• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)

suffolkowner

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
726
Points
1,060
I think he's referring to a PHALANX, Colin. They're about that weight, IIRC.

So is the 13000lb CWIS the one from the AOP's?

CIWS for AOR
25mm for AOPS
30mm for CSC
???? for MCDV replacement
You mean like this thing?

View attachment 67587

I can't even. I mean what's its radar horizon anyways? This is specifically designed to knife fight in the Aegean and nothing else. I've stood on its deck. It's freeboard is akin to that door they were floating on in Titanic.
It's amazing the firepower other navies cram on their ships
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,058
Points
1,040
It's amazing the firepower other navies cram on their ships
I am reminded of a story about the Canadian crewed Patrol Boats in the English channel during WW2 (real or made up, no idea). They had very high accuracy rates with their 50 cal and other guns against german PTs of similar size. When it was asked what they did to improve the accuracy the response was simply "we have no gun shields".

If you are accurate with your weapons you don't need more of them.

I'd be more concerned about the thing shaking itself apart if it fired the 76mm, 2x 35mm, and Harpoon at the same time

That's its job. Kill more stuff before it gets killed. Falling apart is fine as long as the missiles are away! Lol
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,144
Points
1,140
I'd be more concerned about the thing shaking itself apart if it fired the 76mm, 2x 35mm, and Harpoon at the same time. 😬
It would be half underwater at that point - so it the water would dampen the vibrations...

I am reminded of a story about the Canadian crewed Patrol Boats in the English channel during WW2 (real or made up, no idea). They had very high accuracy rates with their 50 cal and other guns against german PTs of similar size. When it was asked what they did to improve the accuracy the response was simply "we have no gun shields".
Well I guess you couldn't hid behind the shield - so you would aim, and incentivized to aim, as you couldn't hide behind a shield,
If you are accurate with your weapons you don't need more of them.
Screaming Red Chinese horde begs to differ. Some times you really do need MOR GUNZ ;)
Generally I do agree with you premise though.

I'm a firm believer in range bands and 360 coverage - I have no idea what a reasonable range band would be for a ship - but I'm familiar with small team ground work. When a 12-14 Man Det has a larger range band with its organic weapons than a Naval Ship does - I cry a little.

HMCS_Goose_Bay_moored_at_the_future_site_of_the_Nanisivik_Naval_Facility,_during_Operation_Nan...jpg
I really wish you could find 2 or more C6's in pintle mounts to cover the 6.
Wouldn't solve my range concerns - but would solve the rear security potential issue.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
4,065
Points
1,260
It would be half underwater at that point - so it the water would dampen the vibrations...


Well I guess you couldn't hid behind the shield - so you would aim, and incentivized to aim, as you couldn't hide behind a shield,

Screaming Red Chinese horde begs to differ. Some times you really do need MOR GUNZ ;)
Generally I do agree with you premise though.

I'm a firm believer in range bands and 360 coverage - I have no idea what a reasonable range band would be for a ship - but I'm familiar with small team ground work. When a 12-14 Man Det has a larger range band with its organic weapons than a Naval Ship does - I cry a little.

I really wish you could find 2 or more C6's in pintle mounts to cover the 6.
Wouldn't solve my range concerns - but would solve the rear security potential issue.

I presume the ship has small arms like C6s, etc that can be brought to the sweepdeck to do that. It's not like an MCDV only has the .50s.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,058
Points
1,040
It would be half underwater at that point - so it the water would dampen the vibrations...


Well I guess you couldn't hid behind the shield - so you would aim, and incentivized to aim, as you couldn't hide behind a shield,

Screaming Red Chinese horde begs to differ. Some times you really do need MOR GUNZ ;)
Generally I do agree with you premise though.

I'm a firm believer in range bands and 360 coverage - I have no idea what a reasonable range band would be for a ship - but I'm familiar with small team ground work. When a 12-14 Man Det has a larger range band with its organic weapons than a Naval Ship does - I cry a little.

View attachment 67610
I really wish you could find 2 or more C6's in pintle mounts to cover the 6.
Wouldn't solve my range concerns - but would solve the rear security potential issue.
Story time:
Once we did an exercise with SOF who were trying to do an opposed boarding onto the MCDV with their new RHIBs. As they approached from the stern the CO went over behind the helmsman and quietly stated "steer by both thrusters". The whole bridge team looked over at him and nodded. He had taken control of the con.

The next thing out of his mouth was "green nine zero" which means the thrust from the propellers is directly 90 degrees from the stern. The ship within its own length spun around hard. As we were rotating the CO stated "Green one eight zero".

The final position within 20 seconds was a full Rockford turn in reverse, both 50 cals, overlapping arcs on the RHIBs who were chasing. "Gotcha..."

