We have already committed to 100 SM-2's if IRCC.Which is a nice start and very much more capability than we have now.
Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ
- Thread starter jmt18325
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 1,502
- Points
- 1,060
thats a lot for 3 ships with with 72 cells total but if we start producing ships with 88 cells each?
- Reaction score
- 5,605
- Points
- 1,040
Then we'll get more missile. Or we won't and fill them with something else. It's kinda putting the cart before the horse here don't you think? Perhaps we worry about filling the loadout when we actually get the ship that can take that loadout!
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 10,851
- Points
- 1,260
Hes been meeting with the whole of the RCN not just the Wardroom and C&POs. And I have to think the reason he is being so candid is because people have been candid with him.
Seriously? #Chinalaughswithsalvosofdozensofsupersonicseaskimmers
Also, one of the operation design philosophies for the CSC has been (I'm told) is that they want it to be able to slide in seamlessly to a USN TG and fill the role of an Arleigh-Burke. Well, not with 24 (or even 36) VLS cells you wont!
We should have just bought Arleigh-Burkes... But noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.
- Reaction score
- 7,940
- Points
- 1,160
Assumption 1 - there is or will be a Mk41 modular launch system available that can be dropped into the Mission Bay of the CSC/Type 26.
Assumption 2 - there is or will be a requirement for a low cost, rapidly deployable CSC/Type 26 variant that can be upgraded.
How many Mk41 VLS cells could be housed in the area under the Vabendaek (Weapons Deck)? How many if the hangar were relocated aft?
The ship is designed to be able to handle variable loads.
- Reaction score
- 16,311
- Points
- 1,010
Is your impression that ships are just lego blocks that can be rearranged in an afternoon?
- Reaction score
- 7,940
- Points
- 1,160
No. My assumption is that the people that brought you Lego blocks design ships...
- Reaction score
- 20,744
- Points
- 1,260
You couldn’t crew 15 AB’s…
Plus while the AB is a great AA Cruiser (I didn’t say destroyer as it’s realistically a cruiser) it’s also not got a bunch of other things Canada needs/wants, and Canada can’t afford to get multiple types of specialized ships.
I mean 6 AB’s would have been awesome and maybe 6 of an ASW system, but again I’m not sure the crewing system would work.
- Reaction score
- 20,744
- Points
- 1,260
Do you send a guy with a torch out to cut through the help deck when you need to use them?
Frankly without adding a very complex access system (either a pivot opening helo deck or a sliding retractable deck - with major complexities and even more major weight issues) or there needs to be a sort of side launching mechanism which again requires some sort of special equipment to allow the cells to rotate out to fire and still be secure in weather.
Based on the models and visuals I can find
Royal Canadian Navy Unveils New Details on CSC Frigates - Naval News
The Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) released the latest details on the configuration details of its next generation frigates: the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC). They will be heavily armed, featuring Naval Strike Missiles, Tomahawk and both ESSM and Sea Ceptor!
www.navalnews.com
The Helo deck doesn’t have any room below for what your image seems to show.
The only way I see a real improvement in VLS cells is tossing the Cyclone over the side, and going to a smaller deck and smaller hangar for a HH-60 type helo.
- Reaction score
- 7,940
- Points
- 1,160
Lego Blocks on Ships
Lego Blocks on ships launching missiles
Lego Blocks for ships
Iver Huitfeldt displaces 6645 tonnes full load
Absalon displaces 6600 tonnes full load and 4500 tonnes light
That gives the Absalon 2100 tonnes of deadweight to play with or 30% of her total displacement.
Ships, and warships, can accommodate Lego design principles. You just need to start with a cargo ship and arm it rather than starting with a destroyer and trying to fit stuff into it.
Original long range cruiser was the Dutch East Indiaman. She set the pattern for Nelson's frigates and ships of the line.
That Weapons Deck on the Absalon could penetrate down on to the flex deck.
A smaller helicopter, or even UASs could permit a smaller hanger, or for a temporary fix, give up some of the flight deck to 40 foot trailers for missiles while still leaving room to launch and recover Firescouts and/or VBAT 120s.
The latest containerized missile launch was from the flight deck of an Independence Class LCS. Those ships evolved from RoRo ferries. Unlike the monohull Freedom class that tried to turn a corvette into a ferry.
Lego Blocks on ships launching missiles
Lego Blocks for ships
Iver Huitfeldt displaces 6645 tonnes full load
Absalon displaces 6600 tonnes full load and 4500 tonnes light
That gives the Absalon 2100 tonnes of deadweight to play with or 30% of her total displacement.
Ships, and warships, can accommodate Lego design principles. You just need to start with a cargo ship and arm it rather than starting with a destroyer and trying to fit stuff into it.
Original long range cruiser was the Dutch East Indiaman. She set the pattern for Nelson's frigates and ships of the line.
That Weapons Deck on the Absalon could penetrate down on to the flex deck.
A smaller helicopter, or even UASs could permit a smaller hanger, or for a temporary fix, give up some of the flight deck to 40 foot trailers for missiles while still leaving room to launch and recover Firescouts and/or VBAT 120s.
