• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

MTShaw

Member
Reaction score
56
Points
430
So when are we calling the concrete ship built to test the electronics a prototype for some sort of Canadian “Aegis Ashore”.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,064
Points
1,040
That is likely a typo or someone on the PA side misunderstanding something; it's still in the preliminary design phase with equipment/materials being selected.

Probably even premature to do something like doing test welds on the specific steel to figure out the warping/deformation.

If they were a year out from construction wouldn't be tabletopping ops room setups, this is all early design type work.

CSC has completed the initial design review and has a few years to go before they get to the final design review. Given that the engineering side for the most part is identical to the UK version of the ship they can start the build of the spaces that are not changing, usually the keel level blocks, and cut the steel for other places. There also might be a test block to build as well.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,064
Points
1,040
So when are we calling the concrete ship built to test the electronics a prototype for some sort of Canadian “Aegis Ashore”.
Never except maybe as a joke. It's only going to be operated when it needs to be for testing or training. It's not supposed to be an operational detection system.
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,006
Points
1,040
Never except maybe as a joke. It's only going to be operated when it needs to be for testing or training. It's not supposed to be an operational detection system.
Depending on what is decided for the NORAD modernization program could that possibly change? Sounds like potentially a missed opportunity if the location/capabilities makes sense for integration into the new system.
 

NavyShooter

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,308
Points
1,090
When your main shipboard RADAR is powerful enough that you're not allowed to turn it on within X miles of land or other habitation....having a shore station that is not in a remote location would be impossible....and having it in a remote location would make it very difficult to use as a training location for crews, or testing.
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,635
Points
1,040
CSC has completed the initial design review and has a few years to go before they get to the final design review. Given that the engineering side for the most part is identical to the UK version of the ship they can start the build of the spaces that are not changing, usually the keel level blocks, and cut the steel for other places. There also might be a test block to build as well.
Initial design review is still ongoing to some extent, with compartment changes and some major design decisions still TBD. The engineering design isn't changing, but still need to do equipment selection for that design.

If I was a betting man don't see basic construction starting for another 3-4 years, and doing a test block isn't starting construction. That just figures out some background data for how to do the production engineering with those grades/thickness of steels and the different types of welds.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,064
Points
1,040
Initial design review is still ongoing to some extent, with compartment changes and some major design decisions still TBD. The engineering design isn't changing, but still need to do equipment selection for that design.

If I was a betting man don't see basic construction starting for another 3-4 years, and doing a test block isn't starting construction.
Yah there is always some system or space that is lagging. For JSS there were a few things even in final design review that needed to be pushed back. Mostly stuff that relied upon acceptance of another design first (knock-on effects).

Starting construction is a very vague statement and the numbers can be played with. There is usually the steel cutting ceremony where some photo-opers get to push the big red button to start the plasma cutter or something dumb like that. Is that start of construction? Is start of construction when they weld one piece to the next? When they weld the ship's coin to the keel? When long lead items are beginning to be built by subcontractors?

That just figures out some background data for how to do the production engineering with those grades/thickness of steels and the different types of welds.
Wait... you actually think ISI is using modern shipbuilding techniques? I would be shocked, absolutely shocked if they did that. The BAE Rep has the worst job in the world trying to get them to think modern.
 

Oldgateboatdriver

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
405
Points
880
Oh! All sorts of things, from mediterranean moorings in harbours where you can only put your stern to the wharf, to actual mooring (anchoring with two anchors spread so you middle the two) in a narrow bay or harbour, to using them to manoeuver off a wharf or jetty in bad wind condition, to helping with stable anchoring in bad holding ground, to emergency stopping the ship while checking stern swing, to avoid it going aground, etc. etc.

Single anchor ships were the death of good anchor work. :)
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,635
Points
1,040
Wait... you actually think ISI is using modern shipbuilding techniques? I would be shocked, absolutely shocked if they did that. The BAE Rep has the worst job in the world trying to get them to think modern.
They did it for AOPs where it was easier with the thicker plate, they will definitely have to do it for CSC. That's part of the basic target state requirements for all the shipyards actually, and why Seaspan did the same thing (and Davie will need to as well). It was one of the FMI requirements for any NSS yard.

Aside from doing the test modules, they also do it for things like running through their own auto welding line to make the longitudinals. It's pretty critical for modular building as all that gets built into the module/block/megablock assembly, and they further refine it in each iteration of the modules/blocks to reduce corrections. Saves them a huge amount of time and money.
 

