Canadian Naval sub-tree

de_Radio_Demon · July 20, 2023, 2:23am

Would you like to see Canadian naval trees presented here added as a sub-tree to the British tech tree?

Yes, I think from what was presented here it would be different enough to be worth adding to the game
I think that this might work, though I would modify it into a single line which would include most ships presented here
Yes, I think they should be added however I would prefer if they were added as apart of a independent Canadian tree
Maybe in the future this could be done
Maybe, but I would rather have it as apart of a larger independent Canadian tree
Unsure
I don’t think the Canadian sub-tree should be added to the game

0 voters

Do you think that some of the classes or ships which have been listed as considered for this suggestion but ultimately not included as options which should still be worth adding?

Yes, I think they could have still been included and maybe should be worth reconsideration
No, I think the ships presented here provide good and sufficient options

0 voters

Canadian Naval sub-tree

Note - Due to the transition to the new forums some of the suggestion that were made along with this suggestion may not be moved by time of posting, as such this suggestion is subject to change

When it comes to the idea of Canadian naval forces being added to war thunder, the idea itself is not a big question in how it would be added, unlike what an Aviation tree and Ground tech tree may consist of, the naval forces are more direct in where they would lie if a Canadian independent tech tree was not added since in the case of Naval forces the options are both limited and have obvious strong ties, this suggestion mainly focuses on it being added as a subtree to the British naval tech tree for both Bluewater and costal where possible, many of the vessels (especially Bluewater) all have British ties and origins, however the refits in particular in thus suggestion have all been chosen so that each ship is distinctly different from a British tech tree counterpart if not similar though they may be similar to those which lie outside the normal tech tree, this also does not count any ship which may share a configuration with another ship which has not been added to the game such as HMCS Algonquin which is a V class destroyer (the wartime emergency destroyer class) which is represented here as built since a British version of the same armament does not exist in-game as of yet (as of Update wings of change), so those ships which have another which might be added after this suggestion which would have the same armament as one of the ships being proposed here will remain. Also since the suggestion if on a sub tree their won’t be any focus on the history of these ships, and most of these selected may have been chosen at random from the class or were ships which could have their armament in refits backed up by images which are available to confirm the armaments of these ships.

This suggestion includes 3 sections of focus on content of this tech tree, blue water, costal, and an extra section which includes ships which were considered for this suggestion but not included in this as an explanation of why some alternatives have not been chosen. In this suggestion this will include also some preexisting suggestions previous made as part of this theoretical tech tree however most of these are ships do not have dedicated suggestions, it should also be noted that some of the present armaments of ships may not be accurate due to some sources not making clarifications as well with contradictions and states of the ships armament and systems from what images have shown.

Notes -

When it comes to the rank V for Blue water their are no ships included in this, at first their would have been 1 ship however in the end I concluded that it would be best to relocate it at rank IV due to the similar refits the other cruiser has and in order to make both potential lines have a ship that may be worth going for 1 cruiser has been placed at the end of each line
Despite attempt to keep these ships different from the current tech tree counterparts, this does not include premium ships and as such their are 2 ships included which are similar to HMCS Haida since that ship is a hidden premium vessel and might not be a permanent premium vehicle once more (this is under the assumption it won’t return permanently)
The Br of ships might still vary from what is shown, the Br’s are theoretical since they are based off first the ships which can be compared to in-game counterparts and then the ability of those which may be more difficult to determine placement
When it comes to some of the Tribal class destroyers, a number will be included in refits when they were put into the role of destroyer escorts however they will be treated as destroyers still due to their abilities and the fact that they still retained many of their destroyer aspects which would make it a bit unfair to have as apart of costal fleet
(Bluewater) Despite the unavoidable fact that this sub tech tree consist of British vessels, all if not most refits are different from any tech tree vehicles already in-game yet their are those which are similar to non-tech tree vehicles however are slightly different
Due to certain difficulties in determining some of the refits of the ships, some will be listed as having a refit from a certain period as I may be unable to figure out the exact point a refit which changed the armament of a ship occurred
(Coastal) While I have been able to find vessel which may be slightly different to version in-game for costal, the issue is that with ships such as torpedo boats it’s hard to find any which they (the British) don’t already have
*(Coastal) Even though their are no premiums listed in the sample tech tree, the possibility of premium equivalents are still present
This dose not include the idea of changing the placement of the Flower class corvette in-game despite it being a Canadian one, this isn’t to say it couldn’t be done however this suggestion and the tech Tre’s layout is under the assumption the addition of this sub tech tree dose not change the preexisting lines of the British tech tree
Not all images of the ships in their exact refits (For those listed in a particular refit)
Most elements of the ships are not included in here, the minimum included the weapon systems, and for those which are either unclear or are suggested from another suggestion list of how much the ships were armed with for a certain weapon, their are other weapon types not included such as depth charges and ASW weaponry

