Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)
- Thread starter x-grunt
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 1,714
- Points
- 1,260
Open source info says the range of the C16 is 1500 meters: Heckler & Koch GMG - Wikipedia
- Reaction score
- 9,932
- Points
- 1,360
The UK Sandown Class have a 30mm cannon, 2x miniguns and 3x GPMGs. They also carry a nice complement of Royal Marines Commandos
They also have some nice RHIBs for interdictions. Any vessel sent to an area like the Arabian Sea needs to be heavily armed.
The AOPS is ill-suited for that theatre of operations. It would not be able to go anywhere near the Persian Gulf and would be a sitting duck if a War ever broke out.
They also have some nice RHIBs for interdictions. Any vessel sent to an area like the Arabian Sea needs to be heavily armed.
The AOPS is ill-suited for that theatre of operations. It would not be able to go anywhere near the Persian Gulf and would be a sitting duck if a War ever broke out.
- Reaction score
- 21,937
- Points
- 1,260
40mm High Velocity is significantly more versatile than a M2 .50
Range is near identical - but the payload options for 40mm HV are much more rewarding
Plus the GMG has some decent FC options.
The downside to the 40mm HV is ammo storage as .50 is pretty benign (Unless it is Mk211) while 40mm causes absolute mayhem if it goes off in storage.
- Reaction score
- 9,932
- Points
- 1,360
Knowing the Navy they will probably go full autist with 40mm ammunition storage requirements as well. All in fear of averting a repeat of the Halifax Explosion. LOL40mm High Velocity is significantly more versatile than a M2 .50
Range is near identical - but the payload options for 40mm HV are much more rewarding
Plus the GMG has some decent FC options.
The downside to the 40mm HV is ammo storage as .50 is pretty benign (Unless it is Mk211) while 40mm causes absolute mayhem if it goes off in storage.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,924
- Points
- 1,160
40mm offers you all sorts of interesting fuzing arrangement and ammo types, a big part why most armies are going bigger for auto cannons.
- Reaction score
- 6,276
- Points
- 1,040
As an actual autist don't really appreciate the implication; the Navy is just straight up dumb with the ammo storage/handling rules, and a lot of processes defy actual logic or facts.
If they got someone on the spectrum to look at it they would probably get a really detailed, non-politic response on why they are wrong, complete with thorough background and research, and some kind of BLUF that could be summed as as 'WTAF?'.
But it's really easy to add safety rules, and really hard to get rid of them, even if they make no actual sense.
- Reaction score
- 18,767
- Points
- 1,280
You mean what the MCDVs used to do.
- Reaction score
- 5,968
- Points
- 1,090
One of the magazines on JSS is expecting to store 40mm grenade ammunition. It's not really a big deal as long as the compatibility groups are met, and the racking arrangements are adequate. But I get you. I dealt with the ATA and FAI on a regular basis and I've imagined all sorts of horrible things on for them over the years out of frustration.
- Reaction score
- 21,937
- Points
- 1,260
The RCN isn't alone on that.As an actual autist don't really appreciate the implication; the Navy is just straight up dumb with the ammo storage/handling rules, and a lot of processes defy actual logic or facts.
If they got someone on the spectrum to look at it they would probably get a really detailed, non-politic response on why they are wrong, complete with thorough background and research, and some kind of BLUF that could be summed as as 'WTAF?'.
But it's really easy to add safety rules, and really hard to get rid of them, even if they make no actual sense.
The CAF M203A1 Grenade Launcher sits apron 1.5" lower than the US (and everyone else's) M203 mount -- because if one fires over 300 rds from a C7 or C8 back to back mag dumps - with a 40mm round in the chamber of the M203 using the plastic hand guards - it is possible to cook off the 40mm Grenade.
The fact that everyone else using the M4/C8 platform uses a rail (which acts as a heatsink) and maybe the CAF should go that route -- or the fact that no one in their right mind is going to fire 10 mags back to back in combat - and if you did NEED to fire 10 mags like that -- you are probably already OUT of any 40mm ammo you have.
So CAF solution -- lets make the mount sit lower so it can be more awkward and bulky...
*there is probably still the dent in a door that I banged my head on after my back and forth emails with the LCMM and DLR on that little gem, despite sending them data from Crane, Colt, Picatinny etc.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 32,209
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 21,937
- Points
- 1,260
Everyone who has tried the Underslung GL has gone back to Stand Alones.Or you can just use one of these tried and true veterans:
JSOC and the Int community has been using HK69's for years.
Whatever happened to those grenade launchers similar to the one pictured above, but had like a 6-round drum?
I always pictured one could do absolute mayhem with one of those…
- Reaction score
- 21,937
- Points
- 1,260
The USMC adopted the M32 - and some SOCOM entities have bought into it.
M32A1-MSGL - Milkor USA Inc.
