AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

[Dana381]

When you guys talk about having a ship and crew in reserve, are you suggesting the ship on standby and a crew on standby or do you mean assign the ship to the naval reserve and crew it with reservists?

I can only speak for myself but I was referring to a reserve force staffing the ship and operating it similar to the way the Kingston class are operated

 

[Colin Parkinson]

My secret hope is that this new found respect for "value for money" permeates to all defense procurements in that we're wasting millions of dollars every year keeping 40 year old ships, aircraft and trucks on the roads with expensive parts and thousands of maintenance hours.

Plus if we have a National Ship Building program working properly, they would be pumping new ships out on a regular basis and we could sell our older ships to allies as they have not been totally run into the ground.

 

[Underway]

I can only speak for myself but I was referring to a reserve force staffing the ship and operating it similar to the way the Kingston class are operated

Kinston class are now Reg F ships.  All ships have positions available for reservists (approx 10%).  That Reserve ship model was proven to be unsustainable and frankly most of those reservists crewing those ships were Reg F in all but name.

 

[YZT580]

My thoughts were in reserve, tied up and properly maintained with a qualified maintenance crew on board to ensure a reasonable response time: could easily be civilians as the vessels could be maintained as part of a federal fleet and brought out whenever one of the  AORs is needing work or in the event of a civilian emergency.  Pay for them partially out of the foreign affairs budget by allocating X number of days per year: creative bookkeeping 101.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

When the contract for the two Berlin-class were signed, does the contracting body as a rule negotiate guaranteed option pricing for follow-up vessels? 

It would seem wise so if need is identified you don't have to RFP the whole thing all over again.

 

[Cloud Cover]

I’m starting to think that no matter what, the RCN is going to be in need of some sort of enhanced civilian augmentation alongside and at sea in certain ships, far beyond what we have now.  There appears to be diminishing numbers of young people who are willing to make the sacrifices required to serve in the RCN full time or in the reserves.
Specifically the living accommodations, lifestyle and treatment do not align with the evolving requirements of younger generations for privacy, space, lifestyle and work life balance. And good for them, BTW.
Like it or not the RCN is going to have to evolve its fleet staffing arrangements and perhaps plan on fewer combat ships due to fewer available personnel. On the other hand a career with a unionized operator could be more attractive. No matter what, that future is expensive but with civilians the RCN does not have to offer a lifetime career- just a pay cheque.
This brings me back to the support ships- do they need to be RCN assets or belong to another organization. Does every AOPs billet need to be RCN, is there a role for another category of sailor.

 

[FJAG]

I’m starting to think that no matter what, the RCN is going to be in need of some sort of enhanced civilian augmentation alongside and at sea in certain ships, far beyond what we have now.  There appears to be diminishing numbers of young people who are willing to make the sacrifices required to serve in the RCN full time or in the reserves.
Specifically the living accommodations, lifestyle and treatment do not align with the evolving requirements of younger generations for privacy, space, lifestyle and work life balance. And good for them, BTW.
Like it or not the RCN is going to have to evolve its fleet staffing arrangements and perhaps plan on fewer combat ships due to fewer available personnel. On the other hand a career with a unionized operator could be more attractive. No matter what, that future is expensive but with civilians the RCN does not have to offer a lifetime career- just a pay cheque.
This brings me back to the support ships- do they need to be RCN assets or belong to another organization. Does every AOPs billet need to be RCN, is there a role for another category of sailor.

Obviously not a sailor and have never really understood the career cycles involved but I have a hard time understanding how turning to civilians to fill certain billets when young people in general have issues with privacy, space, lifestyle and work life balance. I can only see that becoming more expensive and result in even higher turnover considering those folks too will need the training and get the same sea time with the same conditions.

I expect like the Army that the Navy cycles through a ship deployed on operations for x-months, another back home working up with their ship conducting exercises and otherwise preparing to deploy while a third ship and it's crew is in a maintenance and reconstitute cycle. Assuming that I'm correct with that then the manning issues aren't very different from the Army's and the issue is having a robust enough recruiting and training system with an adequate BTL and ATL to keep feeding the cycling ships with enough people to overcome attrition.

Wouldn't adding civilians into the mix complicate an already tough manning challenge not to mention raise the issue of their availability in time of hostile actions?

:cheers:

 

[Uzlu]

How much credibility does Dave Perry have?

Still, defence analyst Dave Perry, who has followed the program for a decade, wonders about value for money.

