Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

[Navy_Pete]

Former NET(A) here - the SONAR dome exists as a protective fairing for the HMS Transducer - which can be raised and lowered so that it's protected by the keel when in dangerous/shallow waters.

The current SQS-510 uses the old SQS-505 Transducer set, which is based directly off the 502 as was installed on the Steamers. 360 individual Transducers built into 36 staves of 10 providing a beamforming network for both transmission and reception.

The upgraded SONAR suite that's being fitted to the fleet makes things even more capable than the 510 - I cannot speak to Caps/Lims in open source, but having seen the 505 and 510, I'm excited for the sailors of today and what the new suite brings for them.

Something I'll observe is that when ships made transits up the St Lawrence, they had to remove the SONAR Dome and put a 'travel plate' over the opening due to some of the shallow waters encountered. With the advent of the bulbous bow, I am suspicious that we will never have any CSC's visit Toronto or the Great Lakes ever again.

Fitting those sonar domes after a DWP costs an absolute fortune to get the required tolerances on flatness, and usually there is trial and error with different domes anyway.

On the ATH's last leg, the direction before that final DWP (in Port Weller) was that the HMS wasn't going to be supported anymore. Took a bit of engineering, but we ended up basically creating some structure on the travel plate to create an actual permanent seal and welded it all up in place, so the HMS became a small confined space. It was about $150k cheaper than getting the sonar dome fitted after DWP, and then there were no worries about the temporary traveler plate falling off in service during the expected full op cycle.

It was an interesting bit of on site engineering to be involved with, especially with how thick some of that structure was..

 

[Colin Parkinson]

When there is a real crisis with CFP's not sailing and only 1-2 CSC in the water, this French design will likley be in full swing production, with capabilities somewhat similar to the CFP.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Weaponry is close but they are nowhere near the same class as the HALs. These are low end ex-colonies patrol type vessels, not NATO front line frigates.

 

[GR66]

The Dutch are going with a version of an "arsenal" ship to provide missile depth to their air defence frigates:

Dutch Navy to buy armed sidekick ships for its air-defense frigates

Dutch shipyard Damen will build the vessels, with Israel Aerospace Industries supplying interceptors, drones and electronic-warfare equipment.

www.defensenews.com

The Netherlands plans to buy two support vessels that will act as sidekicks to its air-defense frigates, packing additional missiles to defeat swarms of anti-ship missiles and drones, for an investment in the range of €250 million to €1 billion (US$279 million to $1.1 billion).

The support vessels will also be able to provide fire support for amphibious operations using long-range loitering munitions, as well as equip underwater drones to track and identify suspicious activity in the North Sea, Dutch State Secretary for Defence Gijs Tuinman said in a letter to parliament on Tuesday.

Dutch shipyard Damen will build the vessels, with Israel Aerospace Industries supplying its Barak ER surface-to-air interceptor, Harop long-range loitering munition as well as electronic-warfare equipment. Buying the missiles, long-range munitions and EW equipment from a single supplier will simplify integration work, the defense ministry said.

The service’s air-defense frigates will continue to be equipped with RTX’s SM-2 surface-to-air missile, and the frigate’s radar and fire-control systems will handle launch and targeting for the missiles on the support vessels.

The Barak ER air-defense missile that will equip the support ships has a range of up to 150 kilometers and can target anything from fighters to tactical ballistic missiles and glide bombs, with eight missiles packed in a vertical launcher, according to the company’s spec sheet.

Small vessels with a small crew. Something suitable for the Reserves?

The vessels will have a length of about 53 meters and a beam of 9.8 meters, for a displacement of 550 tons, a MoD spokesman told Defense News.

The support ships will each have a crew of at least eight sailors. While current technology isn’t sufficiently mature for fully autonomous vessels, the new ships will provide the Navy with experience in operating with small crews, as a first step toward unmanned vessels, Tuinman said.

And the timeline is for making these ships operational is impressive...if only Canada had the same sense of urgency.

The first iteration will be available for the North Sea in 2026, and both vessels will be fully operational in 2027. Equipment on the support vessels will be packed in containers, meaning air-defense kit can be swapped out for long-range munitions based on the specific needs of the mission, according to the letter.

 

[calculus]

When there is a real crisis with CFP's not sailing and only 1-2 CSC in the water, this French design will likley be in full swing production, with capabilities somewhat similar to the CFP.

