Canadian River Class Destroyer Megathread

[Underway]

First confirmation of Mk38 Mod 4 that I've seen anywhere. Possibly missed it elsewhere.

We will see. In my opinion, it's not the size that matters, but the composition.

It appears the RCN is making a conscious effort to improve upon the crewing compositions models used for the AOPS and MCDVs, and that's a positive development.

From a sustainment perspective, the key will be ensuring that leadership and command teams understand that you cannot achieve CPF-level service and support with fewer resources. Overall, however, based on the numbers and positions I have seen, I am encouraged and optimistic.

I'm concerned that they didn't take maintenance into account properly for the Combat Systems side. USN divisional setup is that most sections are their own operator maintainers (like the MSE Dept is now, the operate and maintain the ships engines...). So Sonar would be responsible for both operating the Sonar and maintaining/repairing it.

Our current organization has those responsibilities split. CSE Dept keeps the equipment working and OPS fights using that equipment. But if Sonar is in OPS and are now responsible for the equipment who plans the work period, reports the operational deficiencies and briefs the CO on capability losses. Who speaks to the shore authorities for parts and support?

On USN ships this is all coordinated through a dedicated Maintenance Dept, made up of 6 people (4 techs, 1 supply and 1 supervisor) who liaise with shore, get parts and track maintenance and problems for the entire ship (MSE and CSE). We won't have this part.

And if the CSEO is responsible for this equipment still they are going to have to reach into another department to enforce maintenance routines and repair? That doesn't make sense to me.

Because ashore logistics in Halifax totally addresses all your issues when you're mid Atlantic or south Pacific.

Enter Protecteur Class. Like sea training, we're here to help. Lol

 

[dapaterson]

Enter Protecteur Class. Like sea training, we're here to help. Lol

Two ships. Three oceans. Limited availability due to time / space / maintenance cycles.

Good luck with that.

 

[FSTO]

First confirmation of Mk38 Mod 4 that I've seen anywhere. Possibly missed it elsewhere.

I'm concerned that they didn't take maintenance into account properly for the Combat Systems side. USN divisional setup is that most sections are their own operator maintainers (like the MSE Dept is now, the operate and maintain the ships engines...). So Sonar would be responsible for both operating the Sonar and maintaining/repairing it.

Our current organization has those responsibilities split. CSE Dept keeps the equipment working and OPS fights using that equipment. But if Sonar is in OPS and are now responsible for the equipment who plans the work period, reports the operational deficiencies and briefs the CO on capability losses. Who speaks to the shore authorities for parts and support?

On USN ships this is all coordinated through a dedicated Maintenance Dept, made up of 6 people (4 techs, 1 supply and 1 supervisor) who liaise with shore, get parts and track maintenance and problems for the entire ship (MSE and CSE). We won't have this part.

And if the CSEO is responsible for this equipment still they are going to have to reach into another department to enforce maintenance routines and repair? That doesn't make sense to me.


Enter Protecteur Class. Like sea training, we're here to help. Lol

Have you read the massive occupational review that was just recently completed? I was involved in the very beginning of the process but I was gone before the final report and recommendations were delivered to CRCN.

 

[MJP]

On USN ships this is all coordinated through a dedicated Maintenance Dept, made up of 6 people (4 techs, 1 supply and 1 supervisor) who liaise with shore, get parts and track maintenance and problems for the entire ship (MSE and CSE). We won't have this part.

Ship stuff aside, I have a buddy who did something similar at the unit level and it is amazing when you bake in a control shop mentality that manages and finesses the linkages between all the key depts and the supply chain. Used a bit of analytics and a couple of strong folks and turned around a situation where everyone was guessing to an informed production meeting that reduced VOR and overall outstanding demands. It is not something the RCLS Log world teaches well at any level.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

First confirmation of Mk38 Mod 4 that I've seen anywhere. Possibly missed it elsewhere.

