Replacing the Subs

[Rainbow1910]

I wonder if there is any advantages to outfitting some of the CFP's with the weapon systems destined for the CSC, so one gets the main gun even at the expense of something else, another gets updated VLS's and missile system and perhaps components of the sensor system? All them get the same RWS's and those are also mounted on the AOP's, JSS as they go through refits, the AOP's guns can either be sold, stored or fitted on the MCDV's . But better to give them the same RWS so their commonalty in the fleet and buy simulators and training guns as well.

CPF’s flat out cannot take many, if any of the systems planned for the CSC. The hulls are old and work alongside having limited space/weight margins for any kind of meaningful upgunning or upgrades at this point.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

CPF’s flat out cannot take many, if any of the systems planned for the CSC. The hulls are old and work alongside having limited space/weight margins for any kind of meaningful upgunning or upgrades at this point.

Thanks, I was thinking as a testbed or training ship, not perhaps as a operational ship.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Moreover, the River class systems (weapons and sensors) have not been acquired yet, so don't exist.

However, while the hulls, propulsion and hotel services of the CPF's are quite worn out (and slowly dying), further to the FELEX program, their combat systems, sensors and weapons systems are quite good and ready to keep going for quite a while.

So, we get back to a solution I proposed some time ago: Find a modern hull, power plant and hotel service that is more modern, in the 4,000 t0 6,000 range, build them "as is" and move the weapons, sensors and combat systems - including the Ops consoles - to it.

I get back to the British type 31: Get the hull, power plant/hotel services and move the Sea Giraffe, SMART-S, sonars, electronic warfare, comms suite and ops console with CSS-330 into them with the weapons system (though, for the missiles, I would put in a short length VLS system) and you have your stop gap ship that can be built and hit the water in three to four years from now, with another one every year thereafter. Just have them built by a combination of Hedley and Davie (which is more than big enough to host both these and their Coast Guard icebreakers).

 

[Maxman1]

And the Type 31 is already designed for the Bofors 57mm.

 

[Good2Golf]

Do those 3 in 4 Canadians support higher taxes or less spending on other social programs to finance the submarine program?
That is the real question, previous polls have shown relatively high levels of support for defence spending but those high levels largely collapsed when the question of trade offs came up.
This time might be different; the international context is likely helping that shift, but it also might not be.

Ah yes. The politician’s mugg’s game…make it seem that the only way to afford subs (or whatever other program a government doesn’t want to support) is to directly cut something like healthcare and OAS cheques. Demonize the acquisition as a black or white, this or that choice. Of course the subs would get less public support.

Frame it differently… for less than 4% of the cost of all of Justin Trudeau’s new public servants he added that have done nothing to increase Canada’s federal government productivity (ie. 1B/year, vs +25B of 60B to pay federal public servants), Canadians get a substantive capability to contribute to the defence of Canada’s three coast and support of alliances guarding against Russiannanf Chinese territorial aggression…

It’s all in how the questions are (very deliberately) asked.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Surveys:

Yes Minister National service survey - Search Videos

www.bing.com

 

[KevinB]

Moreover, the River class systems (weapons and sensors) have not been acquired yet, so don't exist.

However, while the hulls, propulsion and hotel services of the CPF's are quite worn out (and slowly dying), further to the FELEX program, their combat systems, sensors and weapons systems are quite good and ready to keep going for quite a while.

So, we get back to a solution I proposed some time ago: Find a modern hull, power plant and hotel service that is more modern, in the 4,000 t0 6,000 range, build them "as is" and move the weapons, sensors and combat systems - including the Ops consoles - to it.

I get back to the British type 31: Get the hull, power plant/hotel services and move the Sea Giraffe, SMART-S, sonars, electronic warfare, comms suite and ops console with CSS-330 into them with the weapons system (though, for the missiles, I would put in a short length VLS system) and you have your stop gap ship that can be built and hit the water in three to four years from now, with another one every year thereafter. Just have them built by a combination of Hedley and Davie (which is more than big enough to host both these and their Coast Guard icebreakers).

The realist in me suggests that would see a significant dip in CSC acquisitions.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Moreover, the River class systems (weapons and sensors) have not been acquired yet, so don't exist.

However, while the hulls, propulsion and hotel services of the CPF's are quite worn out (and slowly dying), further to the FELEX program, their combat systems, sensors and weapons systems are quite good and ready to keep going for quite a while.

So, we get back to a solution I proposed some time ago: Find a modern hull, power plant and hotel service that is more modern, in the 4,000 t0 6,000 range, build them "as is" and move the weapons, sensors and combat systems - including the Ops consoles - to it.

