• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy

  • Thread starter Thread starter GAP
  • Start date Start date
Refreshingly frank piece by RADM (ret'd) Ian Mack--but I think this conclusion wrong--there are simply some things we cannot do in any remotely efficient or cost-effective way and hence should not try. But politics and "Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!":

...Were we launching NSPS today, we could realistically hope to have done better. I have said before that Canada’s continuing prosperity can only grow through national endeavours which are exceptionally difficult by their very nature and which government must routinely nurture, if not manage. Mastery of complex endeavour leadership and execution is not a choice, it is imperative to our future as a nation [emphasis added].

The paper:

Emerging Lessons from the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy
https://www.cgai.ca/emerging_lessons_from_the_national_shipbuilding_procurement_strategy

Mark
Ottawa
 
Thanks Mark, that was a good read.

I think part of the problem NSS is going through is the high turnover at the BGH level, as most of the original players from all departments are long gone, and the supporting underlings have all changed out.  There was a big loss of background knowledge and understanding of what the goals were, so it kind of lost the bubble when it was forced into the deliverology foolishness.  Mr. Mack was one of those corporate anchors, so his retirement had a big impact on a few key things drifting off into bureaucratic oblivion.
 
Davie, rivals square off over future of multibillion-dollar shipbuilding plan

OTTAWA — The president of Davie Shipbuilding says he is confident the Quebec-based shipyard will be tapped to build two new ferries included in this week’s federal budget.

But James Davies says it is time the federal government stop rewarding other shipyards for failing to deliver new vessels to the navy and coast guard, and officially admit his company into the multibillion-dollar national shipbuilding plan.

The comment came late Wednesday as top officials from Davie and its two bitter rivals, Vancouver-based Seaspan Shipyards and Halifax-based Irving Shipbuilding, appeared one after the other before the Senate finance committee.

Seaspan and Irving were selected through the shipbuilding strategy in 2011 as the two shipyards responsible for building what at the time was estimated to be $35 billion worth of new vessels for the navy and coast guard.

Davie also competed but was passed over and has since been forced to fight for scraps outside the plan.

That includes the provision of an interim resupply vessel for the navy and three second-hand icebreakers for the coast guard.

Davies also told the committee he did not think any other shipyard could provide the two new ferries included in the budget. They will replace two existing ferries, one of which operates between Quebec and Prince Edward Island and the other between Nova Scotia and P.E.I. The budget does not provide any further details, including cost or when they will be built.

Despite his sunny view of his company’s capability, Davies was clearly focused on getting his shipyard admitted into the national shipbuilding plan. He noted that, seven years after it was launched, both Seaspan and Irving are continuing to get work despite not having delivered a ship, and the plan’s overall costs have doubled.

“A deal with no consequence of failure is toothless,” Davies said. “Consequence means that in the light of such failure, the government needs the ability to choose an alternative supplier for future contracts.”

That includes potentially breaking up the work that, under the current arrangement, is almost entirely the purview of the other two yards, he said, and contracts not yet awarded.

Davies specifically mentioned 10 large coast guard vessels that were promised to Seaspan in 2013 at an estimated cost of $3.3 billion, but construction of which won’t realistically start until sometime in the mid- to late-2020s.

During his own appearance, Irving Shipbuilding president Kevin McCoy defended his shipyard’s work to date, telling the committee that the first of 21 vessels Irving has been tasked to build, an Arctic patrol ship for the navy, will be delivered this summer.

Progress is also being made on five others, McCoy said, as well as the navy’s new, $60-billion warship fleet, which will be built in the coming decade.

The original cost of those warships was estimated at $26.2 billion, while the first Arctic ship was initially expected in 2015, but McCoy nonetheless said there has been a lot of false information and rhetoric about the state of the plan — and of Irving.

Seaspan chief executive officer Mark Lamarre similarly said a short time later that work is advancing on the West Coast as three fisheries science vessels for the coast guard are near completion after several delays, some of which were caused by faulty welding.

Steel has also started to be cut on the first of two long-overdue resupply vessels for the navy, he said.

Lamarre admitted Seaspan has faced challenges, but he said difficulties were inevitable given that it had been a generation since the government and shipbuilding industry launched such a massive project.

Both sides have learned some hard lessons over the years that are now being applied, he added.

