L the range will be way beyond any other system.
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Chris Pook on January 10, 2016, 16:40:21
Walter

You are asking the same questions many of us have been asking on this site for a long while.

One thing that has always come up, along with the politics, is the money.

You are brilliantly placed to answer a couple of questions.

Can you come up with the real price - as paid out of the Dutch treasury - for each of those vessels you named?  Both capital and operating costs if you can find them.

And the second question is:

I understand that the Dutch decided to stop seeking industrial offsets (kickbacks from suppliers to the national economy) because it was not found to be cost effective.  Can you confirm that and find any relevant government reports?  I remember seeing one a long time back but I lost it.

Cheers, Chris.
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on January 11, 2016, 09:35:39
Walter

You are asking the same questions many of us have been asking on this site for a long while.

One thing that has always come up, along with the politics, is the money.

You are brilliantly placed to answer a couple of questions.

Can you come up with the real price - as paid out of the Dutch treasury - for each of those vessels you named?  Both capital and operating costs if you can find them.

And the second question is:

I understand that the Dutch decided to stop seeking industrial offsets (kickbacks from suppliers to the national economy) because it was not found to be cost effective.  Can you confirm that and find any relevant government reports?  I remember seeing one a long time back but I lost it.

Cheers, Chris.

Well first of all th all for the answers:

And Chris i will look for those numbers(if possible),as for "actively"searching for kick backs,well it's still said that 1 or the other(plane for example)is better for our economy so i think whether or not it's true,they will stay it to the public.
My personal vieuw for example to the F-35 ,is why did we choose such an expensive plane(even co opped in a then non exicisting plane),i mean 140 milj(euros )a pop is ludacrous.

Here are some porjectcosts(no inflacion)

Group Force Commander leiding kan geven aan operaties. De twee andere LCF’n zijn voorbereid voor
deze command & control-faciliteiten.
Een vergelijking van de verschillende projecten, resultaten en projectkosten per land:
Land Projectnaam Aantal Tonnage Lengte In dienst € per stuk
NL LCF 4 6200 144 2002 – 2005 525 miljoen
Spanje F-100 4 6250 147 2002 – 2005 600 miljoen
Duitsland F-124 3 5700 143 2003 – 2006 700 miljoen
Italië Orrizonte 2 5600 153 2007 – 2008 700 miljoen
Frankrijk Horizon 2 5600 153 2008 – 2009 1,35 miljard
GB Type 45 6 8000 153 2009 – 2012 1,2 miljard
De projectkosten zijn niet voor inflatie gecorrigeerd


gr,walter

ps,it's :country-name of project-number-weight-length-year-price per ship.

will look for operating cost(if poss)
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on January 11, 2016, 09:45:27
Hi all,

and found something about the KD(JSS)


Our government by postponing a decision about this vessel made "sure" it costed a lot more then originally planned:


Het schip dat oorspronkelijk zo'n 250 miljoen euro zou kosten, kostte 407,9 miljoen. (it says orig. planned 250 milj.actually,let's say 408 milj.

gr,walter
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Chris Pook on January 11, 2016, 10:47:33
Many thanks Walter.
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on January 11, 2016, 15:16:54
Many thanks Walter.

Here's another one(complete)

Walrus-class subs:procurement (in 1994' money)2 billion for 4,makes 500 million a pop.Latest updates 100 million.(optics,sonar,masts,electronics)

Post   Kosten per jaar (in miljoenen euro's)(costs per annum in million euros)
Personele kosten *   19,65         (personal,375 pplxwages of about 50K euros+alowances)
Jaarlijks onderhoud   10             (yearly maintenance)
Op zee en buitenland **   0,6    (fuell,logistical)at sea and abroad     
Instandhoudingsprogramma ***   2,9  (maintenaceprogrammes) for life of 35 yrs(divided)
Afschrijvingen ****   25                   (depreciation) excl rest worth
Totaal   58,15 miljoen euro
* 375 pers. x middelloon van 50.000 euro plus vaartoelagen
** brandstof, logistiek, etc.
*** bij gemiddelde levensduur ozbt van 35 jaar
**** excl. restwaarde

this number is about 0.83% of total defencebudget(about 7 billion)
every sub has about 50 ppl on board.

gr,walter

ps will search further. ;D
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on January 13, 2016, 01:55:54
We did look at the Walrus class.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/content/hoc/Committee/381/NDDN/Reports/RP1773092/nddnrp01/nddnrp01-e.pdf
Why did Canada go the route that it did for replacement of the O-boats?  Money.

It is only hindsight that shows the obstacles that resulted from this decision.  At the time, the options were probably either cheap subs or no subs.

And sorry if i'm repeating Blackadder,but at the time of our procurement they(Walrus)were about 500 million a pop not 800 for the Upholders,so at the time they were "cheaper"(don't know offcourse what Canada would've had to pay for them,but the logicall thing says,for me,if the series was not 4 but let's say 8 i think they would've been even "cheaper")
-And worked first time around flawlessly,nothing else heard myself(ever since actually),more money saved 
But as said hindsight,just such a shame.(we could've worked on upgrading them together(mony saved again,etc,etc)

Here's a "kicker" from what i've heard(will look into this because it ineterests me too,)the US was also interested in the designplans for the Walrus,but the Dutch wouldn't "fork" them over for zilch.

gr,walter
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Sheep Dog AT on January 13, 2016, 02:11:28
KD could you possibly in the future put a space between letters and brackets. KY jelly(is ok)but not your best option vs. Astroglide (is the cats pyjamas) as many will attest. Same deal with comma's and periods. This is ok,but harder to read. Vs. I'm not trying to be an ***, but I can appreciate people thinking that.
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on January 13, 2016, 03:22:08
KD could you possibly in the future put a space between letters and brackets. KY jelly(is ok)but not your best option vs. Astroglide (is the cats pyjamas) as many will attest. Same deal with comma's and periods. This is ok,but harder to read. Vs. I'm not trying to be an ***, but I can appreciate people thinking that.

Sheep Dog  th and i will try to do that,no probs.

gr,walter
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on January 13, 2016, 16:06:36
Here's a(unbiased )view on the frigates of the world.(seems like we're doing OK,for such a small navy)  [:D

http://defencyclopedia.com/2016/01/02/top-10-most-powerful-frigates-in-the-world/
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Blackadder1916 on January 13, 2016, 18:02:56
And sorry if i'm repeating Blackadder,but at the time of our procurement they(Walrus)were about 500 million a pop not 800 for the Upholders,so at the time they were "cheaper"(don't know offcourse what Canada would've had to pay for them,but the logicall thing says,for me,if the series was not 4 but let's say 8 i think they would've been even "cheaper")

I think you may have misunderstood the link that I provided in my previous post.  While the actual dollar amount may not be as identified in that 2004 parliamentary report, the $800 million figure that they used for the acquisition cost of the used Upholders was for all four boats (i.e. $200 m per sub).  Now compare that to your quoted "$500 million a pop" for the Walrus class (which I understand is for each submarine).  Additionally the original hoped for purchase plan included unique financial arrangements, which, however, did not turn out as planned - though it was probably a good selling point in getting government (and public) approval for the sub replacements.

Quote
financing arrangements included an eight-year, interest-free, lease-to-buy
arrangement, a bartering “of Canadian lease payments on the four submarines for
the costs charged to the U.K. for continued training of British Forces in Canada at
bases in Wainwright, Suffield and Goose Bay” (according to the backgrounder), and
a nominal sum at the end of the lease of one pound Sterling to purchase each
submarine.
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on January 14, 2016, 01:24:56
I think you may have misunderstood the link that I provided in my previous post.  While the actual dollar amount may not be as identified in that 2004 parliamentary report, the $800 million figure that they used for the acquisition cost of the used Upholders was for all four boats (i.e. $200 m per sub).  Now compare that to your quoted "$500 million a pop" for the Walrus class (which I understand is for each submarine).  Additionally the original hoped for purchase plan included unique financial arrangements, which, however, did not turn out as planned - though it was probably a good selling point in getting government (and public) approval for the sub replacements.

Ah OK,as you said i misunderstood you/link.Thought it was 800 million a piece,and the additional financial arrangements.(strong selling tactics from the Brits)
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on February 17, 2016, 02:00:32
Ok Boys and Girls(sorry couldn't help myself   >:D )and i'll keep the updates(Dutch Navy) in this thread,if it's allright for everybody here.

In the next 2.5 months there will be talks in parliament about the replacement of the Walrus class(about 2025),budgetwise, now there is  2.5 Billion for 4 in the kitty (which is way to small a budget)

will be around the 3000 tons,and at least the same capability as the Walrus(diving depth,stealth,etc)but offcourse modernized and when possible better.(AIP is not a wish,because of the latest battery developments)

Maybe an opportunity for Canada as well?

Publieksbijeenkomst over Onderzeedient

http://www.kvmo.nl/nieuws/nieuws-kvmo/item/328-publieksbijeenkomst-over-onderzeedient.html

This was the open public meeting about the sub service.

Let's hope it will all go well(but i think NAVO will push for new subs,at least 4,were/are too important for NAVO)

Whislist of the subservice(AIP is not as important anymore,is about 1 year old)

Wishes Submarine In 2015, the requirements of the navy be drawn to the new submarines. These are called staff requirements. In anticipation summed Group Senior Submarine KTZ Hugo Ammerlaan wishes that he had, during an interview in mid-2014 Marineschepen.nl: (See here for the full article.) - Broadly the same hull as the Walrus class; - Technically at the level of 2025; - As quiet as other submarines in 2025; - Ample space for special forces with their equipment; - More room for crewmembers; - Air Independent Propulsion (besides diesels); - A means / weapon in order also to give a warning (with torpedoes can not, of course); - Weapon against helicopters; - Missile against ships and other targets on the coast (no weapon as Tomahawk); - Upper and underwater drones; - Internet above and below water; - A real galley space and no food or only microwave ovens; - Technology should be compatible with the above-water ships; - Suitable for men and women

The building of these new boats will be  simultaneously with Sweden and Norway.


Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on March 04, 2016, 19:01:00
So the things are heating up(Walrus replacement)this is from the dutch defence forum in wich we discussed the subject;From the Volkskrant part on is my reaction on the matter.
 Opposition fears' second JSF to purchase submarines [/ b]

The intention of Defence to allocate at least 2.5 billion euros for the purchase of four submarines meets with skepticism by several opposition parties in parliament. They fear a repeat of the problems that occurred previously when purchasing the JSF fighter and emphasize that it regards them 'no done deal yet. " But the coalition seems to already.

Defence Spokesman Van Dijk of the SP says a 'déjà vu' burden by having the JSF, "Even when the submarines you see that as a Lower House fait accompli likely to be placed, and also now that you experience the power of the defense lobby . Who first picks up the minister and then the government parties. Formally, the Chamber has it to say, but can you serious doubts put into practice. " His party is still against buying "expensive submarines.

Scepticism also can be heard at the PVV, "You look at these kinds of projects always that the costs of failure in the long run much higher than originally budgeted. It involves a lot of money, but what we get in return? "Asks the spokesperson Roon himself. At GroenLinks spokesman Grashoff lives not only the fear of high costs (a JSF 2 here lies in wait), but also the conviction that the defense money could be better spent than on submarines. He sees Defence prefer to purchase equipment that can be deployed in UN peacekeeping missions, "Then you have very little of this type of toy. D66 assumes a neutral position - spokesman Belhaj insists above all on "the great importance" of early involvement of the Court and the Ministry of Finance. Purpose: To keep the costs under control.
Positive state CDA MP Raymond Knops, once worked in the Air Force, facing the purchase. He is convinced that submarines have "absolutely positive value. Yet he also thinks it is still too early to give all green light, "First is to determine whether there is a real need for it and what the consequences are for the total defense budget.

For Knops is still far from that Dutch companies should get the billion order. "If this is going to cost a billion extra because we allow it to Dutch companies, I think we should not do it." established the need to purchase, the industry must respect him in the waiting room.

The government parties PvdA and VVD is already talk of green light. Labour spokesman Eijsink speaks of a 'good investment' and points to the ability of the boats' operate unnoticed by the coast, for example, to gather information or to enforce an arms embargo. The VVD, which supports in this regard the plans of their own Minister Hennis was not available for comment Friday.

Volkskrant, March 4 2016, 21:24

These reactions were to be expected from the relevant parties. : Glare:

For Mr. Van Dijk:
-deja vu is nonsense, no foreign project (I hope, I think) so you have better control on the whole,.
No Lockheed Martin who at every turn will tell you that the delivery date is postponed, because (again unexpected) problems that can be solved in the next "block" upgrade which carry an extra charge,again: hrmph:
Besides (and my mind)this aircraft is still not up to expectations (demands) that were made by all partners in its development (which were promised so, simply put)
Pepper price is also nonsense (ever so) however pepper now costs  next to nothing: devil: you have to take anyway about 800-1Billion each it is just a "normal" price if you want the "Best"  (we have/had the best , the Walrus, but my opinion is disputed  abroad;)) and we should want the same again (in which a small country can be in BIG, shipbuilding).

