Shipyards to get $1.45-billion deal

[navymich]

http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/story.html?id=83108a3c-b4b1-4d95-b123-54aafd35adee&k=10764

Shipyards to get $1.45-billion deal
Contract to work on military subs 'unbelievable,' company says

Kim Westad
Times Colonist; with files from The Canadian Press

Friday, January 12, 2007

A $1.45-billion contract to maintain Canada's four submarines at Victoria Shipyards could provide decades of work for hundreds of new employees and make Victoria a key training centre for the industry.

"It's absolutely unbelievable," Victoria Shipyards vice-president Malcolm Barker said last night. "It's going to take the Canadian shipbuilding industry to a whole new level. I think it's the most exciting time I've seen in shipbuilding."

Although the contract has not officially been awarded, a spokesman for the federal government said yesterday that Canadian Submarine Management Group, a consortium that includes Victoria Shipyards, has been selected to do the work on the fleet of four troubled Victoria-class submarines.

According to CSMG's bid, the vessels will be maintained at Victoria Shipyards in Esquimalt. Another company named in the consortium is Devonport Royal Dockyard Ltd., which currently looks after British subs, and is known worldwide as a leader in submarines, Barker said.

Canada bought the four mothballed diesel-electric submarines from Britain in 1998 for about $900 million, but the fleet has been plagued by problems from the outset.

The federal government first put out a tender in the fall of 2005 for long-term in-service support for the subs. CSMG was told Wednesday it was the only consortium negotiating, and the two other bidders, one from Halifax and the other from Marystown, N.L., were told they will not get the job.

It's unusual for the government to announce the consortium that will be doing the work before announcing the contract, said Mario Baril, a spokesman for Public Works and Government Services Canada. But because the process has taken so long, Public Works wanted the unsuccessful consortiums to be able to look for other projects.

The contract, worth up to $1.45 billion, could mean 15 years of steady work for 150 employees at Victoria Shipyards, and a rebirth of an industry for generations to come. Currently, the shipyards employ about 550 people.

Working on submarines takes a great deal of expertise, Barker said. Devonport Royal Dockyard has that expertise, and would provide on-site training and apprenticeship programs for many of the jobs.

"It's a tremendous opportunity. They have a world-class reputation in repairing submarines and they will be on site assisting in the transfer of technology and training of Canadian workers. That will give us a whole new level of engineering and quality in our workforce."

The subs are stationed on the east and west coasts, and would be rotated into refit. Actual work on the subs wouldn't likely begin until 2009, after the planning and building of facilities at Victoria Shipyards is complete.
© Times Colonist (Victoria) 2007

 

[CrazyCanuck]

So would this expertise, once acquired allow them to build submarines? Personally I doubt they would be able to design them, but would this allow for construction of other designs in Canada?

 

[aesop081]

So would this expertise, once acquired allow them to build submarines? Personally I doubt they would be able to design them, but would this allow for construction of other designs in Canada?

Its possible.  Building submarines is a complicated affair even for countries with long experience in this field so it wont happen overnight. As for the Victoria Class boats, i cant wait till all 4 are operational. Will give us ASW types a much needed training boost.

 

[CrazyCanuck]

Will give us ASW types a much needed training boost.

Or a headache >

Though that's relative to how good they'll turn out to be

 

[gaspasser]

Hmm, sorry to be a devil's advocate here, but: how much would 3 or 4 new subs have cost versus the cost of purchase and maintaining of 4 old second hand subs?  That have already cost the life of one sailor. 

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Hmm, sorry to be a devil's advocate here, but: how much would 3 or 4 new subs have cost versus the cost of purchase and maintaining of 4 old second hand subs?  That have already cost the life of one sailor. 

Prob 5-6 billion by the time everything got off the ground and we decided where we would bulid them, get the machinery and tools in placed, had the workers trained etc etc.

 

[CrazyCanuck]

To use an example I believe that for a new German U212 sub it would be $500 million USD each

edit: price correction (It seems to go up everynow and then)

 

[aesop081]

Prob 5-6 billion by the time everything got off the ground and we decided where we would bulid them, get the machinery and tools in placed, had the workers trained etc etc.

What if we had decided to have the Germans build us some canadianized 206s/209s/212s ? No need for shipyards to be set up.

Or a headache >

Though that's relative to how good they'll turn out to be

:rofl:

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

You know as well as I do the Goverment, whether Liberal or Conservative, would be roasted alive if they allowed any ship/submarine to be built offshore, however much it makes sense.

 

[aesop081]

You know as well as I do the Goverment, whether Liberal or Conservative, would be roasted alive if they allowed any ship/submarine to be built offshore, however much it makes sense.

i know......i was dreaming in colour again.......I just want some canadian submarines to hunt damit !!!

 

[CrazyCanuck]

http://www.deagel.com/Attack-Submarines/U212A_a000455001.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Attack-Submarines/U209_a000711001.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Attack-Submarines/U206A_a000656001.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Attack-Submarines/U214_a000454001.aspx

That has the price and information on the current German built subs, personally I believe that though cheaper the 209's and 206's may be too old a design for us.

 

[aesop081]

http://www.deagel.com/Attack-Submarines/U212A_a000455001.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Attack-Submarines/U209_a000711001.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Attack-Submarines/U206A_a000656001.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Attack-Submarines/U214_a000454001.aspx

That has the price and information on the current German built subs, personally I believe that though cheaper the 209's and 206's may be too old a design for us.

Granted but how much older than our UPHOLDERS are they ....know what i mean.  regardless i was using those types to ilustrate my point that there are proven designs that can be built at lower cost overseas by builders who have strong reputations and extensive experience in submarine design and production.

