I guess the case could made they couldn’t be bothered with another model or possibly there are other changes that haven’t been finalized and a new model will eventually be shown. Sure hope 32 is the end result, even if the missile load outs aren’t fully ordered. My biggest concern is a 3-6 CSC fleet with a follow on order for a Type 31 or even less capable alternative, a possibility with a subsequent Liberal-NDP coalition after junior.
You're right you shouldn't rely on graphics although in this case it is indeed 24 VLS to save on weight.
The problem is the ship is very heavy, some say way more heavier than the propulsion plant can handle.
Ah yes, that makes sense, I am assuming the Australian variant is running into similar issues then too.
So you have a source for the weight issue?
Not officially of course, but I work in Ottawa and know all matter of things about the CSC project. So lets call it an informed opinion. People need to realize that the "official" info picture of the capabilities of the CSC that most are basing their knowledge of the CSC was very early in the design phase where they didn't know how the ship was being armed, things change. The SPY 7 is one heavy piece of kit and cutting the 32 VLS to 24 saves a substantial amount of weight. I also noticed that people are calling it flight one, two etc. There is no plan to build them in flights with different weapon loadouts.
The 15 ship build will take over 30 years to complete assuming a drumbeat of 2 years. Given the rapid pace of technological military kit, new capability may have to be adapted to later build CSCs. For instance, new hypersonic missiles may require a new VLS option. Therefore different flights may happen out of necessity.
The first 6 ships are expected to take 18 months each, with 12 months ea for the rest. Obviously the first one is going to take the longest with a delivery date currently of 2031. Changing some equipment is not really a different flight. We have CPF's with 2 different steering systems because companies went out of business. Yes it is a projected build of 15 ships but I'll let you in on a little secret.....nobody knows exactly how many given the costs.
Incredibly frustrating to hear this... so we'll end up with a ship close to the same size and cost as a Burke but with 1/3rd the armament. Shouldn't be surprised; but I would be curious if they lengthened the hull and put in a 2nd GT - don't we like to say that steel is cheap around here?
You just can't lengthen a hull. There's all kinds of things that play into changing the ships characteristics. Perhaps they'll leave room for another MK 41 module who knows. Its going to be several years before all the design work is finished, perhaps it will go back to 32 vice 24 as that was the original intent.
I understand it isn't that simple, but we are 10 years out from the first ship hitting the water and we have already run out of margin. I'm sure the RAN is having similar problems with the Hunter design so perhaps they would be interested in helping to fund a lengthened hull?
I don’t think the secret is so little. Given our massive debts (provincial and federal) along with new debt from COVID, 15 CSC ships is very optimistic at best, especially if 88 F-35s, 5 new tankers, and new MPA are still on the table. Let’s not forget new subs. If the CSC number is cut, I hope this doesn’t mean substitution with a minimal frigate. Better to invest in submarines sooner.
Actually, it's the other way around. It's ridiculous to have a massive load of missiles without a top-flight radar. Based on the detect-to-engage sequence and most likely combat scenarios I'm confident a potential loadout of 96 ESSM and 24 CAMM are going to defend the ship just fine. How many missiles are you expecting in a saturation attack against a Canadian Task Group anyways? Pick a number and do the math backwards (pg 129) and find out how many missiles you need. It's not as many as you think.
De Zeven is a specialized AAW frigate designed from the ground up to carry more missiles. Type 26 is a specialized ASW frigate, which is trying to be modified to make it a GP frigate. There are lots of things the Type 26 can do that the De Zeven is unable to do because of the design differences.
I will concede your point on the radar to a degree, although I still have my doubts. Doing the math is probably difficult going on open source info but this relatively recent document discusses salvo size of over 500+ ASMs (per salvo) in a China scenario. Taking_Back_the_Seas_WEB.pdf (csbaonline.org) (pg. 15). No doubt most of these would be designated for our USN counterparts during an outbreak of war, but with over 4,500 missile capable of striking maritime targets deep into the Pacific I think my point still stands.