For Mr. De Roon:
-We Get  employment / job security in return, outside the fact that we remain in the top of the undersea area in the world (SSK) in terms of range, stealth and intelligense gathering, just to name a few. : P
Plus of course we remain a valued partner in these areas (there are more) for our allies. (You want to play at 't highest level then you got to have something to put on the table, simple)

For Mr. Grashoff
-On what are we going to spend this money (again to care?)
What material for peacekeeping flags for the schools crossing patrols(ok I exaggerate: big-smile:)? But what is used in peacekeeping missions, military equipment so I see no problem.
Besides if, for example (as already often mentioned) shipping To secure route or the ports to the other, it 's very useful if you will have boats (alone' t fact that he / or anyone who wants to disrupt the peace process knows / thinks there may be boats somewhere, ours or someone else will make sure that some plans will not be implemented or at least differently)

For Mr. Knops;
-You're not Going to have vessels of this type being build by someone else, if you're able to "do it yourself (I really hope) outside 's security, I mean you might as well say what you  can do and can not do (will be all  on the site of the foreign company, "look what we have built") Let's keep this particular a netherlands built(as much as possible), outside the fact that if you do this  you give a clear signal in terms of capabillety (most difficult branch of "sport", build submarines)

For my fellow forum mate Seaweed, idd I meant so(this was an answer to replace "real" boats with drones)
Cable on a (very) large role, then a Dutch ship somewhere off the coast (we pretend nothing happened); D
-Dropt From a Hercules ( we flew here by chance: big-smile:) outside 't whether the thing survived the fall
Oh crap another submarine now what? Oh wait, we still have Walrus let's just send these boats, (assuming that they are not replaced by the "real" boats).
-And Idd drones should be used in conjunction with real boats (if possible)

g, walter

ps Netherlands should build such a boat again as the Walrus of which the Americans (again) think "DAMN" We should have build this thing (or be able to) This is not a nonsense remark the US was charmed / impressed with the Walrus ( still are ) and you hear / read on foreign sites, the idea of ​​"we should build them again (ssk) by Rickover put away as" redundant "
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on March 16, 2016, 13:13:00
future Submarine
On Wednesday, March 16th, 2016, the Committee for Defence studies the future of the Dutch submarine. Therefore, the committee will organize a technical briefing and a roundtable with experts from home and abroad.


This was to make out what the benefits are for the Netherlands by having subs.First steps in replacing them.

There were experts from Sweden,Norway,Germany,TNO and Marin(as well some admirals ret.)

When there's more news i will post it here.

gr,walter
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on July 04, 2016, 09:34:54
Well it seems there are more ships to come(replacements)on the horizon,starting the view on what's needed:

MAST Europe 2016: Netherlands, Belgium move together on MCM, frigate replacements

Richard Scott, Amsterdam - IHS Jane's Navy International
22 June 2016
   
Key Points
A new stand-off MCM capability is planned from the mid-2020s
The replacement frigate class will be optimized for ASW
The Netherlands and Belgium are advancing bilateral study and scoping work as they look to collaborate on the replacement of their current M-frigates and Tripartite-class mine-countermeasures (MCM) vessels from the mid-2020s.

While neither programme has yet entered the acquisition phase, the two nations have now begun to define key platform and capability requirements together, Air Commodore Richard Laurijssen, director for weapon systems and agencies in the Netherlands Defence Materiel Organization (DMO), told the MAST Europe 2016 conference in Amsterdam on 21 June.


ps,
Belgium has said it wants 2 new frigates and 6 MCM vessels,hopefully the Netherlands will go for  4 frigates(badly needed,since we have to few ships right now to do all things) and 6 MCM vessels as well
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on November 14, 2016, 10:01:28
So a follow on,on my last post(we've had to wait a while  for it   [Xp

Just on the news here in Belgium,where i live. [:D

Belgium and The Netherlands will replace the M-class and the MCM vessels(tripartite)on a 1 on 1 base,great news. :salute:   (with the hope of mine that maybe there will be 2 extra)

Next the Walrus -class,hope we'll hear something about these vessels(subs)too in the near future,in my mind these will probably be a A-26 variant(bigger,oceangoing,etc)

gr,walter

ps,Belgium allocated 2 billion to do so,which is(in my view)a bit optimistic(but hey,you never know.)
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Colin P on November 14, 2016, 11:23:03
LOL this is what got when i goggled Walrus Class submarine

(https://Army.ca/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnew4.fjcdn.com%2Fpictures%2FComrade_d5e81e_5497312.jpg&hash=22e9707b9346d145ed00468ddc78ca2e)

On a more serious note https://rbth.com/news/2016/11/09/dutch-sub-tried-to-approach-russian-aircraft-carrier-group-in-mediterranean_646383
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on November 14, 2016, 13:06:11
LOL this is what got when i goggled Walrus Class submarine

(https://Army.ca/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnew4.fjcdn.com%2Fpictures%2FComrade_d5e81e_5497312.jpg&hash=22e9707b9346d145ed00468ddc78ca2e)

On a more serious note https://rbth.com/news/2016/11/09/dutch-sub-tried-to-approach-russian-aircraft-carrier-group-in-mediterranean_646383

Yep that's what they look like. [:D

The latter newspost,well still not known(whether it's true or not),i mean the Ruski's are known to make up stories,but it could be true.


(https://Army.ca/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi325.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk390%2FWalterleever%2Fwalrus-class-sub-920-15.jpg&hash=61a5e7994607c4f9316c7fe834f37f9f) (http://s325.photobucket.com/user/Walterleever/media/walrus-class-sub-920-15.jpg.html)

 Patrol submarine
Walrus class submarine

The Walrus class patrol submarines replaced Dolfijn and Potvis classes
 
 
Entered service    1986
Crew    52 men
Diving depth (operational)    450 m
Diving depth (maximum)    620 m
Dimensions and displacement
Length    67.7 m
Beam    8.4 m
Draught    6.6 m
Surfaced displacement    2 390 tons
Submerged displacement    2 740 tons
Propulsion and speed
Surfaced speed    13 knots
Submerged speed    20 knots
Diesel engines    3 x 6 300 hp
Electric motors    1 x 6 910 hp
Armament
Missiles    Sub-Harpoon anti-ship missiles
Torpedoes    4 x 533-mm bow tubes for 20 Mk 48 dual-role torpedoes
Other    up to 40 influence ground mines in place of missiles and torpedoes

 

   Based on the US Navy's teardrop-hulled Barbel class of conventional submarine, the Dutch Zwaardvis and Tijgerhaai of the Zwaardvis class were ordered in the mid-1960s. Because of the requirement to use indigenous Dutch equipment wherever possible, the design was modified to include the placement of all noise-producing machinery on a false deck with spring suspension for silent running. The two boats entered service with the Dutch navy in 1972 and were decommissioned in 1994-95. A buyer is still sought for the boats.

   At the same time the need began to arise to start the design of a new class to replace the boats of the elderly Dolfijn and Potvis classes. The new design evolved as the Walrus class, which was based on the basic hull form of the Zwaardvis with similar dimensions and silhouette but with more automation allowing a significant reduction in the number of crew needed, more modern electronics, X-layout control surfaces and fabrication in the French MAREI high-tensile steel allowing a 50 percent increase in the maximum diving depth.

   The first unit, the Walrus, was laid down in 1979 in Rotterdam (where all the boats were built) for commissioning in 1986 and the Zeeleeuw a year later for service entry in 1987. A further two, the Dolfijn and Bruinvis, were laid down in 1986 and 1988 for commissioning in 1993 and 1994.

   In 1987-88 Taiwan received two Improved Zwaardvis or Hai Lung-class units Hai Lung and Hai Hu. These are planned to carry Hsiung Feng II SSMs.

Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on November 25, 2016, 14:36:46
Here's the first step in building and replacing the M-class and the Tripartite(Alkmaar-class) ships(mcm)

Vandeput and sign Dutch colleague 'letter of intent to purchase ships

24/11/16 12:15 - Updated at 12:18

Source: Belga

(Belga) Defence Steven Vandeput (N-VA) Minister and his Dutch colleague Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert signed Wednesday the Memorandum of Understanding for the joint acquisition of new frigates and mine countermeasures vessels. The intention is that following the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding and the corresponding contracts within two years.

Vandeput and sign Dutch colleague 'letter of intent to purchase ships

Vandeput and sign Dutch colleague 'letter of intent to purchase ships © BELGA

Recently it was announced that Belgium and the Netherlands to replace their M-class frigates and minesweepers. Following a conference on the Benelux cooperation in the field of Defence at the Royal Higher Institute for Defence in Brussels two ministers will next week sign a letter of intent. " Belgium and the Netherlands will each have two new frigates and minesweepers six new purchases. To replace the frigates Dutch Defence will take charge of the file itself, the mine ships the Belgian Defence. The acquisition cost of the vessels is estimated at 1 billion euros for the two frigates and one billion for the six mine ships. (Belga)
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on December 05, 2016, 11:42:32
Here's a bit more news about the forthcoming new ships.

Seems like the new MCM(replacement for the tripartite class)will be bigger and will be build first then at least 4 new frigates(ASW specialized) 4000-5000 tons,quite a bit bigger then the M-class will be build directly after the 12 MCM ships.

Belgium for sure 2 new frigates,Netherlands maybe more,depends on study.

Here's the article:

Belgium and the Netherlands Sign Letter of Intent for the Purchase of Sixteen Ships
(Source: Belga news agency; published Nov 30, 2016)
(Published in French; unofficial translation by Defense-Aerospace.com)
BRUSSELS --- Belgian and Dutch defense ministers Steven Vandeput and Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert signed a Letter of Intent (LoI) in Brussels on Wednesday evening for the joint but unprecedented acquisition of four new frigates and twelve minehunters, two programs worth about four billion euros in total.

Dutch Defense will take charge of the replacement of the frigates by multi-purpose ships displacing 4,000 to 5,000 tonnes, with a reduced crew of 80 people and specialized in anti-submarine warfare. Its Belgian counterpart will take charge of the minehunter program.

The objective is to sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in 2018, as well as the corresponding contracts for the acquisition.

This joint Belgian-Dutch purchase, the most important ever, is a "logical step, but a rather unique one", commented Mrs Hennis-Plasschaert. Both ministers view the agreement as a concrete example of European defense cooperation. "Collaboration is crucial because we can do more together than separately," said Vandeput.

The ships should be delivered between 2023 and 2030, with the minehunters coming first to replace the existing tripartite (CMT, formerly jointly developed by the two countries and France) minehunters which will have to be retired from service in 2023.

Belgium currently operates eight such minehunters, which will be replaced by six new-generation vessels which will largely use remote-controlled machines to neutralize naval mines. Six vessels will suffice, thanks to this new concept, which will also make it possible to withdraw the command and logistic support building Godetia, at the end of her service life after a 50-year career, Vandeput said at a conference at the Royal Higher Institute of Defense (IRSD).

Belgium and the Netherlands also plan to jointly acquire at least four multi-purpose frigates intended to replace, over the next ten years, the frigates currently in service in the two navies (The Belgian Navy's Léopold 1 and Louise Marie, and the Dutch Navy’s last two remaining M-frigates).

Ms Hennis, however, was cautious on Wednesday about the number of ships to acquire, stressing that studies were still ongoing in the Netherlands on the size of the requirement -- unlike the situation in Belgium where the two frigates and six minehunters are included in the "2030 Strategic Vision on Defense,” which was approved at the end of June by the Belgian government.

The two ministers also announced a strengthening of cooperation between the two navies for joint operation of the Dutch Joint Support Ship, the Zr. Ms. Karel Doorman, and the training of one or two Belgian amphibious companies in the future “ranger” battalions (currently para-commandos) of the Belgian army.

The Belgian and Dutch navies are already collaborating intensively under the so-called "Admiral Benelux" (ABNL) agreement, which in 1996 created a joint binational operational headquarters in Den Helder (northwestern Netherlands).

This cooperation has been extended over the years to the field of maintenance -- the M-frigates are maintained in Den Helder and the CMT minehunters in Belgium’s port of Zeebrugge -- and training, for example naval cooks are trained in Belgium.

-ends-
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on May 20, 2017, 12:34:38
Dutch Submarines:First of the new class to be in the water by 2025.

Maybe of interest for Canada too.

There's a bit more known now:

- expeditionary-check
-newly designed-check
-air-independent propulsion (AIP) -check
-Industrial Partnership Saab/Damen-check

http://saab.com/region/netherlands/dutch-submarines/
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Colin P on May 23, 2017, 12:09:10
The A26 is a smaller sub good for the European waters and coastal, Saab offers the Type 612, basically a upsized A26 according to what I read, but has never built one. If the Aussie-French deal goes ahead, I think they will still be a better fit for us.
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on May 23, 2017, 13:50:21
The A26 is a smaller sub good for the European waters and coastal, Saab offers the Type 612, basically a upsized A26 according to what I read, but has never built one. If the Aussie-French deal goes ahead, I think they will still be a better fit for us.

Could be Colin,i just wrote down what is known(a bit)
-Another option could be an "upgraded Walrus hull(modernized),since these hullforms are basically very good,and a sort of A-26 command tower.It will be a bit bigger that's sure.

https://www.twente.com/twenty-twente/de-nieuwe-radar-van-thales-is-een-game-changer/

This is an article about the upgraded Smart-L EWC now on board ZR.MS Evertsen is now able to detect missiles ans satellites from about 2000 kms,it's the longest"looking"/"seeing"radar system in the world,hurrah for the Dutchies. [:p   (in dutch)
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Colin P on May 23, 2017, 13:52:33
yes they are not releasing a lot of details
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on June 18, 2017, 07:34:35
Seems we were in Halifax,Nova Scotia [:)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCjDIGuXUAACMK0.jpg


[Photo source:Craig Baines @ www.twitter.com/MapleSeaLeaf ]
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Good2Golf on June 18, 2017, 09:52:28
How much LOX do the Gotlands (or equivalent) carry and how long would that last (generally, not anti-OPSEC detail)?

Regards
G2G
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Chris Pook on June 18, 2017, 12:03:46
Gotlands use Stirling engines, I believe.

The Germans are using Fuel Cells.  Both need oxygen right enough.  But the time endurance is measured in weeks.  I don't know about the distance endurance.  I am guessing that distance from one edge of the ice pack to the other might be a consideration.

Kind of an interesting article here.

http://www.hisutton.com/World%20survey%20of%20AIP%20submarines.html

On the subject of Canadian Opportunities Missed......

We have a company that is a world leader in submersible technology

http://www.ise.bc.ca/auv.html

We have a company building fuel cell vehicles

http://ballard.com/about-ballard/ballard-in-canada



Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on June 18, 2017, 13:31:42
How much LOX do the Gotlands (or equivalent) carry and how long would that last (generally, not anti-OPSEC detail)?

