Author Topic: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]  (Read 69206 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Greater_Ape

  • Guest
  • *
  • 170
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #250 on: February 13, 2019, 23:17:52 »
My issue with the ETVs  is not the day rate, it's the fact that we're leasing a capability that in my opinion is superfluous.  We're not in the business of towing oil rigs.  I don't think the CCG or the public is going to get their money's worth with these 16,000hp Offshore Supply Vessels that are likely going to sit idle at the dock for months on end.
I think the money could have been better spent elsewhere.  But I'm an engineer so what do I know. When you spend most of your days below waterline you don't get to see the big picture  ;).

Offline Not a Sig Op

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 59,817
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,843
  • I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear.
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #251 on: February 14, 2019, 08:59:43 »
We're absolutely in the business of towing oil rigs in an emergency... or anything else stricken and potentially a hazard to life or the environment...

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/02/business/energy-environment/shell-oil-rig-runs-aground-in-alaska.html

Oil rigs aren't the primary concern though, tankers are.

Despite all the tanker traffic on the west coast, the coast guard had no vessels capable of effectively towing one in an emergency, and with that, very little experience towing vessels that size.

I don't know the full details of the contract, but there's no reason to expect their sole task will be towing... they're quite capable of performing many of the tasks other coast guard vessels perform... the Grenfel manages... she even manages to lay bouys.

Though ironically, many of those other vessels spend months idling at the wharf as well when they're on primary SAR standby.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2019, 09:02:56 by Not a Sig Op »

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 143,890
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,576
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #252 on: February 14, 2019, 10:18:46 »
The problem is that the CCG on this coast has no large ship tow capacity and there are very few tugs that do. The last incident with the Russian freighter, none the tugs available were certified to go that far out to rescue her. If LNGCanada continues to go ahead that will change for the North Coast as there will be several large modern escort tugs. When we rigged up the Pearkes to tow the Exxon tanker, we felt at best we would be able to hold her in position and that was in fairly calm weather. There has been a few incidents with pusher tugs out here with oil barges. We been lucky so far. The last freighter I am aware of going aground in the Queen Charlotte Islands was around 1956.
 It would have been better to help Smit and Seaspan out here to acquire a large tug each that would do normal work within an zone and be able to go out to respond to calls. The other option is to buy and man with CCG personal, anchor handling vessels that could do CCG NavAid and SAR work as well. Problem with that is no one wants to work with CCG anymore, pays sucks compared to industry when they actually manage to pay you. When LNGC kicks in they are going to suck up even more ticketed CCG personal as well.

Offline Not a Sig Op

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 59,817
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,843
  • I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear.
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #253 on: February 14, 2019, 12:59:04 »
The other option is to buy and man with CCG personal, anchor handling vessels that could do CCG NavAid and SAR work as well.

Are those duties not included in the contract for these vessels?

No reason they can't do that work as long as they're within suitable range to respond for towing as well.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2019, 13:02:13 by Not a Sig Op »

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 143,890
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,576
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #254 on: February 14, 2019, 17:14:27 »
Not sure what the contract allows, but taking union jobs with non-PSAC employees would be seen as a threat to PSAC and the big ship CCG senior officers types alike.

Offline Not a Sig Op

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 59,817
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,843
  • I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear.
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #255 on: February 15, 2019, 01:21:52 »
Not sure what the contract allows, but taking union jobs with non-PSAC employees would be seen as a threat to PSAC and the big ship CCG senior officers types alike.

I haven't read the contract either, but I have read the solicitation  documents from the tender...

From the operations overview in appendix a...




"The contractor will provide two vessels crewed by certificated personnel and equipped to undertake emergency towing operations as per the contract.

The CCG will deploy and operate these vessels as units within the CCG fleet primarily tasked to the ER program to provide an emergency towing response when required.

The vessels will also be deployed to conduct preparedness activities related to the ER program such as exercising, training, community engagement, scientific assesment and monitoring, while maintaining the standby posture.

Concurrent with the ER deployment, the vessels will be multi-tasked to provide a level of SAR coverage within their area of operation will also support other programs and CCG activities."




