Canadian River Class Destroyer Megathread

[OldSolduer]

Once upon a time, we had to cross-deck two of our RADAR techs over to a USN Frigate that was sailing in company with us on a NATO deployment. Their "SPS-49 RADAR Tech" was sent home sick so they were unable to trouble-shoot or repair a fault on it. Our guys were sent over, fixed it in an hour or two and came back. We had the SPS-49 as well, so it worked out well.

I ended up chatting with a USN "SONAR" Tech once upon a time in Puerto Rico. He was actually an AN/SQR-19 Towed Array Tech. That's all he fixed.

As a RCN SONAR Tech (NET(A)) I was responsible for fixing:

• Hull Mounted SONAR
• Towed Array SONAR
• Sonobouy System
• OPS room Displays
• CCS Computers, Data Bus, etc
• Gyro Compass
• Nav Distribution System
• Speed Log
• Echo Sounder
• Bathythermograph
• Compass Repeaters
• SHINNADS (Digital Nav System)
• etc...

He was responsible for a single one of those systems - and there was no redundancy if he was sick/etc. Their Technical department was larger than ours, but each tech fixed one thing.

Our NET(A) Department had 5 techs (we were overborne by 1) but all of us had skill/experience with the above systems and were capable of fixing most anything that came up.

That said, this was under the NET/NWT construct - I spent over 32 months in the Training System between my QL3 and my QL5 courses. That same training is practically halved in the interests of getting maintainers out to the fleet faster, and there is a much greater emphasis on training in-situ while on ships in the fleet with the W Eng Tech program.

As a result, there is much less knowledgebase, and after 14 years of W Eng Tech, the number of former NET/NWTs is tiny, and I suspect the Navy has discovered that there is a linkage between training technicians versus training maintainers.

American Army are similar. One soldier, one job.

Not much versatility.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

American Army are similar. One soldier, one job.

Not much versatility.

I was told the same thing when I joined the Canadian Armyu and that was back in the mid-70's.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Wasn’t positive, at all….

We (the Air Force) tried to warn them after we amalgamated and then were forced to de-amalgamate our 500 series technicians…

The Royal Navy also specifically told us not to do what we did, because they had and it didn't work, but we knew better somehow.

@dapaterson I think the mobilisation mindset they use really only works if you can rapidly mobilize, which they kind of can if they bring a lot of their mothballed ships back into service.

With how long big ships take to build, and the complexity of modern weapon systems, I don't think that really works for anyone in practice, so having a mix of highly trained people, with some very basic trained people and a lot of small, simpler ships is more realistic, and what some our our allies like the Swedes seem to do.

The operators don't like to admit it, but if you can actually automate most of the detect to engage sequence, if you are willing to accept you'll miss some detection, and may splash some friendlies, but some ways to reduce training there.

For other trades we've already really scaled back on the maintenance side of things, without being smart enough to augment with extra shore support, but more common in small ships to have essentially juniour maintainers running the machinery plant, with a lot of automation and no real combat survivability, so a lot of it depends on your expectations. Cheap ships that people can operate with limited training can still put a lot of effective munitions down range, and probably also harder to target a group of them then one big expensive ship. I think the Iranians have a lot of small boats like that, where it's essentially a jacked up RHIB with a few anti ship missiles, but they have a whack of them they can get to run in at one time. Much simpler as well if you are just doing coastal defence/local area denial vice force projection, so really all depends what you want the Navy to be able to do independently.

 

[AmmoTech90]

I'm not sure if other trades had mobilization MOCs/MOSIDs but Ammo Tech did/has. I would require an expansion of trainers, but the lesson plans and course structures were there. We would have three trades, one focused on guided weapons, and...I believe one focused on storage and inspection, and a third focused on lab work and disposal. Details on the division of tasks may be fuzzy, but the process was there. We couldn't have the mobilization structure in place during peace time because there wasn't the establishment.

There are many problems with the training system, but complaining that we don't train 3 times as many people as we do is pointless when we don't have billets to put those people. Planning to train three times as many people is what is possible.

 

[Lumber]

Some interesting points coming out of Australia's decision to buy 11 frigates from Japan in a VERY quick timeline.

The stated capabilities of these frigates from Japan are second to none.

