Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS
- Thread starter Privateer
- Start date
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,267
- Points
- 1,010
While there may have been some traditional ways of naming ships int he RCN, some adopted or taken straight out of the British Admiralty books, there are no such things as Rules to be Followed for Ship's Naming.
Normally, the Naval Board has a sub-committee which proposes the naming rule for a given class, and then comes up with recommendations for names. What galls me though, is that the more recent names chosen, including their grand standing political presentation by politicians, are exactly that: Politically interfered with or even handed down from the politicians for the purpose of scoring political points.
This by no way diminishes the value of the heroics of the individuals so honoured.
Take Mr. Hall for instance. Clearly the government has selected him for the purpose of appearing to be inclusive of minorities. Don't get me wrong: He has fully deserved his VC and his conduct is worth proclaiming. But can he be said to be a Canadian hero in any sense of the word?
At the time of his birth, he was a British subject born in the Nova Scotia colony of England, not a self ruling or "Canadian" land at all. If Canada existed at the time, it was either Lower Canada (now Quebec) and Upper canada (now Ontario), who where in the trows of their rebellion to get responsible government. They sort of got it a few years latter in 1841, through Union, which created "Canada" for the first time, but made up of the old Lower and Upper Canada only. Nova Scotia did not become "Canada" before 1867, which is well after the time Mr. Hall earned his VC. I submit he cannot be considered a Canadian in any sense of the term.
Moreover, He never served in Canada's Navy, which would not come into being before 1910 - or even in the "fisheries" department ships of the Dominion that preceded that, but with the Royal Navy. He is a British sailor, not Canadian.
Finally, his deed that obtained him the VC has nothing to do with Canada, not even indirectly by protecting Canada as a colony from external danger directed at it, but rather purely in a internal colonial matter of the British empire in putting down an internal revolt in one of its overseas territory. He may have been a hero of the British empire, but not of Canada, and I have no doubt that this is how it was presented and celebrated at the time in Nova Scotia.
Again, don't get me wrong, His own personal deeds were heroic and deserving of recognition in and of themselves, but it is stretching it to call him a Canadian hero IMHO.
This said, if in 2015 creating the appearance of society inclusive of visible minorities is important to the Canadian government, then Mr. Hall is deserving of this honour. I am sure, however, that his descendants will agree that "Canadian" and British society of the mid 1800's was anything but inclusive and one might wonder at how inclusive we have been in the mean time since, apparently, a visible minority true Canadian naval hero could not be found between then and now.
Normally, the Naval Board has a sub-committee which proposes the naming rule for a given class, and then comes up with recommendations for names. What galls me though, is that the more recent names chosen, including their grand standing political presentation by politicians, are exactly that: Politically interfered with or even handed down from the politicians for the purpose of scoring political points.
This by no way diminishes the value of the heroics of the individuals so honoured.
Take Mr. Hall for instance. Clearly the government has selected him for the purpose of appearing to be inclusive of minorities. Don't get me wrong: He has fully deserved his VC and his conduct is worth proclaiming. But can he be said to be a Canadian hero in any sense of the word?
At the time of his birth, he was a British subject born in the Nova Scotia colony of England, not a self ruling or "Canadian" land at all. If Canada existed at the time, it was either Lower Canada (now Quebec) and Upper canada (now Ontario), who where in the trows of their rebellion to get responsible government. They sort of got it a few years latter in 1841, through Union, which created "Canada" for the first time, but made up of the old Lower and Upper Canada only. Nova Scotia did not become "Canada" before 1867, which is well after the time Mr. Hall earned his VC. I submit he cannot be considered a Canadian in any sense of the term.
Moreover, He never served in Canada's Navy, which would not come into being before 1910 - or even in the "fisheries" department ships of the Dominion that preceded that, but with the Royal Navy. He is a British sailor, not Canadian.
Finally, his deed that obtained him the VC has nothing to do with Canada, not even indirectly by protecting Canada as a colony from external danger directed at it, but rather purely in a internal colonial matter of the British empire in putting down an internal revolt in one of its overseas territory. He may have been a hero of the British empire, but not of Canada, and I have no doubt that this is how it was presented and celebrated at the time in Nova Scotia.
Again, don't get me wrong, His own personal deeds were heroic and deserving of recognition in and of themselves, but it is stretching it to call him a Canadian hero IMHO.
This said, if in 2015 creating the appearance of society inclusive of visible minorities is important to the Canadian government, then Mr. Hall is deserving of this honour. I am sure, however, that his descendants will agree that "Canadian" and British society of the mid 1800's was anything but inclusive and one might wonder at how inclusive we have been in the mean time since, apparently, a visible minority true Canadian naval hero could not be found between then and now.
J
jollyjacktar
Guest
:goodpost:
He arrived and departed this mortal coil a Nova Scotian. We all were until the 1970's, British Subjects, for that matter. So what of it?
He arrived and departed this mortal coil a Nova Scotian. We all were until the 1970's, British Subjects, for that matter. So what of it?
- Reaction score
- 5,969
- Points
- 1,090
We have so few national myths, Hall is one of them. We've adopted him long before this naming. The gun run used him as an example and told his legend while the sailors set up for their demonstration. Next you're gonna try and tell us that Canadians didn't burn down the Whitehouse, and then go into a dissertation on the militia myth.