The vessel itself was required to provide accomodations for for additional SAR equipment to be furnished by the government, as well as a 20' ISO container of environmental response gear.

2 FRCs with davit's were listed as a requirement, and bulwarks and a crane suitable for launch and recovery of bouys was listed as a desirable.

It also defines an operations area for the vessels, based on a suitable response time for towing.

Aside from the vessel, the other major deliverable was a training program on board the ship, to teach coast guard officers towing... minimum space on board for the program was 6 desirable was 12... the two vessels they got  should have far more bunk space available than that.



Really sounds like they're planning on doing a lot more then leaving them idling at the wharf...
« Last Edit: February 15, 2019, 05:52:46 by Not a Sig Op »

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 245,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,732
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #256 on: February 19, 2019, 22:41:56 »
The problem is that the CCG on this coast has no large ship tow capacity and there are very few tugs that do. The last incident with the Russian freighter, none the tugs available were certified to go that far out to rescue her. If LNGCanada continues to go ahead that will change for the North Coast as there will be several large modern escort tugs. When we rigged up the Pearkes to tow the Exxon tanker, we felt at best we would be able to hold her in position and that was in fairly calm weather. There has been a few incidents with pusher tugs out here with oil barges. We been lucky so far. The last freighter I am aware of going aground in the Queen Charlotte Islands was around 1956.
 It would have been better to help Smit and Seaspan out here to acquire a large tug each that would do normal work within an zone and be able to go out to respond to calls. The other option is to buy and man with CCG personal, anchor handling vessels that could do CCG NavAid and SAR work as well. Problem with that is no one wants to work with CCG anymore, pays sucks compared to industry when they actually manage to pay you. When LNGC kicks in they are going to suck up even more ticketed CCG personal as well.

An interesting article by Robert Allan:

'In conclusion, it is certainly feasible to consider a system of large rescue tugs to aid in the protection of the B.C. coastline,
but the economics of that operation are not trivial and the probability of an incident is very low.'

https://ral.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/BCSN-14-12-Coastal-Protection.pdf
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Not a Sig Op

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 59,817
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,843
  • I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear.
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #257 on: February 20, 2019, 11:29:46 »
An interesting article by Robert Allan:

'In conclusion, it is certainly feasible to consider a system of large rescue tugs to aid in the protection of the B.C. coastline,
but the economics of that operation are not trivial and the probability of an incident is very low.'

https://ral.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/BCSN-14-12-Coastal-Protection.pdf

The article assumes the sole task of a tug would be towing.

Towing is just a *capability* of the vessels they've leased, and the same of any future vessels they buy to do the same job.

The vessels are and will be multi-tasked.

For anyone interested, the tender solicitation

https://buyandsell.gc.ca/procurement-data/tender-notice/PW-MB-003-26699
« Last Edit: February 20, 2019, 11:35:14 by Not a Sig Op »

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 143,890
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,576
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #258 on: February 20, 2019, 11:51:01 »
No Robert is quite clear that any such vessel should be able to be multi-tasked, but with deep sea towing as the primary design consideration. So you give up some other capability, such as icebreaking or buoy stowage, fuel economy. Also you have to teach and practice open ocean towing. Robert told me (we have cabins on the same island) that the Gordon Reid/John Jacobson was supposed to be bigger and the CCG deleted larger towing gear to save money. 

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 207,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,726
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #259 on: February 20, 2019, 13:48:17 »
Is this something of the type envisioned?



Quote
NoCGV Harstad

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Name:   NoCGV Harstad
Namesake:   The town of Harstad
Builder:   Søviknes yard
Commissioned:   January 2005
In service:   2009[1]
Identification:   
IMO number: 9312107
MMSI number: 259050000
Callsign: JWBR
Pennant number: W318
Status:   Active

General characteristics
Class and type:   Offshore Patrol Vessel
Type:   Patrol and Oil recovery vessel
Displacement:   3,121 long tons (3,171 t)
Length:   270 ft (82 m)
Beam:   51 ft (16 m)
Depth:   6 m (20 ft)

Propulsion:   
Two Rolls-Royce Marine diesel engines, 4000kW each
Two screws; one azimuth thruster, 883kW
Speed:   18.4 knots (34.1 km/h; 21.2 mph)

