Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS

[NavyShooter]

I'm just hopeful that the following ships after the HDW have straight shaftline installations....I heard the other day that the prop shaft couldn't be installed on the first go until they did some extra cutting and welding...it's a good thing paint can cover any mistakes.

Standard high quality work from the yard that produces excellent, on time, on budget ships for the RCN...

 

[Stoker]

LOL- you got me Chief!

From an RCAF perspective, I'd add another 15 helo's.  There is no doubt that we can use them.

Regarding the mine warfare capabilities, how much of this do the Kingston's actually do right now? I haven't read a single article within the last 12 months of them doing an exercise on wine warfare.  Now, I'll be the first to admit that me being the 'joe public' isn't aware of a large percentage of what the RCN is actually doing on a daily basis, but at the same time, the RCN does a decent job of getting out the good news stories when they happen.

So, reduce the 12 River class down to 8/9 and add another 8/9 mine warfare ships (why not combine this role with the role that the Orca's now perform?).  The River class also, I believe, require less crew than a Kingston does.

Currently I am posted to a high readiness mine warfare unit so yes we conduct mine warfare, in fact just before Christmas two units were deployed to Europe doing exactly that. The ORCAS are not suited for anything but training officers. The crewing for a Kingston Class can be reduced significantly due to specific mission.

 

[Czech_pivo]

So you want to replace the MCDV's with a ship that has no mine warfare capability, no capability to embark containerized payloads and the capability to embark helos that we don't have in our inventory. Aren't you the one who posts about worries of not  having enough helos for the AOPV?

According to this article, some of the River class do have containerized payload capability.

The working deck of HMS Tyne is sufficiently large to transport a number of smaller craft, wheeled or tracked light vehicles, or an LCVP landing craft.

The working deck can accommodate up to seven containers, enabling the ship to carry additional stores, workshops, mine countermeasure support containers, a diving recompression container or medical facilities. A heavy crane of 25t capacity is fitted to handle standard containers.

 

[Stoker]

According to this article, some of the River class do have containerized payload capability.

The working deck of HMS Tyne is sufficiently large to transport a number of smaller craft, wheeled or tracked light vehicles, or an LCVP landing craft.

The working deck can accommodate up to seven containers, enabling the ship to carry additional stores, workshops, mine countermeasure support containers, a diving recompression container or medical facilities. A heavy crane of 25t capacity is fitted to handle standard containers.

You can place containers on any flight deck and call it a capability, its not the same as embarking a containerized payload that require specific voltage, connections, freeboard etc. MCM support containers is not the same as embarking actual launchable mine warfare gear, not to mention route survey, ROV and so forth. Do the River Class have degausing gear? Does it have a ice rating? Does it have a maneuverable Z drive system?

I know you are a civilian with very simplistic ideas about replacing one class with another and expect that class to do everything, it doesn't really work like that in real life. As far as I know no immediate plans to procure ships like the river class and no immediate plans to replace the Kingston Class. I fully expect some Kingston Class to be placed in reserve within the next five years however I don't see the class being replaced entirely for at least 10 years or more. Cheap ships when they were bought, cheap ships to operate and incredibly useful.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

LOL- you got me Chief!

From an RCAF perspective, I'd add another 15 helo's.  There is no doubt that we can use them.

Regarding the mine warfare capabilities, how much of this do the Kingston's actually do right now? I haven't read a single article within the last 12 months of them doing an exercise on wine warfare.  Now, I'll be the first to admit that me being the 'joe public' isn't aware of a large percentage of what the RCN is actually doing on a daily basis, but at the same time, the RCN does a decent job of getting out the good news stories when they happen.

So, reduce the 12 River class down to 8/9 and add another 8/9 mine warfare ships (why not combine this role with the role that the Orca's now perform?).  The River class also, I believe, require less crew than a Kingston does.

I have heard recently that the West coast has some mine hunting kits for them and some sweeps for the East Coast.

