# HMCS Iroquois' woes (merged)



## Nfld Sapper

CTV.ca News Staff

A Sea King helicopter has crashed onto the deck of HMCS Iroquois. Two people have been injured, but the extent of those injuries is not yet known. 

A spokesman for the Prime Minister‘s Office said the destroyer was damaged and will be returning to port. 

The crash happened as the chopper was attempting to take off from the Canadian Forces ship around 9:30 a.m. ET. The helicopter lifted, developed problems in the air and attempted to land when it crashed and rolled on the deck.

The two injured were one of the Sea King‘s four crew members, and a firefighter on the deck. Family members were advised of the injuries.

An investigation is under way.

Iroquois just left Halifax Monday, headed for the Persian Gulf to become the main command ship for the allied support fleet in the gulf of Oman. 

The 260 sailors aboard were to be stationed in the Gulf for six months as part of Canada‘s contribution to the war on terror, intercepting ships, enforcing sanctions against Iraq and escorting allied vessels.

Canada‘s fleet of 29 Sea Kings, dating from the 1960s, have suffered from numerous maintenance problems that have forced several emergency landings in recent years.

More to come...


----------



## Gunnar

Interesting that it is the PM‘s office that is first to comment on the crash, not the MND or anyone farther down the chain of command.  It‘s almost as if the PM wants to head off criticism of the Sea Kings...


----------



## The Bread Guy

Just in on MERX.....
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/82651/post-804187.html#msg804187


> ....The Department of National Defence has a requirement for a refit of HMCS IROQUOIS, an IROQUOIS Class Destroyer based in Halifax, Nova Scotia. It is anticipated that the refit work will commence April, 2010 with a completion date of December, 2010....


----------



## Harry Potter

Only nine months?  I was under the impression that the refit of a ship took a lot longer than that.  Dry dock and all.  Learn something everyday.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Think it might also depend on the type of refit.

EDITED TO ADD

Seems like alot of work to be done in 9 months IMHO



> The Vessel will be dry docked with the sonar dome fitted.
> Detailed information will be forthcoming with the issue of the
> Crown's Invitation To Tender documentation.
> An outline of the general objectives and major requirements for
> the Refit Project are as follows.
> 
> Significant dry docking work including:
> Underwater valves and piping systems/survey/repairs,
> Steering and propulsion machinery system surveys/repairs.
> Painting and preservation of underwater hull, tanks, bilges,
> cofferdams, voids etc,
> 
> Comprehensive maintenance/repairs to various ship's machinery
> and systems:
> HP/LP air systems;
> Fuel oil filling and transfer system;
> Electrical systems; and
> Deck equipment.
> 
> Major Painting and preservation program for the following areas:
> Hull above and below the waterline
> Superstructure
> Exterior decks
> Accommodation and machinery spaces and bilges.
> 
> Extensive modifications/installations to the following:
> Secure LAN system;
> Torpedo system;
> Main Machinery system;
> Fire Fighting Protection equipment;
> Boarding Ladder Upgrade;
> Navigational Distribution system and
> Hull Technician Support Tools.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Considering a lot of it is done consecutively its no more or no less then usual.


----------



## PingTech

...we're also part of the FELEX upgrade, with the new NavDDS replacing CCS (exciting news for NET(A)'s!) as it is on ATHAB.  Either way, long or short, this time in refit is necessary and well overdue, IMHO.

280 Ladies!


----------



## Radar114

Whats a NavDDS?


----------



## JBoyd

Radar114 said:
			
		

> Whats a NavDDS?



Navigation Data Distribution System

I read something regarding this and the first ship trials aboard the HMCS Athabaskan in the winter.

http://www.deagel.com/news/Canadian-Destroyer-Conducts-First-Ship-Trials-with-NavDDS-System_n000005227.aspx


EDITed to fix term (thanks Occam  )


----------



## Occam

JBoyd said:
			
		

> Navigation and Data Distribution System
> 
> I read something regarding this and the first ship trials aboard the HMCS Athabaskan in the winter.
> 
> http://www.deagel.com/news/Canadian-Destroyer-Conducts-First-Ship-Trials-with-NavDDS-System_n000005227.aspx



Minor correction there.


