Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)
- Thread starter x-grunt
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 840
- Points
- 1,060
Hmm .... would the brass pole* go midships or port or to starboard?
* was that a security breach? OOPs, I meant ummm .. the new comms array.
* was that a security breach? OOPs, I meant ummm .. the new comms array.
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
Things are heating up here.
Could put it Midship and call it a Fire Pole.
GW
Could put it Midship and call it a Fire Pole.
GW
- Reaction score
- 840
- Points
- 1,060
I volunteer to be the guy with the nozzle on the initial attack team.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Maybe for the west coast types x-grunt for us east coast types we are always gone.
N
navydrill
Guest
OK guys lets set the record straight on a few things.
1. on average an MCDV spends about 280 days A YEAR, EVERY YEAR at sea.
2. we desperately need better RIB launch capability/recovery
3. 12 is not enough, however we don't have the man power to man any more.
4. the navy is getting 4 new ships, something akin to the old yags, to be manned by both reg and res crew.
5. i have sailed on CPF and MCDV and the MCDV is way more work so BZ to all the res that do it year after year.
and 6. the navy period needs more thinkers in HQ who the hell thought up the MCDVs anyway i mean come on i minesweeper with a steel hull D'UH.
1. on average an MCDV spends about 280 days A YEAR, EVERY YEAR at sea.
2. we desperately need better RIB launch capability/recovery
3. 12 is not enough, however we don't have the man power to man any more.
4. the navy is getting 4 new ships, something akin to the old yags, to be manned by both reg and res crew.
5. i have sailed on CPF and MCDV and the MCDV is way more work so BZ to all the res that do it year after year.
and 6. the navy period needs more thinkers in HQ who the hell thought up the MCDVs anyway i mean come on i minesweeper with a steel hull D'UH.
N
navydrill
Guest
wow you guys out on the west coast got it easy. out here we do minimum of 280 and the most I've ever seen is 340 days at sea(trip to Europe minesweeping with everything else). as far as the pay scale there are about 6 class c the rest are class b. we are working to get rid of class b all together.and hey kenward long time no see glad to see you are still around.
cheers LS miller
EX- darksider
cheers LS miller
EX- darksider
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 460
Prove you wrong? Yes the MCDV is good at what it does.... Training Officers..................And they do a good job at it.
But I thought the one of the main purposes of a Reserve force was to Augment the Reg force in time of need. The Navy reserve and the Reg force are two different forces. You can take your average Reserve Soldier and he can fully integrate into an Army unit with little training. Take your average Navres sailor, and throw him in a reg force position and they are lost (nav comm). If the MCDVs and CPFs were manned jointly by SHADS and Reg Force, I think the training standard overall would go up.
There is a difference between your average SHAD (NCM) and your Reg Force sailor.
MCDV Maritime Coastal Defence Vessel <--- Too slow
Mine Sweeping <--- Metal Hull
Funny how when they decided to try to market the MCDV overseas........ Not one country would bite..... I beleive it was Finland who manufactured a Mine Sweeper with a Fibre glass hull
After some research, I did find that last year four MCDVs out east sailed 187 days. They were a part of the nothern deployment, and other sails.
That was a busiest year so far............
So for someone to say that an MCDV spends about 280 days a YEAR, EVERY YEAR at sea........ is unfounded.
Seriously though SHADS are hard working, but don't them fool ya, I am sure that it might be difficult at times on a MCDV, but you get on a CPF preping for the gulf, and you will work. Get a CPF in refit, you will sit around. Depends on where you are posted.
Skimmer Puke = Term used by Submariners to describe our Surface Brothers
But I thought the one of the main purposes of a Reserve force was to Augment the Reg force in time of need. The Navy reserve and the Reg force are two different forces. You can take your average Reserve Soldier and he can fully integrate into an Army unit with little training. Take your average Navres sailor, and throw him in a reg force position and they are lost (nav comm). If the MCDVs and CPFs were manned jointly by SHADS and Reg Force, I think the training standard overall would go up.
There is a difference between your average SHAD (NCM) and your Reg Force sailor.
MCDV Maritime Coastal Defence Vessel <--- Too slow
Mine Sweeping <--- Metal Hull
Funny how when they decided to try to market the MCDV overseas........ Not one country would bite..... I beleive it was Finland who manufactured a Mine Sweeper with a Fibre glass hull
After some research, I did find that last year four MCDVs out east sailed 187 days. They were a part of the nothern deployment, and other sails.
That was a busiest year so far............
So for someone to say that an MCDV spends about 280 days a YEAR, EVERY YEAR at sea........ is unfounded.
Seriously though SHADS are hard working, but don't them fool ya, I am sure that it might be difficult at times on a MCDV, but you get on a CPF preping for the gulf, and you will work. Get a CPF in refit, you will sit around. Depends on where you are posted.
