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

Who needs sailors anyway?

Maybe the platform, but likely not. Definitely not robots launching expensive munitions into the sea during potentially marginal conditions.

I'm not against automation, but putting heavy things into the water is a complex task best suited to humans. Same for the gear required for the launch and recovery of heavy systems. I'd hate to see a ship full of expensive USSVs be lost because a crane malfunctioned, and nobody was within 300mn to fix it before something went catastrophically wrong.
 
Why waste space and tonnage on a combatant for a weapon with a 300-1000nm range? Those sorts of weapons make more sense on light, cheap, and fast transports specifically designed for the task of launching and recovering USSVs.
Perhaps take a page out of the old MTBs during WW2 that hunted German naval craft? Small, agile and capable.
 
Maybe the platform, but likely not. Definitely not robots launching expensive munitions into the sea during potentially marginal conditions.

I'm not against automation, but putting heavy things into the water is a complex task best suited to humans. Same for the gear required for the launch and recovery of heavy systems. I'd hate to see a ship full of expensive USSVs be lost because a crane malfunctioned, and nobody was within 300mn to fix it before something went catastrophically wrong.
Something with a well deck?
 
So what is happening in Japan?



"One destroyer and two USVs could replace three destroyers."

The USVs Mariner and Ranger are crewboat-based test platforms, designed for developing a concept of operations for unmanned vessels in the U.S. fleet. The program - dubbed "Ghost Fleet Overlord" - was developed by Pentagon's Strategic Capabilities Office (SCO) in coordination with the Navy. True to their roots as working vessels, these boats are capable of carrying large payloads on their back decks, including a containerized launcher for the SM-6 multi-purpose missile. This launch system has been tested before, and it could effectively transform the drone boat into an unmanned magazine ship for a U.S. strike group. "One destroyer and two USVs could replace three destroyers. It’s a force multiplier,” Cmdr. Jeremiah Daley (USN) told the Wall Street Journal last week.

“This is the first exercise for the JMSDF with USV, which the U.S. Navy is testing. Both this ship, our [frigate] and USV that the U.S. Navy owns are the next generation of naval vessels. I believe that the exercise together was a good opportunity to develop new ways to utilize surface vessels in the future and to strengthen cooperation," said Kumano's commanding officer, Commander Izumi Atsushi.

And, among other things...

Combat Support Multipurpose USV​

Japan Combat Support Multipurpose USV

Combat support multipurpose USVs are large unmanned surface vessels (USVs) that deal with enemy naval vessels and submarines in support of manned vessels. It can be operated autonomously or remotely from a land-based control facility (remote bridge) via satellite communications, and furthermore, it aims to automatically operate in rough weather and respond to malfunctions. It is also intended to share operational data and other information with other USVs in order to conduct coordinated activities.

The USV will seek to replace payloads (mission module) such as sensors, anti-ship missiles, and torpedoes, depending on the mission. The USV also aims to evade enemy threats by submerging itself in the water. The research will be conducted from FY2024 to FY2027, and in In parallel, tests will be conducted from FY2026 to FY2030.

 
Don't worry we will continue doing the same thing while hoping for a miracle. That being said I will give credit to the RCN for the one year program and actively getting out into the public eye. But I don't bet on their abilty to make hard calls.

 
First Sea Lord briefing the Commons Defence Committee on the RN, Readiness and managing the Middle East.

 
Don't worry we will continue doing the same thing while hoping for a miracle. That being said I will give credit to the RCN for the one year program and actively getting out into the public eye. But I don't bet on their abilty to make hard calls.


I find it amusing how the CRCN blames most, if not all of the issues on recruitment and not retention. That being said, some of the info in that video is pretty harrowing to say publicly, even if many people knew it was true previously.

ggg.png

The amount of red and black is quite alarming, especially in the MAR TECH trade which is a basic requirement to run any and all ships in the fleet.

Here are some direct excerpts from the video I thought were notable/important.

"While our overall attrition is generally good, a MAR TECH leaves us every two days."

"Our West Coast fleet is beset with a shortage of qualified techs, constraining our ability to maintain and operate our ships and causing us to prioritize the Halifax class at the expense of the Kingston class."

"Challenges and generating techs for the Harry DeWolf class mean we could only sail one at a time right now."

"Preparing to fully crew the first JSS by 2025 is a considerable challenge, but we cannot and will not fail."

"RCN requirement of 1200 enrollees this year and every year after."

