Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates

Black Jack Shellac said:
Mission Bay Part 1

I came across this article. I thought it was interesting on 3 parts; first, just he overall description of the mission bay capability; second, the influence this bay may have had on the Canadian bid with reference to Rolls-Royce Canada; and third (but not last), the possible location for a Torpedo Launch System. I had read some opinions that there was not going to be torpedo tubes on the type 26, but I think is still an open question, and it looks like the Type 26 can accommodate them.
Click to expand...

The implication from the article is that TLS would be located between the Boat bay & the flight deck on the PORT side of the ship. However, I'm not sure many navies would go with a single facility, so it would make sense if there was a corresponding facility on the STARBOARD side of the ship to match it.

Its also fair to say that the space would probably only really be big enough for the Torpedo launcher & control equipment, rather than being a full magazine with storage / racking / handling facilities (space is approx. 5 metre fore to aft, based on the scale shown in the image).
 
John Fedup said:
Hardly a surprise junior has taxpayers covering lawyer expenses for himself and his minions, something that Admiral Norman has been denied. His trial will turn out to be a bigger problem than junior’s SNC-Lavin mess IMO. Too bad the brain dead electorate here probably won’t notice.

Taxpayers cover cost of lawyers for Trudeau, others in SNC Lavalin affair but no help for Vice Adm. Norman
Click to expand...
That's absolutely disgusting. He's been presumed guilty by the DND before he has even had his trial and they admit it. I hope his lawyers sue all those involved for costs plus.
 
Forster, just another Liberal bureaucrat brown-noser. Kind of explains part of our military procurement problem although there are many other players contributing to this dysfunctional process. What is appalling to outside observers is just bloody normal to many here.
 
ngatimozart said:
That's absolutely disgusting. He's been presumed guilty by the DND before he has even had his trial and they admit it. I hope his lawyers sue all those involved for costs plus.
Click to expand...

I would rather settle for the POS that is behind all this having his sorry a$$ kicked out of office in October. Admiral Norman may prefer this as well.
 
There are several superb diesel vendors from Europe but Mann really is a great pick! Hopefully this is just the start of an accelerated pace on the construction of these urgently needed ships.
 
Novascotiaboy said:
Not so much navy related but it highlights concerns related to the Seapans ability.

New Canadian Coast Guard Vessel Crashed
Click to expand...
But no details given as to the cause of the incident. Was it due to ship handling, mechanical, or environmental causes? Secondly, the article lacks any details on the damage to rudder and propeller, so any "concerns" will have to be taken in context. Thirdly, it's a first of class, so some delays are to be expected - although two years for a ship of this size and complexity would raise concerns. is that the fault of Seaspan, the client, or a combination of both? An example of a client continuously changing their mind is the RN and the QE CV build, or the UKG & MOD with the T26 & T31 FFG.
 
I get the opportunity to regularly work aboard most of thw CCGS vessels on the east coast and the quality of build and the design of those vessels from the 60s, 70s and 80s was great. Unfortunately we as a country turned our backs on shipbuilding and as a result we have lost the ability. Seaspan was known for building barges and small vessels. Two years in the water and still not delivered? This says a lot about the build and probably the design. What a farce.

I cant say things are much better here with Irving as I am hearing horror stories from the Big Harry D. Lots of work underway to make delivery this fall. She will be more than a year in the water before delivery. Crawl, walk run is the way we take on new capabilities in the fire service .At this rate both of these builders will be crawling for a while.
 
ngatimozart said:
But no details given as to the cause of the incident. Was it due to ship handling, mechanical, or environmental causes? Secondly, the article lacks any details on the damage to rudder and propeller, so any "concerns" will have to be taken in context. Thirdly, it's a first of class, so some delays are to be expected - although two years for a ship of this size and complexity would raise concerns. is that the fault of Seaspan, the client, or a combination of both? An example of a client continuously changing their mind is the RN and the QE CV build, or the UKG & MOD with the T26 & T31 FFG.
Click to expand...

A better article on the incident with a linked time lapse as well
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top