Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

[Navy_Pete]

The cool thing about Sea Ram is it could … cough .. could … be fitted to the JSS and in theory even the AOPs. The Mk 49, not so much.
But can you imagine every ship in the RCN having it or at least being able to use the same missiles.

And if I had wheels I'd be a bicycle.

If we want combatants, build combatants. If you build non-combatants, have realistic expectations of their limitations.

Even the 'standalone' variant would need some kind of console installed in an ops room type setting, which means a bunch of security issues to meet ITAR, red power, extra people on the crew etc, plus welding onto a weather deck which is heated, penetrations etc etc. Doable, but not easy.

And that would give you some non-combatants, that are still almost wholely lacking in any real detection or defence capabilities or ops room set up for warfighting, now with a bolted on Sea Ram. If that's all you have, by the time you detect something you may not even have time to kiss your ass goodbye before launching. There is a reason it's on warships that have a wide array of long term detection systems.

If AOPs ever needs point defence, it is likely going to be mostly kept safe by the fact that it is a total non-threat, but makes a nice big and easy target. The JSS would at least be protected as an HVU, but the AOPs is completely useless in any kind of combat situation, and is also too slow to keep up with any kind of convoy.

 

[Lumber]

but the AOPs is completely useless in any kind of combat situation, and is also too slow to keep up with any kind of convoy.

I keep hearing scuttlebutt about strapping weapons to the AOPS, like a Harpoon launcher, or putting or a TAS. I just shake my head.

 

[Spencer100]

I’ve started a campaign where I just use the last names when I talk about the AOPS.

Well the Russian's copied our homework that we copied. But you know Russians have to Russia....so guns and missiles on their icebreaker patrol ship.

Russian Navy's new Ivan Papanin Project 23550 combat icebreaker begins sea trials with Kalibr missiles

Russian Navy's new Ivan Papanin Project 23550 combat icebreaker begins sea trials with Kalibr missiles

armyrecognition.com

So can we let the missile armed icebreaker gap stand?

 

[Spencer100]

I keep hearing scuttlebutt about strapping weapons to the AOPS, like a Harpoon launcher, or putting or a TAS. I just shake my head.

 

[PrairieFella]

And if I had wheels I'd be a bicycle.

If we want combatants, build combatants. If you build non-combatants, have realistic expectations of their limitations.

Even the 'standalone' variant would need some kind of console installed in an ops room type setting, which means a bunch of security issues to meet ITAR, red power, extra people on the crew etc, plus welding onto a weather deck which is heated, penetrations etc etc. Doable, but not easy.

And that would give you some non-combatants, that are still almost wholely lacking in any real detection or defence capabilities or ops room set up for warfighting, now with a bolted on Sea Ram. If that's all you have, by the time you detect something you may not even have time to kiss your ass goodbye before launching. There is a reason it's on warships that have a wide array of long term detection systems.

If AOPs ever needs point defence, it is likely going to be mostly kept safe by the fact that it is a total non-threat, but makes a nice big and easy target. The JSS would at least be protected as an HVU, but the AOPs is completely useless in any kind of combat situation, and is also too slow to keep up with any kind of convoy.

Would the Navy be better off offloading the AOPS on the CCG and starting from scratch? It always did seem weird to my complete naval ignorant mind that we divert hundreds of very limited sailors to a constabulary vessel more fit for a police force or paramilitary organization.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Would the Navy be better off offloading the AOPS on the CCG and starting from scratch? It always did seem weird to my complete naval ignorant mind that we divert hundreds of very limited sailors to a constabulary vessel more fit for a police force or paramilitary organization.

No, the GoC says we'll have an icebreaker, so that's where we are. It's a good training platform as well to get some people sea time, and show the flag.

Aside from a bunch of design issues, which really more a combo of us not building ships for 30 years and ISI being dicks, it's not a bad ship, for what it is. It's more the risk of us trying to do things way outside what it's designed for, and then not doing those changes properly ends up in a shitty frankenship that doesn't do it's primary roles properly and is really not good at other things it's getting chucked into. That ultimately places the sailors on it at a lot of unecessary and avoidable risk for no real gain. Saving face is not an operational capability.

 

[Rainbow1910]

Well the Russian's copied our homework that we copied. But you know Russians have to Russia....so guns and missiles on their icebreaker patrol ship.

Russian Navy's new Ivan Papanin Project 23550 combat icebreaker begins sea trials with Kalibr missiles

Russian Navy's new Ivan Papanin Project 23550 combat icebreaker begins sea trials with Kalibr missiles

armyrecognition.com

So can we let the missile armed icebreaker gap stand?

It’s funny because the Russians don’t have missiles aboard as standard, they are containerized and put aft on their cargo bay. They take up the majority of the bay, limiting the roles that the vessel can perform to being a bootleg strike platform. We aren’t missing anything by not following them.

Would the Navy be better off offloading the AOPS on the CCG and starting from scratch? It always did seem weird to my complete naval ignorant mind that we divert hundreds of very limited sailors to a constabulary vessel more fit for a police force or paramilitary organization.

Starting from scratch with what? AOPS is designed from the ground up by the Navy and for the Navy, the CCG wants nothing to do with AOPS as it doesn’t fit any of their requirements and has to be modified to even be workable for them. They were forced by the federal govt to take a pair of modified AOPS to bridge the gap in the construction schedule at Irving while they prepare for the CSC build.

