• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Canadian River Class Destroyer Megathread

I get it, people want their living spaces to feel warm and comfortable. The reality is that war fighting is a small part of a ships life and people need to live and feel comfortable on them for long periods and want to call it home away from home. How you square that circle I am not sure, but I think it's best to acknowledge the circle exists.
 
I get it, people want their living spaces to feel warm and comfortable. The reality is that war fighting is a small part of a ships life and people need to live and feel comfortable on them for long periods and want to call it home away from home. How you square that circle I am not sure, but I think it's best to acknowledge the circle exists.
This is it. I guarantee one big fire in a mess and all that fire loading get jettisoned across the fleet. I think AOPS has it right with fire resistant cafeteria and smaller messes without as many combustibles. Little chance of things getting out of hand in there.
 
This is it. I guarantee one big fire in a mess and all that fire loading get jettisoned across the fleet. I think AOPS has it right with fire resistant cafeteria and smaller messes without as many combustibles. Little chance of things getting out of hand in there.

Why haven't the red helmet crew addressed this issue?
 
Why haven't the red helmet crew addressed this issue?
Its FER/FTA's part ship. Honestly I wish @Navy_Pete was helping me out here. He's got the full inside scoop on it and worked in the area for a while. Some of this might be new data/research, and some of it might just be "we used to know this stuff and forgot along the way".
 
This is it. I guarantee one big fire in a mess and all that fire loading get jettisoned across the fleet. I think AOPS has it right with fire resistant cafeteria and smaller messes without as many combustibles. Little chance of things getting out of hand in there.
The first AOPV has a lot of wood used in mess furniture, bunks etc. That has been since rectified in latter ships with metal. I did notice some mess renovations with a half wall being taken down in the Chief and PO's and the use of wood in their bar tops. Corcan mess furniture has been all replaced with much more comfortable civilian made items with the rest being farmed out to workshops and such.
 
Funny enough on CPFs the wardroom table is a secondary operation table with operating light installed above it.

Some things never change...
We were in sea state 9 and that table almost chopped a officer in two due to the fact it wasn’t bolted down. The guy hit was lucky he landed in between the cabinets which stopped the table and not in front of it.
 
We were in sea state 9 and that table almost chopped a officer in two due to the fact it wasn’t bolted down. The guy hit was lucky he landed in between the cabinets which stopped the table and not in front of it.
Yah I had to dive over the top of the bar to evade the furniture once. Lucky I didn't break anything (on myself or anywhere else).
 
Given Canada is planning to procure 15 River Class Destroyers, I thought I would compare such against current NATO naval forces using the criterion of currently commissioned NATO warships in active service, counting frigates and destroyers only (excluding cruisers, corvettes, patrol vessels, reserve ships, and ships still under construction), the NATO members with 15 or more frigates and destroyers (where I may have some of this wrong as it is difficult to have exact numbers ):

United States — 77 destroyers​

  • Arleigh Burke-class destroyer74
  • Zumwalt-class destroyer3
Total: 77

Note: The three Zumwalt-class ships are commissioned destroyers, although they are undergoing modernization to receive the Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) hypersonic missile system and have limited operational availability during this transition.


Turkey — 17 frigates​

  • Gabya-class frigate8
  • Barbaros-class frigate4
  • Yavuz-class frigate4
  • İstanbul (İstif)-class frigate1
Total: 17

I believe turkey currently fields (together with France and Italy) the second-largest fleet of frigates in NATO.


France — 17 frigates​

France officially classifies all of its principal surface combatants as frigates.

  • Aquitaine (FREMM)-class frigate8
  • Alsace (FREMM-DA)-class frigate2
  • Horizon-class air-defence frigate2
  • La Fayette-class frigate5
Total: 17


Italy — 17 major surface combatants (including PPA)​

Officially, the Italian Navy classifies the Thaon di Revel (PPA) class as Multipurpose Offshore Patrol Ships (Pattugliatori Polivalenti d'Altura) rather than frigates. However, the Light+ and Full variants are approximately 6,000–7,000 tonnes, equipped with modern sensors, vertical launch systems, and anti-submarine and anti-air warfare capabilities comparable to contemporary light frigates. Because of their size and capability, I included them.

  • Carlo Bergamini (FREMM)-class frigate10
  • Andrea Doria-class destroyer2
  • Durand de la Penne-class destroyer2
  • Thaon di Revel (PPA)-class3 commissioned
Total: 17 (including the commissioned PPA ships as light frigate-equivalent combatants).

Using this capability-based list, I note four NATO members currently field 15 or more frigates and destroyers (or frigate-equivalent major surface combatants):

  • United States77
  • Turkey17
  • France17
  • Italy17 (including three Thaon di Revel-class PPAs as frigate-equivalent ships)
The next largest NATO fleets fall below or are very close to the threshold:
  • United Kingdom — approximately 14 (6 Type 45 destroyers and 8 active Type 23 frigates, with the total fluctuating as ships retire and Type 26/31 vessels enter service). I believe the UK navy is in the process of modifying its approach for new warships, considering more and more the possibility of large unmanned warships.
  • Canada12 Halifax-class frigates (currently)
  • Germany11 frigates
  • Spain11 frigates
  • Greece — approximately 12–14 frigates, depending on the retirement status of individual Elli-class ships
Under this comparison, Canada's planned fleet of 15 River-class destroyers, if such proceeds (and if NATO fleet numbers remain static) would place it, in NATO, among the largest fleets of high-end surface combatants, comparable in size to those of France, Turkey, and Italy. However, given Canada borders 3 oceans, I speculate possibly only about one-half of that number of quantity 15 (maybe 8 or 9 ? ) would be stationed in the Atlantic (Halifax)

Still, this leads me to a view that, in order to take full advantage of such a fleet, it is very important for the RCN to proceed with the Joint Support Ship (JSS) program and other support capabilities, in order to provide Canada with the flexibility to deploy and sustain naval task groups in support of its alliances and its national foreign policy objectives.
 
We always look at NATO. Take a look at Australia, Japan and Korea for other comparables. Then you need to compare what the "frigates" actually are for capability. Some are short range national water types of ships.

Australia is a good comparable, however their requirements have them worrying about the sea/air gap north of the continent, and their requirement to maintain a health amphibious capability. Japan and Korea like most of NATO only worry about domestic water deployments close to home. France and the UK have plenty of long range colonial remnants that they need to pay attention to.

Right now the Canadian doctrine as presented in various policy documents are that the RCN needs to maintain one task group consisting of an AOR, 3-4 destroyers/frigates, with add ons.

In order to do that 15 destroyers would mean we have approx 4-5 destroyers available at all times. So that part of the doctrine is covered off. Following on from that we would want four JSS/AOR's to provide one available at all times. That fills out the core capabilities of the task group.
 
Back
Top