Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)

[Stoker]

Some of the old auxiliaries got sold off, but we're officially never going with a reef society again after having to take a few back and then disposing of them properly and also spend millions more on others to support artificial reefs.

With the changing environmental regs usually by the time we're used them up there is something like PCBs or asbestos that needs cleaned up first.

I have experience with the HDW and Kingston Classes. There is a large delta on the maintenance requirements and operating costs of the Kingston Class and HDW class obviously given the size difference and complexity. I think we will have challenges maintaining both of these classes through the maintenance model that we currently using. If anything keeps the Kingston Class around is the low costs of operating the ships and maintaining them and any replacement should be designed with that in mind. I know we are burning through the maintenance money for AOPS.

 

[Navy_Pete]

I have experience with the HDW and Kingston Classes. There is a large delta on the maintenance requirements and operating costs of the Kingston Class and HDW class obviously given the size difference and complexity. I think we will have challenges maintaining both of these classes through the maintenance model that we currently using. If anything keeps the Kingston Class around is the low costs of operating the ships and maintaining them and any replacement should be designed with that in mind. I know we are burning through the maintenance money for AOPS.

I fully agree with you, it's an order of magnitude more costly to run and operate the AOPs, and they can't replace each other's capabilities, but I think the reality is we have to give up a lot of somethings to run the AOPs and JSS, and even with winding down a CPF or two and some subs we can't afford to keep all the MCDVs going as well (or crew them).

I think the loss of knowledge from the MWAV contract changing over and the delays there will also hurt them as well.

We would have been better off building something new closer to the MCDVs instead of AOPs but government sent we want icebreakers and then attached 'coastal' to the name, so in the brains of the politicians that's two 'coastal' classes.

 

[GK .Dundas]

We would have been better off building something new closer to the MCDVs instead of AOPs but government sent we want icebreakers and then attached 'coastal' to the name, so in the brains of the politicians that's two 'coastal' classes.

"You mean the AOP isn't a Patrol boat like a big old whatcha call them ..a RIB ???"
I suspect that the above sums up the problem with our political leadership.

 

[Stoker]

I fully agree with you, it's an order of magnitude more costly to run and operate the AOPs, and they can't replace each other's capabilities, but I think the reality is we have to give up a lot of somethings to run the AOPs and JSS, and even with winding down a CPF or two and some subs we can't afford to keep all the MCDVs going as well (or crew them).

I think the loss of knowledge from the MWAV contract changing over and the delays there will also hurt them as well.

We would have been better off building something new closer to the MCDVs instead of AOPs but government sent we want icebreakers and then attached 'coastal' to the name, so in the brains of the politicians that's two 'coastal' classes.

For sure we could of just built a couple and then spend the rest on a river class like replacement. Thales hired many of the Lavlin ships managers but I think they overextended themselves and didn't have the subcontractors agreements in place. I was asked if i was interested in a job. You are right something has to give. I vote for several of the worse off CPF's to go, although that won't be hard to find.

 

[Navy_Pete]

For sure we could of just built a couple and then spend the rest on a river class like replacement. Thales hired many of the Lavlin ships managers but I think they overextended themselves and didn't have the subcontractors agreements in place. I was asked if i was interested in a job. You are right something has to give. I vote for several of the worse off CPF's to go, although that won't be hard to find.

Curious to see what will happen with the CPFs; the baseline estimate is now up at $500m, which is insane. Even with a few of them gone, still well short people but will definitely help.

 

[Stoker]

Curious to see what will happen with the CPFs; the baseline estimate is now up at $500m, which is insane. Even with a few of them gone, still well short people but will definitely help.

Wow that's nuts, I wonder what will be the point where they'll have to stop. We're seeing the effects of the cuts down here now.

 

[NavyShooter]

Um, prices I've heard on 2 of them is actually significantly higher than 500.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Um, prices I've heard on 2 of them is actually significantly higher than 500.

Yeah, I think that's without arisings and without the coming changes to the work packages to try and extend the op cycle (and to fix things while they are shut down for 2 years)

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Some of the old auxiliaries got sold off, but we're officially never going with a reef society again after having to take a few back and then disposing of them properly and also spend millions more on others to support artificial reefs.

With the changing environmental regs usually by the time we're used them up there is something like PCBs or asbestos that needs cleaned up first.

With 30 some ships to dispose of, reefing will renter the picture. The only ship recycler on this coast just got shut down, I think there are only 1-2 legt outfits left back East. When the ARSBC went about sinking HMCS Annapolis, Environment Canada changed it's regulatory process twice during the project(grrrr). The RCN also certified she was PCB free, but PCB's were found in the wiring, which the navy had to pay to remove. The reality is that if you are going to prep the vessel to meet the new Hong Kong Convention rules, then the cost of prepping for reefing is about the same. One advantage of reefing is that you can seal up all the asbestos into a certified oil free space and let it go down with the ship. That saves you big bucks as you reduce transport and disposal cost.
The society will no longer take the ship but will advise on meeting the cleanup regs, find the sink location and look after the EC/DFO and TC permitting requirements. Plus design a good sink plan, including controlling flooding and explosive charge placement. Another advantage is that the recycling of components off the ship high grades the more valuable metals and eliminates almost all of the carbon emissions that you get from cutting a ship up. Also FN groups are generally onboard (well not literally) with sinking of them thanks to the proven benefit to rockfish and other reef dwellers.

 

[Navy_Pete]

With 30 some ships to dispose of, reefing will renter the picture. The only ship recycler on this coast just got shut down, I think there are only 1-2 legt outfits left back East. When the ARSBC went about sinking HMCS Annapolis, Environment Canada changed it's regulatory process twice during the project(grrrr). The RCN also certified she was PCB free, but PCB's were found in the wiring, which the navy had to pay to remove. The reality is that if you are going to prep the vessel to meet the new Hong Kong Convention rules, then the cost of prepping for reefing is about the same. One advantage of reefing is that you can seal up all the asbestos into a certified oil free space and let it go down with the ship. That saves you big bucks as you reduce transport and disposal cost.
The society will no longer take the ship but will advise on meeting the cleanup regs, find the sink location and look after the EC/DFO and TC permitting requirements. Plus design a good sink plan, including controlling flooding and explosive charge placement. Another advantage is that the recycling of components off the ship high grades the more valuable metals and eliminates almost all of the carbon emissions that you get from cutting a ship up. Also FN groups are generally onboard (well not literally) with sinking of them thanks to the proven benefit to rockfish and other reef dwellers.

Still, won't happen again, we'll either sell them on or scrap them ourselves. Lot more work and cost to prep them for reefing than just dispose of them. The small auxiliaries at the end of life might find a second home somewhere else, but for MCDVs, CPFs etc they'll be used for alongside trainers for a bit then run through a shredder.

Aside from being able to make sure it's demilitarized and environmental disposal requirements are met, was also a big morale impact seeing something clapped out and rusting to dust, and despite best intentions the scope and costs of doing the reefing is outside of what the volunteer groups can manage. Unless the GoC actually does the reefing (or a sinkex like Huron) I can't see it happening, at least until a decade after everyone involved in the last few soup sandwhiches (particularly on the East Coast) is retired so that people think it's a good idea again.