Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)

[Nvlgzr]

I don't think that's going to work...

When it's time to fit weapons & sensors to the River Class, nothing other the CIWS systems and maybe a few RWS will be transferrable.


The CMS, radars/sonars, weapon systens, etc are all in a whole other league than what's on the CPF's now

I thought the discussion about using Halifax equipment was for the corvettes. Lockheed is already sourcing River class components.
I think we need to start a separate thread for the CDC, Continental Defence Corvette.

 

[Kirkhill]

I thought the discussion about using Halifax equipment was for the corvettes. Lockheed is already sourcing River class components.
I think we need to start a separate thread for the CMC, Canadian Multi-mission Corvette.

That was the conversation I was having.

I think someone else brought up the notion of cross-decking the Halifax kit to the corvettes as they were de-commissioned.

I was just pointing out that the Danes have blazed a trail that we could follow.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I think someone else brought up the notion of cross-decking the Halifax kit to the corvettes as they were de-commissioned.

It was I. And I still think it would be a good use of the Halifax's kit to move them over to the CDC.

 

[CBH99]

Uhh... hate to call you out but, while different, they are not all in a different league.

The CMS going into the RCD is Aegis and CTI, and CTI is just CMS330 with a different name. In fact, until recently, the plan was for the "main" CMS of the RCD to be CMS330, and Aegis was just going to be the "Fire Control Loop". The entire German navy is about to switch over to CMS330 because they like it so much.

The torpedoes will be the same between the two ships, the only difference being the launching system, and honestly there is no functional difference between SVTTs.

The RCD could have gone with the 57mm instead of a 5", and there are very valid arguments as to why you would want one over the other. It's all about expected mission set vice the actual quality/capability of the 57mm.

Nav Radars could easily be shifted over. MASS could have been switched over. SRD-506 and ELISRA could have been swtiched over (though Im happy they are NOT switching over ELISRA).

Harpoon could have been switcher over. The NSM is better than the Harpoon, but given that the RCD is primarily going to be an ASW and AAW platform, having a suboptimal ASuW capability could have been a trade off for cost savings/program simplification (but, I'm personally happy we are going with NSM, don't get me wrong).

ASW sensors... yea, you have a very good point there.

I'm not sure what there is to call out?

Full transparency - I'm not a navy guy & don't know what most of those acronyms even mean. I'm definitely not an SME)


What I'm saying is that when it comes time to fit sensor & weapon systems to the new River class destroyers, the weapons that are currently on our CPF's will be somewhat dated.

I don't have the most current timeframe estimates about when the new destroyers will start coming online, but I think the first of the new ships are scheduled to come online in the early 2030's.

Let's call it 7 years from now - but my point still stands even if the first of class comes online in 5 years, or 6 years.

The weapons from the CPF will be somewhat out dated to be putting on the newest & shiniest destroyers hitting the water.

...

I didn't say anything about the CMS. I know Lockheed Canada has a winner there, and there is foreign interest in adopting it (beyond the Kiwis & the Germans)


I agree with you - we could have kept Harpoon for some cost savings. The modern Harpoon missile isn't the same beast as the Harpoon missile of even 10 years ago, and we could have put them on the new ships...

But I'm also glad we are going with the NSM.

It may not be in a 'whole other league' as what we currently have, re Harpoon. And the same goes with the torpedoes. But the systems firing those munitions ARE in a whole other league...

...

The RCD's will have a VLS capability, which means munitions like SM-3 and SM-6 become possibilities

The new radars, working with the other new features (re a VLS system) absolutely WILL give the RCN a huge leap forwards in some capabilities that we just don't currently have.

 

[CBH99]

I thought the discussion about using Halifax equipment was for the corvettes. Lockheed is already sourcing River class components.
I think we need to start a separate thread for the CDC, Continental Defence Corvette.

I don't know ANYTHING about a corvette program, so there's a good chance you're right

 

[Colin Parkinson]

As the AOP's go into refit, the main gun should be replaced with the same RWS as the RCD's will have and the two pintle mounted .50cals replaced by the same .50cal RWS's used on the Halifax's and the existing pintles mounted elsewhere. That gives us some commonality and improves all-round targeting and situational awareness. Take the existing guns off of the AOP's , pack them up in grease and use them as war stock. The CDC's should use the same secondary weapons as the rest of the fleet.

