New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy

[Colin Parkinson]

I suspect size does matter in a under the keel hit, it will limit the amount of injuries. Was the Belgarno a under the keel hit or a hull hit?

 

[Kirkhill]

Belgrano displaced about 10,000 tonnes light.

 

[GK .Dundas]

The Brits used a MK 8 torpedo developed in the late 1930s . I suspect a hull impact as opposed to under her keel.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

BTW Kirkhill, the ship in Navy Pete's video is in your favourite 2000 tons range. It's a derivative of the Leander class frigate.

Of course, the pictured hit is just there to drive home the amount of damage such a hit can cause. I say that because it is conducted as a test in perfect conditions : the sub is not under threat from anything, has all the time in the world, can move to optimum distance and sets a perfect center hit on a stopped target.

Real life, as an escort in an ASW scenario, you are maneuvering constantly at speed unless you are in the drift phase of the hunt - but even then you are moving (slowly) and have a tail streamed to get protection from such close shot and the sub knows this. So achieving a perfect under the middle of the ship hit is pretty difficult and a likely rare event even with a guided torpedo following its own sonar. I am not saying you wont be hit, just that the perfect shot is not the most likely hit (actually a hit in the screws is the most likely - not that it is much better).

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

For the larger vessels, a hull hit is probably better. An under the keel explosion would not do as much damage on a 6000 to 8000 tons destroyer, less on a cruiser and probably nowhere near as much under an aircraft carrier.

The limitation is that the upward force being exerted by the explosion is always the same. We all remember our physics: Force = Mass x Acceleration. Since the force is constant, the more mass your ship has, the lesser the "acceleration" being induced in the hull.

 

[Kirkhill]

BTW Kirkhill, the ship in Navy Pete's video is in your favourite 2000 tons range. It's a derivative of the Leander class frigate.

Of course, the pictured hit is just there to drive home the amount of damage such a hit can cause. I say that because it is conducted as a test in perfect conditions : the sub is not under threat from anything, has all the time in the world, can move to optimum distance and sets a perfect center hit on a stopped target.

Real life, as an escort in an ASW scenario, you are maneuvering constantly at speed unless you are in the drift phase of the hunt - but even then you are moving (slowly) and have a tail streamed to get protection from such close shot and the sub knows this. So achieving a perfect under the middle of the ship hit is pretty difficult and a likely rare event even with a guided torpedo following its own sonar. I am not saying you wont be hit, just that the perfect shot is not the most likely hit (actually a hit in the screws is the most likely - not that it is much better).

I picked up on that. Same size as the Tamar.

Conversely though how much bigger would the hull have to be to achieve a different result? The CSC at 8000 tonnes standard is starting to knock on Belgrano's door.

What do you reckon the odds are of repairing a hull with even a near miss? IIRC in the Falklands a number of the hulls that survived Argentine air attacks survived because the Argentinians were flying so low their bombs didn't have time to arm and punched through the hulls without detonating.

This is getting macabre. Time to quit?

 

[YZT580]

For the larger vessels, a hull hit is probably better. An under the keel explosion would not do as much damage on a 6000 to 8000 tons destroyer, less on a cruiser and probably nowhere near as much under an aircraft carrier.

The limitation is that the upward force being exerted by the explosion is always the same. We all remember our physics: Force = Mass x Acceleration. Since the force is constant, the more mass your ship has, the lesser the "acceleration" being induced in the hull.

HMS Belfast took a single mine beneath the keel and it damn near spelled the end of her war effort. If I recall, the keel was actually bent

 

[Halifax Tar]

Thanks, I couldn't remember what it was called.

I think one big difference is previously torpedos hit the hull; now they blow up below you and the pressure bubble breaks your keel. Smarter people then me that specialize in that sort of thing just laugh at the idea of ships surviving a heavy weight torpedo shot, which is a typical sea training scenario for damage. Aside from breaking the ship, the blast wave would pulp everyone down below 3 deck, so don't really need to worrry about abandoning ship.

Whaddya mean ? We regularly survive multiple torp and missile hits during exercises... Are you saying that's not real ? lol

BTW Kirkhill, the ship in Navy Pete's video is in your favourite 2000 tons range. It's a derivative of the Leander class frigate.

Of course, the pictured hit is just there to drive home the amount of damage such a hit can cause. I say that because it is conducted as a test in perfect conditions : the sub is not under threat from anything, has all the time in the world, can move to optimum distance and sets a perfect center hit on a stopped target.

Real life, as an escort in an ASW scenario, you are maneuvering constantly at speed unless you are in the drift phase of the hunt - but even then you are moving (slowly) and have a tail streamed to get protection from such close shot and the sub knows this. So achieving a perfect under the middle of the ship hit is pretty difficult and a likely rare event even with a guided torpedo following its own sonar. I am not saying you wont be hit, just that the perfect shot is not the most likely hit (actually a hit in the screws is the most likely - not that it is much better).

I would surmise even with one being taken out by the nixie the shock wave would probably do structural damage to a ship. But I'm just a simple storesman, so I could be wrong.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Keel bent and limping home is why better than broken in two and going down. Lots of ships survived having their Bows blown off by torpedo's

 

[Kirkhill]

Considering the effect of the torpedo on the Leander and the Belgrano.

Leander, with the same displacement as the Tamar, put 260 lives in harms way. Tamar puts 45.

