Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS

[dapaterson]

Has anyone read anything on what the weaponry will be like on the new Dewolf class ships?

Given the cost premium we're paying for Canadian-built ships, I can only assume it's going to be armed with sharks.  Sharks with frickin' laser beams.

 

[Thumper81]

From the handouts from the presentation on the AOPS I went to it looks like a BAE Systems Mk 38 25-mm Chain Gun (Bushmaster. Same as the LAV III) and some Browning 0.50 HMGs.  Disappointing as I figured they'd arm it with a Bofors 57-mm to keep commonality with the CPFs.  It is also a far more effective weapon.  It's sad when the US Coast Guard has better armed ships than our Navy does.   
http://www.baesystems.com/product/BAES_020038/mk-38-mod-2-machine-gun-system-mgs

 

[Naval Reservist]

Given the cost premium we're paying for Canadian-built ships, I can only assume it's going to be armed with sharks.  Sharks with frickin' laser beams.

You may want to paten that idea as it sounds like the next "sharknado" could be something like "Lazer Sharks"!

 

[Naval Reservist]

From the handouts from the presentation on the AOPS I went to it looks like a BAE Systems Mk 38 25-mm Chain Gun (Bushmaster. Same as the LAV III) and some Browning 0.50 HMGs.  Disappointing as I figured they'd arm it with a Bofors 57-mm to keep commonality with the CPFs.  It is also a far more effective weapon.  It's sad when the US Coast Guard has better armed ships than our Navy does.   
http://www.baesystems.com/product/BAES_020038/mk-38-mod-2-machine-gun-system-mgs

I wonder when they will implement it into our training, as ive never heard of it being used on ship. Any idea what the cannon will be? I assume it will be similiar to the MCDV's 40.

 

[dapaterson]

You may want to paten that idea as it sounds like the next "sharknado" could be something like "Lazer Sharks"!

Thank you for making me feel old.

 

[Naval Reservist]

:facepalm: :facepalm: I totally forgot about that movie... shows you how much time I spend watching movies or online.

 

[Thumper81]

Click the link that I put there.  It's a remotely operated system.  It's similar to the Typhoon RWS.

 

[Pat in Halifax]

I just realized that the link I put in above is a DIN link so you will have to check it out from work but I am pretty sure there is a description of the single gun.

 

[Stoker]

I wonder when they will implement it into our training, as ive never heard of it being used on ship. Any idea what the cannon will be? I assume it will be similiar to the MCDV's 40.

Eventually if some reservists may get the training if they are on a course that offers it. There will probably be a few reservist on short term contracts on AOPS, but not like it was on MCDV's. It will not be offered at CFFS(Q). It is a remote controlled 25MM gun producted by BAE systems, so nowhere alike the 40MM

 

[Stoker]

From the handouts from the presentation on the AOPS I went to it looks like a BAE Systems Mk 38 25-mm Chain Gun (Bushmaster. Same as the LAV III) and some Browning 0.50 HMGs.  Disappointing as I figured they'd arm it with a Bofors 57-mm to keep commonality with the CPFs.  It is also a far more effective weapon.  It's sad when the US Coast Guard has better armed ships than our Navy does.   
http://www.baesystems.com/product/BAES_020038/mk-38-mod-2-machine-gun-system-mgs

I don't think it requires a heavy gun as it will never see combat. There is a lot more things required to have a 57 mm, ammo handling system, bigger mag, more weapon techs etc. The 25mm will be plenty for what it will be required to do.

 

[Pat in Halifax]

It is actually being referred to officially as a Constabulary vice Combat vessel.
This was made clear in Cdr MacLean's brief to MARLANT anyway.

 

[Monsoon]

I don't think it requires a heavy gun as it will never see combat. There is a lot more things required to have a 57 mm, ammo handling system, bigger mag, more weapon techs etc. The 25mm will be plenty for what it will be required to do.

Yep - it's primarily an ISR platform, not a combattant.

 

[MarkOttawa]

From an article under the name of VADM Maddison in 2011 (scroll down):

...
AOPS will not be a complex combatant. It will be armed and equipped for a constabulary role in support of other government departments...
http://vanguardcanada.com/preparing-for-a-unique-maritime-theatre/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Naval Reservist]

I wonder if the fleet will be assisting with Parks Canada on their research intiatives in the arctic? That would be a sail I would want to go on!