The M32A1 is the USMC/SOCOM 40mm Multi-Shot Grenade Launcher of choice. The M321A1 is a hand-held, gas plug operating, semi-automatic, revolving action, 40mm Multi-Shot Grenade Launcher (MSGL). The M32A1 has...
www.milkorusa.com
Weinie
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,518
- Points
- 1,140
If you guys are struggling to come up with my X-Mas gift, le voila.The USMC adopted the M32 - and some SOCOM entities have bought into it.
It is bulky - so it is more of a dedicated role than the other GL'sM32A1-MSGL - Milkor USA Inc.
The M32A1 is the USMC/SOCOM 40mm Multi-Shot Grenade Launcher of choice. The M321A1 is a hand-held, gas plug operating, semi-automatic, revolving action, 40mm Multi-Shot Grenade Launcher (MSGL). The M32A1 has...
- Reaction score
- 4,166
- Points
- 1,120
When I was magazine custodian on MON, I embraced this....we had to do an ammunition transfer within dockyard for 5.56 and 9mm force protection ammo.As an actual autist don't really appreciate the implication; the Navy is just straight up dumb with the ammo storage/handling rules, and a lot of processes defy actual logic or facts.
If they got someone on the spectrum to look at it they would probably get a really detailed, non-politic response on why they are wrong, complete with thorough background and research, and some kind of BLUF that could be summed as as 'WTAF?'.
But it's really easy to add safety rules, and really hard to get rid of them, even if they make no actual sense.
I looked at the rules and regulations.
I proposed a plan that would have seen my sailors walk back to the ship, escorted by the Dockyard's largest fire-truck to ensure fire safety, with MP's to block the roads to make sure we were safe.
Embrace the stupid.
Make it so plainly obvious to all that what they're asking for is stupid that they have to, in the end, deny it or look foolish themselves.
In the end, we walked the can, in hand, back to the ship and called it a morning.
- Reaction score
- 5,968
- Points
- 1,090
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,924
- Points
- 1,160
Yes that would be very nice, how about 7 of these and 7 River Class 2 OPV's as MCDV replacements?
Spencer100
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,201
- Points
- 1,040
Idea fairy time
Well if the government can make the Coast Guard take two red painted AOPS....the they can make the Navy take some MPV's in grey. This will be largest single class of ships (16 planned) to be built in Canada since WWII. Add 10 - 12 more in grey and call it a day? Add a multi mission bay?
Joking......
nss.seaspan.com
Hmmm Come to think about it..........
But in all in all honestly what about that idea? Fact I know they are much larger....but what class of ship has not grown in size with their replacement? They are replacing some 1,500 ton ships in the CCG. Fuel will be a larger bill but manning is always coming down in new ships which is a large bill. Hull and propulsion will offer cost saving by more units. They are commercial standard but so are the MCDV right? The ship will be well proven out by then. Add multi-mission bay in the bow where the large crane is instead of the back of the ship. The design has helicopter hanger built in. I would think not for the CH148 or CH149 but its there for smaller ones. In the larger picture is there huge difference in buoy tending and the recovery of automatist vehicles or sea drones etc? I get there are weapon handling and storage issues that would need redesign. The MCDV are steel hull and don't think there is even though of GFRP hull for their replacement. So that is a non issue. Plus with the ice class hull they can work with the AOPS.
Anyway I am sure this idea will be torn to pieces but hey why not.
Well if the government can make the Coast Guard take two red painted AOPS....the they can make the Navy take some MPV's in grey. This will be largest single class of ships (16 planned) to be built in Canada since WWII. Add 10 - 12 more in grey and call it a day? Add a multi mission bay?
Joking......
Building Ships - Seaspan
nss.seaspan.com
Hmmm Come to think about it..........
But in all in all honestly what about that idea? Fact I know they are much larger....but what class of ship has not grown in size with their replacement? They are replacing some 1,500 ton ships in the CCG. Fuel will be a larger bill but manning is always coming down in new ships which is a large bill. Hull and propulsion will offer cost saving by more units. They are commercial standard but so are the MCDV right? The ship will be well proven out by then. Add multi-mission bay in the bow where the large crane is instead of the back of the ship. The design has helicopter hanger built in. I would think not for the CH148 or CH149 but its there for smaller ones. In the larger picture is there huge difference in buoy tending and the recovery of automatist vehicles or sea drones etc? I get there are weapon handling and storage issues that would need redesign. The MCDV are steel hull and don't think there is even though of GFRP hull for their replacement. So that is a non issue. Plus with the ice class hull they can work with the AOPS.
Anyway I am sure this idea will be torn to pieces but hey why not.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,924
- Points
- 1,160
Looking at the document you provided (thank you) it appears that there may be 2-3 designs. Flight 1 and 2 might be the same or very close, flight 3 is to replace smaller vessels with different tasks than the others. My guess is the third flight will be modified OOSV or modified OFSV's.
Similar threads
