Continental Defence Corvette

[GR66]

I think people arguing for a hangar and helo are seriously underestimating the additional costs in money, space, and personnel required to conduct flight ops from a ship.

If you add an air det(and it's required enablers), you're nearly doubling the crew size that the RCN is shooting for.

You of course are 100% correct about the cost of an air detachment, both in space and crewing. The question is what is your starting point in determining the requirements for a ship...the size of crew you want it to have or the capabilities you want it to have.

There seems to be a bit of schizophrenia in the discussions about the CDC. It's supposed to be a relatively small ship with quite a small crew which would suggest no helicopter, but the role being discussed is patrolling the ice edge to detect enemy submarines which would suggest the need for a helicopter.

The $64,000.00 question is whether UAV's (or other technologies) can replace the capability of a helicopter within the space/crewing targets. Alternately, does the proposed operating concept for the CDC need to be revised to suit the capabilities of a small ship?

 

[daftandbarmy]

The $64,000.00 question is whether UAV's (or other technologies) can replace the capability of a helicopter within the space/crewing targets. Alternately, does the proposed operating concept for the CDC need to be revised to suit the capabilities of a small ship?

I'm no naval air expert but my guess is that UAV technology is not yet advanced enough, or deployable enough, to replace MH helicopters and crew.

Augmenting? Sure. Replacing wholesale? Probably not...

 

[Halifax Tar]

I'm no naval air expert but my guess is that UAV technology is not yet advanced enough, or deployable enough, to replace MH helicopters and crew.

Augmenting? Sure. Replacing wholesale? Probably not...

There was a project, up until 2019/2020(?) to replace the STBD Torpedo Mag on CPFs with a HELO UAV compartment. I am not sure what happened to that project, I suspect its been canceled. But my Cox'n on FRE in 2020 was on the project before joining us.

I am of the opinion that the RCN wants unmanned aircraft sooner than later.

 

[Baz]

I think people arguing for a hangar and helo are seriously underestimating the additional costs in money, space, and personnel required to conduct flight ops from a ship.

If you add an air det(and it's required enablers), you're nearly doubling the crew size that the RCN is shooting for.

I’m very aware of how much it would cost. I’m also not arguing for it per se, I’m expressing a concern that the decisions being made may not be fully informed. By that, I mean the RCN can’t see the future and doesn’t have the resources to fully staff the ramifications of its decisions. This is especially concerning to me because the RCN no longer has a doctrinal understanding of embarked aviation, and the RCAF, who should, don’t institutionally care.

They are setting aside space for UAV facilities. Given that the UAV sizes and requirements aren’t fully developed (to my knowledge) then how is it known for certain what the scale up to a small manned helicopter is? How do they know what the manning requirements for an unmanned vehicle are?

The concern is that the UAV that is assumed will materialize, doesn’t. If it does, in a form that will fit, so much the better.

I’m also very confident that my opinion in this matter is irrelevant.

 

[Baz]

For a more in depth historical perspective of why I'm concerned about maritime air staffing in Canada, please see my post in the CH-124 Historical thread (as it doesn't belong here).

 

[Stoker]

Out of curiosity is the AOPS any good even as an offshore refuelling pad or was adding enough JP 5 capacity too much to think about as well?

AOPS carry around 50000 liters of JP5. Hfx Class around 60.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

AOPS carry around 50000 liters of JP5. Hfx Class around 60.

That has already changed since the ship class designed.

However, since there is nowhere to get JP5 in the Canadian Arctic, that is not a useful load.

 

[Underway]

Is there a tool that can do the helicopter job. If yes one is not required. UAV/s with dipping or dropping capability. What does that look like? Does that get us the 80% solution? And does it match the crewing model?

The job of finding a submarine far away from the ship so it can't get close enough to strike is the job. And there are a lot of ways to skin that cat. Striking the submarine may not be a requirement for the CDC.

 

[Baz]

Is there a tool that can do the helicopter job. If yes one is not required. UAV/s with dipping or dropping capability. What does that look like? Does that get us the 80% solution? And does it match the crewing model?

That is the heart of my concern. Those UAVs don’t yet exist. Yet, there is discussion about providing support for them.

I would think it is unwise to plan a ship around something that does not exist. It’s beyond the capability of the current RCN to make an aviation capability exist.

If someone else was planning a similar capability, then I would be less concerned.

 

[Stoker]

That has already changed since the ship class designed.

However, since there is nowhere to get JP5 in the Canadian Arctic, that is not a useful load.

That's the numbers I saw today. Are we going to be flying that much in the Arctic? Can we refuel the ship? Can we get fuel from the CG? There's options.

