New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy

[Cloud Cover]

ALSC was a project item under that acronym as far back as 1998, when PowerPoint was only 10 years old. 
Edit: prior to that it had some other name, and was much smaller— about 8000 tonnes IIRC.

 

[Sub_Guy]

The AOR replacement saga is painful to look over. Started as just a regular AOR replacement that then morphed into the ALSC Frankenstein monstrosity which was thankfully killed by the Conservatives for a reset. So we are now getting a reduced capability AOR (2 kingposts vice 4) for more money.  :

Wasn’t our ALSC idea brought to life by the Dutch as the HNLMS Karel Doorman? 

 

[Cloud Cover]

Wasn’t our ALSC idea brought to life by the Dutch as the HNLMS Karel Doorman?

Option 3 looks like it: http://mari-tech.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/01%20afloat%20logistics%20and%20sealift%20capability.pdf

 

[FSTO]

IIRC, ALSC begat Hillier's Big Honking Ship idea, or maybe it was the other way around. In the end after all the smoke cleared we are getting classic AOR's but 20 years too late.

 

[Kirkhill]

Best line from the presentation -

"The requirement is to the design as the chicken is to the egg." (Sir Rowland Baker, RCNC)

True then, true now, true on every project. 

Thus iterative design and continuous improvement.  Also known as "advancing in circles".

 

[Navy_Pete]

IIRC, ALSC begat Hillier's Big Honking Ship idea, or maybe it was the other way around. In the end after all the smoke cleared we are getting classic AOR's but 20 years too late.

AOR replacement project has been on the books since the late 80s/early 90s, so the big honking ship was rev 2 that ended up in a failed procurement. Pretty funny reading the original project file, as it was basically just replace the PRE/PRO with comparable oilers (ie JSS with 4 RAS stations). Probably could have bought a ship off the shelf for the cost of the staff work alone (if we accounted for it, which we don't).

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

IIRC, the AOR replacement office was set up in 1991, with a view to the first replacement AOR entering service in 2002, as PRO turned 30. The MARCOM (as it  was then) plan was for four standard AOR's.

But nothing stays as planned when it gets through NDHQ. The Army (sorry Mobile Command, then) got through Bosnia and Kosovo in short order and was not happy to find out they had to get their equipment there on the back of merchant ships (That was even before the G-T-S Katie incident on the way back  ;D). And so, they asked the Navy if they could find a way to piggy back on the AOR's and the ALSC was born. But everybody wanted the ALSC to be fully capable for each of their mission and that turned them into monster. (On that note, the Dutch JSS are much more modest and are basically logistics support vessels for the Dutch army, with some useful naval support function on the side. That would not do for Canada, which needed the reverse: Full time support of the Navy with capacity for the Army on the side.)

The cost estimate for the megalomaniacal ALSC came back from industry and caused a conniption at HQ. The plan was shelved and a more reasonable "JSS" plan was then stood up. Even that turned out to be too much and as a result, we now have a more diminished AOR, still called a JSS for some reason, even though its Army support capability is quite limited and not much bigger than the old AOR's. In fact, MV Asterix has more Army support capability than the future PRO class vessels.

As for the big honking ships of Hillier, they had nothing to do with either the JSS, ALSC or the AOR's. It was a dream of an actual amphibious vessel,and it's a bug he got from operating with the US Marines for  short while. 

 

[Swampbuggy]

Nope, we can do it if we also fix the recruiting system (getting people through the door, thru basic and thru QL3)

So, to be clear, you’d support having 4 AOR, even if 2 were conversions like ASTERIX, though you’d prefer all RCN crewing.

 

[FSTO]

So, to be clear, you’d support having 4 AOR, even if 2 were conversions like ASTERIX, though you’d prefer all RCN crewing.

I'm agnostic regarding mixed crewing for support vessels.

 

[Swampbuggy]

I'm agnostic regarding mixed crewing for support vessels.

I misread your response to my original question regarding the AOR’s. I thought you were saying you didn’t like the 2 ASTERIX/2 JSS idea with FFS crew. My bad. I think I’m starting to see what my wife has been saying about me and comprehension...

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I think the mixed manning is the way of the future whether it's liked or not. If we were in the future to get a support ship beyond the Resolve class, it would also be likely manned by a mixed crew as it's unlikely we will take part in opposed landings. Considering the expeditionary nature of our military it makes a lot of sense to have such capability and is a good way to contribute to combined missions in the future.

 

[FSTO]

But nothing stays as planned when it gets through NDHQ. The Army (sorry Mobile Command, then) got through Bosnia and Kosovo in short order and was not happy to find out they had to get their equipment there on the back of merchant ships (That was even before the G-T-S Katie incident on the way back  ;D). And so, they asked the Navy if they could find a way to piggy back on the AOR's and the ALSC was born. But everybody wanted the ALSC to be fully capable for each of their mission and that turned them into monster.
As for the big honking ships of Hillier, they had nothing to do with either the JSS, ALSC or the AOR's. It was a dream of an actual amphibious vessel,and it's a bug he got from operating with the US Marines for  short while.

