• 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

From reading the SOR it seems like an ice capable MCDV with a flight deck.  There is nothing scary or deterring about an MCDV.  For the trouble it will cause us to man it they should paint it Red and white and hand it over to the Coast Guard now.  Beggars can't be choosers but wouldn't you like something that has teeth?  Modern missiles, sensors and CWIS?

 
Definitely would prefer something with teeth, personally I don't think we need to fit missiles on it but I suppose they could be fitted for. 57mm and CIWS/RAM with 4-6 .50s would get the message across.
 
Dolphin_Hunter said:
According to Annex A of the Statement of operational requirement there will be 1 NESOP sailing on her.

I did notice that they will be capable of carrying a smaller helo (limited support for the Cyclone), so I guess we are either going to lease or buy smaller helicopters for this thing.

If we can manage to get 8 of these I will be impressed.

Bet they would be MBB 105s the CCG uses.
 
Most likely, at least that is what the presentation I found on the Din indicated.

I found this interesting "The AOPS core crew may be comprised of a mix of Regular Force, Primary Reserve and
potentially civilians in designated technician positions"    What kind of technician positions would be manned by civilians?
 
Question: won't the absense of a haul-down winch seriously limit helicopter operations, particularly for S&R efforts.  Deck landings limited to force 3 doesn't seem like a great capability
 
CCG ships seem to do well without it for their helicopters. Most likely if they are patrolling the Atlantic or Pacific they probably will not have an air det.
 
This is what I was looking for earlier.

4.2.2 As it is not expected to engage enemy combatants, AOPS shall not:
4.2.2.1 possess anti-submarine warfare capabilities, including Torpedo Defence;
4.2.2.2 possess anti-air warfare capabilities;
4.2.2.3 possess anti-ship warfare capabilities other than for constabulary purposes;
4.2.2.4 possess offensive or defensive Chemical, Biological, Nuclear and Radiological (CBNR)
capabilities;
4.2.2.5 possess organic Mine Counter Measure (MCM) capabilities;
4.2.2.6 be considered an amphibious platform; and
4.2.2.7 be considered a combatant.

Right there is everything a full capable warship should be.

4.2.3.5 be able to land, launch, house and re-fuel a CH 148 Cyclone

4.2.3.6 conduct CH 148 flight operations using “Aviation Night Vision Imaging System”
(ANVIS)60;
4.2.3.7 provide, within the limitations of para 4.2.3.3 and 4.2.3.4, to the extent practicable,
support for limited CH 148 operations to include limited and emergency maintenance routines;
4.2.3.8 be able to land, launch and re-fuel a CH 149 Cormorant61

If they want to do this why not fit a bear trap?

As far any of the gear I keep harping about.  Make the ship a combatant and "fit the ship for but not with" That means you have room for an extra Sea container but if it required a rack of Harpoons/Sea Sparows could be mounted or give it a magazine capable of holding/firing torps but use it as storage.   Leave room on the mast for capable sensors and radars.  If it were the coast gaurd I wouldn't think its nessisary.  We're the Navy and we are here to do the messy stuff why not build these ships to be capable of it?  I think this non combatant thing is a way of cutting cost using more civilian spec gear and putting on blinders to what the Navy could use.  Capable hulls in the water are better than an ice capable tugboat.
 
40mm?  Maybe they'll decommission (hey, is it decommission or pay-off?  Just kidding!) a few MCDV's and transfer the Bofors...  :blotto:
 
25 mm Bushmasters would do the trick well if the Navy insist they stay with a small caliber auto cannon.
 
Privateer said:
40mm?  Maybe they'll decommission (hey, is it decommission or pay-off?  Just kidding!) a few MCDV's and transfer the Bofors...  :blotto:

They might not transfer the 40mm by paying off the MCDVs, but if the crew is going to be a mix of reg force and shads, where else will they find reservists to crew the a/opvs?
 
Navy_Blue said:
From reading the SOR it seems like an ice capable MCDV with a flight deck. There is nothing scary or deterring about an MCDV. For the trouble it will cause us to man it they should paint it Red and white and hand it over to the Coast Guard now. Beggars can't be choosers but wouldn't you like something that has teeth? Modern missiles, sensors and CWIS?

Agreed. As someone who will be coming on-line as MARS (hopefully) in the next few years, and considering my first ship might be one of these things, I DON'T like the notion it would be toothless.

One thing that particularly has me tweaked is that it would have no ASW capability. In this day where undersea sovereignty is on the line - and the potential for foreign subs in our waters is heightened -  our "war" ships need to be just that, ships capable of war. Not toothless poseurs.

