John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Pugliese probably has an email in the public domain somewhere but I am not looking for it as I said “almost tempted”. He probably pasted it into his column without scrutinizing it.
Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates
- Thread starter stephen weist
- Start date
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
That is correct BUT the article mentions 100 MK 13 vertical launch systems, not canisters and zero mention about the MK 41 VLS. Not a big deal to us but not very informative to many of his readers who only have a passing interest in RCN matters.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the info, didn’t know that, seems somewhat confusing that they would give both the original Launcher and the VLS Canister the same designation.
A few more interesting tidbits on CSC in this Naval News article: Royal Canadian Navy Unveils New Details on CSC Frigates - Naval News
Seems like the main gun has not been finalized yet.
Seems like the main gun has not been finalized yet.
I'm intrigued about the power of SPY 7 for CSC. I've been doing some digging of other GaN S band radars:
EASR (SPY6(V)3) - 1,400 transmitter receiver modules per array (FFGX 3 arrays) source - Richard Scott, Janes Navy International
Saab Sea Giraffe 4a - over 2000 trms per array (1 rotating or 4 fixed arrays) (source Bill Sweetman at a SAAB press event. SAAB unveil 2000 module GaN based radar & BMD capable radar.
CEAFAR for Hunter class - 4096 trms (6? arrays) (Source CEA technologies Understanding CEAFAR's Success)
EASR (SPY6(V)3) - 1,400 transmitter receiver modules per array (FFGX 3 arrays) source - Richard Scott, Janes Navy International
Saab Sea Giraffe 4a - over 2000 trms per array (1 rotating or 4 fixed arrays) (source Bill Sweetman at a SAAB press event. SAAB unveil 2000 module GaN based radar & BMD capable radar.
CEAFAR for Hunter class - 4096 trms (6? arrays) (Source CEA technologies Understanding CEAFAR's Success)
It looks like the discussions and analysis in this forum have been pretty spot on and done even faster than the media.
In regards to the main gun, Leonardo and BAE are collaborating to bring the Vulcano guided round from the Leonardo 127/64 LW to the BAE Mk45 Mod 4, but has there been any indication the Hyper Velocity Projectile could come to the Leonardo 127/64 LW? Currently the Leonardo 127/64 LW looks like the better gun based on higher rate of fire and Vulcano already fielded, but the HVP seems like too important a development to miss out on.
It's hard to find details such as the number of TRMs for this radar. There is a bit more detail here: Four Nations to be Protected with Lockheed Martin’s Next Generation Radar
Looks like a contract for SPY-7 has been signed: Royal Canadian Navy to be Protected with Lockheed Martin's Advanced and Versatile SPY-7 Radar Under Newly Signed Contract
Interesting statement: "Partnering with our teammates, Lockheed Martin Canada has also begun the technology transfer of selected components of the radar system to Canadian suppliers for design, construction and implementation."
There are several Canadian companies that possess the technology to build the TRMs, one of which is Sanmina, about 5 kms from my house here in Ottawa (Ottawa - Sanmina). Sanmina had secured a deal with Thales that had APAR Block 2 been chosen for CSC they would have produced the TRMs for that radar (https://www.sanmina.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/CDR_-State-of-the-Art-Radar_Sanmina.pdf), so they are probably at least in the running. MDA would be another one.
Interesting statement: "Partnering with our teammates, Lockheed Martin Canada has also begun the technology transfer of selected components of the radar system to Canadian suppliers for design, construction and implementation."
There are several Canadian companies that possess the technology to build the TRMs, one of which is Sanmina, about 5 kms from my house here in Ottawa (Ottawa - Sanmina). Sanmina had secured a deal with Thales that had APAR Block 2 been chosen for CSC they would have produced the TRMs for that radar (https://www.sanmina.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/CDR_-State-of-the-Art-Radar_Sanmina.pdf), so they are probably at least in the running. MDA would be another one.
Last edited:
From that press release the SPY-7 is formed from "subarray suite" building blocks. SPY-6 is formed from building blocks called Radar Modular Assemblies that are 2 ft x 2ft. It'd be great to find out the size of a SPY-7 subarray suite building block, but there hasn't been many pictures of LRDR//SPY-7 and in those I've seen, it isn't clear what part could be the subarray.
The Long Range Discrimination Radar is One Step Closer to Tracking Next Generation Threats
The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) relies on cutting edge technology to defend against new and evolving threats to the United States and allies. That’s where Lockheed Martin’s Long Range Discrimination Radar (LRDR) comes in.
