Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)

[Edward Campbell]

Is a helicopter, with the apparent attendant increase in displacement and crew required, really worth it ~ for my "cheap" alternative/MCDV replacement ~ rather than UAVs?

 

[AlexanderM]

If it's going to be deployed for say anti-pirate, and ASW duties then I'd want the helicopter, if it's only for our waters then either UAV or smaller helicopter would be OK.  I like the idea of having a corvette, which is a combatant, and can be deployed like a frigate, at least for some applications, anti-pirate/ASW/escort, so the helicopter works.  Then that would also mean fewer heavies.

 

[Kirkhill]

Is a helicopter, with the apparent attendant increase in displacement and crew required, really worth it ~ for my "cheap" alternative/MCDV replacement ~ rather than UAVs?

I'll stipulate that I believe you will pay a price in displacement to mount a "lily pad" but I believe that to be a sine qua non for any vessel that Canada sends to sea.  The benefits in connectivity and utility are just too great to ignore.

With respect to ongoing costs - well the crew needs only to be increased by the flight det when the helicopter is embarked.  If the mission doesn't require a Medium, or even a Medium-Heavy helicopter then a Flight/Swarm of UAVs and light helo can be carried instead.  Or maybe no helo is embarked at all.

However with the lily pad the vessel can be reconfigured rapidly while 1000 km from shore (not with heavy weapons necessarily although rearming becomes possible).  The vessel can be upgraded from a sentinel, to a troop transport, to a mother ship, without ever coming alongside.

And it adds a FARP node to extend my transport conveyor / checker board, which I believe to be the greatest advantage of a maritime asset.

 

[Edward Campbell]

I'll stipulate that I believe you will pay a price in displacement to mount a "lily pad" but I believe that to be a sine qua non for any vessel that Canada sends to sea.  The benefits in connectivity and utility are just too great to ignore.

With respect to ongoing costs - well the crew needs only to be increased by the flight det when the helicopter is embarked.  If the mission doesn't require a Medium, or even a Medium-Heavy helicopter then a Flight/Swarm of UAVs and light helo can be carried instead.  Or maybe no helo is embarked at all.

However with the lily pad the vessel can be reconfigured rapidly while 1000 km from shore (not with heavy weapons necessarily although rearming becomes possible).  The vessel can be upgraded from a sentinel, to a troop transport, to a mother ship, without ever coming alongside.

And it adds a FARP node to extend my transport conveyor / checker board, which I believe to be the greatest advantage of a maritime asset.

Excellent point, thanks.

But, am I correct is thinking that the flight deck and hanger does require a few hundred more tons ~ taking us from my desired <1,500 tons to something like 1,800± tons?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

For smaller ships, you may not require much of a hangar at all.  A flight deck with refuelling facilities is damned useful all on its own with imposing much (if any) weight penalty.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

You can put a lightweight pad, in fact you could have a pad mounted on top of containers, but you won't be landing a Sea King on it.

go to 6:30  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzUTundMaeQ&list=PLf1iBen1P1nwYSxH387g_DGq_UFrdtzho

Of course we could contract the Sea Shepard Society to modify our vessels
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1J9get8m6E

Laugh as you will, but it goes to show you what can be done when the need is great. I would not fly with that Tuna pilot, he is a showoff and I have already used up all my luck in helicopters and very picky about with whom, where, when and why i fly.

Here is the CCG helo at work, more in the military comfort level.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBoDmzMFKX0

 

[AlexanderM]

But, am I correct is thinking that the flight deck and hanger does require a few hundred more tons ~ taking us from my desired <1,500 tons to something like 1,800± tons?

You can get a flight deck and hanger in 1000 tonnes, but different design.

 

[Monsoon]

Of course we could contract the Sea Shepard Society to modify our vessels
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1J9get8m6E

Laugh as you will, but it goes to show you what can be done when the need is great. I would not fly with that Tuna pilot, he is a showoff and I have already used up all my luck in helicopters and very picky about with whom, where, when and why i fly.

Stability-alicious

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

The wheel has already been invented.

It's 1700 tons, has a helo with "bear trap", is ice capable for Antarctic ops, small crew, 23 kts., small mods could put a 57 bofors on the front instead of an automatic 25 mm chain gun, after deck can accommodate containerized systems for all sorts of things including small missiles, in "war" time, you can mount a tail on that after deck and carry some torps for the help. In use by our "ally" New-Zealand, and best of all: the design belongs to a Canadian company based in Vancouver: STX Marine.

http://www.stxmarine.net/pdf/PV85-br-web.pdf

Should we acquire six to eight of these babies, I am willing to bet that, in case of heightened world tension, Canadian yards could start putting them out at the rate of one or two every month, with a six to eight months first off lead time.

 

[AlexanderM]

23 knots isn't bad, looks very similar to the Spanish BAM design, just a bit smaller.  The Fassmer OPV 2020 is much, much sexier.

 

[Kirkhill]

The wheel has already been invented.

It's 1700 tons, has a helo with "bear trap", is ice capable for Antarctic ops, small crew, 23 kts., small mods could put a 57 bofors on the front instead of an automatic 25 mm chain gun, after deck can accommodate containerized systems for all sorts of things including small missiles, in "war" time, you can mount a tail on that after deck and carry some torps for the help. In use by our "ally" New-Zealand, and best of all: the design belongs to a Canadian company based in Vancouver: STX Marine.

http://www.stxmarine.net/pdf/PV85-br-web.pdf

Should we acquire six to eight of these babies, I am willing to bet that, in case of heightened world tension, Canadian yards could start putting them out at the rate of one or two every month, with a six to eight months first off lead time.