Bluewater

Tech tree

Spoiler

Rank I

Spoiler

G class destroyer, HMCS Ottawa (H31) (1944) (3.3)

Main armament:

2 x 4.7 inch/45 (120mm) QF Mark IX guns (2 x 1 CPXIV mounts)

AA armament:

8 x 20mm Oerlikon AA guns (4 x 2)

Torpedo tubes:

4 x 21 inch (533mm) torpedo tubes (1 x 4)

H class destroyer, HMCS Chaudière (H99) (1945) (3.7)

Main armament:

3 x 4.7 inch/45 (120mm) QF Mark IX guns (3 x 1 CPXIV mounts)

Secondary armament:

1 x 76mm/45 20cwt QF gun (not sure on what version) (1 x 1)

2 x Hotchkiss 6-pdr / 8cwt QF Mark I/II guns (2 x 1)

AA armament:

6 x 20mm Oerlikon AA guns (6 x 1)

Torpedo tubes:

4 x 21 inch (533mm) torpedo tubes (1 x 4)

A class destroyer, HMCS Saguenay (D79) (1943) (3.7)

Main armament:

3 x 4.7 inch/45 (120mm) QF Mark IX guns (3 x 1 CPXIV mounts)

AA armament:

1 x 76mm/45 20cwt QF gun (not sure on what version) (1 x 1)

4 x 20mm Oerlikon AA guns (4 x 1)

Torpedo tubes:

4 x 21 inch (533mm) torpedo tubes (1 x 4)

Algonquin class destroyer (British V class destroyers), HMCS Sioux (R64) (1950) (3.7)

Main armament:

2 x 4.7 inch/45 QF Mark XII guns (2 x 1)

AA armament:

6 x 40mm Bofors (1 x 2 + 4 x 1)

Torpedo tubes:

4 x 21 inch (533mm) torpedo tubes (1 x 4)

Potential premium ships

D class destroyer, HMCS Kootenay (H75) (1944) (3.7)

Main armament:

3 x 4.7 inch/45 (120mm) QF Mark IX guns (3 x 1 CPXIV mounts)

AA armament:

6 x 20mm Oerlikon AA guns (6 x 1)

Torpedo tubes:

4 x 21 inch (533mm) torpedo tubes (1 x 4)

F class destroyer, HMCS Qu’Appelle (H69) (1944) (3.7)

Main armament:

3 x 4.7 inch/45 (120mm) QF Mark IX guns (3 x 1 CPXIV mounts)

AA armament:

6 x 20mm Oerlikon AA guns (2 x 2 + 2 x 1)

Torpedo tubes:

4 x 21 inch (533mm) torpedo tubes (1 x 4)

Rank II

Spoiler

Algonquin class destroyer (British V class destroyers), HMCS Algonquin (R17) (As built) (4.0)

Main armament:

4 x 4.7 inch/45 QF Mark XII guns (4 x 1)

AA armament:

2 x 40mm Bofors (1 x 2 RP.50 mount)

