- Reaction score
- 2,679
- Points
- 1,090
dredging?
New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
- Thread starter GAP
- Start date
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 3,675
- Points
- 1,010
OK. So I cant see either subs or CDC parking on the side where there are only two, but based on max length mentioned by the Admiral, there would be room for two nested together, perhaps three on the side with three MCDV's in the picture.
That could be more than sufficient depending on the actual draft of CDC. The German corvettes of the Braunschweig class draw only 11 feet 4 inches (that's two feet less than the old Gate Vessels and about the same as the MCDV's.
- Reaction score
- 4,631
- Points
- 1,260
Just spitballing here but the CDC is being talked about as being ice strengthened and a possible PC6. Won’t that extra weight mean a greater draught than a ship of similar length?
The subs are going to require as much water under the keel as River class. More than 25 feet.
I see a few problems here. I doubt Y has the electric or plumbing services to accommodate larger vessels, you’re now picking a ship to fit the space, there is little space on the jetty to place materials, no crane….maybe it would make more sense to extend one or both fingers of C jetty
- Reaction score
- 7,989
- Points
- 1,210
With dynamite. Solid rock under the mud. Honestly if they go there they should go whole hog and just dig that entire bay out to be very deep and expand the jetty right up to CFB Naden's main road.
- Reaction score
- 7,989
- Points
- 1,210
Possibly.
Oh and to your earlier question regarding CDC numbers, they don't seem to know. As they define the requirements and potential loadout (mainly sensors) it will better inform the numbers.
Somewhere along the line they are going to say, we need ships at sea doing Y job. This job requires them to cover A and B amount of water/airspace based on N, O and P systems for Z amount of time (endurance). Therefore based on this information the calculation of ships needed is X times 3 (so you account for maintenance time and crew training time).
As you can see the numbers are going to vary wildly as they define what continental defence looks like, how the ships will be employed, where they need to be employed and what they are using to do that mission.
As such over the course of the brainstorming and further definition I've heard 6 ships, 12 ships, and some mad lad threw out 20 ships at some point. I suspect that the last number didn't account for UXV's for example doing a bunch of those boring, dangerous, dirty or repetative jobs.
- Reaction score
- 15,476
- Points
- 1,160
Yes I recall underwater blasting was required. Considering the Graving dock was a natural cove that was blasted and extended, certainly doable, even with our environmental regs.
- Reaction score
- 4,631
- Points
- 1,260
Can you see the CDC only being stationed on one coast, vs both, and the Rivers being more heavily focused on the other? If so, which coast?
- Reaction score
- 7,989
- Points
- 1,210
Both coasts. More ships total on the East Coast. Mainly because East Coast has more area to cover.
Swampbuggy
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 303
- Points
- 730
In the most recent interview, Topshee indicated a dozen corvettes. As an exercise I plotted out what that might mean and it seems like that would give one at sea on both coasts, one possibly in the Caribbean/port visits south and one going to Africa/Euro port visits, simultaneously and more or less at any given time.
The big question for me is what they have in mind when they say “combat capable”. What sort of combat is being considered given its primary purpose is purportedly continental defence. I think it was pointed out earlier by @Underway that the definition didn’t mean ballistic defence necessarily or even as a likelihood. It leaves me to wonder what engagements the ship is predicted to possibly need to be armed for in predominantly our waters. How likely is it to need a subsurface warfare suite or robust AAW system? Is a vessel armed with a 57mm, 2 30mm and a RAM launcher and survivability redundancy built in sufficient for the vast majority of its possible roles? Modular payloads, speed and range are all important considerations as well.
I think until they indicate more fully what is intended, it’s going to be simply speculation as to numbers and whether the ship is more a batch 2 River OPV, a Protector Class OPV or a Braunschweig style corvette.
Maxman1
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,465
- Points
- 1,160
Or even the Finnish Pohjanmaa corvette, which is already designed for Polar Class 7 ice strengthening.
did any of the Heddle proposals envision ice capability? If not, I wonder how long it will take for them to come up with an appropriate paper boat
Similar threads