I'm thinking some senior Mud Monkey  ;D stumbled upon this picture of Maggie during the Suez Crisis and thought, "Crikey! Why don't we get one of these!"

 

[Patski]

I've been following the forum and the news for a while... as a civilian, that's what I understand... Canada's part of the arctic ocean is badly served.  CCGS ships are aged and are failing from time to time, and some communities had problems getting supplies last winter.  The 3 Viking ships wont be enough to patch the problem... Seaspan is overloaded with work and the Diefenbacker has been postponed to probably mid 2030's?  JSS, then a scientific ship, then the other JSS and then maybe the Dief? 

The Dewolf Class while ice capable wont be able to operate up north from fall to late spring, they are not designed for that...  Russians have nuclear ice breakers and if I'm right, they are building a nuclear military icebreaker?  If so... why dont we build 2 polar class military ships? one on each coast? Something Class 3 or 2?  even got a name for them  ;D  HMCS Erebus and Terror!

What do you think about my civilian view of the situation and my solution?  The only thing is, I dont think there is any of the shelf design ready for this kind of military ships?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

If you want to operate in the arctic in the winter you need nuke subs and even then they are limited to beneath the ice for the most part. Compressed ice sheets can easily block shipping and even tear open ships, like a growler did to the CCGS Camsul, almost sinking her. Operating ships up there in the winter is not for the faint of heart.

 

[FSTO]

One of a warship's best defensive tactic is maneuverability. Being heavily constrained by ice is not conducive to survivability.

More C17s, Hercs, and Chinooks for arctic operations would be a better use of our money.

 

[Kirkhill]

With respect to maneuverability in the ice - consider this video when thinking about vulnerability to boarding parties.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJd9PZA9pac

 

[Colin Parkinson]

and this is not even multi-year ice https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyJ5pvkJUpA


How to get suspended https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AxMR2IRIZc

 

[MarkOttawa]

Forever ships:

CCG Provides Icebreaker Nod for Seathigor

Thordon Bearings has received a Canadian Coast Guard contract to supply six award-winning SeaThigor shaft seals for retrofit installation to three purpose-built icebreakers.

The 5,910grt CCGS Pierre Radisson, named after the 17th-century French fur trader and explorer, along with sisterships CCGS Amundsen and CCGS Des Groseilliers, will each be retrofitted with two SeaThigor forward seals during scheduled drydockings over the next year.

The order, confirmed on the 1st of April, follows the success of the 2017 installation and subsequent operation of SeaThigor seals aboard the oceanographic and hydrographic survey vessel CCGS Hudson, for which a procurement agreement was signed with the Government of Canada under its Build in Canada Innovation Program (BCIP).

Due to the success of that first SeaThigor installation, the government permitted the Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) to deal directly with Thordon Bearings without either party having to go through a competitive bid process, via the BCIP – Additional Sales.

The 98.2m (322ft) long, 1200-class vessels are designed to Arctic Class 3 requirements and operate twin 674mm (26.5in) diameter shafts driving fixed pitch propellers. Propulsive power is generated by six Alco M251F main engines delivering 10142kW of power.

The seals supplied to the Pierre Radisson-class of ships will also be the first SeaThigors designed with a split casing, as Carl Sykes, Manager of Thordon’s Global Service & Support division, explained.

CCG is a long-standing customer of both Thordon Bearings and RMH, with a number of vessels operating Thordon’s seawater lubricated COMPAC bearing system.

One of the first CCG vessels to benefit from COMPAC was the 6098gt CCGS Des Groseilliers, which was installed with the system 17-years-ago.  It will be fitted with a SeaThigor seal at a scheduled drydocking in 2020. CCGS Amundsen will be converted to COMPAC at its next drydocking, when the SeaThigor seals will also be installed.
https://www.marinelink.com/news/ccg-provides-icebreaker-nod-seathigor-465084

See here for details on the three #CCG icebreakers noted above being modernized--youngest, CCGS Des Grosseilliers, is 37 years old
http://www.ccg-gcc.gc.ca/icebreaking/home

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Colin Parkinson]

nice to see a no drama procurement contract.

 

[Navy_Pete]

One of a warship's best defensive tactic is maneuverability. Being heavily constrained by ice is not conducive to survivability.

More C17s, Hercs, and Chinooks for arctic operations would be a better use of our money.

AOPS aren't warships though; they are civie ships painted grey with some token armament. Similar to MCDVs, they will have lots of uses for operations, but combat won't be one of them.