Regards
G2G

I hope you did see that it was a Walrus-class(Dutch Navy) [:p

About the Swedish Gotlands,i don't know,but will try to find something(if possible).

gr,walter
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Good2Golf on June 19, 2017, 02:04:56
I hope you did see that it was a Walrus-class(Dutch Navy) [:p

About the Swedish Gotlands,i don't know,but will try to find something(if possible).

gr,walter

What AIP system does the Walrus have?

Regards
G2G
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on June 19, 2017, 05:42:52
What AIP system does the Walrus have?

Regards
G2G

To be simple,none. ;D 

Propulsion is Diesel/electric.(There are three SEMPT-Pielstick 12-cylinder, four-stroke diesel engines. The lone main motor is an electric motor is manufactured by Holec.)

Range:    18,500 km (10,000 nmi) at 9 kn (17 km/h) or +/-60 days surfaced.

Speed: Surfaced:13 knots  Submerged: 21 knots

The Newly designed(in process)probably will have a AIP system,not definitely known yet.
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Good2Golf on June 21, 2017, 15:14:56
I suppose that's why I specified the Gotlands, when posing the LOX question about AIP.  The A-26 specifically referred to AIP technology, so I was interested in what would likely go onto the new Dutch boats, not the old Walruses.  ;)

Tot straks,
G2G
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on June 22, 2017, 08:22:59
I suppose that's why I specified the Gotlands, when posing the LOX question about AIP.  The A-26 specifically referred to AIP technology, so I was interested in what would likely go onto the new Dutch boats, not the old Walruses.  ;)

Tot straks,
G2G

Well not a lot is known about the new ones,it could be a new design,an evolution on the Walrus(perhaps with a A-26 tower),or a A-26NL.

What is known is that they probably will have AIP and will be expeditionary,that's about it.

When there's more news i'll share it.

Hopelijk zo snel mogelijk(as soon as possible i hope)

gr,Walter
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on July 02, 2017, 16:51:20
Well there's a push(and hope )from SAAB towards Polen and The Netherlands regarding the subs wich will replace the Walrus-class.  :nod:


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-10/saab-targets-submarine-sales-jump-as-russia-tensions-lift-demand
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on July 04, 2017, 17:03:34
So there's a bit more news from ...............................The Netherlands  [:)

http://nos.nl/artikel/2181466-hennis-kan-verder-met-zoeken-naar-nieuwe-onderzeeboten.html

The link is in Dutch,but it's about the debate for the replacement for the Walrus-class subs.

In short Parliament agreed to replace the subs,only thing is that the reserved budget for replacement is too little,about 2.5 B,all know that about 3.5-4B is needed to replace the 4 Walrusses for 4 new ones. ;)
The prefered combo to bult these is Damen/Saab,but others will be asked too for information(DCNS,Thyssen,Navantia)

The specs or requirements for the new subs are:these are general.


De specificaties of eisen voor de nieuwe onderzeeboten                                                              -Specs/requirements
* Moeilijk op te sporen                                                                                                          -VeryHard/near impossible to detect 
* Goed bewapend voor echte oorlogsacties                                                                               -Armed for "real"war situations
* Wereldwijd verzamelen, analyseren en delen van inlichtingen                                                      -Globally deployable ,gathering,analyzing and sharing information                                                   
* Op langdurige geheime missie kunnen in vijandelijk gebied                                                          -Prolonged employability for secret missions in hostile terretory
* Speciale operaties met special forces langs een vijandelijke kust                                                 -Spec OPS,delivering/retrieving Special Forces along hostile coasts
* Faciliteiten voor vrouwelijke militairen, Hennis noemt dat 'genderneutrale' onderzeeboten                 -Gender Neutral(or fit for women aswell)


So this was the first step,hopefully Gathering momntum now.

gr,Walter
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Colin P on July 04, 2017, 17:40:30
This 1900 tons submerged correct?
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on July 04, 2017, 18:40:32
This 1900 tons submerged correct?

Colin,what do you mean 1900 tons submerged,are you talking about the A-26?yes they are about that weight.

For the new cass of Dutch subs,i think it will be around 3000 tons submerged.
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on July 15, 2017, 11:12:48
Well here's a sketch off the new vMFF(replacement M-class),first an ASW ship,but can also do a bit of AAW and surface combat.



(https://Army.ca/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi325.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk390%2FWalterleever%2Fth_new%2520M-class.jpg&hash=7d8e41952edfb5b49b4f4f8fbd14a173) (http://s325.photobucket.com/user/Walterleever/media/new%20M-class.jpg.html)


(https://Army.ca/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi325.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk390%2FWalterleever%2Fth_vervanger-m-fregat-computer-animatie.jpg&hash=4d578b4c9f94cfc8d72cc21c4b28ab38) (http://s325.photobucket.com/user/Walterleever/media/vervanger-m-fregat-computer-animatie.jpg.html)



Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Colin P on July 17, 2017, 12:13:11
Gotlands use Stirling engines, I believe.

The Germans are using Fuel Cells.  Both need oxygen right enough.  But the time endurance is measured in weeks.  I don't know about the distance endurance.  I am guessing that distance from one edge of the ice pack to the other might be a consideration.

Kind of an interesting article here.

http://www.hisutton.com/World%20survey%20of%20AIP%20submarines.html

On the subject of Canadian Opportunities Missed......

We have a company that is a world leader in submersible technology

http://www.ise.bc.ca/auv.html

We have a company building fuel cell vehicles

http://ballard.com/about-ballard/ballard-in-canada


we let that ship sail a long time ago, almost got to go for a ride on one, but Transport Canada forbade them offering a trip as they didn't know how to classify the vessel. https://books.google.ca/books?id=9pkrAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA5&lpg=PA5&dq=tourist+sub+built+in+canada&source=bl&ots=SmIzdrWnZu&sig=jrXswndofxekcfqVmwjQKwj-jng&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiX0JPZzJDVAhXMxYMKHVk2BUMQ6AEISDAF#v=onepage&q=tourist%20sub%20built%20in%20canada&f=false
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on July 28, 2017, 14:13:39
So it seems we've a Wiki page. [Xp  (Not by Damen or Government)

That means for the M-class replacements,and with what is known now,so can change(details/outfit)

Future Surface Combatants for the Royal Dutch Navy.(and Belgian Navy)

https://www.google.be/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjnud_JuqzVAhWEuBoKHfmqDMYQFghbMAk&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFuture_Surface_Combatant_(Koninklijke_Marine)&usg=AFQjCNFma72naegaEGRJ2fV92WtGim3RYA


ps,one of the things not mentioned in the wiki article,is a hull mounted sonar,wich will be there also.(see reply#44) and the OTO Melara WS 25mm Autocannon,is not corrcet either,will be the Oto Melara Marlin WS 30mm autocannon.
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Colin P on July 28, 2017, 14:36:45
Seems decently armed, they could build more and keep 1 or 2 in hot layup or refit
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on July 28, 2017, 15:48:07
Seems decently armed, they could build more and keep 1 or 2 in hot layup or refit

Well to be honest ,we should build more,4 at least.
There's an option to build 4 max.for the Netherlands and 2 max for Belgium(let's hope the RNLN ,and the politicians,decide to use this option.
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on July 28, 2017, 16:07:16
And now something completely different,a bit of fun.  ;D

Don't know how many of you seen this clip(it was from a satiric/humoristic prgramme on Sunday("Lubbach"),it's been out a while but still want to post it here.(clip is in English)

"The Netherlands second"(a reaction offcourse on the "America First"speech by Donald Trump.)


https://www.google.be/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi1nq6u1azVAhVL2xoKHcQdCiAQFgg3MAM&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.vpro.nl%2Fzondag-met-lubach%2Flees%2Fnieuws%2FThe-Netherlands-Second.html&usg=AFQjCNEKkDba0g51p1QFwNhYY6WGOxhS7w

or this link.

https://youtu.be/ELD2AwFN9Nc


have fun
Title: Re: Hello first(to all)and what i don't understand
Post by: Karel Doorman on August 31, 2017, 08:37:01
For anyone who's interested,here's Saab's presentation on the A-26 and the possible variants.

There's a Oceanic Extended Range version(3000 tonns) wich is precisely "pointed" at what the Dutch Navy wants(1 question asks this and is confirmed.)Nice subs.

The seminar will be live-streamed on http://saab-seminar.creo.se/170831.

here 's the model range:(btw the "oceanic" variant is the normal A-26)

http://d1qka67o21nlgb.cloudfront.net/cache/assetslidethumb/49984-33986-1504157521.0.0.jpg

http://d1qka67o21nlgb.cloudfront.net/cache/assetslidethumb/49984-33985-1504157520.0.0.jpg

and the Vertical Launch option:

http://d1qka67o21nlgb.cloudfront.net/cache/assetslidethumb/49984-33984-1504157518.0.0.jpg

Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: serger989 on August 31, 2017, 13:46:42
I was just reading the latest issue of CDR and they said Alion-Canada teamed up with DAMEN to supply Canada with the De Zeven Provincien Class ships. Alion is fairly unknown so it will be interesting if they are selected over the bigger names of the other bidders. I also wish Canada got 4x Karel Doorman JLSS ships :P Would have fulfilled the original JSS specs and 4 ship requirement. We could then ignore getting things like an amphibious assault ship because the 4 ships would have provided us with enough capability. Didn't know we had a shot to grab Walrus SSK's over the Oberons though, that would have been sweet! Though right now I am a huge fan of the Stirling AIP A26 SSK's.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on August 31, 2017, 14:36:04
I was just reading the latest issue of CDR and they said Alion-Canada teamed up with DAMEN to supply Canada with the De Zeven Provincien Class ships. Alion is fairly unknown so it will be interesting if they are selected over the bigger names of the other bidders. I also wish Canada got 4x Karel Doorman JLSS ships :P Would have fulfilled the original JSS specs and 4 ship requirement. We could then ignore getting things like an amphibious assault ship because the 4 ships would have provided us with enough capability. Didn't know we had a shot to grab Walrus SSK's over the Oberons though, that would have been sweet! Though right now I am a huge fan of the Stirling AIP A26 SSK's.

If so,Alion and Damen to supply new LCF's for Canada,they will probably be LCF(The De Zeven)2.0 or at least some adjustments( For example APAR 2.0,etc),since these ships are between 10 and 15 years old right now. ;)

It's been going on for so long for Canada,looking for replacements i mean.

Always hoped they would buy them(Canada),very capable ships,and 1 of the most beautiful to look at,know that's not important,but still. ;D

Well it looks like we're going to get those beauties(A-26 Oceanic Extended Range),but nothing is sure yet.(still hope tho)
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Colin P on August 31, 2017, 14:44:32
Interesting comments on the radars on Wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Zeven_Provinci%C3%ABn-class_frigate
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on August 31, 2017, 14:56:51
Interesting comments on the radars on Wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Zeven_Provinci%C3%ABn-class_frigate

What do you mean Colin,I-Band?(X-band offcourse),or do you mean something else?
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: serger989 on August 31, 2017, 16:31:54
If so,Alion and Damen to supply new LCF's for Canada,they will probably be LCF(The De Zeven)2.0 or at least some adjustments( For example APAR 2.0,etc),since these ships are between 10 and 15 years old right now. ;)

It's been going on for so long for Canada,looking for replacements i mean.

Always hoped they would buy them(Canada),very capable ships,and 1 of the most beautiful to look at,know that's not important,but still. ;D

Well it looks like we're going to get those beauties(A-26 Oceanic Extended Range),but nothing is sure yet.(still hope tho)

The Alion-DAMEN bid was revealed at CANSEC 2017 to a rather lukewarm response because of Alion's lesser name recognition. Regardless they seemed to have a strong pitch with the LCF saying no fundamental changes had to be made. They appear to be on point in delivering exactly what Canada needs, a MOTS design that is proven. - This is all sourced from CDR

I personally think the FREMM is the nicest to look at, but the De Zeven is beautiful as well :P The A-26's would be awesome for Canada because of their now blue water capability. The Netherlands is going to grab A-26's though? That would be pretty sweet.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Colin P on August 31, 2017, 16:53:28
What do you mean Colin,I-Band?(X-band offcourse),or do you mean something else?

That the AD radar struggled to pick up small surface or stationary targets until tweaked to lessen it's AD advantages.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on August 31, 2017, 17:17:26
That the AD radar struggled to pick up small surface or stationary targets until tweaked to lessen it's AD advantages.

Ah ok,yep strange,but OTOH the radar is primarily used/envisioned/developed(AAW) to detect "fast movers" at a significant distance(i believe 500 kms now),and as you said(and stated in the article) it was possible to remedy this.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on August 31, 2017, 17:21:12
The Alion-DAMEN bid was revealed at CANSEC 2017 to a rather lukewarm response because of Alion's lesser name recognition. Regardless they seemed to have a strong pitch with the LCF saying no fundamental changes had to be made. They appear to be on point in delivering exactly what Canada needs, a MOTS design that is proven. - This is all sourced from CDR

I personally think the FREMM is the nicest to look at, but the De Zeven is beautiful as well :P The A-26's would be awesome for Canada because of their now blue water capability. The Netherlands is going to grab A-26's though? That would be pretty sweet.

As said if the RNLN(and parliament offcourse) will choose the A-26,it will be the Oceanic Extended Range version,with maybe a couple of "Damen twist"and RNLN "twist(adjustments),also interesting for Canada.(Range wise)

See post #50 for the pictures/renderings.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Underway on August 31, 2017, 17:50:32
The Alion-DAMEN bid was revealed at CANSEC 2017 to a rather lukewarm response because of Alion's lesser name recognition. Regardless they seemed to have a strong pitch with the LCF saying no fundamental changes had to be made. They appear to be on point in delivering exactly what Canada needs, a MOTS design that is proven. - This is all sourced from CDR

Not exactly correct and leads to a misunderstanding of the bids.  Though the gov't said they wanted a "proven design" to the press what they actually asked for was a "mature design".  As was explained to me this was somewhere on the line between napkin sketch of a ship to ship fully operational.  Hence why the Type 26 was allowed to compete.  The design is complete and the steel is being cut.  There is also the requirement to have Canadian requirements for the ship added.  This means that whatever ship we get won't quite be MOTS.  It's looking like these are in the MOTS+ category.  Mature design modified.
 
