Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates

Albedo

Active Member
If the government decided on building a couple of LHDs (HADR and amphibious capability with HADR making the project politically saleable) with SeaSpan as the builder sometime in the future along with a third AOR committed at the same time Davie gets a dual icebreaker contract all parties should be satisfied. A dual build by the same yard will be more efficient and after building three 25k ton AOR ships, SeaSpan would be well prepared to build two LHDs with support from either Spain or Italy’s LHD builders (likely design choices). LHDs should be considered as they would be very useful for domestic HADR should the long overdue big one hit the Pacific Northwest.
I always thought HMCS Lester B. Pearson would be a good name for General Hillier's mythical Big Honking Ship since being known for getting a Nobel Peace Prize and inventing peacekeeping emphasizes the soft power uses of an amphibious assault ship and Pearson was a military man himself. And although his government was responsible for unifying the Canadian Armed Forces which didn't work out as planned, that concept of the Navy, Army, and Air Force working together would be critical to making an amphibious assault ship work since it's unlikely Canada would stand up a dedicated Marine Corps. But I suppose the CCG is going to claim Lester B. Pearson's name for the second Polar icebreaker.

I wonder to what degree existing LHD designs incorporate acoustic dampening techniques and how quiet they are relative an ASW warship? While HADR roles provide a political selling point and an amphibious capability will take time, will, and money to develop where a LHD can immediately benefit the RCN is as an ASW carrier for Cyclone helicopters finally replacing the HMCS Bonaventure. ASW is afterall Canada's traditional contribution to NATO. With the CSC only carrying 1 helicopter compared to the Iroquois-class' 2 and the new Protecteur-class only carrying 2 helicopters to the old Protecteur-class' 3, the extra helo spots from a LHD would ensure a Task Group can keep multiple Cyclone's up in the air 24/7 to maintain a proper ASW screen and provides second line helicopter maintenance facilities that stay with the Task Group rather than losing it when the AOR leaves to resupply as is currently the case. Although I don't see Justin Trudeau's government approving an ASW LHD, it would be extra meaningful coming from them considering it was Pierre Trudeau's government that prematurely retired the Bonnie.

AOPV (AOPS) 2 (HMCS Margaret Brooke 431) started her builders trials yesterday, and the bow section of AOPV 3 (HMCS Max Bernays 432) was joined to the rest of the ship today at the Irving Shipyard land level construction point in Halifax. HMCS Margaret Brooke will be delivered to the RCN this summer, and HMCS Max Bernays should start her builders trials by December. AOPV 4 is under construction in the Assembly hall, with blocks being moved into the Ultra Hall now for assembly into the mega-blocks, of which there are three. AOPV 5 is set to cut steel imminently. AOPV 1 (HMCS Harry DeWolf 430) meanwhile, is on her warm weather trials in the Caribbean. These ships are designed to operate in temperatures ranging from -50C to +40C, which is no small thing, but until that range is tested, this capability remains theoretical. The cold weather portion was confirmed in February, but weather so far in the Caribbean has not exceeded 30C.
It's great that Irving seems to be hitting their stride for AOPS production. With CSC production start to begin in 2024 instead of 2023 though, the concern ironically might be that Irving is getting too efficient with the AOPS. Hopefully, the government has made clear to Irving that having increased the AOPS order from 5 to 8 already they won't be getting another AOPS order so they need to properly space out the remaining AOPS production to ensure a production gap doesn't appear between the AOPS and CSC.
 

Black Jack Shellac

Active Member
Interesting, perhaps Canada is just gonna go with the Aepigs CMS instead of CMS 330, or perhaps an AAW variant with the Aegis CMS?
I believe it was already stated that CMS330 was going to be modified to include the Aegis architecture.

What I find interesting is that they procured 4 of the radar, Aegis and CEC but only 3 of the MK41 VLS. I am guessing (perhaps others know) that they are planning on setting up the complete sensor suite and CMS on surface as a training/test facility and the rest is for the first 3 ships.
 

Calculus

Well-Known Member
I believe it was already stated that CMS330 was going to be modified to include the Aegis architecture.

What I find interesting is that they procured 4 of the radar, Aegis and CEC but only 3 of the MK41 VLS. I am guessing (perhaps others know) that they are planning on setting up the complete sensor suite and CMS on surface as a training/test facility and the rest is for the first 3 ships.
That is my understanding as well. It also supports the rumour out there that these are going to be batch built, with incremental changes/improvements in each batch. Suggests quite strongly that the first batch will be 3 ships. Note we also bought 4 of the Leonardo 127mm guns, so presumably one of those will be for training as well...
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
That is my understanding as well. It also supports the rumour out there that these are going to be batch built, with incremental changes/improvements in each batch. Suggests quite strongly that the first batch will be 3 ships. Note we also bought 4 of the Leonardo 127mm guns, so presumably one of those will be for training as well...
Building in batches is a good approach as new kit is constantly evolving and in a uncertain world the CONOPs could change as well. Some ashore kit for training is a good investment.
 

FormerDirtDart

Well-Known Member
I was wondering about the numbers, given the total class build objectives. Then I read some reporting on the State Department approval:
US approves $1.7 billion Aegis missile defense sale to Canada
The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of the sale Monday. However, notifications do not represent final sales; if Congress does not reject the potential sale, it goes into negotiations, which determine final quantities of equipment and costs.
 

CB90

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Interesting, perhaps Canada is just gonna go with the Aepigs CMS instead of CMS 330, or perhaps an AAW variant with the Aegis CMS?
Given the experience of other navies who have purchased AEGIS, expect the implementation will be AEGIS handles all/most US supplied kit, and CMS 330 will handle all the interfaces the RCN will want to manage independently.
 

