Search results

The plan has always been that they would get the type 31's in full well before they get all the type 26. The type 31 were acquired in order to maintain numbers of frigates and cover the retirement of Type 23's in the meantime (i.e. until all 26's come on line), after which they are to decide if...

Baz, I can see the logic, in a Carrier Task Group/Force, that everything that flies from the carrier or around it be centrally controlled from the carrier. Does it make sense to go back to such a model if operating a Task group made up of helicopter carrying escort vessels (up to and including...

Exactly, and fly two different models of the EH101: The ASW version, HM1 and HM2, while the RM's fly a commando version, HC3. Don't you trust your shipmates to safely transfer you by way of a light jackstay? :)

Well, today was Putin's deadline for peace, or else. So, obviously, now Trump will have to give him another absolutely firm deadline ... or else. In the words of the eternal Robin Williams, talking about unarmed Bobbies making arrests in England: "Stop! Or I'll say Stop again" (Of course...

Sorely to be missed. He had such a great and natural way of delivering his lines. R.I.P.

Ah! C'mon FJAG. One of them has a clue: The Secretary of State. Last cabinet meeting you could see it when he brought up to the president the important issue of Saturday weddings during college football season interfering with watching the games.

The Norwegians have never operated ships or vessels made in the US. They either built their own or bought from other European nations builders (such as Navantia for their current frigates). The US may have been on the list of countries offering their ships to Norway, but why would anyone buy...

Why did you have to mention that? Why did you have to mention that ? Have you heard anything about gun control or this program from Carney since he became PM? I think he is letting that die on the vine quietly and not mention a word, keeping his fingers crossed that there...

Are actual submariners playing against you as the simulated submarine, or other TACCO's? Lets see here: 1) You do know that submarines have the capability of slowly deploying a torpedo a couple of miles (or more, perhaps?) away in a direction opposite to where they are before turning it into...

Not surprised. With a little TLC, those things are near impossible to kill. Had I been on the West coast after my retirement, I might have bought one just for the pleasure of turning it into a real, moving, boat house (much cheaper than any Victoria or Vancouver living!).

A SSK with AIP can still clear datum at about 20 kts for about five or six hours, but the beauty is after that, they don't have to surface to recharge. Just go to loiter mode. And an AIP SSK loitering around at three kts makes about as much noise as a hole in the water. If they have deep diving...

Last summer, I saw an old YAG turned into a personal yacht in Victoria harbour. It floated. I don't know if it could move. I know it definitely couldn't fight.

We have not historically named our submarines after fish. Rainbow was an outlier, and was so named after the first cruiser of the RCN. CC-1, CC-2, CC-14, U-190 and Grilse were definitely not named after fishes, nor were any of the "O" boats or VIC's.

Then would you settle for a Frontenac class to muddle things up a bit? Here's the historical reason, for those history buffs around here: When they named vessels after cities and towns in WWII and Kingston's turn came around, they couldn't name the ship for the city of Kingston by the city name...

I just saw PM MC on TV last night saying that basically, our military budget would quadruple over the next ten years. However, like Underway, I have yet to see or hear of any plan for how Ottawa intends to manage the expansion and training of the personnel we will need for all those new shinny...

Paying-off's are always sad, but are part of naval life (not as much in Canada since we stretch the period of commission way too long). The only thing I would have changed on that invite is that I would have made the picture at the bottom one of a MCDV sailing into the sunset.

Some missiles acquisitions being looked at for the RCD's are land strike missiles. If we are going into that rabbit hole, then extending similar capability to our submarines would not be either a strategic or tactical addition, but merely a second platform to fulfil a mission we have already...

Not aware that even the Americans use a Gold/Blue crew system for their attack boats. Only for the Ballistic Nuclear launching ships, so the deterrent is maintained. I don't think Canada would consider that just for SSK's either.

Which would be perfect as, at first, JSS 1 and 2 could rotate into a mid-life refit. Then about 10-15 years later, JSS 5 and 6 get built. JSS 1 and 2 get retired (at about 25-30 years old), while JSS 3 and 4 go into mid-life refits in rotation. And you finally achieve one of the original...

That is absolutely pathetic.