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on August 31, 2017, 18:05:49
Not exactly correct and leads to a misunderstanding of the bids.  Though the gov't said they wanted a "proven design" to the press what they actually asked for was a "mature design".  As was explained to me this was somewhere on the line between napkin sketch of a ship to ship fully operational.  Hence why the Type 26 was allowed to compete.  The design is complete and the steel is being cut.  There is also the requirement to have Canadian requirements for the ship added.  This means that whatever ship we get won't quite be MOTS.  It's looking like these are in the MOTS+ category.  Mature design modified.
 

That was my thinking too,i mean that the City class(Type-26) is allowed to compete,and i think it will be a very nice ship,but very pricey tho.

I heared something of around 1.2 billion per ship;wow.

OTOH if it takes long enough maybe the M-class replacements(in final stages of design) can come in too(competition) >:D

They will be around the 600 million mark,way more affordable.Also ASW orientated.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Oldgateboatdriver on September 01, 2017, 10:44:56
I was just reading the latest issue of CDR and they said Alion-Canada teamed up with DAMEN to supply Canada with the De Zeven Provincien Class ships. Alion is fairly unknown so it will be interesting if they are selected over the bigger names of the other bidders. I also wish Canada got 4x Karel Doorman JLSS ships :P Would have fulfilled the original JSS specs and 4 ship requirement. We could then ignore getting things like an amphibious assault ship because the 4 ships would have provided us with enough capability. Didn't know we had a shot to grab Walrus SSK's over the Oberons though, that would have been sweet! Though right now I am a huge fan of the Stirling AIP A26 SSK's.

You didn't know because we never did, Serger:

The Walrus' were designed, then the first laid down in 1979 and launched up to 1985. That is fifteen years after we acquired the "O-boats". We purchased the "O-boats" in 1964, with deliveries from 1965 to 1967.

The Walrus' were considered for the replacement of the "O-boats" when the project got underway in 1986. Then the Mulroney government Defence minister asked the Navy to consider nuclear boats, and we looked (and were lobbied) at the French Rubis class and the British Trafalgar class. That put looking at diesel boats on the back burner. Then the wall came down, and so did the economy, and those ambitious plans of the Mulroney government came crashing down in deficit reduction efforts. The Navy tried to resuscitate the submarine program, but by then, Chretien's Liberal's were in power and, being "un Ptit-gars de Shawinigan-Trudeauist", he couldn't care less about the Navy (too British still in his mind) and couldn't understand why you would spend that much money on a submarine Canada didn't need, in his mind. We were lucky to manage to get the Upholders in as stop gap - even if it ended costing much more than it should have (if he had, for instance, accepted to buy them immediately when they were decommissioned and offers first by the RN).

Also, the Dutch JSS's are for logistical support, not amphibious assault per se. They do not have the capability to carry troops to carry out the assault. Their facilities are dedicated to housing the logistics personnel and support personnel (such as medical staff, rear area repairs personnel, technicians, etc.), not the fighting troops. So they can't replace the actual amphibs. That's why the Dutch Navy has the Rotterdam class ships for those functions. And the Dutch JSS were looked at for the original Canadian JSS program, but the Navy found them unsuitable  because they did not have the fuel transport capacity that the RCN wanted.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on September 01, 2017, 12:20:38
You didn't know because we never did, Serger:

The Walrus' were designed, then the first laid down in 1979 and launched up to 1985. That is fifteen years after we acquired the "O-boats". We purchased the "O-boats" in 1964, with deliveries from 1965 to 1967.

The Walrus' were considered for the replacement of the "O-boats" when the project got underway in 1986. Then the Mulroney government Defence minister asked the Navy to consider nuclear boats, and we looked (and were lobbied) at the French Rubis class and the British Trafalgar class. That put looking at diesel boats on the back burner. Then the wall came down, and so did the economy, and those ambitious plans of the Mulroney government came crashing down in deficit reduction efforts. The Navy tried to resuscitate the submarine program, but by then, Chretien's Liberal's were in power and, being "un Ptit-gars de Shawinigan-Trudeauist", he couldn't care less about the Navy (too British still in his mind) and couldn't understand why you would spend that much money on a submarine Canada didn't need, in his mind. We were lucky to manage to get the Upholders in as stop gap - even if it ended costing much more than it should have (if he had, for instance, accepted to buy them immediately when they were decommissioned and offers first by the RN).

Also, the Dutch JSS's are for logistical support, not amphibious assault per se. They do not have the capability to carry troops to carry out the assault. Their facilities are dedicated to housing the logistics personnel and support personnel (such as medical staff, rear area repairs personnel, technicians, etc.), not the fighting troops. So they can't replace the actual amphibs. That's why the Dutch Navy has the Rotterdam class ships for those functions. And the Dutch JSS were looked at for the original Canadian JSS program, but the Navy found them unsuitable  because they did not have the fuel transport capacity that the RCN wanted.

You're Correct OGBD,plus from what i heared,when the Canadians looked at  the Walrus they were considered to expensive(then) at 500 million per boat(there was no money),so it was the Upholder for 800 million(all 4 of them)or probably nothing.

JSS(dutch)is not a "real" AOR ship,it can take some stores(fuel,goods,etc)not enough when a "real" AOR ship is needed.

In the last year it also is shared with the Germans,so the RNLN has a real need for a additional AOR-ship,it's been looked at right now.

Maybe something in the order of this 1;(just a "simple tanker"),around the 300 million Euros mark.

http://products.damen.com/-/media/Products/Images/Clusters-groups/Naval/Logistic-Support-Vessel/Logistic-Support-Vessel-Replenisher-16000/Top-image/Logistic_Support_Vessel_Replenisher_16000.jpg?h=767&la=en&w=1300

Which is the LSV R16000.(15800 tonns,Range 10000 nm,about 18 knts,but Navy wants it to go a bit faster,around the 20 knts,is possible)

Measurements: 165,50  x 24,00 x 7,30 m
Crew: 43 + 116

This ship has a reasonable Hospital,48 places,and can be taken offboard.

Helidek for 1 NH90
Hangar for2 NH90's

Cargo deck or 135 lane meters
F76 (Marine Diesel)    5100 t
F44 (Kerosene) 425 t
Cargo Stores    360 m²
Ammo Stores    300 m²
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: serger989 on September 01, 2017, 12:57:15
You didn't know because we never did, Serger:

The Walrus' were designed, then the first laid down in 1979 and launched up to 1985. That is fifteen years after we acquired the "O-boats". We purchased the "O-boats" in 1964, with deliveries from 1965 to 1967.

The Walrus' were considered for the replacement of the "O-boats" when the project got underway in 1986. Then the Mulroney government Defence minister asked the Navy to consider nuclear boats, and we looked (and were lobbied) at the French Rubis class and the British Trafalgar class. That put looking at diesel boats on the back burner. Then the wall came down, and so did the economy, and those ambitious plans of the Mulroney government came crashing down in deficit reduction efforts. The Navy tried to resuscitate the submarine program, but by then, Chretien's Liberal's were in power and, being "un Ptit-gars de Shawinigan-Trudeauist", he couldn't care less about the Navy (too British still in his mind) and couldn't understand why you would spend that much money on a submarine Canada didn't need, in his mind. We were lucky to manage to get the Upholders in as stop gap - even if it ended costing much more than it should have (if he had, for instance, accepted to buy them immediately when they were decommissioned and offers first by the RN).

Also, the Dutch JSS's are for logistical support, not amphibious assault per se. They do not have the capability to carry troops to carry out the assault. Their facilities are dedicated to housing the logistics personnel and support personnel (such as medical staff, rear area repairs personnel, technicians, etc.), not the fighting troops. So they can't replace the actual amphibs. That's why the Dutch Navy has the Rotterdam class ships for those functions. And the Dutch JSS were looked at for the original Canadian JSS program, but the Navy found them unsuitable  because they did not have the fuel transport capacity that the RCN wanted.

Oh lord my apologies... I meant Upholder/Victoria... Since I have had Oberon models since I was a kid, they are on my mind often! The nuclear subs never would have happened as they were, the US would have blocked France or UK from providing us with the means if it came down to it. At which point we would have to start our own indigenous reactor from scratch I would imagine $$$$$$$$$. In terms of the Karel Doorman, I just checked and it's got about 1000+ less tonnes of fuel/water, but couldn't we have "Canadianized" it to a point where we could use it for small amphib operations? The deck space is large, the cargo space is large, it has a steel beach stern construction, so it can still use LCAV and LCU at-sea can it not? All I am saying is, am I wrong to think it would be more versatile than the upcoming Queenston. I am also running under the assumption we would have obtained the original planned 4 JSS. But I didn't know that it lacked the proper fuel capacity for true AOR capability, interesting!
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on September 01, 2017, 13:43:49
Oh lord... I meant Upholder/Victoria... Since I have had Oberon models since I was a kid, they are on my mind often! The nuclear subs never would have happened as they were, the US would have blocked France or UK from providing us with the means if it came down to it. At which point we would have to start our own indigenous reactor from scratch I would imagine $$$$$$$$$. In terms of the Karel Doorman, I just checked and it's got about 1000+ less tonnes of fuel/water, but couldn't we have "Canadianized" it to a point where we could use it for small amphib operations? The deck space is large, the cargo space is large, it has a steel beach stern construction, so it can still use LCAV and LCU at-sea can it not? All I am saying is, am I wrong to think it would be more versatile than the upcoming Queenston. I am also running under the assumption we would have obtained the original planned 4 JSS. But I didn't know that it lacked the proper fuel capacity for true AOR capability, interesting!

Offcourse it's possible to Canadiaze the Dutch JSS,and yes you'll have a more versetile ship or ships(if 4)

Karel Doorman:(LCAV/LCU is idd possible)

http://navaltoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/JSS-Karel-Doorman-Brings-Aid-Supplies-to-Freetown-Sierra-Leone.jpg

http://navaltoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/HNLMS-Karel-Doorman-Sets-Sail-On-July-1.jpg

For maritime support the ship will have Two Replenishment-At-Sea masts, the holding capacity of approx 8000 m3 of fuel, more than 1000 m3 of helicopter fuel, approx 450 m3 of potable water and approx 400 tonnes of ammunition and other supplies.

The JLSS has 2,000 lane metres for transport of material such as tracked & wheeled vehicles or containers. She has an elevator and crane for up to 40 tons, a roll on/roll off facility for vehicles, and a steel beach stern construction for accommodating cargo transfer via landing craft. The ship is equipped with two LCVP's landing craft.

For sea-basing operations she will have large helicopter deck with landing spots for operating two Chinooks simultaneously, and a hangar with a storage capacity of up to 6 medium sized helicopters, including NH-90, CH-47F and AH-64D Apache.

The ship can accommodate up to 300 personnel, of which 159 are the ship's crew. She also has command rooms for war staffs and a large hospital facility with 20 treatment areas, and two surgery rooms. Modular flexibility allows configuration of temporary areas for evacuees or prisoners.

Positioned off shore, the ship is designed to act as a Sea Based Operations Platform supporting (amphibious) land forces with logistic support providing supplies and helicopter support (transport and attack).

Queenston Class will be less versetile but a better "true" AOR vessel.(from what i understand)

http://contrarian.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Chateauguay.jpg  (hope i've got the right one,lol)

The Joint Support Ship Project envisions several multi-role vessels capable of supporting the Royal Canadian Navy's warships at sea, as well as providing strategic sealift and some airlift for naval task groups or army operations. The vessels will have a multi-purpose covered deck with the ability to carry up to 10,000 tonnes of ship fuel, 1,300 tonnes of aviation fuel, 1,100 tonnes of ammunition as well as 1,000–1,500 lane metres of deck space for carrying vehicles and containerized cargo. The vessels will also have hospital facilities as well as a large helicopter deck with two landing spots, hangar space for four helicopters, and a roll-on/roll-off deck for vehicles onto a dock.[9]
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Oldgateboatdriver on September 01, 2017, 14:23:53
Don't worry about mixing up Oberon's and Upholders. We all make mistakes - and in any event it resulted in a teaching moment for those who are unaware of this situation, which is one of the great benefits of these fora.  [:D

However, concerning your last post: There is no comparison between the Karel Doorman and the Queenston class for the AOR function: You have to compare apples with apples: The KD can carry 8000 cubic meters of fuel, that is 7120 metric tons. The Q can carry 10000 metric tons, so basically 30% more. The difference is even greater for avgas: KD carries 1000 cubic meters, which is 820 metric tons to Q 1300 metric tons, or 50 % more. Cargo and ammo is even worse: KD = 400 tons, Q = 1100 tons.

As for flexibility, well Queenston will have some capability to carry army vehicles, though not as much as KD, some hospital facilities, though a little smaller than KD and the capacity to carry some extra support personnel and small number of troops, again even though not as much as KD.

However, in the Dutch Navy, they consider the KD as a support vessel for their amphibious forces first and the "AOR" role second. In Canada it's the reverse, which is logical as we have much greater distances to travel with our Task Forces to get to any place where we fight on sea, be it the Med., the Caribbean, the Persian Gulf, etc. The likelihood of the Queenston being required to support land operation when required is very small, whereas fuelling gas guzzling Destroyers and Frigates is going to be the Queenston's daily bread and butter.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on September 01, 2017, 15:56:36
Don't worry about mixing up Oberon's and Upholders. We all make mistakes - and in any event it resulted in a teaching moment for those who are unaware of this situation, which is one of the great benefits of these fora.  [:D

However, concerning your last post: There is no comparison between the Karel Doorman and the Queenston class for the AOR function: You have to compare apples with apples: The KD can carry 8000 cubic meters of fuel, that is 7120 metric tons. The Q can carry 10000 metric tons, so basically 30% more. The difference is even greater for avgas: KD carries 1000 cubic meters, which is 820 metric tons to Q 1300 metric tons, or 50 % more. Cargo and ammo is even worse: KD = 400 tons, Q = 1100 tons.

