Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

[Underway]

It should certainly increases the number of simultaneous engagements that a CPF can execute, though with only 16 missiles, they're still going to run out pretty fast.

On a side note, the Kiwis went with active-guidance PDSMs recently, and as a result, got rid of their fire control radars. Now, we can't do that because our gun still requires it, but it's interesting how significant an effect that switching to active-guided missiles can have.

Second batch of CSC are rumoured to be looking at nixing the X band fire control as well.

It's not just simultaneous engagements. Active missiles improve a number of variables important for ship AAW defence. Some significantly so. The ESSM 2 is as big a jump in capability as Sea Sparrow was to ESSM.

My personal favourite is the ship doesn't need to even see the target with its own sensors to engage. It just needs a good linked track from another sensor/platform to make the engagement, plot an intercept point and then fire/forget away.

The air force won't let ships band their torpedoes anymore... well, technically they will "let" ships, but they always seem to redo it. Why? Because the Weng Techs either get very little or no training on banding torpedoes, so the air force always has to redo it (because they do get training on it).

Air Safety. Nothing touches the helicopter that the helo techs haven't touched themselves. Sonar techs get training on banding, but since that rule came into effect they don't get much experience anymore.

There’s talk of certain aspects of amalgamation being rolled back, but the train has been rolling down the single set of rails for so long that the remaining brain trust is flummoxed as to a COA.

It's not talk. There are significant changes coming.

 

[Rainbow1910]

It's not talk. There are significant changes coming.

I think it will likely be far too late considering what I've heard about the MarTech trade from current and past service members, described as "apocalyptically bad" in basically all aspects.

 

[Grimey]

I think it will likely be far too late considering what I've heard about the MarTech trade from current and past service members, described as "apocalyptically bad" in basically all aspects.

I‘ve heard the same. Those having released just five years ago wouldn’t recognize the trade. Out west there Is an astonishingly small number of legacy guys left.

My old CERA (and by old I mean a paltry five years older than me ) is convinced that the rot set in when machinery was placed within acoustic enclosures. What he really meant was the MWM 602 doors and how much an embuggerance they were to remove. Those on here who have done the same will know exactly what I mean. Not sure if things have changed with the Cat replacements.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Second batch of CSC are rumoured to be looking at nixing the X band fire control as well.

It's not just simultaneous engagements. Active missiles improve a number of variables important for ship AAW defence. Some significantly so. The ESSM 2 is as big a jump in capability as Sea Sparrow was to ESSM.

My personal favourite is the ship doesn't need to even see the target with its own sensors to engage. It just needs a good linked track from another sensor/platform to make the engagement, plot an intercept point and then fire/forget away.


Air Safety. Nothing touches the helicopter that the helo techs haven't touched themselves. Sonar techs get training on banding, but since that rule came into effect they don't get much experience anymore.



It's not talk. There are significant changes coming.

The W Engs not banding any more torpedoes has nothing to do with “air safety” (I think you meant airworthiness).

NWTs did it all the time for HELAIRDETs- they were better at it than our random AVN Tech, who got a course on the side and was the load chief, part time. Now each det has an AWS tech dedicated to the task. However, if a W Eng is trained to the same standard and follows the CFTO, there is zero reason to not accept a weapon from them.

In summary- the RCN cut training and competence in that area and the RCAF increased it, so naturally the Navy has offloaded the task on us.

 

[NavyShooter]

Doing WUPS on MON in 2014/15, we did a specific class on torpedo banding at NAD - it was required for all our Armament and SONAR techs. I went along as their supervisor. It was eye opening to me how such a simple process with clear direct detailed instructions could get messed up by folks that 'knew what they were doing'.

It was the same 'I knew what I was doing' group that turned the lock pin on the torpedo bridge crane into a shear pin because they used it to stop a rotating crane, rather than stopping the rotation and then locking it.

Interestingly, the only person on the ship who, on a Friday afternoon before weapons certs on a Monday that was capable of spinning a lathe and making a replacement lock pin was me. Not a single stoker had the ability to make it - not a single former NWT either. The stokers didn't even have a set of calipers I could use to measure the damaged one - I had to grab a set of chart dividers from the NAVO on the bridge to use as a measuring tool.

(When I was duty on Sunday, I brought in my own Starrett calipers and tools to make another one that was a bit more accurate, but I had a functional replacement spun out in just under 2 hours on Friday afternoon.