For example the LRDR installation picture in the article above shows a series of rectangular tiles which are about 3 times wider than they are tall. The Genie S-125 crane has a 12 ft wheelbase which is also approximately the length of the crane's grey main body. In the picture, the crane is at an angle to the radar which distorts things, but the crane's main body length seems to be between 3 and 4 rectangular tiles long. I would estimate each rectangular tile is 3 ft x 1 ft. If these rectangles are the "subarray suite" building blocks, the most reasonable size options for the CSC's square SPY-7 would be either 6 ft x 6 ft or 9 ft x 9 ft. I'd guess the CSC would have 6 ft x 6 ft arrays while the F-110 has 9 ft x 9 ft.
However this other picture of the LRDR installation doesn't show those clear rectangular tiles. The vertical panel is composed of lots of small squares and it isn't clear whether those are "subarray suites" or individual TRMs or something else.
"Partnering with our teammates, Lockheed Martin Canada has also begun the technology transfer of selected components of the radar system to Canadian suppliers for design, construction and implementation. The work in Canada will open doors to a new export market for local industry, producing high value jobs in Quebec and across the country through subcontractors and suppliers involved in the production."
That mention of jobs in Quebec seems too specific not to mean a particular company. Any idea who it might be?
While we're kind of on the subject of Canadian suppliers, I've been wondering if Thordon bearings and Dominis propellers might be used by the CSC. I missed it at the time, but this summer, they teamed up with Patriot Forge Co., forming a consortium to push for inclusion in Canada's National Shipbuilding Strategy, with their Canadian Integrated Shaftline System (CISS), "an entirely made-in-Canada solution".
CISS Announcement
CISS Partners
That mention of jobs in Quebec seems too specific not to mean a particular company. Any idea who it might be?
While we're kind of on the subject of Canadian suppliers, I've been wondering if Thordon bearings and Dominis propellers might be used by the CSC. I missed it at the time, but this summer, they teamed up with Patriot Forge Co., forming a consortium to push for inclusion in Canada's National Shipbuilding Strategy, with their Canadian Integrated Shaftline System (CISS), "an entirely made-in-Canada solution".
CISS Announcement
CISS Partners
In Canadian Naval Review Vol. 15, No. 3, Timothy Choi (TimDotChoi on twitter) detailed a tour he took of Lockheed Martin's Solid State Radar facility in Moorestown, New Jersey on December 10, 2019.
"While the basic units of the SPY-6 are to be the 2-foot cubed Radar Module Assemblies (RMAs), Lockheed Martin’s most basic units are shoebox-sized sub-arrays. The long axis of these shoe-boxes is perpendicular to the face of the overall antenna."
Thanks. Shoebox-sized sub-arrays would give a lot of options for SPY-7 sizing, even more than SPY-6. We'll have to hope there's eventually an explicit statement on the CSC's SPY-7 size since it'll be difficult to determine accurately from pictures.
An update from Janes Navy International that coincidentally arrived today - Sea Giraffe 4a arrays have 'over' 1700 trms, according to a long article by Richard Scott based on extensive interviews with SAAB.
I hadn't heard anything about Leonardo/BAE working together on Volcano, so went searching & turned up this, from 2017...It looks like the discussions and analysis in this forum have been pretty spot on and done even faster than the media.
In regards to the main gun, Leonardo and BAE are collaborating to bring the Vulcano guided round from the Leonardo 127/64 LW to the BAE Mk45 Mod 4, but has there been any indication the Hyper Velocity Projectile could come to the Leonardo 127/64 LW? Currently the Leonardo 127/64 LW looks like the better gun based on higher rate of fire and Vulcano already fielded, but the HVP seems like too important a development to miss out on.
Vulcano Precision-Guided Munitions
Another good video of HMCS Harry DeWolf: (courtesy RCN twitter feed):
Nice ship but i cant help but think that "push button" telegraphs are an incident waiting to happen.
In these days of remote control when the ships driver is using the controls (as opposed to conning) nothing is more logical than pushing forward when you want to move forward and pulling back when reversing, its a natural movement requiring no eye contact.
I would agree too. It also lacks that slow increments / decreases in power that are required for certain evolutions such as towing, for example.
Good article on the CSC in The War Zone: Canada's New Frigate Will Be Brimming With Missiles
Interesting article on the new Japanese 30FFM frigate: Japan launches its second 30FFM frigate Kumano for Japanese Navy
Though not specifically Canadian, I include it here because the article indicates that in this vessel the MT30 will deliver a power rating "in excess of 40 megawatts". It would be interesting to know what "in excess of 40 MWs" equates to (41, 42, 45?), and the possible implications of that on the CSC.
Though not specifically Canadian, I include it here because the article indicates that in this vessel the MT30 will deliver a power rating "in excess of 40 megawatts". It would be interesting to know what "in excess of 40 MWs" equates to (41, 42, 45?), and the possible implications of that on the CSC.