Canadian River Class Destroyer Megathread

[NavyShooter]

Considering the total NEQ involved, yes, that would be an interesting task....then getting it from whatever airfield to the waterfront would be interesting as well. Lots of interesting placards on vehicles. Also probably interesting routing to the waterfront - some locations (ie Halifax) don't allow certain classes of 'stuff' to be brought across bridges. I'm sure other nations/cities have similar concerns about tunnels/etc too. Also, which jetty can be used for it - there's a reason that Bedford Mag and Rocky Point are 'away' from other jetties.

As a former Magazine Custodian having been involved in many ammo loading/unloading evolutions over the years, you'd also need skilled/qualified/capable crane operators to do the hoisting - are you bringing them over from one of the CFADs or hiring locals?

At Bedford, a full ammo evolution was normally planned for 2 days - lots of factors to consider there - jetty security, what happens to the ammo that doesn't all make it aboard on day 1? If it's in a foreign nation, do we have permission to put armed guards on the jetty to protect it? What's the crappy weather plan in case the winds are too high to load missiles? Are the Harpoon cannister tools/hoists inspected/certified? What happens when one of the new ESSMs fails to tune to the FCS and has to get swapped out? Are you bringing a couple of spares in case that happens?

That's a much bigger problem set than most would think.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Considering the total NEQ involved, yes, that would be an interesting task....then getting it from whatever airfield to the waterfront would be interesting as well. Lots of interesting placards on vehicles. Also probably interesting routing to the waterfront - some locations (ie Halifax) don't allow certain classes of 'stuff' to be brought across bridges. I'm sure other nations/cities have similar concerns about tunnels/etc too. Also, which jetty can be used for it - there's a reason that Bedford Mag and Rocky Point are 'away' from other jetties.

As a former Magazine Custodian having been involved in many ammo loading/unloading evolutions over the years, you'd also need skilled/qualified/capable crane operators to do the hoisting - are you bringing them over from one of the CFADs or hiring locals?

At Bedford, a full ammo evolution was normally planned for 2 days - lots of factors to consider there - jetty security, what happens to the ammo that doesn't all make it aboard on day 1? If it's in a foreign nation, do we have permission to put armed guards on the jetty to protect it? What's the crappy weather plan in case the winds are too high to load missiles? Are the Harpoon cannister tools/hoists inspected/certified? What happens when one of the new ESSMs fails to tune to the FCS and has to get swapped out? Are you bringing a couple of spares in case that happens?

That's a much bigger problem set than most would think.

I won't get into to to many details but everything you talk of and more is a consideration and process that we are moving through to make it happen.

Safe to say, in a time of open conflict we will need standing agreements with host countries and forward deployed materials and people.

 

[NavyShooter]

Oh....and as the first T26 nears completion of assembly/painting, the 2nd static version is now off the building slips and ready for putty/etc.

After this, I'll be switching over to building the R/C version.

 

[AvroArrow92]

Out of curiosity looking at the load out of the Australian Hunter class, it has 32 VLS with a Mark 45 gun. Would that mean the RCN is trying to squeeze in the extra set of Mk 41 cells by defaulting back to the Mk 45? Or they setting aside the weight savings for something else, like fuel storage?

 

[Lumber]

Out of curiosity looking at the load out of the Australian Hunter class, it has 32 VLS with a Mark 45 gun. Would that mean the RCN is trying to squeeze in the extra set of Mk 41 cells by defaulting back to the Mk 45? Or they setting aside the weight savings for something else, like fuel storage?

I don't think it has anything to do with trying to get more VLS cells, I think it has entirely to do with ease of integration and program risk.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Didn't the Hunter Class gain another 1-2m of beam to accommodate their loadout?

 

[Underway]

Didn't the Hunter Class gain another 1-2m of beam to accommodate their loadout?

Yes more beam and more length.

Hunter class is just bigger.

 

[Swampbuggy]

I don't think it has anything to do with trying to get more VLS cells, I think it has entirely to do with ease of integration and program risk.

I hope the integration de risking doesn’t also mean swapping out the 30mm lionfish for 25mm mk38…

 

[Underway]

I hope the integration de risking doesn’t also mean swapping out the 30mm lionfish for 25mm mk38…

Thise guns aren't integrated. They are seperate systems. Might have a feed to OPS (CIC) but not actually controlled by Aegis.

 

[Rainbow1910]

Thise guns aren't integrated. They are seperate systems. Might have a feed to OPS (CIC) but not actually controlled by Aegis.

Both the original Leonardo 127mm gun and the Lionfish 30mm guns weren't integrated into AEGIS but into the Canadian Tactical Interface, that doesn't seem to have stopped the main gun from being scrapped partially due to integration concerns regardless it would seem.

 

[NavyShooter]

The first version of my RCD has Harpoon missiles...because there were no free to download versions of the Kongsberg NSM available that I could find.

Fixed that tonight.

Here we have my version of the NSM quad pack.

I'm going to be taking to print tonight then will release the files on Makerworld so others can build them as well.

 

[Lumber]

Both the original Leonardo 127mm gun and the Lionfish 30mm guns weren't integrated into AEGIS but into the Canadian Tactical Interface, that doesn't seem to have stopped the main gun from being scrapped partially due to integration concerns regardless it would seem.

Right but the main gun can used in an AAW role. One of the best features of Aegis is it's extreme level of integration and synchronization between its weapons and sensors. With the Leonardo, you'd have to have the gun talk to CTI which would then talk to Aegis, and Aegis doesn't like that. There would have to be a whole development process to figure out how to make that work (does Aegis send a fire signal to CTI that CTI automatically executes? Does Aegis send a fire recommendation to CTI that an operator has to execute? Is there no integration at all and the CTI operator has to monitor the engagement and fire the Leonardo at the correct time?), plus with whatever integration solution you come up with, there's be a lengthy certification process to make sure it actually works safely and effectively. With the Mk 45, you don't have to do ANY of that.

The newest versions of the Mk38 is capable of being integrated with Aegis, so I wouldn't be surprised if they switch to it as well.

 

[Rainbow1910]

Right but the main gun can used in an AAW role. One of the best features of Aegis is it's extreme level of integration and synchronization between its weapons and sensors. With the Leonardo, you'd have to have the gun talk to CTI which would then talk to Aegis, and Aegis doesn't like that. There would have to be a whole development process to figure out how to make that work (does Aegis send a fire signal to CTI that CTI automatically executes? Does Aegis send a fire recommendation to CTI that an operator has to execute? Is there no integration at all and the CTI operator has to monitor the engagement and fire the Leonardo at the correct time?), plus with whatever integration solution you come up with, there's be a lengthy certification process to make sure it actually works safely and effectively. With the Mk 45, you don't have to do ANY of that.

The newest versions of the Mk38 is capable of being integrated with Aegis, so I wouldn't be surprised if they switch to it as well.

From what I've gathered, CTI acts as the interface between the non-AEGIS integrated equipment and AEGIS itself. Information is passed through CTI and to AEGIS, where AEGIS passes information back through CTI and down the chain. It would make zero sense of CTI was entirely reliant on operator execution without integration from AEGIS, and it sounds from the Maritime Engineering Journal on the subject that CTI actively executes commands passed down through AEGIS/the AEGIS operator team.

CTI also integrates the entirely ASW suite and related weaponry into AEGIS, as none of the systems we have in that department aboard the River class are American in nature.

Anybody who is a SME can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.