NavyShooter

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,308
Points
1,090
There are test modules in the laydown area in front of the main doors of D-206 in dockyard right now for testing deck covering I think.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,064
Points
1,040
Oh! All sorts of things, from mediterranean moorings in harbours where you can only put your stern to the wharf, to actual mooring (anchoring with two anchors spread so you middle the two) in a narrow bay or harbour, to using them to manoeuver off a wharf or jetty in bad wind condition, to helping with stable anchoring in bad holding ground, to emergency stopping the ship while checking stern swing, to avoid it going aground, etc. etc.

Single anchor ships were the death of good anchor work. :)
The first anchorage I ever planned as a wee barely shaving subbie was a med mooring/stern in with Brandon. The jetty we were going to had a low tide very near the keel, so the CO decided that we should just have the stern in as that's the shallowest point. It just blew my mind as I was researching it, and that we did it without tugs is a testament to how manouverable the MCDV actually is.

What I like with the Type 26 style is the prow-mounted anchor . Should simplify the mechanics of the tow line forward, as well as any attaching to a buoy. As opposed to an anchor on both bows.
 

JMCanada

Member
Reaction score
68
Points
380

T26

Vice-Admiral Sir Chris Gardner, Director General (Ships) at DE&S confirmed the first Type 26 frigate, HMS Glasgow was 12 months behind schedule. This has been caused by three main issues: COVID, “Inadequate engineering maturity” and problems with the supply chain.

While the impact of COVID was unavoidable, the engineering issues are harder for BAE Systems to explain. The five OPVs built in Glasgow at an inflated price were supposed to subsidise the yard to re-baseline its shipbuilding skills. After the serious construction mistakes with HMS Forth, promises were made that “lessons would be learned” and BAES were also very keen to highlight how its digital shipyard technologies would drive efficiency. The 10-year construction plan for HMS Glasgow was already pretty leisurely. An optimist might hope that if the integration work at Scotstoun goes more smoothly than the construction phase, the ship could still meet the 2026/7 delivery schedule.

The supply chain issue mainly relates to the late delivery of the gearboxes built by David Brown Santasalo in Huddersfield. As long-lead items, the development of these sophisticated and ultra-quiet gearboxes has been underway for many years, including constructing a land-based test rig. Late delivery meant HMS Glasgow was rolled out of the build hall without the gearboxes which had to be fitted by cutting the hull open and skidding them into place on the hard standing. The Defence Secretary said they had been in touch with the supplier [David Brown] and “read them the riot act” as their products are fundamental to the whole Type 26 project, including in Australia and Canada.
 
Last edited:

suffolkowner

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
727
Points
1,060

"In terms of dimensions, the proposed shipbuilding hall will be approximately 81 metres wide, 170 metres long and 49 metres high to the building ridge line."

big building room at Irving for the same?
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,517
Points
1,060
Opportunity for Canada?

Increased demand

The Polish government, for instance, is asking for its first frigate of three new warships to be delivered ahead of time, according to people close to the negotiations. Babcock won the key contract to supply Poland in March, beating Germany’s Thyssenkrupp.

When it comes to the UK’s preparation for the return of industrial war, the Government plans to order a replacement to the Type-45 missile destroyer and a new fleet of frigates. This could offer opportunities to both Babcock and BAE.

“There will be some ships in the longer term,” says BAE’s Woodburn. “There's quite a range of opportunities to be pursued in the UK.

Existing capacity

“People are learning lessons as we speak,” says Woodburn, who took the helm in 2017. “One of the takeaways is that ramping up a hot production line is a lot easier than trying to restart a cold production line, particularly one that in some cases may have been turned off for several years.”

If the Poles, and others, want the Type 31s faster then is it possible that the Brits could lay off some of the Type 26 work to Canadian or Aussie yards? Would that encourage ISY and its supply chain to work faster and could that have a knock on effect on the Canadian NSS plan?

And thinking of opportunities - "hot production lines" in Canada obviously include GDLSC LAVs (LAV II,III and 6) as well as GDOTC Ammunition and Colt Canada.

How cold is the Magellan Bristol Aerospace CRV-7 line? Could that be spooled up? Could Winnipeg become a Canadian centre of missile excellence?


I know jumping on opportunity is not the Canadian Way ....
 
Top