Boats & landing
craft carried:   2 x MOB boats type NORSAFE

Complement:   26

Armament:   40 mm Bofors

Notes:   
Crane: 15m/5 tons
Modified to support the Nato Submarine Rescue System
NoCGV Harstad is a purpose-built offshore patrol vessel for the Norwegian Coast Guard. She is named after the city Harstad in Northern Norway. As of May 2018, the commanding officer is Lt. Cmdr. Kyrre Einarsen.[1]

Harstad was built as a multipurpose vessel, but optimised for emergency towing of large oil tankers (up to 200,000 tonnes deadweight (DWT)), oil spill clean-up and fire fighting. The most common duty will be fishery inspection and search and rescue in Norway's large exclusive economic zone. The steadily increasing traffic of large oil tankers along the Norwegian coast explains the need for this type of vessel.

The vessel is built of high-end design. Designer is Rolls-Royce Marine AS, Dept. Ship Technology - Offshore Type: UT 512



Or perhaps the Natural Gas powered Barentshav?

"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Navy_Pete

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 30,595
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 859
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #260 on: February 20, 2019, 13:49:18 »
Got to work with the USNS on the tow home for the Protecteur (from HI to BC); their approach is quite different for what you would do for a standard tug around the harbour or a short distance, and it was a great learning experience to see professionals at work. After seeing the USNS Salvor though, can't really imagine anything not designed primarily for open ocean towing being able to do the job.

The wikipedia page is here; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USNS_Salvor

These guys are really impressive to see in action, and that winch is a big piece of kit. They are geared up for salvage/rescue, so also do diving and some other similar tasks, but would not want to do any kind of planned open ocean towing of a big ship without something of similar size and power.

I could see something like that being outfitted to be able to do some offshore work (environmental response? Basic SAR?) but tugs are built for bollard pull, not speed, so compromises to do other tasks can kill your primary role.

Given the desired uptick in vessel traffic they want to have with the pipeline port, would seem to be a reasonable precaution for those low likelihood/extreme impact risk scenarios with things running aground etc.


Offline Not a Sig Op

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 59,817
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,843
  • I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear.
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #261 on: February 20, 2019, 15:49:58 »
I could see something like that being outfitted to be able to do some offshore work (environmental response? Basic SAR?) but tugs are built for bollard pull, not speed, so compromises to do other tasks can kill your primary role.

Most of the Canadian Coast Guard vessels max out at 15-17kts, any off the shelf anchor handler design should be able to do the same.

With the exception of a lack of helicopter facilities (which really get less use than you might think), there's a lot of off-the-shelf OSV designs that are pretty well suited to most coast guard tasks.

Bollard pull aside, one of the big features an anchor handler (or off shore tug) has in terms of towing is constant tension winch.

You set the tension on the winch, and the drum will automatically pay-out/take up to maintain the constant tension.

Plus shark jaws and tow pins, a hydraulic system on deck for holding whatever you're towing while you're making or breaking connections on deck.

Oil recovery systems, fire fighting, and SAR are all usually part of any off the shelf design as well.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2019, 15:54:08 by Not a Sig Op »

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 143,890
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,576
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #262 on: February 20, 2019, 16:11:36 »
For handling the bigger buoys you need a 10/5 ton crane with 2 hooks and a decent reach and swing area. Buoys are 9 tons and rocks are 3 tons.

here is my old ship hard at work, the chain drum is a east coast addition. The nice thing about this design is you have a good size hold to hold buoys, chains and anchors, along with other stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIgjcbOkoag

Offline Navy_Pete

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 30,595
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 859
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #263 on: February 20, 2019, 22:19:42 »
Most of the Canadian Coast Guard vessels max out at 15-17kts, any off the shelf anchor handler design should be able to do the same.

With the exception of a lack of helicopter facilities (which really get less use than you might think), there's a lot of off-the-shelf OSV designs that are pretty well suited to most coast guard tasks.

Bollard pull aside, one of the big features an anchor handler (or off shore tug) has in terms of towing is constant tension winch.

You set the tension on the winch, and the drum will automatically pay-out/take up to maintain the constant tension.