----------



## CallOfDuty

My god...how old is the Iroquois now??


----------



## geo

TangoHotel said:
			
		

> My god...how old is the Iroquois now??


Built in '70 and commissioned in '72
Doesn't matter how old she is .... nothing coming down the pipes to replace em...


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

geo said:
			
		

> Built in '70 and commissioned in '72
> Doesn't matter how old she is .... nothing coming down the pipes to replace em...



Yet...


----------



## Radar114

OK, how is the NavDDS going to replace a CCS?  I still prefer parts of the 280 CCS over the 330 CCS.  Maybe they could use better space in the new CCS as opposed to all that empty area around the scope.


----------



## PingTech

Radar114 said:
			
		

> OK, how is the NavDDS going to replace a CCS?  I still prefer parts of the 280 CCS over the 330 CCS.  Maybe they could use better space in the new CCS as opposed to all that empty area around the scope.



The bus system that CCS uses was replaced with the INDB (Inertial Navigation Data Bus) on the 280's - much more reliable and easy to maintain - which is now being replaced by the NDDS (Navigation Data Distribution System) - an even BETTER, faster, up-to-date system bringing a state of the art sensor distribution system to CCS end users.  We will be saving ourselves a bit of weight and space with NDDS coming in, and along with the other major work being done, we'll be that much more efficient, reliable, and modern, as a command platform should be. 

At the risk of sounding like a total geek, I'm really excited about this refit period and can't wait to trial our new equipment - I'm one of the 2 East coasters who recently finished the first NDDS course (2 on the West) and we are thrilled with this gear and its performance..we know our fellow techs will enjoy this system too.


----------



## Occam

Radar114 said:
			
		

> OK, how is the NavDDS going to replace a CCS?  I still prefer parts of the 280 CCS over the 330 CCS.  Maybe they could use better space in the new CCS as opposed to all that empty area around the scope.



I think what she's trying to say is that NavDDS is going to replace the existing Nav interface to CCS 280.  It's a distribution system, it's not a Command and Control System.


----------



## Occam

PingTech said:
			
		

> The bus system that CCS uses was replaced with the INDB (Inertial Navigation Data Bus) on the 280's - much more reliable and easy to maintain - which is now being replaced by the NDDS (Navigation Data Distribution System) - an even BETTER, faster, up-to-date system bringing a state of the art sensor distribution system to CCS end users.  We will be saving ourselves a bit of weight and space with NDDS coming in, and along with the other major work being done, we'll be that much more efficient, reliable, and modern, as a command platform should be.



Did you happen to eat a Sperry Marine brochure?   ;D


----------



## PingTech

Occam said:
			
		

> Did you happen to eat a Sperry Marine brochure?   ;D



LMFAO...they're quite tasty when you add the Navy's Patented 'Flavour-B-Gone'...


----------



## NCRCrow

This is getting ridiculous, because I will get posted there for my fourth tour

Once a 280 Lady..well you know the rest


----------



## PingTech

HFXCrow said:
			
		

> This is getting ridiculous, because I will get posted there for my fourth tour
> 
> Once a 280 Lady..well you know the rest



The 280's sort of remind me of a Cat's Cradle...never-ending manoeuvering in an attempt to get out, and then somehow you end up back where you started...*shrug*...I guess I'll see you onboard, HFXCrow!


----------



## Radar114

More like a whirlpool, you start getting sucked down into it, then get spun out to the edges, AKA ashore or CPF and then the suction starts again and you head back into the middle.  Never ends.