The RCN inherently has the role that the AOPS is utilized for. Unlike the US and similar to the UK, Canada’s Coast Guard is an entirely civilian organization that is not militarized. You would need to entirely change the mandate of two federal organizations that work fine the way they are, even then it’s just shifting the burden from one to another. There is no free lunch.

The RCN has done constabulary work since its inception, it is woven into their roles and history.

 

[PrairieFella]

No, the GoC says we'll have an icebreaker, so that's where we are. It's a good training platform as well to get some people sea time, and show the flag.

Therein lies the problem I suppose. The GoC said and now the navy is stuck with an icebreaker that can't really break ice (from what I understand).

 

[Stoker]

Therein lies the problem I suppose. The GoC said and now the navy is stuck with an icebreaker that can't really break ice (from what I understand).

Up to 2M in trials and able to transit the NW passage during the navigation season. Good enough I suppose.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Up to 2M in trials and able to transit the NW passage during the navigation season. Good enough I suppose.

Yeah, good for first year ice, maybe more (although it's apparently complicated). With the way things are going, that may be more or less enough.

I think it's like calling something 'bullet proof'; it can do some icebreaking, but at some point it's above the limit.

There is a pretty good explanation of it all here; would be interesting to do commercial escorts under fees if that came up for some reason; don't think that's CONOP that's on the radar but could happen at some point if CCG wasn't available.

Icebreakers in Canadian Waters – Clear Seas

 

[Stoker]

Yeah, good for first year ice, maybe more (although it's apparently complicated). With the way things are going, that may be more or less enough.

I think it's like calling something 'bullet proof'; it can do some icebreaking, but at some point it's above the limit.

There is a pretty good explanation of it all here; would be interesting to do commercial escorts under fees if that came up for some reason; don't think that's CONOP that's on the radar but could happen at some point if CCG wasn't available.

Icebreakers in Canadian Waters – Clear Seas

From what I have told breaking for others won't be happening. I also heard that the Arctic refueling depot is having quite a few issues and other options are being looked at.

 

[Navy_Pete]

From what I have told breaking for others won't be happening. I also heard that the Arctic refueling depot is having quite a few issues and other options are being looked at.

That's a shame, I think something like the St Lawrence would be good practice and a chance to work with the CCG; we do that internationally all the time so why not cross departmental domestically? Plus gives a chance for port visits in Montreal or QC, which would be a bit more lively than an artic fuel depot.

Icebreaking seems like a really perishable skill that needs a lot of practice so hopefully they have a general plan to do it fairly regularly, especially at the rate we push OOWs through.

 

[Underway]

I was wondering about that. With regards to the mk49, would it be able to take direction from the Sea Giraffe on the JSS?

Maybe. More likely you would integrate a SeaRAM as JSS already has CIWS integrated. Not sure what the power/environmentals would look like but from what I understand its pretty close to a one to one swap out with minimal internal change to the system as well.

Reached out for some RAM vs Sea Ceptor info today. 2x Mk49 RAM are in, Sea Ceptor is out. No idea what is going into the aft silo at this point. Perhaps nothing and they leave the space for future growth or are happy to liberate the weight up high.

I can see why RAM is the replacement choice. More missiles (42 vs 24), doesn't overlap capabilities with ESSM, can be reloaded at sea, cheaper missiles, surface engagement capability (vs small boats).

 

[Czech_pivo]

From what I have told breaking for others won't be happening. I also heard that the Arctic refueling depot is having quite a few issues and other options are being looked at.

Goes back to my question last month if the Arctic refueling station would or would not be operational this season or not.

 

[Stoker]

Goes back to my question last month if the Arctic refueling station would or would not be operational this season or not.

Read the news

Navy facility in Canadian Arctic 'could be finished this season,' a decade overdue

 

[Rainbow1910]

surface engagement capability (vs small boats).

CAMM is claimed to be able to engage surface targets, specifically small boats. Doesn’t change the advantages of RAM though.

 

[Stoker]

CAMM is claimed to be able to engage surface targets, specifically small boats. Doesn’t change the advantages of RAM though.

I would think the reason why we're doing this is the drone threat and what's happening in the red sea.

 

[Underway]

I would think the reason why we're doing this is the drone threat and what's happening in the red sea.

The main reason they are doing it is because juice is not worth the squeeze on CAMM integration with Aegis. But I would agree that RAM provides a number of advantages that Sea Ceptor does not, and the advantages of Sea Ceptor are covered off by the ESSM missiles.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Would the Navy be better off offloading the AOPS on the CCG and starting from scratch? It always did seem weird to my complete naval ignorant mind that we divert hundreds of very limited sailors to a constabulary vessel more fit for a police force or paramilitary organization.

Here is a well deck of a 1100 class icebreaker/buoytender with a 20 ton crane. Below it is a tween decks and a hold that can accommodate 6-7 buoys plus anchors, chains, etc

 

[JMCanada]

Since methanol and ethanol have much lower freezing point (and viscosity) than marine fuel. Would it be an option in the mid-long term to use them for propulsion in the Arctic? Much easier to store them at the refuelling station.
Just asking.