With a full-load displacement of 6,200 tonnes, it’s much larger than and has important technical advantages over its German competitor, the 3,700-tonne TKMS Meko A-200. Most notably, the upgraded Mogami has 32 vertical-launch system (VLS) missile cells, double the number in the Meko A-200. Each of the seven remaining ships of the 3,600-tonne Anzac class has only eight VLS cells.
The Mark 41 VLS cells on the upgraded Mogami frigate are of a large type, called ‘strike length’. This means the ships can potentially carry Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles, though, officially, Australia plans to load such weapons only on Hobart-class destroyers. Again, having lots of cells is helpful.
Another advantage of the upgraded Mogami frigate is the smallness of its crew, just 90 people, thanks to extensive automation. The A-200 needs 120, and the Anzac class, which the upgraded Mogami class will replace, about 180. As the Royal Australian Navy struggles to recruit and retain personnel, the leaner complement of the upgraded Mogami design will help keep ships ready for service.
The Mogami also has a longer design operational life of 40 years versus 30 years for the Meko A-200—though making use of that will depend on how naval technology will develop during the ships’ years of service.

Australia chooses big, heavily armed Japanese frigates | The Strategist

If all goes to plan, Australia will receive its first made-in-Japan frigate in 2029. The choice of the upgraded Mogami design of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, announced today, means the Royal Australian Navy will replace its ...

www.aspistrategist.org.au

Currently, the Navy operates seven Anzac-class frigates after one was decommissioned in May 2024. These ships, built between 1996 and 2006, have recently undergone modernisation but are nearing the end of their operational life.
To accelerate the programme, the first three Mogami frigates for Australia will be built in Japan, with the first expected to be delivered in 2029 and entering service in 2030. Subsequent ships will be constructed at the Henderson Maritime Precinct in Western Australia.

https://defence-industry.eu/mitsubishi-to-build-new-frigates-for-royal-australian-navy-beating-tkms-meko-a200-design/

Australia ups defense spending amid China's military buildup​

Australia announced a major restructuring of its military in 2023, turning towards long-range strike capabilities to better respond to China's military expansion.

It is striving to expand its fleet of major warships from 11 to 26 over the next 10 years.

The deal is Japan's first warship export since before World War II and only its second major defense package sold abroad.

Australia says the first three general-purpose frigates will be built offshore, with the remainder built in Western Australia.

Misubishi Heavy Industries has never built warships in a foreign country, The Australian wrote.

Australia to buy 11 advanced warships from Japan – DW – 08/05/2025

Japan has beat a German company to win a contract for 11 frigates in what will be its biggest-ever postwar foreign defense contract.

www.dw.com

The government's decision is a major victory for Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) and for Japan, which has thrown substantial political resources into securing the bid.
It is also a vote of confidence in MHI, which has never built warships overseas before.
"This is clearly the biggest defence industry agreement that will ever have been struck between Japan and Australia. In fact, it's really one of the biggest defence exports that Japan has ever engaged in."

Mr Marles said the first would come into service by the end of this decade, closing a gap that would have otherwise meant Australia would not receive a new surface combatant until 2034, when the first of the Hunter Class vessels would arrive.
While the government insists it was making the decision on capability alone, Japan has leaned heavily on the blossoming strategic and defence relationship between the two countries as it lobbied for the contract.

The United States is also believed to have backed Japan's bid, and Mr Conroy said on Tuesday the decision to select MHI would "reassure our allies, deter our adversaries and make Australia safer".

Japan's prime minister welcomed the decision on social media, promising the two countries would "work together — across both government and industry — to move toward the conclusion of the contract".

I find that sentence above telling - as the Japanese specifically stated that they had zero interest in bidding on our Sub contract for a dozen new subs, a contract that would have been substantially much more lucrative in terms of time/money when compared to this frigate contract. Maybe the Japanese didn't want to share their IP on the subs with us or anyone, maybe the timelines don't line up in terms of deliveries, maybe the US specifically told the Japanese NOT to bid on our contract or maybe the Japanese don't take us as being serious about this project, knowing that the Australians are actually serious about defence and have been actively upgrading/expanding their capabilities over the last 5-8yrs.

Australia picks Japan to build $10b frigates after fierce contest

Japanese shipbuilder Mitsubishi Heavy Industries wins a fierce contest to build the Australian navy's new fleet of warships, beating a bid from German rival ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems.

www.abc.net.au

Ok I was reading the wiki article on this class, and this really stuck out to me:

"At Sea Air Space 2019, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries revealed their 'Advanced Integrated CIC' for the vessel. It will combine the wheelhouse, the managing and situational awareness room, the engine and power control room, and combat information center within a large 360-degree circular screen wall.[24] It can display panoramic views around the ship without a blind spot on the screen and will utilize augmented reality technology to discriminate among the objects shown and to navigate the ship.[23] This allows the crew to operate under a Total Ship Crew System (TSCS) where navigation, steering and ship management is centralized into one area.[25]"

So they'll manage navigation, situational awareness, weapon and sensor employment, and engineering plant control, all from a single room with a massive 360 degree screen? I need to see this...

