Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)

[Kirkhill]

Seeing as how Heddle is in the hunt I guess we can assume that, like the MCDVs the Vigilance won't displace much more than the 970 tonnes of the Kingstons. For a minor in the NSS she has to stay under 1000 tonnnes. No?

About the National Shipbuilding Strategy - National Shipbuilding Strategy - Sea - Defence Procurement - Buying and Selling - PSPC

The National Shipbuilding Strategy has helped restore our shipyards, rebuild our marine industry and create sustainable jobs in Canada

www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca

 

[Underway]

It all depends on yard availability I think at this point. We've got three yards all working full tilt for the most part. Given the announcement for replacement for a whole swath of CCG ships not to long ago we'll have to see if there is spare capacity.

Likely its going to be quite a few years away before those ships are built anyways.

 

[Dana381]

The kingstons have azipods but the vard dosent? Did the RCN decide the azipods were unnecessary?

 

[Underway]

The kingstons have azipods but the vard dosent? Did the RCN decide the azipods were unnecessary?

This is just a concept design to get their name out there. RCN hasn't even stood up the project office properly yet.

Likely the RCN will allow industry to propose what their solution is for the requirements. If that means azipods then they'll show up in the solution space.

 

[JLB50]

Could some of the blocks, mega blocks or other large components be farmed out by one of the Big Three to a smaller yard like Heddle?

 

[Dana381]

This is just a concept design to get their name out there. RCN hasn't even stood up the project office properly yet.

Likely the RCN will allow industry to propose what their solution is for the requirements. If that means azipods then they'll show up in the solution space.

I guess, but If I was spending the money they are to try to land a yet to be announced contract I would want my offering to be at least as capable as the current ships. Unless I had been told by someone at the RCN that the official position is the azipods weren't necessary.

Otherwise If another company starts promoting an azipod equipped offering they may steal the show. Then all my money spent will be for nothing. Or worse make me look stupid.

Anyway she is a nice looking ship and a good way to get attention for those companies.

 

[Stoker]

The kingstons have azipods but the vard dosent? Did the RCN decide the azipods were unnecessary?

Dynamic positioning will most likely be an requirement.

 

[Spencer100]

Dynamic positioning will most likely be an requirement.

Is there more than one way to do that? I have a feeling there is now days but I am no SME. Are Azipods more expensive than traditional screws? And would guess it may have to which type of propulsion engine/drive/gensets are chosen?

 

[calculus]

Seeing as how Heddle is in the hunt I guess we can assume that, like the MCDVs the Vigilance won't displace much more than the 970 tonnes of the Kingstons. For a minor in the NSS she has to stay under 1000 tonnnes. No?

About the National Shipbuilding Strategy - National Shipbuilding Strategy - Sea - Defence Procurement - Buying and Selling - PSPC

The National Shipbuilding Strategy has helped restore our shipyards, rebuild our marine industry and create sustainable jobs in Canada

www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca

If there is a tie-up between Heddle and Seaspsan, would the 1000 ton limit apply anymore? In theory, the only limiting factor then would be Seawaymax restrictions.

 

[Spencer100]

If there is a tie-up between Heddle and Seaspsan, would the 1000 ton limit apply anymore? In theory, the only limiting factor then would be Seawaymax restrictions.

I thought they announced a partnership between the two. But there is no note of Seaspan on this PR piece.

The will most likely be Seawaymax. Unless something is deep hull mounted like a sonar.

FYI one of the reasons the Constitution class doesn't have a hull mount sonar is the the Seawaymax restrictions from the WI based Lake Michigan shipyard. But I guess if they really wanted it they would find away. But the other yards looking for the second shipyard source are playing that fact up.

 

[Swampbuggy]

Is there more than one way to do that? I have a feeling there is now days but I am no SME. Are Azipods more expensive than traditional screws? And would guess it may have to which type of propulsion engine/drive/gensets are chosen?

No expert, but I’d think you’d at least need a retractable bow thruster in conjunction with your main propulsion, if you didn’t have azipods.

 

[TacticalTea]

No expert, but I’d think you’d at least need a retractable bow thruster in conjunction with your main propulsion, if you didn’t have azipods.

Yes, bow thruster is the other conventional option.

Harry DeWolf class, as an example, has bow thruster in conjunction with rudders and screws.

Orcas and CPFs, at 300 and 5000 tons, rely only on rudders and screws.

No HMC ship has proper dynamic positioning (even an attentively manoeuvred MCDV will drift slowly and require repositioning) and I don't see the need for it on the MCDV replacement. The new class would be adapted for drone deployment and those drones can take on minesweeping tasks. As far as I'm aware, the requirement for azipods was borne out of those tasks specifically.

There are other advantages to azipods, but I'm no naval architect so I won't deep dive into that. Point being, if it makes sense for the ship to have them from an engineering perspective, then sure, but I don't see it being identified as a requirement per se.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

UK answer to the Mine hunting and undersea infrastructure protection issue. I think building up the RCFA is something we need to do.

 

[Kirkhill]

UK answer to the Mine hunting and undersea infrastructure protection issue. I think building up the RCFA is something we need to do.

We could use a government-connected Project Manager with experience of the Civil and Naval nautical environments. Got any candidates?

 

[Underway]

Yes, bow thruster is the other conventional option.

Harry DeWolf class, as an example, has bow thruster in conjunction with rudders and screws.

Orcas and CPFs, at 300 and 5000 tons, rely only on rudders and screws.