As for flexibility, well Queenston will have some capability to carry army vehicles, though not as much as KD, some hospital facilities, though a little smaller than KD and the capacity to carry some extra support personnel and small number of troops, again even though not as much as KD.

However, in the Dutch Navy, they consider the KD as a support vessel for their amphibious forces first and the "AOR" role second. In Canada it's the reverse, which is logical as we have much greater distances to travel with our Task Forces to get to any place where we fight on sea, be it the Med., the Caribbean, the Persian Gulf, etc. The likelihood of the Queenston being required to support land operation when required is very small, whereas fuelling gas guzzling Destroyers and Frigates is going to be the Queenston's daily bread and butter.

Again true OGBD ,the KD is used primarily in the way you said. ;)

As for my statement about the cooperation with "Ze" Germans   >:D ,The Dutch Marines and the German "Seebattaillon work together(under Dutch Command) and use the(amongst other)the KD for exercises,so the problem arises for the availability of the KD for "her"AOR tasks,that's why the Navy is looking to order an additional ship,a true tanker.(just for the AOR part)
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Colin P on September 01, 2017, 16:21:29
You could have 1 of these on each coast and an AOR, the JSS could support more of the coastal ops and arctic, while the AOR  do the deep sea stuff. Toss in the Asterix as a AOR relief ship and we have deep capabilities back into the RCN.   
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: serger989 on September 01, 2017, 19:48:43
You could have 1 of these on each coast and an AOR, the JSS could support more of the coastal ops and arctic, while the AOR  do the deep sea stuff. Toss in the Asterix as a AOR relief ship and we have deep capabilities back into the RCN.

That's actually what my "fantasy" Canadian Navy looks like if we do not procure any amphibious assault ships, just seems like our style... I would love if Canada managed to get itself 18 surface combatants (6 for AAW), if the Dewolfs can replace the Kingstons, then 12 of em'! And 12 A-26 SSK's with 5 at-sea-replenishment capable ships (2 Queenstons, 2 Karel Doormans, 1 Asterix). I would also love if we could help our Northern communities grow and provide at least some more deep sea ports... Tuktoyaktuk, Cambridge Bay, Resolute, Rankin Inlet (Or re-invest in Churchill which will never happen), finish Nanisivik! Start Iqaluit! I would also love if we could start something similar to the Australian Marine Complex so we could centralize a lot of our industry on one of our coasts so that many companies can use the space for shipbuilding and keep business and tech healthy. But boots and so much more first. Sorry for that unnecessary rant of fantasy procurement excitement.

Do the Dutch have any LHD ship designs? I know Canada tried to procure those two Mistrals, and Naval Group is probably privately trying to pitch at least their more HADR minded Mistral 140 design to us and many others nations. I know DAMEN provides the Rotterdam LPD (is it an LPD?), what would the differences be in what we would require. Like say... A new battalion for over-seas rapid deployment, helicopter differences (would we need an attack helicopter at all?), how many would we need for an LHD vs LPD (Say if an LHD could hold 10x Cyclones total +the hangar, would we need to buy... 12 or more?), etc. Basically I am unaware of the fundamental differences in mission purpose and capability between the two. I know there are zero plans now to my knowledge for any amphibious assault ships, but I still think it would be possible if the global atmosphere changes a bit more (Northwest passage opening up, more submarine activity etc), as with getting more submarines.

Sorry for the lack of knowledge, I just love shipbuilding, infrastructure, warships, but I know diddly about the details.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Good2Golf on September 03, 2017, 22:54:02
Perhaps if the Egyptians can't keep things together, the Mistralskis may come up on the market in the future?
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Colin P on September 05, 2017, 14:38:06
I would not want them after they are finished with them.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: jollyjacktar on September 05, 2017, 17:47:47
Agreed, we should have bought them when we had the chance if we were to get them.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on September 05, 2017, 18:03:12
That's actually what my "fantasy" Canadian Navy looks like if we do not procure any amphibious assault ships, just seems like our style... I would love if Canada managed to get itself 18 surface combatants (6 for AAW), if the Dewolfs can replace the Kingstons, then 12 of em'! And 12 A-26 SSK's with 5 at-sea-replenishment capable ships (2 Queenstons, 2 Karel Doormans, 1 Asterix). I would also love if we could help our Northern communities grow and provide at least some more deep sea ports... Tuktoyaktuk, Cambridge Bay, Resolute, Rankin Inlet (Or re-invest in Churchill which will never happen), finish Nanisivik! Start Iqaluit! I would also love if we could start something similar to the Australian Marine Complex so we could centralize a lot of our industry on one of our coasts so that many companies can use the space for shipbuilding and keep business and tech healthy. But boots and so much more first. Sorry for that unnecessary rant of fantasy procurement excitement.

Do the Dutch have any LHD ship designs? I know Canada tried to procure those two Mistrals, and Naval Group is probably privately trying to pitch at least their more HADR minded Mistral 140 design to us and many others nations. I know DAMEN provides the Rotterdam LPD (is it an LPD?), what would the differences be in what we would require. Like say... A new battalion for over-seas rapid deployment, helicopter differences (would we need an attack helicopter at all?), how many would we need for an LHD vs LPD (Say if an LHD could hold 10x Cyclones total +the hangar, would we need to buy... 12 or more?), etc. Basically I am unaware of the fundamental differences in mission purpose and capability between the two. I know there are zero plans now to my knowledge for any amphibious assault ships, but I still think it would be possible if the global atmosphere changes a bit more (Northwest passage opening up, more submarine activity etc), as with getting more submarines.

Sorry for the lack of knowledge, I just love shipbuilding, infrastructure, warships, but I know diddly about the details.

Don't think we or Damen allready have a LHD design,but if we asked Damen i'm sure they can come up with a design. ;)

R'dam is indeed an LPD as is the Johan de Witt.I know the KD can store the CH-53 in her hangar below decks.

HNLMS Johan de Witt:The ship is equipped with a large helicopter deck for helicopter operations and a dock for large landing craft. It can carry six NH 90 helicopters or four Chinook helicopters. It has a well dock for two landing craft utility and it carries four davit-launched LCVPs. The dock is wide enough to support two LCAC.

The vessel has an extra deck with rooms for command staff to support a battalion size operation. The ship has a complete Class II hospital, including an operation theatre and intensive care facilities. A surgical team can be stationed on board. The ship also has a desalination system enabling it to convert seawater into drinking water.

It is also equipped with pod propulsion to ensure the ship stays in position when sea basing.

Rotterdam Class Landing Platform Dock (LPD):The ship is operated by a crew of 124, including 13 officers. Accommodation is also provided for a fully equipped marine battalion or up to 613 troops. HrMs Rotterdam has facilities to transport 170 armoured personnel carriers, or 33 main battle tanks, plus docking facilities for up to six landing craft, for example six LCVP mk3, four LCU mk9 or four LCM 8 landing craft.

HrMs Rotterdam has extensive fully equipped hospital facilities with a medical treatment room, a medical operating theatre and a medical laboratory.

As for attack heli's,we operate the Apache wich will be upgraded:he Netherlands -­ Upgrade AH-64D APACHE Block I Helicopters to Block II

As for the subs,as said it seems we're going in the direction of th A-26ER,hope this helps.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on September 18, 2017, 12:48:55
This fall the first SMART-L MM/N will be delivered to the RNLN(SMART-L MM/N is known as the Smart-L Multi Mission/Naval version,or formerly known as the SMART-L EWC/ ELR)to replace the SMART-L on board of the LCF-class.

This radar will be able to detect targets(Satellites,ICBM)at a distance from at least 2000 kms.

So that will propel the Dutch ships in leading roles at providing support for naval NAVO/NATO squadrons(make them "Kings" of the Squadrons if i may call them that)

This means that the Dutch are the second nation,US was first,to be able to do that.

https://youtu.be/qtVh539mRng

Here's an article,sorry it's in Dutch,but you'll get the meaning.(i hope)

https://marineschepen.nl/dossiers/SMART-L-MM-N-radar-antwoord-Thales-op-dreiging-ballistische-raketten.html

As you may or may not be able to understand from this article(or know allready),in 2006,during the first tests,the Americans were blown away about the capabillities of the SMART-L and admitted that the Dutch(Thales or as it's formely known HSA,Hollandse Signaal Apparaten), are at least 6 years ahead of them in radar science/design.

HSA are the maincreators of the first 3-D radar system in the world on board a ship(an evolution of the "Broomstick radar on board the Tromp-class),The Goalkeeper and the SMART-L.(to name a few)

Dutch ships(LCF)will also take part in Formidable Shield 2017,which will start next week.

Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Colin P on September 18, 2017, 14:32:33
No offense, but not the "prettiest" vessel I have seen, how is her sea keeping? Handling her with all that sail area forward must be interesting in high winds.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on September 18, 2017, 14:48:08
No offense, but not the "prettiest" vessel I have seen, how is her sea keeping? Handling her with all that sail area forward must be interesting in high winds.

Well Colin tastes differ ,i quite like them and think they're one of the more prettier ships around nowadays.  [Xp

as for seakeeping well i think they're quite good,since they're designed to go globally(not an active crewmember,but i will ask),and btw not to sound to braggy,i think we know how to build ships we've been doing it for quite a while now.

https://youtu.be/O87Yl8_gQWA

And her "maiden"(test)voyage.when there was still a bit to be improved.(vibrations in the back of the ship),that was corrected immediately.

https://youtu.be/ajU-xlTv9N8

And for the fans,lol,here's one of Hr.Ms De Ruyter going full speed.

https://youtu.be/e_b_NzUAvuo

here' are the older ones in action(M-class)"Van Nes" and "Van Speyk" (last 2 in the RNLN)

https://youtu.be/G-6V55tCF3E

Hope you like.  ;)
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on September 25, 2017, 06:46:31
Well finally some good news for the Dutch Defence Budget.  ;D

As it seems the new cabinet(politics)will probably put a serious amount of money towards the Budget,there's talk about a 1.5 Billion plus,the total of the Budget will go from 8.5 Billion now towards 10 billion.

All this is needed to buy,spare-parts,munitions,to better the collective employment agreement,etc,the rest of the extra money will be put to the investments neede to update certain things(weapons,,etc)

the article is in Dutch,sorry for that.


'Nieuwe coalitie trekt zo'n 1,5 miljard uit voor defensie'

https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nederland/politiek/nieuwe-coalitie-trekt-zon-15-miljard-uit-voor-defensie


So finaly after about 25 years of cuts,there's a reverse wich is much needed,as you'll know we need a lot of new ships,replacement M-class,Alkmaar-class(minehunters), the Walrus-class subs,a new Tanker,etc, and that's just the Navy. 
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Colin P on September 25, 2017, 12:36:59
Glad the tide is slowly turning for them.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on September 25, 2017, 16:42:19
So here's a personal story,history,about the landings in Sicily dating from 1943.(a one time "side step")

I know there's a history(military)box here on the forum,but since this is Dutch and to be fair my family's history i will put it here.

What you may or may not know is that i come from a "marine" family,that meaning my granddad, (story here),my dad and 2 uncles were marines in the Dutch Marine Corps,and there are still nephews who are in the Corps.

The official motto of the Dutch marines is"Qua patet orbis " wich means in dutch "Zo wijd de wereld strekt." wich rougly translates in English as "as far as the world extends" this as an aside.

Here's the story about 2 Dutch Gunboats aiding the allies at the landings in Sicily,my granddad(H.P.Leever) was part of it aboard the "Flores" and was distinguished with the bronze cross.


The Terrible Twins

During the war, many, often somewhat romanticized, newspaper articles were written about courage under fire. An especially interesting subject for reporters were the exploits of the navies in exile, and the Royal Netherlands Navy was no exception. The following article is from the newspaper "Voice of the Netherlands", dated August 7, 1943 [1]. The gunboats, or better sloops, in question are the Flores and Soemba, which became known in the Royal Navy as the "Terrible Twins".

A special correspondent in the Mediterranean emphases the part which ships of the Dutch Navy are playing in the operations off Sicily.

The First official announcement of their presence was contained in General Eisenhower's communiqué of July 10th. Then came the story of the Dutch gunboat, which silenced shore batteries during the landings. As the Allies disembarked in a small bay they found that certain shore guns had managed to get the range of the beach and were causing considerable trouble. The Dutch gunboat closed in to less than a mile off shore and put the batteries out of action with a few well-placed broadsides.

The short official information is amplified by the special correspondent who cables: "Squat, camouflaged fighting ships of the Royal Netherlands Navy are playing a considerable part in the operations off Sicily. Two gunboats in particular have been bombarding enemy gun positions and troop concentrations on the eastern beaches, non-stop day and night, since the start of the invasion.

"Like terriers chasing rats, they refuse to leave them alone. They pour in shells so fiercely and with such grim determination that it is no exaggeration to say that they steam up and down the coast leaving a long snaking trail of empty, cordite-blackened shell cases floating astern. They show complete disregard for personal danger and never miss an opportunity to bombard at close range."

The two gunboats' exploits made one British gunnery officer say: "It is fantastic how these little ships sail in to attack with the Netherlands Ensign flying cockily at the masthead. Their gunnery officer, dressed in khaki, unconcernedly stands on the bridge, calmly surveying the coastline.

"In the early stages of the campaign the Dutch gunboats took on eight strong Axis batteries on the top of a hill. The boats dashed in, and in an incredibly short while secured direct hits on three of the shore batteries. They killed the gun crews, and when our forward troops reached the position they found the five other batteries abandoned." At one stage of the land battle for the Catania plain the Germans, harassed and confused by the Navy' s persistent sea bombardment, brought up an enormous gun and started a terrific barrage, throwing up gigantic columns of water. The Dutch gunboats were completely outranged, but they overcame that by rushing in, firing salvos all the time, and then twisting and turning out again, only to repeat the manoeuvre.

