Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

[Oldgateboatdriver]

That's nice, but question here, why is GLASGOW, the first one still in dock and in a less (apparent) state of advancement? Most of the back of the clip is of GALSGOW, not CARDIFF, and you can see the difference in advancement when they sail by one another.

 

[Czech_pivo]

UK launches 2nd Type 26

Time line from first steel cut on the first ship to this 2nd ship floating in water?

 

[Czech_pivo]

That's nice, but question here, why is GLASGOW, the first one still in dock and in a less (apparent) state of advancement? Most of the back of the clip is of GALSGOW, not CARDIFF, and you can see the difference in advancement when they sail by one another.

Glasgow got into a knife fight after drinking in the pub on a saturday night a few months back and is still on the mend.

 

[Stoker]

That's nice, but question here, why is GLASGOW, the first one still in dock and in a less (apparent) state of advancement? Most of the back of the clip is of GALSGOW, not CARDIFF, and you can see the difference in advancement when they sail by one another.

CARDIFF looks cleaner as she just came off the land and was buttoned up for transport and more than likely for looks. She'll have all the staging up and work going on soon with plenty of rust spots like GALSGOW.

 

[Cloud Cover]

I thought they would look bigger.

 

[Maxman1]

I thought they would look bigger.

Might just be in comparison to the floating drydock. Arleigh Burke destroyers are even bigger, but the USS Cole looks like a toy on the Blue Marlin and Black Marlin after the attack.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I thought they would look bigger.

Different seaman's eye: My first thought was "God, those are big SOB's".

 

[Cloud Cover]

Well I had (earlier in the thread) posted a black silhouette graphic comparing T26 to HMS Belfast where T26 was nearly quite as large.
She is certainly a solid looking ship, I’m sure up close it is a giant!

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Their tonnage is as much as that of a light WWII Cruiser.

 

[Rainbow1910]

Might just be in comparison to the floating drydock. Arleigh Burke destroyers are even bigger, but the USS Cole looks like a toy on the Blue Marlin and Black Marlin after the attack.

It's amusing because the Type 26 and Arleigh Burke are basically the same dimensions.

Type 26 - 149.9m long, 20.8m wide.

Burke - 155.3m long, 20m wide.

CSC is actually longer than baseline Type 26 at 151.4m.

 

[Underway]

It's amusing because the Type 26 and Arleigh Burke are basically the same dimensions.

Type 26 - 149.9m long, 20.8m wide.

Burke - 155.3m long, 20m wide.

CSC is actually longer than baseline Type 26 at 151.4m.

Flight I Burkes (of which USS Cole is one) is actually 154m and 8800 tons, with slightly less beam. So its pretty close to each other.

 

[Navy_Pete]

The other important bit is the draught; CSC is looking to be around 8m (maybe estimate of max on the wiki?), where the CPFs are around 5.5 (maybe 6m?) when loaded up. Not sure if the mast will be higher as well, but the draught and mast height are both pretty important when figuring out where you can go. When looking at sending the ships to a few spots for work, that only happens if we do stuff like crop the mast or sail light.

Going to keep the first few NavOs busy double checking the depth charts for places we are used to going into where we might not be able to unless it's at high tide with the deeper CSCs.

 

[Pelorus]

The other important bit is the draught; CSC is looking to be around 8m (maybe estimate of max on the wiki?), where the CPFs are around 5.5 (maybe 6m?) when loaded up. Not sure if the mast will be higher as well, but the draught and mast height are both pretty important when figuring out where you can go. When looking at sending the ships to a few spots for work, that only happens if we do stuff like crop the mast or sail light.

Going to keep the first few NavOs busy double checking the depth charts for places we are used to going into where we might not be able to unless it's at high tide with the deeper CSCs.

"Navigational Draught" of the CPFs is around 7.5m due to the sonar dome. CSC may not be a major difference, although most charts use 10m as a contour line so even a extra half meter may start to encroach onto planning safety margins, especially at high speeds.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

"Navigational Draught" of the CPFs is around 7.5m due to the sonar dome. CSC may not be a major difference, although most charts use 10m as a contour line so even a extra half meter may start to encroach onto planning safety margins, especially at high speeds.

Keeping in mind squat, sea state can change your draught as well.

 

[Navy_Pete]

"Navigational Draught" of the CPFs is around 7.5m due to the sonar dome. CSC may not be a major difference, although most charts use 10m as a contour line so even a extra half meter may start to encroach onto planning safety margins, especially at high speeds.

Thanks, forgot about the dome. I don't think CSC has a sonar dome extending down though, so might be the keel depth. Just remember it also sitting deeper in comparison when looking at the side by sides during some support to design review, and generally being bigger in every dimension. She's chonky on the outside, and packed chockers inside, with a lot of kit lockers in the flats.

One thing I loved was seeing the back up locations for the section bases being fully stocked; if you've ever had to try and relocate aft section base in a no duff helo emergency it sucks hard. If we don't screw it up, the RN did a great job at spreading out a lot of gear so that shouldn't be an issue for combat recoverability, even if main sections are lost. Similarly they put a lot of thought into cable routing and all kinds of things so that it should be pretty hard for a single point damage to wipe out capability by taking out power,cooling, etc. Probably not impossible, but almost need a direct hit on a radar or something to take it out.

