Kingston Class 40MM replacement?

[Colin Parkinson]

I like what the RWS brings in the way of control and optics, I am disappointed at the gun being used. (I admire the .50cal, but way to small)

 

[jollyjacktar]

Is this what they're supposed to be putting on the CPF as well?

 

[Stoker]

Is this what they're supposed to be putting on the CPF as well?

Its a different version and a version will also go on the new CSC.

 

[Stoker]

I like what the RWS brings in the way of control and optics, I am disappointed at the gun being used. (I admire the .50cal, but way to small)

The reason why this is being used is we have 33 units sitting in storage, this mount unfortunately doesn't support a 20mm.

 

[Stoker]

Depends if the retrofit is done by a contractor with an incentive to proceed quickly or by the Dockyard personnel  .

Joking aside, once the system is proven through the testing, this is not big or complex matters it should be fairly quick.

The unit will be trialed in an evaluation over the next 6 months to check its suitability.

 

[Good2Golf]

The reason why this is being used is we have 33 units sitting in storage, this mount unfortunately doesn't support a 20mm.

Is it at least an M3M/GAU-21 variant? (i.e. 1200rd/min)

cheers
G2G

 

[Stoker]

Is it at least an M3M/GAU-21 variant? (i.e. 1200rd/min)

cheers
G2G

I wish but no.

 

[donaldk]

According to wikipedia the NRCWS can take a few guns... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanuk_Remotely_Controlled_Weapon_Station

The cheap choice would be the M2 .50 cal option due to plenty of inventory for both the guns and ammo within CFSS.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I also don't hold out a lot of faith in introducing a electronic device not designed for the marine environment, it's been done before and generally ends up corroding badly.

 

[Underway]

I also don't hold out a lot of faith in introducing a electronic device not designed for the marine environment, it's been done before and generally ends up corroding badly.

I'm pretty sure many of the mods were marine proofing.  It's not like the Summerside didn't do this before with a different system.  Lessons learned and all that.  With 6 months of trials though they'll know real quick if the marine mods are working or not.  Salt water doesn't do things slowly with regards to electronics and that part of the ship get plenty of spray.  Either way, it's a huge upgrade for the ship.  Even with something as simple a night navigation for the watchkeeper, just having night vision capability to look at a ship, buoy or if that thing is a trick of the light or floating debris is pretty useful.

My own experience with NV on an MCDV included my lookout peering directly ahead of the ship saying to himself, "huh... is that bird standing on a rock?" as my head was in the chart table plotting a fix.  I finished the rest of the mids with soiled trousers, but as a plus I didn't need any more coffee!

 

[Kirkhill]

Is the operator sitting side-on to the motion of the ship?  I would have thought it would have been better with fore and aft alignment.  Make it easier to read the motion?

 

[Stoker]

Is the operator sitting side-on to the motion of the ship?  I would have thought it would have been better with fore and aft alignment.  Make it easier to read the motion?

He is sitting looking fwd.

 

[Kirkhill]

Thanks for that.  Just as well I'm not driving.  :cheers:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I'm pretty sure many of the mods were marine proofing.  It's not like the Summerside didn't do this before with a different system.  Lessons learned and all that.  With 6 months of trials though they'll know real quick if the marine mods are working or not.  Salt water doesn't do things slowly with regards to electronics and that part of the ship get plenty of spray.  Either way, it's a huge upgrade for the ship.  Even with something as simple a night navigation for the watchkeeper, just having night vision capability to look at a ship, buoy or if that thing is a trick of the light or floating debris is pretty useful.

My own experience with NV on an MCDV included my lookout peering directly ahead of the ship saying to himself, "huh... is that bird standing on a rock?" as my head was in the chart table plotting a fix.  I finished the rest of the mids with soiled trousers, but as a plus I didn't need any more coffee!

We trialed NV and FLIR on the hovercraft, the NV googles failed as light discipline inside the hovercraft was not good enough and resulted in the NV picking up glare on the inside of the windows. FLIR was ok, but heavily affected by spray, mists and rains. This was mid 1990 tech.

 

[Lumber]

Is the operator sitting side-on to the motion of the ship?  I would have thought it would have been better with fore and aft alignment.  Make it easier to read the motion?

The weapons systems operators on a CPF face to port in their seated positions.

 

[Privateer]

Bumping this as I'm curious as to how (or if) this is progressing.  Thanks.

 

[Swampbuggy]

Bumping this as I'm curious as to how (or if) this is progressing.  Thanks.

HMCS GOOSE BAY was trialing a NANUK based .50 cal RWS with EO IR last year and by all accounts it was a decent piece of kit. But, a few months afterward, it was shipped off. Haven’t heard any reason why. Must have been a surprise decision as everyone I spoke with onboard was convinced it would be adopted across the MCDV fleet. There was even an article in “Maple Leaf Navy” with a timeline for when they’d be installed across the board. Now, God only knows if they’ll ever get anything beyond the pair of crew served .50’s.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Sigh and then we send them on Global missions, no wonder we have a hard time being taken seriously and that's not a slag on the personal, just on the equipment we give them.

 

[Swampbuggy]

It’s a kind of mystery why they even bothered doing the trial in the first place. If it wasn’t meant for the MCDV’s then what? Not for the CPF’s or JSS because the order for the Raytheon RWS’s had already been placed. The AOPS already has its BAE RWS and I don’t think there’s any appetite to put them on ORCA’s. So, someone went through the trouble of contracting SNC-Lavalin to repurpose Army stock for Naval use, commenced a sea trial phase and then abandoned it.
Weird, since the bulk of the cost for weapon was already spent on the initial procurement and then the development for a naval platform.

It makes me wonder if it has to do with the upcoming “gap” between AOPS and CSC construction. Maybe, someone thinks that they may build a few more DEWOLF’s. Maybe enough to retire the bulk of the MCDV’s, and so it wouldn’t be wise to spend too much on them at this point.

Or, maybe the Army plans on exercising its option on a whack load more TAPV’s and feel like they’ll need more NANUK’s for that.

Or, I’m reading too much into it and it’s just another weird chapter in RCN procurement.

Regardless, I agree with you Colin. There is a message sent by how you arm your ships and I’m not sure this sends the right one. My 2 cents...

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Frankly I think you are giving them to much credit in the planning department, more like fumbling in the dark and stubbing their toes on things, then reacting.