I found a few companies that can provide this such as Active Anti-Jamming | Technology | GPS Receiver Chips & Modules | FURUNOThere is no such thing as an anti-jammer
These are small compact devices enabling a drone get much closer to a jammer.
I found a few companies that can provide this such as Active Anti-Jamming | Technology | GPS Receiver Chips & Modules | FURUNOThere is no such thing as an anti-jammer
Thanks ngatimozart to pointing me to Mahon which I haven't read and looks like an awesome read. Should keep me busy for awhile. I believe you have a post on good reading material which I shall visit and also find/dig out my copies of Sun Zsu to refresh my old memory from 40 years ago.@shadow99 The Sun Tzu Ping fa is taught in every military academy in the western world. I have a copy in my bookshelf which I picked up during my first year at university many years ago. Our friends in Beijing are great readers of Mahon so maybe you should read him as well. They are real disciplines of his. I too have him on my bookshelf.
Here's the official GoC press release: Polar icebreakers and the National Shipbuilding Strategy - Canada.caCanada Will Move Forward with the Construction of Two Polar Icebreakers and has Awarded Contracts to Seaspan and Davie
new_item_enwww.canadiandefencereview.com
Two Polar Icebreakers are to be built, with one to be built at Seaspans shipyard in Vanvouver and the other at Davie Shipyard according to Canadian Defense Review and that one of them will be completed by 2030.
Constructing 2 will enable Canada to have a year round presence in the Arctic.
There is an existing design, several years old now, but from what I have heard was recently updated to increase bunkerage (for longer range) and to incorporate newer technology. The original design has been tested by NRC, and thoroughly modelled. I've attached a good description of it for information purposes, as I could not find anything more recent (Courtesy We Represent: | SNAME, and their publication Marine Technology Magazine, October 2014).I'm happy to see that Canada will construct 2 PC-2 class icebreakers. Building them in separate yards is not efficient though as previously mentioned.
One thing that is puzzling me is which design will be chosen since both Davie and Seaspan are using different design contractors. With Davie using Vard and Seaspan using Genoa Design.
I don't expect that each shipyard will get to use whom they aligned with but rather the government will have to choose which design wins out and then both shipyards would have to build that design. I imagine there is going to be a lot more government lobbying taking place.
Not to mention the ‘burn through’ power of a ship-based EW system is going to be absolutely dominant compared to whatever ECCM capabilities might be able to be deployed on a small, lightweight drone. If necessary, something like the below products are widely available. The drone threat is over-stated in my opinion. It is a threat, only against those who haven’t bothered thinking of a solution to address it. The ability of drones to withstand counter-measures is negligible.There are some less "intrusive" options on the market and being tested, mostly going in the direction of fire control systems for small arms - from assault rifles up to a 40mm GMG with airburst shells (Kongsberg will sell you a RWS with integrated radar designed specifically for that).
There is no such thing as an anti-jammer. If it's externally guided/piloted this guidance can be jammed. If it retrieves position information from external sources that can be interfered with. If it doesn't use either then with current technology we're no longer talking about Class I UAS.
Sure, "backpack solutions" are vulnerable in that regard, for the sake of mobility. But against an actual integrated cUAS system? No chance. Especially so when we're talking harbour protection for a ship with an actual electronic warfare suite in a port, or a containerized solution with similar-scale capability.
I'm happy to see that Canada will construct 2 PC-2 class icebreakers. Building them in separate yards is not efficient though as previously mentioned.
One thing that is puzzling me is which design will be chosen since both Davie and Seaspan are using different design contractors. With Davie using Vard and Seaspan using Genoa Design.
I don't expect that each shipyard will get to use whom they aligned with but rather the government will have to choose which design wins out and then both shipyards would have to build that design. I imagine there is going to be a lot more government lobbying taking place.
I too am glad the CCG is getting two Polar icebreakers in order to maintain a year-round presence in the Arctic and to make sure the CCGS Terry Fox gets a replacement too. My preference also would have been that Davie got both Polar Icebreakers and Seaspan got a 3rd AOR. But even with a 3rd AOR, Seaspan would have probably been able to claim compensation if they didn't get a Polar Icebreaker since that's what they were originally promised under the NSS and they've already spent money doing preparation for it. So I wouldn't be surprised if money wasted on lost efficiency in splitting the Polar icebreaker build between two shipyards is at least partially offset by not being sued by Seaspan. In terms of production queue juggling, with 2030 being a hard in service date (likely meaning a 2028/2029 delivery date) for at least 1 Polar icebreaker to allow CCGS Louis S. St-Laurent to retire, the best hope for a 3rd AOR is if Davie really is the on time, on budget shipbuilder they've been lobbying as in the last few years and can commit to being the shipyard that provides that 1st Polar icebreaker thereby giving Seaspan the ability to slot the 3rd AOR in after the 2nd AOR allowing serial production and before their Polar icebreaker. Otherwise, the increased cost of building a 3rd AOR after the Polar icebreaker at Seaspan likely makes a 3rd AOR unpalatable.Thank you Calculus. I'm pleased with the decision to build two PC-2 class icebreakers. I had feeling that Davie was going to get the polar icebreaker contract and leave Seaspan in the cold. I thought to make up for the loss of the polar icebreaker that the Federal Government would kick Seaspan a 3rd AOR. I'm still hopeful that happens mind you and that Seaspan does get a contract to build a 3rd AOR.
For some reason I can't get the theme song for and images of the "Zero-X" being assembled out of my head...
Pictures courtesy Irving Shipbuilding Twitter feed
Picture 1 AOPV 3 (HMCS Max Bernays 432) bow section being moved from the Ultra Hall
View attachment 48210
Picture 2 AOPV 3 (HMCS Max Bernays 432) bow section being joined to the middle and stern sections at the land level construction point.
View attachment 48211