Why Only Frigates and NO Destroyers in Royal Canadian Navy?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 чер 2024
- Frigates vs Destroyers. Why Does the Canadian Navy Have No Destroyer Ships, Only Frigates? It was a time when Canada's mighty destroyers reigned supreme over its waters. But times changed, and now sleek, versatile frigates patrol where these giants once dominated. What drove this transformation in the Canadian Navy? And why does the Canadian Navy have no destroyer ships, only frigates?
Ah, the Iroquois-class destroyers. Just their name conjures images of steel giants slicing through icy waves, Canadian flags snapping proudly in the wind. They were the apex predators of the north, the guardians of a vast coastline, and symbols of national pride.
Imagine four of these majestic ships, named after fearsome Mohawk warriors - Iroquois, Huron, Algonquin, and Athabascan. Each weighed over 4,000 tons (3628 tonne), bristled with guns and missiles, and carried helicopters like loyal hawks perched on their shoulders. They patrolled the frigid Atlantic, the treacherous Arctic, and even ventured far south, showing the maple leaf wherever the seas may lead. #destroyers #frigates #canadiannavy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Become a member and proudly bear the title of 'Navy Life Supporter'!
As a 'Navy Life Supporter', you show your appreciation and respect for all Navy Sailors. By becoming a member, you not only support this channel but also enjoy fun extras like unique badges and emojis, and your comments get the attention they deserve!
Let's share special experiences and stories in the comments under the videos. This is the chance for former sailors to reminisce and for everyone curious about life at sea. It's more than just sharing stories; let's together discover and share the fascinating and diverse aspects of maritime life. Let's strive to show the world how intriguing and complex the life of a sailor at sea can be, with all its challenges and adventures.
Together, we offer a glimpse into the unique world of the navy and show our appreciation for the brave men and women who brave the open sea and defend our country. Whether you want to relive old sea tales or learn more about the maritime world, it's all possible here.
Do you also want to show your appreciation and support for the brave men and women of the Navy? Support this channel by becoming a member!
Click the link below and proudly become a 'Navy Life Supporter'!
/ @navyproductions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: "This channel is exclusively intended for entertainment, informative, and educational purposes. The content herein does not reflect the official positions or policies of the US Navy or any other naval units from various countries. The appearance of visual material from the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) or other military sources neither implies nor constitutes an endorsement by the DoD or these organizations."
We use images and content in accordance with UA-cam's Fair Use copyright guidelines. We also give as much credit as possible to our sources.
If we have forgotten to do this, please contact us via our email address!
Become a member and proudly bear the title of 'Navy Life Supporter'!
ua-cam.com/channels/8Kz9iel6zpNoJ8oHMLiRnQ.htmljoin
As a 'Navy Life Supporter', you show your appreciation and respect for all Navy Sailors. By becoming a member, you not only support this channel but also enjoy fun extras like unique badges and emojis, and your comments get the attention they deserve!
Click the link below and proudly become a 'Navy Life Supporter'!
ua-cam.com/channels/8Kz9iel6zpNoJ8oHMLiRnQ.htmljoin
Let's share special experiences and stories in the comments under the videos. This is the chance for former sailors to reminisce and for everyone curious about life at sea. It's more than just sharing stories; let's together discover and share the fascinating and diverse aspects of maritime life. Let's strive to show the world how intriguing and complex the life of a sailor at sea can be, with all its challenges and adventures. ⬇💙
Note that the new type 26 "frigates" are larger than the retired Iroquois destroyers.
True, but you're comparing a ship that was built back in the 50s,60s to a ship in the 2020s, and the new destroyers are even bigger and better than the new frigates, there's no comparison, it's comparing apples to oranges.
Not really comparing, just noting the difference in size as the video mentions. "big slow DDS" No question that they are a fine upgrade though. Good ships. @@user-ls5zb2dx5j
@@user-ls5zb2dx5jthe new Type 26 will be a game changer for the RCN
The idea is to be able to deploy 2 naval task forces (1 resupply ship + 4 combatants) and the Type 26 will literally have us operating at a level the current CPF's just can't.
(The VLS alone is a leap in capability!)
@@chrisburke624 No kidding, current ships carry like 8 harpoons and 12 sea sparrows... Imagine spending so much on fuel to crew ships to send around the world to send 8 harpoons. I get it that they are sub hunters but dang man, those are corvette numbers.
