New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy

[Underway]

So that article talks about a mobile base and PC2. This is not an amphib in anything resembling the traditional sense.
The Seapan proposal was JSS power on a PC2 hull. This is something else entirely.

I'm thinking no well deck, two big cranes, large hanger but limited flight deck space in comparison to traditional LHDs.

 

[Baz]

You're asking for quiet contemplation from a collection of Naval Warfare Officers.

Well, I'd hope it would include Air Officers, which would be even harder to get quiet contemplation from. I think if you promised a room where the air types could hang and contemplate how great they are that would keep them focused, and maybe a similar room where NWOs could contemplate how they are going to screw over their follow ons the way they were screwed over. Once you had those two groups all fixated you could let a bunch of MWOs and CPO2s draw up some good ideas.

 

[Baz]

So that article talks about a mobile base and PC2. This is not an amphib in anything resembling the traditional sense.
The Seapan proposal was JSS power on a PC2 hull. This is something else entirely.

I'm thinking no well deck, two big cranes, large hanger but limited flight deck space in comparison to traditional LHDs.

I wouldn't limit the flight deck, I'd embrace it. One helo, especially a small one, can move very little. People don't like to be dropped off in cold inhospital places with very little. Helo lift works better either in waves or as a continuous cycle. For that you need spots. Four small ones or two big ones seems about right.

Plus a flight deck also beocmes a very good place to stack sea cans if you have different needs. Or vehicles.

 

[Underway]

I wouldn't limit the flight deck, I'd embrace it. One helo, especially a small one, can move very little. People don't like to be dropped off in cold inhospital places with very little. Helo lift works better either in waves or as a continuous cycle. For that you need spots. Four small ones or two big ones seems about right.

If you want an amphib then yes. But an icebreaking mobile base is not an amphib. This is a PC2. You think a helo is going to work on -50? Are we designing for optimal performance in the middle of winter or other times and places.

Are we using aide to civil power as the mission or the raison d'etre for a different capability.

 

[Baz]

If you want an amphib then yes. But an icebreaking mobile base is not an amphib. This is a PC2. You think a helo is going to work on -50? Are we designing for optimal performance in the middle of winter or other times and places.

Are we using aide to civil power as the mission or the raison d'etre for a different capability.

You and I have completely different idea of what a Joint Support Ship or mobile base is. To me, what your describing is an ice stengthened cargo ship that happens to have a flight deck, which is not what the RCN is for.

The helos will be flying for at least as long as the people going ashore are willing to. Do I think a helo will work in -50? Probably, but it will be the ground crew and the passengers that have stopped long before the helo does.

I am not describing amphibious, I'm explicitely describing something else. We did learn some lessons from SCTF, ill thought out by both the CDS and the Navy as it was.

Let's say, as an example, what you are trying to set up is a persistent OP overlooking a maritime choke point. That's not amphibious, that's unopposed, and well within a peacetime remit. So, no real threrat to your ships, unless there is an ASW or long range air threat.

What do you need:

• 3 observers (8 hour shifts)
• 3 comms types
• 1 feeding
• 1 general support
• 1 arctic tent for ops
• 1 arctic tent for habitability
• 2 arctic tens for sleeping
• some heaters
• sustainment; well, until you make it back, let's say minimum two weeks.

And that last one is the problem. Nobody in their right mind would let one helo do that. The problem is, if you only get some of your stuff, and then they go away, your FUBAR'd.

What we learned in SCTF is if they have to have a robust self defence capability, that amount of stuff goes up. Almost exponentially.

Same thing if you want to set up a HADR site. That first lift needs to be substantial. If not, your risking becoming part of the problem, instead part of the solution. My experience: I was part of the planning staff for Katrina/Rita, and my USN co-director was the CO of Abraham Lincoln for the 2004 Tsunami and provided a very good briefing. He was a helo gut originally, had commanded a squadron. They used a lot of helos.

If this is what Adm Topshee is thinking, then I applaud his efforts. If he is thinking an ice strengthened cargo ship, then I think others, including the Coast Guard, can do it better.

I, by the way, I'll leave others to discuss the merits of a well deck. However, the Marines I have worked with have all seemed to indicate that it is much better to embark in your own little harbour than over the rail.

And none of this is amphibious. It's about providing a secure, available, and controlled place to operate. No matter the reason.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I wouldn't limit the flight deck, I'd embrace it. One helo, especially a small one, can move very little. People don't like to be dropped off in cold inhospital places with very little. Helo lift works better either in waves or as a continuous cycle. For that you need spots. Four small ones or two big ones seems about right.

