AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

[SeaKingTacco]

Really? 

Perhaps you should ask the RAN how happy they are with the "deal" they got on their Bay Class.

Hint- electrical problems, again.

 

[Monsoon]

The best part about the choice of the Berlin class is that since it's a proven off-the-shelf design, Vancouver Shipyards will likely begin construction of the JSS before the new-design CGG icebreaker. That means delivery on-schedule (barring other intervening factors).

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

Really? 

Perhaps you should ask the RAN how happy they are with the "deal" they got on their Bay Class.

Hint- electrical problems, again.

Self-caused electrical problems. For once that's not he fault of the UK.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Really? 

Perhaps you should ask the RAN how happy they are with the "deal" they got on their Bay Class.

Hint- electrical problems, again.

The problems they experienced are nothing compared to what we experienced with the subs.  I imagine it was frustrating at the time to be sure, but has since been corrected and the ship is operational.  Overall I would think they were happy with the deal.  I'll stick with my assertion that we missed the boat, litterally.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

As I mention to people, those subs sat along the wall for a long time before we bought them, never a great idea in any type of vessel and I suspect even worse with a complex vessel like a sub. The story would have been different had we bought them when first offered.

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

The story would have been different had we bought them when first offered.

Not really. The issues with the boats go far beyond neglect while they were along the wall.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Self-caused electrical problems. For once that's not he fault of the UK.

Ahh- seen.  The RAN Officer I spoke to, neglected to mention the "self-caused" part.

Still, it would have politically unthinkable to buy another used RN vessel.  Any problems (and there are always problems) would have landed the gov't on the editorial pages and would have incurred the wrath of the ship-building industry and BC.

 

[Good2Golf]

Out of interest, how was the transformer insulation failure on Largs Bay/Choules the RAN's fault?

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

Their version of Sea Training shut down the transformer cooling system, against the advice of the RN officer assisting. The idea was to test the crews reaction to the backup system taking over.

The problem was that there was no backup system.....

 

[Good2Golf]

Ah, seen.  Thanks DS.

 

[Jacky Tar]

Their version of Sea Training shut down the transformer cooling system, against the advice of the RN officer assisting. The idea was to test the crews reaction to the backup system taking over.

The problem was that there was no backup system.....

You'd like to think Sea Trg would actually listen to the section heads and CHODs about systems and capabilities, wouldn't you?

 

[ironduke57]

And shouldn´t something like that be written in some manual? Which would make this a clear "RTFM!!!!11!1111" moment. :facepalm:

Regards,
ironduke57

 

[Pat in Halifax]

Around 2001/2002, the STS CERA ordered the standby air turbines on the port MLO pumps disabled, the alternate pump removed from 'standby' and the on line MLO pump to be shut down on board TOR against the advice of the ship's IMCS Tech. Before he (IMCS Tech) could do anything, it was done. Thank God the watch reacted as they should and stopped shafts very quickly. It seems there was a bit of residual pressure though several bearings in the cross connect gearbox got wiped. Oddly enough, that same Chief was posted to TOR a few years later as the Cox'n. Nothing ever came of it though I believe the IMCS Tech had his pee-pee slapped.You can have all the orders, regs, SOPs, EOTIs...etc but sometimes people feel they are above all that. I suspect if the same thing happened today though, that STS member would at the very least be removed from staff and possibly even be convinced to 'retire' early. I doubt a summary investigation would ensue and if it did, I am not sure where it would go.

 

[Lineman]

I know CASR is not everyone's favourite site but some capacity/capability comparisons can be found at the bottom of the page.
http://casrca.nationprotect.net/bg-navy-jss-joint-support-ship-aor.htm

 

[RC]

The best part about the choice of the Berlin class is that since it's a proven off-the-shelf design, Vancouver Shipyards will likely begin construction of the JSS before the new-design CGG icebreaker. That means delivery on-schedule (barring other intervening factors).

Don't get your hopes up on that.  Given how far the Berlin class is from meeting the requirements, they will likely attempt to modify it, not to mention that the regulatory regime under which it was built is long out of date.  In my experience, it's quicker, cheaper, and easier to start from a blank sheet or from a decent parent form.  I expect that choosing this design will require at least as much time as the BMT design; more if the requirements can't be fit into the existing hull and it takes them time to determine that.

The idea that buying an off the shelf design is cheap and easy is an idea promulgated by people who know little about ship building and its ever shifting regulatory environment.