"What is the precise value of that [roughly] $3 billion difference?" he said, adding that DND's argument that the ships must be ready for war zones is a bit of a stretch.

He said history has shown that when the shooting starts, resupply ships are ordered out of the area "because they are floating gas cans."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/navy-armed-forces-supply-ships-giroux-1.5805407

 

[Good2Golf]

How much credibility does Dave Perry have?https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/navy-armed-forces-supply-ships-giroux-1.5805407

He’s very well-regarded pretty much universally. His work and research is solid. He is likely one of the most knowledgable ‘outsiders’ (non-DND/GoC) when it comes to Canadian defence procurement.

Regards
G2G

 

[Underway]

How much credibility does Dave Perry have?https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/navy-armed-forces-supply-ships-giroux-1.5805407

The capability difference between say the Asterix and JSS is staggering.  Is it worth the cost?  Well that's a valid question to ask.  But it's missing the whole story.

If you can order something valuable out of the operational area you will.  Why take the risk?  But we aren't planning for Gulf War 3.0 (or is that 2.5).  We're planning for great power competition.  In that case, the safest place for JSS to be is under the defensive air envelope of the CSC SM2's.  And behind the screen of Cyclones looking for subs.

And the RCN logic that followed was since we have so few ships, add an OPS capability to the ship, with a proper comms suite, damage control, helicopter operations and 3D radar to detect and track threats.  And then have it Link that info out.  And have it be able to take command staff as well, because the ship is huge and in the center of the task group. 

Then the Gov't looks and says here is an opportunity to build Canadian industry, so they select a barge and tug company to build a 20,000 ton warship.  So what is the project actually paying for?  The ship?  Industry building? Capability? 

So the cost difference isn't just the capability difference.  It's the industrial difference as well.  That needs to be in the calculation.  The question should be "Is this cost worth the capability improvement in the ship and the industrial improvements?".

 

[Colin Parkinson]

That tug and barge company is part of a huge international company that includes container ships among others bits and the yard built a solid rep for ship repairs on the international market. As for crewing, the Coast Guard and the coastal fleet out here struggle to find crews and before covid hit, it was easy to walk from one job to another.

 

[Underway]

That tug and barge company is part of a huge international company that includes container ships among others bits and the yard built a solid rep for ship repairs on the international market. As for crewing, the Coast Guard and the coastal fleet out here struggle to find crews and before covid hit, it was easy to walk from one job to another.

That tug and barge company was a tug and barge company. Where or how big their owner is has nothing to do with their day to day operations or in house expertise. It has nothing to do with any growing pains or learning curve they have to endure with their team and facilities or learning to work with the government, or on how to build a warship with no experience.  They are on their own.  Like most companies structured this way.

 

[Uzlu]

So the cost difference isn't just the capability difference.  It's the industrial difference as well.  That needs to be in the calculation.  The question should be "Is this cost worth the capability improvement in the ship and the industrial improvements?"

I agree that the boost to Canada's shipbuilding industry is very important.  But what was in the statement by the Department of National Defence on the Parliamentary Budget Officer's report on the Joint Support Ships?  It was mostly about how much more capable the Protecteurs are compared to MV Asterix and how it was an unfair comparison of costs.  That statement should have also emphasized the importance of building up Canada's shipbuilding industry by providing many concrete examples.  The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is going to really milk this for all it's worth.

 

[Uzlu]

Davie ship part of Navy's long-term plan to prevent 'capability gap': Documents

OTTAWA — The Royal Canadian Navy plans to continue relying on a converted civilian container ship owned by a Quebec shipyard for supplies at sea even after two new support vessels are built.

The revelation is in new documents obtained by The Canadian Press through the access-to-information law as the federal Liberal government is facing pressure to buy the MV Asterix from Chantier Davie.

The Liberals have been resisting such calls and are instead in the midst of a five-year, $700-million leasing arrangement with Davie for the Asterix, with an option to extend the deal for another five years.

Yet the documents suggest the ship is part of the navy's plan to ensure it has enough support ships to prevent a "capability gap" over the long term, such as when one of the two new joint support ships being built in Vancouver is out of commission.

The federal government originally planned to buy three new joint support ships for the navy when it launched the project more than a decade ago, before cost overruns saw the order cut down to two.