Aw shucks.  Someone always has to come along and take all the fun out of things.  ;D

Good solution.  What would it take to increase that flight deck to support a Chinook?  I believe the RN's Clyde is Chinook capable.  It can certainly land a  Merlin although it can't hangar it (for that matter it can't hangar anything as a hangar is absent).

One of the other advantages is it would likely put more work on the West Coast given that it is an STX design.  (But there again the AOPS was also an STX design).

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

A Chinook would be out of its league, unless you accepted to lose the after deck space and extend the landing pad with the attendant loss of containerized equipment.

But the structural changes and hangar adaptations required to handle a Merlin (maybe- who knows now) or a Cyclone is well within the design capacity.

 

[AlexanderM]

If it will handle a Cyclone that's more than good enough.

 

[Edward Campbell]

The wheel has already been invented.

It's 1700 tons, has a helo with "bear trap", is ice capable for Antarctic ops, small crew, 23 kts., small mods could put a 57 bofors on the front instead of an automatic 25 mm chain gun, after deck can accommodate containerized systems for all sorts of things including small missiles, in "war" time, you can mount a tail on that after deck and carry some torps for the help. In use by our "ally" New-Zealand, and best of all: the design belongs to a Canadian company based in Vancouver: STX Marine.

http://www.stxmarine.net/pdf/PV85-br-web.pdf

Should we acquire six to eight of these babies, I am willing to bet that, in case of heightened world tension, Canadian yards could start putting them out at the rate of one or two every month, with a six to eight months first off lead time.

That ship is pretty close to being within my "envelope" - displacement (albeit a bit heavy), speed, complement (35), armament, and it can even carry a rifle platoon, minus, for a few days, but my Google-fu is weak and I cannot find any cost data.

I take you back to my original "requirement:" 10% of the cost of a "heavy" for 15%+ of a heavy's capabilities.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Somewhere I have seen a picture of a Lab sitting on the deck of the George E. Darby,  (a oil rig tender turned CCG SAR vessel) I did find this picture of the CCG S61 landing on her deck likely up near Prince Rupert/QCI

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4090/5073417067_5460ce6041_z.jpg

My suggestion is the Navy lease one of these Ice capable oil rig supply vessels, paint it grey and start playing in the Arctic. By the time you get an ice capable ship you will have Ice capable deck officers and crew. Plus it can act as a floating Depot ship for large helicopters like the Sea King/Cormorant/Chinook for your Northern adventures. I suspect they fear doing this as the TB will say "gee that's way cheaper than building purpose design ships".

The ship will work in the summers, man it with a mix of Regs/Reserves and a sprinkling of CCG Officers to mentor the Captain on ice navigation. Such a ship can run with a 30 man crew or less depending on mission and the age of the ship.

 

[Kirkhill]

ERC:

How much do you want to budget for a Heavy?  Because I can find numbers all the way from 230 MUSD (the Danes) to 1100 MUSD (the Spanish, Brits and Yanks) with most folks clustered around the 500 to 800 MUSD range (Norwegians, Spanish, Dutch, French, Italians).

For patrol ships, well the Icelanders built a stretched version of the Norwegian Barentshav in Chile for 38.6 MUSD (4000 tonne Thor) while the Spanish paid 160 MUSD for their 2500 tonne BAMs and the Dutch paid 155 MUSD for their 3750 tonne Hollands.

The Clyde cost the RN 50 MUSD (30 MUKP) to charter for 5 or 6 years  including in-service support for that period.

And before people get bent out of shape about leasing military gear, didn't we lease some tanks recently?  And I believe the Czechs are leasing Gripens from the Swedes.  Presumably these are all self-insured.

Thor in Halifax

Merlin aboard Clyde (Image)


According to Wikipedia the 1450 tonne Leeds  Castle took a Chinook onboard athwartships.

With respect to the 10:1 ratio I would point out that if the Norwegian Ministry of Defence were in charge of our budget then one of their Nansen class "Heavies" bought from Spain at 710 MUSD apiece would buy 10 6000 tonne Svalbards at 70 MUSD each.  The same ship that prompted the whole AOPS discussion in the first place.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Colin,

We used to have those. They were known as HMCS MORESBY and HMCS ANTICOSTI. They were used as gap training platform to switch the reservists from the Gate vessels seamanship platforms to the MCDV minesweeping platforms. MORESBY even performed, in the early 90's, a first since WWII by fueling aft at sea.

One of the two, I can't remember which one, was transferred to the CFAV upon its decommissioning, to replace St-Anthony in its ocean going tug/support ship role.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Interesting, will digging around also found pictures of CCG 95' R class in naval service as well, lot's happened on the east coast I was not aware of!

 

[Kirkhill]

Colin,

We used to have those. They were known as HMCS MORESBY and HMCS ANTICOSTI. They were used as gap training platform to switch the reservists from the Gate vessels seamanship platforms to the MCDV minesweeping platforms. MORESBY even performed, in the early 90's, a first since WWII by fueling aft at sea.

One of the two, I can't remember which one, was transferred to the CFAV upon its decommissioning, to replace St-Anthony in its ocean going tug/support ship role.

Funny OGBD, I was just thinking about those myself and came across this on the Anticosti from May of this year.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Interesting, will digging around also found pictures of CCG 95' R class in naval service as well, lot's happened on the east coast I was not aware of!

I captained Rally for a while, well, OIC'd as they were considered tenders in the Navy, not commissioned ships.