Plus a flight deck also beocmes a very good place to stack sea cans if you have different needs. Or vehicles.
View attachment 97399

I think if you want something like what you are proposing a few posts up we need to relook at reestablishing the Fleet Air Arm. I do not believe the current way we do business will work for this.

The culture clashes are already divisive with just a small air dept. I can imagine the impact one the size that would be needed for these ideas not being interested in being part of the crew outside of flying as being absolutely detrimental to crew morale and cohesion.

 

[Baz]

Well, that got away from them quick. YouTube just kindly fed me a CBC article on Topshee’s comments. He said (sic) “a mobile base would be very useful for ____, and that’s essentially what an amphibious ship is.” To “explain” it they said here’s what he’s talking about, using Iwo Jima as the reference platform. And Iwo Jima never operates with a San Antonio and Whitby in company, plus escorts (that’s what an ARG is). I’m pretty sure that’s not, in fact, what he meant…

 

[Nvlgzr]

It's a good article from the CBC covering this topic. Thought experiment is certainly where we are at with this.

This issue will always be "does the army want this" because at the end of the day this is an enabler for the army. And they only dabble in amphib operations (Vandoos the most). This isn't anywhere on their radar for the big reorg. Fighting as a division will take all of their resources.

I think at the end of the day the RCN will have its hands full and more with just the RCD, Subs, more JSS and CDC. That's a good fleet honestly.

This won't be fully realized in the same time frame due to build times but...

15 Destroyers
12 Attack subs
4 AORs
12 Light Frigates
6 AOPVs
Bunch of patrol boats...

I love your optimism, but Trump (hopefully) is gone in 3 years and the Canadian public is short on attention so things could change back to no mo money for CAF.
Just the pessimist in me says ’Revised fleet:
3 destroyers,
8 subs
2 AORs
6 Corvettes
6 AOPVs

 

[Underway]

You and I have completely different idea of what a Joint Support Ship or mobile base is. To me, what your describing is an ice stengthened cargo ship that happens to have a flight deck, which is not what the RCN is for.

I know what a JSS is for, but I don't know what a mobile base is. My concern is the icebreaking component.

A med sized LHD (Say Canbera Class) is about 28000 tons and 700ft long. A PC2 icebreaker as currently constructed (Seapan Aker version) is also ~28000 tons but only ~520ft long. If you just translate that hull form over to an LHD then you've got a very small LHD.

You can't get a proper through deck design for a breaker, you would still need a large house up forward (for full views of the ice both port and starboard of the ship as well). So we're looking at something like a San Antonio class or GLAM presented above.

That being said, in an emergency why can't a CCG PC2 be the lead ship in a response, breaking the ice ahead of the follow on LHD.

And the last consideration is draft. LHD's have a deep draught and the arctic is very shallow. Anything large enough to properly carry enough supplies and equipment would have a deep draught and have to stand well offshore or be unable to access the truly remote communities.

Well, that got away from them quick. YouTube just kindly fed me a CBC article on Topshee’s comments. He said (sic) “a mobile base would be very useful for ____, and that’s essentially what an amphibious ship is.” To “explain” it they said here’s what he’s talking about, using Iwo Jima as the reference platform. And Iwo Jima never operates with a San Antonio and Whitby in company, plus escorts (that’s what an ARG is). I’m pretty sure that’s not, in fact, what he meant…

Yah I saw that video as well. I think they just googled Amphibious ship and picked the biggest one. San Antonio is more what I think would be the style would be based on what I said above (restrictions on ice breaking forms etc...). Two spots for aircraft max, well deck, and plenty of space for people and gear, probably a large crane as well.

 

[suffolkowner]

I love your optimism, but Trump (hopefully) is gone in 3 years and the Canadian public is short on attention so things could change back to no mo money for CAF.
Just the pessimist in me says ’Revised fleet:
3 destroyers,
8 subs
2 AORs
6 Corvettes
6 AOPVs

i think we get 12 RCD for sure, were paying for them either way

 

[Stoker]

We still need to sign the contract for 12 subs and get approval for CDC before we can think about Arctic capable amphib ships. I wonder will the incoming CRCN have these same thought exercises?

 

[GR66]

Just a hypothetical question about a hypothetical Arctic BHS and helicopters...

Would something like the AW159 Wildcat work for the BHS or would you need something bigger? It has multiple variants including an ASW variant currently in use by the RN.