More on this: Pictures: France's First FDI Frigate Built by Naval Group Starts Sea Trials - Naval News

What struck me in the article is the following:

"Thanks to the investments made by Naval Group, the site of Lorient has a modern industrial infrastructure that enables it to meet the technical and technological challenges of designing and building naval vessels in series. Thanks to this industrial organization that optimizes construction times, Naval Group is able to deliver two ships per year at its Lorient site from 2025."

If Naval Group can build 2 ships a year of what appears to be a pretty sophisticated design, surely there is some similar optimization of facilities and processes possible at Irving to accelerate the building of the River class. My personal opinion is Irving needs a fire lit .... There does not appear to be any sense of urgency. Send some process engineers to the top yards in France, Italy, Japan, and Korea and learn from them. 2050 for the last River class delivery is ludicrous.

 

[Czech_pivo]

More on this: Pictures: France's First FDI Frigate Built by Naval Group Starts Sea Trials - Naval News

What struck me in the article is the following:

"Thanks to the investments made by Naval Group, the site of Lorient has a modern industrial infrastructure that enables it to meet the technical and technological challenges of designing and building naval vessels in series. Thanks to this industrial organization that optimizes construction times, Naval Group is able to deliver two ships per year at its Lorient site from 2025."

If Naval Group can build 2 ships a year of what appears to be a pretty sophisticated design, surely there is some similar optimization of facilities and processes possible at Irving to accelerate the building of the River class. My personal opinion is Irving needs a fire lit .... There does not appear to be any sense of urgency. Send some process engineers to the top yards in France, Italy, Japan, and Korea and learn from them. 2050 for the last River class delivery is ludicrous.

There seems to be 0 sense of urgency coming out of Irving. They intend to milk this cow long after its dead.

 

[YZT580]

There seems to be 0 sense of urgency coming out of Irving. They intend to milk this cow long after its dead.

why blame Irving? I don't see Ottawa stepping up to the plate with contracts to actually start building. They are quite content to NOT increase the fleet anytime soon. Our current frigates were more than 20 years from concept design to construction as I recall.

 

[Czech_pivo]

why blame Irving? I don't see Ottawa stepping up to the plate with contracts to actually start building. They are quite content to NOT increase the fleet anytime soon. Our current frigates were more than 20 years from concept design to construction as I recall.

Fair point

 

[Rifleman62]

The longer it takes, the more it costs, the more cost overruns, add inflation =

They intend to milk this cow long after its dead.

 

[YZT580]

The longer it takes, the more it costs, the more cost overruns, add inflation =

accepting completely that this is the way it works, does Irving have a contract to build a CSC or just a contract to do the prototype construction and complete the planning phases?

 

[Czech_pivo]

accepting completely that this is the way it works, does Irving have a contract to build a CSC or just a contract to do the prototype construction and complete the planning phases?

I believe they have a contract for the first 4 CSC's. At least I seem to remember something along those lines.

 

[Furniture]

More on this: Pictures: France's First FDI Frigate Built by Naval Group Starts Sea Trials - Naval News

What struck me in the article is the following:

"Thanks to the investments made by Naval Group, the site of Lorient has a modern industrial infrastructure that enables it to meet the technical and technological challenges of designing and building naval vessels in series. Thanks to this industrial organization that optimizes construction times, Naval Group is able to deliver two ships per year at its Lorient site from 2025."

If Naval Group can build 2 ships a year of what appears to be a pretty sophisticated design, surely there is some similar optimization of facilities and processes possible at Irving to accelerate the building of the River class. My personal opinion is Irving needs a fire lit .... There does not appear to be any sense of urgency. Send some process engineers to the top yards in France, Italy, Japan, and Korea and learn from them. 2050 for the last River class delivery is ludicrous.

Part of the reason is simply that the NSS was set up to make the project last a long time, to ensure the yard had work and could keep in operation. Spitting out 15 RCDs in 10 years would be great, apart from the fact it would be another 20 years before we tried to build anything else, and we'd be starting from scratch again.

Remember, the CSC and NSS are products of a time before the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, and the increased belligerence of China.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

In my view the NSS is just as important as the new ships. But if the NSS is not producing then penalties need to apply. Canada also needs to be more ruthless at replacing ships before end of life and save on costly refits.

