Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)
- Thread starter x-grunt
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 460
True MCDVs are better for local waters....... that is what their main mission is, and sure the CPF isn't a logical choice for ripping around the straits out here on the west coast. Speaking as a 277, I have seen many OOW maneouvers go wrong with a Kingston class in the mix, and it isn't from our inexperience. That being said, there are cluster fcuks all over the place, and no matter where they are and who they work for, they always stand out when representing an organization.
MCDV should be the logical choice for local waters, and as for adding more contacts in GCCS over the last year BZ to the SHAD fleet, considering the REG force fleet was exhausted and spent most of the time sitting alongside from the numerous tours to the middle east.
MCDV should be the logical choice for local waters, and as for adding more contacts in GCCS over the last year BZ to the SHAD fleet, considering the REG force fleet was exhausted and spent most of the time sitting alongside from the numerous tours to the middle east.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
So true Sub Guy so true.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
navydrill said:
And you don't think that happens with the Reg Force? More often then we like..and let us not forget the poor sailors that get posted a high readiness unit every 3 to 5 years. Doesn't happened? Happened to me up until 2002 when I went ashore finally and I have been Navy since 1994.
- Reaction score
- 3,426
- Points
- 1,120
To modify the Kingston class MCDV to be a better vessel for the task it does, here's a few suggestions.
1. Lengthen the ship by 20 feet. (better length/beam ratio = faster ship, better handling, also provides more space for additional crew)
2. Remove 40mm Bofors (most of which are dated from the 1940's, I saw them being re-furbed in the weapons shop in D-200) replace with modern 25mm Bushmaster (Smaller ammo, larger quantity able to be carried)
3. Add active stabilizers, provide better sea handling
4. Increase engine power available, or upgrade Z-drives, allowing greater speed (over 20 knots), allows greater flexibility and ability to be used for MIO Ops
5. Add IR/NV system to permit covert surveillance as part of MIO ops.
6. Add better Zodiac/RHIB system, again allowing better utility for MIO ops.
If the 20 ft section was added in midships, there could be more cabin space added, better stability, more speed, and a spot for RHIBs on each side.
The likelyhood of the ships being modified/improved in any significant way (such as adding 20 feet) is extremely unlikely, so the options most likely to provide improved capabilities for the MCDV's would be an increase in engine power to allow greater speeds, adding stabilizers, and adding an IR/NV system.
As you can see, I'm suggesting a lot of things that would allow the ships to be better used in MIO ops, (Maritime Interdiction Operations). Having a greater capability in doing this would make the ships that much more deployable, and because of their cheaper operating costs, they might be a better option to send in the case of a mostly MIO operation.
I do not think it would be a worthwhile option to consider increasing the armament on the MCDV's to the point of them being a major surface combattant, but adding a Stinger team, or Blowpipe might be a good idea, allowing for some local air defence in the case of a high risk area (especially if deployed overseas doing MIO in the Goo or somewhere.)
Just my thoughts, but adding a 20 foot section was proposed half-way through the build cycle on the ships (just as it was proposed to add 28 feet into the CPF's during building.)
NavyShooter
1. Lengthen the ship by 20 feet. (better length/beam ratio = faster ship, better handling, also provides more space for additional crew)
2. Remove 40mm Bofors (most of which are dated from the 1940's, I saw them being re-furbed in the weapons shop in D-200) replace with modern 25mm Bushmaster (Smaller ammo, larger quantity able to be carried)
3. Add active stabilizers, provide better sea handling
4. Increase engine power available, or upgrade Z-drives, allowing greater speed (over 20 knots), allows greater flexibility and ability to be used for MIO Ops
5. Add IR/NV system to permit covert surveillance as part of MIO ops.
6. Add better Zodiac/RHIB system, again allowing better utility for MIO ops.
If the 20 ft section was added in midships, there could be more cabin space added, better stability, more speed, and a spot for RHIBs on each side.
The likelyhood of the ships being modified/improved in any significant way (such as adding 20 feet) is extremely unlikely, so the options most likely to provide improved capabilities for the MCDV's would be an increase in engine power to allow greater speeds, adding stabilizers, and adding an IR/NV system.
As you can see, I'm suggesting a lot of things that would allow the ships to be better used in MIO ops, (Maritime Interdiction Operations). Having a greater capability in doing this would make the ships that much more deployable, and because of their cheaper operating costs, they might be a better option to send in the case of a mostly MIO operation.
I do not think it would be a worthwhile option to consider increasing the armament on the MCDV's to the point of them being a major surface combattant, but adding a Stinger team, or Blowpipe might be a good idea, allowing for some local air defence in the case of a high risk area (especially if deployed overseas doing MIO in the Goo or somewhere.)
