959 replies to this topic

[Midnightly]

by the sounds of it.. i had the golden ticket! i managed to take the tour on the sub this afternoon (i won 4 tickets through facebook, my parents came down from up island to join us) it was a very interesting experience, one i won't soon forget it's amazing just how many people live on there while it's on tour (56 i think they said) in such cramped conditions the last tour was 6 months long.. the hallways are very narrow same with the ladders for climbing and very well organized

[Mattjvd]

BAE Type 26 is selected as the new surface warship for the RCN: http://www.australia...type-26-frigate

[AllseeingEye]

Impressive - big ship for a frigate and significantly so compared even to the old RCN Tribal-class destroyers. Helicopter-capable and they carry a wicked assortment of armament. Hopefully they come through the negotiation process and become the de facto replacements for the Halifax-class frigates - the Type 26 would be a massive improvement over the latter in virtually every sense.

[Mattjvd]

Yeah, they sound like very capable ships. Larger than any destroyer ever operated by the RCN, but the standard crew is even smaller than the Halifax class.

The British configuration will house wide-area air defense and surface attack missles. Our Navy has been without those capabilities since the retiremeng of the Tribal class destroyers.

[Bingo]

Impressive - big ship for a frigate and significantly so compared even to the old RCN Tribal-class destroyers. Helicopter-capable and they carry a wicked assortment of armament.

Hopefully they come through the negotiation process and become the de facto replacements for the Halifax-class frigates - the Type 26 would be a massive improvement over the latter in virtually every sense.

 

My guess is that they will be obsolete before they are even built. A few torpedoes would take out a frigate in short order in a major conflict.

But then I suppose we will never see those kind of naval battles in the future.

[Mattjvd]

My guess is that they will be obsolete before they are even built. A few torpedoes would take out a frigate in short order in a major conflict.

But then I suppose we will never see those kind of naval battles in the future.

A few torpedo (hits) would destroy any surface ship. Surface ships are not obsolete. 

 

My guess is they won't be obsolete until guided missiles are not the best for surface to surface and surface to air weapons. They carry acoustic decoy systems, and the anti-submarine helicopters project ASW capabilities to a couple hundred Km around the ship. With appropriate maintenance and IT / IS upgrades, expect a useful life at least into the 2050s, probably 2060s. 

[AllseeingEye]

My guess is that they will be obsolete before they are even built. A few torpedoes would take out a frigate in short order in a major conflict.

But then I suppose we will never see those kind of naval battles in the future.

No the biggest worry in modern battle is the anti-ship missile - bigger warhead and a far, far greater range. Modern fleets employ hunter-killer submarines for the express purpose of killing other submarines, both ballistic and attack subs -> i.e.the latter being the type most apt to fire torpedo's at an enemy surface target.

 

You'll occasionally hear the argument that aircraft carriers are vulnerable to torpedo attack to which I say good luck with that; not only do large blue navy fleets like the USN deploy multiple air assets and surface naval units to screen and protect the carriers more critically they also deploy nuclear hunter killer subs whose primary job is to sanitize a huge area around the carrier group, meaning unless the other submarine is a USN sub, he's as good as dead....

.

[Mattjvd]

No the biggest worry in modern battle is the anti-ship missile - bigger warhead and a far, far greater range. Modern fleets employ hunter-killer submarines for the express purpose of killing other submarines, both ballistic and attack subs -> i.e.the latter being the type most apt to fire torpedo's at an enemy surface target.

You'll occasionally hear the argument that aircraft carriers are vulnerable to torpedo attack to which I say good luck with that; not only do large blue navy fleets like the USN deploy multiple air assets and surface naval units to screen and protect the carriers more critically they also deploy nuclear hunter killer subs whose primary job is to sanitize a huge area around the carrier group, meaning unless the other submarine is a USN sub, he's as good as dead....
.

Well, typically torpedoes do have larger warheads. The MK 48 warhead is nearly 300Kg, and it explodes under a ship, transffering the force through water. A single torpedo hit will crack the hull in half on most surface vessels.

Torpedoes have much less range and are much more limited in their delivery methods though. (Relative to anti-ship missiles). 1 to 1, a torpedo is a larger threat to the survivbility of the ship than an anti ship missile.

Both are interceptable, keneticly or by confusing the tracking, and both have their uses. Submarines don't make surface ships obsolete, and the same for the inverse. They complement each other.