It wouldn't be that hard to convert ships to run specific voltage and connections. Civilian ships get converted to different configs all the time, mind you they don't have to go through PWGC to let the contract and won't go back to a contractor that messes it up.

by the way I see that Irving is asking the government to buy more AOP's , but for the CCG to fill a work void.

 

[Stoker]

I have heard recently that the West coast has some mine hunting kits for them and some sweeps for the East Coast.

It wouldn't be that hard to convert ships to run specific voltage and connections. Civilian ships get converted to different configs all the time, mind you they don't have to go through PWGC to let the contract and won't go back to a contractor that messes it up.

by the way I see that Irving is asking the government to buy more AOP's , but for the CCG to fill a work void.

Mine-sweeping gear is long gone, what the ships are using now is a AUV for mine hunting and side scan sonar.

 

[Kirkhill]

I have heard recently that the West coast has some mine hunting kits for them and some sweeps for the East Coast.

It wouldn't be that hard to convert ships to run specific voltage and connections. Civilian ships get converted to different configs all the time, mind you they don't have to go through PWGC to let the contract and won't go back to a contractor that messes it up.

by the way I see that Irving is asking the government to buy more AOP's , but for the CCG to fill a work void.

On the plus side,  if this is any predictor of future behaviour, Irving getting the CSC contract may be the best indicator yet that the RCN will get all 15 hulls (and maybe a couple more).

 

[MarkOttawa]

Further to this post on idea of two extra Irving A/OPS for CCG, https://milnet.ca/forums/threads/64037/post-1571024.html#msg1571024 , as far as I can see this is far more ship than CCG needs for its patrol role, and how much use might A/OPS be as icebreaker off east coast and in St. Lawrence (where there are serious needs for commercial shipping)?

Ice-capable Canadian Coast Guard ships could be both ‘a blessing and a curse’: expert

If reports that federal officials are considering equipping the Canadian Coast Guard with two ice-capable patrol ships are true, it could be both a blessing and a curse, says a Canadian expert on maritime strategy.

On the one hand, these new patrol ships would allow the coast guard to operate in greater areas along Canada’s coastline throughout longer periods of the year, said Timothy Choi, a maritime strategy expert at the University of Calgary’s Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies.

On the other hand, it might make it harder for coast guard officials to press the cash-strapped federal government for real icebreakers, he added.

Earlier this week, Postmedia reported that federal officials are setting the stage to award Irving Shipbuilding contracts to build two more Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ships (AOPS)...

The two additional ships for the coast guard would help Irving’s Halifax shipyard avoid layoffs during a production gap while it retools to begin construction of the next generation of Canadian warships and allow the Liberal government to head into the federal election in October claiming it was delivering on its promise to rebuild the coast guard, the report said...

Whether the AOPS are a good match for the coast guard, however, depends on what they are expected to do, he added.

For the coast guard, the most obvious advantage of having the two AOPS would be that its ageing fleet will receive two long-endurance, helicopter-carrying, offshore vessels much earlier than expected, Choi said.

While much of the coverage of the Canadian Coast Guard’s fleet tends to focus on its icebreakers, a significant portion of its major vessels are used for offshore patrol duties, he said.

However, work on replacements for the coast guard’s 1970s-vintage offshore patrol ships such as the CCGS Cape Roger, which played a key role in the “Turbot Wars” off Newfoundland in 1995, hasn’t even started.

Vancouver-based shipyard Seaspan has won the contract to build large non-combat vessels for the coast guard and non-combat support ships for the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN).

Under the current production schedule, Seaspan’s Vancouver Shipyards have to first complete the two Joint Support Ships for the navy, as well as the Diefenbaker polar icebreaker, the two of the three remaining Offshore Fisheries Science Vessels (the first of three, CCGS Sir John Franklin, was launched in 2017 and is undergoing sea trials) and the Offshore Oceanographic Research Vessel for the coast guard before they move on to building new offshore patrol vessels.