8 x 20mm Oerlikon AA guns (4 x 2)

Torpedo tubes:

8 x 21 inch (533mm) torpedo tubes (2 x 4)

Crescent class destroyer (British CA class destroyer), HMCS Crusader (288) (Not sure on when refit took place but is post war) (4.0)

Main armament:

3 x 4.5 inch/45 Mark IV guns (3 x 1)

AA armament:

8 x 40mm Bofors (1 x 2 + 4 x 1)

Torpedo tubes:

4 x 21 inch (533mm) torpedo tubes (1 x 4)

Tribal class destroyer, HMCS Huron (216) (1951) (4.0)

Main armament:

6 x 4 inch/45 QF Mark XIX guns (3 x 2)

AA armament:

8 x 40mm Bofors (2 x 2 + 4 x 1)

Torpedo tubes:

4 x 21 inch (533mm) torpedo tubes (1 x 4)

Potential premium ships

Tribal class destroyer, HMCS Cayuga (218) (1951) (3.7 - 4.0)

Main armament:

4 x 4 inch/45 QF Mark XIX guns (2 x 2)

Secondary armament:

2 x 3 inch/50 Mark 22 guns (1 x 2 Mark 33 FMC mount)

AA armament:

4 x 40mm Bofors (4 x 1)

Torpedo tubes:

4 x 21 inch (533mm) torpedo tubes (1 x 4)

Rank III

Spoiler

Tribal class destroyer HMCS Nootka (R96) (Not sure on refit date, it is a post war refit that took place before 1949) (4.3)

Main armament:

6 x 4.7 inch/45 (120mm) QF Mark IX guns (3 x 2)

Secondary armament:

2 x 4 inch/45 QF Mark XVI guns (1 x 2)

AA armament:

4 x 40mm Bofors (2 x 2)

8 x 20mm Oerlikon AA guns (4 x 2)

Torpedo tubes:

4 x 21 inch (533mm) torpedo tubes (1 x 4)

Tribal class destroyer, HMCS Athabaskan (219) (1949) (4.0 - 4.3)

Main armament:

8 x 4 inch/45 QF Mark XIX guns (4 x 2)

AA armament: (The values here are a bit of a estimation)

4 x 40mm Bofors (1 x 2 + 2 x 1)

4 x 20mm Oerlikon AA guns (2 x 2)

Torpedo tubes:

4 x 21 inch (533mm) torpedo tubes (1 x 4)

Rank IV

Spoiler

HMCS Uganda/Quebec (British Crown Colony class light cruiser) (5.3)

Main armament:

9 x 6-inch/50 (152mm) BL Mark XXIII guns (3 x 3) (Consistent among all refits in Canadian service)

Secondary armament:

up to 8 x 4-inch/45 (102mm) QF Mark XVI guns (4 x 2)

AA armament:

up to 20 x 40mm guns (Mix of pom poms and Bofors)

up to 16 x 20mm Oerlikon AA guns

Torpedo tubes:

up to 6 x 21 inch (533mm) torpedo tubes (2 x 3)

See link below for more details:
Crown Colony class light cruiser, HMCS Uganda/HMCS Quebec (C66/C31) - Nos canons parleront

HMCS Ontario (British Minotaur class light cruiser) (5.3)

Main armament:

9 x 6-inch/50 (152mm) BL Mark XXIII guns (3 x 3) (Consistent among all refits in Canadian service)

Secondary armament:

up to 10 x 4-inch/45 (102mm) QF Mark XVI guns (5 x 2)

AA armament:

up to 20 x 40mm guns (Mix of pom poms and Bofors)

up to 10 x 20mm Oerlikon AA guns

Torpedo tubes:

up to 6 x 21 inch (533mm) torpedo tubes (2 x 3)

See link below for more details:
Minotaur class light cruiser, HMCS Ontario (C53) - Ut incepit fidelis sic permanent

