AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

[Navy_Pete]

I utterly despised RDMIN's. We kept all our file specific documents in our database under the associated file number. But the database had a field select search function, allowing you customize your searches.

Yeah, imagine how bad a program is when people hate it more than DRMIS (which is SAF with a bunch of DND custom interfaces layered on top).

You can actually add in metadata tags and do a lot of field searches, but the search function seems to suck. I can't even reliably find all the files I created, which should just be everything where I'm in the creator profile field. It's bizarre.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Yeah, imagine how bad a program is when people hate it more than DRMIS (which is SAF with a bunch of DND custom interfaces layered on top).

You can actually add in metadata tags and do a lot of field searches, but the search function seems to suck. I can't even reliably find all the files I created, which should just be everything where I'm in the creator profile field. It's bizarre.

I called it the "pit of no return" Our HQ said we must use it and it works fine. Yet they were always asking me to resend documents......

 

[Good2Golf]

You can actually add in metadata tags and do a lot of field searches, but the search function seems to suck. I

DWAN search function enters the chat.

 

[Underway]

I don't mind RDIMS, but I can understand if you don't have access or it's a different server how it can be irritating.

As far as building more AOR's, Canada doesn't build a navy for someone else's requirements, we build one for our own. We aren't Belgium. Maybe we should be but that's not the current thinking anyways. Also US tankers are usually just that. Tankers. They don't necessarily do food or ammo. The US uses different ships for that. UK is the same with the Tide Class. Just a refueling stop for the carriers and escorts.

Hence the future fleet mix.

 

[MTShaw]

I don’t hate DavIe. It is a degraded, underused capacity. If they can upgrade they would be useful for CSC refits but who knows.

I don’t know if there are many people who operate freelance tanking. 11 years of government, across 2 parties state that Canada needs 2 military capable AORs. Asterix is not that.

 

[suffolkowner]

what analysis came up with the requirement for 2 JSS?

 

[Underway]

what analysis came up with the requirement for 2 JSS?

The needs analysis. RCN needs 3 AOR's to keep a standing task group. One at high readyness with the task group, one on the road to high readyness, and one in a docked work period getting fixed up.

We get 2 RCN AOR's and 1 rental. That was the political calculus result, not ideally what the RCN wanted. However the iAOR is doing ok and providing what we need even though its pretty friggin expensive.

 

[FSTO]

The needs analysis. RCN needs 3 AOR's to keep a standing task group. One at high readyness with the task group, one on the road to high readyness, and one in a docked work period getting fixed up.

We get 2 RCN AOR's and 1 rental. That was the political calculus result, not ideally what the RCN wanted. However the iAOR is doing ok and providing what we need even though its pretty friggin expensive.

3 is the absolute barest of minimums. We have 2 coasts plus an archipelago that will see more and more traffic and deployments. We have no depth, 3 ships is not depth.

 

[GK .Dundas]

3 is the absolute barest of minimums. We have 2 coasts plus an archipelago that will see more and more traffic and deployments. We have no depth, 3 ships is not depth.

Years ago I heard one naval officer say at the minimum we needed actually six AORs.

 

[suffolkowner]

The needs analysis. RCN needs 3 AOR's to keep a standing task group. One at high readyness with the task group, one on the road to high readyness, and one in a docked work period getting fixed up.

We get 2 RCN AOR's and 1 rental. That was the political calculus result, not ideally what the RCN wanted. However the iAOR is doing ok and providing what we need even though its pretty friggin expensive.

I was thinking of some actual numbers like what we have for the RCAF fighter fleet.
Has it been confirmed that the iAOR is a permanent thing and not just a renewed stopgap?

 

[Halifax Tar]

I was thinking of some actual numbers like what we have for the RCAF fighter fleet.
Has it been confirmed that the iAOR is a permanent thing and not just a renewed stopgap?

There are three options:

1 The contract expires and we all move on.

2 Resign another contact.

3 Buy it out right.

ATM I haven't heard what the plan is. But I would estimate we have her until at least the second JSS comes operational.

 

[suffolkowner]

There are three options:

1 The contract expires and we all move on.

2 Resign another contact.

3 Buy it out right.

ATM I haven't heard what the plan is. But I would estimate we have her until at least the second JSS comes operational.

Thats what I figured as well. Once the second JSS is in the water it will all be revisited

 

[Halifax Tar]

Thats what I figured as well. Once the second JSS is in the water it will all be revisited

I'm of the opinion we have Oblix built and buy both outright.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I'm of the opinion we have Oblix built and buy both outright.

and then run them both with a RFA type crew setup.

 

[Halifax Tar]

and then run them both with a RFA type crew setup.

Exactly.

I would run JSS the same way.

 

[dapaterson]

Thats what I figured as well. Once the second JSS is in the water it will all be revisited

Long before then. The Asterix contract will have to be renegotiated well before it reaches its end; that decision point may or may not align with JSS reaching FOC.

 

[GR66]

As far as building more AOR's, Canada doesn't build a navy for someone else's requirements, we build one for our own. We aren't Belgium. Maybe we should be but that's not the current thinking anyways. Also US tankers are usually just that. Tankers. They don't necessarily do food or ammo. The US uses different ships for that. UK is the same with the Tide Class. Just a refueling stop for the carriers and escorts.

Hence the future fleet mix.

I think we SHOULD think of our military as part of a greater alliance rather than just look to our own requirements. Due to our unique location in the World our actual domestic military requirements are really fairly limited and thinking only about our own needs is exactly what leads to the small thinking that has resulted in the weak, rusted out military we have right now.

We're too small (and cheap) to exert much influence externally if we just focus our efforts on what we can do on our own. If we instead look at how we can enhance our Allies capabilities as well then we can in effect act as a force multiplier.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Years ago I heard one naval officer say at the minimum we needed actually six AORs.

I've heard that six AOR requirement thing also.

It was part of a staff paper on fleet organization drafted as a proposal after the "fall of the wall" that lead to the creation of the Canadian Task Group reorganisation from the old Destroyers Squadron/Maritime Ops Group we used to have. The idea put forward in the paper was that Canadian national interest required the Navy to operate far beyond our coats to solidify ties with potential naval allies in every region of the world. to face any situation arising. To do so, we would have a high readiness CTG on each coast operating far away from our coast and interacting with such allies and one under WUPS/training near our coasts. West Coast had the Pacific / Indian oceans and the Persian Gulf area, East Coast had the Atlantic (North and South) and the Med.

As pointed out by Underway, you need three AORs to keep one in high readiness, so with two high readiness Task Groups forward deployed, this staff paper concluded for the need of six AORs minimum.

 

[ringo]

Additional JSS should be Dutch Karel Doorman type, HMCS Vimy Ridge & HMCS Juno Beach perhaps?

 

[FSTO]

Additional JSS should be Dutch Karel Doorman type, HMCS Vimy Ridge & HMCS Juno Beach perhaps?

No