[spanky123]

Impressive - big ship for a frigate and significantly so compared even to the old RCN Tribal-class destroyers. Helicopter-capable and they carry a wicked assortment of armament. Hopefully they come through the negotiation process and become the de facto replacements for the Halifax-class frigates - the Type 26 would be a massive improvement over the latter in virtually every sense.

 

The Halifax class frigates are what 30 years old?

 

I am surprised that we are buying 15 ships. Able we currently able to staff more than 2 frigates operationally on each coast at any given time?

Edited by spanky123, 25 October 2018 - 06:47 AM.

[Mattjvd]

The Halifax class frigates are what 30 years old?

 

I am surprised that we are buying 15 ships. Able we currently able to staff more than 2 frigates operationally on each coast at any given time?

They were commissioned between 1992 and 1996. There are enough personnel for all 12 Halifax class ships, though at any given time two are usually down for maintenance or upgrades. They new ships will have a much smaller crew as well, 225 to crew the Halifax class, 118 for a type 26, in the British configuration at least. (I don't think that includes the helicopter crews though).

[Benezet]

...meaning unless the other submarine is a USN sub, he's as good as dead....
.

Or maybe not.

“HSwMS Gotland managed to snap several pictures of USS Ronald Reagan during a wargaming exercise in the Pacific Ocean, effectively "sinking" the aircraft carrier.[11] The exercise was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the US fleet against diesel-electric submarines, which some have noted as severely lacking.[12][13]”

https://en.m.wikiped...class_submarine

Also:

https://en.m.wikiped..._Challenge_2002

[Mike K.]

Currently we have three vessels away on missions, two Kingston and one Halifax-class.

[lanforod]

Or maybe not.

“HSwMS Gotland managed to snap several pictures of USS Ronald Reagan during a wargaming exercise in the Pacific Ocean, effectively "sinking" the aircraft carrier.[11] The exercise was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the US fleet against diesel-electric submarines, which some have noted as severely lacking.[12][13]”

https://en.m.wikiped...class_submarine

Also:

https://en.m.wikiped..._Challenge_2002

 

I suspect in the 10 years since then, the USN has figured out some new ways to deal with diesel-electric. That's likely one of the key reasons for testing this out.

[spanky123]

Currently we have three vessels away on missions, two Kingston and one Halifax-class.

 

Only the Halifax is a frigate though correct?

[spanky123]

They were commissioned between 1992 and 1996. There are enough personnel for all 12 Halifax class ships, though at any given time two are usually down for maintenance or upgrades. They new ships will have a much smaller crew as well, 225 to crew the Halifax class, 118 for a type 26, in the British configuration at least. (I don't think that includes the helicopter crews though).

 

From what I read the type 26 with a full crew is about 215.

[Mattjvd]

From what I read the type 26 with a full crew is about 215.

https://www.royalnav...ype-26-frigate 

 

https://www.naval-te...-gcs-programme/

 

Looks like 157, including the flight crew, or 118 without. It has room for 200+, so mission specific crews can be added. (IE special  forces, scientists, intelligence crews, etc)

[Mike K.]

Only the Halifax is a frigate though correct?

 

Yes. HMCS Nanaimo and Edmonton (Kingston-class) are coastal defence vessels roughly 1/3 the length of a Halifax-class frigate (50-odd meters versus 140-odd meters).

[David Bratzer]

Supposedly this is a real sign on CFB Esquimalt property. Has anyone seen it??

 

[57WestHills]

It is, they're all on defence establishments now!

[Bingo]

Claiming it was coincidental is hardly an answer for the crews who have stay safe on the high seas. There could be a coincidence that all the upgrades might have been done by the same contractor installing the same equipment on similar frigates based in Esquimalt.

 

OTTAWA — The Canadian military is investigating a rash of fires and power outages on board several naval ships, but says preliminary indications are that there are no connections among the various incidents.

The Royal Canadian Navy has been rocked over the past two weeks by fires on two of its frigates during operations at sea near Europe. One of those frigates and a coastal-defence ship in the Pacific also experienced power outages.

"The initial returns from those investigations are indicating that there is absolutely no relationship between these four incidents and it was really just coincidental that they happened in such a short period of time," MacLean said.

https://www.timescol...sels-1.23490037