Costal

Tech tree

Spoiler

Rank I

Spoiler

Motor torpedo boat CMTB-1 (1.0 - 1.3)

Armament:

4 x 12.7mm Machine guns (2 x 2)

Bangor class minesweeper, HMCS Bayfield (J08) (1.7)

Armament:

1 x 76/40 12pdr 12cwt QF Mk I/II/V gun

2 x 20mm Oerlikon AA guns

The only potential premium that could act as a premium counterpart to CMBT-1 is a lend lease American torpedo boat

Rank II

Spoiler

Bangor class minesweeper, HMCS Melville (J236) (2.0)

Main armament:

1 x 4-inch/40 (102mm) QF Mark IV gun

AA armament:

4 x 12.7mm machine guns

Castle class Corvette, HMCS Arnprior (K494) (2.7)

Main armament:

1 x 4-inch/45 (102mm) QF Mark XIX gun

AA armament:

6 x 20mm Oerlikon AA guns (2 x 2 + 2 x 1)

Rank III

Spoiler

Algerine class minesweeper, HMCS St. Boniface (J332) (2.7)

Main armament:

1 x 4-inch/45 (102mm) QF Mark V gun

AA armament:

8 x 20mm Oerlikon AA guns (4 x 2)

Loch class destroyer escort, HMCS Loch Achanalt (K424) (1944) (3.0)

Main armament:

1 x 4-inch/45 (102mm) QF Mark V gun

AA armament:

4 x 2 pdr (40mm) Mk VIII pom pom AA guns (1 x 4)

6 x 20mm Oerlikon AA guns (2 x 2 + 2 x 1)

Rank IV

Spoiler

Annapolis class destroyer escort (Frigate) (3.3)

Main armament:

Up to 2 x 3 inch/50 Mark 22 guns (1 x 2 Mark 33 FMC mounts)

Torpedo tubes:

Up to 6 x 324mm torpedo tubes

Annapolis class destroyer escorts - One step back, one step forward - #2 by Fireraid233

Type 15 class frigate, HMCS Crescent (226) (3.7)

Main armament:

2 x 4 inch/45 QF Mark XIX guns (1 x 2)

2 x 3 inch/50 Mark 22 guns (1 x 2 Mark 33 FMC mount)

AA armament:

2 x 40mm Bofors (2 x 1)

St. Laurent-class destroyer escort (Frigate) (4.0)

Main armament:

up to 4 x 3 inch/50 Mark 22 guns (2 x 2 Mark 33 FMC mounts)

Torpedo tubes:

Up to 6 x 324mm torpedo tubes

See link down bellow for more details:

St. Laurent class destroyer escorts - A major step in Canadian naval development - #2 by Arcadia_Nyx

Mackenzie class destroyer escort, HMCS Qu’Appelle (Frigate) (4.0 - 4.3)

Main armament:

4 x 3 inch/50 Mark 22 guns (2 x 2 Mark 33 FMC mounts)

Torpedo tubes:

Up to 6 x 324mm torpedo tubes

See link down bellow for more details:

Mackenzie class destroyer escorts - Making good with what you got

Rank V

Spoiler

Restigouche class destroyer escort (Frigate) (4.0 - 4.3)

Main armament:

2 x 3 inch/70 Mark 6 Vickers guns (1 x 2)

up to 2 x 3 inch/50 Mark 22 guns (1 x 2 Mark 33 FMC mount)

Torpedo tubes:

Up to 6 x 324mm torpedo tubes

See link down bellow for more details:

(Restigouche class added in update sky guardians, as such since no new suggestion the class in general will be made and no new link will be posted)

Restigouche class destroyer escort (Frigate) (Gulf war modernization) (Without ASM) (4.0 - 4.3 )

Main armament:

2 x 3 inch/70 Mark 6 Vickers guns (1 x 2)

Missile armament: (Not included in the br placement here)
8 x RGM-84 Harpons SSM

Secondary armament:

