• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)

VAdm Topshee speaking on the future of the MCDV's from the latest edition of the Canadian Defence Review, it would seem that the rumours of mothballing, sale or otherwise decommissioning might be coming down the pipeline.

CDR: "You have mentioned that the Navy has needed to prioritize the Halifax-class over the MCDVs. Is that still the case and what does that mean for the Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDV's)?"

VAdm Topshee: "I think what it means is we need to get out of the old ship business as quickly as we can. You may have seen some remarks by the Minister a couple of weeks ago where he says he's waiting for me to deliver a recommendation with respect to the future of the MCDVs. When you look at that class, the reality is that they were designed to last 25 to 30 years. We're at that window and they have been absolutely fantastic.

They've got a new lease on life right now with the off-board systems and technology that we've got for Mine Counter-Measures. In fact, I'm really proud of the fact that HMCS Shawinigan and Glace Bay are deployed right now with the Standing NATO Maritime countermeasures group in Europe, so it's fantastic to see that that platform can still be relevant today. But when you step back, and you look at what it is, a Maritime Coastal Defence Vessel is effectively an offshore support vessel. It's the type of vessel that is used routinely around the world to support the offshore industry. It is something that, if we really needed to get more of them, we can do so quite quickly. They're not heavily armed nor are they designed to survive a massive conflict.

MCDVs have a couple of machine guns and some sophisticated communications systems. We can replicate that quite quickly, and we're really confident in the offboard systems. I think our number one question is whether or not we need to be out of the MCDV business? Should we make sure that we are transitioning to the future fleet, that we are embracing autonomy, uncrewed systems, remotely operated things, and all sorts of other systems that can go on to vessels of opportunity that are not necessarily part of the Navy fleet."
 
I've heard the MCDVs supposed death knell for 10 years now, and despite the fact that looks like no more DWPs for them are funded (effectively meaning they'll be disposed vice repaired) and we don't have people for them (or the full subs or the CPFs) I won't believe it until I can shave with one of them.
 
Back
Top