Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 12,414
- Points
- 1,160
Would she also carry torpedoes as well?
Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ
- Thread starter jmt18325
- Start date
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 12,414
- Points
- 1,160
It would be really nice if CBC would spend some money doing something like this for our ships https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0NzDVPVWoc&fbclid=IwAR3J_LXzyNi27S6rrhk91i87tHqSpvrCkKvXubAW5laOsdWmXy_NaWqM9uM&app=desktop
Might be a great way to recruit and to educate the public on what our navy does.
Might be a great way to recruit and to educate the public on what our navy does.
Dale Denton
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 151
- Points
- 580
Colin P said:
Don't want to derail, but the level of quality and effort put in to these types of RN documentaries make for genuinely quality TV, and also makes you sad we don't do any of this at all.
Really hope that once the first RCN T26 is ready they'll bombard the public with shows like this. I figure with all of my CF/military web traffic that i'd get at least one ad...
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 12,414
- Points
- 1,160
Well HMCS Toronto gets a cameo at 28:13, so that's our contribution.
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,426
- Points
- 1,010
Colin P said:
If you look under the two remote controlled light guns (whatever type they are) on both sides of the helicopter hangar, you see two (one each side) square openings (closed in the pictures) these are the 'portholes' for the torpedo launchers on either side of the ship.
- Reaction score
- 2,291
- Points
- 1,160
Weird they don’t have MASS but appear to have a throwback chaff launcher installed beside the SSM mounts.
- Reaction score
- 6,354
- Points
- 1,090
Oldgateboatdriver said:
They were bid as BAE 30mm Mk38's but it could end up as 25mm to match the AOPs.
There are square panels are forward on the ship as well. I think they are removed to place/handle lines. It doesn't seem to have a torp launch panel on this model. I have seen other images where there is a longer swing panel for a torp tube on the stbd side forward of the square panel and astern of the multi-mission deck. Could be wrong though, models are only so accurate.
CloudCover said:
I was told that they are torpedo decoy launchers like these, not chaff/flares. No more throwing decoys in the water from the bridge wing anymore apparently. Of course, my source could be wrong and 130mm tubes like that can also fire chaff/flares.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 12,414
- Points
- 1,160
To be fitted for but not with when TB comes at the program with the cutting knife.
- Reaction score
- 6,354
- Points
- 1,090
Not necessarily CSC, but it's related. Posted here for comparison and discussion purposes.
The USN has chosen the FREMM for its next frigate.
Note the cost and the reason for the cost: The Navy is providing a significant portion of government furnished equipment, including a variant of the AN/SPY-6 radar destined for the Flight III Arleigh Burke-class destroyers under construction, and those costs are not included in the $5.58 billion.
As argued here by various members, much of the costs of new ships are hidden in other government-furnished equipment and different forms of subsidization/accounting practices.
Also interesting the shipyard that won the contract is in Wisconson, which if it goes against Trump will most likely cause his loss in the next election as it's considered a critical battleground.
The timelines indicate that the first ship to be finished by 2026. (which is probably around when we will expecting CSC as well). This doesn't surprise me to much as that shipyard has quite the infrastructure and tradition building ships recently. It's also interesting as all the new FF(X) will have to pass through Canadian waters to even reach the ocean.
The USN has chosen the FREMM for its next frigate.
Note the cost and the reason for the cost: The Navy is providing a significant portion of government furnished equipment, including a variant of the AN/SPY-6 radar destined for the Flight III Arleigh Burke-class destroyers under construction, and those costs are not included in the $5.58 billion.
As argued here by various members, much of the costs of new ships are hidden in other government-furnished equipment and different forms of subsidization/accounting practices.
Also interesting the shipyard that won the contract is in Wisconson, which if it goes against Trump will most likely cause his loss in the next election as it's considered a critical battleground.
The timelines indicate that the first ship to be finished by 2026. (which is probably around when we will expecting CSC as well). This doesn't surprise me to much as that shipyard has quite the infrastructure and tradition building ships recently. It's also interesting as all the new FF(X) will have to pass through Canadian waters to even reach the ocean.
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
Underway said:
Also here, making similar points about costs. But I believe in a 2026 CSC delivered as I believe in the tooth fairy; there are still five A/OPS to be "delivered" for RCN and two for CCG (https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/services/procurement/arctic-offshore-patrol-ships.html):
https://milnet.ca/forums/threads/128231/post-1608834.html#msg1608834
Mark
Ottawa
- Reaction score
- 2,291
- Points
- 1,160
You’re likely on safe ground about 2026, in fact I’d wager never26. If the gravity of our 300 billion dollar deficit doesn’t strike our PM, it will definitely strike the armed forces multi billion dollar projects and pretty much everything else.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 280
Not sure if I'm the only one who wishes we could have taken that FREMM deal but.....Underway said:
MTShaw
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 197
- Points
- 580
AlexanderM said:
The FREMM bid wouldn’t go through the bidding process because they didn’t want to do a full knowledge transfer. And the 30Bn from the FREMM just accounts for the building the ships and nothing else.
We would be beholden to France and Italy for all of the service. So it was a shitty deal for us.
I like the FREMMs and am happy the Americans found something that fits their needs.
- Reaction score
- 6,354
- Points
- 1,090
MTShaw said:
I agree on all points. To elaborate there seems to be a large difference between the FREMM that was bid for Canada and the US bid. Due to the entire combat system, electronics, and weapons being government-furnished equipment FREMM was basically bidding an empty warship. The competition was basically for a hull and prime mover. The bid for Canada was everything, which is why I'm sure the French/Italians were not happy with it. There's little to be lost if the Italians hand over ship hull plans. Hardly top secret information.
- Reaction score
- 22,857
- Points
- 1,360
What Underway said. :nod:
FREMM for Canada would have been a Capital ship and huge commitment with Canada and its shipbuilding industry ‘all in.’
FREMM for the US is a halfway between the LCS experiment and true DDGs. It’s the little brother to OHPs.
FREMM for Canada would have been a Capital ship and huge commitment with Canada and its shipbuilding industry ‘all in.’
FREMM for the US is a halfway between the LCS experiment and true DDGs. It’s the little brother to OHPs.
- Reaction score
- 6,354
- Points
- 1,090
Good2Golf said:
OHP's are the old US frigates. I assume you meant Burkes. FREMM for the US will be a good competitive frigate. Better than the new UK Type 31. Based on what I have seen its a bit behind our and Australia's Type 26. 32 VLS, 21 RAM, 57mm Bofors, Spy 6 variant radar. It's perfect for what the US needs.