There are no out-of-fire arcs on those ships, they can turn just too damn fast. Lots of fun.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,058
Points
1,040
I presume the ship has small arms like C6s, etc that can be brought to the sweepdeck to do that. It's not like an MCDV only has the .50s.
Yes, I've sailed on them with C6 and C9's embarked for opposed exits and entries. Not sure if C6 is a normal issue or if it's for heightened security threats or not on them these days.

OP CARIBE IIRC the USCG bring onboard sharpshooters as well. The NTOG folks if embarked also have sharpshooters.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,144
Points
1,140
There are no out-of-fire arcs on those ships, they can turn just too damn fast. Lots of fun.
Well there are out of fire arcs still - but you are mitigating those due to its rate of turn.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,144
Points
1,140
Yes we have C9's onboard and are available if needed.
Secondary anchors?
:sneaky:

While a fan of 5.56mm for many things, anti-vehicle usages aren't on that list. But against soft craft - they can be very useful - as well as anti-personnel...
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,261
Points
1,260
I am reminded of a story about the Canadian crewed Patrol Boats in the English channel during WW2 (real or made up, no idea). They had very high accuracy rates with their 50 cal and other guns against german PTs of similar size. When it was asked what they did to improve the accuracy the response was simply "we have no gun shields".

If you are accurate with your weapons you don't need more of them.



That's its job. Kill more stuff before it gets killed. Falling apart is fine as long as the missiles are away! Lol

Wrote a report on Thomas Fuller for a course a few years back. Dude was just made different.

Canadian MGB and MTB operations fascinate me.

Back on track, sorry :)
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,807
Points
1,160
A good question was raised on social media, why does a MCDV need two tugs to dock?

266604502_337479601524997_4337195973548550543_n.jpg
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
4,568
Points
1,010
I am reminded of a story about the Canadian crewed Patrol Boats in the English channel during WW2 (real or made up, no idea). They had very high accuracy rates with their 50 cal and other guns against german PTs of similar size. When it was asked what they did to improve the accuracy the response was simply "we have no gun shields".

If you are accurate with your weapons you don't need more of them.



That's its job. Kill more stuff before it gets killed. Falling apart is fine as long as the missiles are away! Lol
There is an awesome book called “The Champagne Navy” which covers RCN Patrol boats Ops during WW2.

Suffice it to say that the stuff they pulled off was hair-raising and should be the subject of a feature length movie.
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,261
Points
1,260
There is an awesome book called “The Champagne Navy” which covers RCN Patrol boats Ops during WW2.

Suffice it to say that the stuff they pulled off was hair-raising and should be the subject of a feature length movie.

Excellent book.
 

MARS

Sr. Member
Mentor
Reaction score
111
Points
630
My guess is "cold move".
This is the correct answer which I can confirm based on the combination of flags that are flying.

As to why a MM under its own power might employ ugs: prudence and risk mitigation. My first ever CO was an outstanding shiphandler and also thought it was unnecessary to button on tugs when a MM is about as manouvreable as a tug. so, in the name of training as we fight and keeping skills sharp, he exevtuted a beautiful alongside in 35+ kt winds. The Squad Boss saw it from an adjacent ship and promptly put my CO an remedial measures for needlessly risking HMC equipment.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,807
Points
1,160
Meanwhile on the other side the CCG is plunking it's ships to the dock with no tugs, also "risking" HMC equipment. The Squad Boss needs a kick in the butt, for lack of trust in their choice of CO's.

Thanks for the flag info
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,058
Points
1,040
I've been onboard a CCG transiting the canals on the way to Lake Superior. Grinding the ship along the side of a lock causing smoke from the friction was standard operating procedure. Very different way of doing things.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,807
Points
1,160
In the commercial coastal trade on the westcoast they say : "if you haven't hit something, you haven't been around enough". I can't fathom a MCDV needing to do a cold move unless there is a propulsion problem already. They are not big vessels and flashing them up to do a short hop is not a significant event. Plus it gives the deck officer and the CO time on the wheel which is where you learn your ship handing.
 

Stoker

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
294
Points
880
In the commercial coastal trade on the westcoast they say : "if you haven't hit something, you haven't been around enough". I can't fathom a MCDV needing to do a cold move unless there is a propulsion problem already. They are not big vessels and flashing them up to do a short hop is not a significant event. Plus it gives the deck officer and the CO time on the wheel which is where you learn your ship handing.
Well Colin most of the CCG ships you talk about have bow thrusters, MCDV's don't and the frigates don't. If the tugs are available I see no issue taking them. Just for the record we don't always take tugs either. The picture above is several ships that came back from a pretty intensive sea training two weeks and propulsion is up. Why are they taking them? most likely because its pretty tight in the camber and they probably want to secure and get home and using tugs speeds things up.

For MCDV's we usually do a cold move because we may have systems down for maintenance , may have to move to another jetty because of a high priority ship coming in or as simple as to facilitate crane work to remove payloads etc. There are literally dozens of reasons why we do cold moves when we don't want to do a lengthy flash up for a simple move.

So no offense stop comparing us to the CCG.
 
Top