 

[Swampbuggy]

As the AOP's go into refit, the main gun should be replaced with the same RWS as the RCD's will have and the two pintle mounted .50cals replaced by the same .50cal RWS's used on the Halifax's and the existing pintles mounted elsewhere. That gives us some commonality and improves all-round targeting and situational awareness. Take the existing guns off of the AOP's , pack them up in grease and use them as war stock. The CDC's should use the same secondary weapons as the rest of the fleet.

That would at least give the main weapon an air burst capability and a higher max elevation to engage drones.

 

[Kirkhill]

Just realizing that given the swerves in both the CDC project and this thread that this conversation seems to have aged well

Thread 'Type 31 for Canada?' Type 31 for Canada?

 

[Navy_Pete]

I don't know ANYTHING about a corvette program, so there's a good chance you're right

That's no problem, you are in the same boat as Cabinet, Treasury Board and most of the CAF outside the small team working on the fever dream while ignoring reality.

 

[Kirkhill]

Will this impact on the fever dream?

Heroes falling apart ahead of schedule and the CCG needing more platforms for sensors?

Coast guard patrol ships to be pulled from service 'sooner than expected,' amid pressures from new security mandate

A fleet of Coast Guard patrol ships the government paid hundreds of millions to build will be pulled from service "sooner than expected."

nationalpost.com

Question: Are sensors legitimate military target? Should platforms with sensors, or patrolling and maintaining sensors be deployed without the means to defend themselves?

 

[dapaterson]

Question: Are sensors legitimate military target? Should platforms with sensors, or patrolling and maintaining sensors be deployed without the means to defend themselves?

Wait until you learn about satellites.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The problem of speed, in a smaller vessel is you must saciface weight to get it. Adding horsepower begins to add weight, unless you go turbine, but then you make up that weight in more fuel.

Get better vessels for the CCG and squeeze a few more years out of these as navigation training vessels.

 

[Kirkhill]

The problem of speed, in a smaller vessel is you must saciface weight to get it. Adding horsepower begins to add weight, unless you go turbine, but then you make up that weight in more fuel.

Get better vessels for the CCG and squeeze a few more years out of these as navigation training vessels.

Or do more of the AOPS thing? Sacrifice speed of platform but add more systems, crewed and uncrewed, that can be deployed remotely at speed?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Too big, a slightly faster MCDV is needed. The 500 Class with some changes to length and improvements to stability is likely the solution. Fast response can be by a big RHIB with a stern launch. The RHIB should have a small wheelhouse.

 

[deepblue202]

This looks like a better option

Stan Patrol 4207 - Damen Stan Patrol 4207 | Damen

 

[Kirkhill]

Too big, a slightly faster MCDV is needed. The 500 Class with some changes to length and improvements to stability is likely the solution. Fast response can be by a big RHIB with a stern launch. The RHIB should have a small wheelhouse.

Seen. Actually I was thinking more in terms of general tendencies that absolutes.

So the 500 class, like the Gordon Reid? 50m or roughly equivalent to the MCDVs?
Both of them had a top speed in the 15 to 16 knot range, just a bit slower than the 17 knot AOPS.
The Heroes apparently had a top speed of 25 knots.
Did that extra 10 knots improve their utility?

The Vard Vigilance is apparently a 72 m, 21 knot vessel or a 93 m, 26 knot vessel.
Both seem to be designed for carrying stuff rather than running down evil-doers.

The Rasmussen is a 72 m, 17 knot vessel. Intercepts are done by a CB90 variant and air assists.

....

If the CCG is getting into DND territory and being asked to expand their range of activities is the Continental Defence Corvette / OPV in the target zone for procurement?

The navy seems to be wanting to stretch the answer towards a blue water frigate of 107 m. And yet the hull they are replacing because it was well used is a half that. And that vessel is, in my eyes, compatible with Hero/500 vessels, being addressed here.

...

If the CDC is not yet funded and staffed, and originated prior to the change in status of the CCG, and this latest Hero finding, is it possible that the MCDV replacement budget and the CDC/OPV coild find its way into the CCG while the RCN focuses on the RCDs and the CPSs?