 

[Underway]

Thanks, forgot about the dome. I don't think CSC has a sonar dome extending down though, so might be the keel depth. Just remember it also sitting deeper in comparison when looking at the side by sides during some support to design review, and generally being bigger in every dimension. She's chonky on the outside, and packed chockers inside, with a lot of kit lockers in the flats.

CSC has the hull mounted sonar (HMS) in the bulbous bow. The reason the CPF has a sonar dome was so that no matter the seastate we could keep the HMS in the water. I think that thinking is different now given that the CSC is designed to take heavier seas better then the CPF (higher displacement, different hull design) and that the towed array is the main ship mounted ASW sensor and HMS is just a backup.

One thing I loved was seeing the back up locations for the section bases being fully stocked; if you've ever had to try and relocate aft section base in a no duff helo emergency it sucks hard. If we don't screw it up, the RN did a great job at spreading out a lot of gear so that shouldn't be an issue for combat recoverability, even if main sections are lost. Similarly they put a lot of thought into cable routing and all kinds of things so that it should be pretty hard for a single point damage to wipe out capability by taking out power,cooling, etc. Probably not impossible, but almost need a direct hit on a radar or something to take it out.

I heard the same, the cable access is also better designed as well, so you can get in and make repairs more easily ((or at least find the damage and bypass). Very much a lot of modern DC thinking going into the ship. I'll never sail on one but I'm excited to see how its working.

 

[DBNSG]

Here is hoping that HMS Glasgow will visit Halifax sometime in the not tooooo distant future.
RCN public affairs should be all over that visit to help recruiting. Nothing like a reasonable facsimile
to get the blood moving.

 

[Navy_Pete]

CSC has the hull mounted sonar (HMS) in the bulbous bow. The reason the CPF has a sonar dome was so that no matter the seastate we could keep the HMS in the water. I think that thinking is different now given that the CSC is designed to take heavier seas better then the CPF (higher displacement, different hull design) and that the towed array is the main ship mounted ASW sensor and HMS is just a backup.

I heard the same, the cable access is also better designed as well, so you can get in and make repairs more easily ((or at least find the damage and bypass). Very much a lot of modern DC thinking going into the ship. I'll never sail on one but I'm excited to see how its working.

Thanks, that's what I thought the arrangement was but wasn't 100% certain.

Was involved in some initial combat recoverability assessments on the DC side and sounds pretty impressive, but all is heavily dependent on maintaining all the remote operation and monitoring as designed (even more so compared to the CPFs) due to the way smaller section base numbers. Really well thought out though, and pretty impressed with the RN design (and all their underlying standards and design requirements that drove the design). We'll do some stupid stuff to it for sure, but the as built design should be really capable at FOC. Not confident they'll maintain everything running so that level of recoverability is maintained, but that's a problem for future generations.

 

[NavyShooter]

Former NET(A) here - the SONAR dome exists as a protective fairing for the HMS Transducer - which can be raised and lowered so that it's protected by the keel when in dangerous/shallow waters.

The current SQS-510 uses the old SQS-505 Transducer set, which is based directly off the 502 as was installed on the Steamers. 360 individual Transducers built into 36 staves of 10 providing a beamforming network for both transmission and reception.

The upgraded SONAR suite that's being fitted to the fleet makes things even more capable than the 510 - I cannot speak to Caps/Lims in open source, but having seen the 505 and 510, I'm excited for the sailors of today and what the new suite brings for them.

Something I'll observe is that when ships made transits up the St Lawrence, they had to remove the SONAR Dome and put a 'travel plate' over the opening due to some of the shallow waters encountered. With the advent of the bulbous bow, I am suspicious that we will never have any CSC's visit Toronto or the Great Lakes ever again.

 

[lenaitch]

Former NET(A) here - the SONAR dome exists as a protective fairing for the HMS Transducer - which can be raised and lowered so that it's protected by the keel when in dangerous/shallow waters.

The current SQS-510 uses the old SQS-505 Transducer set, which is based directly off the 502 as was installed on the Steamers. 360 individual Transducers built into 36 staves of 10 providing a beamforming network for both transmission and reception.

The upgraded SONAR suite that's being fitted to the fleet makes things even more capable than the 510 - I cannot speak to Caps/Lims in open source, but having seen the 505 and 510, I'm excited for the sailors of today and what the new suite brings for them.

Something I'll observe is that when ships made transits up the St Lawrence, they had to remove the SONAR Dome and put a 'travel plate' over the opening due to some of the shallow waters encountered. With the advent of the bulbous bow, I am suspicious that we will never have any CSC's visit Toronto or the Great Lakes ever again.

On that note, I came across this account of the USS Macon journey into the brand new Seaway for its opening in 1959. A tad long but an interesting read.

The Freshwater Cruise Of USS Macon

In March 1959, at anchor in

www.usni.org