Plus shark jaws and tow pins, a hydraulic system on deck for holding whatever you're towing while you're making or breaking connections on deck.

Oil recovery systems, fire fighting, and SAR are all usually part of any off the shelf design as well.

Thanks for the info; pretty interesting to hear what the CCG does.  Hadn't previously looked up the ETVs; bigger than what I thought they were.  Remember seeing those ships around St. John's but didn't realize they had been repurposed for this contract in BC.

Offline Not a Sig Op

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 59,817
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,843
  • I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear.
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #264 on: February 20, 2019, 23:12:26 »
Thanks for the info; pretty interesting to hear what the CCG does.  Hadn't previously looked up the ETVs; bigger than what I thought they were.  Remember seeing those ships around St. John's but didn't realize they had been repurposed for this contract in BC.

They're well suited for what they've been contracted to do, at least as an interim solution.

They'll be a bit heavy on fuel consumption though. If they were to buy or build something in the future, they'd be well suited to go with a diesel-electric or hybrid option.

It's part of the reason they were available on the market, oil companies are paying more attention to fuel bills.

Coincidentally, Maersk Cutter is one of the more fuel efficient vessels that replaced them...

http://tugfaxblogspotcom.blogspot.com/2016/01/maersk-cutter-finds-work.html?m=1

Maersk had also bid the Cutter for the ETV contract.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2019, 23:37:54 by Not a Sig Op »

Offline Uzlu

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,980
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 184
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #265 on: March 06, 2019, 07:47:44 »
Quote
Is the Canadian Coast Guard Underfunded?

“When there is more ice, you need more icebreakers. When there is less ice, you need more icebreakers.” At first, I was puzzled by this statement from a Canadian Coast Guard officer. The first part is obvious enough, the second part was less so. The reason for the second part is that when the ice starts to disappear, as is the case right now, the remaining ice starts moving unpredictably around by currents, tides and wind. Moving ice can prevent or delay the resupply of a community if there is not an available icebreaker to support the approach to that community.

Moving ice is what happened this past summer with expensive consequences. A significant amount of multi-year ice formed a plug in the Amundsen Gulf. Multi-year ice can be very thick and prevent even heavy icebreakers from getting through. That situation was a major factor in the failure to resupply a number of Arctic communities by barges. Some of the resupply had to be shipped by air at a cost of millions of dollars. Most of the heavy or bulky items such as vehicles and construction material will only be moved by the next shipping season causing delays to projects and logistical nightmares.

Unfortunately, the disappearing ice invites growing maritime traffic in the Arctic, including adventurers who may not be prepared for one of the most challenging environments on Earth. When the chief of defence staff states that when the Canadian Forces deployments to the Arctic are a form of expeditionary deployments people should pay attention. Too many come to the Arctic unprepared.

I was on board of the Canadian Coast Guard icebreaker Louis St-Laurent in 2013 when the ship received a distress signal from a group of adventurers who thought that it would be cool to sea-doo across the Northwest Passage. They became ice-bound by moving ice and their camp was attacked by polar bears. This past summer, a sailboat sank in the Arctic near the Bellot Strait. Fortunately, the crew members managed to transfer to a large ice floe and were later rescued.

One of the problems adventurers create when they come unprepared is that they may trigger a distress signal which will divert a Canadian Coast Guard icebreaker from their other duties. Apart from the significant cost to the Canadian taxpayers to rescue a party that is there for pleasure, it may very well delay the annual resupply of an Arctic community putting it at risk and/ or add significant cost to the companies like the Nunavut Eastern Arctic Shipping Inc. providing the resupply. Suzanne Paquin, president and chief executive officer, stated: “A community resupply delay because an icebreaker has been diverted to a distress call could cost our company as much as tens of thousands of dollars a day.”

Several maritime companies have criticized the availability of icebreaker support this past shipping season which experienced unusual difficult ice conditions. In 2018, the cruise ship Akademik Ioffe, operated by One Ocean Expeditions (OOE), grounded in the western gulf of Boothia on August 24. A Canadian Coast Guard icebreaker was dispatched to the scene as a precaution and remained onsite for three days. The cost to the taxpayers was more than $240,000 to support a tourist vessel which had sailed in uncharted waters.