@SpruceMoose-iv8un they aren't even really sub hunters, but more 'general purpose patrol frigates'
So some decent AD capability, decent ASW capabilities (the real sub hunter is the Cyclone), and some anti ship capabilities. (Any fires sent towards land targets is either in the form of naval gunfire support, or firing a Harpoon at a land target...not really ideal and very limited in terms of capacity, you're right)
The new CSC will be a massive game changer for us, and will have us operating a whole level above where we are at now
The Halifax class frigates are longer, have greater beam and have better weapons and sensors than the old 280 class destroyers and the type 26 frigate will be larger than a world war two cruiser and about the same size as an Arleigh Burke destroyer.
True---but it will be YEARS before Canada even has ONE operating---remember --the feckless leftist trudeau has plenty of $$$$ waste but very little for defense of canada
Somebody had to tell these guys. Silly compote of words in this article, with footage totally at odds with the drivel issuing from the sound track..
@dereksollows9783 I must agree with you. The English language has degenerated to a sugary adjective laden nonsense. Documentaries should be laden with facts. Not the shock, surprise approach of the likes of The Masked Singer. TV show. Also,the lack of personnel is keeping ships docked and military hardware in decaying storage. Even Ukraine declining gifted missiles due to their dangerously decomposed condition! Moral across the services is also very low.
The VLS and 5” gun were superior on the 280s. There is a video out that compares the baby pea shooter vs the 5”…its “wreaking havoc” vs. “sink the enemy”…so, you need a lot of pea shooters to take on an actual enemy. This all assumes the missiles have all been expended. There is very likely a role for high caliber guns onboard. Just a gut feeling.
@@doogleticker5183 The 280's never had a 5" gun and VLS at the same time. The post refit gun was 76mm.
"Lumbering Giant" Destroyers? Are you talking about the U.S. DDG-1000 class? That's the only Giant Destroyer class in North American waters. "Giant 4,000 ton Canadian Destroyers?" The new U.S. class of Frigates is going to be about 7,000 tons. "Canadian Frigates move with the grace of a catamaran." Good grief! Who writes this stuff?
Who writes this stuff? An idiot.
I know what a joke
your right..not a clue
Can you say propaganda
some one not caught up in yankee bull
The distinction between calling a warship a Destroyer or a Frigate is whatever a government decides to call it.
Not quite
I served on the Athabaskan. No complaints we were a family of sailors who were proud of the lady we served on. Not like the navy of today.
282 - We Fight As One
The last of the Sisters Of The Space Age
I was there 2010-2013
The RCN Type 26 “frigates" will be over 8,000 tons loaded. Larger than a lot of “destroyers”. Almost double the displacement of the Halifax class.
Theyre destroyers
@@zacmorris3932 or light cruisers, are called “frigates”.
Who writes this bull? a destroyer is better than a frigate any time and can do everything a frigate can but better, a frigate is the poor man's destroyer.
Another keyboard “Admiral General Haffaz Aladeen”.
You flat out have no idea what you are talking about. many frigates are bigger and more capable than many destroyers.
In 688s, surface ships were viewed simply as "targets."
1) Having an Iroquois-class DDH on the thumbnail as a “frigate”, next to a USN Arleigh Burke-class DDG does little for credibility.
2) Iroquois, Algonkian, Huron, and Athabaskan are their own nations…Mohawk were actually one of the nations of the Iroquois Confederacy
You are mixing up confederacies with individual tribes. Suggest if you are that interested to study the history of these peoples.
@@jonmce1i was calling out the nonsense of the videos, saying all the ships were named after “fearsome Mohawk warriors”.
Plus 3 out of the 4 aren’t necessarily just confederacies, they are their own language groups.
Plus, isn’t a confederacy a nation…like the Confederation of Canada?
All 3 of the "OBERON" submarines are beached. Respect my middle finger Sir!
Never mind whether warships are called destroyers or frigates, as long as they have anti-air, anti-submarine, and surface warfare capabilities. Of larger concern is why the RCN does not have the capability to provide sea lift for a Canadian battalion of troops and its equipment. Canada has numerous islands, two large islands have a significant population. Both islands can block access to both oceans major sea ports, ports whose commerce affects Canada's economy.
I think the idea is that unless Canada wanted to go to war with another country without Canadian ever territory being attacked, that they would have the rest of NATO with them in any war they would be in.
Visited Vancouver in 1985 while stationed on USS Cape Cod AD 43. The Canadian Navy hosted a party on their base. Great time.