Otherwise just paint it red and white and give it to the CGG.
 
cheeky_monkey said:
One thing that particularly has me tweaked is that it would have no ASW capability.

Exactly what capability would you want a ship of that size to have when it comes to ASW ?
 
CDN Aviator said:
Exactly what capability would you want a ship of that size to have when it comes to ASW ?

Keeping in mind that I know very little about space requirements, personnel requirements, etc. (and as a civvie  ;)) I would want to see it have the capability to defend from, or if warranted, attack a belligerent submarine. At the very least, the capability to detect it, and have the proposed CH 148 (armed, of course) prosecute it.
 
cheeky_monkey said:
Keeping in mind that I know very little about space requirements, personnel requirements, etc. (and as a civvie  ;)) I would want to see it have the capability to defend from, or if warranted, attack a belligerent submarine. At the very least, the capability to detect it, and have the proposed CH 148 (armed, of course) prosecute it.

I very higly doubt that these ships will have sufficient space for everything that is required for ASW. You (IMHO) will need passive & actve sonar, the necessary operator stations for the sonar equipment, extensive communications suite, radar ..........then add in torpedo launchers, sonobouys, weapons storage spaces for the torps ( for your "defend from" )

I do ASW from the air so i could be ROTL..........
 
The vessels sit just fine with me, because I feel that the arctic isn't going to be ice free any time soon.  I know they are saying that it could be for a few months this summer, but I doubt it. 

Lets establish the military presence, the bases, and lets take it from there, small steps.  Who knows, global cooling could make a come back!
 
DONT_PANIC said:
They might not transfer the 40mm by paying off the MCDVs

I can almost imagine the howls of joy by the Bosuns who won't have to do 3-hour pre/post fire maintenance, and the DeckOs who don't have to schedule CTWSC and INO Tech Certs!  ;D
 
Looks like they're trying to specify something like a Mk 44 mount. The old Boffin mounts from the MCDV's won't meet the spec.

SRD-728 The AOPS shall have a primary gun weapons system
that:
a.  has a calibre of between 20mm and 40mm,
b.  is stabilized,
c.  provides clear firing arcs over an arc of not less than
45 degrees abaft the beam on one side, through the
bow, to an arc of not less than 45 degrees abaft the
beam on the other side,
d.  has elevation limits not less than 10 degrees below
the horizontal and 80 degrees above the horizontal,
e.  has dual ammunition feed system that allows the
operator to select either of two types of ammunition
instantly,
f.  has selectable rates of fire,
g.  has the ability to display firing arcs and gun vector
line,
h.  is integrated with a laser range-finding system,
i.  is integrated with a single on-mount or off-mount all-
weather, day and night, electro-
optical fire control system for weapon target designation
in manual and automatic modes,
j.  requires no more than a single operator,
k.  receives surface target designation from the
navigation radar,
l.  supports automatic collection of video and other data,
and
The gun weapons system will be selected
or detailed requirements will be developed
by PMO AOPS during definition.
The electro-optical system could include
television, IR and thermal imaging
elements and should be capable of electro-
optic surveillance independant of the gun
system.
The location of the weapon system shall
take into account maintenance
requirements, weather effects on the
system and facilitate the load/un-load and
operational use.
A gun calibre of between 20mm and 40
mm is likely appropriate.

 
ASW is not very practical on an ARCTIC patrol vessel.

Ships require Sonar to detect Subs. Sonar requires a sonar dome protruding below the hull of the ship to transmit/receive into the water. I'm afraid the ice would make short work of a sonar dome as it would be smashed in short order. Secondly ice itself is very noisey and a ship traveling thru ice is extremely noisey making listening to sound emitting from subs difficult to say the least. Acoustic homing A/S torpodoes also don't perform well if at all in ice infested waters. The vessel will have a towed side scan sonar which will give it some underwater picture when it is able to tow it in open water.

Cheers
 
Question: won't the absense of a haul-down winch seriously limit helicopter operations, particularly for S&R efforts.  Deck landings limited to force 3 doesn't seem like a great capability

A haul-down system adds weight and complexity to the ship.  It also requires a pilot to operate it, which implies that you are assigning a Det to the ship.  If you are not putting a hangar on the ship, you are not assigning it a helicopter- period.  It would be unserviceable in short order being exposed to the elements.

Giving the AOPV a flight deck that will be Cyclone capable, however, is a good move.  Having a large flat surface on a the top part of a ship usually comes in handy and doesn't cost much.  Being able to land a helo on for short periods of time is useful, too.
 
Back
Top