This was the third cruise ship to run aground in the Arctic after the Hanseatic in 1997 and the Clipper Adventurer in 2010. Fortunately, there was no loss of life and only minor environmental impacts. With increasing activity in poorly-charted areas, our luck may soon run out.

Given the challenging conditions of the Arctic and the tremendous cost of search and rescue operations, it might be time to consider the requirement for those who wish to enter the Arctic to post bonds which would be forfeited should they trigger a search and rescue operation. The main reasons would be to force them to be better prepared given the inherent risks of the environment, discourage the less professional adventurers altogether and recover a portion of the cost incurred by the Canadian taxpayers when a rescue is triggered.

At the very least, Canada should consider a similar policy as in the case of the Nahanni National Park where “individuals who, through court proceedings, are found to be negligent, may be held responsible for the full cost of search and rescue.”

To make matters worse, the Canadian Coast Guard icebreaker fleet vessels are past their design life and require extensive refits and increased maintenance time, all of which reduces their availability. To the Canadian government’s credit the recent acquisition of three surplus icebreakers from Shell has improved the availability of icebreakers not only for Arctic operations but also for ice-breaking duties to maintain the Saint-Lawrence Seaway open during the winter season.

On December 14, 2018, it took delivery of CCGS Captain Molly Kool, the first of three newly-refitted medium icebreakers from Chantier Davie Canada Inc. Apart from the CCG Diefenbaker, which service date is slipping to the right, there is not a public plan to replace the aging fleet which averages 35 years of age. It could be that the Canadian Coast Guard is not funded properly to provide it with the resources necessary to perform their essential functions in the Arctic.

It has also been suggested that it may be better to move it to Transport Canada. Another option would be to move it back to the Department of National Defence where it used to be. That addition would improve the percentage of resources allocated to the defence of Canada and move us closer to the two percent of GDP pledge with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

The U.S. Coast Guard is part of their armed forces. Regardless of which department it should be with, there is an urgent need to fund the Canadian Coast Guard adequately so that it has the necessary resources to provide essential services in the Canadian Arctic at a time when the maritime activity is on the increase.

In an exciting development for the people of the Canadian Arctic, the Canadian Coast Guard has recently created a new regional office called CCG Arctic Region. Its headquarters is in Yellowknife, N.W.T. It is refreshing that now “Coast Guard arctic operational decisions will be made in the Arctic.”

The Department of National Defence is about to deploy a new family of Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships that will have a limited capability to operate in ice of up to one meter. The development will certainly add to the federal government assets in the Arctic but those ships are not designed to break ice in support of maritime activity. That function has to be done by a properly designed icebreaker.
https://www.maritime-executive.com/editorials/is-the-canadian-coast-guard-underfunded

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 143,890
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,576
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #266 on: March 06, 2019, 11:39:33 »
Coast Guard was never part of the Armed Forces, SAR was and still is a responsibility of the CF. CG was formed by amalgamating the Department of Transport and the RCAF Crashboats stations into the Coast Guard around 1962-64.

Problem for a lot of people outside looking at the CG i they forget the other tasks such as Navaids, as you can suspect buoy tending is not high on the CF or Homeland Security priority list.

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 73,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,569
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #267 on: March 19, 2019, 13:57:54 »
Latest on problems:
Quote
How some coast guard ships stayed tied up when they could have been at work
Social Sharing

Vessels tied up for 151 days when weather was 'within operational parameters,' document says

There is more evidence suggesting Canadian coast guard mid-shore patrol vessels are a fair-weather fleet.

Documents obtained by CBC News show that during a one-year period, two mid-shore patrol vessels based in Nova Scotia were tied up for 151 days in weather conditions when they were supposed to be operable.

Last month, CBC revealed the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) is looking at installing stabilizers — blades that counteract the motion of waves — on its nine coast guard mid-shore vessels. This followed widespread complaints from crew about excessive rolling at sea.

Michael Grace, DFO's offshore surveillance supervisor, looked at sea conditions during the 165 days when two mid-shore vessels based in Nova Scotia were in port or anchored — from April 1, 2017, to March 31, 2018.