I would peg the Polar icebreaker design as being at least a year ahead of the JSS design with very little chance of JSS catching up.  I'm not sure what role design readiness will ultimately play in the sequencing decision, but this decision doesn't help.  I expect the JSS design contract will still be under negotiation when the Polar is ready for functional design.  That said there's a reasonable chance that the schedules for ofsv and OOSV make the difference irrelevant to the overall decision.

It could still go either way.

 

[Monsoon]

I would peg the Polar icebreaker design as being at least a year ahead of the JSS design with very little chance of JSS catching up.  I'm not sure what role design readiness will ultimately play in the sequencing decision, but this decision doesn't help.  I expect the JSS design contract will still be under negotiation when the Polar is ready for functional design.  That said there's a reasonable chance that the schedules for ofsv and OOSV make the difference irrelevant to the overall decision.

The sequencing has less to do with the readiness of the designs (and I have no visibility on the CCG icebreaker, except that I suspect the CCG is no faster at designing from scratch than the RCN) than on the amount of delay risk that the shipyard is prepared to assume. Once the Berlin license is procured, the exact schedule will be known with very little risk; even if the CCG icebreaker design is close to completion, the operational risk will still be huge at the construction commencement.

I agree it could still go either way, but I assess that the RCN is nosing ahead in the race with this decision.

 

[Kirkhill]

TFTFY.....

Don't get your hopes up on that.  Given how far the Berlin class is from meeting the requirements, they will likely attempt to modify it, not to mention that the regulatory regime under which it was built is long out of date.  In my experience, it's quicker, cheaper, and easier to start from a blank sheet or from a decent parent form.  I expect that choosing this design will require at least as much time as the BMT design; more if the requirements can't be fit into the existing hull and it takes them time to determine that.

The idea that buying an off the shelf design is cheap and easy is an idea promulgated by people who know little about ship building and its ever shifting regulatory environment.

GAP Wins.......

 

[HB_Pencil]

Don't get your hopes up on that.  Given how far the Berlin class is from meeting the requirements, they will likely attempt to modify it, not to mention that the regulatory regime under which it was built is long out of date.  In my experience, it's quicker, cheaper, and easier to start from a blank sheet or from a decent parent form.  I expect that choosing this design will require at least as much time as the BMT design; more if the requirements can't be fit into the existing hull and it takes them time to determine that.

The idea that buying an off the shelf design is cheap and easy is an idea promulgated by people who know little about ship building and its ever shifting regulatory environment.

Hi there. I'm not as familiar with shipbuilding as other areas of defence procurement, but what would you suggest are key factors behind cost overruns/delays and below specification performance in ship building, and how do we avoid them? In aerospace I'd suggest complexity and immature technological and manufacturing knowledge as being major factors behind failures in that sector. If you were attempt to produce a start a domestic production of a preexisting design in aerospace, final assembly isn't really the issue... cost increases are significant, but not as much as trying to replicate all of the tier two and below suppliers. IS that similar for ships, or is more of the cost found in the ship's actual construction?


Also, is there an incongruence between building a ship for military and civil purposes? How difficult a transition is it for a civil shipyard. I now we spent several hundred million into upgrades, but is that because of the military requirements or the scale of the ship seaspan must build.  Granted an jss is probably the least demanding capability we're building, but what are the issues they must deal with which are different from civil manufacturing?

I spent over 35 years in the military, the last quarter (plus) of that in NDHQ, including a stint on the staff of the two star who oversaw major capital acquisitions ...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
... I predict cost overruns before the project is completed.

In the past 30 years, several defence writers have noted that in the United States only two major aerospace projects have come on budget, schedule and performance... and only one was a newly developed capability (of sorts)... the EA-18G growler. So its a pretty safe bet to say that any major capital acquisition there will be a cost overrun.

 

[The Bread Guy]

More info on the vessel from Flensburger Schiffgebau - the yard that built the Berlins.

EGV Berlin Type 702

Another interesting product from Flensburger here  as well as the Strategic Ro-Ros built for MOD charter (as adjuncts to the RNs LPDs/LHDs and the RFAs LSD(A)s).

And what appears to be some imagery from the company, attached.

 

[Lineman]

Some visual differences from the image of the Berlin displayed from the Navy Technology site to the ones above are : only one large crane, an addition of 2 landing craft (not sure of the size), a different RAS rigs configuration, and other minor things like life boats etc. I'm sure there's been some tweeking of the original design but most of it I suspect would be in the controls, coms, and radars. From what I've been able to read it is a much more capable ship than the Aegir26 offered by BMT.