Author Topic: Save Money and Get a Big Ship  (Read 29683 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 145,330
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,296
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #50 on: August 07, 2018, 09:17:48 »
I can tellyou with some degree of certainty that Canada would not embark upon a second MH competition, to buy a supplement to the Cyclone fleet, anytime soon, as you propose.

That said, purchasing some type of naval UAV is probably within the realm of the possible.

Offline JMCanada

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 1,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 57
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #51 on: August 07, 2018, 09:55:46 »
You are right, I know. Having a 2nd helo is more a wish than anything else.

But I consider than the 2nd helo for ASW would be almost a MUST for any navy: provides more time a day for searching submarines, higher reliability (if one breaks down, still you have the 2nd while repairing the 1st) and provides support either to cover a wider area or to better locate the SS.

And I find that flying 6.000 kg  (Wildcat) with all its ASW capabilities is more efficient searching the SS than running all time with 13.000 kg on the air.

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 48,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,743
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #52 on: August 07, 2018, 10:26:59 »
You are right, I know. Having a 2nd helo is more a wish than anything else.

But I consider than the 2nd helo for ASW would be almost a MUST for any navy: provides more time a day for searching submarines, higher reliability (if one breaks down, still you have the 2nd while repairing the 1st) and provides support either to cover a wider area or to better locate the SS.

And I find that flying 6.000 kg  (Wildcat) with all its ASW capabilities is more efficient searching the SS than running all time with 13.000 kg on the air.

Stop with the second type of helicopter on a frigate/destroyer okay? These size of ships are packed to the hilt already (helicopter support) and having a second aircraft type and the accompanying spare parts is just not feasible. 

You might as well have a Canberra type carrier and carry a dozen helicopters!


Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 20,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 896
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #53 on: August 07, 2018, 20:29:08 »
I can tellyou with some degree of certainty that Canada would not embark upon a second MH competition, to buy a supplement to the Cyclone fleet, anytime soon, as you propose.

That said, purchasing some type of naval UAV is probably within the realm of the possible.

I know for a fact that NETE is working on developing a UXV control system to control multiple types of UXV's from one system.  Flexibility from a single space.  The currently navy UAV is a RQ-20 Puma which I don't know is purchased yet but the contract has be awarded.

Offline IN ARDUA NITOR

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,440
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 144
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #54 on: August 07, 2018, 23:13:35 »
I know for a fact that NETE is working on developing a UXV control system to control multiple types of UXV's from one system.  Flexibility from a single space.  The currently navy UAV is a RQ-20 Puma which I don't know is purchased yet but the contract has be awarded.

We have Puma on both coasts now. HAT completed out west a few weeks ago. SATs upcoming.

Offline JMCanada

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 1,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 57
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #55 on: August 08, 2018, 07:18:44 »
You might as well have a Canberra type carrier and carry a dozen helicopters!
Actually ... she can embark up to 30 NH-90 helicopters  8)

OK ... I did not think much on spare parts and so, but I would prefer 2 medium helos (same type) in an ASW frigate than only one Cyclone. Could leave Cyclones on other frigates for other purposes as AEW/ASaC.

I did not know about RQ-20 Puma, and for sure it has unique features for Canadian climate, but in order to operate in warmer waters Fulmar has much better capabilities for a similar length and wingspan.
https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/fulmar-x

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 37,060
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,026
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #56 on: August 08, 2018, 10:48:59 »
I can tellyou with some degree of certainty that Canada would not embark upon a second MH competition, to buy a supplement to the Cyclone fleet, anytime soon, as you propose.

That said, purchasing some type of naval UAV is probably within the realm of the possible.

I'm curious if you are of the opinion that Canada has purchased MH for the next 50-60 years?
Living the lean life.

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 145,330
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,296
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #57 on: August 08, 2018, 10:52:59 »
All I can go by is our recent procurement history....

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 217,050
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,677
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #58 on: August 08, 2018, 11:32:52 »
Actually ... she can embark up to 30 NH-90 helicopters  8)

OK ... I did not think much on spare parts and so, but I would prefer 2 medium helos (same type) in an ASW frigate than only one Cyclone. Could leave Cyclones on other frigates for other purposes as AEW/ASaC.


Asid from the amount of issues that would come from a second helicopter on an ASW frigate...3 questions:

1.  You do know the CH-148 is an ASW helicopter, right?  (I'm not SURE what you'd propose doing with the Cyclone, their gear and crews that are there for ASW)

2.  Where are these "other, non-ASW frigates" coming from in the RCN?  Are we able to put the entire fleet of CPFs to sea now at once?  Do any of our Allies want/need us to do these other tasks and are we 'big' enough for that stuff?

