Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS

[Colin Parkinson]

The structure won't support a 5" gun and the magazine would be a major redesign, but also no targeting system or sensors to go with it (or bunks for operators/maintainers).

It'll be a common naval gun though, so should be lots of lessons learned from other navies using it, and honestly the transition from the old 76mm to 57mm didn't seem too bad as would just be part of the transition training from CPF to CSC for the crews.

Common equipment works well when you have common requirements, so may end up with common equipment on AOPs and JSS, but very little with CPFs and CSC, as the gulf between non-combatants and combatants can be huge.

The other thing with common equipment is some of the kit we're using dates back to WW2 (or the days of sail) so it's a chance to push the reset and change some traditional things as there is a lot of better kit available that also works better with smaller crews.

I was only referring to the Lionfish gun.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The other thing with common equipment is some of the kit we're using dates back to WW2 (or the days of sail) so it's a chance to push the reset and change some traditional things as there is a lot of better kit available that also works better with smaller crews.

So your still using these?

 

[Czech_pivo]

You also need a radar system that can properly track them; AOPs is just nav radars so not sure if drones even get picked up.

Combining input from different sensors to use to target weapon systems implies a lot of of things are going on with a lot of additional systems, so unless it's fully integrated into the weapon it's not something you can just drop into a non-combatant. The small slow fliers are suprisingly hard to target generally on land, let alone on a moving platform, so generally a problem.

If AOPs is getting attacked by drones they may have better luck with a bunch of shotguns TBH, but they were never intended to go into an OPs area and take drone attacks (or any other attacks) so again, completely outside the CONOPs or design requirements.

I agree and understand that the more you add, the more you have to integrate and the more complexion you add. Nothing is free or easy.
My concern/thoughts come from trying to think outside of the box. But every time one of these ships leaves our waters, the US's waters and the waters of our Allies, there is always an increase in the % chance of something bad occurring. Sending them off to Nigeria or Ghana or the west coast of Africa in general exposes them to the possibility of some semi-intelligent Boko Harim, JNIM ( Jama'at Nursat al Islam wal Muslimeen) or ISGS (Islamic State in the Greater Sahara) member with a drone carrying a mortar bomb, rpg or IED landing on the ship.

I've heard many many times on here people in the know say that our 2 JSS will never be put in harm's way or an active combat zone. If that is true why are they getting a pair of Phalanx? Won't they need the radar systems, weapons systems and integration necessary to make the Phalanx effective?

 

[Underway]

Just curious (as the name implies, army background), why do the Dewolf class AOPS not have any air defence or torpedo launch thingys? They look big enough to hold that kind of stuff. Feel free to educate me.

It's kinda like SWAT equiping out the traffic cop.

As soon as you add combat capabilities to a ship you start exponentially increasing crew requirements and sensor requirements. A 25mm can get buy with a dual use EOIR camera for targeting, and a Bosn with the right course.

A 57mm requires a fire control radar, air search radar and 57mm magazine and a combat management system. Otherwise you're completely wasting a capable gun designed for AAW to make loud noises and miss everything but stuff the 25mm can damage just as easily.

The crew needed increase by about 6 weapons eng techs for gun maint and misfire, radar maintenance, fire control maintenance, ammo custodian requirements. Then add 3 NESOPs (master and two S1s) to operate the gun.

The cost for all that stuff is now multiple millions of dollars. For what I would consider low capability enhancement for the mission sets required of AOPS.

So now you're walking back AOPS low crewing requirements, increasing cost for what gain?

 

[suffolkowner]

SeaRam vs CIWS, a semi self contained system for those looking for a self protection add on to the AOPs and even the JSS now that CAMM has been replaced with RAM?

 

[Rainbow1910]

SeaRam vs CIWS, a semi self contained system for those looking for a self protection add on to the AOPs and even the JSS now that CAMM has been replaced with RAM?

Where do you put SeaRAM/Phalanx on a ship like AOPS that was never designed for it and it would actively detract from the capability of the vessel in some cases?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

It's kinda like SWAT equiping out the traffic cop.

As soon as you add combat capabilities to a ship you start exponentially increasing crew requirements and sensor requirements. A 25mm can get buy with a dual use EOIR camera for targeting, and a Bosn with the right course.

A 57mm requires a fire control radar, air search radar and 57mm magazine and a combat management system. Otherwise you're completely wasting a capable gun designed for AAW to make loud noises and miss everything but stuff the 25mm can damage just as easily.

The crew needed increase by about 6 weapons eng techs for gun maint and misfire, radar maintenance, fire control maintenance, ammo custodian requirements. Then add 3 NESOPs (master and two S1s) to operate the gun.

