CANADA

[RetroSicotte]

The tactic here is obvious.

"Delay the program long enough until we're able to make a new election manifesto that doesn't have a monumentally stupid 'Cancel F-35' bill in it".

[NickC]

Did the De Zeven Provinciën-class ever get a variable depth sonar? I'm having trouble finding a reference it has one. It's got a hull mounted sonar but that's about all I can find.

Would see no problem in fitting one in an updated design of the De Zeven Provinciën-class which is 6,050t FLD ship to meet the CSC specs.

Alion/Daman team with the De Zeven Provinciën-class includes Atlas Electronik who would presumably have no problems in fitting and supplying their low frequency ACTAS and ASO medium frequency HMS.

Ultra Electronics Maritime Systems Canada supplied the sonars as part of the C$4.3B update of seven Halifax 4,800t class frigates, HMS and its in-line horizontal projector arrays, UEMS Canada is part of the Type 26 team as is LM Canada with its CMS which is standard in Canadian Navy ships and why T26 is the current firm favourite for the Canadian Surface Combatant contract.

PS The Royal Netherlands Navy installed a new VDS aboard HMNS VAN AMSTEL, 3,320t FLD. Last December it completed an OPEV of the Low Frequency Active Passive Sonar, LFAPS, UEMS Canada developed the hardware and the processing software was developed by the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO.)

Conducted over several days in conjunction with a WALRUS-class submarine and an NH90 helicopter fitted with low frequency dipping sonar, the OPEVAL demonstrated LFAP’s capability to detect and track a diesel-electric submarine, both mono- and bi-statically, in challenging conditions in littoral waters. Marine Corps Lt.-Gen. Rob Verkerk, Commander of the Royal Netherlands Navy, used Twitter to express his opinion that the testing represented a “quantum leap in the field of submarine warfare!”
http://www.monch.com/mpg/news/15-mariti ... lfaps.html

[Defiance]

Would see no problem in fitting one in an updated design of the De Zeven Provinciën-class which is 6,050t FLD ship to meet the CSC specs.

It's the second order implications that're more interesting rather than the equipment alone; what's their acoustic budget for the hull? As it has been billed as an AWD frigate it's not impossible they've given it as much thought as our Type 45's, which isn't to say that it's bad, just that it's less likely to be as comeptitive in this regard to a Type 26.

This leads into the NG/Fincantieri comment about how their offering leant towards the Italian design being better designed for ASW - a competitive decision to pick a more ASW suited design. If the thinking is there that you want something good at ASW work to win this bid, will redesigning an AWD's innards to be able to fit a towed sonar array cut the mustard?

I don't know the answer, but i have my doubts.

[james k]

Nice plan, but plans never survive first contact. When conflict comes you use what you have, not what you wish you had.

Yes it might well be a conflict zone, which is why Canada wants to increase its submarine arm. in the mean time it is receiving OPVs to patrol the new navigation route across the north west passage. The new vessels are just that hence the 25mm etc. They are not and will not be used as combat platforms so the are kited out just fine for their role.

[james k]

Why have surface ships anywhere?

Yeah if you're preparing for a shooting war in the Arctic you invest in subs, not bigger deck guns for patrol vessels.

[R686]

The tactic here is obvious.

"Delay the program long enough until we're able to make a new election manifesto that doesn't have a monumentally stupid 'Cancel F-35' bill in it".

I dunno seems like the current Government likes to do things the hard way, seems like a recipe for driving up costs not down.
https://www.defensenews.com/global/the- ... petitions/

[Defiance]

I dunno seems like the current Government likes to do things the hard way, seems like a recipe for driving up costs not down.
https://www.defensenews.com/global/the- ... petitions/

Or is it just a good tag-line for voters and a cheap shot at Boeing? Offset is critical in defence offerings, Canada wants contractors to hand out a good chunk of work the same as most other competitions. Their Berlin v2 program's not exactly a posterchild of cost efficiency, but you're not likely to see a similar situation falling out here.

That being said, I thought they were after 65 F-35's now they're after 88 jets? Isn't that a slight expansion on numbers (~10-15?) from their current active CF-18's?

[Halidon]

Why have surface ships anywhere?

Yeah if you're preparing for a shooting war in the Arctic you invest in subs, not bigger deck guns for patrol vessels.

The Arctic isn't "anywhere." At least not until the ice cap totally melts, in which case your need for ice-rated vessels is among the least of your concerns.

[Lord Jim]

If I remember rightly only Denmark has anything like an ice rated warship so to speak, and most countries give the responsibility for patrolling this area to civilian agencies or para-military at most. The real naval operations in the area are submarine based and have been for decades which is why Canada wants AIP conventional subs t replace their Victoria (Upholder) class, to improve their under ice capability

[NickC]

NavyRecognition
"Navantia-led team has submitted its tender response for the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) program, with global defence and security company Saab as the Combat Systems Integrator (CSI) and CEA Technologies providing key elements of the proposed solution.//
The frigate design submited by Navantia for CSC is fitted with a 127mm main gun by Leonardo, a CEAFAR2 radar by CEA, 2x RAM launchers by Raytheon, 2x 35mm Millenium CIWS guns by Rheinmetall, 48x VLS and 8x RBS-15 Mk3 anti-ship missiles by Saab."

A cut and paste copy of their bid for Australian SEA 5000 competition with Canadian flag pasted on mast, minimal Canadian content and would think rank outsider.

[2HeadsBetter]

That Navantia frigate may have a lot of kit but where's the mission bay - does Canada want one? And what is its endurance? Canada does face the Pacific as well let's not forget.

