J
jollyjacktar
Guest
Chris Pook said:And how did you elect your shop stewards? ;D
Trial by combat, of course. It was said, we had the best union in the navy. :nod:
Chris Pook said:And how did you elect your shop stewards? ;D
Not a Sig Op said:This is part of what I'm getting ar about the "new ship"
How much of this was a manual operation on a 50 year old ship? Opening valves, lining up tanks, starting and stopping pumps, controlling flow, etc.
Does it even need to be an important skill set on future ships? Or alternately will methods be changed? (I genuinely don't know, just asking the question)
On a new modern civillian ship, all of this, plus reballasting as cargo is discharged, can be/is done from an integrated UMS display, graphically showing your tanks, pumps, valves,lines, etc, and it's done from the bridge, with an identical display/control system in the control room.
If you're used to manual operation of systems, it's going to be very hard to trust an automatic system, particulalry given the navy has a "navy" way of doing things, based on long standing training and procrdures, based on 50 year old ships, but that's some of the new tools a new ship brings to the table.
It's a great opportunity to examine the Navy way of doing things for future warships as well... do you need as many crew.to operate a future ship? Can you reduce numbers of certain trades to increase numbers of other trades? Etc.
They stopped making 50 year old ships 50 years ago.
Not a Sig Op said:To be clear, I never said it wasn't.
Just that you're going to have a whole new ship to it with.
Oldgateboatdriver said:Actually, Colin, we haddo havesuch a service.It'scalled CFAVS (Canadian Forces Auxiliary Vessels Service). They are merchant mariners who operate our harbour vessels (though we have less and less of them), such as our tugs, fireboats, target towing vessels, etc. They used to be a larger organization when we had the harbour and coastal fuel tankers, the "blue boat" ferries and the research vessels CFAV Endeavour and CFAV Quest.
/snip
for the disposal of the Royal Canadian Navy’s former Her Majesty’s Canadian Ship (HMCS) Preserver and Canadian Forces Auxiliary Vessel (CFAV) Quest. The dismantling, for both ships, is expected to be completed by summer 2019.
/snip
Not a Sig Op said:This is part of what I'm getting ar about the "new ship"
How much of this was a manual operation on a 50 year old ship? Opening valves, lining up tanks, starting and stopping pumps, controlling flow, etc.
Does it even need to be an important skill set on future ships? Or alternately will methods be changed? (I genuinely don't know, just asking the question)
On a new modern civillian ship, all of this, plus reballasting as cargo is discharged, can be/is done from an integrated UMS display, graphically showing your tanks, pumps, valves,lines, etc, and it's done from the bridge, with an identical display/control system in the control room.
If you're used to manual operation of systems, it's going to be very hard to trust an automatic system, particulalry given the navy has a "navy" way of doing things, based on long standing training and procrdures, based on 50 year old ships, but that's some of the new tools a new ship brings to the table.
It's a great opportunity to examine the Navy way of doing things for future warships as well... do you need as many crew.to operate a future ship? Can you reduce numbers of certain trades to increase numbers of other trades? Etc.
They stopped making 50 year old ships 50 years ago.
Karel Doorman said:To be fair i like this tanker as well,and about 100 million us cheaper then the Type 702/Berlin.
http://www.janes.com/article/66675/new-zealand-discloses-further-details-of-navy-s-new-fleet-tanker
I mean the price Canada is paying for those Berlins is ,in my eyes ridiculous.
Or look at the price the Brits are paying to build theirs in South Korea, although I now do agree that building there isn't the best idea, given current events.Karel Doorman said:To be fair i like this tanker as well,and about 100 million us cheaper then the Type 702/Berlin.
http://www.janes.com/article/66675/new-zealand-discloses-further-details-of-navy-s-new-fleet-tanker
I mean the price Canada is paying for those Berlins is ,in my eyes ridiculous.
Should we also divest ourselves of anything marked Samsung, Kia (and its parent, Hyundai), Daewoo.....?AlexanderM said:..... in South Korea, although I now do agree that building there isn't the best idea, given current events.
If that is meant for me, then yes, I have a reasonable grasp of geography. Thank you.Spencer100 said:You know South Korea is not the DPRK (North Korea), right?
You're forgiven. If anyone could start a war it's Trump. BTW, in the battle of Kapyong, fought by Canadians which saved the whole damn peninsula, an uncle of mine was on top of that hill. I do completely agree about the Canadian shipyards comment.Journeyman said:Should we also divest ourselves of anything marked Samsung, Kia (and its parent, Hyundai), Daewoo.....?
Forgive me if I don't hide under the bed just yet.