“As a result, the first of the new CCG offshore patrol vessels would not likely enter service until the late 2020s if they are contracted at all [I'd bet on 2030s] – there have been no movements in that regard,” Choi said. “Whereas the two AOPS could be built at the end of the currently ‘hot’ construction line and be completed much earlier to help replace older ships like the Cape Roger and its sister Cygnus as they reach the end of their service lives.”

However, one of the biggest disadvantages of getting the AOPS is that having two ice-capable patrol ships might make it harder for the Canadian Coast Guard to justify getting new, dedicated icebreakers, Choi said.

“Being ice-capable is not the same thing as being an icebreaker, as they come with very different hull and machinery requirements: whereas the former suffices to get the ship itself through ice, the latter requires the ship to be able to break ice to the extent necessary to allow other, less well-protected, ships to transit,” Choi said.

This distinction may be lost on lawmakers and politicians, he added...
https://milnet.ca/forums/index.php?action=post;topic=64037.1800;last_msg=1571313

Mark
Ottawa

 

[kratz]

Mine-sweeping gear is long gone, what the ships are using now is a AUV for mine hunting and side scan sonar.

Interesting shift for the role of MCDVs.
Mine-sweeping and route-survey capabilities are retained, with a modern update.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Currently I am posted to a high readiness mine warfare unit so yes we conduct mine warfare, in fact just before Christmas two units were deployed to Europe doing exactly that.

Operational missions, not training/exercise ones?

 

[Stoker]

Operational missions, not training/exercise ones?

I just got posted in, I know Summerside was part of standing NATO mine sweeping fleet when they were over there.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Copy, thanks.  Like most people, I know very little about the Kingston class deployments (outside of the CARIBBE piece).

 

[Stoker]

Copy, thanks.  Like most people, I know very little about the Kingston class deployments (outside of the CARIBBE piece).

They're definitely doing a lot more with deploying to Europe and annual African deployments. Last year saw them operate off Iceland which is a first.

 

[Cloud Cover]

They're definitely doing a lot more with deploying to Europe and annual African deployments. Last year saw them operate off Iceland which is a first.

Did they make a port visit in Iceland? That would be an awesome place for a young person to visit.

 

[Stoker]

Did they make a port visit in Iceland? That would be an awesome place for a young person to visit.

Yes the ship did, I was part of Sea Training at the time and a wonderful 5 nights there in a nice hotel. Got to see to whole island. After that we operated with the Danish navy and traveled inland through Greenland's fjords. Unbelievable.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Mine-sweeping gear is long gone, what the ships are using now is a AUV for mine hunting and side scan sonar.

Interesting the person who told me is a CPO 2 out here and he was specific to mine hunting on the West Coast and Sweeping on the East? Perhaps "sweeping " is how they refer to side scan sonar usage?

 

[Stoker]

Interesting the person who told me is a CPO 2 out here and he was specific to mine hunting on the West Coast and Sweeping on the East? Perhaps "sweeping " is how they refer to side scan sonar usage?

Both coasts are using side scan and have been using it for many years and both coasts are using AUVs. As far as I know sweeping means using sweep gear. The CPO2 is probably mistaken in his terminology.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Yes the ship did, I was part of Sea Training at the time and a wonderful 5 nights there in a nice hotel. Got to see to whole island. After that we operated with the Danish navy and traveled inland through Greenland's fjords. Unbelievable.

Thats great, Im happy to hear that. ! I keep telling any of my students if they want to join the CAF, join RCN. One of the young guys deployed to Africa last year on an MCDV, now he wants to go reg force. Cheers!

 

[dapaterson]

Canadian Coast Guard to get two AOPS to keep Irving from firing their workforce in gap between AOPS and CSC builds.

https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2019/05/21/federal-government-to-buy-two-more-arctic-ships-from-irving-to-prevent-layoffs-2/#.XOS4ichKi73

 

[YZT580]

Question for those who know ships.  Are the AOPS of sufficient strength to manage the ice on the great lakes and St. Lawrence down through to the gulf?