Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS

[Stoker]

A manually sighted 76mm??  Whaaaa?  That just seems like such a waste for a beautiful dual purpose gun.  Your photos were very revealing.  Those 76's seem to only hold their ready use ammo, as it didn't seem like there was a magazine elevator.  Short and sharp engagements only, with limited reload ability, like the MCDV 40's were. 

As for crewing Chief Stoker you know better then most here that the RCN won't do anything with such a small crew given the missions and required watches.  That would force the CO to stand a bridge watch like those dirty Coast Guard Captains, the Watch Officers to stand 1 in 3 for eight hour watches and everything on the ship to be super automated.

Yes there was a ammo loading hatch in the deck and was told there was a ammo lifting cruet. Its not a quick evolution. It was interesting to note that while the ships were fitted for a containerized weapon system, that space was used for racks of spare parts. As for crewing, sadly I would think you're correct. Interesting to note AOPS will be highly automated.

 

[Kirkhill]

I just think Theodore is so cute and cuddly.... he has to be a Major Combatant.  Unicorn mascot.  Rainbow ensign.  What more could you ask for?  :rofl:

Back to reality for a minute -

The vessels (Edit: - Rasmussens)have two flex container positions, one in the front and one in the aft, enabling them to carry a number of flexible systems, must of all one 76 mm Gun Mk M/85 LvSa on the foredeck.

http://www.navalhistory.dk/English/TheShips/Classes/KnudRasmussen_Class(2007).htm

I stand to be corrected but my understanding is that the Danish 76s are designed to be dropped into a Stanflex enclosure - and the lack of connection to an external magazine would seem to be in line with that.

http://www.seaforces.org/wpnsys/SURFACE/STANFLEX-modules.htm

Stanflex modules are constructed by Monberg & Thorsen. Each module is housed in a stainless steel container measuring 3 metres (9.8 ft) in length, 3.5 metres (11 ft) in width, and 2.5 metres (8.2 ft) in height. Precision-machined flanges ensure that the module accurately mates up with connections for power, ventilation, communications, water, and data. The weapon or system is mounted on the roof of the module, while the machinery, electronics, and supporting equipment are housed within.

Modules are usually installed and replaced by a 15-ton capacity mobile crane. A module can be swapped out and replaced within half an hour, and after system testing completed, the ship is ready to deploy within a few hours. However, refresher training for the ship's crew will take significantly longer. Standardised consoles are fitted in the combat information centre: the console's role is defined by the software installed, which can be quickly replaced.

source: wikipedia


Variants:

GUN = 1 x Oto-Melara/OtoBreda 76mm/62 caliber Super Rapid gun

SSM = 2 x Mk-141 quad launchers for RGM-84 Harpoon missiles

SAM = 1 x 6-cell Mk-48 (Mod.3) / Mk-56 Vertical Launching System (VLS) for RIM-7 Sea Sparrow missiles or RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow missiles (ESSM)

ASW = launcher for MU90 Impact torpedoes

VDS = TSM 2640 Salmon variable-depth active/passive sonar

MCM = Command & Control equipment to operate mine warfare drones

CRANE = hydraulic crane to operate a Rigid-Hulled-Inflatable-Boat (RHIB)

 

[winnipegoo7]

I noticed on the Danish KNUD RASMUSSEN  EJNAR MIKKELSEN Arctic patrol ship had a 76mm and the only fire control was a manually sighted station on the bridge.

I'm wondering if the Scanter 4100 radar can control the 76mm in a track-while-scan / splash spotting mode (like the Sea Giraffe with the 57mm)?

Also, I've seen photos of the Knud Rasmussen class fitted with a Saab CEROS fire control radar, so it can have a fire control radar.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Quite correct winnipegoo7.  The RASMUSSEN class is normally (perhaps the MIKKELSEN was an anomaly when last seen by Chief Stoker) fitted with a CEROS 200 radar/optronic track and illuminate system.

Also, while everybody seems in awe and keeps quoting the crew of only 18, that is the crewing when the ships are operating in their "coast guard" type tastings. For actual military ops, the crew goes up to 43.

 

[Stoker]

Quite correct winnipegoo7.  The RASMUSSEN class is normally (perhaps the MIKKELSEN was an anomaly when last seen by Chief Stoker) fitted with a CEROS 200 radar/optronic track and illuminate system.

