- Reaction score
- 17,811
- Points
- 1,010
Your particular situation is not typical for an RCAF Wing…
Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)
- Thread starter x-grunt
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 6,516
- Points
- 1,040
People in the CRCN line really like it when you work for an ADM and remind them when they try to give you an order that you will have to check with your chain of command as you don't work for the Navy.
I need a break from the Navy generally so will see if I can ride out a few purple postings; it will be real work that benefits the CAF, just don't have to deal just with the Navy. My next job will involve a lot of interface with RPOps which I'm actually looking forward to; sure there will be other frustrations but will be nice to have a different flavour of them, and a break from dealing with problems we said would happen under the status quo (some over a decade ago).
- Reaction score
- 2,543
- Points
- 1,190
You're a god damn masochist.
- Reaction score
- 6,516
- Points
- 1,040
It sounded like that typing it out, but I think indicates how ground down I currently am that I'm looking forward to herding RPOps cats. Not having to argue with some people that you can't really just risk assess away life safety systems working will probably improve my mental well being considerably. Also, may even get some things implemented, so pretty cool.
The folks I'll be working with in the core (non-RPOps) team though are awesome, and hoping to do some interesting side gig stuff as well that would be extremely rewarding. Also lines up with some 2nd career options I've been looking at so will give me a chance to get some quals and experience, if that's something I decide to do in a few years once I hit 25.
- Reaction score
- 17,811
- Points
- 1,010
- Reaction score
- 6,516
- Points
- 1,040
Yeah, fair point.
I guess it's just what they are risk assessing away is a different scale. At least people can evacuate buildings.
The hangar the CAF halon bank is in, which has our strategic stockpile in it, has leaks in the roof and some other issues so we could potentially lose the ability to recharge fixed FF on ships, planes and some other assets plus an absolutely massive halon loss because a leak that was left for years turns into a roof falling in on a bunch of high pressure cylinders. Because it falls under RPOps and they have bigger priorities overall for the base we're having a hard time getting it fixed as it's not our funding. It's a bit maddening.
I'm sure the actual damage is probably worse now and may be a lot of mold as well, so a $5k patch job probably has also ballooned in cost and scope since we reported it a few years ago.
Anyway, still different from the RCN issues. At least I won't be getting weekly reports of things on fire, were at least half of them are for stupid things where we aren't following basic common sense, like not doing hot work near combustible things, or having a ship flood in the synchrolift while trying to put out a butt can fire. A lot of it isn't even not following 'best practices', it's basic (un)common sense.
- Reaction score
- 17,811
- Points
- 1,010
I love your optimism, Pete….
- Reaction score
- 1,089
- Points
- 1,160
On the river class? Nothing, its been removed.
Fabius
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 1,185
- Points
- 810
I thought he was talking about the 6 cells in the bottom pic of the Vard design?
Yes, correct.
Maybe replacing those 6 cells, in the Vigilance, with a 11- cell Sea-Ram mount would be an option.
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 1,089
- Points
- 1,160
Talking to some of the people who actually work for the Canadian Multirole Corvette Program its going to be light in the armament department.
Rainbow1910
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 1,067
- Points
- 810
I'd expect something like a 25mm or 30mm gun in all likelihood, perhaps a 40mm Bofors at absolute most if they are feeling like pushing the armament capability. I don't expect any missile armament aboard indigenously, I think Vard's proposal is pretty far off base in a few notable aspects.
- Reaction score
- 1,089
- Points
- 1,160
Yes that's what I'm thinking as well, that could change though. The danger is that a well armed Corvette could also be an excuse to cut CSC's. I wish it wasn't like that but that's where we're at.
- Reaction score
- 6,516
- Points
- 1,040
I bet it will last until about October!
Fabius
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 1,185
- Points
- 810
I don’t doubt the reality of this statement but the fact that we as a nation and armed force refuse to seriously arm our minor warships because we fear then loosing our major warships is just plain wrong, shortsighted and stupid.
My statement has nothing to do with what mission our ships should or should not do or whether they are constabulary or combatant, simply purely institutional and GoC mindset.
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,426
- Points
- 1,010
That Vard Marine design is an OPV with good self protection (front end - and the pictures actually show the latest version of Bofor's 40 mm as the main gun), but a corvette it ain't. It shows little ASW capability - no openings for a tail or VDS or decoys but only a hull mounted sonar - likely for self protection or mine defense, and I doubt they would invest what is required to make it sufficiently silent to carry out ASW. It has little if any air capability, except for a small vertical take-off and landing RPA, which is more an extension of shipboard sensors than a prosecution capable asset. It otherwise needs to switch the aft load out every time it changes mission.
It would be a very capable OPV, but just an OPV.
It would be a very capable OPV, but just an OPV.
Maxman1
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,619
- Points
- 1,160
Which is good, since we'll have the CSC for serious ASW, air operations and general surface warfare.
Similar threads