Another British officer said: "These Dutchmen have the right fighting spirit. Nothing will stop them, and they won't cease firing. The only rest they had during the nights of unceasing bombardments was when they ran out of ammunition, and then they returned, reshelled and refuelled, and were off again. They will take on anything. Last Friday, when we knew them to be some distance away, they came rushing in at the sound of firing and went full speed ahead into the fray. Their shells roared overhead, straddling us. We could not make out where the firing came from until someone said 'It 's those damned Dutchmen again; you can't keep them out of anything!' And he was right.

[1]: The "Voice of the Netherlands" was first published in August 1941, and last in September 1946.

gr,walter.

My dad fought as did my uncles in Indonesia and i myself(not marine material, ;D)served in the Dutch Airforce as a stinger-shooter protecting the Patriot batteries(my squadron 327)during the Gulf war(1990-91),or as it's known "Desert Storm".

This as an aside,just wanted you'll to know where i come from so to speak.My "love",if i may call it that,lies with the Navy. ;D

Not only during over lord also during the landings in italy where the flores and soemba gained the name terrible twins .

there is a small film of the flores actualy firing on D-Day:(reconstruction)

https://youtu.be/BzZ1vRa_JtE
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: MarkOttawa on September 25, 2017, 17:13:13
Karel Doorman: Here's a photo and article--the vessels had remarkably long service (launched 1926):

Quote
(https://Army.ca/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.navypedia.org%2Fships%2Fnetherlands%2Fnl_of_6.gif&hash=98092318ff66ebb5279f14cb6e13e007)
http://www.navypedia.org/ships/netherlands/nl_of_flores.htm

Also :

Quote
DUTCH GUNBOATS BACK FROM THE MEDITERRANEAN. 16 MARCH 1944, PORTSMOUTH. ADMIRAL J TH FURNSTER AND REAR ADMIRAL J W TERMIJTELEN, OF THE ROYAL NETHERLANDS NAVY INSPECTED THE GUNBOATS HNMS FLORES AND SOEMBA ON THEIR RETURN FROM THE MEDITERRANEAN.
(https://Army.ca/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.iwm.org.uk%2Fciim5%2F511%2F654%2Flarge_000000.jpg%3Faction-d%26amp%3Bcat%3Dphotographs&hash=d869e584180772aaffb9c61d53e2673b)
http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205154585

Plus see here for an account of Sicily in a book:
https://books.google.ca/books?id=XDqBUqnrFLYC&pg=PA156&lpg=PA156&dq=netherlands+gunboats+Flores+and+Soemba&source=bl&ots=yZ1LsPla6r&sig=YgY19l0lqKvcu8HfkXncmaqY_1Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjBnfG-kMHWAhVXzWMKHXIdATUQ6AEIbjAP#v=onepage&q=netherlands%20gunboats%20Flores%20and%20Soemba&f=false

Mark
Ottawa
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on September 25, 2017, 18:22:23
Thanks,Mark for the read,i've seen  the pictures  ;)

gr,walter.l. leever.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on September 27, 2017, 14:26:48
Again a bit of (former)Dutch history:

Last gun cruiser in the world decommisioned.

Peruvian Navy decommissions ‘Almirante Grau’, picks frigate ‘Montero’ as new flagship

The Peruvian Navy decommissioned its long-time flagship B.A.P. Almirante Grau after 45 years of service during a ceremony on September 26.

B.A.P. Almirante Grau was replaced as fleet flagship by B.A.P. Montero, a Carvajal-class frigate built by Servicio Industrial de la Marina (SIMA) and commissioned into the navy in 1984.

On the occasion, B.A.P. Montero was renamed to B.A.P. Almirante Grau as flagships of the Peruvian Navy bear the name of famous Peruvian Admiral Miguel Grau Seminario.

During the ceremony, the Peruvian Navy flag was lowered for the last time from the previous B.A.P. Almirante Grau, a former Dutch Navy De Zeven Provinciën-class cruiser bought by Peru in 1973. Before starting service in the Peruvian Navy, B.A.P. Almirante Grau was known as HNLMS De Ruyter (C801) and was commissioned into the Dutch Navy in 1953.

The former B.A.P. Almirante Grau was also the world’s last gun cruiser in active service.


http://www.debakstafel.nl/uploads/1/4/1/3/14135904/4242714_1_orig.jpg

http://www.debakstafel.nl/uploads/1/4/1/3/14135904/467882_1_orig.jpg
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: jollyjacktar on September 27, 2017, 16:16:04
A good and proper looking warship.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Oldgateboatdriver on September 27, 2017, 16:22:35
A good and proper looking warship.

That would have lasted a whole of five minutes in a modern shooting war, like the ARA General Belgrano, of the Argentine Navy.

We disposed of our own HMCS QUEBEC and HMCS ONTARIO in 1956 and 1958 respectively because they were obsolete even then as far as modern warfare was concerned.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: MilEME09 on September 27, 2017, 16:34:18
That would have lasted a whole of five minutes in a modern shooting war, like the ARA General Belgrano, of the Argentine Navy.

We disposed of our own HMCS QUEBEC and HMCS ONTARIO in 1956 and 1958 respectively because they were obsolete even then as far as modern warfare was concerned.

The concept of a large warship meant to engage other large ships is pretty well dead, dido for the battleship and having the need for shore bombardment. Mind you with new technologies like railguns in the process of being viable for warships, a nuclear power assault ship with a railgun would probably provide enough cover for landing forces if there ever was a need for it.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on September 27, 2017, 16:35:14
That would have lasted a whole of five minutes in a modern shooting war, like the ARA General Belgrano, of the Argentine Navy.

We disposed of our own HMCS QUEBEC and HMCS ONTARIO in 1956 and 1958 respectively because they were obsolete even then as far as modern warfare was concerned.

True,but still the end of an era.(and it looks like a "real" warship with all the guns.  [:p  ),but still outdated now,ship was 65 years old,so truly a "grand"old lady.There are plans to keep her as a "museum"ship.(Chili)

There's also interest from her 1st owner to do so.(we)
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: jollyjacktar on September 27, 2017, 17:20:27
That would have lasted a whole of five minutes in a modern shooting war, like the ARA General Belgrano, of the Argentine Navy.

We disposed of our own HMCS QUEBEC and HMCS ONTARIO in 1956 and 1958 respectively because they were obsolete even then as far as modern warfare was concerned.

But of course.  Much like a Spitfire or similar mechanical device of the era.  Doesn't mean they're not beautiful in appearance.  I still remember being taken aboard one of the steamers in Esquimalt when l was 12 or so for a tour by my cousin's husband who was XO.  I was most disappointed at the lack of guns in a modern ship.  Missiles just aren't as sexy to my eyes to this day.  As much as l love the appearance of a classic car l wouldn't want one as l know how well the meat inside fares in a serious collision.  For that matter, I wouldn't be keen to get into serious naval engagements today even in a CPF that post HCM FELEX as l know what one missile or torpedo would do to us if it got through.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Colin P on October 02, 2017, 11:15:29
That would have lasted a whole of five minutes in a modern shooting war, like the ARA General Belgrano, of the Argentine Navy.

We disposed of our own HMCS QUEBEC and HMCS ONTARIO in 1956 and 1958 respectively because they were obsolete even then as far as modern warfare was concerned.

Sunk by a torpedo almost as old as it was as I recall :)
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on October 08, 2017, 12:59:36
As stated by me earlier,Thales Netherlands is a world leader in the field of radar development.

Unrivaled Performance by Thales SMART-L Multi Mission Radar during Formidable Shield 2017


https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2017/october-2017-navy-naval-forces-defense-industry-technology-maritime-security-global-news/5629-unrivaled-performance-by-thales-smart-l-multi-mission-radar-during-formidable-shield-2017.html
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: AlexanderM on October 08, 2017, 15:22:10
As stated by me earlier,Thales Netherlands is a world leader in the field of radar development.

Unrivaled Performance by Thales SMART-L Multi Mission Radar during Formidable Shield 2017


https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2017/october-2017-navy-naval-forces-defense-industry-technology-maritime-security-global-news/5629-unrivaled-performance-by-thales-smart-l-multi-mission-radar-during-formidable-shield-2017.html
Not only do I hope that at least our destroyers are equipped with this system but I also wonder if this technology could be used in upgrading the NORAD system. A few of those spread across northern Canada, and one on the West Coast, might not be a bad idea.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on October 09, 2017, 05:17:31
Maritime RNLN Van Hengel-Spengler Award 2017 is a maritime/naval price for the best innovation into operational systems.

Nice little upgrades for the submarines,the benefit of having a very dedicated sub community/crew.

https://youtu.be/R5am9aSg3z0

https://youtu.be/6_OkL2uZAwc?list=PLR6PLK_s9CGTNgTfyTP4mvLEfoPsra7eg

and here's another one,will save up to 4% in fuell costs for the new frigates.

https://youtu.be/NkQii8sO6r8?list=PLR6PLK_s9CGTNgTfyTP4mvLEfoPsra7eg
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on November 10, 2017, 07:55:50
Thales SMART-L radar proves BMD capability during Formidable Shield 2017
(Dit zet NL wel weer op de kaart, zowel op het gebied van radar als ook haar schepen en de capaciteiten)

Thales’s SMART-L radar detected and tracked a Terrier Oriole ballistic missile well outside the earth’s atmosphere. This unique achievement was the highlight in Formidable Shield 2017, an integrated air and missile defence exercise organized by the US Navy’s Sixth Fleet in the Hebrides test range in the Atlantic Ocean.

Admiral Rob Kramer of the Royal Netherlands Navy tweeted: “Technology triumph and top innovation by Thales and the Royal Netherlands Navy. This helps us keep safe in turbulent times.”

On the 15th of October, the ballistic missile was launched from the Hebrides coast. It reached an altitude of 300 km and a velocity of more than 3 km/second. Thales’s SMART-L radar on board of HNLMS De Ruyter detected and tracked the ballistic missile and made the data real-time available to a US Navy’s Aegis-class ship, via the designated NATO communications network. The quality of the data was high enough to be used for a Launch on Remote. The SMART-L radar on HNLMS De Ruyter, was temporarily modified to include the latest technology that Thales has recently developed for Ballistic Missile Defence purposes. This technology is used in the SMART-L Multi Mission radar that Thales is building for the four Royal Netherlands Navy’s Air Defence and Command Frigates and for two land-based versions for the Royal Netherlands Air Force.

Gerben Edelijn, CEO of Thales in the Netherlands: “This exercise proves that Thales has developed a radar system that is capable of timely detecting a ballistic missile and generating reliable data to enable the elimination of the threat. Such a sensor is an essential asset for armed forces in the protection of their countries’ population and high-value objects.”

Parallel to the events in the Atlantic, the SMART-L Multi Mission on the test tower in Hengelo again detected and tracked the ballistic missile.

https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2017/november-2017-navy-naval-forces-defense-industry-technology-maritime-security-global-news/5708-video-thales-smart-l-radar-proves-bmd-capability-during-formidable-shield-2017.html
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: AlexanderM on November 10, 2017, 11:38:21
We absolutely need to have the above system on our destroyers and several land based installations might not be a bad idea, wouldn't take very many to cover all of Canada, that is the north and the coasts.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Cdn Blackshirt on November 11, 2017, 19:54:58
I'm frankly shocked by the lack of urgency to get this defensive measure deployed on the West Coast.  I can see Little Kim taking a shot at us first as we don't have our own nukes to respond. 
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: MarkOttawa on November 11, 2017, 21:07:02
What RCN CSCs should have--missile defence radar and newest Raytheon Standard missiles:

Quote
Could SM-3 Interceptor [and SM-6] Take On Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles?
http://aviationweek.com/defense/could-sm-3-interceptor-take-intercontinental-ballistic-missiles

Quote
SM-6 Cleared for International Sale; Australia, Japan, Korea Could Be Early Customers
https://news.usni.org/2017/01/10/sm-6-cleared-international-sale-australia-japan-korea-early-customers

Quote
Aegis Intercept Test
https://www.csis.org/analysis/aegis-intercept-test

Mark
Ottawa
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: jmt18325 on November 12, 2017, 11:55:54
I'm frankly shocked by the lack of urgency to get this defensive measure deployed on the West Coast.  I can see Little Kim taking a shot at us first as we don't have our own nukes to respond.

They don't even consider us to be their enemy.  Why would they shoot at us?
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Chris Pook on November 12, 2017, 14:24:49
They were aiming for Seattle?
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Underway on November 13, 2017, 16:05:55
Its a bit of cry wolf thinking NK is going to hit us with anything, yes wolves are out there.  No they are not coming for our sheep.  I agree that a missile defense capability is important if only to ensure that we meet some NORAD continental defense requirements.  We don't want to be the weak link and make the US vulnerable to attack through us.  However, NK isn't going to hit us.  It's going to hit Japan, the South or US bases in Guam etc...  even continental US is from a geostrategic point of view on the lower end of the targeting priority.  Canada isn't even on the list.  Shrieking about it makes one look overly alarmist.  If one wants a strategic BMD capability there are better more solid arguments out there.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Cdn Blackshirt on November 13, 2017, 16:50:25
I think underestimating the threat that NK is becoming, is very short-sighted.

From a capability standpoint, most reports are indicating he's less than 18-months from being able to hit British Columbia with either a tactical nuke or biological.

Strategically, if he's looking for a country to make an example of, in terms of his willingness to kill innocents to maintain power, not sure there's a better target. 

*- Close to United States (largest trading partner and common language)
*- Part of NATO
*- Considered part of "the Western Coalition"
*- No nukes to respond
*- And culturally, part of our population would likely rush to blame the United States for having instigated the launch.

Other potential targets:
*- China? - NK would look like surface of Mars when China finished with them.
*- Russia - Similar
*- India - Similar
*- United States - Similar
*- Japan - Currently non-nuclear, but not thinking that will last much longer.
*- Vietnam - Non-nuclear, but wouldn't prove much and Russia is more likely to counterstrike.
*- Indonesia - Also non-nuclear, but wouldn't really prove much.
*- Philippines - Similar to Philippines....wouldn't prove much.