 

[CrazyCanuck]

I agree with you completely, just if we wish to keep our navy up to a high standard it may be best to go with a more modern design

 

[aesop081]

I agree with you completely, just if we wish to keep our navy up to a high standard it may be best to go with a more modern design

again you are missing my point.

But the best we can hope for , IMHO, is for the Victoria Class to get up to full speed.  it is a sorely needed capability for the Navy both as an instrument of naval power but as a home-grown training tool for surface/air ASW forces.

 

[gaspasser]

i know......i was dreaming in colour again.......I just want some canadian submarines to hunt damit !!!

Why? Aren't the American ones easy enough prey?
Maybe some good Aus ones to keep you on your toes?

HeeHee ;D

We all know that our subhunters are the best....Dang, I forgot the competition name???
Help me out there, cdnaviator... :'(

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Why? Aren't the American ones easy enough prey?
Maybe some good Aus ones to keep you on your toes?

HeeHee ;D

We all know that our subhunters are the best....Dang, I forgot the competition name???
Help me out there, cdnaviator... :'(

Are you referring to Fincastle?

 

[aesop081]

Why? Aren't the American ones easy enough prey?
Maybe some good Aus ones to keep you on your toes?

HeeHee ;D

We all know that our subhunters are the best....Dang, I forgot the competition name???
Help me out there, cdnaviator... :'(

FINCASTLE

 

[cobbler]

FINCASTLE

More info here:


http://www.primeimages.co.uk/Articles/2006/Fincastle%202006/Fincastle%20'06.htm

 

[Journeyman]

So if we have three subs in Halifax and one in Victoria, is there some navy/union/voting block logic that escapes me for setting up the maintenance shop in Victoria?

 

[navymich]

For you JM, here is the story from the East Coast's point of view: http://thechronicleherald.ca/NovaScotia/9002247.html

O’Connor in dark on contract
Minister says he would have no reason to view sub bid criteria
By STEVE BRUCE Staff Reporter

Defence Minister GordonO’Connor doesn’t know why a lucrative repair contract for Canada’s fleet of four used submarines, three of which are based in Halifax, has been awarded to a British Columbia shipyard.

“It’s a competitive process," Mr. O’Connor said after a speech to the Halifax Chamber of Commerce Friday. “There are criteria and obviously somebody won on the criteria."

Asked to explain the criteria and why a consortium involving Halifax Shipyard Ltd. came up short, Mr. O’Connor replied: “I don’t know what the criteria (are). I wouldnever have access. I wouldn’t look at it."

The Chronicle Herald reported Friday that Ottawa has chosen the Canadian Submarine Management Group to maintain the vessels at Victoria Shipyard. The contract could be worth as much as $1.45 billion over 15 years for the consortium ofWeir Canada Inc. and Devonport Royal Dockyard Ltd., which looks after British nuclear subs.

The two other groups that bid for the contract would have done the work on the East Coast.

Irving-owned Halifax Shipyard partnered with BAE Systems, the British company that built and maintains the subs, to submit a bid.

Peter Kiewit Sons’ Co. teamed up with German submarine manufacturer HDW, proposing the repairs be done in Marystown, N.L. Halifax Shipyard did some repairs to one of the subs, HMCS Chicoutimi, which was badly damaged in a deadly electrical fire in October 2004, and the company hoped to get in on the larger contract.

But the Public Works Department informed the team headed by BAE on Wednesday that the work will not be coming to Halifax.

Irving says the contract would have provided full-time work for about 75 employees.

Mr. O’Connor, who was in Halifax to give a speech on Canada’s military mission in Afghanistan, said the Department of National Defence’s only involvement in the bidding process is that “we provide the funds."

“The process is carried on by Public Works," the defence minister said. “I only learned about it just before you did, that they intend, at least — it hasn’t actually been finalized — to give the contract to the company out west."

Ottawa’s decision on the submarine- repair contract comes just two months after Halifax Shipyard learned it will not be part of the $2.1-billion program to build joint support ships for the navy.

Union spokesman Les Holloway said the latest news was disappointing for workers at Halifax Shipyard.

“We think it made all kinds of sense that the work be done here," said Mr. Holloway, national representative for the Canadian AutoWorkers.

“We’re still sifting through to find out why we aren’t the yard that was successful in our contract."

Halifax MP Alexa McDonough said the decision is a serious blow to the shipyard and the regional economy. The New Democrat said she wants answers from the Conservative government about the cost of transporting the submarines from Halifax to Victoria for repairs.

“Has anyone been able to get an inkling of what the actual cost of transporting them out and back will be?" Ms. McDonough said. “There’s talk of everything from doing it under their own steam to going out on the backs of other ships, but that sounds like a pretty costly undertaking."

For example, it cost Ottawa almost $3 million to have the disabled sub Chicoutimi transported fromScotland aboard a sealift vessel, which arrived in Halifax Harbour in February 2005.

The winning bidder confirmed Thursday that the cost of transporting or sailing the subs between coasts was not included in the bid. But that might not matter because two of the four subs are eventually expected to be based in B.C. Trips to theWest Coast would be used for required crew training.

Ms. McDonough asked that if the project “is really about doing the most responsible thing in cost-effective terms, has the cost of that transportation even been fully incorporated into the financial calculations here?"

“Let’s get answers to some of these questions."

She also questioned the wisdomof eliminating the other bidders before the contract has been finalized.

“I have to say, for a government that likes to talk about operating more efficiently, it’s not apparent to me at all how Canadian taxpayers can be well served to eliminate (the other) bidders when you still haven’t signed a contract. You’ve just eliminated any competitive element. It just seems to me very, very, very unacceptable on both efficiency grounds and fairness grounds.

“People have every reason to ask for a full explanation about what the basis of this decision is, and so far there is none forthcoming."

(sbruce@herald.ca)