Let's say you defined a logical role for a minimally manned ship...say for example an "arsenal" ship to accompany a CSC and provide additional missile launch cells.OK
How about from an accompanying helicopter?
Or an adjacent frigate?
Getting on and off a ship at sea is one of the most challenging and dangerous operations going. The whole reason they have these "launched Lifeboats" is to improve the chances of the crews to survive the escape from the ship. There is no way for them to recover it at sea. plus once in the lifeboat, it's utter misery and still you risk death getting rescued from the lifeboat in anything but a calm sea.Let's say you defined a logical role for a minimally manned ship...say for example an "arsenal" ship to accompany a CSC and provide additional missile launch cells.
Why would you go through the trouble of creating a detachable control module for the crew to live in if the only purpose is ultimately to act as a lifeboat should the ship get hit by enemy fire. Couldn't the small crew simply have regular quarters and control stations for the 99.9999999% of the time when it's not being targeted by incoming fire and simply have the crew man the lifeboat if a missile hit appears imminent?
It's sad how brutally accurate that statement really is.Shhh, keep that under your hat.
But I wouldn't worry, Canadians as a whole see the F35 as the only plane in the RCAF (if they even know what a RCAF is) the rest of them are just grey things flying about and they have no idea what they do.
I think this is the Star Trek he watched over the week end:
Why the fixation on operating ships with little or no crew? What are you trying to achieve with you large cargo ship (not Big Honking Ship, which in Gen. Hillier's view were large amphibious assault ships).?
Why don't do existing maintenance on simpler control systems, why does anyone think we can maintain an autonomous ship?Why minimal crew?
Don't I keep hearing about recruiting problems for the ships we have?
Why have the crew live in the lifeboat?
How much warning are the going to get of an attack?
Besides, the Boat would be the home for the PLC and the coffee pot.
With a big ship attached the crew can get out and stretch their legs. Thay will be doing that in any event to confirm the sensors are sensing the real world.
It would also mean a common module that could be built anywhere, that could be transported by truck, that could be trained on anywhere and that could be plugged into any size ship.
And for the record, I haven't watched Star Trek since Picard ran the bridge.
Why don't do existing maintenance on simpler control systems, why does anyone think we can maintain an autonomous ship?
Cheap ships can be built in numbers so that they can be maintained in harbour.
So do you want cheap or do you want autonomous?
Automation and remote control costs a lot, and has severe limits (right now). We would save on crew but would have to massively invest in the FMFs. Which is fine, but it's also not a quick fix.
There is always a balance between automation, crewing, shore support costs and actual operational capability.
The Triple E-class vessels are operated by a crew of 13, while the even larger Globe class requires 31 on board
The world’s first fully electric, completely autonomous cargo ship has successfully completed its maiden voyage in Norway
Pentagon’s Ghost Fleet Program Ends, Its Four Unmanned Ships Will Be Transferred To The Navy
Shipping companies other than Japanese are notoriously cheap, you can be guaranteed they go for autonomous crewed ships, with systems from WISH or good systems never properly maintained until the accident rates skyrocket and insurance makes crewed vessels cheaper.So do you want cheap or do you want autonomous?
Automation and remote control costs a lot, and has severe limits (right now). We would save on crew but would have to massively invest in the FMFs. Which is fine, but it's also not a quick fix.
There is always a balance between automation, crewing, shore support costs and actual operational capability.
Shipping companies have been making profits for centuries in a high risk environment. Lloyds loves them.Shipping companies other than Japanese are notoriously cheap, you can be guaranteed they go for autonomous crewed ships, with systems from WISH or good systems never properly maintained until the accident rates skyrocket and insurance makes crewed vessels cheaper.
Many merchant ships operate with a crew of 12 to 20 these days. But they are all either bulk carriers - not self loading/unloading type, tankers or container ships. All ships which, by design do not have to carry out their own loading or unloading, and therefore only need the watch keeping crew plus a cook. They usually rely on an unmanned engine room that simply sends an alert to the Engineering mate and/or his assistant and the bridge if something goes wrong on the engine side. If such thing go wrong, then they either drift, collide or run aground until the engineering mate fixes the problem or outside assistance arrives.
This brings me back to my original question - what are you trying to achieve with your large cargo ship?
contracting for cargo ships may not be an option, because recent work suggests that finding contractors who do not have close ties to China or other disqualifiers will be very challenging.