His briefing table on the "probabilities the vessels were being anchored based on wind speeds and sea conditions" was released to CBC under the Access to Information Act.

"The vessels frequently did not operate in winds in excess of 20 knots, sea states under 2 metres," the table compiled by Grace states.

In March 2018, the Dartmouth-based supervisor delivered the presentation at a joint management meeting of officials with the Canadian Coast Guard and DFO in Vancouver.

DFO official studies wind speed, sea state

The vessels, which are 42 metres long and seven metres wide, are known as the Hero class since each is named after an exemplary military, RCMP, coast guard or DFO officer.

The mid-shore patrol vessels are based on both the east and west coasts of Canada.

According to minutes of the meeting, Grace looked at wind speeds and sea conditions when the CCGS G Peddle and CCGS Corporal McLaren were ashore.

"The reported weather and sea state condition outlined in the table indicates that up to 91.5% of the in port/anchored time occurred within the stated operating parameters of the MSVP."

For primary missions in the Atlantic, like fishery patrols, the vessel is expected to sail in what is known as Sea State 5, which is three-metre seas and winds averaging 24 knots.

According to the table, "28.6% of the port/anchored time took place in weather conditions with winds of less than 20 knots and a sea state of 0.5 to 2.0 metres."

Coast guard: no response

The Canadian Coast Guard did not comment on Grace's report when contacted by CBC News...


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/canada-s-coast-guard-mid-shore-vessels-fair-weather-fleet-1.5061767

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 143,890
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,576
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #268 on: March 19, 2019, 19:18:14 »
This is a Malaysian Coast Guard ship that my Uncle inlaw was Chief Officer on, note the A frame on the bacf, another was of buoy tending.
https://perkapalanmalaysia.com/2018/07/30/kapal-untuk-dijual-buoy-tender-vessel/

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 207,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,726
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #269 on: March 20, 2019, 09:45:39 »
This is a Malaysian Coast Guard ship that my Uncle inlaw was Chief Officer on, note the A frame on the bacf, another was of buoy tending.
https://perkapalanmalaysia.com/2018/07/30/kapal-untuk-dijual-buoy-tender-vessel/

Question to you Colin.  What would happen to the stability issues if those Coast Guard Yellow structures were removed - to wit: the deck crane and the mast extension?

"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 143,890
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,576
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #270 on: March 20, 2019, 12:13:24 »
Likely help a lot, but you lose the ability to launch a boat and lose Radar horizon, and create interference with the electronics. Better off to do Bilge keels, stabilizers and perhaps redeploy them elsewhere.   

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 207,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,726
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #271 on: March 20, 2019, 13:12:57 »
Radars are only a quarter of the way up the mast as it is so your radar horizon wouldn't improve much.  And as to launching boats - stern ramp.

https://products.damen.com/en/ranges/stan-patrol/stan-patrol-4207
https://www.youtube.com/embed/njhxLcauNZ4?rel=0?autoplay=1


Or perhaps something like this

« Last Edit: March 20, 2019, 13:22:17 by Chris Pook »
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 143,890
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,576
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #272 on: March 20, 2019, 13:58:56 »
Same problem, a smaller vessel designed to go fast is going to suffer in the North Atlantic in winter time. there is no free lunch in ship design. 

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 207,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,726
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #273 on: March 20, 2019, 15:11:17 »
Point taken - but the vessel purchased as the Hero was the Damen Stan 4209 - which is the boat shown in the you tube video launching and recovering a RIB over the stern.

In addition, the official designation of the vessel is a Mid-Shore Patrol Vessel.  That neither suggests rolling around in deep water nor tending buoys.  Rather it suggests operations in sight of land in aid of the the police, fisheries and the environment.

"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline STONEY

  • Member
  • ****
  • 7,170
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 194
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #274 on: March 20, 2019, 16:48:00 »
The Damen Stan 4209 is a perfectly good design used by several country's around the world including the US Coast Guard but when we bought the design and Canadianized it is when it was turned into a disaster. This is nothing new for CG HQ in Ottawa and continues today with problems in constructing new ships. You have to realize that most people in Ottawa don't know what a ship looks like let alone make decisions on design.
Cheers.