 

[KevinB]

So they'll manage navigation, situational awareness, weapon and sensor employment, and engineering plant control, all from a single room with a massive 360 degree screen? I need to see this...

I believe they have multiple work stations as well for specific things, the large screen can show the outside in 360, or segments of it can can be used to put up data from the various stations as well.

 

[Lumber]

I believe they have multiple work stations as well for specific things, the large screen can show the outside in 360, or segments of it can can be used to put up data from the various stations as well.

Found a picture. While "cool", This just seems like an inefficient use of space... except that I suppose if this is both your CIC and MCR, I guess it might actually be an efficient use of space...

 

[Stoker]

The Kniple Effect.

Live long and prosper

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Ok I was reading the wiki article on this class, and this really stuck out to me:

"At Sea Air Space 2019, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries revealed their 'Advanced Integrated CIC' for the vessel. It will combine the wheelhouse, the managing and situational awareness room, the engine and power control room, and combat information center within a large 360-degree circular screen wall.[24] It can display panoramic views around the ship without a blind spot on the screen and will utilize augmented reality technology to discriminate among the objects shown and to navigate the ship.[23] This allows the crew to operate under a Total Ship Crew System (TSCS) where navigation, steering and ship management is centralized into one area.[25]"

So they'll manage navigation, situational awareness, weapon and sensor employment, and engineering plant control, all from a single room with a massive 360 degree screen? I need to see this...

Assuming that the "managing and situational awareness" thing is what we call Integrated Platform management and Navigation, respectively, that would mean that we have the engineers, the bosns and OOW all co-located in the CIC (I hope that there is still a bridge with actual lookouts, just in case). Does that mean that you now have to make sure all these engineers and bosn have a top secret security clearance, because they are in the CIC?

 

[Navy_Pete]

I'm not sure if other trades had mobilization MOCs/MOSIDs but Ammo Tech did/has. I would require an expansion of trainers, but the lesson plans and course structures were there. We would have three trades, one focused on guided weapons, and...I believe one focused on storage and inspection, and a third focused on lab work and disposal. Details on the division of tasks may be fuzzy, but the process was there. We couldn't have the mobilization structure in place during peace time because there wasn't the establishment.

There are many problems with the training system, but complaining that we don't train 3 times as many people as we do is pointless when we don't have billets to put those people. Planning to train three times as many people is what is possible.

From what I understand, the small gun on the AOPs is almost identical to one already in use by the Army so maybe don't need to reinvent the wheel.

Sure some Navy folks would be really happy to do TD in Borden or wherever for a training course, and seems like an odd spot where everyone gets treated like an untrained private again, but if the training kit and course material are already on site, that would at least tick the box for infra and facility to support the courses. Aside from that sure there are a lot of tips and tricks we could learn from the army folks that have already been using it and fixing it, as the delta for marinizing it is probably pretty small.

 

[KevinB]

Does that mean that you now have to make sure all these engineers and bosn have a top secret security clearance, because they are in the CIC?

Yes.

 

[KevinB]

Found a picture. While "cool", This just seems like an inefficient use of space... except that I suppose if this is both your CIC and MCR, I guess it might actually be an efficient use of space...

View attachment 95055

I am very disappointed it doesn't have a nice captains chair in the center.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Assuming that the "managing and situational awareness" thing is what we call Integrated Platform management and Navigation, respectively, that would mean that we have the engineers, the bosns and OOW all co-located in the CIC (I hope that there is still a bridge with actual lookouts, just in case). Does that mean that you now have to make sure all these engineers and bosn have a top secret security clearance, because they are in the CIC

In general most people already need level 2 clearance just for controlled goods/ITAR, but even level 3 won't catch this if it comes up after the screening.

This is the kind of situation where you need some kind of active surveillance or reporting, but sounds like these idiots are well known so wouldn't be surprised if someone reported this to the CoC or elsewhere.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

In general most people already need level 2 clearance just for controlled goods/ITAR, but even level 3 won't catch this if it comes up after the screening.

This is the kind of situation where you need some kind of active surveillance or reporting, but sounds like these idiots are well known so wouldn't be surprised if someone reported this to the CoC or elsewhere.

Um, what?

 

[KevinB]

Um, what?

Seems like an intended reply to another thread got tacked on.