New Patrol Vessels

General maritime and engineering discussion occurs on this board. Feel free to post newsbits, comments, ask questions about maritime matters and post your opinions.
User avatar
D Winsor
Superintendent
Posts: 333
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 8:23 am
Currently located: Dartmouth

New Patrol Vessels

Postby D Winsor » Thu Jan 28, 2016 11:10 am

Troubleshooting 101 "Don't over think it - K.I.S.S. it"

Wyatt
Officer of the Watch
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 12:12 am
Currently located: Victoria

Re: New Patrol Vessels

Postby Wyatt » Sun Jan 31, 2016 8:59 am

I give these piles of crap 5 years before they are mothballed. What a waste of taxpayers money!!!!

User avatar
camshaft
Tanktop Cleaner
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 3:38 pm
Currently located: The Left Coast

Re: New Patrol Vessels

Postby camshaft » Thu Feb 04, 2016 9:29 pm

Mothballed at 5 years, that's hard to believe. Typically this news report is short on actual facts, what's the story? Ice buildup, capsize, potentially detained by TC? What on earth are they talking about?

User avatar
JK
Enduring Contributor
Posts: 2697
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:29 am
Currently located: East Coast, Canada

Re: New Patrol Vessels

Postby JK » Fri Feb 05, 2016 5:23 am

Yes, that guy has been gone for at least 15 years out of CG. Not the most reliable source. New ships have growing pains .

Wyatt
Officer of the Watch
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 12:12 am
Currently located: Victoria

Re: New Patrol Vessels

Postby Wyatt » Sun Feb 07, 2016 3:46 pm

There is more to it than simply growing pains I am afraid. The hull and superstructure consists of 3 different metal types, aluminum being one of them, all welded construction, the alum/steel using the explosive method. And guess what, there is no cathodic protection on board these vessels!!!! So guess what is happening, use your imagination, the hull thickness is 4 mm. The generators are far too large for the small power that is required, they are carbonizing up with no solution to this problem as yet. They are thinking of bringing in a load cell and loading the generators up once a year or more as required!!!! The M/E's are those real economical MTU's, and we all know how inexpensive these are to maintain. The vessels travel at either full out or not at all, so fuel economy is amazing. For what these vessels do, their justification for use will get quickly reduced, especially when the older, more reliable vessels begin to prove more capable and the decision will have to be made to either keep these older vessels running, or can we afford to build something more practical?

Wyatt
Officer of the Watch
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 12:12 am
Currently located: Victoria

Re: New Patrol Vessels

Postby Wyatt » Sun Feb 07, 2016 3:54 pm

There are many more issues with these vessels which I am not at liberty to post on this open forum board. Suffice it to say things are not kosher with some of the touchy subjects being discovered on these piles of taxpayers money pits.

User avatar
The Dieselduck
Administrator
Posts: 2748
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:41 pm
Currently located: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada (West Coast of Canada)

Re: New Patrol Vessels

Postby The Dieselduck » Sun Feb 14, 2016 5:42 pm

Well, they look pretty...
MTU seems a bit much for these boats. Maybe they should have trolling engines mounted separately, or maybe auxiliary electrical motors on the shafts, use up that excess generating capacity.
Martin Leduc
Certified Marine Engineer and Webmaster
Martin's Marine Engineering Page
http://www.dieselduck.net

User avatar
JK
Enduring Contributor
Posts: 2697
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:29 am
Currently located: East Coast, Canada

News on the CSC Project-Related to Patrol Vessels?

Postby JK » Wed Feb 24, 2016 10:42 am

I'm unable to comment on this due to my position but :shock:

The Canadian government is looking at changing course on the largest shipbuilding program in Canadian history and will now examine combining bids for new warships into one package in the hopes that will allow vessels to be constructed more quickly.

The $26-billion Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) project will see a new fleet built to replace the navy’s destroyers and frigates. The plan established by the Conservative government was to have companies submit bids for the design of the ships, and to consider separate bids for the integration of the various systems on board those vessels.

But the federal government will now look at combining those two processes, with a designer and integrator submitting a combined bid.

The government will decide in a few months on how it wants to proceed.

“One competitive process versus two is much faster,” Lisa Campbell, assistant deputy minister for acquisitions at Public Services and Procurement Canada, said in an interview Tuesday. “It takes out a whole bunch of the design technical risk of trying to fit together a combat systems integrator with a warship design that possibly was more customized.”

The warship designs will be off-the-shelf vessels, she added. “We’re talking about existing designs,” Campbell explained. “That eliminates a lot of technical risk and will get us to building ships sooner.”

The first of the Canadian Surface Combatants were supposed to be delivered around 2026. But Campbell said this new process would allow for the first ship to be delivered in the early 2020s.

She said Halifax-based Irving Shipbuilding will still be prime contractor for the surface combatants, but the government will ensure there is maximum use of other Canadian firms on the program. As many as 80 domestic companies could potentially provide equipment, and the bids from the warship designer and integrator will be evaluated in part on how well those firms are represented.

“We decide the evaluation process,” said Campbell. “They (Irving) execute it.”

Government officials are now talking to industry representatives about the changes.

Two variants of the new ships are expected to be built. One type will provide air defence and command and control, while the other will be a general purpose type to do the jobs now handled by Canada’s Halifax-class frigates.

The CSC project has been dogged with controversy and concerns about delay and increasing costs.

Last year Vice-Admiral Mark Norman, the head of the Royal Canadian Navy, acknowledged that the project’s cost would be well above its $26-billion budget.

The Liberal government has committed to moving ahead with the surface combatant program, putting emphasis on the number of jobs it could create.

During the election campaign Liberal leader Justin Trudeau pledged to pull Canada out of the U.S.-led F-35 stealth fighter program and select a less costly jet to replace the military’s CF-18s. Those savings would be pumped into the shipbuilding program, which the Liberals contend is not properly financed.

Defence analysts, however, have suggested the Liberals will be hard-pressed to find many savings from the jet replacement program.

Campbell said the shipbuilding strategy is now proceeding well. “The shipyards had to get to a certain industrial capacity before we would let them start building ships,” she said. “They are exactly at the point in time we thought they would be right now.”

On Monday, Public Services Minister Judy Foote announced that Steve Brunton has been selected as “expert advisor” to assist the government on the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy.

Brunton is a retired Rear Admiral from the United Kingdom’s Royal Navy with experience in overseeing shipbuilding programs and naval acquisitions.

Campbell said Brunton has already started his job and is one of several independent advisors brought on board. “He’ll advise on specific projects as needed,” she added.


Return to “Crew Mess”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 

 

cron