New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy

[Furniture]

I know we already have the 57’s but why not put 76’s on the CDC’s and hold the 57’s in reserve in case we were pressed to put them on the AOPS or on something else.

To put them on AOPS would require rebuilding the entire front end of the ship, it isn't happening.

The 57mm is a great gun for what we need smaller ships to do, so using what we have, or buying more updated versions makes a lot of sense.

This isn't WWII, we aren't using the "main battery" to engage in surface warfare, it's mostly about air threats and lower threat actions against smaller ships/boats.

 

[NavyShooter]

Installing the 57mm on the foc'sle of the AOPS with a through deck penetrating magazine feed mechanism would require a lot of work.

However.

If you give up the loading system, and are willing to go with just 121 rounds in the mount, loaded manually from the rear door...you can have a surface mounted turret with 121 rounds onboard...

Note that in order to unload the 57mm, you have to do it manually on the upper decks. There's no reason you couldn't also load it that way as well.

Now, adding a 57mm without an effective fire control system - well - that means you need to add a CEROS 200 on the bridge-top. Then you need an air/surface search radar capable of designating targets accurately enough for them to be in the target finding window (range/elevation/bearing) that the CEROS needs.

So, bringing over the 57mm, doing a deck mount only with upper deck loading could work, but you'd need an improved search radar, and you'd need to add a fire control radar as well.

Oh, and interestingly, that same FC radar could also be used for aircraft engagements, so you could add a couple of the Adaptable Deck Launching System box launchers on the foc'sle as well, and get some self-defense Sea Sparrows mounted....and they work with the Quad Pack ESSM, so with 2 of the box launchers, you could have 16 ESSM, with a 57mm gun....and boom...you've got most of the capability of a CPF.

Note based on the BAE Fact Sheet, with the ESSM, it'd be 5820 pounds per loaded launcher - so that's 6 tons of topside weight for 4 cells (16 missiles) plus the weight of the CEROS 200 (~750 Kg) - so that's another ton high up, plus the support cabinets, then the increased weight of the AMB Sea Giraffe 3D radar (assuming those got put on - same as the Radar on the CPF's)

So...you end up with a bunch more weight up topside, and a minimum self-defense capability.

Your relatively unarmed AOPS becomes a Continental Defense Corvette on the cheap.

NS

 

[Maxman1]

I don't think we'll have a CDC by 1930

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Installing the 57mm on the foc'sle of the AOPS with a through deck penetrating magazine feed mechanism would require a lot of work.

However.

If you give up the loading system, and are willing to go with just 121 rounds in the mount, loaded manually from the rear door...you can have a surface mounted turret with 121 rounds onboard...

Note that in order to unload the 57mm, you have to do it manually on the upper decks. There's no reason you couldn't also load it that way as well.

Now, adding a 57mm without an effective fire control system - well - that means you need to add a CEROS 200 on the bridge-top. Then you need an air/surface search radar capable of designating targets accurately enough for them to be in the target finding window (range/elevation/bearing) that the CEROS needs.

So, bringing over the 57mm, doing a deck mount only with upper deck loading could work, but you'd need an improved search radar, and you'd need to add a fire control radar as well.

Oh, and interestingly, that same FC radar could also be used for aircraft engagements, so you could add a couple of the Adaptable Deck Launching System box launchers on the foc'sle as well, and get some self-defense Sea Sparrows mounted....and they work with the Quad Pack ESSM, so with 2 of the box launchers, you could have 16 ESSM, with a 57mm gun....and boom...you've got most of the capability of a CPF.

Note based on the BAE Fact Sheet, with the ESSM, it'd be 5820 pounds per loaded launcher - so that's 6 tons of topside weight for 4 cells (16 missiles) plus the weight of the CEROS 200 (~750 Kg) - so that's another ton high up, plus the support cabinets, then the increased weight of the AMB Sea Giraffe 3D radar (assuming those got put on - same as the Radar on the CPF's)

So...you end up with a bunch more weight up topside, and a minimum self-defense capability.

Your relatively unarmed AOPS becomes a Continental Defense Corvette on the cheap.

NS

I understood that the 57mm is offered with multiple version of through deck ammunition feeds in length and complexity?

At the very least switch the RWS to the Lionfish so we have the same systems on the AOP's and RCD's, plus the .50cal RWS that our on the Halifax's.

 

[Maxman1]

There's apparently a version of the 76 that doesn't require deck penetration, intended for mounting on aircraft hangars. Maybe that would be useful on the AOPS.