The thing is, the skillset to spin a piece of metal on a lathe used to be a LS/S1 level skill - on Gatineau, we had a very average (ok, maybe below average) LS who was sent to spin out a new set of shear pins for the 3"70 while the rest of the NWT's stripped out the broken bits and re-aligned everything after a jam happened.

The skills that used to reside in an average LS, now reside at the PO1 rank level or higher...and it's getting very thin at that rank level due to releases of experienced/skilled people.

NS

 

[dapaterson]

Don't worry, DHL will get you those parts within 24 hours... Assuming you're not mid Atlantic and they're in stock and you CoC supports your high priority request .

 

[Halifax Tar]

Don't worry, DHL will get you those parts within 24 hours... Assuming you're not mid Atlantic and they're in stock and you CoC supports your high priority request .

And the various levels customs and brokerages don't lose it or hold it up for exorbitant amount of time.

But hey Just on time is awesome! Down with warehousing!

 

[Kirkhill]

One of the original design selection requirements was that Canada would buy a hull that was already floating and in operation.

It seems that it will abide by that requirement.

The first batch of 3 Type 26s will be in the water and the second batch will be just starting to cut steel, meaning the revised and stabilized design will be decided, before Canada starts cutting steel on its hulls.

Interesting article on the next steps for the T26 before the RN commissions first-of-class HMS Glasgow.

In focus: delivering the Type 26 Frigates | Navy Lookout

www.navylookout.com

Once the design review is complete, production for the CSC should begin in 2024, with deliveries expected to begin in the early 2030s, and full operational capability achieved by 2031 or 2032, Copeland added.

Canada’s multibillion-dollar combat ship plan nears key decision

Officials in Ottawa have taken their time in reviewing the Canadian Surface Combatant design because the one ship class must do it all.

www.defensenews.com

 

[Underway]

The W Engs not banding any more torpedoes has nothing to do with “air safety” (I think you meant airworthiness).

NWTs did it all the time for HELAIRDETs- they were better at it than our random AVN Tech, who got a course on the side and was the load chief, part time. Now each det has an AWS tech dedicated to the task. However, if a W Eng is trained to the same standard and follows the CFTO, there is zero reason to not accept a weapon from them.

In summary- the RCN cut training and competence in that area and the RCAF increased it, so naturally the Navy has offloaded the task on us.

Airworthiness... roger.

There aren't NWT's anymore so there's that. The Sonar techs offered last I sailed with an Airdet and were told don't bother we got our own guy to do that. So perhaps this is a bit of telephone game/rumor milling going on here.

 

[Grimey]

Doing WUPS on MON in 2014/15, we did a specific class on torpedo banding at NAD - it was required for all our Armament and SONAR techs. I went along as their supervisor. It was eye opening to me how such a simple process with clear direct detailed instructions could get messed up by folks that 'knew what they were doing'.

It was the same 'I knew what I was doing' group that turned the lock pin on the torpedo bridge crane into a shear pin because they used it to stop a rotating crane, rather than stopping the rotation and then locking it.

Interestingly, the only person on the ship who, on a Friday afternoon before weapons certs on a Monday that was capable of spinning a lathe and making a replacement lock pin was me. Not a single stoker had the ability to make it - not a single former NWT either. The stokers didn't even have a set of calipers I could use to measure the damaged one - I had to grab a set of chart dividers from the NAVO on the bridge to use as a measuring tool.

(When I was duty on Sunday, I brought in my own Starrett calipers and tools to make another one that was a bit more accurate, but I had a functional replacement spun out in just under 2 hours on Friday afternoon.

The thing is, the skillset to spin a piece of metal on a lathe used to be a LS/S1 level skill - on Gatineau, we had a very average (ok, maybe below average) LS who was sent to spin out a new set of shear pins for the 3"70 while the rest of the NWT's stripped out the broken bits and re-aligned everything after a jam happened.

The skills that used to reside in an average LS, now reside at the PO1 rank level or higher...and it's getting very thin at that rank level due to releases of experienced/skilled people.

NS

That raises a good question as to whether the QL5 MarTech course or whatever it’s referred to now is enough of a foundation piece for the machinist specialist course. At one point, the entry requirement was, IIRC, 85% on the QL5 fitting/machine shop phase. So the guys ( not sure if a gal has ever had the course) were adept at machining or really enjoyed it. Preferably both.

I’m assuming the specialist course is still run on either coast.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Airworthiness... roger.

There aren't NWT's anymore so there's that. The Sonar techs offered last I sailed with an Airdet and were told don't bother we got our own guy to do that. So perhaps this is a bit of telephone game/rumor milling going on here.