I toured your ship that time! 😀
@@RogerDLee That's awesome! She was sold for scrap and broken up. 💔
Yellowstone class? Man they were cool
@@Snow-cj4imYes, Yellowstone class. She was barely 2 years in commission when I reported onboard.
Cost and politics. Cost is self explanatory .
Naming something a destroyer sounds aggressive to Justin.And lord knows ,we can't have any aggression in the CAF .
The RCN no matter what ships it has in commission is ineffective as a whole for one single reason, not enough sailors to man the fleet. You can have the newest most advanced ships yet can only put so many to sea if you can't recruit enough people to join up. It's been Canada's achilles heel for decades and only getting worse thanks to policies of the current government. Recruiting is no longer aimed at the 18yr old who seeks adventure and to go into harms way, it's the opposite and dismal recruiting figures reflect that fact.
So true. Forces overall are missing upto 16k people. it's going to take years to fix this.
Our only advantage is that when we go to war people sign up.
I wish we had more “patriots” really wanted to serve Canada.
🇨🇦 Army Vet
@@robandcheryls -- I totally agree. Ex-military police.
The solution. MANDATORY MILITARY SERVICE. Plus, they are too young to vote to oppose the madatory service bill
I had no idea about any of this😍. Thanks.
Some of the pictures didn't match the narrative but interest to reminisce. Sailed on Iroquois, Athabascan, Saguenay(DDH) and Toronto as an Aircraft Technician during the Sea King Era between 1978 and 2002.. Great life.
I'd say a lot did not match, not sure why the video would show Australian Hobart Class DDG or ANZAC Class FFG as well as a graphic of a Canberra Class LHD. Interesting thought to see Canada as also a partner in the Type 26 program.
The Canadian Surface Combatant will be a hammer, and a scalpel all in one.🇨🇦🤝🇬🇧
Canadian destroyers were poorly equipped to fight a war like say an Arleigh Burke class one is. Few ships are. The ships originally took a few minutes to fire the first rounds of Sea Sparrows, then 10 minutes to reload/relaunch. I can go on and on but the modern type 26 will weigh almost twice what the Iroquois weighed. Many frigates now are in the 8K to 10K ton class. A destroyer is designed to fight a war by attacking multiple land, sea, and air targets. The Arleigh Burke carries 96 VLS cells. The Type 26 will only carry 30 or 32 VLS cells?
The destroyer starts a war, a frigate fights in it. That is primarily Canada's philosophy. Be able to fight, but not to be the one starting a war. The Type 26 will also have to evolve thru time just as the Iroquois destroyers did.
A better question is when will Canada be able to defend the arctic with submarines? Hasnt done that ever!
There are type 26 models can carry upto 124 VLS, reason UK wants to use it as a cruiser infront of it's carriers. We are getting 4 anti-air versions, they will probably be atleast 64 VLS.
@@niweshlekhak9646 No. The first builds of the RCN Type 26 will have 6x4 cells for 24 SeaCeptors and 24 Mk41 VLS. ESSM 2 can be quad fitted though for up to 96 ESSMs for a total of 120 SAMs or a much more likely smaller mix of ESSMs, SM2s, and other missiles. This is in addition to the 8 NSM anti ship missiles. There is talk later builds will replace the mission bay with more VLS cells
@@edwhlam no actually more VLS can be fitted into missions bay anytime, it will probably take or month or so. Same can be done with the frontal gun as it has 3 guns frontal one can be removed, so that's 62 VLS.
@@niweshlekhak9646 I meant replacement of the entire mission bay with VLS. May never be done.
I see only one 127mm gun forward. Where are the other two? There are one 30mm guns on each side though, closer to midship.
@@edwhlam Yes those two 40 mm Bofors cannon can do the work, and you can add 14-24 VLS instead of the main gun.
I toured the HMCS VANCOUVER wars ago and was impressed with ship and crew Canada has a long tradition of small ships and big seas. We always show up first and leave last ,Ready aye ready !
This was a fantastic documentary. I wish I knew all of this back when I was in the Navy. No wonder the Frigates looked like a dragster when accelerating from 20 knots with it's bow lifting up out of the water.
because our frigates is already 2x the cost of a destroyer.
Source="trust me bro"? Build a frigate and destroyer side by side. Destroyer is at least twice the price.
The new Single Class Surface Combatant will replace all Halifax-class frigates and the tribal class destroyers. Even though they'll be based on the type 26 frigates, they're more like big destroyers as they will weigh 8000 tons and have a ton of armament.