1 x 20mm Mark 15 Phalanx CIWS

2 x 40mm Bofors

Up to 6 x 12.7mm machine guns

Torpedo tubes:

6 x 12.75 inch (324mm) Mark 32 torpedo tubes (2 x 3)

See link down bellow for more details:
Restigouche class destroyer escort, HMCS Restigouche (DDE 257) (Gulf war modernization) - The end of the line

Mackenzie class destroyer escort (Frigate) (4.0 - 4.3)

Main armament:

2 x 3 inch/70 Mark 6 Vickers guns (1 x 2)

2 x 3 inch/50 Mark 22 guns (1 x 2 Mark 33 FMC mount)

Torpedo tubes:

Up to 6 x 324mm torpedo tubes

See link down bellow for more details:

Mackenzie class destroyer escorts - Making good with what you got

Bonus - List of additional ships which were considered for inclusion and why in the end they were not (This list is mainly for Bluewater)

Spoiler

Montgomery class destroyer (Wickes class) (3.3) Because it would be like adding another clemson all over again when their are better options
St. Croix class destroyer (Clemson class) (Probably HMCS St. Croix (1940)) (3.3) (Since Britain had already problem with having Clemson class and the only reason this was considered was that in this refit it would be like the American one but with machine guns and no loss of main guns)
C class destroyer, HMCS St. Laurent (1943) (3.3) (After making considerations, I have chosen HMCS Ottawa as more favorable due to more main gun firepower, granted this ship would have 2 57mm guns and 6 20mm guns rather than 8 20mm guns however as the 57mm guns might lack any practical use since they don’t have a AA ability so I choose Ottawa instead of HMCS St. Laurent, though this ship could still work but Ottawa might be a better choice in my opinion)
River class corvette; Main due to the fact that their is a hidden premium version and that just adding the ships listed between rank II and III will leave out any classes already in-game and that it would just make the research on these lines take longer
Light cruiser, HMCS Aurora ; while this was considered at least later on while making the suggestion, in the end I decided not to include it since it would lack some of the strengths even the lowest br cruisers have

Sources (Does not list the ones for ships previously suggested as they already have been covered with their own sources)

Spoiler

Image sources

Spoiler

Fireraid233 · August 10, 2023, 8:02am

+1

R_nminbiY_n · March 12, 2024, 1:11pm

Actually Saguenay got its stern blown off in 1942 and it was never fully repaired.

I guess I should also say Navypedia isn’t an especially reliable source. Most of it just regurgitates Conways and Janes.

jon_man1199 · March 12, 2024, 11:30pm

A +1 from me

As for HMCS Aurora, I still think she would make for a neat ship despite her inherent weaknesses if placed at a BR that’s low enough, could even make her a Premium. There’s also HMCS Niobe which might also work as a counterpart to the lower BR cruisers.

As for the Coastal Fleet might I suggest HMCS Acadia and HMCS Sackville as premiums? I feel considering the history of both as well as Sackville’s status of being the only Flower-class Preserve both would make for wonderful premiums.

de_Radio_Demon · March 12, 2024, 11:58pm

Yeah that isn’t really surprising to me, while I still like to use navypedia as a basis to try find some information plenty of times it misses stuff or gets them wrong, though the unfortunate part outside of how it’s not that accurate most of the time (to the point I sometimes trust even wikipedia more which is saying something on how much of a pain it can be) their isn’t anything like it that is more reliable that’s online and easy to access, which is honestly the only reason I still use it. That being said I don’t have any plans to change the tech tree image or the list here since I only do suggestion on the forums now far less now, and when I did make this I made sure to at least include potential premiums so its certainly possible to have something in place Saguenay and since the suggestion is for a sub tree it may not be necessary to have something even have something in place of Saguenay.

GTP_Paulie · March 13, 2024, 10:54am

Canada and Australia/New Zealand together as a whole new tech tree would be nice to see. They have a lot more to offer than can be fit in with UK, especially when also considering air and ground.