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

AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

Captain Drew Graham (Director of Naval Requirements) recently did a Speakers Event for the Naval Association of Canada and had some interesting information to put forward to the public regarding the JSS and an unmanned aircraft program planned for it. All of the information is taken from his slideshow, that I will link at the bottom for anybody interested.

- Heavy lift aircraft, will be able to lift a single loaded pallet of supplies and conduct ISR.

- Will be operated aboard Protecteur class ships and primarily utilized for vertical replenishment.

- Largely automated, "pilotless" operations.

- Operated by specially trained UAV operators, which are send alongside aircraft when tasked.

- Currently unfunded, 2031 to 2033 introduction timeline.

bz8OrfE.png


LX-300 is shown as a potential example photograph in the slideshow.



Some more info on the LX300. Interesting option. - 180 kg payload.

Dimensions

  • Length: 2.9 meters
  • Height: 1.5 meters
  • Width: 1.2 meters
  • Rotor diameter: 2.8 meters (CH-148 = 17.7 meters and CH-146 = 14.88 meters)

  • Empty weight: 190 kilograms
  • Maximum takeoff weight: 300 kilograms
  • Payload: Up to 90 kilograms

Endurance

  • Can fly for up to 10 hours without a break
  • Endurance depends on payload capacity

Speed

  • Maximum cruising speed of 210 kilometers per hour
  • Best endurance airspeed of 140 kilometers per hour

Propulsion

  • Continental CD-155 engine
  • Can use F-44 (JP-5), Jet A, Jet A-1, and other fuels


 
Some more info on the LX300. Interesting option. - 180 kg payload.

Dimensions

  • Length: 2.9 meters
  • Height: 1.5 meters
  • Width: 1.2 meters
  • Rotor diameter: 2.8 meters (CH-148 = 17.7 meters and CH-146 = 14.88 meters)

  • Empty weight: 190 kilograms
  • Maximum takeoff weight: 300 kilograms
  • Payload: Up to 90 kilograms

Endurance

  • Can fly for up to 10 hours without a break
  • Endurance depends on payload capacity

Speed

  • Maximum cruising speed of 210 kilometers per hour
  • Best endurance airspeed of 140 kilometers per hour

Propulsion

  • Continental CD-155 engine
  • Can use F-44 (JP-5), Jet A, Jet A-1, and other fuels


Given the comparatively small dimensions of the LX300, I’m guessing there’s enough room to house them alongside 2 x CH-148 in the hanger? Or maybe there’s enough open space to launch and maintain them from a shipping container on the main deck? UAS are certainly useful as an additive capability alongside the helos, but it doesn’t seem worthwhile to lose the ASW, pax transfer, and larger payload capabilities of a helo if 1 x CH-148 needs to be given up to fit UAV in the hanger.
 
Given the comparatively small dimensions of the LX300, I’m guessing there’s enough room to house them alongside 2 x CH-148 in the hanger? Or maybe there’s enough open space to launch and maintain them from a shipping container on the main deck? UAS are certainly useful as an additive capability alongside the helos, but it doesn’t seem worthwhile to lose the ASW, pax transfer, and larger payload capabilities of a helo if 1 x CH-148 needs to be given up to fit UAV in the hanger.
It might not matter… it might make sense to structure all 12 Wing deployments for the conceivable future around single aircraft, two crew, 12 hour deck cycle. Especially since there are fewer dets available than ships that can embark them. Use the extra space for whatever. We already had the conversation that 2nd line at sea is not really in the offing anyway.
 
It might not matter… it might make sense to structure all 12 Wing deployments for the conceivable future around single aircraft, two crew, 12 hour deck cycle. Especially since there are fewer dets available than ships that can embark them. Use the extra space for whatever. We already had the conversation that 2nd line at sea is not really in the offing anyway.
That sort of work between UAS and helo is going to require an increase in support staff like SACs. It's great to bring in new toys, but if the people who enable you to operate the toys aren't considered, things can go off the rails pretty fast.
 
I think that's some nav archs coming up with a 'backronym' for the definition while ignoring exceptions to that rule (kayaks were already pointed out).

Globally 'vessels' is used in IMO and class rules in their definitions (which is all written by a lot of engineers, techs and other mariners), probably because ships/boats is all over the place, but I think generally ships are big, boats are small, with the context of what is 'big and small' changing over time as manufacturing change, what kind of vessel you are talking about etc, so neither of them have any accepted engineering definition.
I already answered the kayak question, its clearly a boat as its centre of gravity (unloaded) is below its freeboard, which is the first deck or gunnel. The gunnel or first deck on a kayak is at the ring around your waist when you're seated in it.

All ships are vessels but not all vessels are ships. Just like all cats are mammals but not all mammals are cats.

There are lots of other maritime vessels that are not ships or boats in the various international rules, like ground effect vehicles (wing in ground or WIG), air cushion vessels, barges, rafts, seaplanes and others. They are vessels, but neither boats nor ships. Here's the qoute from the international collision regulations that defines a vessel:

The word “vessel” includes every description of water craft, including non-displacement craft, WIG craft and seaplanes, used or capable of being used as a means of transportation on water.
 
Really a shame we can't build another with that kind of efficiency improvement from JSS1 to JSS2. A little puzzled by how they reduced steel by 30% however...
Probably just better efficency cutting to reduce waste. Ship 1 each piece i bet was cut a little bit larger and then adjusted down to fit to be in the safe side.
 
Here is another episode in the the series Go Bold, this time on the Asterix:

Finally got the chance to sit down and watch this whole tour. Very impressive ship and set up. My 17 year old twins were even paying attention and expressed some interest in Navy life. That shows the power of exposure. More of this and you may just get more of a buy in, even from this generation.
 
Really a shame we can't build another with that kind of efficiency improvement from JSS1 to JSS2. A little puzzled by how they reduced steel by 30% however...

Personally, I hear a "13%" reduction, but not in actual steel but in steel allowance. There is a difference between the two. When they start work on anew ship of a type they have not worked on before, shipyard allow for a certain amount of extra steel because, while they know the size of the ship and of its surfaces, they are uncertain as to which dimensional steel they will need to use for any specific parts being cut and welded into final usable shape. It's that extra steel allowance they have been able to cut by 13%. That is still an impressive amount.

Think of it as if you were re-siding a house: You know the actual surface of the walls you will cover, but because the joints have to be staggered, you don't know exactly where all the pieces will be cut, and therefore how much wastage you will get, so you purchase a certain amount of extra siding (usually about 10% more) so you don't run out when all the various cuts are made. Same concept here but with steel. And considering the cost of steel - especially marine grade steel of the type we use for military vessels - a 13% reduction in the allowance is a sizeable savings.
 
Godstrewth ye scunners are ye a' glaikit? The lad wuz clear as day. They reduced the "steel hours" by 30%. Presumably yon means less time spent fiddlefartin' aroon' haundlin' the steel.

Sumphs, the lot o' ye. No' able tae unnerstaun' the King's English as she is spoke. :giggle:
 
Back
Top