The Iroquois class aren't named after "Mohawk warriors" smh
The problem for the RCN comes from Ottawa. Chronic underfunding
The American Aleign Burke destroyer are built at $2 billion dollars a piece without armaments, and looks like Canada and Australia with all the politics will build their type 25 around $5 billion apiece with half the armaments of the American destroyer. The American navy is having their frigates built by an Italian company because they got too fancy in their own designs of littoral ships that are not capable to use as a frigate
We need the new ships for Canadian Navy but the Government is not giving the support they need. Example taking Iroquois destroyer at PWDD several years ago for rebuild only to fine the rusted hull almost 40 million dollars to fix. The funds should been put towards building the new ships earlier Other problems many navies are having man power for these ships. Canada needs to increase the budget to meet NATO requirement of 2 percent
Canada had to spend a ton of money on the Halifax class because the procurement of new vessels waited too long. Same with the F18, and the Aurora aircraft. Been going of like this forever. Does not seem to matter which party is in at the time neither.
Not going to get much of any funding from a Trudeau government.
I understand that I was watching computer graphics, but they showed a frigate with waves extending, not only from the bow and stern, but also from amidships.
That’s unlikely, nowadays. I know that commercial freighters and oil tankers have got rid of those waves 🌊 (for fuel efficiency reasons, I believe), and likely, military Ships would have got rid of them by now, as well.
Anyone is free to correct me, if I’m wrong, of course.
I was reading a book by a retired AP reporter, back in the 2000’s. He was boarded and robbed by pirates while sailing around the world, alone, in his sailboat ⛵️.
So after he completed his trip, he wrote a book about modern-day piracy 🏴☠️, and mentioned how the elimination of that mid-ships wave made it easier for pirates to maneuver around the ships, nowadays.
Can’t win for losing. Get rid of drag, and make it easier to be boarded.
During the cold war (when we had the 4 destroyers, and a bunch of destroyer escorts (roughly the size of a frigate), Canada's role within NATO was primarily anti-submarine warfare. That's why our ships had mortars, ASROC (anti-submarine rockets), and helicopters, with token guns for self defense. The nature of the threat has changed, so the CPFs and the next generation ships are different. That's the real reason for "only frigates and no destroyers."
Can the Canadian Navy fight & attack during an event of war?
Anyone. Has steel begun being cut for the RCN CSC?
The terms destroyer and frigate have become a game of nomanclature rather than siificant definition. The type 26 will weigh nearly as much as an early ww2 heavy cruiser and is not much lighter than the Russian missle cruiser sunk in the Back Sea. The most common class of destroyer in the world, the Burkes, are only slightly heavier. About the biggest difference and that is not always true is top speed with the destroyers being faster.
As a member of the family we could still sail any ship we have now serving. Even at our age 40 Yeats after retirement
Canada needs 25 frigates 25 destroyers and 2 Nimitz aircraft carriers for the size of our waters
Why would you want aircraft carriers? They are about power projection not defending the homeland. The US does not use its Carrier Battle Groups to patrol around home waters. Besides to generate enough vessels to protect the carriers would take the rest of the fleet and leave none available to do anything else.
Whatever happened to Canada’s RCN corvettes?
Sackville is at the Maritime Museum.
You keep calling the frigate HMCS Calgary the 'Iroquois'
It is just a naming game, warships been shrinking since WW2 , with more compact weapon systems, big ships are no longer necessary. A few Harpoons are more destructive than several of the 18 inch guns on the Yamato, and smaller ships spread out the odds more that you will not lose a whole big ship in one shot. A light cruiser such as the German Emden would be classified as a destroyer today with vastly more fire power than a light cruiser. It is the old assault rifle argument, if it has a wooden stock and not black and plastic, it is not a military weapon !
Didn't mention most of the families visit food banks to survive.
Same fate as the battleship......except the destroyers the target this time.
Our RCAF and RCN is broke asf..
👍
The Destroyers were wrongly named,one wasnt even an Iroquois class ship.
With respect to the shoreline of Canada plus their international obligations, fielding a "navy in transition" is impressive for a country of 38 million. We who are south of the 49th Parallel do forget that our navy is backed by a population of almost 332 million whose maritime trade easily eclipses our neighbors to the north.
Well, that was weird.
Need DDGs
Why is this video is talking about the Iroquois as being huge? 4,000 tons is surprisingly small. Nations that deploy both frigates and destroyers, like Australia, allow destroyers to be air warfare specialist, and frigates concentrate on anti-submarine warfare. Canada would benefit from this kind of thinking, but the only reason Canada lost destroyer power is because of low defense budgets and an unwillingness to build forces based on a solid long term plan. Too much dithering, and not enough commitment to serious defense spending.