Vanquish

New Member
Having witnessed previous governments cancelling procurements such as the EH101 I'm always wary of any good news story's about possible procurements until the item in question is actually in hand.

I must say though that I am none the less happy to see the appropriate government agency's placing contracts for the CSC Type 26 project from guns and missiles to the SPY 7 radar. I feel for one that the more contracts that are tendered the harder it will be for the Feds to not only cancel the Type 26 but also to weaken any of the proposed systems currently being requested by the RCN.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Having witnessed previous governments cancelling procurements such as the EH101 I'm always wary of any good news story's about possible procurements until the item in question is actually in hand.

I must say though that I am none the less happy to see the appropriate government agency's placing contracts for the CSC Type 26 project from guns and missiles to the SPY 7 radar. I feel for one that the more contracts that are tendered the harder it will be for the Feds to not only cancel the Type 26 but also to weaken any of the proposed systems currently being requested by the RCN.
A cancellation of the current CSC program is very unlikely but a reduction from 15 ships is a real possibility which in turn increases the unit cost and capability for RCN.
 

Calculus

Well-Known Member
Having witnessed previous governments cancelling procurements such as the EH101 I'm always wary of any good news story's about possible procurements until the item in question is actually in hand.

I must say though that I am none the less happy to see the appropriate government agency's placing contracts for the CSC Type 26 project from guns and missiles to the SPY 7 radar. I feel for one that the more contracts that are tendered the harder it will be for the Feds to not only cancel the Type 26 but also to weaken any of the proposed systems currently being requested by the RCN.
It will be even harder once the actual build contract is signed with Irving.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
It will be even harder once the actual build contract is signed with Irving.
That’s true but 30 years ago a Liberal government pi$$ed away $500 million to break the EH101 contract. What’s $500 million 1992 dollars worth today? The way junior $ucks with taxpayer money perhaps a $1.5-2.0 billion penalty would be acceptable in order to cancel a projected $70 billion expenditure and likely the pansies that vote for him would be fine with this.
 

Black Jack Shellac

Active Member
That’s true but 30 years ago a Liberal government pi$$ed away $500 million to break the EH101 contract. What’s $500 million 1992 dollars worth today? The way junior $ucks with taxpayer money perhaps a $1.5-2.0 billion penalty would be acceptable in order to cancel a projected $70 billion expenditure and likely the pansies that vote for him would be fine with this.
Can't see him doing this. Junior is in the pocket of the Irvings, and the Conservatives will want this project to go ahead as well. I think the CSC is one of the few safe militrary procurement projects. Only thing that would kill it would be the NDP or, God forbid, the greens getting into power.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Can't see him doing this. Junior is in the pocket of the Irvings, and the Conservatives will want this project to go ahead as well. I think the CSC is one of the few safe militrary procurement projects. Only thing that would kill it would be the NDP or, God forbid, the greens getting into power.
I agree, outright cancellation is very unlikely but given the debt situation and the questionable economic outlook, a reduction is possible if there is a serious tax revenue decline. It is also possible any funding problems on the CSC could be eased by cuts to the replacement fighter requirement, a move that would be politically easier and keep the Irvings happy.
 

Git_Kraken

Member
It would undermine the continuous build strategy if they canceled some of the ships. The cost savings in all things come as the build goes longer as the cost per ship comes way down. It would be a shame to not realize the savings from all that design and tooling work done at the beginning.

Of course, it didn't stop the UK from reducing their total number of Type 26 to build Type 31.

*edit: found this analysis on batch procurement and some of the tricks the Gov't pulls to reduce the sticker shock.
 
Last edited:

Calculus

Well-Known Member

Git_Kraken

Member
CH-148 trials are currently underway for the AOPV (AOPS). This is a significant capability - the CH-148 is a large machine, larger than an MH-60.

Courtesy RCN Twitter feed:
This helo, combined with this (TRAPS - Towed Reelable Active/Passive Sonar - GeoSpectrum Technologies Inc), gives the AOPV class of ships the capability to both detect and prosecute an enemy submarine.
AOPS doesn't have a Torpedo Magazine so prosecution is likely out of the picture (unless you can make a Sea Can Magazine and then elevator the torps up to the flight deck). Its refueling capability is limited as well.

However the ability to land, refuel and operate a helicopter, whatever the limitations are great. SHOL is the first step for UAV's, CCG ice recce helo's and other aircraft. Cyclones have excellent sensors for RMP even if you aren't doing sub hunting. All the new capabilities are very exciting.
 

Calculus

Well-Known Member
AOPS doesn't have a Torpedo Magazine so prosecution is likely out of the picture (unless you can make a Sea Can Magazine and then elevator the torps up to the flight deck). Its refueling capability is limited as well.
Your point about torpedo stowage is well taken. That would need to be addressed. The CH-148 can carry two Mk 46/54 torpedoes. AOPS (with TRAPS) detects, sends the helo, which confirms with its own sensors. If a decision is made to engage, the helo drops a torpedo. All this will need to be tested and SOPs developed, of course, but all the core capability is there now. I should add that TRAPS has already been tested on a Kingston class:

Acoustic Systems from Our Canadian Friends


 
Last edited:

Xthenaki

Active Member
Building in batches is a good approach as new kit is constantly evolving and in a uncertain world the CONOPs could change as well. Some ashore kit for training is a good investment.
Wish the RNZN would look at their ANZAC frigate replacements in two batches (2 +1 or 2 +2).
 
Top