J
jollyjacktar
Guest
:nod: Agreed.
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
Underway said:
Even though I can smell the dripping sarcasm, in clarification, We didn't. British regular troops led by Gen. Robert Ross shipped from Spain after the victory in the Peninsular Campaign took an essentially deserted Washington after routing American troops at the Battle of Bladensburg.
However it still pisses the local off when you remind them of that fact. >
- Reaction score
- 82
- Points
- 330
cupper said:However it still pisses the local off when you remind them of that fact. >
Good enough for me ;D
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 32,253
- Points
- 1,160
Underway said:Lalalalalala can't hear you. Ignore evidence...national myth. Nothing to see here folks, move along....;D
At the risk of a tangent, another great Canadian victory with a strong role played by a British chap:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Byng,_1st_Viscount_Byng_of_Vimy ;D :highjack:
- Reaction score
- 27,567
- Points
- 1,090
- Reaction score
- 8,305
- Points
- 1,160
Found a neat little graphic on the deWolfs created by the infomachine at this link:
http://www.navy-marine.forces.gc.ca/assets/NAVY_Internet/docs/en/aops-factsheet.pdf
Perhaps somebody can paste the actual image to the site. It is beyond my ken. Figured it out.
http://www.navy-marine.forces.gc.ca/assets/NAVY_Internet/docs/en/aops-factsheet.pdf
- Reaction score
- 5,969
- Points
- 1,090
I have that printed out and on the office bulletin board. 6440 tonnes is heavier than other publications, but I suppose we won't fully know until the first ship is completed.
Its role is nicely summarized in the fact sheet. Armed sea-borne surveillance, support to OGD's. She's a mobile base not a proper warship.
It's said that the Inuit see no difference between the ice and the land. It seems like the A/OPS is taking its cue from them with all that shore deployable gear. Now we just need to get that 25mm on the MCDV's to replace the Bofors..... I also heard that the other side of the ship will have a davit for a covered landing craft. I also don't understand why the crew compliment is so large. It shouldn't need more than 40 pers, same as an MCDV to operate.
Its role is nicely summarized in the fact sheet. Armed sea-borne surveillance, support to OGD's. She's a mobile base not a proper warship.
It's said that the Inuit see no difference between the ice and the land. It seems like the A/OPS is taking its cue from them with all that shore deployable gear. Now we just need to get that 25mm on the MCDV's to replace the Bofors..... I also heard that the other side of the ship will have a davit for a covered landing craft. I also don't understand why the crew compliment is so large. It shouldn't need more than 40 pers, same as an MCDV to operate.
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,267
- Points
- 1,010
Chief Stoker has it right. The extra personnel is mostly in the engineering side as the type of deployment expected from the AOPS means they have to be more self reliant when fixing problems is required than for an MCDV, which is supported by civilian contractors out of Halifax or Esquimalt dockyards for second and third tier engineering support.
For instance, considering their size and the environment they are getting into, I expect the AOPS to carry a certain number of hull techs, The MCDV's don't. Similarily, they have to provide their own logistical support at greater distances for a more complex vessel, so it is logical to carry a Log O and a few supply techs. Finally, in view of the longer duration of deployments than the ones you see in MCDV's and the "individual" deployment of the AOPS vice the MCDV's, I expect a few extra seaman and so forth in order to keep a reasonable harbour/at anchor watch keeping schedule, since you cannot spread them between a number of ships operating together.
For instance, considering their size and the environment they are getting into, I expect the AOPS to carry a certain number of hull techs, The MCDV's don't. Similarily, they have to provide their own logistical support at greater distances for a more complex vessel, so it is logical to carry a Log O and a few supply techs. Finally, in view of the longer duration of deployments than the ones you see in MCDV's and the "individual" deployment of the AOPS vice the MCDV's, I expect a few extra seaman and so forth in order to keep a reasonable harbour/at anchor watch keeping schedule, since you cannot spread them between a number of ships operating together.
J
jollyjacktar
Guest
Chief Stoker said:
Yes, as I understand the initial thought was for a P2 and LS HT. This has now been revised to be more or less what is carried on a CPF if I have heard correctly. While there is going to provisions for Irving to do the maintenance alongside as part of the package they will still need people to fix things while they're away from home port.
- Reaction score
- 1,027
- Points
- 1,160
jollyjacktar said:
Considering what could go wrong in the Arctic, there is great need for the 6 hull techs that the AOPS has listed for their manning. I would imagine along with well equipped workshops on the the AOPS, there will be contractors possibly flying into Nanisivik eventually to work on the ship. I also want to point out the provision on the manning for a MET TECH, a senior steward, Chief Clerk and 3 cooks. From the manning some trades are going to be working bodies again, not supervisors much like a MCDV. The manning also doesn't take into account training bunks eiher or how many reserves that will be employed on them. I would imagine though that the manning will be adjusted over time as well.
- Reaction score
- 5,973
- Points
- 1,260
Chief Stoker said:
And, yet, it was an lightly (dare I say "inadequately?") crewed MCDV that made it to 80o28' N, not a larger warship. (In fairness, I believe the FFHs are even less "ice capable" than the MMs.) I can imagine that the Captain and the Chief Engineer had pretty tight sphincter muscles the whole way, imagining what could go wrong, but ...
