Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

[Underway]

I thought that we were out of the heavy jackstay game?

Me too but I can't otherwise explain that random post on the focsle.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Look, we're nearing the point where Oriole will be deployed to a theatre of hostility due to a lack of any other available ship...

3 12pdr broadside to fight pirates with? We could also take on the Bluenose with a 5 gun broadside and give Letters of Marque to the SALT society. That will give us two ships on each coast.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I look at the picture and ask myself, where would I conduct a light jackstay?

There are few spots that would be interesting, so perhaps someone figured you need some sort of King post to carry out light jackstays. But I agree that it would not be extended under normal sailing conditions - that could ruin a good radar signature reduction.

 

[Underway]

I look at the picture and ask myself, where would I conduct a light jackstay?

There are few spots that would be interesting, so perhaps someone figured you need some sort of King post to carry out light jackstays. But I agree that it would not be extended under normal sailing conditions - that could ruin a good radar signature reduction.

Where are you gonna conduct a RAS? Amid ships? Might be the RAS post.

Given how high the upper decks are amid ships certainly won't be able to RAS from the Asterix. They didn't make her RAS posts high enough to refuel anything but a smaller ship properly (they used the Protecteurs old RAS post design, but failed to consider the Protecteurs freeboard hight, thus the gravity feed doesn't work on larger ships).

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Asterix's gear seems high enough to RAS an Australian LPH, I don't see why she couldn't RAS a CSC type 26.

 

[Underway]

First off that's an amazing photo.

Asterix has to pump at a higher PSI it instead of letting the gravity feed work properly. That can cause some issues on the other end so I'm told. I haven't been in that sort of a RAS type situation myself. I now feel like I'm missing some more info regarding the Burke situation.

 

[Rainbow1910]

Some upcoming news regarding the CSC program this fall, as per Espirit de Corps Volume 30, Issue 7.

Direct link and linked text removed by Staff

Having another party besides the PBO release an updated cost estimate for the CSC program, especially one that strips away much of the trappings of the program and provides a more baseline per unit cost should be very interesting. Especially as this will come from the Navy itself as the PBO and National Defence have disagreed on the PBO's CSC reporting cost in the past. If I am not mistaken as well, this will be the first proper update by the DND regarding the program in sometime.

Linked text removed by Staff

This seems like a positive to me, I do not particularly agree with the PBO in this regard. CSC very much seems like a good investment and capability for the RCN moving forward, cutting the knees out from under the program would be self defeating even if it satiated the misers in the short term. Holding the course and not being distracted by changes which will cause nothing but delays is something the DND should be striving to do. Caving to pressure from bodies like the PBO would be troublesome especially considering their pie in the sky alternatives.

Link and linked material removed by Staff, in accordance with Site Guidelines.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

, cutting the knees out from under the program would be self defeating even if it satiated the misers in the short term. Holding the course and not being distracted by changes which will cause nothing but delays is something the DND should be striving to do. Caving to pressure from bodies like the PBO would be troublesome especially considering their pie in the sky alternatives.

But that would be such a Canadian thing to do and fit into our traditions and values.......

 

[Underway]

We're a bit to far gone to implement structural change for the CSC program at this point. I can see there being some changes as we move past the initial three ships.

And there have been changes to procurement overall, I've spoken to them here a few times.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Me too but I can't otherwise explain that random post on the focsle.
View attachment 79614

Random renderer thought it looked cool.

I don't think the 3D model of the current build we were looking at a month or two ago has the same mast setup as what is shown here, so that might be a 'look cool' factor. There are a lot of fairly random ideas thrown around though by one silo until they talk to another silo and realize it won't actually work overall.

I want to say the version I saw was fully enclosed.

 

[Lumber]

We're a bit to far gone to implement structural change for the CSC program at this point. I can see there being some changes as we move past the initial three ships.

And there have been changes to procurement overall, I've spoken to them here a few times.

Never underestimate Canadian politics...

 

[Underway]

Random renderer thought it looked cool.

I don't think the 3D model of the current build we were looking at a month or two ago has the same mast setup as what is shown here, so that might be a 'look cool' factor. There are a lot of fairly random ideas thrown around though by one silo until they talk to another silo and realize it won't actually work overall.

I want to say the version I saw was fully enclosed.

I don't disagree. Nav Arch friend of mine pointed out that the limiting element in warship design these days is often upper deck square footage. It used to be tonnage (for armour, engines and guns), and then it became space (for the huge computers and their cooling that used to be needed in the 80-90s), and now its square footage to fit all the Ae, sensors, weapons and flight deck.

Given that I wouldn't be surprised if the mast design took forever and had multiple iterations. The CPF one took many years I'm told and they still didn't get it quite right.

 

[Furniture]

Random renderer thought it looked cool.

I don't think the 3D model of the current build we were looking at a month or two ago has the same mast setup as what is shown here, so that might be a 'look cool' factor. There are a lot of fairly random ideas thrown around though by one silo until they talk to another silo and realize it won't actually work overall.

I want to say the version I saw was fully enclosed.

I know my directorate was engaged by the CSC team a little while back, as they wanted to ensure some of the mistakes of the AOPS were corrected before the first ship was even started.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I know my directorate was engaged by the CSC team a little while back, as they wanted to ensure some of the mistakes of the AOPS were corrected before the first ship was even started.

Anemometer for the win?

 

[Furniture]

Anemometer for the win?

It was more than just that, but that is a big one. We have tools to make up for the other fitted system deficiencies.

The ceilometer is displayed in fathoms I believe, and the barometer is displayed to the nearest 0.03 inHg, our standard is 0.005inHg.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I am intrigued by get ceiling in fathoms in a METAR or a TAF…

 

[Furniture]

I am intrigued by get ceiling in fathoms in a METAR or a TAF…

Yeah... I suspect some NWO/CSEO though 'We do depth in fathoms, why not height?"

I was a bit blown away that Vaisala even sold it to them that way. Though, if the RCN says "we want fathoms" the folks in Colorado and Finland likely laughed and said "as you wish".

 

[Navy_Pete]

I know my directorate was engaged by the CSC team a little while back, as they wanted to ensure some of the mistakes of the AOPS were corrected before the first ship was even started.

It's definitely complex, but I think the CSC team is much better resourced so they can do a lot more coordination compared to AOPs/JSS. We're getting a lot more coordination with the CSC/ISI/BAE/LM teams, which is great.

 

[Underway]

It's definitely complex, but I think the CSC team is much better resourced so they can do a lot more coordination compared to AOPs/JSS. We're getting a lot more coordination with the CSC/ISI/BAE/LM teams, which is great.

CSC is asking JSS and AOPS what mistakes they made or challenges they had all the time. I know that for network systems JSS was invited to a number of the CSC planning briefings to point out some challenges and things that weren't quite working. The PM's talk on a regular basis and the PD staff also work together and share notes.

And there are a few Gov't specialists who work on all three programs in specific jobs (cyber/system security as an example).

 

[childs56]

CSC is asking JSS and AOPS what mistakes they made or challenges they had all the time. I know that for network systems JSS was invited to a number of the CSC planning briefings to point out some challenges and things that weren't quite working. The PM's talk on a regular basis and the PD staff also work together and share notes.

And there are a few Gov't specialists who work on all three programs in specific jobs (cyber/system security as an example).

Serious question, did we not send staff over to the UK/Germany etc to see how they design, manufacture war ships? or id we dust the book off and figure we could do it. All the while throwing good money after bad money at the situation.