 

[Lumber]

Installing the 57mm on the foc'sle of the AOPS with a through deck penetrating magazine feed mechanism would require a lot of work.

However.

If you give up the loading system, and are willing to go with just 121 rounds in the mount, loaded manually from the rear door...you can have a surface mounted turret with 121 rounds onboard...

Note that in order to unload the 57mm, you have to do it manually on the upper decks. There's no reason you couldn't also load it that way as well.

Now, adding a 57mm without an effective fire control system - well - that means you need to add a CEROS 200 on the bridge-top. Then you need an air/surface search radar capable of designating targets accurately enough for them to be in the target finding window (range/elevation/bearing) that the CEROS needs.

So, bringing over the 57mm, doing a deck mount only with upper deck loading could work, but you'd need an improved search radar, and you'd need to add a fire control radar as well.

Oh, and interestingly, that same FC radar could also be used for aircraft engagements, so you could add a couple of the Adaptable Deck Launching System box launchers on the foc'sle as well, and get some self-defense Sea Sparrows mounted....and they work with the Quad Pack ESSM, so with 2 of the box launchers, you could have 16 ESSM, with a 57mm gun....and boom...you've got most of the capability of a CPF.

Note based on the BAE Fact Sheet, with the ESSM, it'd be 5820 pounds per loaded launcher - so that's 6 tons of topside weight for 4 cells (16 missiles) plus the weight of the CEROS 200 (~750 Kg) - so that's another ton high up, plus the support cabinets, then the increased weight of the AMB Sea Giraffe 3D radar (assuming those got put on - same as the Radar on the CPF's)

So...you end up with a bunch more weight up topside, and a minimum self-defense capability.

Your relatively unarmed AOPS becomes a Continental Defense Corvette on the cheap.

NS

To be fair, you don't technically NEED an improved search radar to designate targets: you could settle for operators designating targets manually through the camera and joystick (SLAVE MAN).

 

[Furniture]

I understood that the 57mm is offered with multiple version of through deck ammunition feeds in length and complexity?

At the very least switch the RWS to the Lionfish so we have the same systems on the AOP's and RCD's, plus the .50cal RWS that our on the Halifax's.

There's apparently a version of the 76 that doesn't require deck penetration, intended for mounting on aircraft hangars. Maybe that would be useful on the AOPS.

There is another option...

We can live in reality and accept that the AOPV is not a warship. Then we can not pretend that slapping an expensive weapons system on a ship not designed to fight is a good idea.

 

[GK .Dundas]

There is another option...

We can live in reality and accept that the AOPV is not a warship. Then we can not pretend that slapping an expensive weapons system on a ship not designed to fight is a good idea.

Nobody said it was a good idea in fact it maybe a horrible idea...however we may not be given a choice it may simply be necessary.

 

[Furniture]

Nobody said it was a good idea in fact it maybe a horrible idea...however we may not be given a choice it may simply be necessary.

In the time it would take to convert an AOPV, we could likely build a new OSV with the magazine and other features baked in. Kind of like how the corvettes came about.

Switching to the new RWS used on the RCD? Reasonable. Converting the ship to use a 57mm mount? Ridiculous.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

In the time it would take to convert an AOPV, we could likely build a new OSV with the magazine and other features baked in. Kind of like how the corvettes came about.

Switching to the new RWS used on the RCD? Reasonable. Converting the ship to use a 57mm mount? Ridiculous.

They have fitted the 57mm to a 250 ton ships, pretty sure they can easily fit it to the AOP's. It's still a mostly a self-defense weapon. Considering the places it is likley to end up and proliferation of threats a non-state actor can now bring to the table, we are going to have to up our game, a lot.

 

[Furniture]

They have fitted the 57mm to a 250 ton ships, pretty sure they can easily fit it to the AOP's. It's still a mostly a self-defense weapon. Considering the places it is likley to end up and proliferation of threats a non-state actor can now bring to the table, we are going to have to up our game, a lot.

Mounting the gun is not the problem.

Adding the fie control radar, and the magazines for the ammunition is a problem.

We could waste time and effort trying to make AOPVs into shitty CPFs, or we could accept reality, and design/build the CDC instead.

There is essentially nothing a 25mm cannon won't dissuade form fighting that a 57mm cannon will... If you're close enough to shoot a 57mm at it, you're already well inside every ASuW missiles range.

