Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

[Lumber]

I guessing some of these are for other navies?

View attachment 75381

Yes. Second from the top is the Chilean Type 23 and third from the bottom is the New Zealand ANZAC, both of whom have been fitted out by Lockheed Martin Canada with CMS 330.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Yes. Second from the top is the Chilean Type 23 and third from the bottom is the New Zealand ANZAC, both of whom have been fitted out by Lockheed Martin Canada with CMS 330.

Smart minds and all that

 

[Lumber]

Smart minds and all that

That's the nicest thing you've ever said about me

 

[Halifax Tar]

That's the nicest thing you've ever said about me

Hoisted on board, Sir. I will work to be more pleasant lol

 

[dimsum]

What does “ahead of ready” mean?

 

[Lumber]

What does “ahead of ready” mean?

I think they're playing on the RCN motto of Ready Aye Ready? Or since there's non Canadian there, maybe it's just a awkward slogan that literally just means they are more than ready?

 

[Swampbuggy]

I guessing some of these are for other navies?

View attachment 75381

Weird colour on the CPF…

 

[Spencer100]

Weird colour on the CPF…

The sizing is way off too. T26 size comparative to CPF a big difference. The Anzac's are smaller than the T22 and the CFP.

I'm sure put this was put together by a marketing intern very quickly.

 

[calculus]

Interesting article on the next steps for the T26 before the RN commissions first-of-class HMS Glasgow.

In focus: delivering the Type 26 Frigates | Navy Lookout

www.navylookout.com

 

[Czech_pivo]

Interesting article on the next steps for the T26 before the RN commissions first-of-class HMS Glasgow.

In focus: delivering the Type 26 Frigates | Navy Lookout

www.navylookout.com

'Assuming there are no further delays, it will be more than 11 years from the time the first steel was cut for HMS Glasgow until she achieves Initial Operating Capability – a performance that compares poorly with first-of-class warships constructed by other major nations.'

Any takers on the following bet: CSC goes 'over/under' on this 11yr timeline?

 

[Lumber]

'Assuming there are no further delays, it will be more than 11 years from the time the first steel was cut for HMS Glasgow until she achieves Initial Operating Capability – a performance that compares poorly with first-of-class warships constructed by other major nations.'

Any takers on the following bet: CSC goes 'over/under' on this 11yr timeline?

Ooof. That's though.

First, the end date: when will Canada define "IOC"? Capable of routine domestic ops (i.e NR2)? Capable of route, non-kinetic international ops (i.e. NR1)? Or capable of full-spectrum international ops (i.e. HR)?

Second, the start date: with respect to cutting steel, it was shared here somewhere that as soon as the steel cutting shop has time, they will cut the first few pieces of steel and then put them in a holding bay for future use, potentially sitting there for months and years. Is that really a fair starting point?

 

[Navy_Pete]

Ooof. That's though.

First, the end date: when will Canada define "IOC"? Capable of routine domestic ops (i.e NR2)? Capable of route, non-kinetic international ops (i.e. NR1)? Or capable of full-spectrum international ops (i.e. HR)?

Second, the start date: with respect to cutting steel, it was shared here somewhere that as soon as the steel cutting shop has time, they will cut the first few pieces of steel and then put them in a holding bay for future use, potentially sitting there for months and years. Is that really a fair starting point?

I don't even know if the first cut pieces ever even make it into the ship; there is usually some test modules to check distortion etc that will get scrapped (or is even just for PR).

That's one of the issues with reporting it as 'construction has started' when really you are just welding some steel together to see what happens and adjusting how much heat etc you use for different thicknesses and weld geometries.

 

[dapaterson]

IOC will be as defined in the project documentation. Don't have them handily in front of me right now ...

 

[Underway]

Ooof. That's though.

First, the end date: when will Canada define "IOC"? Capable of routine domestic ops (i.e NR2)? Capable of route, non-kinetic international ops (i.e. NR1)? Or capable of full-spectrum international ops (i.e. HR)?

Second, the start date: with respect to cutting steel, it was shared here somewhere that as soon as the steel cutting shop has time, they will cut the first few pieces of steel and then put them in a holding bay for future use, potentially sitting there for months and years. Is that really a fair starting point?

IOC is full spectrum Ops IIRC. Everything works on the ship as advertized for the most part.

I think 11 years is probably close to the mark. 7 years to build and 4 years to fix up issues and get to the missile defence Ex phase.

I suspect the first CSC will be doing lots of operations before that though, just not High Readyness ones.

 

[NavyShooter]

I'll observe that it was not until 1997 that CHA did the first multiple missile firing on Halifax Class. (We fired 4 - one decided to spin in...in an 'unplanned' fashion.)

 

[Navy_Pete]

I'll observe that it was not until 1997 that CHA did the first multiple missile firing on Halifax Class. (We fired 4 - one decided to spin in...in an 'unplanned' fashion.)

Had that happen with an SM2 during a missile ex; made for an interesting XO pipe and woke us up in FSB (directly aft of the missile bank)!

 

[Underway]

Interesting side note on missile shoots, RCN is transitioning out of ESSM Block 1 to Block 2 this coming summer. Should be fun to see how the active mode compares to the semi-active. I'm legit excited to see what happens.

 

[Lumber]

Interesting side note on missile shoots, RCN is transitioning out of ESSM Block 1 to Block 2 this coming summer. Should be fun to see how the active mode compares to the semi-active. I'm legit excited to see what happens.

It should certainly increases the number of simultaneous engagements that a CPF can execute, though with only 16 missiles, they're still going to run out pretty fast.

On a side note, the Kiwis went with active-guidance PDSMs recently, and as a result, got rid of their fire control radars. Now, we can't do that because our gun still requires it, but it's interesting how significant an effect that switching to active-guided missiles can have.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Missile shoots are surprisingly kind of boring when everything goes to plan. You prep for months, do all kinds of drills, and then it's over in a fraction of a second (and most never even get to see cool video of the launch/strike).

The most exciting part of the last one I did was all the DGs deciding to crap out on us with fuel leaks etc as the target was inbound, and we were crashing non-essential equipment and juggling the load to stop from blacking out.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Missile shoots are surprisingly kind of boring when everything goes to plan. You prep for months, do all kinds of drills, and then it's over in a fraction of a second (and most never even get to see cool video of the launch/strike).

The most exciting part of the last one I did was all the DGs deciding to crap out on us with fuel leaks etc as the target was inbound, and we were crashing non-essential equipment and juggling the load to stop from blacking out.

Missile shoots only excite the Navy because the vast majority of it has never actually engaged in combat and done the job for real. Cool guys don't look at explosions.