While they didn’t mention Davie, the Seaspan and Irving officials also both pushed back against any suggestions of opening up or otherwise changing the national shipbuilding strategy, saying a fair competition was held in 2011.

James Irving, co-chief executive officer of J.D. Irving Ltd., which owns the Halifax yard, said his company invested $450 million of its own money with the “good faith” understanding the strategy would not be changed.
https://toronto.citynews.ca/2019/03/20/davie-rivals-square-off-over-future-of-multibillion-dollar-shipbuilding-plan/
 
"good faith" understanding.

"I assumed"?

"Quid pro quo"?

"Believe me"?

Real question - was the NSPS predicated on delivering the hulls defined and contracted or was it based on replacing all the hulls in the federal fleet, and increasing the number of hulls should the need arise, and replacing the replacements, now and forever, amen?

Or was that just the assumption of Irving?

Second issue - is it just me or does anyone else perceive that Seaspan is less invested in keeping Davie out of the running and that Irving seems to take the lead on the Davie file?
 
Chris Pook said:
Second issue - is it just me or does anyone else perceive that Seaspan is less invested in keeping Davie out of the running and that Irving seems to take the lead on the Davie file?

Seaspan gets the benefit of geography in this case.  There's no one else close to their size/ability on the West Coast. Due to our deep historical mantra of pleasing as many Provinces as possible when spending public money, this puts them in a fantastic, almost unassailable, position. 

Irving on the other hand has to deal with a geographically closer, long time rival, who has a larger capacity and comes from the undisputed King of squeaky wheels getting the grease in Canada. 

The reality is that Davie will get more contracts - its a given fact that its going to occur - its just a question of what they get.  Irving wants ALL of those 15 CSC ships and will fight a scorched earth policy to protect them.  Davie will have to be content with more CCG vessels and quite possibly the Kingston replacements because they will need to be replaced before the CSC programme is completed and before Seaspan can complete the 2 (3?) JSS, the Dief, the OSV and whatever CCG OPV's they were promised. 
 
Chris Pook said:
Real question - was the NSPS predicated on delivering the hulls defined and contracted or was it based on replacing all the hulls in the federal fleet, and increasing the number of hulls should the need arise, and replacing the replacements, now and forever, amen?

Or was that just the assumption of Irving?

Second issue - is it just me or does anyone else perceive that Seaspan is less invested in keeping Davie out of the running and that Irving seems to take the lead on the Davie file?
The National Shipbuilding Strategy is a long-term project to renew Canada's federal fleet of combat and non-combat vessels.
https://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/amd-dp/mer-sea/sncn-nss/index-eng.html

I am assuming that this means that once all the ships that displace 1 000 tonnes or larger are replaced, new ships will be built in Canada to replace these replacements.  And I am assuming that Irving and Seaspan will again build most of these ships.  Davie hates Irving.  Irving hates Davie.
 
So far only Seaspan/Lockheed have won an overseas military contract to refit Allied warships (NZ). the Seaspan yards out here have built a solid rep for their repair work.
 
[urlhttps://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/canadian-coast-guards-newest-vessel-damaged-after-running-into-victoria-port/ar-BBVaVUH?ocid=spartanntp][/url]

Not even handed over and it has to go back to the body shop. lol
 
From the Times Colonist

Team to probe crash of Coast Guard ship at Ogden Point

https://www.timescolonist.com/news/local/team-to-probe-crash-of-coast-guard-ship-at-ogden-point-1.23769090

Looks like the trials team got a bit excited coming alongside at the end of a week of sea trials and ran into the jetty while backing up.

Good thing this is still fully in Seaspan's control (so they are responsible for all repairs) but for damage to the stern, rudder and propellor that may require a quick docking to fix.  :facepalm:
 
With a tug in support as well,unless a mechanical issue, then someone has some career management issues ahead.
 
You just know you are in Victoria when they feel the need to tell us that "bird nesting boxes" were damaged in the collision but "no bird were using them" at the time.

;D
 
To be fair, that's probably because the only birds in Halifax this time of year are the seagulls swimming around by the harbour sewage outflow pipe.  ;D
 
Ahh yes, the perpetual flame retardant shit birds of Halifax. FML, they can ruin a uniform.
 
Heard a rumour elsewhere that it was run by a third party, and everyone onboard has been let go, including the cook.
 
Just a rumour?