Also, while everybody seems in awe and keeps quoting the crew of only 18, that is the crewing when the ships are operating in their "coast guard" type tastings. For actual military ops, the crew goes up to 43.

I guess the whole point is it is entirely feasible at the build stage of the Harry DeWolf Class to fit the existing 76mm in lieu of the 25mm. With high price of the build even purchasing a fire control radar wouldn't break the bank. In fact its interesting to note a number of systems onboard the Danish Ship will also be used on Harry DeWolf.

As for the small crew yes I think for what they do and its a wide range of taskings similar to what the Harry Dewolf will be doing and some that we don't, they can do it with 18. Its logical to assume that the addition of any other payloads the crew number would be flexible and increase and decrease dependent on mission. In fact thats exactly what we're doing in the RCN right now.

The Danes run their ships and their navy quite different from what we're used to and was very refreshing to see these things in practice.

 

[winnipegoo7]

Quite correct winnipegoo7.  The RASMUSSEN class is normally (perhaps the MIKKELSEN was an anomaly when last seen by Chief Stoker) fitted with a CEROS 200 radar/optronic track and illuminate system.

Also, while everybody seems in awe and keeps quoting the crew of only 18, that is the crewing when the ships are operating in their "coast guard" type tastings. For actual military ops, the crew goes up to 43.

I sailed in the EJNAR MIKKELSEN for about 12 hours back in summer 2011 (I think). It didn't have a fire control radar then either for some reason. Also, reference the 18 person crew, they were all very, very tired and they told me that 18 sailors was just enough to keep doing what they do.

They gave me a Zippo lighter as a souvenir and a tshirt that had a photo of the 76mm shooting out the ships bridge windows during trials (or that's what they said the photo was of). I don't have the tshirt anymore, but here's a photo of the zippo and of the accident:

http://www.navalhistory.dk/Danish/SoevaernsNyt/2009/0202_76mmblasttest.htm

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I don't know if its the camera angle that's playing tricks, but it sure looks in that picture like someone screwed up the safety angle blocks and the ship is actually shooting herself in the bridge.  ;D

And yes, with the 18 persons manning, it gives them minimal operational capabilities, which is fine when they operate in home waters as I understand they usually operate a bit like our coast guard: Sail only as required for a specific task (or training evolution), otherwise stay in port or at anchor. So they do a lot of day sails. That type of ops is not really possible for us for the operations of the Harry DeWolfe in view of the distances at issue.

Oh! And BTW: The CCG does stay in the Arctic all winter from time to time: The Amundsen does a lot of research over winter in those waters.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Maybe that’s their way of chipping paint. Even if not hitting bridge, the frigging heat from that would suck. Now I’m dating myself here, but think the safety dentents on the 5/54 pre TRUMP would not allow that traverse and the 76 mm post TRUMP for sure.  The problem pre trump was to not shoot the sea sparrow off the extended rail launcher (remember those motherless contraptions) and post TRUMP to not shoot within 3 metres of the compartment just aft of the mount or the vibration through the bulkhead caused unantipatrd problems.

 

[winnipegoo7]

They called it a 'blast test'. Apparently it was to see if the pressure from the gun would damage the ship. I read somewhere that it damaged the bridge windows, but I can't find the article any more.

 

[Kirkhill]

I'm hoping that that orange dot on the recessed platform below the bridge wasn't a hard hat. 

Although, having worked with Danish engineers, I wouldn't doubt it...... ;D

 

[Underway]

They called it a 'blast test'. Apparently it was to see if the pressure from the gun would damage the ship. I read somewhere that it damaged the bridge windows, but I can't find the article any more.

It makes sense for such a small ship with such little distance from the gun to the superstructure.  If the pressure wave did do a lot of damage you could refine the guns cutouts to better protect the superstructure.  If the pressure isn't an issue then you can really refine the cutouts to shoot just past the superstructure (say 140 degrees off of the bow).  If the pressure is an issue maybe the gun doesn't turn further then 100 degrees either side of the bow.

 

[Stoker]

I'm hoping that that orange dot on the recessed platform below the bridge wasn't a hard hat. 

Although, having worked with Danish engineers, I wouldn't doubt it...... ;D

Port running light.

