Search results

I recognize that these were directed questions, but I do know the answers, so hopefully you won't mind me responding. 1)  "Ice hardened" is non-specific and could mean as little as the ability to gently bounce off a few bergy bits of ice in ice infested waters.  Polar Class 5 means the ability...

This is similar to suggesting that we buy OTS bridge designs in hopes of finding one that has just the right length, traffic flow, weight capacity, construction method, etc that we are looking for.  It's not going to happen.  Unlike many other pieces of military hardware, ships have requirements...

The problem with two classes, as I understand it, is that the political will exists to fund arctic patrol vessels, but not offshore patrol vessels, whereas the Navy sees more of a need for OPVs. From an end product perspective it makes the most sense to split the program and get 3 APVs and 3 or...

I think the requirement for the landing craft is now that it can hold the pick-up truck or a couple of ATVs.  Should still be quite versatile.

The Palmer is just referenced as an example of simplified hull construction techniques for icebreakers given that there is/was some question as to Canadian yards ability to build fully formed hulls.  It's not a design reference.

Much more current info than the CASR page for those who are interested: http://www.forces.gc.ca/admmat-smamat/aops-npea/march2009workinggroup-groupedetravailmars2009-eng.asp

BTW, the ship is not an Aker Arctic design as the CASR article implies; it is a Canadian design based on a Scandinavian reference with an AARC designed hull form.

Unfortunately, Colin P is right. The BV206 could be fitted, but if you look carefully at the most recent presentations, you'll notice it's no longer a design requirement and the landing craft is not big enough to carry it.  Design speed is now 17 knots. Not really.  I'm fairly certain that a...