 

[Kirkhill]

And how

Don’t necessarily need the air det always embarked, but if they build a ship without a hangar and deck I suspect they will regret it in the long term.

Yes it’s a 100 million addition.

And how many patrol boats that 100 million?

I am crticized for wanting to buy bridging gear because it might come in handy.

That 100 million would buy you 8 or so Orcas. Or 20 CB90s.

Scratch the Cyclone hangar and deck, leave provisions for three Proteus and a pair of Valkyries, (a lot cheaper than a Cyclone) and have the Corvette sail with 4 Orcas and 12 CB90s spread among the ships.

 

[Cloud Cover]

I served on the IREs and Mackenzie Class. Those ships were about the same dimensions and tonnage as the CDC specs.

Let me tell you, a helo deck and hangar would come in handy even without an embarked air det.

Money is not the issue anymore. It’s all borrowed anyway and it will never be paid back. We can either borrow and give it to Ukraine or to the CAF. I know which options I favour.

 

[Kirkhill]

I served on the IREs and Mackenzie Class. Those ships were about the same dimensions and tonnage as the CDC specs.

Let me tell you, a helo deck and hangar would come in handy even without an embarked air det.

Money is not the issue anymore. It’s all borrowed anyway and it will never be paid back. We can either borrow and give it to Ukraine or to the CAF. I know which options I favour.

You have a point on the deck and hangar themselves. Space is not particularly expensive. The 6000 tonne Absalon with its hangar, large helideck and massive roro ferry/flex deck only cost 300,000,000 exclusive of weapons and sensors.

But still, one hull is still one hull and can only be in one place. Save 100,000,000 and your one hull becomes 17 hulls.

You could still leave enough room aft for a helicopter to perch for transfers.

 

[Prairie canuck]

Putting the ASW aspect aside wouldn't a helicopter provide a SAR capability, medical evacuation, ice reconnaissance, logistics between ships and ship to shore and shore to ship, and extend the ship's surveillance? I'm sure there's more that can be added to the list.

 

[Good2Golf]

Yes, but also no.

The hangar and flight deck are generically big enough for a Cyclone, but in a bid to save money on the AOPS project, there was a deliberate effort not to spend the money required to integrate Cyclone (remember the time period when this project commenced).

Now, there is no real way to maintain a Cyclone onboard; no way to store or load torpedos; and certainly none of the esoteric computer networks that the Cyclone require to operate daily. Oh, and not enough JP5 storage to be useful.

All of that can be fixed. Bring money.

Fair point.

How about “a little of column A, a little of Column B…”

Column A:


Column B:


Just sayin’

 

[Kirkhill]

But does the ship have to billet a helicopter and crew or, given that it is a short seas continental vessel, couldn't it just have a landing pad?

 

[Cloud Cover]

The hangar is useful for more than aircraft. Maybe garage with a helo deck is a better term.
And I’m not talking about square dancing either. A dry place to assemble, sort kit, bring VERTREP supplies by hand truck, hold debris taken from crash sites or interesting stuff found floating in the ocean, store extra zodiacs, store HADR or remote site supplies, conceal embarked special mission kit and equipment you don’t want the bad guys to see. All kinds of stuff that a ship like that might easily be tasked to do.

 

[Underway]

Putting the ASW aspect aside wouldn't a helicopter provide a SAR capability, medical evacuation, ice reconnaissance, logistics between ships and ship to shore and shore to ship, and extend the ship's surveillance? I'm sure there's more that can be added to the list.

Yes. There is a UAV that does ice reconnaissance, the S in SAR, and extends the ships surveillance. There is another UAV that does VERTREP (air logistics).

I'm sure there will be a flight deck. I'm fairly confident there will be a small hangar for UAV's. I'm 100% sure there will be no organic crewed helicopter operations.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Is there a tool that can do the helicopter job. If yes one is not required. UAV/s with dipping or dropping capability. What does that look like? Does that get us the 80% solution? And does it match the crewing model?

The job of finding a submarine far away from the ship so it can't get close enough to strike is the job. And there are a lot of ways to skin that cat. Striking the submarine may not be a requirement for the CDC.

Okay, not a naval expert, but could you use underwater sensors and XLUUV/UUV to detect foreign submarines and communicate that info to the CDC's?

 

[Kirkhill]

Naval Group offers MP-OPV to Lithuanian Navy - Naval News

Naval Group is offering its MP-OPV (multi-purpose offshore patrol vessel) as a solution to the planned modernisation of the Lithuanian Navy.

www.navalnews.com

82m
2800 tonnes
helideck but no hangar
flexdeck/boatdeck