John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Good thing modern sailors aren’t superstitious or they might think the ship is jinxed.
Ok, I just though you might have been there that's all because I remember you saying that you were going to some show. There is a program out that if you know the focal length of the camera lens and the dimensions of one object in the photo, you can calculate the dimensions of the other objects. It's called photo rectification and I've used in measuring sand bars in an estuary. It was part of a very good & expensive GIS program I had access to at the time.
Gotcha. That's good to know. Thanks.Ok, I just though you might have been there that's all because I remember you saying that you were going to some show. There is a program out that if you know the focal length of the camera lens and the dimensions of one object in the photo, you can calculate the dimensions of the other objects. It's called photo rectification and I've used in measuring sand bars in an estuary. It was part of a very good & expensive GIS program I had access to at the time.
Seaspan lays Keel for Royal Canadian Navy’s First Joint Support Ship, HMCS ProtecteurView attachment 47057
More on the "ceremonial" keel laying for the first JSS: Seaspan lays Keel for Royal Canadian Navy’s First Joint Support Ship, HMCS Protecteur
The ships will reputedly have 2 CIWS (Phalanx 1b baseline 2), 4 RWS (.50 cal), full NBC citadel, Nixie torpedo decoy, Saab AMB radar, CMS 330, a full C&C suite, 45-bed hospital facility (with operating rooms), and hangar space for two CH-148s (including a comprehensive maintenance facility for "better than first-line" helicopter repair). They will also be ice hardened, and I've seen mentioned this would be to PC5.
Some recent photos of the construction of the various blocks here:Joint Support Ships | Seaspan
http://www.davie.ca/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/DEFSEC-FOR-WEB.pdfNavy Recognition said:The vessels will have a multi-purpose covered deck with the ability to carry up to 10,000 tonnes of ship fuel, 1,300 tonnes of aviation fuel, 1,100 tonnes of ammunition as well as 1,000–1,500 lane meters of deck space for carrying vehicles and containerized cargo. The vessels will also have hospital facilities as well as a large helicopter deck with two landing spots for the CH-148 Cyclone helicopters, hangar space for four helicopters, and a roll-on/roll-off deck for vehicles onto a dock.
So what are the specs then? CAN$2.1 billion per ship is still a helluva lot of coin for one ship. Are the heads gold plated or something? Just to put things into perspective, the RNZN are having this ship delivered shortly HMNZS Aotearoa for the cost of NZ$493 million (CAN$424 million) and whilst it doesn't have vehicular RO/RO, it's winterised and ice strengthened to PC6 for use in Antarctica, so that it can follow an icebreaker in McMurdo Sound, for annual fuel and stores deliveries. CAN$800 million per ship yes, I can understand that, but the cost of nigh on 2 T26 frigates?????Seaspan lays Keel for Royal Canadian Navy’s First Joint Support Ship, HMCS Protecteur
http://www.davie.ca/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/DEFSEC-FOR-WEB.pdf
Are Navy Recognition's JSS specs accurate to the finalized design? On slide 14 of Davie Shipyard's 2017 PDF advertising the Asterix they present JSS specs presumably based on a combination of the original JSS requirements and the Berlin-class base design.
Comparing the old specs versus the latest report: 10,000 tonnes ship fuel is at the top end of the original proposal, aviation fuel has increased from 700 tonnes to 1,300 tonnes, from no vehicle bay to 1,000–1,500 lane meters deck space with roll-on/roll-off capability, from 1 helicopter landing spot to 2, and from hangar space for 2 helicopters to 4 helicopters. Combined with ice-strengthening the hull, electrical changes from 230V to 120V, probably HVAC changes for arctic operations, seemingly more extensive sensor and command and control capabilities, there seems to be extensive changes from the base Berlin-class.
Assuming Navy Recognition is accurate, on one hand it's good to know that the large budget and long time-scale of the JSS at least yields some more capabilities compared to the Berlin-class. On the other hand, all these changes seems to defeat the purpose of going with an off-the-shelf design.
I think you are confusing the Asterix with the Protecteur. The Asterix is a converted civilian ship prepared by Davie ship building and the Protecteur is a modified Berlin class JSS being build by Seaspan. The Asterix is a stop gap and is not expected to be capable of entering hostile waters, but was desperately needed at the time. Navy Reognition's specs are accurate for the Protecteur as far as I know....Are Navy Recognition's JSS specs accurate to the finalized design?...
Joint support ships - Large vessel shipbuilding projects – Shipbuilding projects to equip the Royal Canadian Navy and the Canadian Coast Guard – National Shipbuilding Strategy – Sea – Defence and marine procurement – Buying and Selling – PSPCSo what are the specs then? CAN$2.1 billion per ship is still a helluva lot of coin for one ship. Are the heads gold plated or something? Just to put things into perspective, the RNZN are having this ship delivered shortly HMNZS Aotearoa for the cost of NZ$493 million (CAN$424 million) and whilst it doesn't have vehicular RO/RO, it's winterised and ice strengthened to PC6 for use in Antarctica, so that it can follow an icebreaker in McMurdo Sound, for annual fuel and stores deliveries. CAN$800 million per ship yes, I can understand that, but the cost of nigh on 2 T26 frigates?????
Slide 14 of the 2017 Davie PDF compares the specs of the proposed JSS/Berlin-class with the Asterix and I'm using these older proposed JSS/Berlin-class specs to compare to Navy Recognition's current JSS specs showing there have been improvements.I think you are confusing the Asterix with the Protecteur. The Asterix is a converted civilian ship prepared by Davie ship building and the Protecteur is a modified Berlin class JSS being build by Seaspan. The Asterix is a stop gap and is not expected to be capable of entering hostile waters, but was desperately needed at the time. Navy Reognition's specs are accurate for the Protecteur as far as I know.
The MV Asterix is an excellent stop gap, It was necessary to fill a critical role temporarily. But it was never designed to fit what the RCN ultimately wants. Not that the JSS is, but I think the JSS is much closer.But the Asterix isn’t a true military vessel, Skjerpen said, which is why it won’t be allowed to operate in dangerous environments. That may not be an issue now, as the navy is not operating in any areas that are classified as overtly dangerous, but Skjerpen said: “All of our capabilities and everything we design and everything we need is about operating in that threat environment.”
Two true military resupply vessels are scheduled to be built in Vancouver and will include more powerful self-defence systems than the Asterix has, as well as better communications equipment and overall survivability against attack.
Maybe my old eyes are deceiving me, but has the prop on the model changed from 5 blades to 6 from the latest image that Calculus posted?First CSC pics from SNA 2020 (showing 32 Mk41s forward, 6 x ExLS aft, and a bit more detail on the radar superstructure). Also looks like NSM has now replaced Harpoon definitively.
Pics from Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only] - Page 158 - UK Defence Forum
View attachment 47061 View attachment 47062
At some point (distant no doubt) the Kingston class will have to be replaced. A higher speed OPV class is needed for the Pacific and Atlantic coasts. Probably having a dedicated mine warfare class is best but no sign of anything being purposed yet that I am aware of.Just something that has me curious from a distance. Are any of the planned ships supposed to replace the Kingston-class’ patrol and mine warfare capabilities?