• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Search results

  1. Stoker

    AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

    Yes that's an option I hope they will do and keep it a government ship. The first tanker is staying on the West Coast and they have greater personnel shortfalls than the EC.
  2. Stoker

    AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

    Lots of good ideas there but its hard to put a ship to sea with no crew or maintain it when the lions share is going to the CPF's to keep them sailing. There are lots of practical considerations of how it would of been a bad idea at this point for the RCN.
  3. Stoker

    AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

    I just assumed we were too cheap....
  4. Stoker

    AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

    I've seen these Mistrals arguments for years from people pineing away on why didn't we get them and how good it would be if we did. All the 280 personnel went to crew the Kingston Class as the the crewing model changed to mostly regular force and the fleet in general so there wasn't excess...
  5. Stoker

    Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

    As someone who has sailed in both yes.
  6. Stoker

    Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

    From what I have been told by someone looking into the requirements and the CRCN's own words the intention is to have a replacement globally deployable. That may not mean missiles or a helo but certainly better armed than a Kingston Class.
  7. Stoker

    AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

    They would be sitting along side somewhere with no crew if we had a place to berth them.
  8. Stoker

    Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

    "The sinking of Sheffield is sometimes blamed on a superstructure made wholly or partially from magnesium-aluminium alloy, the melting point and ignition temperature of which are significantly lower than those of steel. However, this is incorrect as Sheffield's superstructure was made entirely...
  9. Stoker

    Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

    Ships in the Falklands didn't have issues because of aluminum use, that is misinformation that persists even to this day it seems.
  10. Stoker

    Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

    Yes I think that's what many people miss that the entire build is over 20 years which means new governments, new emerging threats that could change many things in regards to the project. 100% sure we're getting at least 3 and anything after that all bets are off.
  11. Stoker

    Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

    Yes I thought by your absence of comments you were googling or whatever. The point is that the mission bay is still a massive reduction of capability and its never a simple matter of taking this away and replacing it with something else and expect to have the same characteristics which all have...
  12. Stoker

    Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

    Now you are cutting capabilities and changing the ships characteristics can cause all sorts of unintended consequences. Its not a good idea if your ship can't trim correctly. It may seem easy to you but I'm pretty you are not a Nav Arc. Best you stay in your own lanes.
  13. Stoker

    Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

    You can put all the missiles you like on the type 26, won't do you any good if it can only go 20 knots due to excessive tonnage.
  14. Stoker

    Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

    Does anyone know what Illumination AESA Radar MDA went with?
  15. Stoker

    Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

    The presentation I saw just before Christmas in Halifax said that there are no more changes to the design for the first flight of ships. Perhaps that will change but I saw no other additional weapon systems mentioned. Certainly no dragonfire.
  16. Stoker

    Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

    We're getting the Marlin 30 I thought. https://electronics.leonardo.com/documents/16277707/18421316/MARLIN+30_new.pdf?t=1618842731728
  17. Stoker

    Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)

    The ship was designed to go to Florida on occasion not Africa. Anything with extreme heat, the AC plant is taxed and being an all electric ship with aging systems that's been running for over 20 years with no updates heat affects them in surprising ways. Couple that with problems getting parts...
  18. Stoker

    Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)

    The OP Projection deployments were more about showing the flag to West Africa and lots of community events. The Kingston Class do not operate very well in that extreme heat and support is difficult if they require a MRP. We also support Op Reassurance now and that is the priority. Its just as...
  19. Stoker

    Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)

    We have three Kingston Class essentially laid up out west now because of lack of crews.
Back
Top