The latest containerized missile launch was from the flight deck of an Independence Class LCS. Those ships evolved from RoRo ferries. Unlike the monohull Freedom class that tried to turn a corvette into a ferry.
Attachments
- Reaction score
- 7,940
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 7,940
- Points
- 1,160
Attachments
- Reaction score
- 7,940
- Points
- 1,160
Here is the Iver Huitfeldt on the left and the Absalon on the right.
From the waterline down they are the same. From the bridge forwards they are the same. They have a common Stanflex weapons deck aft of the bridge.
Absalon extends the line of the foredeck aft to the stern to create a covered deck with a stern ramp. The hangar, flight deck and weapons deck sit on top of the cargo deck.
Iver Huitfeldt class Guided Missile Frigate Royal Danish Navy
iver huitfeldt class guided missile frigate ffg royal danish navy hdms peter willemoes niels juel
www.seaforces.org
Absalon class Frigate Command Support Ship Royal Danish Navy
absalon class frigate command support ship royal danish navy hdms esbern snare stanflex essm missile harpoon
www.seaforces.org
Here is the Polish Miecznik
New details on Poland's Miecznik class Frigates - Naval News
Poland's PGZ-MIECZNIK consortium has unveiled new details regarding the weapon and sensor systems of the three Project 106 Miecznik frigates
www.navalnews.com
And the British Type 31
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,133
- Points
- 1,160
@Kirkhill Finally a Carrier we could possibly afford and crew
news.usni.org
Iran Building Drone Aircraft Carrier from Converted Merchant Ship, Photos Show - USNI News
In a dry dock near the entrance to the Persian Gulf, Iran’s sectarian naval force is converting a former merchant container ship into a drone aircraft carrier, according to satellite and open source photos published last week by USNI News contributor H I Sutton. Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps...
news.usni.org
- Reaction score
- 5,605
- Points
- 1,040
That would have been a different sort of problem. They looked at Burkes but the crewing requirements are about 120 more people per ship. Old decisions vs new realities. Looking back it might have been a better decision. But at the time it made little sense.
@Kirkhill you know that the Danes are moving away from STANFLEX for their newer ships right (for a lot of capability, though not all). There's a reason for that.
- Reaction score
- 7,940
- Points
- 1,160
There is a reason for that. They can afford to do the other thing. On the other hand the Stanflex system put hulls in the water and kept them there for a good long time.
Let me know how big your pot of gold is.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 10,851
- Points
- 1,260
If you build it they will come ? Or in our case, but it...
quadrapiper
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 419
- Points
- 810
Aren't the Burkes also dancing around the edge of hull capacity? Or has that been addressed?
FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 13,220
- Points
- 1,160
I'm kind of board with this cargo/container ship with you @Kirkhill. It probably comes from my artillery view of things. The weapon of the artillery is not the gun but the projectile.
I'm sure you need several sophisticated ships for force protection but you can add some cheap container ships into the mix that really just carry anti-ship, anti-air, anti-sub weaponry. It strikes me as a logical and cheap way to beef up the fire power of the force.
When I take a look at that Iranian drone carrier I say to myself that those drones should probably be relatively easy to shoot down, as long as you have an adequate supply of variable types of ant-air weaponry. But you could be swamped by drones. A cheap anti-air, anti-missile picket ship on the other hand could give you the weaponry to defeat those and protect their big brothers. My guess is we need less expensive ships and many more expensive weapons and a way to transport them to sea.
To us gunners its all about servicing targets.
I'm sure you need several sophisticated ships for force protection but you can add some cheap container ships into the mix that really just carry anti-ship, anti-air, anti-sub weaponry. It strikes me as a logical and cheap way to beef up the fire power of the force.
When I take a look at that Iranian drone carrier I say to myself that those drones should probably be relatively easy to shoot down, as long as you have an adequate supply of variable types of ant-air weaponry. But you could be swamped by drones. A cheap anti-air, anti-missile picket ship on the other hand could give you the weaponry to defeat those and protect their big brothers. My guess is we need less expensive ships and many more expensive weapons and a way to transport them to sea.
To us gunners its all about servicing targets.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 10,851
- Points
- 1,260
I'm kind of board with this cargo/container ship with you @Kirkhill. It probably comes from my artillery view of things. The weapon of the artillery is not the gun but the projectile.
I'm sure you need several sophisticated ships for force protection but you can add some cheap container ships into the mix that really just carry anti-ship, anti-air, anti-sub weaponry. It strikes me as a logical and cheap way to beef up the fire power of the force.
When I take a look at that Iranian drone carrier I say to myself that those drones should probably be relatively easy to shoot down, as long as you have an adequate supply of variable types of ant-air weaponry. But you could be swamped by drones. A cheap anti-air, anti-missile picket ship on the other hand could give you the weaponry to defeat those and protect their big brothers. My guess is we need less expensive ships and many more expensive weapons and a way to transport them to sea.
To us gunners its all about servicing targets.
There was a ship like that that was proposed called the Arsenal Ship.
Arsenal ship - Wikipedia
I think that's kinda what you mean.