I get back to the British type 31: Get the hull, power plant/hotel services and move the Sea Giraffe, SMART-S, sonars, electronic warfare, comms suite and ops console with CSS-330 into them with the weapons system (though, for the missiles, I would put in a short length VLS system) and you have your stop gap ship that can be built and hit the water in three to four years from now, with another one every year thereafter. Just have them built by a combination of Hedley and Davie (which is more than big enough to host both these and their Coast Guard icebreakers).

So we should invest in ocean going tugs to tow the CFP's out to their station and back?

 

[Underway]

And the Type 31 is already designed for the Bofors 57mm.

Type 31 is garbage compared to the CSC. From underwater signature alone, might as well just yell to submarines "HEY OVER HERE, PLEASE SINK ME!!!!"

 

[Underway]

The realist in me suggests that would see a significant dip in CSC acquisitions.

No that's the tramau from being burned before and pessimist in you. The realist would see the military industrial complex and the 1000's of jobs on the East Coast and in Halifax in particular and think... votes.

Though technically the CSC might end up being a different ship as the build goes on, but the build will be continuous.

 

[Good2Golf]

Type 31 is garbage compared to the CSC. From underwater signature alone, might as well just yell to submarines "HEY OVER HERE, PLEASE SINK ME!!!!"

Is T31 notably worse than CPF as a physical platform, vis a vis acoustic/physical signature?

 

[GK .Dundas]

So we should invest in ocean going tugs to tow the CFP's out to their station and back?

It works for the Russian's surface fleet. And in particular their carrier fleet. (Does a single non-functional burnt out shell collapsing in it dry dock count as a fleet? Asking for a friend.)

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Is T31 notably worse than CPF as a physical platform, vis a vis acoustic/physical signature?

Good question. The type 31 is base don the Absalon's hull and power plant, and the Danish navy considers the Absalon class to be ASW frigates.

 

[KevinB]

Good question. The type 31 is base don the Absalon's hull and power plant, and the Danish navy considers the Absalon class to be ASW frigates.

But are they good ASW frigates?

 

[CBH99]

I think the whole idea of the government looking into buying 12 new patrol submarines is nothing more than rubbish, if I am being perfectly honest.


The project to replace the submarines, in whatever ambition and form it may take, will happen once Trudeau is long gone. He knows it, the other LPC members know it.

This is a long term project that would require a lot of money, a lot of inter-government cooperation and streamlining, a big boost to recruiting for the Navy, and all kinds of 'mini-projects' to be negotiated along the way - and Trudeau knows he isn't going to be around long term at this point to see the project through

This is all for the sake of his own image in the eyes of fellow NATO countries, and to be seen to be taking defence matters seriously when it comes to election time.

I hope I'm wrong...


...


This is the same guy that recently gave our personnel a pretty significant pay cut while the cost of living skyrockets, to save a whopping $30 million, further exasperating a recruiting crisis that has run rampant while he has been PM. (Despite DND regularly returning approx $1B annually...)

And the scandal of the week, this week, is hundreds of millions of dollars being given to companies that MP's themselves own - in exchange for basically no goods or services rendered for those tax dollars. (Also called money laundering if I'm not mistaken? Or is it just simple blatant corruption? I was never that great at financial crime stuff...)

Maybe instead of cutting from here or there to pay for the subs, we could just cut out the pure graft at the top?
 
If we can't afford to give veterans what they are asking for (consistent service, and some helpful options be presented BEFORE being offered MAID) and we can't afford to give our members their PLD - I just don't see us being able to afford subs with Justin at the helm


<Accidental rant done>

 

[Underway]

Is T31 notably worse than CPF as a physical platform, vis a vis acoustic/physical signature?

Good question. The type 31 is base don the Absalon's hull and power plant, and the Danish navy considers the Absalon class to be ASW frigates.

According to Navy Lookout (the best go to for open source information on RN news and equipment) the Type 31 doesn't even have rafted diesel engines (CPF's have a number of quieting solutions applied). That means that whatever noise created by the ship goes straight into the water with low amounts of damping.

It also has a far inferior radar (Thales NS110), no hull mounted sonar, no towed array. Its basically designed around the "more hulls = more capability" concept. These frigates will be operating alone or in pairs to do things that don't require much ASW. The Type 26 will be escorting Carriers as they are the more capable platforms for ASW.

The Polish version does have that ASW suite added, but costs go up as soon as you start adding things to frigates, so don't be fooled by the design and $$$ that the British are actually building.

But are they good ASW frigates?

They are good enough ASW frigates. The Danes are now moving away from the Absalon multi role concepts towards more specialized purpose built ships and are looking at the new Dutch/Belgian ASW frigates as a replacement for the Absalon.

 

[GR66]

According to Navy Lookout (the best go to for open source information on RN news and equipment) the Type 31 doesn't even have rafted diesel engines (CPF's have a number of quieting solutions applied). That means that whatever noise created by the ship goes straight into the water with low amounts of damping.