The only other relatively 'ideal' target for NK would be Australia and assuming NK could potentially be in possession of 20+ missiles capable of those ranges within the next 3-5 years, that should be a giant warning sign that our government needs to step up and get the procurement plan in place now....not AFTER the newest missile type with nuclear tip has gone operational.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: YZT580 on November 13, 2017, 20:42:33
NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT WE HAVE NEVER SIGNED A PEACE AGREEMENT WITH NK. 
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: MarkOttawa on November 13, 2017, 21:21:10
But in fact neither Canada nor anybody else actually declared war--was called a UN "police action":
http://www.cbc.ca/archives/entry/canada-pledges-military-aid-to-south-korea

Mark
Ottawa
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Underway on November 13, 2017, 22:29:26
I think underestimating the threat that NK is becoming, is very short-sighted.

Not underestimating the threat. Approaching it from reality.  Don't overinflate Canada's geopolitical importance.  We are a non-player and are not even on the NK radar.  Like I said if you are going to blow someone up then you better pick someone who if you hurt it really matters from a geopolitical point of view.  Why hit Canada and have all of NATO fall on you when you can hit the US and hurt them before all of NATO falls on you.  Better yet hit Japan and really do some damage before anyone can even defend themselves, while avoiding NATO all together.  Or even hit Taiwan, just to really f things up.  No, we don't even rate a tertiary target.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on December 03, 2017, 19:24:10
So i have an artist impression (Damen)of the new class of ASW/GP frigates together with the new MCM vessels to be built in the next years.(Damen's idea of how these ships could look like)


(https://image.ibb.co/iTPAEb/v_MFF_en_v_MCM.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mJ9MLG)

Here 1 of the Frigate alone.

(https://preview.ibb.co/gHayjb/v_MFF_By_Damen.jpg) (https://ibb.co/ceoJjb)

These are the 3 pictures released by the DMO(Defence Material Organisation,roughly translated),they show a different picture.(also artist impressions)

(https://image.ibb.co/hAS3jb/silhouetten_vergeleken_v_MFF.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

A is from 2014
B is from 2015
C is from 2017

Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on December 06, 2017, 01:38:49
And today(well yesterday) was the day for the 1st Smart-L MMN to be delivered to the DMO(Defence Material Organisation)for the DZP class.

Thales delivered the first SMART-L MM/N radar to the Defence Materiel Organisation. This milestone marks an important moment in time, where we continue to fulfil the big ambitions of our Netherlands Ministry of Defence.

https://www.facebook.com/ThalesNederland/?hc_ref=ARSrb79ZROX2_gJavf_H88zh0Zjgpa5keVN3n2sW_KUAOl_tPi9wJt_czHsHGyN48AY&fref=nf
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on March 20, 2018, 15:27:17
Thales Goalkeeper Passes Sea Acceptance Trials Following Upgrade

The first Goalkeeper Close-In Weapon System of the Royal Netherlands Navy equipped with the Upkeep modifications contracted in 2012, was subjected to the Sea Acceptance Trials (SAT) and passed all tests with flying colours.



The tests with air targets included: detection, tracking and elimination of Kinetiq Banshee propeller and jet drones with traditional and modern inbound attack flight paths. For surface targets, the same procedure was carried out with Kinetiq Sprite II drones.

The Upkeep Modification will once again bring performance of the Goalkeeper system to the highest operational status, in correspondence with the Royal Netherlands Navy’s ambition to optimally protect its crew and ships during overseas deployments. The Upkeep consists of new algorithms and state-of-the-art electro-optic tracking capabilities, making Goalkeeper capable of dealing with any threat, including modern, evasive maneuvering air threats with a complex trajectory. The system was developed in the 1980s; the update will enable its deployment for many years to come.

The Goalkeeper SAT was performed on HNLMS Johan de Witt. Other Goalkeeper Customers expressed their interest in this Upkeep modification.

Over the years, Goalkeeper's excellent performance has been clearly demonstrated in various live firing trials. A total of 63 Goalkeepers have been sold to Navies across Europe, the Middle East and the Far East.

https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2018/march-2018-navy-naval-defense-news/6067-thales-goalkeeper-passes-sea-acceptance-trials-following-upgrade.html
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on March 26, 2018, 15:15:00
The latest rendering and possibly the final one for the new ASW frigates(look very nice)Budget for these(for now 2 for The Netherlands and 2 for Belgium with option for 2 more for The Netherlands) is about 2-2.5 billion.

The strange thing offcourse is that Belgium has budgetted about 1.5 billion for 2,so very likely that we will buy more(let's hope so) :whistle:

https://photos-5.dropbox.com/t/2/AADZD1PCHlnJXA097bO8xSuEfxWxHEkU7xsH5S1DOhXJ6g/12/154874981/png/32x32/3/1522105200/0/2/vMFF_0318_edit.png/EJq3sXYY2QQgBygH/qGuYOYXAhIzlH3yN3em4VV6b6_6PZDmN0DzpOMyT6Z8?dl=0&preserve_transparency=1&size=2048x1536&size_mode=3
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: tomahawk6 on March 26, 2018, 21:18:28
Gotta find work for Canadian shipyards I would think.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Colin P on March 28, 2018, 14:12:32
Gotta find work for Canadian shipyards I would think.

that will be the driving force.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on June 02, 2018, 02:49:56
exciting news for us the proposed design from Damen/Saab has been revealed,for the Walrus replacement. 8)

Saab-Damen presents design of the replacement Walrus-class class submarine

http://nlnavy.damen.com/saab-damen-presents-design-replacement-walrus-class-submarine/
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: jollyjacktar on June 02, 2018, 08:33:03
Very sleek and nice.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on July 24, 2018, 12:27:55
Some dual spot operations on board The Johan de Witt  (LPD)of the Dutch Navy.

https://youtu.be/-nwgNXTsbY8
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on November 07, 2018, 15:11:08
ndoDefence 2018: Damen Unveils 6000 Tons 'Omega' Frigate

    November 2018 Naval News   
    Posted On Wednesday, 07 November 2018 17:05

By Xavier Vavasseur - Editor in Chief
At IndoDefence 2018, the tri service defense exposition currently held in Jakarta, Indonesia, Dutch shipbuilding group Damen unveiled the new 6,000 tons class 'Omega' Frigate design.

IndoDefence 2018 Damen Unveils 6000 Tons Omega Frigate 1 The new Omega frigate by Damen. Damen image.

Talking to Navy Recognition at the event, Bob De Smedt, one of the naval architect who worked on the Omega project, explained that the scale model on display is representative of an early concept for the future Royal Netherlands Navy (Koninklijke Marine) and Belgian Navy (Marinecomponent / Composante marine) M Frigate replacement. However the main reason the new Omega class of frigates was unveiled at IndoDefence (and not Euronaval for example which was held two weeks ago) is because Damen is now ready to answer Indonesia's potential need for a large frigate (hence the 'FFI' name on a Damen image, standing for Future Frigate Indonesia).

Omega is actually set to be a new family or product line by Damen, that will come in addition to (and above) the famous Sigma product line. The main difference however is that there will be no "standard Omega lines": Omega designs will always be fully tailored to customer requirements.

For this reason, a future Indonesian Navy (TNI AL) Omega frigate design is likely to look different to the future M Frigate replacement... unless Indonesia is willing and able to team up with the Dutch and Belgian order. The Netherlands and Belgium are jointly procuring four frigates (two each) to replace their M frigates. Navy Recognition learned from various sources during IndoDefence that TNI AL has an "emerging need" for a 6,000 tons class of frigates as a follow on to its third and fourth PKR frigates (also a Damen design, of the Sigma family).

While this design could be proposed to other navies (New Zealand comes to mind), Damen stressed that this is not the  design they are offering for Germany's MKS 180. Damen could not elaborate further about MKS 180.

IndoDefence 2018 Damen Unveils 6000 Tons Omega Frigate 2 Omega frigate sailing alongside TNI AL's PKR frigate (Sigma 10514). Artist impression: Damen.

Omega design features
Damen explained to us that the Omega / FFI frigate is based on the proven LCF / De Zeven Provinciën-class frigate hull form. The vessel features an hybrid propulsion system consisting of 4x diesel engines (two can be used for economic speed, four for sprint) plus 2x electric engines. The diesel engines are separated forward and aft for increased survivability. Power generation aboard the ship takes into account future weapon systems such as directed energy weapons.

The Omega frigate features two large multi mission bays: One amidship and one at the stern. As is the trend with latest generation frigates (Type 26 and FTI/Belharra) the midship multimission bay goes across from port to starboard sides with an overhead handling system to load and move containers or launch and recover RHIBS or USVs/UUVs. The midship multimission bay is large enough to accommodate up to 4x 20 foot containers and the stern multmission bay can accommodate 2x 20 foot containers. Note that there is an additional space on the upper deck, next to the anti-ship missile launchers for 2x additional containers.

IndoDefence 2018 Damen Unveils 6000 Tons Omega Frigate 3 Omega scale model on Damen stand at Indodefence 2018. Navy Recognition picture.

Thales S/X suite
The futuristic looking (almost Zumwalt-eske) topside of the Omega Frigate is mainly due to the new generation radar suite provided by Thales: Boudewijn Geerink from Thales Netherlands told Navy Recognition at Indodefence 2018 that it is the new S/X suite consisting of the SeaMaster 400 fixed panel S-band radar suite and the APAR Block II X-band multi-function radar, both using gallium nitride technology. According to Thales, the new fixed panel S-band radar solution is the right answer to counter threats posed by airborne or surface drones, precision-guided munitions, or submarine-fired pop-up missiles, typically attacking just above the sea surface (low elevation, sea skimming) or from high elevation angles (high diving). APAR Blk2 defends against saturation attacks in the highest threat scenarios by supporting many simultaneous AAW and ASuW engagements with both active and semi-active guidance using ICWI. Thales SeaMaster 400 offers a range of 450km while APAR Block 2 can replace illuminators to directly provide guidance for ESSM and SM-2 missiles.

Omega frigate is also available with different radar configurations. A version fitted with a rotating radar (such as the Thales NS200) is also being pitched by Damen.

IndoDefence 2018 Damen Unveils 6000 Tons Omega Frigate 4 Omega scale model on Damen stand at Indodefence 2018. Navy Recognition picture.

Weapons and other sensors
The weapons and sensor suite depends on customers requirements as usual. However the scale model on display at Indodefence shows the Omega frigate fitted with a 127mm main gun by leonardo, a 76mm secondary gun (non penetrating variant) by Leonardo on top of the helicopter hangar, a Rheinmetall Millenium CIWS, 2x Leonardo Hitrole remote weapon stations, 8x Kongsberg NSM anti-ship missiles, 4x Rheinmetall MASS decoy launchers, a Thales Kingklip hull mounted sonar and a Captas-4 variable depth sonar, 4x satellite link antennas and 2x Thales Mirador EO systems. For air defense, the scale model shows 24x VLS cells (likely VL MICA NG for Indonesia or ESSM Block 2 for Netherlands and Belgium).

IndoDefence 2018 Damen Unveils 6000 Tons Omega Frigate 5 Omega scale model on Damen stand at Indodefence 2018. Navy Recognition picture.

Omega frigate /  FFI early specifications:
Length: 144 meters
Breadth: 18.8 meters
Displacement: 6100 tons
Max. speed: 29 knots
Range: 5,000 nautical miles @ 18 knots
Endurance: 30 days at sea
Stabilisation: Rudder roll (similar to LCF)
Crew: 122 sailors (accommodations for up to 160)
Storage space for 3x 12 meters RHIBs
Hangar space for 2x medium lift helicopters and/or UAV.



https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2018/november-2018-navy-naval-defense-news/6660-indodefence-2018-damen-unveils-6000-tons-omega-frigate.html
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on January 25, 2019, 16:34:05
As i said(in the Victoria lead)a new CSS(Combat Support Ship )will be build,will look similar to this:

https://youtu.be/_W0FlGLXO9Y

Sorry,it's in Dutch,but you'll get the picure(no punn intended)
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on February 13, 2019, 07:32:30
Negotiations have started with Chili,to replace the 2 L-class frigates(ex-Dutch)for our 2 remaining M-class frigates.

If all goes to plan(agreement)first ship to be delivered in 2024,last in 2027.

Article is in Dutch(but in short that is what it says) :nod:

Defensie verkoopt m-fregatten aan Chili

https://www.telegraaf.nl/t/3145759/ via @telegraaf
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on February 28, 2019, 10:56:24
A bit more news about the new upcomming Multi purpose frigates.(not the definite design,btw  ;D )

https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2019/february/6855-thales-group-awarded-contract-for-the-belgian-dutch-anti-air-frigates.html

and the rivalry for the new subs tightens. :orly:


Contenders line up for Netherlands replacement submarines

Industry rivals for the Netherlands’ Walrus-class submarine replacement programme have laid out details of their propositions ahead of the government’s release of the all-important ‘B-letter’ that will start the definition phase of the programme.

France’s Naval Group, Navantia in Spain, Saab Kockums of Sweden, and German shipbuilding group thyssenkrupp Marine Systems are all proposing in-country construction of new non-nuclear boats, and promising significant opportunities for Dutch industry consistent with the government’s recently unveiled Defence Industry Strategy (DIS).

Local media reports suggest that Saab Kockums (teamed with Damen) and Naval Group (in partnership with Royal IHC) are set to be shortlisted to participate in the B-phase.

[Source: Janes.com ]
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Oldgateboatdriver on February 28, 2019, 16:06:59
A bit more news about the new upcomming Multi purpose frigates.(not the definite design,btw  ;D )

I sure hope so. Who is the genius who decided to put a five inch gun on top of the helicopter hangar ???
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on March 01, 2019, 09:49:01
I sure hope so. Who is the genius who decided to put a five inch gun on top of the helicopter hangar ???