I'm concerned that they didn't take maintenance into account properly for the Combat Systems side. USN divisional setup is that most sections are their own operator maintainers (like the MSE Dept is now, the operate and maintain the ships engines...). So Sonar would be responsible for both operating the Sonar and maintaining/repairing it.

Our current organization has those responsibilities split. CSE Dept keeps the equipment working and OPS fights using that equipment. But if Sonar is in OPS and are now responsible for the equipment who plans the work period, reports the operational deficiencies and briefs the CO on capability losses. Who speaks to the shore authorities for parts and support?

On USN ships this is all coordinated through a dedicated Maintenance Dept, made up of 6 people (4 techs, 1 supply and 1 supervisor) who liaise with shore, get parts and track maintenance and problems for the entire ship (MSE and CSE). We won't have this part.

And if the CSEO is responsible for this equipment still they are going to have to reach into another department to enforce maintenance routines and repair? That doesn't make sense to me.


Enter Protecteur Class. Like sea training, we're here to help. Lol

I've had this funny feeling for a while that warships have gotten so complicated that two things need to happen. First, the Engineering departments should be brought together under a single E.O., but you make it a LCDR on a third sea tour, and give him/her two assistant EO, one for machinery and one for systems. Second, the supply department has to come up with a sub-specialty just for naval engineering and run that side of the house at arms length from the general stores, so that those log techs are intimately familiar with all of the steps required for the maintenance and repair of the specific equipment of the (now unified) engineering department and have familiarity with the actual parts and associated stores.

 

[Stoker]

The subs will or will not be there?

Not that I'm aware of. You maybe thinking of the rumour of the sub builder buying the former Imperial Refinery site and turing it into a mainteance facility.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Not that I'm aware of. You maybe thinking of the rumour of the sub builder buying the former Imperial Refinery site and turing it into a mainteance facility.

Yes!
That’s it!

 

[Stoker]

Yes!
That’s it!

Yes different refinery site. There's two in Dartmouth, ones often confused with the other.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Yes different refinery site. There's two in Dartmouth, ones often confused with the other.

Which is the one that has ‘Main Rd’ running through it?

 

[Underway]

I've had this funny feeling for a while that warships have gotten so complicated that two things need to happen. First, the Engineering departments should be brought together under a single E.O., but you make it a LCDR on a third sea tour, and give him/her two assistant EO, one for machinery and one for systems. Second, the supply department has to come up with a sub-specialty just for naval engineering and run that side of the house at arms length from the general stores, so that those log techs are intimately familiar with all of the steps required for the maintenance and repair of the specific equipment of the (now unified) engineering department and have familiarity with the actual parts and associated stores.

You sort of hit it. The plan is for two Engineering officers (CSE and MSE). Both LCdrs. This will be their second sea tour. Their first will be done as Divisional Officers (two each dept) who report to the HOD. The DivO tour is 2 years, as is the HOD tour. Which is the same amount of sea time as current for PHVI + AHOD. Whether this survives implementation of the new ship org charts I'm unsure. There's a lot more to it than I'm writing, including courses, sub occupations, changes to CSE responsibilities among other things.

Have you read the massive occupational review that was just recently completed? I was involved in the very beginning of the process but I was gone before the final report and recommendations were delivered to CRCN.

I've been to the presentations and am invited sometimes to the working groups. I also get sent documents for review, mainly due to my big mouth in asking questions during presentations... lol.

Not a lot of definition on the processes, more on who does what. How maintenance implementation is covered is what I'm concerned about. They may have covered it and just aren't saying anything. Problem is processes are not owned by the career/occupation shops. Those are owned by the RCN through the various organizations (NFR, Sea Training, FTA, FER, FMF, FEO, Maritime Commands etc...) and may require complete rewrites of some publications which are approved at the CDS level (Naval Engineering Manual, Naval Material Management System etc...).

Two ships. Three oceans. Limited availability due to time / space / maintenance cycles.

Good luck with that.

You know I was trolling you. Lol.