The AWS is not super busy on a Det. It is one less thing the CSE Dept has to do.

 

[Stoker]

That raises a good question as to whether the QL5 MarTech course or whatever it’s referred to now is enough of a foundation piece for the machinist specialist course. At one point, the entry requirement was, IIRC, 85% on the QL5 fitting/machine shop phase. So the guys ( not sure if a gal has ever had the course) were adept at machining or really enjoyed it. Preferably both.

I’m assuming the specialist course is still run on either coast.

Yes it is, in fact I have one of my pers on it in Jan.

 

[NavyShooter]

And...yes, there have been females (or at least people who identify as such) that have passed the machinist specialist course.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I am shocked that most of the engineers can't run a small lathe. Most marine engineers I have met pride themselves on their abilty to make and repair small components. With the advent of CNC, 3D printing, etc a small machine shop aboard should be able to produce many of the small components and for small parts that wear and break often, you could stock a small supply of raw materiel and drawings, so you can maintain your own stock.

 

[MTShaw]

I was reviewing the most recent PDF press release/graphic thing, on top of the change of the CMS, I just noticed that the Naval Fire Support Missile has changed from Tomahawk to ?.LRASM?

https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/rcn-mrc/documents/ships/csc-factsheet-2022-2.pdf

I have to much time on my hands today.

 

[Lumber]

I was reviewing the most recent PDF press release/graphic thing, on top of the change of the CMS, I just noticed that the Naval Fire Support Missile has changed from Tomahawk to ?.LRASM?

https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/rcn-mrc/documents/ships/csc-factsheet-2022-2.pdf

I have to much time on my hands today.

LRASM is an anti-ship missile. Tomahawk has been replaced in the graphic with "Naval Fire Support Missile", which could mean Tomahawk, an alternative to Tomahawk such as the French MdCN "Storm Shadow" missile, or perhaps it'll just carry more NSMs and with some being used in the land attack role, similar to how the Harpoon can be.

 

[Navy_Pete]

I am shocked that most of the engineers can't run a small lathe. Most marine engineers I have met pride themselves on their abilty to make and repair small components. With the advent of CNC, 3D printing, etc a small machine shop aboard should be able to produce many of the small components and for small parts that wear and break often, you could stock a small supply of raw materiel and drawings, so you can maintain your own stock.

A lot can, but weirdly had a red seal machinist that wasn't allowed to use a lathe because he was a HT (prior to full martech implementation) but didn't have the RCN safety course. It's a perishable skill though so that's why we got extra stock and encouraged folks to make random things in their spare time (when we didn't have parts they could fix).

Usually sounds like a BS excuse to buy stuff for departure gifts but usually came in handy when stuff broke, but they can only do so much with how broken things get. Some real wizards with the pipe repair wrap though.

 

[MTShaw]

LRASM is an anti-ship missile. Tomahawk has been replaced in the graphic with "Naval Fire Support Missile", which could mean Tomahawk, an alternative to Tomahawk such as the French MdCN "Storm Shadow" missile, or perhaps it'll just carry more NSMs and with some being used in the land attack role, similar to how the Harpoon can be.

I was wondering if the AGM-158C still has the capabilitit’s of the AGM-158B plus the ASuW capabilities. The Tomahawk V is also dual use cruise missile. I often don’t wonder clearly.

The space for more NSM launchers is a a premium. Many more antenna’s to locate/relocate.

 

[Lumber]

I was wondering if the AGM-158C still has the capabilitit’s of the AGM-158B plus the ASuW capabilities. The Tomahawk V is also dual use cruise missile. I often don’t wonder clearly.

The space for more NSM launchers is a a premium. Many more antenna’s to locate/relocate.

Both the LRASM and NSM have been trialed and successfully launch from a Mk41 VLS, so you wouldn't have to move any sensors around, you'd just put them in whatever VLS cells you were originally planning on putting Tomahawks (at the expensive of much more valuable, IMO, SM-2s)

 

[MTShaw]

Both the LRASM and NSM have been trialed and successfully launch from a Mk41 VLS, so you wouldn't have to move any sensors around, you'd just put them in whatever VLS cells you were originally planning on putting Tomahawks (at the expensive of much more valuable, IMO, SM-2s)

I did not know that the NSM was MK41 compatible. There is something satisfying about the 1000lb warhead of the also stealthy LRASM

If the current government’s intentions of joining the ABM family are true then we’d need the SM-6 at least.

I also think we are getting our arms twisted.