Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

[Kirkhill]

Swamper - If I'm not mistook, a number of the Navy types on this site have stated at regular intervals that the MCDV is not being retired but retained and refurbished and will serve alongside the AOPS.

Or perhaps I misunderstand them and you.

:cheers:

 

[Swampbuggy]

Swamper - If I'm not mistook, a number of the Navy types on this site have stated at regular intervals that the MCDV is not being retired but retained and refurbished and will serve alongside the AOPS.

Or perhaps I misunderstand them and you.

:cheers:

That’s 100% right...for now. It was how the fleet’s readiness was being discussed that got me wondering how they manage to do it all with 24 surface vessels, currently. In the next 5 years the AOPS will bring the total to 30 vessels, but this will include a far greater presence in the Arctic, so the demand on the fleet will still be very high. Then, in say 12-15 years, the MCDV will be retired and all these tasks will remain to be done by 12 fewer ships. That’s kind of worrisome, wouldn’t you say? I see a need coming for a fleet of smaller, cheaper, mainly coastal vessels to augment the AOPS and CSC and allow them to be sent wherever need dictates and still have a effective, efficient response team at home. I know the MCDVS will be here for a long time yet, but given how slowly the wheels turn in procuring new vessels, I believe that conversation should take place within the next 5 years, IMHO.

 

[Dale Denton]

Then, in say 12-15 years, the MCDV will be retired and all these tasks will remain to be done by 12 fewer ships. That’s kind of worrisome, wouldn’t you say? I see a need coming for a fleet of smaller, cheaper, mainly coastal vessels to augment the AOPS and CSC and allow them to be sent wherever need dictates and still have a effective, efficient response team at home. I know the MCDVS will be here for a long time yet, but given how slowly the wheels turn in procuring new vessels, I believe that conversation should take place within the next 5 years, IMHO.

How about this as an alternative:

As the CSCs start coming online, make the CPFs replace the MCDVs. Yes, they are more expensive and intensive to run, but they'll be cheaper to run than building new OPVs (or starting a 15 year replacement project for them). And yes, they are overkill for the job, but why not (you could keep them in a low-readiness state considering the job)? As each CSC is brought in, thats 1 more CPF to start O-OPV (Overkill-OPV) patrolling. As the later CSC builds come on, you can start to retire the first CPFs, and by that time the 15 year MCDV project would have started (hopefully) to cut steel.

 

[blacktriangle]

How about this as an alternative:

...

No.

Have you been on either class of vessel? I'm sure the Navy will be along soon to pick this apart if any of them feel the need...

 

[SeaKingTacco]

How about this as an alternative:

As the CSCs start coming online, make the CPFs replace the MCDVs. Yes, they are more expensive and intensive to run, but they'll be cheaper to run than building new OPVs (or starting a 15 year replacement project for them). And yes, they are overkill for the job, but why not (you could keep them in a low-readiness state considering the job)? As each CSC is brought in, thats 1 more CPF to start O-OPV (Overkill-OPV) patrolling. As the later CSC builds come on, you can start to retire the first CPFs, and by that time the 15 year MCDV project would have started (hopefully) to cut steel.

No.
We will be luckily to keep the 12 Frigates we have floatable until the CSCs come, much less keep them past that point.

 

[dapaterson]

Operating cost differential between CPF and MCDV is an order of magnitude; crewing is nearly the same.

 

[Swampbuggy]

As far as it goes, the replacement for an MCDV doesn’t have to be anything over the top, like using a CPF would be. I’d say something along the lines of the USCG Sentinel class. It’s a version of the same vessel that became the HERO class for the CCG, but a little bigger and I think a little more durable in heavy seas? Building 6-7 of those with twin fast launch RHIBS, an RWS and a 25kt speed requirement shouldn’t be overly expensive.

It should be adequate for Canadian coastal defence/interdiction and frees up the CPF/CSC/AOPS to go wherever else the Navy’s business sends them.

My point to this whole thread wasn’t really to find an MCDV replacement, but rather to find out what we have available for home water defence when the big guys are gone and the MCDV’s are in the Caribbean or Africa. If it’s not OPSEC, can anyone say what the basic level of Naval defence Canada requires in home waters?

 

[FSTO]

Can anyone say what the basic level of Naval defence Canada requires in home waters?

Don't ask any of our political leaders. They have no clue that we even have a coastline!

 

[Swampbuggy]

Don't ask any of our political leaders. They have no clue that we even have a coastline!

But also,

...

 

[Cloud Cover]

can anyone say what the basic level of Naval defence Canada requires in home waters?

#@Hiltontheshark
He’s got us covered.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Orca's Class vessels armed with Newbies learning to navigate

 

[Spencer100]

a phone to the pentagon

 

[Lumber]

can anyone say what the basic level of Naval defence Canada requires in home waters?

Several thousand miles of Ocean between us an the nearest potentially hostile nation.

Some newfie fisherman with a working VHF during trappin' seasun'.

1 x Filipino monkey...

 

[Swampbuggy]

Thanx guys, I’ll sleep much better tonight.

 

[blacktriangle]

What Spencer100 said.

 

[Spencer100]

Plus it works in both possible situations  first "we are being invaded, please take care of that". Or the second US is invading " we would like to talk terms, please". 

 

[MilEME09]

How bad is the issue of illegal fishing boats from Spain off our east coast? I remember that being an issue in the head lines years ago? Could a case still be made we need more ships to prevent illegal fishing? in our EEZ?

 

[dapaterson]

If only we had some group responsible to Guard our Coast.  Whatever could we call them?

 

[Baz]

How bad is the issue of illegal fishing boats from Spain off our east coast? I remember that being an issue in the head lines years ago? Could a case still be made we need more ships to prevent illegal fishing? in our EEZ?

It was called the Turbot War... has receded into the past.

I sailed twice with ready duty ship at the time, the mighty warboat Nipigon (it wasn't a happy wardroom).  Both times left on a Fri night and came back on the Mon morning when they changed their minds (7-11 and 14-18 Apr 95; checked my log).  We even had ROE the second time...

 

[GR66]

If only we had some group responsible to Guard our Coast.  Whatever could we call them?

Sounds good to me.  Give the OPVs to the Coast Guard and replace the Kingston-Class with another MCM vessel.  No point having a navy if an enemy can keep our ships bottled up in port by laying mines.

I'd rather see the RCN supplement the CSC's with a multi-purpose corvette.  Something that has good range, has ASW capabilities (towed array sonar and capability to embark a Cyclone if required) but cheaper and less crew requirement than the CSC. 

Maybe something like this:  https://saab.com/naval/submarines-and-warships/naval-surface-ships/nextgenerationcorvette/

I could live with Canada having a fleet something like this:

12-15 x CSCs
12 x Corvettes
6 x AOPS
8-12 x MCM's
2 x Asterix
2 x JSS
6-8 x SSKs

I'd love to add 2 x Amphibious Assault Ships to give us the ability to project ground forces as well, but I think the above would do a pretty good job of protecting Canada's maritime approaches and be a major asset to our allies as well.

The above force might sound like dreaming but when it comes down to it we in North America are basically an island.  Our Navy (and the RCAF) will always be our best defense and also be key to our being able to project force overseas.  Ultimately if the budget is limited and choices have to be made I'd choose to build up our Naval and Air forces over our land forces.