The cost for all that stuff is now multiple millions of dollars. For what I would consider low capability enhancement for the mission sets required of AOPS.

So now you're walking back AOPS low crewing requirements, increasing cost for what gain?

How many weapons techs onboard now?

 

[Swampbuggy]

Yes but used in a naval application on hundreds of ships and boats worldwide.

Oh yes, I realize that, but I think it’s predominantly for use against small surface targets and unlikely to be effective against airborne threats. I don’t know how likely it is that they will ever face anything like that, but something like the 30mm seemed a good fit with a dual purpose, but far less complicated than a deck penetrating weapon.

 

[Swampbuggy]

You also need a radar system that can properly track them; AOPs is just nav radars so not sure if drones even get picked up.

Combining input from different sensors to use to target weapon systems implies a lot of of things are going on with a lot of additional systems, so unless it's fully integrated into the weapon it's not something you can just drop into a non-combatant. The small slow fliers are suprisingly hard to target generally on land, let alone on a moving platform, so generally a problem.

If AOPs is getting attacked by drones they may have better luck with a bunch of shotguns TBH, but they were never intended to go into an OPs area and take drone attacks (or any other attacks) so again, completely outside the CONOPs or design requirements.

Understood. Wasn’t certain if the Scanter had that ability…I thought I’d read at one point it was capable of tracking air targets as well as for organic helo ops.

 

[Underway]

How many weapons techs onboard now?

I think its 3-4? Nav system, 25mm, comms and cranes. MCDV has 1. @Stokerany idea?

 

[Underway]

Understood. Wasn’t certain if the Scanter had that ability…I thought I’d read at one point it was capable of tracking air targets as well as for organic helo ops.

Scanter does do air ops. But its not really a radar for air search and track in a combat sense.

 

[Navy_Pete]

It's kinda like SWAT equiping out the traffic cop.

As soon as you add combat capabilities to a ship you start exponentially increasing crew requirements and sensor requirements. A 25mm can get buy with a dual use EOIR camera for targeting, and a Bosn with the right course.

A 57mm requires a fire control radar, air search radar and 57mm magazine and a combat management system. Otherwise you're completely wasting a capable gun designed for AAW to make loud noises and miss everything but stuff the 25mm can damage just as easily.

The crew needed increase by about 6 weapons eng techs for gun maint and misfire, radar maintenance, fire control maintenance, ammo custodian requirements. Then add 3 NESOPs (master and two S1s) to operate the gun.

The cost for all that stuff is now multiple millions of dollars. For what I would consider low capability enhancement for the mission sets required of AOPS.

So now you're walking back AOPS low crewing requirements, increasing cost for what gain?

Also unsexy things like a lot more red power, EMF control and a lot of other background things that don't really come into play on a non-combatant that really need to be done at the design stage with a cable management plan. And probably would naturally lead to additional comms and crypto requirements and generally creep towards a lot of the combat capabilities, for no real gain.

Maybe more Ops room watch officers as well? ERT?

All that for a ship that isn't built to take damage, has no shock hardening or have any combat recoverability, and doesn't even have a steaming watch in the MCR because the plant will make itself safe and has no battle over ride.

Just because it's shipside grey and big doesn't mean it should be anywhere near an active op area. It'll do ice breaking fine within it's rating, but it's no a fighting ship.

Really don't get these discussions; arming the AOPs and sending it into harms way really only makes sense if you are okay with the crew being killed and the ship being lost to low level naval combat.

 

[suffolkowner]

Are we going to send the JSS into the Persian Gulf or similar?

 

[GK .Dundas]

Are we going to send the JSS into the Persian Gulf or similar?

Shades of , " It's purely a training vehicle I can assure you THAT IT WILL NEVER BE USED IN AN OPERATIONAL THEATRE....
Gee , I wonder where I'd heard this beforehand.

 

[dapaterson]

Really don't get these discussions; arming the AOPs and sending it into harms way really only makes sense if you are okay with the crew being killed and the ship being lost to low level naval combat.

So, given the current state of the Halifax class...

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I know people deride the sate of the Halifax class, and they do have tired hulls and machinery, but the combat systems, sensors and weapons systems are still first class and quite sufficient to carry out combat missions by the side of any NATO country.

 

[Stoker]

I think its 3-4? Nav system, 25mm, comms and cranes. MCDV has 1. @Stokerany idea?

4 sounds about right.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Shades of , " It's purely a training vehicle I can assure you THAT IT WILL NEVER BE USED IN AN OPERATIONAL THEATRE....
Gee , I wonder where I'd heard this beforehand.

Cougar enters the chat...