Because thay cost less
The Royal Canadian Navy was once the worlds 3ed largest navy, and now the largest warship they have is a frigate.😐
3rd largest merchant navy, from all our supply runs to the UK
No money
Do t really know.
Very poor editing. Showing ships, not only of the wrong class but names? And why do you keep saying Destroyer ships? You need to do more research, even for a channel that says 'for entertainment purposes'.
Wrong class, wrong names, wrong country. Some of the ships in the video were Royal Australian Navy ANZAC Class Frigates and Hobart Class Destroyers>
Lack of funding and lack of national interest is almost always the answer to why Canada lacks systems militarily….Plus a broken procurement system.
Hot mess of a video with a collection of clips that don't match the dialogue. Maybe spend more time working out the details before publishing.
🇨🇦⚓️👍
Boasting about the Iroquois (Tribal class) and showing the CPFs (Halifax class)?!! WTF?? They were not named after Mohawk warriors, but after aboriginal tribes/nations.
This is a pathetic video. Take it down, fix it, and get your damn facts right!!
We have Frigates because they are cheaper, and therefore politically easier to sell to the public. They are substantially less capable than destroyers. They have less range, less armour, less ability to detect other surface combatants, aircraft, and submarines. They have less life support, so the time they can spend at sea is a fraction of what a destroyer can do. Destroyers can go almost anywhere a frigate can go. Destroyers are faster, and better armed by a factor of 10. A destroyer can safely travel by itself anywhere in the world, and then lead a naval task force. A frigate cannot safely travel by itself, it must join a naval task force because it can’t sustain itself. We have frigates because politicians are afraid to make hard decisions.
Not the case with the new ships the RCN's getting, which are T26 variants. They're actually bigger than what most European counties call destroyers, anyway, and not that much smaller than our existing RN T45s. While the armament the RCN's specified is pretty good too, including deck box launch for 8 x Naval Strike Missile and VLS for 24 x Sea Ceptor as well as onboard launch tubes for ASW torpedoes as well as Helicopter mounted ASW. Plus 24 x T41 VLS fit. So, considering too that the vessel is innately optimised for ASW in any case, including propulsion plant etc and will have both hull mounted and towed array sonar fits, you'll be getting the world's most deadly ASW combatant that can also carry significant mission tailored Anti Air/Missile, Anti Surface and/or Land Strike packages in addition to its standard armaments.
Range is c7,000 nautical miles, too.
We do not have any that can fight? This is a retarded question. Most were in Halifax or Vancouver to re-build the Turbines that did not explode.
Dude...17 1/2 minutes? Canada doesn't need destroyers because the US will save their ass.
I think that you should educate yourself on reading if you can on the contributions and sacrifice Canada made during world war 1 and 2 with a population 10 times smaller after world war 2 having one of the largest navies in the world remember the war of 1812 you invaded Canada and lost. The only threat we face is probably from you Americans 1812 part 2 unless you have another civil war!!
@@tilaman3 not questioning their bravery. Lack of defense spending. Canada had been admonished by NATO for not pulling their weight on spending.
@@davestevens4193 NATO defense is national defense what a nation is spending in total I agree but what is missing In the cost of the cost of the 15 naval ships that have to be built the cost of the 88 fighters the possible purchase of 12 new submarines for starters once those costs are added in I believe we will meet the task but I do agree both our Liberal and Conservative federal governments have pushed to ball to the brink.
stop listening tyo idiots like Trump his clowns have no clue whatsoever @@davestevens4193
What a load of garbage. Modern frigates are better than old destroyers. They are often bigger than destroyers. Modern ships have a roll. They are advanced technological weapons, not armored battleships FFS!
Is this a Liberal propaganda video? Sure feels like it….
So much propaganda here,I can't stomach it.sounds like something only Trudeau,could pay for.
Hahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahaha because it's friggin canada
hahahahaha idiot yank !!!!!
Unfortunately the RCN isn't a balanced force. After WWII the British RN gave Canada two light cruisers and two light aircraft carriers, most were laid up by the RCN as quickly as possible. The RCN then, and still is today, an escort navy with nearly no sea power. The RCN has no sea lift ships to support their army to defend any of the islands off their mainland coasts....
How many ships frigates does Canada have
Come on Canada's cheap and relies on the United States to protect it , it always was Canada has hardly any ships