3.  2 types of helicopters for the RCN would require 2 different types of aircrew and maintainers as well.  Where will they come from? 

OK...I couldn't limit it to 3 questions...but it was close.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2018, 12:16:53 by Eye In The Sky »
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,935
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,356
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #59 on: August 08, 2018, 13:08:24 »
A modern version of the flying peanut with a dip sonar would be interesting, mount the Mk 48 triple mounts on the AOP's and they could do some ASW if needed, their a target anyways.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yvRrv8St2I

Offline suffolkowner

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 12,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 335
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #60 on: August 08, 2018, 14:19:43 »
It doesn't seem likely that an additional aircraft could be added to a frigate.
Does not our doctrine count/rely on a medium helicopter capable of independent operation from the ship?
How would the other helicopter be integrated?
I could see another helicopter based off the AOR(Maybe UH-1Y).
Can the CH-148 be used for other purposes or are they essentially limited to anti submarine warfare?

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 217,050
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,677
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #61 on: August 08, 2018, 14:31:17 »
Can the CH-148 be used for other purposes

Yes

Quote
or are they essentially limited to anti submarine warfare?

No.
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline suffolkowner

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 12,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 335
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #62 on: August 08, 2018, 14:47:02 »
Yes

No.

Thanks EITS

That would suggest to me that there is no huge need to diversify the marine helicopter fleet

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 48,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,743
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #63 on: August 08, 2018, 15:11:31 »
Thanks EITS

That would suggest to me that there is no huge need to diversify the marine helicopter fleet

That is why we have such a big bird on the decks of our frigates. It gives the RCN great flexibility when conducting operations abroad and not just ASW.

Hmmmm, just imagine the flexibility and range of operations that a carrier the size of Mistral or Canberra would provide to the government of Canada?
But then, that would assume that Canada is capable of having some sort of strategic doctrine to support combat/peace support or disaster relief operations outside of purely ad hocery.   

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,935
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,356
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #64 on: August 08, 2018, 16:47:14 »
It would have been fun to be in the room if Harper had gotten the 2 Mistrals and dropped the bomb on the senior staff; "By the way you now have 2 helicopter carrying assault ships you need to incorporate into how you do business and we have a mission for you already....."

Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 20,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 896
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #65 on: August 08, 2018, 18:14:11 »
1.  It doesn't seem likely that an additional aircraft could be added to a frigate.
2.  Does not our doctrine count/rely on a medium helicopter capable of independent operation from the ship?
3. How would the other helicopter be integrated?
I could see another helicopter based off the AOR(Maybe UH-1Y).
4. Can the CH-148 be used for other purposes or are they essentially limited to anti submarine warfare?

Questions in order...

1.  An additional aircraft can be added provided its not much bigger then a Puma.  Not much space left in that hangar when the Cyclone is embarked.

2.  Yes.  The capabilities of a medium helo are one of the reasons the TG numbers are what they are. 

3.  There was a discussion on another thread regarding using a helo for AEW much the same way the UK does.  I would surmise that would be a good use.

4.  Their surface search radar is excellent.  Asking a Cyclone in the air to pop up to 10000 ft or so to help find a contact is a real game changer in Recognized Maritime Picture.  They can the go check out the contact if needed.  Their sensor suite is amazing.  I'm a huge fanboy of this aircraft so far.

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 105,300
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,567
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #66 on: August 08, 2018, 19:04:51 »
Some type of helicopter assault ship would have a number of possible missions from ASW to humanitarian. It would be a good to have on the tool belt.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3010499/Japanese-navy-gets-biggest-flat-WWII-era-aircraft-carriers.html

Offline JMCanada

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 1,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 57
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #67 on: August 08, 2018, 19:06:04 »
Asid from the amount of issues that would come from a second helicopter on an ASW frigate...3 questions:
Since I am not an expert ...  could you please indicate a few ?

1.  You do know the CH-148 is an ASW helicopter, right?  (...)
Yes ... and can do many other tasks as well, for which the crews are trained. 

2.  Where are these "other, non-ASW frigates" coming from in the RCN?
Well, when I started my post in this thread I mentioned about future CSCs, of which I would make two variants: ASW (10 units) & AAW (5). All the following is built on that as a will/ desire/ hypotheses on my best understanding.

Of course I am not suggesting all the CSCs (and crews) should be available at all times.


3.  2 types of helicopters for the RCN would require 2 different types of aircrew and maintainers as well. (...)

Sorry if I have bothered anyone, was not at all in my mind. I see Cyclones as a very useful MH including ASW roles , but looking into other navies ...

* UK operates both Merlin (similar to Cyclone) and AW 159 Wildcat

* Italy & Germany use 2 helos in their ASW Fremms / F-123 & F-124 frigates.

