Swampbuggy
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 267
- Points
- 730
New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
- Thread starter GAP
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 7,320
- Points
- 1,090
Quoting Shakespeare on this thread? I bet you’ve got more than two types of mustard in your fridge, Your Majesty
Only old guys like me who used to watch commercials will understand this.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 14,650
- Points
- 1,260
Quoting Shakespeare on this thread? I bet you’ve got more than two types of mustard in your fridge, Your Majesty
lol I actually do, I have a few different mustards. And Horseradish.
I bought some really good mustard from Toulon last year. Fantastic stuff.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 14,650
- Points
- 1,260
- Reaction score
- 7,157
- Points
- 1,040
Probably not the specifics, but more to do with some things that we currently do automatically on the current control system in response to things like smoke detection or system activation now require operator input in different panels as some key systems aren't integrated. Introduces the risk of operator missing a step and things going sideways, which is avoidable in cases where the SOP is to always do A, B, C, and it's things like opening/closing things, shutting off ventilation etc.
More of a difference in design and operating philosophy, but tend to forget that our systems are much more integrated and automatic compared to allies. Things still have manual, independent operation capability, but we then push it up into the main platform system as well so gives us the ability to automate functions and also more flexibility on where you can remotely activate it.
The Royal Navy also does some weird things like they won't activate clean agent fire suppression systems with people in the compartments and then have a minimum 24 hour until you can reenter, which defeats the purpose of using clean agent systems as they are selected to be safe for occupants in the compartment, and not like CO2 or steam smothering where the suppression system will kill people.
Possible to do some of these things later, but means a significant engineering change where you are integrating new systems into your platform control system which requires a fair bit of testing, so would have been a lot easier to do it at build.
edit: In a lot of cases, these functions are standard in buildings already under the National Fire Code and Building Code, so we weren't really innovating, just applying it to ships.
- Reaction score
- 3,363
- Points
- 1,160
What a Fine looking ship...
edit: seems as soon as this ship is finished at BAE, it will heading straight to the Babcock yard for the MK 41 insertions (4x8). That contract was only added this spring.
edit: seems as soon as this ship is finished at BAE, it will heading straight to the Babcock yard for the MK 41 insertions (4x8). That contract was only added this spring.
- Reaction score
- 3,363
- Points
- 1,160
Maxman1
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,166
- Points
- 1,160
It would be nice if we built five or six of those, and eight or ten of a smaller corvette.What a Fine looking ship...
edit: seems as soon as this ship is finished at BAE, it will heading straight to the Babcock yard for the MK 41 insertions (4x8). That contract was only added this spring.
View attachment 93529
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 14,066
- Points
- 1,160
Interesting they were able to fit those guns and a few more cells into a hull 2,000 tons lighter than a RCD. Apparently the hull form was lent to the new Type 31 Frigates.
Iver Huitfeldt-class frigate - Wikipedia
I could see a RCD Flight II getting twin guns (76 and 127mm?) and the mission bay being converted to VLS instead.
- Reaction score
- 7,320
- Points
- 1,090
Such a Baltic thing to do. It does look cool though.
- Reaction score
- 7,320
- Points
- 1,090
There are a lot of survivability and redundancy cuts made to do that. Those ships are not surviving any battle damage. A T26 hull can take a couple of missiles and have a good chance of getting the crew home.
I can see the later but not the former. That mission bay is a big deal though. Creates an easy way to future proof the ship by modifiying the contents as opposed to the bay.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 14,066
- Points
- 1,160
It seems that guns are making a come back as way to deal with the non-missile threat, saving the missiles to deal with missiles and allowing the ship to stay on station longer. My guess is that as good as the 57mm is, the range is to short and I think 76mm will be considered the new minimum.
- Reaction score
- 3,363
- Points
- 1,160
Best we can do is a pair of cracked 4 pounders.
- Reaction score
- 3,363
- Points
- 1,160
As far as I’m concerned building a ship that doesn’t survive contact and a good ass kicking from the enemy is not a ship that we want. In the next war our ships will almost certainly take multiple hits in every meeting engagement. And we’ll dish it out as well.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 14,066
- Points
- 1,160
I have a line on a 12pdr and a 9pdr for ya. For a bit extra I can get you some pirate types including costumes, but only free for pillaging on the weekend.
- Reaction score
- 32,866
- Points
- 1,090
They made an awful din.
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 3,197
- Points
- 1,010
I think that's a little harsh. Depends what you are fighting the battle with. Neither type 31 nor type 26 can take a well placed torpedo and survive, both can take multiple hits in a gun fight, and the type 26 can take more missile damage than the type 31. However ...
Depends on how much fuel was left in the missile when it hit. They said the same thing (could take multiple missile hits) about the type 42 destroyers. How did that work out for HMS SHEFFIELD?
- Reaction score
- 7,320
- Points
- 1,090
No, we need attritable assets that can be built quickly to provide mass and geographic dispersion. The question is whats the best way to do that. Likely with optionally crewed ships with very low crew counts, combined with a normal core fleet mix of high capacity hard hitters. Ships being lost are an expectation and we would be silly to expect it not to happen. But if we design the fleet mix right we can mitigate the issues caused by casualties
(I'm reading a lot of naval stuff right now on getting the core fleet mix correct and not getting carried away with "modular" and "uncrewed")
Czech_pivo
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,481
- Points
- 1,260
I know where you can get a pair of prized Stevastapol cannons from 1854.
- Reaction score
- 4,951
- Points
- 1,120
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.
Only the 10 Gauge is a breech-loader though. The others are old fashioned muzzle loaders....
They DO make an awful din.
Similar threads