Euhm,it's not a 5 inch(127mm),those are 2 76mm sovraponte's.   :tsktsk:  (no penetration),and btw,no exeption, our LCF's all have a Goalkeeper in the same spot. 8)


Above Water Warfare System (AWWS)

The development of AWWS has become necessary because above-water threats are growing exponentially in terms of complexity, coordination and speed. Missiles go up to three times faster than the speed of sound, and possibly even up to five times faster in 2020. Currently used technologies are insufficient to make use of all the new sensor and weapon systems to counter these threats in the future. This new system continuously generates the best solution to counter any incoming threats, whatever the environmental conditions or threat complexity. The system will support the operator in making the right decision at every decisive moment.

When faced with scenarios of several different threats arriving simultaneously and employing complex behaviours, such as very high speed, a human operator will no longer be able to schedule and plan the right defensive priorities effectively and efficiently. However, AWWS will offer the operator information to make the right decisions within seconds, so the ship can protect itself successfully and continue on its mission.

AWWS will consist of a new generation of sensors, coupled with intelligent software that continuously calculates which actions are best suited to tackle each threat detected by radar and other sensors in the right manner. This maximizes the chance of survival, while the crew stays in control.

This system uses the latest sensor technology from Thales to detect and monitor all abovewater threats, including the next-generation, fully digital dual-band X/S radar suite: an integral combination of Active Phased Array Radar (APAR) and Sea Master 400 radar technologies.

https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2019/february/6855-thales-group-awarded-contract-for-the-belgian-dutch-anti-air-frigates.html
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on March 15, 2019, 08:15:15
a bit more clarity.(M-class replacement)

Will be based on the Omega design,great looking vessels. :D(see reply#102(Damen's artist impressions) or link reply#111 to get an idea)

Thales Netherlands and the Defense Materiel Organization (DMO) of the Dutch Navy have concluded an agreement for the development of the combat system of the 4 new frigates for the Dutch and Belgian navies that will replace as many M-class units currently in service. RID was able to participate both in the official ceremony and in the presentations related to the program in favor of the press which were held in Hengelo, in the Netherlands, the main site of Thales Netherlands. The combat system is produced according to a scheme typical of the Royal Netherlands Navy presented as a "Dutch naval ecosystem", in which the Marina's design offices maintain the initiative on the design of the units and actively participate in all the design phases and industrialization. The expected general characteristics of the units were illustrated by Vice-Admiral Arie-Jan de Waard, Director of DMO and by Gerben Edelijn, CEO of Thales Netherlands. The ships will have strong antisubmarine capabilities (ASW), but will have a specific suite - called Above Water Warfare Suite (AWWS) - to combat surface and air threats. Physically, the hull is built on the basis of Damen Shipbuilding's OMEGA frigate project, revisited by the Royal Netherlands Navy's design offices. The main sensors will be grouped in the integrated SEA MAST 400 mast, in which a new dual-band radar in X and S bands will be integrated, probably in the wake of what can be done today with the NS-100/200 family radar. To the sensors in the tower will be added electronic warfare equipment and deception distributors (chaff and flares). The armament has not been specifically discussed, but it is very likely that it will be based on the surface-to-air missiles of the SM-2 family which will guarantee the defense of the area, while for the artillery there are 2 76 mm towers Leonardo SOVRAPONTE, one aft and one in the bow, and 2 remote controlled MARLIN units, also by Leonardo, with a 30 mm machine gun. The anti-ship missiles have not been decided, but given the collaboration with Deutsche Marine to standardize the equipment it is to be assumed that they will opt for the Saab RBS-15 Mk.3 / 4 (cited as an example by Viceammiraglio de Waard during the presentation) . The first unit will be delivered to the Netherlands in 2025, the second in 2026. The Belgian units will follow in 2027 and 2028.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Fred Herriot on March 15, 2019, 10:55:28
What about ships like the SIGMA 9113-class corvettes?  Would be perfect to replace the Kingston-class ships, I believe.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Colin P on March 15, 2019, 14:57:26
50% bigger, blurs the line between the classes. The Kingston can get into places the larger vessels can't.
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on March 15, 2019, 18:34:01
And more news,builder for the 12 new MCM ships is known(replacement "tripartite-class),sorry for the "google" translation. :-X

Thanks to an unbeatable financial proposal, Naval Group would take the rope to extract from STX / Thales a € 2 billion contract for the supply of twelve minehunters to Belgium and the Netherlands. The naval group would also have benefited from a boost from Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian. What the Quai d'Orsay denies.

Atmosphere, atmosphere. Between STX, Thales and Naval Group, the atmosphere will soon be very, very explosive. The new Belgian Minister of Defense and Foreign Affairs, Didier Reynders, was supposed to award, on Friday after a restricted interdepartmental council, a contract for the purchase of twelve minesweepers by the Belgian navy (six vessels ) and the Netherlands (six others) for approximately € 2 billion. However, the decision could be postponed, according to concordant sources. Belgium has in principle until the end of the month to decide, the legislative elections are scheduled for May 26. Brussels is not at its first postponement.

    "The contract award for demining vessels has been slightly delayed for two to three months, partly because of the complexity of the procurement file," Defense Minister Didier Reynders said on Wednesday. Why: "In order to give bidders the maximum opportunity to submit compliant and optimized offers, it was necessary to extend the negotiation period by a few weeks".

The Belgian choice should generate strong explanations between the three groups which are closely linked to each other: STX is 15% owned by Naval Group, which itself has a stake in Thales (35%). For its part, the State has participations in the three groups. A little more consistency would have made the position of France more healthy situation. The consortium STX / Thales, backed by France, and Naval Group have engaged a fierce competition, too fierce ... which could be ultimately disastrous for both groups. An umpteenth Franco-French export war, which should never have taken place. Initially, the Directorate General of Armament (DGA) had asked the Naval Group not to compete but the group finally forced the door after the departure of the delegate general for weapons, Laurent Collet-Billon. The Hôtel de Brienne is delighted with a possible French victory in Belgium, explains one in the entourage of Florence Parly.

Three consortia submitted bids deemed credible by the Belgian Directorate General of Material Resources (DGMR), which has already eliminated the Spanish shipyard Navantia: the Dutch group Damen Schelde, associated with the company IMTECH België; a consortium called Sea Naval Solutions, bringing together the Thales shipyards, including Thales Belgium, STX France, Socarenam and the Antwerp firm Engine Deck Repair (EDR); and, finally, a consortium between Naval Group and ECA Robotics called Naval & Robotics.
Naval Group winner?

According to Belgian sources, it is Naval Group, who would hold the rope the day before (?) The award of contract in front of favorite STX / Thales, who was still the race in the lead in recent weeks. The naval group would have made an unbeatable financial proposal to win this market, which could not, it seems, not escape technologically and politically to the electronics group, one of the world champions, otherwise the champion anti-submarine warfare. Because sonar acoustic performance is the key to detecting mines and systems. "Between Thales and ECA, there are several divisions of difference in this area," ensures a very good knowledge of the case.

Thales, which has developed a CAPTAS 4 sonar of excellence for French multi-mission frigates (FREMM), is also working on a new-generation sonar for future nuclear launching submarines (SNLE). State-of-the-art technologies that meet the needs of the Belgian navy, a reference in NATO for mine warfare. This capacity is important for Belgium in a context of renewed international tensions, particularly with Russia, which tests Western defenses in the air and under the sea. "Belgium is the pilot country for a project on the future development of autonomous systems of mine action," said Wednesday the Belgian Defense Minister before the Defense Committee.

For example, last August, during an exercise off the coast of Norway, NATO's SNMCMG 1 mine-control fleet was under Belgian command, the command and support vessel being the Godetia. Every year, Belgian minesweepers take part in a NATO demining campaign carried out by an international squadron from the Baltic coast to the Mediterranean. According to the Belgian Ministry of Defense, stalking
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on March 22, 2019, 07:40:28

ECA Group won €450 million through Belgian-Dutch MCM contract

As part of the Belgian-Dutch Mine Counter Measures (MCM) contract awarded to the Belgium Naval & Robotics consortium, with a worth value of €2.2 billion, ECA Group is to win €450 million for the building and the procurement of a total of 100 drones (ROVs) to supply the 12 mine-hunting vessels.

As a reminder, a call for tenders was launched by the Belgian and Dutch navies in the Summer of 2018, seeking for companies to build a provide them 12 brand new autonomous mine-hunting vessels, scheduled to be fitted with a state-of-the-art toolbox.

Recently, the Belgian government in charge of the final decision has awarded the contract to the Belgium Naval & Robotics consortium, which regroups Naval Group and ECA Robotics. As part of this contract, ECA Group is in charge of the building of a total amount of 100 drones to supply the 12 mine-hunting vessels (6 for each navy).

The 10-year program will start with a design phase of about 3 years before the production and delivery phase of the drone systems. The contract should generate revenue starting 2019. This contract will be, by far, the largest contract ever won by ECA Group, its amount being greater than 4 years of turnover for the group.

This success is the achievement of a strategy focused for many years on the development of drone systems composed of multiple and varied drones cooperating as autonomously as possible within the same mission. In this case, it is a mine clearance mission at sea.

The Belgian and Dutch navies are thus acquiring the latest generation of mine hunters designed by Naval Group and fully integrating ECA Group's naval drones systems capable of conducting submarine mine clearance operations autonomously in the minefield. The drone systems to provide are the latest generations of drones developed over the last 4 years. The drones, all integrated into ECA Group's C2 MCM system, are Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs),towed sonars and Mine Identification & Destruction Systems (MIDS) composed of Remotely Operated Vehicles (ROV) for the identification and destruction of mines, all of these drones can be implemented fully automatically from the USV (Unmanned Surface Vehicles). The naval drones system also incorporates UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) and sweeps.

The Belgian navy is a reference in submarine mine clearance within NATO, this contract is a major asset for export: as 40 years ago with the tripartite mine hunters program that had generated sales of PAP robots to dozens of marines in 20 years, this success in Belgium should generate many commercial export benefits in the coming years.

Several major navies including France, India or England will renew their mine hunting fleet in the coming years. In addition, ECA Group believes that most navies will also be equipped with transportable drone systems that can be used from the coast.

A significant part of the execution of the contract will take place in Belgium within ECA Robotics Belgium, as part of a cooperation plan that already includes 39 Belgian partners. The equipped surface drones will be designed and produced in Belgium and all underwater drones will also be produced there. Finally, these naval or air drones generate a logistic support, repairs, spares activities that can be done by ECA Robotics Belgium. These activities generate additional revenues as maintenance and support contracts throughout the lifespan of drones, generally greater than 20 years for naval drones.

[Source: Navy Recognition  @ Article ]
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on March 22, 2019, 07:46:49
and a bit about the the new Thales X/S suite(wich will be on the new frigates)

Naval News
Gepubliceerd op 20 mrt. 2019
An important element of Thales' AWWS is the new "X/S Suite". This next-generation, fully digital dual-band X/S radar suite is an integral combination of the SeaMaster 400 fixed panel S-band radar suite and the APAR Block II X-band multi-function radar, both using gallium nitride technology.

https://youtu.be/QAUhBC7Eyfs
Title: Re: Dutch ships and designs and the possibilities for Canada
Post by: Karel Doorman on March 23, 2019, 08:48:37
Finally the new SMART-LMM is here(first ship,the.........."The Seven" will get it first) 8)


Thales SMART-L MM Radar Installed on HNLMS De Zeven Provinciën Frigate
The Royal Netherlands Navy HNLMS De Zeven Provinciën Frigate has received her SMART-L Multi Mission radar upgrade, providing enhanced Air and Missile Defense capability.

Xavier Vavasseur 23 Mar 2019

HNLMS De Zeven Provinciën is the lead ship of her class (also known as LCF for Air Defense and Command Frigate). All four ships of the class will be upgraded with the new radar (and other systems) as part of the modernization programme.

According to Thales, the SMART-L MM is a next generation Long Range Multi Mission Radar for Air and Space Surveillance and Ballistic Missile Detection. The fully digitally controlled Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) type of radar, applying GaN transmitter and Dual Axis Multibeam receiver technology, is capable of detecting a very wide variety of air and space objects including stealth, short up to long range ballistic missiles and space objects. The SMART-L MM is capable of surveillance and tracking of Ballistic Missiles up to 2000 km while simultaneous maintaining the Air Defence capability. Aboard the LCF vessels, the MM variant replaces the existing SMART-L radars.
Thales SMART-L MM Radar Installed on HNLMS De Zeven Provinciën Frigate 2

With the SMART-L MM, Thales is also considering export prospects such as the German Navy’s three Sachsen-class air-defence frigates (F 124) for which a requirement for new BMD capable radars as been issues, as well as further down the road, the upgrade of the French Navy’s two Horizon class air-defence destroyers.

Regarding the LCF, the mordernization effort includes other systems: Plans were announced in 2018 to acquire the BMD-capable SM-3 surface-to-air missiles (these plans still need to be confirmed). De Zeven Provinciën-class frigates can pass on the tracking and detection data to other sea-based or land-defense BMD assets, including U.S. Navy’s warships, that can deal with a ballistic missile threat.

On 3 May 2018 the Dutch Secretary of Defence, Barbara Visser, informed the Dutch national parliament that the Raytheon evolved sea sparrow missile (ESSM) aboard the De Zeven Provinciën-class frigates will be upgraded from block 1 to block 2. This upgrade will be completed by 2024 along with a new anti-ship missile (to replace the existing Harpoon). Last but not least, the existing 127mm Oto Melara (Leonardo) main guns will be replaced as those are over 50 years old and were acquired second hand from the Canadian Navy. On March 20th, a contract notice for the supply of 127mm guns was issued on the European tender platform TED. The programme named “Frigates 127 mm gun replacement program” has a estimated value between 50 and 200 million Euros. Both Leonardo and BAE Systems are expected to bid with their respective gun systems, along with their smart, guided ammunition.


https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2019/03/thales-smart-l-mm-radar-installed-on-hnlms-de-zeven-provincien-frigate/