No HMC ship has proper dynamic positioning (even an attentively manoeuvred MCDV will drift slowly and require repositioning) and I don't see the need for it on the MCDV replacement. The new class would be adapted for drone deployment and those drones can take on minesweeping tasks. As far as I'm aware, the requirement for azipods was borne out of those tasks specifically.

There are other advantages to azipods, but I'm no naval architect so I won't deep dive into that. Point being, if it makes sense for the ship to have them from an engineering perspective, then sure, but I don't see it being identified as a requirement per se.

Well MCDV's don't actually have azipods, they have Z drives.

Difference is that z drives have the motor inside the ship and azipods have the motor in the pod. Minimal difference in effect but big difference for damage control and maintenance.

MCDV's would have dynamic position keeping if they had a bow thruster. Their old nav system was designed to do just that.

 

[Spencer100]

Well MCDV's don't actually have azipods, they have Z drives.

Difference is that z drives have the motor inside the ship and azipods have the motor in the pod. Minimal difference in effect but big difference for damage control and maintenance.

MCDV's would have dynamic position keeping if they had a bow thruster. Their old nav system was designed to do just that.

Thanks I think I understand.

I have wondered about the survivability of an Azipod for warship. But then look at the shaft problems on a ship like PoW. Azipods do drive some of the biggest ships in the world.

I guess it all about the tradeoffs.

As aside I would love to have a boat with the Volvo Penta IPS drives. Just would be worried about Lake St Clair being so shallow. I love to see guys with them docking almost sideways.

 

[Kirkhill]

Well MCDV's don't actually have azipods, they have Z drives.

Difference is that z drives have the motor inside the ship and azipods have the motor in the pod. Minimal difference in effect but big difference for damage control and maintenance.

MCDV's would have dynamic position keeping if they had a bow thruster. Their old nav system was designed to do just that.

So three shafts and two gear boxes and an electric motor instead of an electric motor, longer cables and a single, heavier gear box?

Just saw this article in Naval News

RNLN looks at low-manned platform to augment frigate fire power - Naval News

The Royal Netherlands Navy (RNLN) is exploring the case for acquiring TRIFIC low-cost, low-manned vessels to complement the frigates

www.navalnews.com

Seems like the Dutch are contemplating building the US Navy's Ghost Fleet Overlord LUSVs, and arming them with sea-cans, but leaving a skeleton crew on board to supervise HAL.

Dave? Da-ave!

Ghost Fleet Overlord Unmanned Surface Vessels, USA

Ghost Fleet Overlord is a family of experimental unmanned surface vessels (USVs) to accelerate the US Navy’s experimentation of larger and autonomous USVs.

www.naval-technology.com

It would also serve as a Light Amphibious Warship for the Dutch Marines operating in smaller groups more broadly distributed.

https://sgp.fas.org/crs/weapons/R46374.pdf

Perhaps some of the thinking could apply to the Vard Vigilance type of vessel? A three seat Bridge? Driver/Engineer - Co-Driver/Gunner - CO/Navigator?

 

[Kirkhill]

Wiki has a nice write up on the Dutch ship.

TRIFIC programme they are calling it
The Rapidly Increased Firepower Capability

Intent to operate in conjunction with a Mothership (5 NM radius of Mother)

~10 crew
60-70m Offshore Supply Vessel
48 VLS Cells in Seacans
Any Missile - SAM, SSM, PGM, LAM, LRCM....
Or no missiles and a boatload of Marines in Seacans.
Or, conceivably, mine warfare gear, or electronic warfare, or survey ..... or nav aids, or USV/UUV tender?

TRIFIC-program - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[YZT580]

Wiki has a nice write up on the Dutch ship.

TRIFIC programme they are calling it
The Rapidly Increased Firepower Capability

Intent to operate in conjunction with a Mothership (5 NM radius of Mother)

~10 crew
60-70m Offshore Supply Vessel
48 VLS Cells in Seacans
Any Missile - SAM, SSM, PGM, LAM, LRCM....
Or no missiles and a boatload of Marines in Seacans.
Or, conceivably, mine warfare gear, or electronic warfare, or survey ..... or nav aids, or USV/UUV tender?

TRIFIC-program - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

who is going to volunteer to go to sea off Newfoundland in January in a small hull like that. I suspect it would be just a little rough and a bitch to hold for station keeping but then that is just me and my pleasure craft license talking.

 

[Kirkhill]

who is going to volunteer to go to sea off Newfoundland in January in a small hull like that. I suspect it would be just a little rough and a bitch to hold for station keeping but then that is just me and my pleasure craft license talking.

The sailors of Newfoundland Marine Services?


Main Details:
Vessel Name: Palaimon
Year of Construction: 2004
Class: Lloyd's Register 100A1 0SV

Dimensions:
LO.A: 62.5 m
Width: 12 .8m
Draught:
Light 2.2 m
Heavy 4.7 m

Gross Tonnage (ITC 69): 1237
Net Tonnage: 395

NL Marine Services – NL Marine Services

nlmarineservices.com

The Concept of Operations the Dutch are proposing for this Optionally Manned Vessel is that it will sail in close proximity to a Mother Ship. The TRIFIC ships will sail in company with Mother and I suppose the crews will be housed in Mother with only short term accommodation on board.
The vessel then becomes a very large sea-boat that keeps pace with Mother rather than being swayed or floated aboard.

Ultimately the crew may only go aboard for maintenance, supervision of firings and to keep any Marines aboard company.