It also has a far inferior radar (Thales NS110), no hull mounted sonar, no towed array. Its basically designed around the "more hulls = more capability" concept. These frigates will be operating alone or in pairs to do things that don't require much ASW. The Type 26 will be escorting Carriers as they are the more capable platforms for ASW.

The Polish version does have that ASW suite added, but costs go up as soon as you start adding things to frigates, so don't be fooled by the design and $$$ that the British are actually building.

They are good enough ASW frigates. The Danes are now moving away from the Absalon multi role concepts towards more specialized purpose built ships and are looking at the new Dutch/Belgian ASW frigates as a replacement for the Absalon.

So what I'm reading between the lines here is that any Corvette-type ship that is being planned for the MCDV replacement will basically be a poor ASW platform - even if equipped with a containerized towed array and UAV's - since being a "budget" platform it won't have all the expensive extras that makes the River-Class/Type 26 a good ASW platform?

So, if you deem that ASW should be the primary focus of the RCN (which I do) then the extra you'd spend on replacing the 12 x MDCV's with Corvettes (and the additional PY's required to man the the larger vessels) should instead be put into an extra 3 x River-Class and the MCDV replacements should be as per the original plan - an OPV that basically the same size/crew/capability as the MCDV's but faster?

 

[suffolkowner]

I think the whole idea of the government looking into buying 12 new patrol submarines is nothing more than rubbish, if I am being perfectly honest.


The project to replace the submarines, in whatever ambition and form it may take, will happen once Trudeau is long gone. He knows it, the other LPC members know it.

This is a long term project that would require a lot of money, a lot of inter-government cooperation and streamlining, a big boost to recruiting for the Navy, and all kinds of 'mini-projects' to be negotiated along the way - and Trudeau knows he isn't going to be around long term at this point to see the project through

This is all for the sake of his own image in the eyes of fellow NATO countries, and to be seen to be taking defence matters seriously when it comes to election time.

I hope I'm wrong...


...


This is the same guy that recently gave our personnel a pretty significant pay cut while the cost of living skyrockets, to save a whopping $30 million, further exasperating a recruiting crisis that has run rampant while he has been PM. (Despite DND regularly returning approx $1B annually...)

And the scandal of the week, this week, is hundreds of millions of dollars being given to companies that MP's themselves own - in exchange for basically no goods or services rendered for those tax dollars. (Also called money laundering if I'm not mistaken? Or is it just simple blatant corruption? I was never that great at financial crime stuff...)

Maybe instead of cutting from here or there to pay for the subs, we could just cut out the pure graft at the top?
 
If we can't afford to give veterans what they are asking for (consistent service, and some helpful options be presented BEFORE being offered MAID) and we can't afford to give our members their PLD - I just don't see us being able to afford subs with Justin at the helm


<Accidental rant done>

it doesnt take that long in reality. We've shown recently that we can decide fairly quickly to pursue something. Say another 2 yrs given change of government. I dont consider 12 subs to be a serious number but you never know

So what I'm reading between the lines here is that any Corvette-type ship that is being planned for the MCDV replacement will basically be a poor ASW platform - even if equipped with a containerized towed array and UAV's - since being a "budget" platform it won't have all the expensive extras that makes the River-Class/Type 26 a good ASW platform?

So, if you deem that ASW should be the primary focus of the RCN (which I do) then the extra you'd spend on replacing the 12 x MDCV's with Corvettes (and the additional PY's required to man the the larger vessels) should instead be put into an extra 3 x River-Class and the MCDV replacements should be as per the original plan - an OPV that basically the same size/crew/capability as the MCDV's but faster?

A case of some peoples eyes being larger than our stomachs again. We already have 6 AOPS for better or worse. So maybe another 6 to 8 replacement MCDV's.

An interim replacement for the Halifax's is another issue and one wonders how quickly it could be done and how small a frigate would work given the timelines for the River's.

The River class production run and timing should eventually gel with RCN output needs but the next 20 yrs look rough. Begs the question are we stuck with Irving, Seaspan and now Davie building the replacements for that which they have already built forever? Is there a plan to ever have one shipyard compete against another on the same platform?

 

[Rainbow1910]

The River class production run and timing should eventually gel with RCN output needs but the next 20 yrs look rough. Begs the question are we stuck with Irving, Seaspan and now Davie building the replacements for that which they have already built forever? Is there a plan to ever have one shipyard compete against another on the same platform?

This directly flies in the face of the National Shipbuilding Strategy alongside the fact Davie and Seaspan aren't set up to build combatants.

 

[suffolkowner]

This directly flies in the face of the National Shipbuilding Strategy alongside the fact Davie and Seaspan aren't set up to build combatants.

the NSS specifically is set up so that Seaspan is going to be the provider of AOR's for Canada forever? Irving for frigates for ever? This is without doubt the dumbest part.