 Weekend collision with naval supply ship could hasten Pacific destroyer's demise A naval expert warns that a weekend collision with naval supply ship could hasten the demise of the Canadian navy's only command-and-control destroyer in the Pacific.Commentsview comments in forum Page 1 2 You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
Guess our Air Defence ships are in the same catagory. Fucking disgrace.
I've been in 3 collisions at sea and a grounding, with one of the collisions opening up a rather sizeable hole in the After Seamens Head. It was a nice feature being able to have a dump and watch the sunrise.
Other than a severely degraded watertight integrity rating
The real reason they want this thing written off is because it's been an albatross around the neck of the Pacific Fleet Staff since it was upgraded with the command and control package. It was the wrong 280 to be upgraded and the Huron, which was in better shape should have been the one to get that upgrade. But money became an issue and the Huron is now a lump of steel on the bottom of the ocean while the Algonquin in a lump of steel on the surface and guess which one is costing the Gov't a ton of money.
.
you were on the Yukon when she lost the sonar dome?
Nope but, if IIRC we were in concert with her when it happened though. It's kind of foggy though because:
A. I was still drinking
B. 4 Squadron ships were always getting banged up
C. I somehow got old and my recollections of accidents are blurring together.
So give me a date and I'll be able to tell you if we were with her definitively.
I had a car like that once. Had a fender bender and the thing was such a piece of crap it wasn't worth fixing.
Guess our Air Defence ships are in the same catagory. Fucking disgrace.
I certainly agree that it is a disgrace, but I do understand it from a bean counter's POV. Why pay a million or three bucks to fix a ship that is due to be decommissioned in a couple years?
It would certainly sting a lot less if the replacement hull was at least under construction, but if this ship gets scrapped without a replacement getting built at the same time, who knows if one will ever get built. The current government is slow footed when it comes to the navy (on naval construction) and I doubt the NDP or Liberals care enough to maintain this capability.
I had a car like that once. Had a fender bender and the thing was such a piece of crap it wasn't worth fixing.
Guess our Air Defence ships are in the same catagory. Fucking disgrace.
They are ancient. The 280's were re-fit as air defence ships during the TRUMP refit a quarter of a century ago. They were already two decades old, at the time. It's a disgrace that the navy has to wring generations of use out of vessels that are designed to give a generation's worth of service. Only the taxpayers of this country are to blame.
What a load of political crap. It's a gash along the hanger not a gash 10 feet below the waterline. If the dockyard can't fix that tear in a couple of weeks then they'd better reopen Yarrows because there are no more tradesmen left in H.M. Dockyard.
I've been in 3 collisions at sea and a grounding, with one of the collisions opening up a rather sizeable hole in the After Seamens Head. It was a nice feature being able to have a dump and watch the sunrise.
Other than a severely degraded watertight integrity rating
The real reason they want this thing written off is because it's been an albatross around the neck of the Pacific Fleet Staff since it was upgraded with the command and control package. It was the wrong 280 to be upgraded and the Huron, which was in better shape should have been the one to get that upgrade. But money became an issue and the Huron is now a lump of steel on the bottom of the ocean while the Algonquin in a lump of steel on the surface and guess which one is costing the Gov't a ton of money.
.
I never understood why they did that to the Huron. Did she get damaged, somehow, during the first Gulf War when she was deployed to the Persian Gulf? If so, I don't remember hearing about it.
I never understood why they did that to the Huron. Did she get damaged, somehow, during the first Gulf War when she was deployed to the Persian Gulf? If so, I don't remember hearing about it.
The Huron didn't go to Gulf War I (Desert Storm).
What a load of political crap. It's a gash along the hanger not a gash 10 feet below the waterline. If the dockyard can't fix that tear in a couple of weeks then they'd better reopen Yarrows because there are no more tradesmen left in H.M. Dockyard.
I've been in 3 collisions at sea and a grounding, with one of the collisions opening up a rather sizeable hole in the After Seamens Head. It was a nice feature being able to have a dump and watch the sunrise.
Other than a severely degraded watertight integrity rating
The real reason they want this thing written off is because it's been an albatross around the neck of the Pacific Fleet Staff since it was upgraded with the command and control package. It was the wrong 280 to be upgraded and the Huron, which was in better shape should have been the one to get that upgrade. But money became an issue and the Huron is now a lump of steel on the bottom of the ocean while the Algonquin in a lump of steel on the surface and guess which one is costing the Gov't a ton of money.
.
I never understood why they did that to the Huron. Did she get damaged, somehow, during the first Gulf War when she was deployed to the Persian Gulf? If so, I don't remember hearing about it.
I recall reading that the Huron was the guinea pig for the TRUMP program, and she didn't come out quite right.
I never understood why they did that to the Huron. Did she get damaged, somehow, during the first Gulf War when she was deployed to the Persian Gulf? If so, I don't remember hearing about it.
I recall reading that the Huron was the guinea pig for the TRUMP program, and she didn't come out quite right.
That's why she was drydocked and used for parts to keep the other 280s running.
I never understood why they did that to the Huron. Did she get damaged, somehow, during the first Gulf War when she was deployed to the Persian Gulf? If so, I don't remember hearing about it.
The Huron didn't go to Gulf War I (Desert Storm).
Sorry. Right you are. That 280 was the Athabascan.
I never understood why they did that to the Huron. Did she get damaged, somehow, during the first Gulf War when she was deployed to the Persian Gulf? If so, I don't remember hearing about it.
The Huron didn't go to Gulf War I (Desert Storm).
The Huron deployed to Desert Storm to relieve Athabaskan but damaged a fuel tank enroute. The war ended while she was still tied up in Gibralter for repairs.
I never understood why they did that to the Huron. Did she get damaged, somehow, during the first Gulf War when she was deployed to the Persian Gulf? If so, I don't remember hearing about it.
The Huron didn't go to Gulf War I (Desert Storm).
The Huron deployed to Desert Storm to relieve Athabaskan but damaged a fuel tank enroute. The war ended while she was still tied up in Gibralter for repairs.
True enough! Forgot about that incident.