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

Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)

Oldgateboatdriver

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
124
Points
680
I suspected as much. But then it means my simplified explanation, which you quoted, is the correct one ["Minor Warship is any warship armed ONLY with ASu weapons for use within line of sight."], which is another way to say that the regs still don't trust the reserves to do anything other than shooting with light guns at targets they can actually see, and if they get attacked by air, then let them sink. :nod:

Did it occur to someone working on those definitions that, if for any reason (technological development unforeseen, for instance) it was decided to do away with the helicopter pad on the AOR's, they would qualify as minor warship  ;D

In my mind, this attempt at defining the reserves out of the ships the regulars don't want reserves to drive to make it look "non-discriminatory" is ridiculous: As I proposed, just specifically name the classes of ships in each category and be done with it.
 

Edward Campbell

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
125
Points
710
Many decades ago I went to staff college with three, count 'em three, LCdrs (still in "jolly green jumpers" ~ it was that long ago) who had commanded Bay class minesweepers (plus one who had commanded a submarine). Two of the three were Comm/EW experts (one retired as a commodore, the other as a captain (N)), the other was a deep diver ~ fellow named Barry Ridgewell if that means anything to anyone. It was explained to us that the Bay class ships were "reserved" for semi-technical types who were likely to be "streamed" into technical staff jobs as three and four stripers ~ as Comm/EW guys were. They (some of them, anyway) were thought to merit sea command, as long as they could pass the exams, and those who would be sent to staff college and promoted in their area of expertise were thought to need sea command experience. So we were told, anyway ...

bay_thunder.jpg
 
kingston_704_welland_canal_3440.jpg

                        Bay Class Minesweeper                                                                                                                                              Kingston Class MCDV
            Length:    152 ft                                                                                                                                                                                  181 ft
            Beam:        28 ft                                                                                                                                                                                  37 ft
  Displacement:    390 tons                                                                                                                                                                              970 tons
              Crew:      38                                                                                                                                                                                    31 to 47


Maybe that sort of policy makes sense for the modern RCN, too.

          (Are Log officers (and helicopter pilots) (still) allowed to have upped deck watch-keeping qualifications? If YES and IF they can pass the sea command exams would it not make sense to give a small combatant command to very highly selected
          Log officers and Maritime Helicopter pilots .. for both moral/service pride and expertise reasons?)
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
742
Points
910
Negative to both, Mr Campbell. The watch keeping regs are written to explicitly exclude non-MARS Officers.

Even though I am aware of one case where a HELAIRDET is composed of a couple former MARS Officers, sufficiently senior that in case of accident onboard a frigate that took out both the CO and XO, either of them would be the next logical choice for command (given their seniority and experience) over every other officer onboard.

Neither the RCAF nor the RCN particularly want helicopter aircrew as watchkeepers. The RCN has an institutional memory of the old Naval Aviation branch making a better than average showing at commanding ships (which is both embarrassing and career limiting, if you are a surface fleet officer) and the RCAF has seen too many attempts by the RCN to mis-employ Air Detachments, to the point where there is actually very little trust between the two services.
 

Good2Golf

Army.ca Legend
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
721
Points
1,040
OGBD, I concur with your approach of explicit designation.  The grammatical-Venn method reeks of people wanting to develop all-encompassing regs (and who are most often shocked when an exceptional case arises they they, the smart folks, had missed in their deliberations).

Regards
G2G
 

Oldgateboatdriver

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
124
Points
680
E.R. Campbell said:
Many decades ago I went to staff college with three, count 'em three, LCdrs (still in "jolly green jumpers" ~ it was that long ago) who had commanded Bay class minesweepers (plus one who had commanded a submarine). Two of the three were Comm/EW experts (one retired as a commodore, the other as a captain (N)), the other was a deep diver ~ fellow named Barry Ridgewell if that means anything to anyone. It was explained to us that the Bay class ships were "reserved" for semi-technical types who were likely to be "streamed" into technical staff jobs as three and four stripers ~ as Comm/EW guys were. They (some of them, anyway) were thought to merit sea command, as long as they could pass the exams, and those who would be sent to staff college and promoted in their area of expertise were thought to need sea command experience. So we were told, anyway ...

bay_thunder.jpg
 
kingston_704_welland_canal_3440.jpg

                        Bay Class Minesweeper                                                                                                                                              Kingston Class MCDV
            Length:    152 ft                                                                                                                                                                                  181 ft
            Beam:        28 ft                                                                                                                                                                                  37 ft
  Displacement:    390 tons                                                                                                                                                                              970 tons
              Crew:      38                                                                                                                                                                                    31 to 47


Maybe that sort of policy makes sense for the modern RCN, too.

          (Are Log officers (and helicopter pilots) (still) allowed to have upped deck watch-keeping qualifications? If YES and IF they can pass the sea command exams would it not make sense to give a small combatant command to very highly selected
          Log officers and Maritime Helicopter pilots .. for both moral/service pride and expertise reasons?)

Ah! THUNDER me old mate. Nice to see you again.

Truly Mr. C., I don't know to what you would be referring exactly. Unlike the RN, we did not have "Radio Officers" in  Maritime Command. Comms and EW were handled by  the seaman and C&PO's under the MARS officers of appropriate rank and training (Comm O  or Ops Room officer or Combat officer courses) on their normal career progression. On the technical/electronics side of things, the Combat Systems Engineering officers handled things, but I have never heard of or seen a CSE getting any command, and only know of one MSE officer who managed the feat, onboard CHAUDIERE.