Navy officials have previously indicated that two joint support ships alone are not enough to meet the maritime force's long-term needs, and the parliamentary budget officer last week suggested Ottawa could buy the Asterix for $633 million.

https://www.princegeorgecitizen.com/davie-ship-part-of-navy-s-long-term-plan-to-prevent-capability-gap-documents-1.24245341

 

[Cloud Cover]

But one of these ships is not like the others ...

 

[CBH99]

With the way the RCN has been driving Asterix like they stole it, I'd be surprised if she has any useful life in her after the first lease it up.  Definitely not the second.

I realize they are probably trying to get every dime of that lease worth out of her - plus showcasing to the government that replenishment ships REALLY ARE NEEDED - but man that ship has been driven hard since we got her!

 

[Navy_Pete]

With the way the RCN has been driving Asterix like they stole it, I'd be surprised if she has any useful life in her after the first lease it up.  Definitely not the second.

I realize they are probably trying to get every dime of that lease worth out of her - plus showcasing to the government that replenishment ships REALLY ARE NEEDED - but man that ship has been driven hard since we got her!

We haven't had 3 AORs since the late 90s, and we frequently had periods where there was only one AOR of the two available (or none, before they were both paid off). It's not really a big deal, and we don't have enough of a mix of assets to operate one TG on our own, let alone two.

It would be nice on paper, but if it means the crews never get any non-deployment time because we would have 2 crews spread between 3 ships, just makes retention worse. I think two oilers is enough for our pretty limited resources, and unless we figure out our recruitment/retention not really sure how we would keep the CSCs, AOPs and JSSs going at the same time anyway under the existing numbers of ships, let alone adding on more hulls.  :dunno:

Then again the people that want more hulls also don't like planning work periods that are long enough to actually get the planned maintenance done (let alone the major corrective maintenance required for 25 year old hulls) or doing things like load leveling the schedule so that the entire fleet isn't in a work period at the same time, so not really holding my breath. Does make coastal postings a bit less appealing though; as much as I like hands on work don't feel like volunteering to be Sisyphus.

 

[CBH99]

We haven't had 3 AORs since the late 90s, and we frequently had periods where there was only one AOR of the two available (or none, before they were both paid off). It's not really a big deal, and we don't have enough of a mix of assets to operate one TG on our own, let alone two.

It would be nice on paper, but if it means the crews never get any non-deployment time because we would have 2 crews spread between 3 ships, just makes retention worse. I think two oilers is enough for our pretty limited resources, and unless we figure out our recruitment/retention not really sure how we would keep the CSCs, AOPs and JSSs going at the same time anyway under the existing numbers of ships, let alone adding on more hulls.  :dunno:

Then again the people that want more hulls also don't like planning work periods that are long enough to actually get the planned maintenance done (let alone the major corrective maintenance required for 25 year old hulls) or doing things like load leveling the schedule so that the entire fleet isn't in a work period at the same time, so not really holding my breath. Does make coastal postings a bit less appealing though; as much as I like hands on work don't feel like volunteering to be Sisyphus.

I'm not a Navy type, but I do usually try to keep these points in mind.  Especially your first point, which I admit I hadn't even thought of.

You are right.  We will only deploying one TG, not two.  So as long as one vessel is available for the TG, it works.

You are also right about spreading the crews out amongst more ships, aka less home time, aka more retention issues.



Hadn't thought about any of those things.  All good points, thanks for making them

 

[suffolkowner]

With the way the RCN has been driving Asterix like they stole it, I'd be surprised if she has any useful life in her after the first lease it up.  Definitely not the second.

I realize they are probably trying to get every dime of that lease worth out of her - plus showcasing to the government that replenishment ships REALLY ARE NEEDED - but man that ship has been driven hard since we got her!

5 more years for Asterix based on the current schedule seems like good value.

Personally I would have Seaspan build the third ship in the class, which they originally quoted at $500M. Inflation has ballooned the shipbuilding programs costs of course so I would be curious what it would be today.

The other problem being that the government has been unable to effectively negotiate with Seaspan and Irving and why I welcome the addition of Davie into the field so that hopefully in the next batch of shipbuilding contracts that come due, the projects can actually be bid on, instead of given away and then hoping for the vendor to hold themselves to account

 

[CBH99]

Do you mind expanding on the bit about the government being unable to negotiate with Irving or Seaspan?

Do you mean there wasn't much room to negotiate due to them being the only players when this program started?  Or are there regular difficulties between the government and shipyards?