[RetroSicotte]

2 Searams, 48x Mk41 and 8x canisters?

Thats an awful lot of missiles.

[R686]

2 Searams, 48x Mk41 and 8x canisters?

Thats an awful lot of missiles.

Well it's a step up in capabilty just like the RAN, my main beef with the Hobarts is they lag behind the Arleigh Burkes 2-1 even when the new ASW come into it.

2 Hobarts equal 1 Burke it be all right if we were getting 9-12 but only having 3 we should have just gone to the yanks.

[RetroSicotte]

2 Searams, 48x Mk41 and 8x canisters?

Thats an awful lot of missiles.

Well it's a step up in capabilty just like the RAN, my main beef with the Hobarts is they lag behind the Arleigh Burkes 2-1 even when the new ASW come into it.

2 Hobarts equal 1 Burke it be all right if we were getting 9-12 but only having 3 we should have just gone to the yanks.

To be fair, there are some advantages to the Hobart's design. Not saying its better than a Burke all around, just mentioning off-hand.

There's every chance the Hobarts ended out being cheaper. The Burkes are not cheap ships. But I'm not 100% familiar with that acquirement process or how the Hobarts ended up costing.

[xav]

NavyRecognition

A cut and paste copy of their bid for Australian SEA 5000 competition with Canadian flag pasted on mast, minimal Canadian content and would think rank outsider.

Actually, their SEA 5000 proposal is quite different (bottom picture)
https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.p ... ogram.html

No RAM, no Millenium, no RBS-15 (Harpoon instead, and in different location) and main gun looks like Oto Melara as opposed to BAE

[R686]

2 Searams, 48x Mk41 and 8x canisters?

Thats an awful lot of missiles.

Well it's a step up in capabilty just like the RAN, my main beef with the Hobarts is they lag behind the Arleigh Burkes 2-1 even when the new ASW come into it.

2 Hobarts equal 1 Burke it be all right if we were getting 9-12 but only having 3 we should have just gone to the yanks.

To be fair, there are some advantages to the Hobart's design. Not saying its better than a Burke all around, just mentioning off-hand.

There's every chance the Hobarts ended out being cheaper. The Burkes are not cheap ships. But I'm not 100% familiar with that acquirement process or how the Hobarts ended up costing.

yep the Navantia was a fair bit cheaper, the RAN actually wanted Arleigh Burkes but cost and manning paid to that idea, Gibbs &Cox proposed the baby Burkes which had a higher future growth margin but came at a cost, the government sold the RAN on the cheaper ship by having a fourth as option, we all know was never taken up.

[NickC]

NavyRecognition

A cut and paste copy of their bid for Australian SEA 5000 competition with Canadian flag pasted on mast, minimal Canadian content and would think rank outsider.

Actually, their SEA 5000 proposal is quite different (bottom picture)
https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.p ... ogram.html

No RAM, no Millenium, no RBS-15 (Harpoon instead, and in different location) and main gun looks like Oto Melara as opposed to BAE

XAV thanks for pointing out the differences with the Navantia CMS, SeaRAM, Millenium and SAAB RBS-15, they are independent and bolt on systems requiring power from ship and comms with the CMS. (Remember demo of LCS firing both NSM and Harpoon at different times from temporary deck canisters on flight deck controlled by laptop computer)

Correct me if wrong but these are 'minor' differences compared to 'major' if had to change the SAAB Australian 9LV CMS/LM IAFCL integrated to radar/SM-2/ESSM and the various CEA radars come in the custom made mast. The Navantia CMS proposal uses the 127mm gun by Leonardo, do not know what main gun included in their Australian SEA 5000 bid, but if it uses the BAES 127mm gun that would be a bigger change.

As said think outsider for CMS contract due to lack of Canadian content.

[R686]

Don't know if this has been shown before but an interesting little article on future Canadian sub program, Also has an article on F35

http://vanguardcanada.uberflip.com/i/89 ... t-nov-2017

[R686]

I wonder if Jr is going to be pretty pissed when he realises that the Airforce has written a requirement that spells out F35 in all its glory.

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/ ... for-monday

capable of being deployable, operable, and sustainable worldwide in known threat environments into the 2060s, and be able to meet Canada’s military airworthiness regulations.

[Lord Jim]

Wanting a Fast Jet that will be still top of the class after a 50+ year service life probably exceeds even the F-35.

[R686]

Wanting a Fast Jet that will be still top of the class after a 50+ year service life probably exceeds even the F-35.

From memory the production run last untill the late 2030's in theroy with upgrades aircraft will still be flying in the 2060's


And bedsides if they are still going ahead with the RAAF leagacy Hornet purchase I'm not expecting first aircraft till late 2020's

[Lord Jim]

It was the fact that the article insinuated the platform chosen had to still be cutting edge in the 2060s. I agree the F-35 will still be around but it surely won't be cutting edge unless other nations stop development future weapon systems. Like the F-16 now it will still be effective but not top of the class.

[xav]

Interim AOR M/V Asterix Completes Royal Canadian Navy Trials & Achieves FOC

Davie Shipbuilding and Federal Fleet Services announced that following an intensive period of at-sea trials and testing, Asterix has been formally accepted by the Department of National Defence and has now entered full operational service with the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) and Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF).

https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.p ... s-foc.html

[Lord Jim]

What does or is the RCAF using the Asterix for? Great name though, imagine the Dreadnought class named after Asterix and other characters form the books, suggestions anyone?

[SKB]

Obelix, Dogmatix, Getafix, Vitalstatistix, Cacofonix, Geriatrix, Unhygienix.