"The Halifax class frigates are and will remain our only surface combatant for atleast the next 15 years. Why? Because we cannot retire the Halifax class until we have atleast 4 Canadian Surface Combatants certified for operations. We have made great progress in the past year because of some tough decisions to prioritize schedule over initial capability, and I am very confident that the first CSC will deliver early in the next decade. This is a massively complex ship, so it will take 2-3 years of tests and trials to make sure it works well enough to deploy the first one, and years more to have enough to relieve the burden from the Halifax class. We must therefore find a way to keep the Halifax class going until atleast 2040. Given that they have reached their design life of 30 years and that all 12 are absolutely required to meet Canada's commitments to NATO and the Indo-Pacific strategy, this is a very considerable challenge and the reason why the RCN consumes such a massive share of national procurement funds. I wish it was not so, but I am afraid there is simply no other choice. These ships (Halifax class) play a vital role in ensuring that sailors retain the unique core combat skills that can only be developed, exercised and used in surface combat ships. Today's Halifax class ships will train the crews of tomorrow's warships. There is no other path."

"We've received 4 of our 6 Arctic and Offshore Patrol vessels and the final 2 will be delivered in 2024 and 2025 respectively. Like all new ships, they've had teething problems but let me assure you that the AOPV's are outperforming expectations and proving the value of the National Shipbuilding Strategy."

"The first support vessel will be delivered in 2025 and the second will follow in 2027."

"Finally, we launched the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project to replace our Victoria class with a commercial submarine in the mid-2030's."
 
Last edited:
^^^
What was unsaid was we now seeing the bow wave of people who stuck around after FRP and the recruiting freeze now retiring. I realize that cohort is no longer in the fleet, but the gap behind them is huge to say the least.
 
^^^
What was unsaid was we now seeing the bow wave of people who stuck around after FRP and the recruiting freeze now retiring. I realize that cohort is no longer in the fleet, but the gap behind them is huge to say the least.
Another reason why contemporary malarkey about cuts to administration will have no effect on operations is patently untrue. Well, that and the complete mess that was made of the MarTech reset.
 
^^^
What was unsaid was we now seeing the bow wave of people who stuck around after FRP and the recruiting freeze now retiring. I realize that cohort is no longer in the fleet, but the gap behind them is huge to say the least.
I was refrigeration instructor at CFFSE from '94-'96 and for about 12 months, we had more staff than students.

The death knell for the stoker branch was obvious to the most junior stoker in '95 when it was apparent that not only were we losing some of our career restricted PO2s who would never adapt to the push-button navy of the CPFs, but also the highly motivated young wunderkids who were prescient enough to see the writing on the wall for the trade. The restriction on applicants was if you had a Cert 4 with less than 16 years in, you couldn't apply for FRP. Well, in Esquimalt that was one guy (one of the young thrusters) who appealed it anyway and was accepted.

With the freeze on recruiting, you've essentially had a vacuum moving up the system since then in concert with demographics and outside employers who found us highly desirable.

This might come across as hyperbolic, but the MARS/NWO branch always seemed to have it in for the the Mar Eng branch. This was personified in Ron Lloyd. The magic wand of MARTECH was to correct all of our manning woes, yet ended up diluting core skills just as your major surface combatants rust out and those core skills are needed.

As mentioned above, to young PO2 Grimey and his greasy brethren at the time, this was all blindingly obvious yet the brain trust didn't notice or worse, didn't care.
 
I was refrigeration instructor at CFFSE from '94-'96 and for about 12 months, we had more staff than students.

The death knell for the stoker branch was obvious to the most junior stoker in '95 when it was apparent that not only were we losing some of our career restricted PO2s who would never adapt to the push-button navy of the CPFs, but also the highly motivated young wunderkids who were prescient enough to see the writing on the wall for the trade. The restriction on applicants was if you had a Cert 4 with less than 16 years in, you couldn't apply for FRP. Well, in Esquimalt that was one guy (one of the young thrusters) who appealed it anyway and was accepted.

With the freeze on recruiting, you've essentially had a vacuum moving up the system since then in concert with demographics and outside employers who found us highly desirable.

This might come across as hyperbolic, but the MARS/NWO branch always seemed to have it in for the the Mar Eng branch. This was personified in Ron Lloyd. The magic wand of MARTECH was to correct all of our manning woes, yet ended up diluting core skills just as your major surface combatants rust out and those core skills are needed.

As mentioned above, to young PO2 Grimey and his greasy brethren at the time, this was all blindingly obvious yet the brain trust didn't notice or worse, didn't care.

Did they have it in for the Engineers or just not Grok the situation?

How many of them just assumed that they would have a boat to drive and make holes in the water?
 