Skimmer Puke = Term used by Submariners to describe our Surface Brothers
- Reaction score
- 35
- Points
- 530
Sounds like a good platform for fisheries patrol and that's about it.
M. ???
M. ???
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 460
A minimum of 280 days for all the MCDVs? Are you crazy? And can you really count the days where you leave in the morning and return back for supper? Don't get me wrong I know that there are busy ships, but the MCDV fleet as a whole isn't ripping around 280 days a year.....
I know people like to inflate numbers, for example when you sail for 5 months, it is always inflated to 6...............
I know people like to inflate numbers, for example when you sail for 5 months, it is always inflated to 6...............
x-grunt
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 230
Sub_Guy said:
From what little I know - and I confess to being a noob with current naval issues - NavRes primary task is not to augment Reg force personnel, but man the MCDV's and provide personnel for coastal ops. At least, this is what I get from the defence website. I assume this was done to free up the Regs for bluewater ops. Providing manpower (person-power?) to the CPF's is a lesser role and and perhaps training does not reflect CPF equipment all that well.
Army reserves supply members to augment the Reg units as a primary task. And from what I've read here and experienced in the infantry, it does take a while upgrade an army reservists training, regardless of element.
Regardless, you are absolutely right. Part-timers will never be as cozy and competent with the work as a full-timer in any activity. That's the way it is. The Regs are the overall pro's. Reserve organizations are never going to have the same level of experience and training. As you stated, this doesn't mean Res members don't try as hard or have any less pride in their work when deployed.
I can't speak to how many days at sea any vessel does. I have no right to speak of the workload, I have not been to sea on a CF vessel since '77. But I have met several reservists who each spent over 300 days at sea last year. So maybe it's not so much the ships being at sea, as the sailors moving from hull to hull to fill crews?
Bizarre. Who bought these things?
I still like the idea of converting these to "entertainment vessels"
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 460
Yes I will agree that sailors with 300 days at sea, are most likely the result of switching hulls, but there are a lot of day sailing trips, sailing in the morning, and returning at night...
Our MCDVs and SHADs are top notch, but the vessel could have been better designed. Our Naval reserve has it own distinct mission. How about the Air Force reserve, what is their primary role? Is there even such a thing?
Our MCDVs and SHADs are top notch, but the vessel could have been better designed. Our Naval reserve has it own distinct mission. How about the Air Force reserve, what is their primary role? Is there even such a thing?
N
navydrill
Guest
OK let me clarify the ship its self may not sail that much however due to manning shortages sailors get bumped around the ships all the time.half the time i did not know what ship i was on in the morning.
all this leaves the crews with poor morale and sailor with no time along side.
all this leaves the crews with poor morale and sailor with no time along side.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 230
Though a good concept, the design of the MCDV's weren't fully thought out as many here will agree.
They do serve as a good training platform for MARS officers, but due to the lack of modern weaponry, and stability issues, I think it's role would be better suited as a training platform.
NCRCrow, you've just dated yourself, as that place has been closed for many years!! Don't get me wrong, it was an excellent place which was frequented by many Naval Reservists....
They do serve as a good training platform for MARS officers, but due to the lack of modern weaponry, and stability issues, I think it's role would be better suited as a training platform.
NCRCrow said:
NCRCrow, you've just dated yourself, as that place has been closed for many years!! Don't get me wrong, it was an excellent place which was frequented by many Naval Reservists....
- Reaction score
- 840
- Points
- 1,060
The Tudor House is closed?
- Reaction score
- 15
- Points
- 230
If the Tudor house closed I'd quit! LOL. In all seriousness, there are many things they could do to improve the MCDV's. Yes, the design was flawed. Yes, metal is a poor choice for a MM. The DC arrangement is atrocious. But all in all they fulfill the mandate very well considering. I'm sure the frigates would love to set to sea for a single day tasking any time our american friends want to visit Esquimalt.
Anyway, point of the post... MCDV's do many things well. In fact many things we do better than the frigates could since they don't know ANYTHING about sailing in local waters (listening to a frigate call into Victoria Traffic borders on embarassing).
