Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)

[Stoker]

When Oriole came from the WC she was in shit shape and required a huge expensive refit including a mast change. Only a few places that can do that specialized work. Electrical work, new fridges, stove, watertight bulkhead to name a few. Her season on the EC is short and really only a matter of time before she gets damaged in some bad weather during the winter. This year she was supposed to do an extensive Great Lakes Tour, cutbacks meant she stayed closer to come to save on the TD costs of hotels for the crews when in foreign port. Many say she needs to go.

 

[Rainbow1910]

When Oriole came from the WC she was in shit shape and required a huge expensive refit including a mast change. Only a few places that can do that specialized work. Electrical work, new fridges, stove, watertight bulkhead to name a few. Her season on the EC is short and really only a matter of time before she gets damaged in some bad weather during the winter. This year she was supposed to do an extensive Great Lakes Tour, cutbacks meant she stayed closer to come to save on the TD costs of hotels for the crews when in foreign port. Many say she needs to go.

In my opinion for this sort of thing, you need to go big or go home. Oriole would get laughed out of a small town yacht club, let alone a proper port. If you are in a situation where you are willing to spend the money and can afford to do so, commission a proper large and impressive vessel to actually undertake these duties. Yards are building these sorts of vessels abroad, the nations of South America and elsewhere commissioned a few new tall ships throughout the 2000's.

 

[Navy_Pete]

When Oriole came from the WC she was in shit shape and required a huge expensive refit including a mast change. Only a few places that can do that specialized work. Electrical work, new fridges, stove, watertight bulkhead to name a few. Her season on the EC is short and really only a matter of time before she gets damaged in some bad weather during the winter. This year she was supposed to do an extensive Great Lakes Tour, cutbacks meant she stayed closer to come to save on the TD costs of hotels for the crews when in foreign port. Many say she needs to go.

I've had a violent hatred of that ship since it got $1M+ in repairs and a lot of effort into instead of sold off or scrapped when we were tying up MCDVs and not doing needed repairs to the 280s and AORs due to lack of funding. So I'm definitely biased, but I'm expecting the rose coloured glasses that the Orioles supporters wear would shame 70s era Elton John for sheer size and gaudiness.

It is such an expensive, underwhelming POS that I cannot believe we are still holding on to. I would not only not scrap it, I would use it as a target for heavy weight torpedo practice so that it is blown into it's component atoms out of spite.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Is there some good, military reason why any Navy members need to serve under sail as part of their training for war in the 21st century?

 

[dapaterson]

Is there some good, military reason why any Navy members need to serve under sail as part of their training for war in the 21st century?

 

[Stoker]

I've had a violent hatred of that ship since it got $1M+ in repairs and a lot of effort into instead of sold off or scrapped when we were tying up MCDVs and not doing needed repairs to the 280s and AORs due to lack of funding. So I'm definitely biased, but I'm expecting the rose coloured glasses that the Orioles supporters wear would shame 70s era Elton John for sheer size and gaudiness.

It is such an expensive, underwhelming POS that I cannot believe we are still holding on to. I would not only not scrap it, I would use it as a target for heavy weight torpedo practice so that it is blown into it's component atoms out of spite.

Yes I was part of the team doing RRI's on it where it came out of the yard in Lunenburg. Did a BSSRT on it this year and was offered a bunk overnight, no thanks. If a fire did get hold they wouldn't have long to get the frig off if the CO2 surge didn't work.

 

[Stoker]

Is there some good, military reason why any Navy members need to serve under sail as part of their training for war in the 21st century?

Not that I can see, just PR.

 

[Furniture]

Is there some good, military reason why any Navy members need to serve under sail as part of their training for war in the 21st century?

Given that most of the RCN has never, and will never set foot onboard her, I think it's safe to say no.

 

[dimsum]

Is there some good, military reason why any Navy members need to serve under sail as part of their training for war in the 21st century?

Engines die but the wind always blows?

 

[suffolkowner]

Engines die but the wind always blows?

time for a new supply ship

High-Tech Sailing Ship Starts Maiden Voyage With 1,000 Tonnes of Cargo

Anemos, a one-of-a-kind sail cargo ship operated by French carrier TOWT, has departed on her maiden transatlantic voyage from Le Havre to New York wi...

maritime-executive.com

maybe add a kite sail

Home

Kite propulsion systems for yachts and other boats.

www.kite-boat.com

 

[Furniture]

time for a new supply ship

High-Tech Sailing Ship Starts Maiden Voyage With 1,000 Tonnes of Cargo

Anemos, a one-of-a-kind sail cargo ship operated by French carrier TOWT, has departed on her maiden transatlantic voyage from Le Havre to New York wi...

maritime-executive.com

maybe add a kite sail

Home

Kite propulsion systems for yachts and other boats.

www.kite-boat.com

I can actually see a market for that sort of sailing cargo ship, particularly in the luxury goods world.