On the other hand, from the moment I joined, mid-seventies, to the days the PB's retired, I have only known MARS officers to be given command of them, and in most cases, "up and coming" mars officers that got major surface commands later and often went on to a flag of their own.
 

Edward Campbell

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
125
Points
710
Well, there was, in the 1970s (and well into the 1990s, when I retired) a strong Comm/EW grouping in the Navy. The N6 in Halifax was a four striper with a very strong Comm EW background, and a couple of other Comm EW four stripers had desks in Ottawa: all MARS, some with sea command experience, all in charge of Comm EW policies for the Navy or the CF. I don't know if they had any formal designation, but they, and everyone else, apparently, knew who (and what) they were.
 

Old Sweat

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
36
Points
480
Was there not an order or something of Old Crows that was sort of a "club" of naval EW guys?
 

Oldgateboatdriver

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
124
Points
680
Not to be confused with the "Crow's Nest", which was (is?) a Naval officer's club in St-John's  ;D.

And ERC, you are confirming my info: They were MARS officers, so they were perfectly competent to sit their boards and have command of PB. BTW, while wearing greens, we did not have an N6 in Maritime Command (that came in during the late 80's). The jobs you had in mind would have been SSO Comms and under him, SO EW, the first was a four ringer post and the second a three ringer IIRC.
 
 

Pat in Halifax

Sr. Member
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Pedantic (and tangent) possibly but the Crow's Nest is NO LONGER restricted to just Officers though it is still referred to as the "Crows Nest Officers Club" but from their website:

"Membership is open to all persons who are interested in maintaining The Crow’s Nest Club’s character and purpose. All membership applications are reviewed by the membership committee and approved by the Board of Directors."
 

Stoker

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
74
Points
530
Pat in Halifax said:
Pedantic (and tangent) possibly but the Crow's Nest is NO LONGER restricted to just Officers though it is still referred to as the "Crows Nest Officers Club" but from their website:

"Membership is open to all persons who are interested in maintaining The Crow’s Nest Club’s character and purpose. All membership applications are reviewed by the membership committee and approved by the Board of Directors."

I have been a member for some years now, excellent place to have a pint and a quiet conversation.
 

Pat in Halifax

Sr. Member
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Many times I go there, i don't recall (clearly) leaving! Must be a time warp or something!
 

Edward Campbell

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
125
Points
710
Chief Stoker said:
I have been a member for some years now, excellent place to have a pint and a quiet conversation.


Me, too ... and I am a member of Old Crows, too!

... pins, pins, pins ...

    ... this one
index.php
provoked a few questions here on Army.ca a few years ago.
 

cupper

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I've seen the Old Crows office in Alexandria VA whenever I was taking the Metro into DC. Always wondered what that was until I googled them.
 

MMSS

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Pat in Halifax said:
Many times I go there, i don't recall (clearly) leaving! Must be a time warp or something!

Funny, sounds like the last time I was there...
 

Stoker

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
74
Points
530
It looks like the Kingston Class demise may be premature. A design life of 25 years they are about 5 years away from losing their Loyd's certification. Apparently there is a study being conduced the feasibility of extending the platform for a further 10 to 15 years beyond its service life. The class is constantly being upgraded with new equipment and this is very doable. Plans to remove and replace all main DA's and alternators is in the works. They only recently received a new machinery monitoring system. These ships are constantly busy and are the workhorses of the fleet. Recently the 60/40 split in manning was rescinded and if a reserve is able to take a billet, they will get it.
 

kratz

Army.ca Veteran
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
17
Points
530
Wow ! That's some big news on a couple of items. Thanks for the update.
Now if the budget follows to fund these changes.
 

Stoker

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
74
Points
530
kratz said:
Wow ! That's some big news on a couple of items. Thanks for the update.
Now if the budget follows to fund these changes.

Upgrading the class would be relatively cheap I would imagine with ships being upgraded at the end of their 60 month maintenance cycle during their docking.
 
J

jollyjacktar

Guest
I'm hearing the same thing from the class desk.  They're not going away soon.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
188
Points
710
Further to the discussion on smaller warships: - this from SMA http://army.ca/forums/threads/64325/post-1452711.html#msg1452711

Which leads to this on Naval Technology

Key points re the River Class OPVs

The offshore patrol vessel is intended to carry out a range of economic exclusion zone management tasks such as maritime security, border control, routine patrols, anti-smuggling, counter-terrorism, counter-piracy, and fishery protection, as well as effective disaster relief. It can also be used for the protection of natural resources.

BAE Systems received a £348m ($529m) contract from the UK Ministry of Defence to build three new OPV class ships for the UK Royal Navy in August 2014.

The patrol ship has a length of 90.5m, width of 13m and a displacement of 2,000t. It provides accommodation for 60 personnel, including a crew of 34. The vessel can also carry up to 50 embarked troops or passengers.

The OPV boasts of an enhanced flight deck at the aft to operate the latest Merlin helicopters. It is capable of carrying two Pacific 24 rigid inflatable boats (RIBs). A 16t crane will be attached to lift equipments. The vessel also features large storage, accommodation, and medical facilities.

The main armament of the UK Royal Navy's new 90m offshore patrol vessel is a 30mm cannon. The vessel will be fitted with small calibre machine guns. It can also be mounted with a 12.7mm gun location and a 25mm secondary armament on both the port and starboard sides.

Not suggesting building or acquiring.  Just taken with the design parameters and the discussion about "small ships".

By contrast the Holland OPV displaces 3750 tons deep with similar accommodation over similar range but a bit slower.  She also has a hangar and heavier armament.
 
Top