Search results

I guess if they really wanted to, they could acquire and bolt on a SeaRAM unit to partially address that SAM issue, for at least short range threats. So, long as there's power and a structurally reinforced area where you'd want to put it, that is.

I think the major drawback here would be having everyone know where your subsurface asset is.

There's more to it than just endurance and ability to break through ice, I believe. I've been told in the past that one of the most important reasons that you want a nuclear powered sub under ice, is if you have a fire. I believe it has to do with the power requirements to change over the...

Point taken. I just was thinking that since sub building isn't something that Canada should really get into, then there may be a benefit to rolling a couple of projects into one, with whoever you get to build your subs. So, maybe something smaller scale, then. Like we buy your subs, but then we...

Hindsight and all, but it's a bit too bad that they didn't lump a bunch of stuff together, when they put out RFI's. Something like, we need a design for AOR, AAW vessels and SSK's. Whoever put together the best bid, by whatever metric you weigh most important, gets all three pieces. For example...

I seem to remember watching a documentary about HMCS GOOSE BAY doing an Arctic tour and being refueled at sea by CCGS PIERRE RADISSON.

To add to this, in my experience, most people I've spoken to are under the impression that the Coast Guard is already armed, a la USCG. I've had arguments with other regular Canadians that fully believe the CCG is interchangeable with the RCN and I've had to show them the difference via the...

The NRWS mounts aft on both sides look more like DS30M units than a 25mm Mk.38. That's a nice upgrade, if the model is correct. 

Right behind the funnel, before the Anti Ship Missiles, you'll see two 3 cell VLS. They're for CAMM, which is said to be replacing PHALANX with 24 point defense missiles.

The Aussies are replacing several ship classes with the ARAFURA class, including the HUON's. The capabilities and design would seem to check off all the boxes Underway mentioned above.

Raytheon did however lose out on a guided munitions project specifically for this gun back around 2008, so maybe still some sour grapes there.

I think there's going to be a meeting in the middle on subs, if anything at all. I doubt the RCN will ever see a 12 sub fleet and 4 is too small. I imagine 7-8 subs will be the max. That's not a bad number, when the Navy has made due with 3 or 4 for decades and it certainly opens up some more...

I don't know. It seems to me there's an opportunity here. If the Gov were to try and purchase new US nuclear subs, it would get Trump off our backs in two ways. Might even help with CUSMA or whatever the hell they're calling it.

SM for long range, ESSM for intermediate and CAMM for close in. Better than a PHALANX with less chance of self damage.

Halifax Shipping News blog reported that it's rumoured HDW will commence sea trials this upcoming Friday.

I guess that means mid November for starting sea trials.

Curious where the HMCS HARRY DEWOLF is with regards to sea trials? Seems like awhile since there's been any news about it at all.

CAMM seems likelier than NULKA, RAM, LONGBOW or JAGM, though, wouldn't you say? We have all seen models of the CSC with two midships 3 cell ExLS launchers, so it's definitely something that's on someone's mind. Also, I was under the impression that CAMM would be complimentary to ESSM, not...