Search results

The tubes that were designated for the RCD are designed to fire any of the NATO light torps (which IIRC are all the same diameter and almost the exact same length/weight, and Korea matched that with their torps). I don't think we would change torps though from what we have now, as that would...

Yep, the only reason the Protecteur CWIS were available was because they were in rotation as replacement within the fleet already. Winnipeg's CWIS was broke, PRO's just came out of refirb, swap them, send WIN to refirb etc... Otherwise they would have been retired a long time ago.

Depends on what you mean by re-use. The CWIS on the Protecteur are the "same" CWIS that the original Protecteur have. But not really. They underwent a massive refurbishment and upgrade program to the Baseline B standard. Ship of Theseus and all that. So perhaps the 57mm could be used, IF it...

I'll take a crack though @Rainbow1910 has done a great job already. There isn't really a debate at this point, its more of a discussion on what capability you want in the ship. Earlier in the thread it looked like the CDC was going to part of NORAD BMD or somesuch, which would mean a...

Oh deep cut. I love this.

I'm not picking on you, as others point out this sort of thing, but this is a good comment to follow down the rabbit hole. Smart S would require: -5 more crew to operate the system, -2 maintainers -changes to the AOPS electrical load (does it have spare capacity or do we have to do load...

There is a certain point where you just take the hit and build a new ship for some of these specialist craft. AOPS is a specialist craft. You're not building a tug boat to do the job of a battleship. AOPS is a patrol vessel, not a warfighter. If the shooting starts they are going to be in a...

I dunno, some of those French frigates are just gorgeous. But certainly not as impressive.

Shush, I'm actually maybe winning an internet argument. I've only heard legends about that! I could be one of those legends! :ROFLMAO:

That profile makes it look like a star destroyer... which is cool in its own way.

The tanker is a combatant. It goes in the forward echelon with the warships. But it's not doing a warship role, its doing the tanker role with the warships. Give me one example where a non-combatant ship was used in recent history for a role a combatant was necessary. I'm happy to eat crow...

So when have we (since the 1980's) sent a ship that wasn't actually a warship for a combat type scenario? Gulf war was warships, some were converted with new equipment but they were still warships. MCDV's haven't done a single warship job that I can think of outside of the MCM tasks. Honestly...

Bow thrusters not to be used for combat conning. Slow speed manouver only. Those ships do look cool, the bow design really reduces their upper deck surface area. Not really designed for high speeds in big seas.

Don't disagree, I'm just mildly offended. As someone who paints miniatures for a hobby angles of pictures matter, and you won't get a proper appreciation of the hull and superstructure shape until you see it from various angles (walk around).

Yep, they took a smooth radar cross section and lego'd the hell out of it. Yes I know its going to have waaaay more stuff on it than the UK version but damn that angle looks cool and awful at the same time. Makes me think that they should choose all the equipment for the CDC first and then...

I guess your sub base will have to wait...

This is new info to me, I knew they were going to do a new Naval Depot building for the Aegis stuff but didn't know where it was going to be. It showing up on the Shearwater side is interesting, and the new fueling farm and jetty is also news to me. There is also plans afoot for a High...

The facility is where we make Aegis Version RCD our own. We will manage all the upgrades and changes from there. It's integral to the continuing support of the entire class. Also training for some of the techs and integration testing for any new equipment. Its basically a shore based ship...