 

[GK .Dundas]

Part of the reason is simply that the NSS was set up to make the project last a long time, to ensure the yard had work and could keep in operation. Spitting out 15 RCDs in 10 years would be great, apart from the fact it would be another 20 years before we tried to build anything else, and we'd be starting from scratch again.

Remember, the CSC and NSS are products of a time before the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, and the increased belligerence of China.

Problem is, we may need those 15 in 10 years time or less and perhaps a lot more.
I'll be honest I'm frightened by some of the things I've been seeing over the past couple of years.
I never thought I would see a major war that would involve Canada in my lifetime.
But I'm beginning to wonder if that's exactly what I am seeing happening around us

 

[Czech_pivo]

Part of the reason is simply that the NSS was set up to make the project last a long time, to ensure the yard had work and could keep in operation. Spitting out 15 RCDs in 10 years would be great, apart from the fact it would be another 20 years before we tried to build anything else, and we'd be starting from scratch again.

Remember, the CSC and NSS are products of a time before the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, and the increased belligerence of China.

I question that age of the AOPS's by the time that the last of the 15 CSC's are built. They will be in the 35yrs range by the time Irving is done with the CSC's.
Its painfully obvious to me that Irving doesn't have the through-put to meet our needs to be able to push out a ship over 1-1.5yrs per ship timeframe.

 

[Furniture]

Problem is, we may need those 15 in 10 years time or less and perhaps a lot more.
I'll be honest I'm frightened by some of the things I've been seeing over the past couple of years.
I never thought I would see a major war that would involve Canada in my lifetime.
But I'm beginning to wonder if that's exactly what I am seeing happening around us

We may, and if we do I suspect the timelines will be pushed up.

I also did not expect to actually see WWIII, but sometimes that's how things go. Hopefully we manage to walk back from that path, but there is no guarantee.

I question that age of the AOPS's by the time that the last of the 15 CSC's are built. They will be in the 35yrs range by the time Irving is done with the CSC's.
Its painfully obvious to me that Irving doesn't have the through-put to meet our needs to be able to push out a ship over 1-1.5yrs per ship timeframe.

They don't, because that has never been part of the plan/ask.

They are going to make the RCDs at the pace we want them made, which is about a ship every 12-18 months... That's not an "Irving sucks and can't build ships" problem, that's a NSS planned production problem. If we demanded that Irving build more ships and faster, they would demand the money to upgrade their facilities, and build them faster for us.

Naval Group didn't just open their wallets and decided to build ships faster, the French government gave them money and said make it happen. The French take defence spending and industrial capacity seriously, Canada doesn't. No amount of blaming Irving for not achieving a production schedule they were never asked to achieve will fix that.

 

[YZT580]

I question that age of the AOPS's by the time that the last of the 15 CSC's are built. They will be in the 35yrs range by the time Irving is done with the CSC's.
Its painfully obvious to me that Irving doesn't have the through-put to meet our needs to be able to push out a ship over 1-1.5yrs per ship timeframe.

Irving is performing as per request. The feds. don't want them to build faster, plain and simple. I've worked in a union plant. 'We could build 300 units per day or 500 units per day. It was totally dependent upon the union and management. If the goc wants a unit every 1.5 years they can have it. all they have to do is ask and be willing to pay for it.

 

[FJAG]

I know that heavy construction doesn't precisely work this way, but if a given project takes 1,000 man days to complete then generally 10 men can do it in 100 days or 50 men can complete it in 20 with appropriate work flow adjustments. The manpower costs remain generally neutral and some associated costs could actually be reduced due to a shortened timeline.

Yes. I know, you can't produce that additional workforce overnight from scratch but for a long-term project an increased work force can be achieved. The same goes for systems on the ships - some may be harder to speed up.

However, if the government truly wanted to speed up the production cycles it could do so and so could Irvine. For a variety of reasons, most expressed above, neither do. And yeah. I'm the guy who keeps advocating for low-rate continuous production of logistics vehicles rather than the orgy feasts that take place every few decades. I think of the NSS as currently operated as exactly that.

Canada is highly adept at ignoring security issues. Big picture Stage 4 mobilization and the industrial and training base to achieve that are not exactly non-existent but . . .

 

[Halifax Tar]

Álvaro de Bazán-class frigate - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

We've been working with one of these a lot. Seems impressive.

 

[Lumber]

Álvaro de Bazán-class frigate - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

We've been working with one of these a lot. Seems impressive.

The ships, absolutely. The crews? Not so much.