Belgrano, displacing 9,575 tons (empty) 12,242 (full load) put 1138 lives in harms way. The CSC, displacing 8080 tons standard, has a complement of 210

The Type 31 with a displacement of up to 7000 tons will have a complement in the 50 to 150 range, apparently.

 

[Kirkhill]

Putting this here even though it is a USMC led venture.

A pair of NSMs on an unmanned semi-submersible for last kilometer cargo delivery to marines ashore. How long before they apply Rogue Fires / NMESIS technology and launch from the semi-submersibles?

Marines’ underwater missile-delivery drone faces key test this month

The Marines will put a new semi-submersible boat to the test designed to stealthily deliver ship-killing missiles to troops ashore.

www.defensenews.com

SAN DIEGO —The U.S. Marine Corps will put a new type of missile-delivery drone to the test in an operational scenario this month, following a year of developmental work, according to a senior service official.

Lt. Gen. Karsten Heckl, the deputy commandant of the Marine Corps for combat development and integration, told reporters the service had been working on two autonomous, low-profile vessels, which resemble drug runners’ semi-submersible boats seen in Central America. The boats are designed to carry two Naval Strike Missiles to Marine units ashore, stealthily delivering their payload without attracting any attention.


“They’re very, very hard — if not downright impossible — to track,” Heckl told reporters after speaking on a panel at the WEST 2024 conference here hosted by the U.S. Naval Institute an AFCEA International. That is because the boats produce almost no wake while gliding through the water, he explained.

After working with a “mom and pop shop” to design and build the two craft, Heckl said the Marine Corps has demonstrated it can launch and recover them from the Navy’s Expeditionary Fast Transport vessels and the Marines’ Stern Landing Vessels.

This month, the Marines will demonstrate the full evolution of using these boats to resupply Marines ashore with the missiles they need to fire at ships from land.

A Navy Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System launcher deploys into position aboard Pacific Missile Range Facility Barking Sands, Hawaii, Aug. 16, 2021. The NMESIS and its Naval Strike Missiles participated in a live-fire exercise, here, part of Large Scale Exercise 2021. (Maj. Nick Mannweiler/Marine Corps)

Heckl said the boats will play a role in the Army-led Project Convergence Capstone 4 event in California, featuring in a “multi-domain mobility corridor” phase of the exercise designed to test equipment for resupply and logistics missions.

Service tests so far have been “very successful,” he added, describing the price tag as so low that the craft can be deemed expendable if lost. If the Marine Corps does decide to pursue buying these in larger numbers, however, Heckl said the service will have to find a bigger contractor for production.

 

[Kirkhill]

And the USN standing up another USV unit but this one is for small, lethal vessels under the Replicator programme. Sea denial.

Navy Will Stand Up Lethal Drone Unit Later this Year, First Replicator USVs Picked - USNI News

SAN DIEGO – The Navy will establish a second unmanned surface vessel squadron in the next few months, as the Pentagon accelerates unmanned systems development to tackle an expansionist China in the Western Pacific, a service official announced Wednesday. The second Unmanned Surface Vessel...

news.usni.org

 

[Kirkhill]

(Delete)

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I know a lot of people like to compare the cost of the future US Constellation class frigates to the future CSC's. I found this little gem in the Wiki page for the Constellation class: It is a table of the equipment that will be provided by the US government, and therefore is NOT included in the cost per ship for building them - but would be in the Canadian case: Constellation-class frigate - Wikipedia

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Yup.

You cannot compare US ship building practices to anyone else. It is literally comparing Apples to Atom Bombs.

 

[suffolkowner]

Seaspan

delivery of JSS #1 HMCS Protecteur in 2025
keel laying of JSS #2 HMCS Preserver in Oct 2023
OOSV to be launched this year
prototype block for CCGS Diefenbaker done/started
design review done with CCG on MPV

Irving

4th AOPS HMCS William Hall delivered 2 months early in August 2023
AOPS 5,6,7 under construction
AOPS 5 to be delivered 4 months early
ship 4 total 51 months
ship 5 total 39 months
CSC prototype design block July 2024
CSC # 1 construction to start in April 2025

Davie still hopes and dreams lol

Vol 30-Issue 1

Vol 30-Issue 1

viewer.zmags.com

 

[Kirkhill]

Seaspan

delivery of JSS #1 HMCS Protecteur in 2025
keel laying of JSS #2 HMCS Preserver in Oct 2023
OOSV to be launched this year
prototype block for CCGS Diefenbaker done/started
design review done with CCG on MPV

Irving

4th AOPS HMCS William Hall delivered 2 months early in August 2023
AOPS 5,6,7 under construction
AOPS 5 to be delivered 4 months early
ship 4 total 51 months
ship 5 total 39 months
CSC prototype design block July 2024
CSC # 1 construction to start in April 2025

Davie still hopes and dreams lol

Vol 30-Issue 1

Vol 30-Issue 1

viewer.zmags.com

Missed the three OFSVs delivered by Seaspan as part of the program.

Offshore Fisheries Science Vessels - Seaspan

www.seaspan.com

Nice tour video of the Jacques Cartier on the link.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Yup.

You cannot compare US ship building practices to anyone else. It is literally comparing Apples to Atom Bombs.

Are warships built in the US and sold to other countries subject to the 30% FMS surcharge?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Are warships built in the US and sold to other countries subject to the 30% FMS surcharge?

Are you buying from the shipyard directly or from the USN?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Are you buying from the shipyard directly or from the USN?

In this case, lets assume we are buying/ordering from a shipyard.