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

Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
87
Points
530
I can categorically confirm that the RCN is working on the landing and air safety aspects of the HDW for Cyclone. Where it will end up and where they are in the process I don't know. But its being worked on.
 

Stoker

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
52
Points
530
They have already trialed the UAV that they will embark
EmEjiwQXEAAsO7w.jpg
 
Last edited:

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
202
Points
680
Must be a lot of fun for the crew to be the ones "Writing the book" on procedures for the entire class of vessels, not something everyone gets to do in their career. I suspect morale is quite high onboard.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
421
Points
880
Hopefully the RCAF will consult with the RCN and Canadian Army for pointers on employing Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems - after all, they're the only one of the three main environments in the CAF that don't...

Alanis Morissette Reaction GIF by MOODMAN
 

Humphrey Bogart

Army.ca Veteran
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
89
Points
630
Do we really need cyclones on AOPs anyway? If we can partner with the CCG and embark their helo and crew, we would presumably be able to leverage their experience in the Artic for the ice spotting and other relevant local ops knowledge.

Really fail to see what advantage we'd get with a big ASW helo over ice, and given the lack of airframes makes more sense to reserve them for their primary purpose. A helo would generally be a big asset, but the Cyclone seems like massive overkill and frankly wasted, especially given the lack of a full ops room or any complementary systems on the AOPS (like sonar or any kind of ASW capability).

AOPs are civilian ice breakers painted gray with a small gun on the front, not a warship. Maybe we should just use them for what they were designed for, instead of trying to strap everything on afterwards and make is useful for nothing?
MIO, Maritime Counter Terrorism and HADR would like a word with you.

This is a real problem with our Navy though. The Naval Officer Corps doesn't think in a Joint Context at all.
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
135
Points
680
MIO, Maritime Counter Terrorism and HADR would like a word with you.

This is a real problem with our Navy though. The Naval Officer Corps doesn't think in a Joint Context at all.
Or none of those is a great idea to deploy an artic icebreak with no real armament or defences on? We have actual warships for those kinds of ops. AOPS is a non-combatant. It was built as a non-combatant, and will be maintained as a non-combatant to civilian standards (by the Non-Combatant class desk).

Support to an artic SAR, some kind of land based Ranger/infantry artic ops, things like that would make total sense, and where a helo asset would be great, just doesn't need to be a cyclone. It's great for all kinds of joint ops, as long as none of them involve AOPs doing fighty things.

I'm more of a big fan of using the right tool for the job. The AOPs will do lots of things well, but expecting it to do full spectrum warfare is unrealistic. Even if we slap all kinds of weapons and sensors on it, it's not designed or crewed to live through battle damage so would be effectively disposable. If that's what someone wants a drone fleet would be far more effective.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
202
Points
680
If we send a Kingston to West Africa, you can be sure the AOPs is going as well and likely do most of the jobs better, although a Kingston could get into more places. In fact a Kingston and AOP's (with a helicopter, not Cyclone, likley Allied nation) would make a good set for piracy patrol. The AOP's could carry some extra RHIB's and dedicated security team/boarding party.
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
135
Points
680
If we send a Kingston to West Africa, you can be sure the AOPs is going as well and likely do most of the jobs better, although a Kingston could get into more places. In fact a Kingston and AOP's (with a helicopter, not Cyclone, likley Allied nation) would make a good set for piracy patrol. The AOP's could carry some extra RHIB's and dedicated security team/boarding party.
They could but generally the MCDVs come back beat to hell. We could send the AOPs, but that would be sending a knife to a gun fight and the # of bunks would limit how many extra capabilities you can pack on concurrently. The MCDVs at least cost a lot less to deploy than a frigate, with AOPs it's still a great big ship to support even if you have less crew.

We'll only have a few per coast, and will generally have one per coast shuffling in/out of docking. And if we want them to be able to carry out extended ops in the artic, we'll also need time for the ISSCs to do the required maintenance in the off season.

Not saying they can't fit in to some extra roles if they have to, but anti piracy, HADR, MIOs etc are pretty bread and butter for CPFs. If we aren't using warships for actual offensive ops, we should just junk them all together and stick with civi ships painted gray. Because that seems like sending a jeep while leaving a LAV tied up to do patrols in a combat zone.

Maybe we should figure out what they can do and how to do it first, before getting them to do things outside the conops?
 

Humphrey Bogart

Army.ca Veteran
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
89
Points
630
Or none of those is a great idea to deploy an artic icebreak with no real armament or defences on? We have actual warships for those kinds of ops. AOPS is a non-combatant. It was built as a non-combatant, and will be maintained as a non-combatant to civilian standards (by the Non-Combatant class desk).

Support to an artic SAR, some kind of land based Ranger/infantry artic ops, things like that would make total sense, and where a helo asset would be great, just doesn't need to be a cyclone. It's great for all kinds of joint ops, as long as none of them involve AOPs doing fighty things.

I'm more of a big fan of using the right tool for the job. The AOPs will do lots of things well, but expecting it to do full spectrum warfare is unrealistic. Even if we slap all kinds of weapons and sensors on it, it's not designed or crewed to live through battle damage so would be effectively disposable. If that's what someone wants a drone fleet would be far more effective.
MIO, MCT and HADR aren't even close to Full Spectrum War. The AOPS is far more suitable at all those OOTW we mostly do. It's far more suitable than a Frigate is.

It's actually better than a Frigate at MIO and MCT as it's got dedicated facilities for it, can carry better RIBs plus more of them, has cargo capacity, unlike the Frigate so it can actually carry all the mission PUKs we stuff in to random holes on the Frigate. It's got enough firepower to more than deal with any sort of Piracy threat.

Two SO RIBs armed with machineguns and a boat full of operators, the 25mm + small arms on the ship, + armed helo if we so desire is more than a match for any piracy threat.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Army.ca Veteran
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
89
Points
630
If we send a Kingston to West Africa, you can be sure the AOPs is going as well and likely do most of the jobs better, although a Kingston could get into more places. In fact a Kingston and AOP's (with a helicopter, not Cyclone, likley Allied nation) would make a good set for piracy patrol. The AOP's could carry some extra RHIB's and dedicated security team/boarding party.
You don't even need a helo, put a rotary UAV in the hangar and now you've got a great ISR capability.

Too bad we don't have a smaller MH of the UH variety. A couple of Wildcats with Minigun and .50cal would be great for anti-piracy.
 
Top