I find it amusing how the CRCN blames most, if not all of the issues on recruitment and not retention. That being said, some of the info in that video is pretty harrowing to say publicly, even if many people knew it was true previously.

View attachment 81459

The amount of red and black is quite alarming, especially in the MAR TECH trade which is a basic requirement to run any and all ships in the fleet.

Here are some direct excerpts from the video I thought were notable/important.
They have 3 Kingston Class tied up out on the WC currently. The EC recently proposed to transfer one hull to the EC as the EC Kingston Class are full out. Too much resistance from the WC and that COA was dead.
 
Another reason why contemporary malarkey about cuts to administration will have no effect on operations is patently untrue. Well, that and the complete mess that was made of the MarTech reset.
What you mean the system the British adopted and abandoned due to pushing too many complex trades into one, isn’t working for the RCN?

There is a huge shortage of mechanically minded people in Canada. Why would someone who has those skills stay in the Navy when they can get paid substantially better, do honestly cooler things (from a maintenance perspective) and get treated better well they are at it?

Apprentices for Millwrights or Electricians start in the high 20s to low 30s generally. The RCN will pay you 3500$ a month for the same level of work.
 
OK Crayon eater question time: I am not familiar with Naval trades. So what does a MarEngTech do? and what ever else it takes to sail in harms way?
Keep it simple please.
 
OK Crayon eater question time: I am not familiar with Naval trades. So what does a MarEngTech do? and what ever else it takes to sail in harms way?
Keep it simple please.
Float, Move, Fight is their mantra. The ship needs to float (hull techs) and it needs to move (stokers) for it to effectively fight (ETs and CSEs for sensors and weapons). MARS/NWO and Combat trades are then able to tactically use the ship and its sensors to fight the battle.
 
OK Crayon eater question time: I am not familiar with Naval trades. So what does a MarEngTech do? and what ever else it takes to sail in harms way?
Keep it simple please.
Take a millwright, electrician, plumber, welder, and small amount of carpentry then slap it into one trade.

Basically the mechanics that keep all the non-combat systems running.
 
Did they have it in for the Engineers or just not Grok the situation?

How many of them just assumed that they would have a boat to drive and make holes in the water?
I think you're right, and I suspect there were lots of people inside the stoker world who were blinded by their own experiences and pre-conceived notions.

My trade was broken by a few Snr NCMs who refused to listen to anyone who questioned their assumptions, and by meteorologists and officers who didn't know enough about the job to not listen to bad advice.

What strikes me as blindingly obvious from the graphic up thread is there is something broken about the way occupations are using/managing their MS-PO1s. It makes sense that there are smaller numbers at those ranks, so each member short amounts to a greater percentage, but clearly the RCN(and I suspect much of the rest of the CAF) is not doing something(s) right.
 
The basis of the collapse of the RCN's technical trades was laid out a few years ago at the Naval Technical Seminar by (then) Commodore Simon Page.

He explained that his goal as the senior technical officer in the Navy was to have our technicians (of all trades) doing technical work at least 40% of the time. There was not a single ship in the fleet that attained that. The highest was on operations and hit 36%. No other ship in the fleet had about 18%.

That means that technicians who joined the Navy to be a Technician were doing everything but their actual trade for 4 out of 5 days a week.

Why would you stay if you're not doing your job? How do you get good at your job if you're not doing your actual job?

This should come as no surprise to the leadership if they'd actually listened...

And Mr. Topshee should ponder the 'death of a thousand cuts' that he helped preside over, most visibly being the parking issue in HMC Dockyard in Halifax.
 
The basis of the collapse of the RCN's technical trades was laid out a few years ago at the Naval Technical Seminar by (then) Commodore Simon Page.

He explained that his goal as the senior technical officer in the Navy was to have our technicians (of all trades) doing technical work at least 40% of the time. There was not a single ship in the fleet that attained that. The highest was on operations and hit 36%. No other ship in the fleet had about 18%.

That means that technicians who joined the Navy to be a Technician were doing everything but their actual trade for 4 out of 5 days a week.

Why would you stay if you're not doing your job? How do you get good at your job if you're not doing your actual job?

This should come as no surprise to the leadership if they'd actually listened...

And Mr. Topshee should ponder the 'death of a thousand cuts' that he helped preside over, most visibly being the parking issue in HMC Dockyard in Halifax.
How happy would they be to have twice as many people in their mess decks to cover all the jobs that are "beneath" the technicians?

I'm sure parking would be fixed if there were twice as many boatswains, cooks, and MPs to fill and the non-tech jobs that need to be done.
 
Back
Top