* French navy is operating 4 types of helos: panther, dauphin, caiman (NH90) & Lynx (what a zoo  ;)  ).

That being said, my proposal is for only a second type of helo of around 6.000 kg MTOW. I consider this could bring savings by using them as a "force multiplier" in support of the frigates and Cyclones.

Doesn't it make sense a naval group of one AAW frigate with one CH-148, another ASW or multipurpose frig with one more CH-148 and a 3rd ASW frig with 2x Wildcats to cover a wider area and provide more time on air?

This , of course, from an amateur point of view.

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 145,330
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,296
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #68 on: August 08, 2018, 21:43:09 »
A modern version of the flying peanut with a dip sonar would be interesting, mount the Mk 48 triple mounts on the AOP's and they could do some ASW if needed, their a target anyways.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yvRrv8St2I

Mk48 torpedos, are a heavy weight, launched only by submarines.

They are not carried by surface ships, ever. You are, perhaps, thinking of either the Mk46 or the Mk54.

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 145,330
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,296
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #69 on: August 08, 2018, 21:48:42 »
Sorry if I have bothered anyone, was not at all in my mind. I see Cyclones as a very useful MH including ASW roles , but looking into other navies ...

* UK operates both Merlin (similar to Cyclone) and AW 159 Wildcat

* Italy & Germany use 2 helos in their ASW Fremms / F-123 & F-124 frigates.

* French navy is operating 4 types of helos: panther, dauphin, caiman (NH90) & Lynx (what a zoo  ;)  ).

That being said, my proposal is for only a second type of helo of around 6.000 kg MTOW. I consider this could bring savings by using them as a "force multiplier" in support of the frigates and Cyclones.

Doesn't it make sense a naval group of one AAW frigate with one CH-148, another ASW or multipurpose frig with one more CH-148 and a 3rd ASW frig with 2x Wildcats to cover a wider area and provide more time on air?

This , of course, from an amateur point of view.

Without getting into a lot of detail, none of what you propose makes any sense for Canada.

Our task groups are structured in such a way that the Cyclone provides 24/7 coverage. It it large enough to carry enough sensors to be able to switch roles, required. A small helo like your propose is a "one trick pony" or is always fuel critical.

To say nothing about where we would get the people to staff entirely new squadrons- personnel being a zero sum game in the CAF.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 139,935
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,356
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #70 on: August 08, 2018, 23:52:31 »
Mk48 torpedos, are a heavy weight, launched only by submarines.

They are not carried by surface ships, ever. You are, perhaps, thinking of either the Mk46 or the Mk54.

you be correct, my bad.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 217,050
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,677
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #71 on: August 09, 2018, 08:32:30 »
Sorry if I have bothered anyone, was not at all in my mind.

I don't think you're bothering anyone, truthfully.  Some of us here do the Maritime and Maritime Air stuff for a living so we're a little more aware of the issues that come along with 'adding this or that' into our current ORBAT. 

*disclaimer - I am not an MH type, but I understand some of the very basic 'stuff' about their (both the RCN and MH) worlds.  I am a LRP type; we work with them on occasion.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2018, 08:41:08 by Eye In The Sky »
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 48,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,743
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #72 on: August 09, 2018, 08:38:39 »
Sorry if I have bothered anyone, was not at all in my mind.

No you are not bothering anyone. In fact its nice to see a Canadian citizen take an interest in our nation's maritime defence capabilities.

I apologize for my somewhat snarky response to your initial post.

Cheers and keep up your interest!

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 217,050
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,677
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #73 on: August 09, 2018, 08:40:10 »
4.  Their surface search radar is excellent.  Asking a Cyclone in the air to pop up to 10000 ft or so to help find a contact is a real game changer in Recognized Maritime Picture.  They can the go check out the contact if needed.  Their sensor suite is amazing.  I'm a huge fanboy of this aircraft so far.

I'd love to see the LRP fleet start getting a little more involved in the picture you're talking about here too, Cdn CPFs, SSKs, MH and LRPAs working and training together.  I know, I'm dreaming.   ;D

Very happy to hear the Cyclone is thought of this way though.  I'm sure there will be tons of discussions during the VDQ sail and "lessons learned" stuff both during and after they get back. 
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline Swampbuggy

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,630
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 145
Re: Save Money and Get a Big Ship
« Reply #74 on: August 09, 2018, 08:57:04 »
If we were looking at a second class of MH, I’d like to see one picked for AOPS operations. I read awhile back a proposal for a variant of the new help the CCG just got. A Cyclone seems like overkill on an AOPS and I’m still not sure about CCG air dets on RCN missions.