 

[Pat in Halifax]

I wonder if the fleet will be assisting with Parks Canada on their research intiatives in the arctic? That would be a sail I would want to go on!

We are already. Have a look at some of the images from the discovery of the EREBUS. You will see the ocassional grey thing in the background. As well, side scan sonar operators from the RCN have sailed on other vessels.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

It is actually being referred to officially as a Constabulary vice Combat vessel.
This was made clear in Cdr MacLean's brief to MARLANT anyway.

One can make the same argument about the USCG ships and they are armed with heavier weapons. This is cost cutting dressed up in words.

 

[Naval Reservist]

We are already. Have a look at some of the images from the discovery of the EREBUS. You will see the ocassional grey thing in the background. As well, side scan sonar operators from the RCN have sailed on other vessels.

That's awesome, everybody I talked to at my home unit has never heard of any partnership. Im glad to hear that though. Hopefully I get the oppurtunity to serve on that operation.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Yep - it's primarily an ISR platform, not a combattant.

Just because it's anticipated as such, doesn't mean it won't be thrust upon it one day.  If, the Arctic is going to be a potential flash point who knows what might happen done the road.  I am sure there are many examples of Constabulary forces thrust into combat unexpectedly.  (NWMP in 1885 for one)  And even they had field guns.

 

[Kirkhill]

One can make the same argument about the USCG ships and they are armed with heavier weapons. This is cost cutting dressed up in words.

Colin (and Jack), I think you are treading the same path as the critics of the Yankee LCS programme - in days gone by guns were the only means of reaching out and touching somebody.  Missiles changed that game and perhaps more thought should go into leaving deck space for bolt on systems like the Harpoon and SeaRAM.  But most folks don't seem to see the role of the armed helo, and more to the point the armed UAV (like the Firescout), in extending the surveillance envelope as well as the range at which targets can be engaged while the launching platform is mast-down over the horizon.

If any CF vessel on patrol is actively engaged by a near-peer vessel in a one-on-one engagement I am guessing that that is not a preferred scenario for any skipper.  Ideally I would think the preferred plan would be to detect before being detected and then vector HE to the target. That HE can be delivered by Patrol Aircraft, Fighter, Armed Helo, Predator, Firescout or those traditional, disposable UAVs -guided missiles.

But the AOPS, I don't believe, is expected to be operating in those types of situations.  Most of its time is going to be spent in boring show-the-flag sovereignty patrols in a very quiet arctic while standing as gate guard on the Northwest Passage and as SAR guard for civil air traffic.

The rest of the time will be spent with the following comms "Radio Check" and "Nothing to Report".

But....

Having said that, it is important that those negative reports be filed as they verify our claim to the territory by right of regular usage.

 

[Stoker]

Colin (and Jack), I think you are treading the same path as the critics of the Yankee LCS programme - in days gone by guns were the only means of reaching out and touching somebody.  Missiles changed that game and perhaps more thought should go into leaving deck space for bolt on systems like the Harpoon and SeaRAM.  But most folks don't seem to see the role of the armed helo, and more to the point the armed UAV (like the Firescout), in extending the surveillance envelope as well as the range at which targets can be engaged while the launching platform is mast-down over the horizon.

If any CF vessel on patrol is actively engaged by a near-peer vessel in a one-on-one engagement I am guessing that that is not a preferred scenario for any skipper.  Ideally I would think the preferred plan would be to detect before being detected and then vector HE to the target. That HE can be delivered by Patrol Aircraft, Fighter, Armed Helo, Predator, Firescout or those traditional, disposable UAVs -guided missiles.

But the AOPS, I don't believe, is expected to be operating in those types of situations.  Most of its time is going to be spent in boring show-the-flag sovereignty patrols in a very quiet arctic while standing as gate guard on the Northwest Passage and as SAR guard for civil air traffic.

The rest of the time will be spent with the following comms "Radio Check" and "Nothing to Report".

But....

Having said that, it is important that those negative reports be filed as they verify our claim to the territory by right of regular usage.

From what I have seen after deploying to the Arctic on ship five times now, the stuff we did will mostly likely be the same kind of stuff AOPS will be doing and 99% percent of that is very boring but absoultely needed. If we need an armed combatant AOPS will call in Air or vector in a warship. AOPS will be ill suited to survive any direct combat situation, its simply not built for that.