Just my thoughts, but adding a 20 foot section was proposed half-way through the build cycle on the ships (just as it was proposed to add 28 feet into the CPF's during building.)
NavyShooter
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Would you want the Kingston class to be redesignated as an OPV and look on the market for dedicated MCM vessels?
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
x-grunt said:
CCFP-Commander of Canadian Forces Pacific
TG-Task Group
MIO-Maritime Interdiction Operations
Sub_Guy said:
Unfortunately, on the Kingston class side of the house, problems with maneouvers usually ARE from the inexperience. I joined as a sig, and will always be a sig at heart. The guys in my dept are well trained up on maneouvers thanks to me, and are even used to how anal I am on my flag deck. But new pers onboard, and even some of my counterparts on the other ships scare me with reporting signals and even transmitting them. OOW Man. died long ago, and teaching basic resultant order on crses is not helping at all. They are cramming too much info into a 8 week crse for comms now (including trying to add IT to the mix) and stuff is being lost including tactical and semaphore.
Yes, upgrading an MCDV equipment and looks-wise is a choice that needs to be made. But what also needs to be upgraded is the training of the personnel serving on them. The current ones and the "oldies" have learned, but the new ones coming onboard are, sadly, lacking in the upgrades that have been added and even the old-famil. As a current full-time reservist, I have all the time right now to learn. But a Class A shad lacks for the time to train, and that is noticeable. No fault to them though, they are simply doing their job as a typical reserve. But to NavResHQ, they must step to the plate and work on seriously training people.
- Reaction score
- 35
- Points
- 530
Ex-Dragoon said:
Personally, I think the Oksoy-class with a remote 25mm turret (like the Australian Armidales) would be an interesting alternative.
Matthew.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 460
So if you've got a problem with SHADS... here's a news flash... WE DON'T CARE. We've heard enough of it....
I don't think anyone has a problem with SHADS, what happens is a little friendly rivalry which keeps everyone on their toes. I am sure that we can all agree that the Air Force takes a lot of hits from the NAVY and the ARMY. Within the army in the Combat arms trade there are rivalries (Infanteers poking sticks at artillery and tank drivers, or how about MSEOPS?) In the Navy we have reg force poking sticks at SHADS, and within the reg force Navy, you get OPS types, Bosn's, Stokers, all who poke fun at the each others trade.
My main point is that we are all part of a team and each and every part of this team has to remain strong as when it comes time for all of the team to work together, there are no weak links, and the job will get done with great success. I feel that the elbow rubbing that goes on between services, ships, bases, trades, reg, and reserve is healthy and good for us all, as it keeps camaraderie strong, and keeps us in check.
I married and ex-SHAD, and trust me I always hear about it when I start to poke fun at them.
Everyone take care and enjoy the extra $$$ that is coming our way
I don't think anyone has a problem with SHADS, what happens is a little friendly rivalry which keeps everyone on their toes. I am sure that we can all agree that the Air Force takes a lot of hits from the NAVY and the ARMY. Within the army in the Combat arms trade there are rivalries (Infanteers poking sticks at artillery and tank drivers, or how about MSEOPS?) In the Navy we have reg force poking sticks at SHADS, and within the reg force Navy, you get OPS types, Bosn's, Stokers, all who poke fun at the each others trade.
My main point is that we are all part of a team and each and every part of this team has to remain strong as when it comes time for all of the team to work together, there are no weak links, and the job will get done with great success. I feel that the elbow rubbing that goes on between services, ships, bases, trades, reg, and reserve is healthy and good for us all, as it keeps camaraderie strong, and keeps us in check.
I married and ex-SHAD, and trust me I always hear about it when I start to poke fun at them.