Your competitor might have a great hand picked tea, but your tea arrives the traditional way, under sail from Ceylon or Bombay... Maybe add some guns to make it a proper East Indiaman.

 

[Halifax Tar]

This was alongside next to us in Piraeus last week:

Wind Spirit (ship) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[GR66]

Let's take as a given that there are certain tasks for which something like the MCDV is better suited (due to economy of effort) than either the AOPS or a potential Corvette-type replacement ship. Is there any reason we need to replace the MCDVs with just a single ship type?

Let's say for example we go with a Corvette-type replacement something like proposed by Team Vigilance (led by Vard Marine). Instead of a straight 12 x MCDVs for 12 x Corvette replacement program we instead get 9 x Corvettes (giving you three deployable at any time under a 3:1 formula).

To cover the tasks that are overkill for either AOPS or a Corvette you could also get 6 more traditional MCDV replacements (3 per coast giving you one available at any time). Vard Marine has a couple of options that could potentially be used (using the same designer would hopefully result in a certain level of commonality in design approach and components).

If you want something that is essentially a faster MCDV replacement with similar size and complement you could go with the VARD 7 055.

If for the lower end tasks that couldn't/shouldn't be shifted to the AOPS/Corvettes you could get away with something a little smaller than the MCDVs you could go with the VARD 7 045. It's still faster (25kn max), has reasonable endurance (14 days/3,500nm at 12kn) but only has a complement of 18.

In my fantasy world we'd also get something like this or this for the Naval Reserve. 18 would be about enough to have one at each Naval Reserve Division located on major bodies of water.

 

[Kirkhill]

Curious choice on the Damen Stan 3007

Stan Patrol 3007 | Damen

The combination of superior seakeeping and the position of the wheelhouse results in the highest possible level of operability for Damen Stan Patrol 3007.

www.damen.com

That family seems to have bred the newest addition to the Dutch Navy, the Lightly/Optionally crewed Missile Carriers.

New Dutch Navy Support Vessels Will Be Missile-Toting Wingmen To Frigates

Small and with a tiny crew, the new support vessels will add important magazine capacity to frigates, and launch loitering munitions. Small and with a tiny crew, the new support vessels will add important magazine capacity to frigates, and launch loitering munitions.

www.twz.com

....

Here's a question:

What would happen if the US, with the support of the northern NATO allies (Our neighbours the Danes together with the Icelanders, Norwegians, Swedes and Finns) suggested that we swap the Caribbean for the Donut Hole?

The US Coast Guard can handle the Caribbean from Florida without our showing the flag.

On the other hand neither the USCG nor the USN have the patrol capacity for the ice.

....

We have 6, possibly 8 if the two Coast Guard AOPS were refitted to RCN standards, that were designed from the get go to follow the slob.

They were designed to handle the Gulf of St Lawrence, the Grand Banks, the Labrador, Baffin and Davis, the Beaufort, Bering and Gulf of Alaska, as well as the waters of the Archipelago.

And unlike the US Coast Guards arctic patrol ships, they are already in the water.

The Danes are also pretty good neighbours, as are the Norwegians and the Icelanders. We already work together with them on fisheries and search and rescue.

....

The Norwegians are feeling a bit exposed on Svalbard with their Russian neighbours inviting the Chinese in. Perhaps the Norwegians might appreciate some mutual support in the form of interlocking arcs of fire (Canada, Denmark and the US contributing).

....

Add the subs and a network of UxVs and sensors and properly secure our sector of the Arctic.


....

WRT the MCDVs - well, keep an eye on the Dutch experiment and see how well they make out with their Missile Carriers. They may make a useful model for a training ship, a Caribbean ship, a reserve ship and a potentially useful combatant to supplement the CSC Destroyers.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Let's take as a given that there are certain tasks for which something like the MCDV is better suited (due to economy of effort) than either the AOPS or a potential Corvette-type replacement ship. Is there any reason we need to replace the MCDVs with just a single ship type?

