New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy

[Underway]

I'll dig into my personal collection and....um....maybe I have a 3 pounder, a 1 pounder, and a 10 Gauge cannon.

Only the 10 Gauge is a breech-loader though. The others are old fashioned muzzle loaders....

They DO make an awful din.

I don't care what everyone else says, you are cool.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

A bit on the bits that are needed to make a ship and streamlining of that process.

PipeCloud Partnership: Optimizing Production and Setting New Benchmarks in Marine Manufacturing - Seaspan

Seaspan's Victoria Shipyards has partnered with PipeCloud, a new, cutting-edge software to help streamline pipe production.

www.seaspan.com

 

[Kirkhill]

Another example of two-tier Britain: the Royal Navy’s Type 31 frigate

In this case, however, the second-class option is a good idea

www.telegraph.co.uk

The original requirement was for a ship costing £250m per hull (compared to c.£1.2 – 1.5bn for the Type 26). This has crept up now to about £300m. You’re still getting about five for the price of one (Type 26). And you can tell: the Type 31 has no gas turbines for sprint power, and no silent and stealthy electric drive option. There’s no sonar for hunting submarines either, though the ship can easily act as a base for a sub-hunting Merlin helicopter.

The ship itself will displace around 5,700 tonnes and have a length of 138 metres. Armed with a 57mm Bofors main gun, 40mm secondary guns, Sea Ceptor air defence missiles, and fitted for but not with strike-length Mk 41 vertical launch missile cells, it is designed for flexibility. It features the Thales TACTICOS combat system, a decent radar, and multiple electro-optic and infrared sensors. The flight deck and hangar will take a Merlin (relatively unlikely) or the smaller Wildcat helicopter (likely) and like the Type 26, the Type 31 has a large mission bay to deploy boats, drones, and unmanned systems. Crew size is around 105 which is lean. A Type 23 of today has over 200 people onboard when deployed and is notably smaller.

The cost is the production cost - what it cost the yard to manufacture. Government furnished equipment is over and above that as are weapons.

There is provision for a Mk41 VLS in the build but not fitted at the yard.

Opinion on utility

What we should do with them depends on many things. The easy/lazy solution is to say that they replace the five Batch 2 Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPVs) one-for-one. These are currently in the Falklands, Caribbean, Gibraltar and two in the Indo-Pacific and doing tremendous work, but are essentially unarmed. All of these tasks would benefit from being up-gunned to a Type 31.

But they have potential to do so much more. Type 31s of the future, fitted with the versatile Mk41 vertical launch system – and properly networked – could make a serious contribution to the Royal Navy’s firepower, accompanying fully-equipped destroyers or anti-submarine frigates and adding another 32 missiles and another helicopter to the mission. You could also use them to launch and recover the vast array of emerging anti-submarine and mine countermeasures technology currently under development. These ships have huge potential.

Type 31s alone would be no good for stealthily hunting an adversary nuclear submarine, or protecting a task force against incoming ballistic missiles. They’d be ideal for escorting Russian or Chinese ships through UK waters, patrolling Critical Underwater Infrastructure, fighting pirates, intercepting sanctions-busting merchant ships, shooting down or sinking drones, showing the flag and many other tasks. Five won’t be enough.

Defence effect and influence is a continuum from peace to war, and not the one-zero proposition the online debate would have you believe. These ships sit smack in the middle of this continuum bridging the gap between the exquisite and the unarmed. They are comparatively affordable, available now and ultimately adaptable. We should back them.

This is a really important point. You cannot wax lyrical about new build platforms these days without acknowledging that the Royal Navy is critically short of people. They are working to rectify this and whilst recruitment is showing signs of improving, retention is not. Both of these are a global maritime issue that must be overcome but also, must not be used as an excuse to slow the rate of build. One thing I am sure of; build a load of these frigates then set them away around the world doing demanding and fun things, and retention will improve. I suggested the same with small, cheap, diesel-electric submarines to complement our nuclear powered fleet. Build them and the crews will come, if you will.

 

[Rainbow1910]

I mentioned Vard 100 back in February in the MCDV section on the forums however, Noah has posted new information from CANSEC 2025 regarding this offering from Vard as part of the Vigilance family. Credit goes to them and their original post can be found below. I thought this would also be a relevant post here as I know some folks aren't checking the MCDV thread as well.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1928269719066350022

Detailed specifications were not listed however, I will include what was listed here alongside a quote back to my original comment. It seems the vague hull form and dimensions might be the same as the older Vard 7 100 design however, the upperworks and likely much of the internals has been changed significantly.

• 57mm main gun
• 16 strike length Mark 41 VLS cells
• 2x4 NSM box launchers
• 2x .50 caliber RWS
• NS100 4D AESA radar
• Integrated ESM suite
• Full flight deck and hanger to fit a Cyclone sized helicopter
• Pair of RHIB's as standard
• BlueWatcher/BlueHunter system in a sonar dome
• Multi-mission deck amidships able to fit 4x40ft or 8x20 ISO containers/cargo of similar weight/dimensions

Additional payloads are apparently available for maritime interception operations, route surveys, mine countermeasure work and anti-submarine warfare to name a few. The swing to the new Continental Defence Corvette moniker has seemingly been informed by the info given out prior by the RCN that they are looking for a system capable of using strike length VLS to contribute to continental defence, alongside some proper ASW, self defence and other role requirements.

It is interesting to see Vard changes their offerings to suit an ever changing program.

 

[Kirkhill]

I mentioned Vard 100 back in February in the MCDV section on the forums however, Noah has posted new information from CANSEC 2025 regarding this offering from Vard as part of the Vigilance family. Credit goes to them and their original post can be found below. I thought this would also be a relevant post here as I know some folks aren't checking the MCDV thread as well.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1928269719066350022

Detailed specifications were not listed however, I will include what was listed here alongside a quote back to my original comment. It seems the vague hull form and dimensions might be the same as the older Vard 7 100 design however, the upperworks and likely much of the internals has been changed significantly.

• 57mm main gun
• 16 strike length Mark 41 VLS cells
• 2x4 NSM box launchers
• 2x .50 caliber RWS
• NS100 4D AESA radar
• Integrated ESM suite
• Full flight deck and hanger to fit a Cyclone sized helicopter
• Pair of RHIB's as standard
• BlueWatcher/BlueHunter system in a sonar dome
• Multi-mission deck amidships able to fit 4x40ft or 8x20 ISO containers/cargo of similar weight/dimensions

Additional payloads are apparently available for maritime interception operations, route surveys, mine countermeasure work and anti-submarine warfare to name a few. The swing to the new Continental Defence Corvette moniker has seemingly been informed by the info given out prior by the RCN that they are looking for a system capable of using strike length VLS to contribute to continental defence, alongside some proper ASW, self defence and other role requirements.

It is interesting to see Vard changes their offerings to suit an ever changing program.

View attachment 93607
View attachment 93608

VARD's (and their predecessors') entire history has been based on building one-offs to spec. It comes with their commercial heritage. Few commercial buyers buy fleets. And thse that do often adjust their specs on the fly. The commercial market also has short planning and delivery periods.

If the navy is going to face a rapidly evolving environment they might need some of that.