MCDV's are sent to sea because,
We're cheap to send out
We're cheap to send out
and finally,
We're cheap to send out
So, in essence we're everything a frigate is NOT:
Small
Low cost for fuel
Low cost for maintenance
Low cost for crew (CCFP doesn't pay the salaries on the MCDV's but owns the ships)
Long endurance without victuals or fuel replenishment
Excellent redundant propulsion system (twin screw, twin motor, four diesel engines)
Highly maneouverable at any speed (up to 15 knots)
Purpose designed for coastal operations
-Black water treatment system one of only two approved by the USCG to discharge within US TTW
-2 High capacity ROD units capable of making 12 CUMs of water daily
-Capable of shallow water transits (3.3 metre draught... INCLUDING mandatory safety depth of 50cm)
As part of TGEX 04/02 the MCDV's proved capable of not only integrating with a TG, they proved invaluable for intelligence gathering in restricted waters. Further, in the last 12 months the MCDV fleet (west coast) added more contacts to GCCS than the "reg force" fleet did, resulting in over a dozen RCMP/USCG interdictions that ended in arrests. Further, the last sovereignty patrol conducted by HMCS Calgary covered the exact same areas that three MCDV's were already patrolling. When it comes to local (seattle to prince rupert) ISR, the only choice CCFP wants to make is the group with experience... and they're not on a frigate.
For all the reg force types that continuously haggle about our training and experience.... I have to agree the training is sometimes lacking. But I'll tell you this (from experience on both sides of the house), my four man ops team could bury a frigate when it comes to contact identification and reporting in Canadian waters.
You can have your MIO ops and American TG experience. I can go to sea every day knowing that I'm contributing to the security of MY country directly. It may not be our "mandate" on paper, or in any CF doctrine. But the workhorses of our ISR network are the "only useful for training" MCDV's.
Quite frankly, I'm sick and tired of the reg force making fun of reservists... especially those of us who work every day of the year on unlimited liability just like you. Yeah, my trade courses have been shorter than yours... so what? My JLC was the same, and I finished atop 25 reg force guys. My shipboard training is the same... Flood, Fire, Boarding party.... all with the reg force. I taught some reg force folks how to use C2PC and sametime chat when they couldn't figure it out. In the end, I work under an ex reg force CO, who in turn works for a ex-reg force DCOMD MOG4 (who incidentally was my old CO), who in turn works for a whole line of reg force guys.
So if you've got a problem with SHADS... here's a news flash... WE DON'T CARE. We've heard enough of it....
Good day.
Anyway, point of the post... MCDV's do many things well. In fact many things we do better than the frigates could since they don't know ANYTHING about sailing in local waters (listening to a frigate call into Victoria Traffic borders on embarassing).
MCDV's are sent to sea because,
We're cheap to send out
We're cheap to send out
and finally,
We're cheap to send out
So, in essence we're everything a frigate is NOT:
Small
Low cost for fuel
Low cost for maintenance
Low cost for crew (CCFP doesn't pay the salaries on the MCDV's but owns the ships)
Long endurance without victuals or fuel replenishment
Excellent redundant propulsion system (twin screw, twin motor, four diesel engines)
Highly maneouverable at any speed (up to 15 knots)
Purpose designed for coastal operations
-Black water treatment system one of only two approved by the USCG to discharge within US TTW
-2 High capacity ROD units capable of making 12 CUMs of water daily
-Capable of shallow water transits (3.3 metre draught... INCLUDING mandatory safety depth of 50cm)
As part of TGEX 04/02 the MCDV's proved capable of not only integrating with a TG, they proved invaluable for intelligence gathering in restricted waters. Further, in the last 12 months the MCDV fleet (west coast) added more contacts to GCCS than the "reg force" fleet did, resulting in over a dozen RCMP/USCG interdictions that ended in arrests. Further, the last sovereignty patrol conducted by HMCS Calgary covered the exact same areas that three MCDV's were already patrolling. When it comes to local (seattle to prince rupert) ISR, the only choice CCFP wants to make is the group with experience... and they're not on a frigate.
For all the reg force types that continuously haggle about our training and experience.... I have to agree the training is sometimes lacking. But I'll tell you this (from experience on both sides of the house), my four man ops team could bury a frigate when it comes to contact identification and reporting in Canadian waters.
You can have your MIO ops and American TG experience. I can go to sea every day knowing that I'm contributing to the security of MY country directly. It may not be our "mandate" on paper, or in any CF doctrine. But the workhorses of our ISR network are the "only useful for training" MCDV's.
Quite frankly, I'm sick and tired of the reg force making fun of reservists... especially those of us who work every day of the year on unlimited liability just like you. Yeah, my trade courses have been shorter than yours... so what? My JLC was the same, and I finished atop 25 reg force guys. My shipboard training is the same... Flood, Fire, Boarding party.... all with the reg force. I taught some reg force folks how to use C2PC and sametime chat when they couldn't figure it out. In the end, I work under an ex reg force CO, who in turn works for a ex-reg force DCOMD MOG4 (who incidentally was my old CO), who in turn works for a whole line of reg force guys.
So if you've got a problem with SHADS... here's a news flash... WE DON'T CARE. We've heard enough of it....
Good day.
Similar threads