 

[Kirkhill]

Germans change step

Germany Ditches Super-Frigate Dreams Orders 8 Simpler Ships After Dutch Yard Misses 2027 Deadline | Defense Express

German Navy seeks 8 MEKO A-200 frigates by 2029 as F126 super-frigate project stalls years behind schedule with Dutch builder

en.defence-ua.com

...

Damen laid the keel of first F126 only in summer 2024, four years after concluding a contract that stipulated first frigate commissioning in 2027.

Therefore, a preliminary contract for building frigates under MEKO A-200 project in quantity of eight units is planned to be signed soon with already German shipyard TKMS.

An important contract condition is first ship delivery by December 2029.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

So, the high end vessels of the Deutsche Marine wont be available on time or in sufficient numbers fast enough, as a result of which the D.M will seek a certain number of lower end vessels to keep up numbers in the mean time.

Sounds familiar? Anyone? Anyone? UK? Canada? Anyone?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Mounting the gun is not the problem.

Adding the fie control radar, and the magazines for the ammunition is a problem.

We could waste time and effort trying to make AOPVs into shitty CPFs, or we could accept reality, and design/build the CDC instead.

There is essentially nothing a 25mm cannon won't dissuade form fighting that a 57mm cannon will... If you're close enough to shoot a 57mm at it, you're already well inside every ASuW missiles range.

From my reading the 25mm give you an effective range against drone threats (My main concern at this point) of around 4800m, but will struggle a bit due to the nature of the ammunition. Whereas the 57mm gives you a effective range of 8500m against drones, with a potentiel range of 17km to stationary targets with conventional ammunition. What the 57mm brings is a much better chance of defeating aerial and surface drones at a distance and dealing with more than one target at a time, particularly using 3P ammunition. We are not trying to build a shitty CFP but accepting the changing reality of the threats and unless you want to significantly limit where you send them, then you will need to adopt some form of increased protection.

Given the state of the CFP's and the time before at least 2 RCD are operational, the tasking burden for the AOP's is going to be high and will be likley used as a place holder where we used to use the CFP's till the RCD arrive. The CDC's if ever built are even further away. I would start the design process for the refit now and then likley refit the HDW first, in a few years. Which would allow them to fix other "First of class" issues as well.

 

[Maxman1]

From my reading the 25mm give you an effective range against drone threats (My main concern at this point) of around 4800m, but will struggle a bit due to the nature of the ammunition. Whereas the 57mm gives you a effective range of 8500m against drones, with a potentiel range of 17km to stationary targets with conventional ammunition. What the 57mm brings is a much better chance of defeating aerial and surface drones at a distance and dealing with more than one target at a time, particularly using 3P ammunition. We are not trying to build a shitty CFP but accepting the changing reality of the threats and unless you want to significantly limit where you send them, then you will need to adopt some form of increased protection.

Given the state of the CFP's and the time before at least 2 RCD are operational, the tasking burden for the AOP's is going to be high and will be likley used as a place holder where we used to use the CFP's till the RCD arrive. The CDC's if ever built are even further away. I would start the design process for the refit now and then likley refit the HDW first, in a few years. Which would allow them to fix other "First of class" issues as well.

How about the Bofors 40 Mk4?

Bofors 40 Mk4 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Or there's the DARDO mounting of the Bofors 40mm L/70.

DARDO - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Troopasaurus]

For anti-drone self defense on the AOPS , I would tend to think moving the CIWS over from the Halifax as they are decommissioned would make more sense, rather than the 57mm/40mm. They come with their own sensor suite (Ku Radar and FLIR) and minimal power requirement, heck they could even be upgraded to SeaRAM...

 

[Rainbow1910]

From my reading the 25mm give you an effective range against drone threats (My main concern at this point) of around 4800m, but will struggle a bit due to the nature of the ammunition. Whereas the 57mm gives you a effective range of 8500m against drones, with a potentiel range of 17km to stationary targets with conventional ammunition. What the 57mm brings is a much better chance of defeating aerial and surface drones at a distance and dealing with more than one target at a time, particularly using 3P ammunition. We are not trying to build a shitty CFP but accepting the changing reality of the threats and unless you want to significantly limit where you send them, then you will need to adopt some form of increased protection.

Given the state of the CFP's and the time before at least 2 RCD are operational, the tasking burden for the AOP's is going to be high and will be likley used as a place holder where we used to use the CFP's till the RCD arrive. The CDC's if ever built are even further away. I would start the design process for the refit now and then likley refit the HDW first, in a few years. Which would allow them to fix other "First of class" issues as well.