Let's say for example we go with a Corvette-type replacement something like proposed by Team Vigilance (led by Vard Marine). Instead of a straight 12 x MCDVs for 12 x Corvette replacement program we instead get 9 x Corvettes (giving you three deployable at any time under a 3:1 formula).

To cover the tasks that are overkill for either AOPS or a Corvette you could also get 6 more traditional MCDV replacements (3 per coast giving you one available at any time). Vard Marine has a couple of options that could potentially be used (using the same designer would hopefully result in a certain level of commonality in design approach and components).

If you want something that is essentially a faster MCDV replacement with similar size and complement you could go with the VARD 7 055.

If for the lower end tasks that couldn't/shouldn't be shifted to the AOPS/Corvettes you could get away with something a little smaller than the MCDVs you could go with the VARD 7 045. It's still faster (25kn max), has reasonable endurance (14 days/3,500nm at 12kn) but only has a complement of 18.

In my fantasy world we'd also get something like this or this for the Naval Reserve. 18 would be about enough to have one at each Naval Reserve Division located on major bodies of water.

I would like to see the Naval Reserve in Vancouver and Victoria tasked with Harbour security. Starting with being able to provide a (lightly) armed presence to back up law enforcement if required and then add the tasks of route survey and clearance. Start with a big RHIB like the USCCG uses for escort and work up to patrol boats such as you mention. For Vancouver and Victoria/Esquimalt there are shipyard already maintaining naval vessel. So they get a contract to do regular maintenance on the patrol boats, reducing that task on the FMF. Those boats won't require more than a 5 man crew. Start out with two Class B positions per location to keep the boats ready and have the rest of the crews on a regular training schedule and on emergency callout.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Let's take as a given that there are certain tasks for which something like the MCDV is better suited (due to economy of effort) than either the AOPS or a potential Corvette-type replacement ship. Is there any reason we need to replace the MCDVs with just a single ship type?

Maintaining different classes and configurations is very expensive, so yes, we can't afford more unicorns. Even the same platform with multiple variants adds a lot more support challenges. It also adds a lot more non-transferrable training, which doesn't work when you don't have enough people so you do a lot of transferring around on the people side.

 

[GR66]

Maintaining different classes and configurations is very expensive, so yes, we can't afford more unicorns. Even the same platform with multiple variants adds a lot more support challenges. It also adds a lot more non-transferrable training, which doesn't work when you don't have enough people so you do a lot of transferring around on the people side.

Granted there are certainly challenges and costs related to multiple fleets. Are the insurmountable? How do other navies do it? Is the alternative a single class of ships that attempts to do everything and potentially none of them as well as a more specialized ship (and likely at significantly greater expense than task-dedicated platforms)?

Edited to add: Stealing from another thread...if you were to divest the submarine fleet then adding a Corvette as well as an MCDV replacement would result in exactly the same number of platform types we have currently - with less divergence in support/training requirements as you would only have a surface fleet rather than both surface and sub-surface fleets.

 

[quadrapiper]

A flatbed that can take containerized weapons can take containers for other systems as well.

Given some of the tasks described in this thread as covered by the MCDVs, something very basic with a small crew, perhaps CFA crewed, might be useful. If there's a bunch of seagoing pickup truck tasks to be done, maybe just buy a few pickups (rig support vessels, buoy handlers, etc.).

If such a vessel were RCN-crewed, it could provide additional coverage for FISHPATs and similar "any grey hull" work.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Granted there are certainly challenges and costs related to multiple fleets. Are the insurmountable? How do other navies do it? Is the alternative a single class of ships that attempts to do everything and potentially none of them as well as a more specialized ship (and likely at significantly greater expense than task-dedicated platforms)?

Edited to add: Stealing from another thread...if you were to divest the submarine fleet then adding a Corvette as well as an MCDV replacement would result in exactly the same number of platform types we have currently - with less divergence in support/training requirements as you would only have a surface fleet rather than both surface and sub-surface fleets.

Other navies have much bigger support groups; when I was an LCMM the RN had about 12 people doing the same scope of work. That was probably an outlier, but we could easily have many more LCMMs and supply managers for the existing fleet and the ones coming down the pipe. Every time you add another class there can be a step increase in work, and small batches of separate classes are a nightmare.

Even if they look similar, the systems will all be different enough that it's a lot to learn. That's the same for coastal support and repairs, where things will be slightly different, and they'll just need more people across the board. When you get down to detailed planning, and component level support those changes really make a difference.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Serious question: is the Heddle proposal a logical solution?

No