Shipyards don't put out enough new ships to warrant having "test-crew" on salary. They invariably hire out for these tests. Most often, they hire the crew of the company who commissioned the vessel, but if that crew is not available, they will simply go out and hire mariners at large to do the job.

Now, considering the time required in the CCG to make Master, I would be very surprised if this was an actual CCG crew on board for these trials, as they wouldn't screw up like that. Moreover, this being the CCG, they may not even have completed the crew selection process, so don't have a crew: wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. So, yeah! Likely a hired crew.
 
$60bn for new warships out of Irvnig shipyard in Halifax.

15 type 26 frigates.

This means BAE is also involved somehow, because the type 26 is their design.

The problem with the type 26 design, is that the propulsion system is known to randomly shut down at sea.

Basically, it seems like insurance to keep the maintenance requirement high, and therefore employ more people.  I guess that's a good thing, but also annoying as hell for the stokers.

While the type 26 looks really cool, the procurement process completely ignored past issues with the type 45s from BAE that were sold to the British Navy. The type 26 uses the same propulsion system.

Of course, the British type 26s were built at Clyde shipyards, so a lot of the blame should probably be placed there.  And hopefully Irving has plans to be extra careful when assembling the propulsion systems for the Canadian frigates.

https://www.thestar.com/halifax/2019/02/08/halifax-irving-shipbuilding-workers-applaud-60b-design-contract-awarded-to-lockheed-martin-for-warship-fleet.html

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/questions-raised-about-propulsion-system-on-new-canadian-warship-amid-fears-engines-could-conk-out

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/the-clyde-and-the-type-26-frigate-a-never-ending-source-of-conspiracy-theories/
 
Where are they getting that info?  The type 26 has never been to sea, and the commonality with the type 45 is the propulsion configuration.  It's like saying this rear wheel drive car would shut off, so all other rear wheel drive cars have the same problem.

The type 45 issue was a combination of undersized generators and a one off GT with a complicated intercooler system (for energy recovery) that never worked properly.  They are currently replacing the generators with bigger ones, and guessing the GTs will eventually be replaced by something else as they are the only ones in the world in operation, so they are going to be incredibly expensive to maintain.

The type 26s use a completely different GT (the RR MT30; a marine variant of the boeing 777 engine and also used on a number of other warships in various navies), and they would obviously have learned the lesson on sizing the generators.

Not involved in the projects, but there are a bunch of really smart people involved on all sides, and confident they would avoid the same pitfalls as the 45. Saying they are the same propulsion system is one of those conclusions that comes from people who don't really understand what they are talking about.
 
Canadian Naval Review appears to be suggesting that the Canadian variant of the Type 26 might have different propulsion machinery compared to the British variant.
The Type 26 is leading edge in layout and automation, even if some of the characteristics vary between the navies, such as speed which will be based on different propulsion machinery, and national requirements, such as whether you wish to be able to join and keep up with an American carrier battle group.
Source:  PDF page 11 of http://www.navalreview.ca/wp-content/uploads/public/vol14num2/vol14num2waves.pdf
 
Navy_Pete said:
Where are they getting that info?  The type 26 has never been to sea, and the commonality with the type 45 is the propulsion configuration.  It's like saying this rear wheel drive car would shut off, so all other rear wheel drive cars have the same problem.

The type 45 issue was a combination of undersized generators and a one off GT with a complicated intercooler system (for energy recovery) that never worked properly.  They are currently replacing the generators with bigger ones, and guessing the GTs will eventually be replaced by something else as they are the only ones in the world in operation, so they are going to be incredibly expensive to maintain.

The type 26s use a completely different GT (the RR MT30; a marine variant of the boeing 777 engine and also used on a number of other warships in various navies), and they would obviously have learned the lesson on sizing the generators.

Not involved in the projects, but there are a bunch of really smart people involved on all sides, and confident they would avoid the same pitfalls as the 45. Saying they are the same propulsion system is one of those conclusions that comes from people who don't really understand what they are talking about.

I hope so, because those are pretty slick looking ships.

Smart people can bungle things up a lot worse than stupid people sometimes, because stupid people aren't smart enough to build something that's so overly complicated that it can be bungled up that badly.  Stupid people can also get involved later on, and/or restrict the original design based on cost.  I haven't really looked around, but I'm guessing that the type 45's undersized engines had a cost reassessment, and the result was smaller engines.  I'm pretty sure really smart people also worked on the type 45, as well.
 
Back
Top