My problem with this attitude is that even if you put a larger gun on the AOPS, it fundamentally cannot be used as a placeholder for the kinds of operations where the CPF's are required. AOPS is not a combatant and even if you festooned the entire vessel with electronic warfare systems, decoys, CIWS, additional guns, anti-ship missiles, a towed array sonar, ESSM, etc, you would be left a totally unsuitable hull. AOPS is designed to be a non-combatant patrol vessel capable of long endurance Arctic operations, meaning you have an unstealthy and slow vessel that is unable to take a real hit in combat and remain operational.

AOPS isn't a workable stand-in for a CPF for a wide variety of their missions, especially in dangerous environments. If we are looking to send AOPS into environments where a 57mm gun might be needed to protect it, you should not be sending the vessel there in the first place.

A more realistic retrofit for AOPS would be the fitting of drone detection and soft-kill electronic warfare systems, given these sorts of systems have a much smaller physical and electrical footprint in the overall design. Changing the 25mm gun out for the 30mm Lionfish mount being planned for the RCD's provides commonality while not overly upping the footprint of the main gun, it's below deck requirements and the associated terminals on the bridge. Retrofitting remotely controlled .50 caliber mounts in place of the manual .50 caliber mounts is another option for increased capability at relatively low cost, purchasing RBS 70 NG and stocking them aboard is another low cost, low footprint option for drone defence. Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) can likely be retrofitted at relatively low cost/footprint, giving your a laser guided Hydra 70mm rocket to use against surface and air drones.

Realistically though, don't send AOPS to do CPF work and don't turn it into a best value CPF. The operational deployments of the RCN will need to be fundamentally adjusted as the CPF's age out, MCDV's are retired and the RCD's come online.

 

[DBNSG]

My problem with this attitude is that even if you put a larger gun on the AOPS, it fundamentally cannot be used as a placeholder for the kinds of operations where the CPF's are required. AOPS is not a combatant and even if you festooned the entire vessel with electronic warfare systems, decoys, CIWS, additional guns, anti-ship missiles, a towed array sonar, ESSM, etc, you would be left a totally unsuitable hull. AOPS is designed to be a non-combatant patrol vessel capable of long endurance Arctic operations, meaning you have an unstealthy and slow vessel that is unable to take a real hit in combat and remain operational.

AOPS isn't a workable stand-in for a CPF for a wide variety of their missions, especially in dangerous environments. If we are looking to send AOPS into environments where a 57mm gun might be needed to protect it, you should not be sending the vessel there in the first place.

A more realistic retrofit for AOPS would be the fitting of drone detection and soft-kill electronic warfare systems, given these sorts of systems have a much smaller physical and electrical footprint in the overall design. Changing the 25mm gun out for the 30mm Lionfish mount being planned for the RCD's provides commonality while not overly upping the footprint of the main gun, it's below deck requirements and the associated terminals on the bridge. Retrofitting remotely controlled .50 caliber mounts in place of the manual .50 caliber mounts is another option for increased capability at relatively low cost, purchasing RBS 70 NG and stocking them aboard is another low cost, low footprint option for drone defence. Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) can likely be retrofitted at relatively low cost/footprint, giving your a laser guided Hydra 70mm rocket to use against surface and air drones.

Realistically though, don't send AOPS to do CPF work and don't turn it into a best value CPF. The operational deployments of the RCN will need to be fundamentally adjusted as the CPF's age out, MCDV's are retired and the RCD's come online.

But will ignorant desperate Ottawa fundamentally change our overseas commitments? Its gray with a gun so they WILL send it .Canada will be an AOR, A330 Tanker , P-8 contributor if Ottawa listens to the Professionals. Until the mid 30's.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Not trying to make it a CFP lite. It will have to play act the part of the CFP in training scenarios, thanks to the failure to enact NSS some 15 years earlier than it has been. We are very likley to see a hull gap between the CFP's and the RCD's and to keep some of the basic skillsets alive, that will fall onto the AOP's, even when they can't do the majority of the tasks, other than steaming around with a training Task Group.

What worries my more is the likelihood that the AOP's are going to see service around the globe doing tasks they are better suited for. But also exposing them to smaller state actors and non-state actors with significant surface and aerial drone capabilities. I see the 57mm as a way to vastly increase the self defense bubble around the ship, along with other self-defense systems.