 

[jollyjacktar]

They called it a 'blast test'. Apparently it was to see if the pressure from the gun would damage the ship. I read somewhere that it damaged the bridge windows, but I can't find the article any more.

I have no doubt they were changing the windows after that test.  Must have been interesting to see from inside the bridge during the shot.  If they were allowed to remain inside.

 

[Stoker]

Article on the Blast test.

http://navalhistory.dk/Danish/SoevaernsNyt/2009/0202_76mmblasttest.htm

 

[Underway]

I think this classifies nicely for the Arctic Patrol portion of the ships mission on this thread.

Arctic Experience & Operations - Episode 1: Into the White

 

[Underway]

Was party to a briefing today regarding AOPS project design and implementation.  Some real interesting stuff from a design and procurement perspective.  A few things we haven't discussed here.

-HMCS Harry DeWolf's goal is to be launched in September (jollyjacktar mentioned this earlier but this is to backup that statement)

-HMCS Margarete Brook's two megablocks will be brought out right after, hence the hard push for HDW to get finished by Sept

-most of the work on HDW left right now is pulling cable, which for anyone who has done that is a gigantic job

-the AOPS have power to spare.  They intentionally over engineered her power generation for a few reasons.  First, spare power for icebreaking is a good thing.  Second getting her to her hull design speed (17kts) with a 19m beam requires a pile of power.  Third design margins for future proofing.

-some sections of her hull are designed for Polar Class 4, which is a higher grade than her requirements (PC5).  This is again, a safety margin as they fully expect the NWO community to smack her into ice too thick a few times.

-her ability to take on multiple boats, multifunction Ops room, carry 20 extra pers, 6 ISO containers etc... is a real strength.  OGD, CANSOFCOM and the Army were stakeholders in the initial design.  She's more capable than the frigates for many tasks because of her ability to carry extra supplies, and equipment.

-New Zealand is very interested in AOPS.  They visited ISI a while ago.  She matches quite a bit of what they are looking for, including that she will have a Lloyds Certification.  Now my own opinion is the NZ military procurement is even more politically sensitive then Canada's so this might be a pipe dream, but there are fingers crossed.

**edit- had a quick look a the RNZN PLAN out to 2025 and in it they identify an ice capable/strengthened OPV requirement, as well as a Littoral Operations Support Capability.  AOPS may fit both of those depending on what LOSC requirements are.  Two birds with one stone?**

 

[Cloud Cover]

Thanks for that RNZN link. Can you imagine a Canadian defence document mandating enhanced war fighting capability to protect our country and our citizens out of country?????

 

[Swampbuggy]

Was party to a briefing today regarding AOPS project design and implementation.  Some real interesting stuff from a design and procurement perspective.  A few things we haven't discussed here.

-HMCS Harry DeWolf's goal is to be launched in September (jollyjacktar mentioned this earlier but this is to backup that statement)

-HMCS Margarete Brook's two megablocks will be brought out right after, hence the hard push for HDW to get finished by Sept

-most of the work on HDW left right now is pulling cable, which for anyone who has done that is a gigantic job

-the AOPS have power to spare.  They intentionally over engineered her power generation for a few reasons.  First, spare power for icebreaking is a good thing.  Second getting her to her hull design speed (17kts) with a 19m beam requires a pile of power.  Third design margins for future proofing.

-some sections of her hull are designed for Polar Class 4, which is a higher grade than her requirements (PC5).  This is again, a safety margin as they fully expect the NWO community to smack her into ice too thick a few times

I would imagine there’s still quite a bit of work yet to do even after launching. Is there any timeframe for sea trials to start, at this point? It’s been awhile since I’ve seen an updated picture, so I don’t think I’ve seen any of the radar or comms units installed yet.

 

[Underway]

I would imagine there’s still quite a bit of work yet to do even after launching. Is there any timeframe for sea trials to start, at this point? It’s been awhile since I’ve seen an updated picture, so I don’t think I’ve seen any of the radar or comms units installed yet.

That question was asked.  The presenters were not going to commit to a timeframe but said they expect builders trials to take up to a year.  Lots of integration needs to happen from IPMS to Nav and Comms systems.  Systems integration can take quite a while.

 

[Czech_pivo]

So if it takes a full year, Sept. 2019, the then earliest that HDW will be up in the arctic will be the summer of 2020.