No. They'll be taking over the roles of the Mid-Shore Science Vessels (Limnos, Otter Bay, Vector) as well as giving the Coast Guard a lighter complement to the fleet for littoral duties where things like the MPI are not optimized for due to their size.
Easy to forget that the MPI are large vessels, even though Batch II will be slightly smaller they still arent always optimal or able to get to certain places. Thats where the MSMM come in.
If we were to move to a tier I and tier II, essentially like AUS, and given the high cost of the River Class. Would it make sense for us to get 3 larger destroyers like the KDX III batch II, reduce our Rivers to 6 or 7 ships, with the second batch having 32 VLS. These would be our tier one and similar to AUS Hobart and Hunter Class. For the tier 2 buy updated Mogami frigates like AUS did, but maybe 12 of them. They can do littoral, asw, mines and they come with unmanned vehicles. They could fill roles like escorts or work on own, very automated and pack a punch. Pohjanmaa corvettes and several year-round polar frigates with VLS in the Arctic designed in house and would round out the fleet working with subs and autonomous vehicles. The KDX is 1.3 B CAN, if it could maybe upgraded, and it does allow for updates, to AN SPY 6 from its 1DV, and say when outfitted at a generous 10B purchase estimate for 3, and based on AUS export purchase of the Mogami @ 12 ships it would cost us about 10B though we could order more and 6 Rivers at 42B, this program would cost us around or closer to 62B CAN rather than 105B. Having the other ships built in SK and Japan to keep costs down. This would give us at least 21 hulls, 9 Aegis nodes, a lot of VLS and replace our fleet faster. With the reduction in Rivers, we could fast track and have the Pohjanmaas built here and several year round Arctic frigates. I feel this model gives more flexibility, and layered defense, where the Rivers are eating up a lot of capital, and many other areas in defence could use some of that that capital. All of the ships are Aegis or work with Aegis and f35, and if subs were bought from Hanwha, our fleet would be very interoperable with Pacific allies and as well as NATO. The KDX and KSS could use similar missiles with the KVLS launcher on KDX, while also having traditional MK.41; though it having 2 KVLS launchers one could be converted to a second MK.41. Thoughts?
I’m not a navy guy, more army myself, but I’m fascinated by ships. I can’t help but feel what’s needed out of the CDC is really a “Picket Ship”. A ship that’s equipped to escort larger, more expensive ships, design and equipped to detect, intercept a range of Surface drones, swarms, missiles, etc. On the other hand, maybe an entirely automated picket ship would be something worth designing for export one day.
The Fin Pohjanmaa are PC 1A, with an attractive total build and thru life sustainment cost per platform. Any total CDC project budget limits / estimates being thrown around?
Thanks for the table, there used to be a good spreadsheet comparing the different ice classes and how they matched up with other levels of classification. Wished I had saved it as it has disappeared.
are the MSMM ships replacing the Hero class?
No. They'll be taking over the roles of the Mid-Shore Science Vessels (Limnos, Otter Bay, Vector) as well as giving the Coast Guard a lighter complement to the fleet for littoral duties where things like the MPI are not optimized for due to their size.
ok that makes more sense
Easy to forget that the MPI are large vessels, even though Batch II will be slightly smaller they still arent always optimal or able to get to certain places. Thats where the MSMM come in.
This is great news! Thanks!
If we were to move to a tier I and tier II, essentially like AUS, and given the high cost of the River Class. Would it make sense for us to get 3 larger destroyers like the KDX III batch II, reduce our Rivers to 6 or 7 ships, with the second batch having 32 VLS. These would be our tier one and similar to AUS Hobart and Hunter Class. For the tier 2 buy updated Mogami frigates like AUS did, but maybe 12 of them. They can do littoral, asw, mines and they come with unmanned vehicles. They could fill roles like escorts or work on own, very automated and pack a punch. Pohjanmaa corvettes and several year-round polar frigates with VLS in the Arctic designed in house and would round out the fleet working with subs and autonomous vehicles. The KDX is 1.3 B CAN, if it could maybe upgraded, and it does allow for updates, to AN SPY 6 from its 1DV, and say when outfitted at a generous 10B purchase estimate for 3, and based on AUS export purchase of the Mogami @ 12 ships it would cost us about 10B though we could order more and 6 Rivers at 42B, this program would cost us around or closer to 62B CAN rather than 105B. Having the other ships built in SK and Japan to keep costs down. This would give us at least 21 hulls, 9 Aegis nodes, a lot of VLS and replace our fleet faster. With the reduction in Rivers, we could fast track and have the Pohjanmaas built here and several year round Arctic frigates. I feel this model gives more flexibility, and layered defense, where the Rivers are eating up a lot of capital, and many other areas in defence could use some of that that capital. All of the ships are Aegis or work with Aegis and f35, and if subs were bought from Hanwha, our fleet would be very interoperable with Pacific allies and as well as NATO. The KDX and KSS could use similar missiles with the KVLS launcher on KDX, while also having traditional MK.41; though it having 2 KVLS launchers one could be converted to a second MK.41. Thoughts?
I’m not a navy guy, more army myself, but I’m fascinated by ships. I can’t help but feel what’s needed out of the CDC is really a “Picket Ship”. A ship that’s equipped to escort larger, more expensive ships, design and equipped to detect, intercept a range of Surface drones, swarms, missiles, etc. On the other hand, maybe an entirely automated picket ship would be something worth designing for export one day.
The Fin Pohjanmaa are PC 1A, with an attractive total build and thru life sustainment cost per platform. Any total CDC project budget limits / estimates being thrown around?
Thanks for the table, there used to be a good spreadsheet comparing the different ice classes and how they matched up with other levels of classification. Wished I had saved it as it has disappeared.