Which leads to a couple of questions/options:

• Would the smaller AW159 be easier to certify for use on the AOPS than the Cyclone?
• Would facilities for an AW159 on the CDC make it a more useful partner in a hi/low ASW task group with a River-class?
• How big a trade-off would it be to replace the Cyclones on the River-class with the AW159 if the space saved could be used for supporting UAV's?
• Could the AW159 be part of the proposed CH-146 Griffon replacement along with say some AW101's and UAV's? That would increase the commonality of our crewed rotary wing fleet by going from four types to three.

 

[suffolkowner]

Just a hypothetical question about a hypothetical Arctic BHS and helicopters...

Would something like the AW159 Wildcat work for the BHS or would you need something bigger? It has multiple variants including an ASW variant currently in use by the RN.

Which leads to a couple of questions/options:

• Would the smaller AW159 be easier to certify for use on the AOPS than the Cyclone?
• Would facilities for an AW159 on the CDC make it a more useful partner in a hi/low ASW task group with a River-class?
• How big a trade-off would it be to replace the Cyclones on the River-class with the AW159 if the space saved could be used for supporting UAV's?
• Could the AW159 be part of the proposed CH-146 Griffon replacement along with say some AW101's and UAV's? That would increase the commonality of our crewed rotary wing fleet by going from four types to three.

do they build them in Canada?
What does Airbus build here?

 

[JLB50]

Placentia……has school k-12 plus a collage.

Right? Presumably that is also part of the thought exercise. The ship also gives you another option outside of the north, say in responding to crisis in the Caribbean. And I would imagine you would need 2 in order to always have 1 available. But like the admiral said, it's a thought exercise.

“Thought exercise”? Sounds as if it’s dead in the water before it’s ever built.

 

[Baz]

We still need to sign the contract for 12 subs and get approval for CDC before we can think about Arctic capable amphib ships. I wonder will the incoming CRCN have these same thought exercises?

It is the job of (part of) CRCNs staff to have these thought experiments. If the CRCN is floating them because the government wants to test the waters, then that is a good thing. If he is floating them because he wants to test the waters, less so..

 

[Stoker]

It is the job of (part of) CRCNs staff to have these thought experiments. If the CRCN is floating them because the government wants to test the waters, then that is a good thing. If he is floating them because he wants to test the waters, less so..

I would settle for working dockyard cranes honestly.

 

[Baz]

I know what a JSS is for, but I don't know what a mobile base is. My concern is the icebreaking component.

A med sized LHD (Say Canbera Class) is about 28000 tons and 700ft long. A PC2 icebreaker as currently constructed (Seapan Aker version) is also ~28000 tons but only ~520ft long. If you just translate that hull form over to an LHD then you've got a very small LHD.

You can't get a proper through deck design for a breaker, you would still need a large house up forward (for full views of the ice both port and starboard of the ship as well). So we're looking at something like a San Antonio class or GLAM presented above.

That being said, in an emergency why can't a CCG PC2 be the lead ship in a response, breaking the ice ahead of the follow on LHD.

And the last consideration is draft. LHD's have a deep draught and the arctic is very shallow. Anything large enough to properly carry enough supplies and equipment would have a deep draught and have to stand well offshore or be unable to access the truly remote communities.

I would argue a true JSS is a mobile base. In this case it also needs to be ice strengthened. Someplace to operate helos and boats safely and securely.

It does not have to be huge or through deck, just get as big a flight deck as you can. Maybe put the hangar below with an elevator?

Also agree don’t want it huge. Maybe two medium (Cyclone) spots or 3-4 smaller spots aft?

I’m not sure were disagreeing here…

 

[Baz]

Just a hypothetical question about a hypothetical Arctic BHS and helicopters...

Would something like the AW159 Wildcat work for the BHS or would you need something bigger? It has multiple variants including an ASW variant currently in use by the RN.

Which leads to a couple of questions/options:

• Would the smaller AW159 be easier to certify for use on the AOPS than the Cyclone?
• Would facilities for an AW159 on the CDC make it a more useful partner in a hi/low ASW task group with a River-class?
• How big a trade-off would it be to replace the Cyclones on the River-class with the AW159 if the space saved could be used for supporting UAV's?
• Could the AW159 be part of the proposed CH-146 Griffon replacement along with say some AW101's and UAV's? That would increase the commonality of our crewed rotary wing fleet by going from four types to three.

… or, hypothetically, would a mix of 60Rs and 60Ss, replacing the Cyclone with a larger number, accomplish the same goals.

I bought the MH-60 for Microsoft Flight Sim today, and started on the Queen Elizabeth in the Halifax harbour approaches. Does that make me qualified on type?