Everyone take care and enjoy the extra $$$ that is coming our way
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
Interesting, the real reason that MCDVs are used so much more Domestically than CPFs/280s was never really addressed as you all bickered about reg force vs shads. MONEY! Sending an MCDV out for a day costs $10-12,000, whereas a CPF costs anywhere from $25-30,000. (Please don't be a loser and debate back with exact figures, people, it all depends on how much gas is burned and what type of Sea Day it is, either low activity, operational, etc. I know) As for the SHAD vs Reg Force debacle, get a grip. Each has it's own role, and fulfills their roles quite well. In fact, most Reg Force trg and MOC coursing is identical to SHAD courses, particularly Bosn's, MARS Officers and the like. Granted, reg force types get much more specialized trg down the road, but I would hope and expect a more in-depth course being on a $1 billion platform with 24 missiles, several weapons systems and radars under my control vice one dated, un-stabilized gun, and no LINK or CCS. P. Diddy said it best -it's all about the Benjamins, baby.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
Ex-Dragoon said:
Ah, Dragoon hits it on the head again. When I first hit the fleet (reg force) I was TD'd to so many different ships, I actually put a velcro patch where my ship's crest goes, and velcroed them on and off to save trips to the tailor! SHAD-tubs don't spend 280 days at sea at all. They do short little trips, and are never away on 50, 60, 70-day stints at sea like a CPF or 280 -becasue they don't have the refuelling at sea capabili, nor the stores to maintain an extended cruise at sea. As well, they are so minimally manned, any evolution is virtually all-ship, they cannot maintain "Stbd SSD" or "Port SSD", it's just SSD!
Now, to finally answer the original question in this blog -what does an MCDV do? Not much, really. They are essentially replacement PBs, used primarily for junior officer and operator trg (without, regretably, a Dunk's Diner, of course!
) Those "Salty" "Senior NCIOPs" and Master Seaman "Yeoman" can drivel all they want about "Operational Effectiveness" of that platform, but it boils down to this -no legs (sustainablility at sea for a duration of time), 2 -no LINK (thus cannot tangiably contribute to force RMP or RAP) 3 -poor self-defence "suite", let alone force weapons. 2 .50 cals (which are highly inaccurate) coupled with a WWII 40mm Bofors that is welded to the deck with no stabilization OR CCS interface so that targets can be designated and engaged through radar/STIRs). MCDVs are completely useless operationally, but a sound trg platform, as their rolling ride helps to give young trainees their sea legs early on. Overall, SHADs are good people working with bad, old, operationally ineffective and irrelevant kit. For that, I salute you all!
N
navydrill
Guest
ok guys enough shad bashing! we do alot and we have our place in the navy just as the regs have theres so lets leave it at that.
any shad that reads this knows we get boned with all the shitty little jobs that are to good for the regs. so without us, you would be doing all the fish pats and little trips out trainging the MARS. so i think you owe us a thank you. because of us you get to spend more than 3 weeks at a time along side! :threat:
hey kenward, not much! still out east been here since 99.same old same old.
any shad that reads this knows we get boned with all the shitty little jobs that are to good for the regs. so without us, you would be doing all the fish pats and little trips out trainging the MARS. so i think you owe us a thank you. because of us you get to spend more than 3 weeks at a time along side! :threat:
hey kenward, not much! still out east been here since 99.same old same old.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Ah yes bow down before the mighty naval reservist we know how they carry the navy on their backs...blah blah blah. :
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
yea sorry navy drill, i was a little drunk when i wrote that. I used to work with a lot of reservists most were great, but then again a lot of the others were just bags of shit.
I had a kilik for life preaching to me about dress and deportment, meanwhile this guy couldn't put crease in his sleave to save his life.
I had a kilik for life preaching to me about dress and deportment, meanwhile this guy couldn't put crease in his sleave to save his life.
- Reaction score
- 309
- Points
- 880
Technical question that a fixed wing flunkie such as myself has no knowledge...
There is an MCDV coming up the coast some time in the future (sorry guys, ship movements are OPSEC) to look for the Beaver float plane that went down off Campbell River, BC. The water in that area is approx. 600' deep. How effective is the Side Scan SONAR that our MCDVs carry (within reason - no details required) ? I know that we had MCDVs in Lake Ontario looking for Avro Arrow models - will it be able to do the job here in BC?
There is an MCDV coming up the coast some time in the future (sorry guys, ship movements are OPSEC) to look for the Beaver float plane that went down off Campbell River, BC. The water in that area is approx. 600' deep. How effective is the Side Scan SONAR that our MCDVs carry (within reason - no details required) ? I know that we had MCDVs in Lake Ontario looking for Avro Arrow models - will it be able to do the job here in BC?
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Well seeing how detailed the side scan details are of Halifax harbour is I would say its one of the best features of the MCDV.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Zoomie said:
Only when it's more then 48hrs away!!
It's not my trade, so I'm not all that knowledgeable on this, but hopefully some others that I know are out there will fill in the high points (Cronicbny, I mean you...). What I do know though is that the gear has been trialled out here (B.C.) numerous times, but most recently just a month or so ago. And trialled successfully too. There is also other gear that can be taken for mission-specific to aid in Route Survey, dependent on the depth, area, terrain etc.
Sorry, I know that didn't answer much...
Zoomie, can I assume that you have been part of the search so far to know about what's happening next?
Similar threads