----------



## Stoker

Cracks In HMCS Iroquois Will Limit Warship’s Operations

Patrick Smith

Ottawa Citizen

A Canadian military ship will be limited in future operations after cracks were discovered on the upper part of the vessel in late February.

HMCS Iroquois, an air defence destroyer ship that has been in use by the Royal Canadian Navy since 1972, suffered stress fractures to the superstructure – the part of the ship above the main deck – as a result of 

stress from the sea’s movement.

The damage, on a portion of the ship that is above water, were discovered while HMCS Iroquois was completing a fleet exercise off the East Coast of the United States.

Further examination of the ship while it was docked in Boston, Mass. showed that the cracks’ impact were not serious enough to affect the current exercise. HMCS Iroquois was able to complete its mission and return 

to Canada.

However, the Citizen has discovered that the ship, which is currently docked in Halifax, N.S. while engineers further assess the damage, will only be able to operate at limited capacity when the weather is bad.

Specifically, the Iroquois will be unable to navigate waters when the waves are particularly heavy.

The 42-year-old vessel typically operates in the North Atlantic Ocean, known for its rough water. The ship was declared safe enough to continue sailing in winter conditions during the examination in Boston.

As the Citizen reported in November 2013, Iroquois-class destroyers received a major upgrade in the 1990s and are scheduled for replacement in the mid-2020s if the government schedule remains on target.

Previous reports, though, have shown that officials do not expect the lifespan of these ships to last longer than 2017. As it stands, the ships will not be replaced before they are retired, leaving a sizeable gap in 

Canada’s navy. Although the navy’s Halifax-class frigates will pick up some of the slack, the retirement of the Iroquois class will limit the range of operations the navy can undertake.

The Iroquois class has only three remaining ships: HMCS Iroquois, HMCS Athabaskan and HMCS Algonquin.

It’s unclear whether the Iroquois will be left in its current, restricted state, repaired for use until 2017, or retired from the fleet ahead of time.

The commanding officer of the ship was not available for comment.


----------



## donaldk

Nice find Chief Stoker.

Curious to see what the media will spin behind this.


----------



## FSTO

donaldk said:
			
		

> Nice find Chief Stoker.
> 
> Curious to see what the media will spin behind this.


This all was so avoidable. We had a state of the art shipyard with an experienced workforce when the last Frigate was floated up. We knew we had to replace the AOR's and Tribals and Icebreakers and a myriad of Govt of Canada vessels and we did nothing. I really hope that there was an MP, a PS Mandarin or an Admiral who was raising this issue with the PMO at the time because once again, we are going to build a shipbuilding industry, from scratch, again.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

FSTO said:
			
		

> This all was so avoidable. We had a state of the art shipyard with an experienced workforce when the last Frigate was floated up. We knew we had to replace the AOR's and Tribals and Icebreakers and a myriad of Govt of Canada vessels and we did nothing. I really hope that there was an MP, a PS Mandarin or an Admiral who was raising this issue with the PMO at the time because once again, we are going to build a shipbuilding industry, from scratch, again.



Here is a picture of what our once state of the art shipyard looks like now:













and now back in the hey-day!






Talk is cheap and the jury is still out on the NSPS or whether this is just a rehash of recent history.


----------



## FSTO

That is a god-damn crying shame. Anyone with half a brain would have seen this coming.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

FSTO said:
			
		

> That is a god-damn crying shame. Anyone with half a brain would have seen this coming.



That's not even the biggest crime!

The government paid Irving millions of dollars as part of an economic stimulation package to dismantle their former shipyard in Saint John, NB so they could turn it into a wallboard factory and now we are paying them again to re-establish a shipbuilding industry in Halifax.  Tell me how that makes sense  :facepalm:


----------



## RedcapCrusader

RoyalDrew said:
			
		

> That's not even the biggest crime!
> 
> The government paid Irving millions of dollars as part of an economic stimulation package to dismantle their former shipyard in Saint John, NB so they could turn it into a wallboard factory and now we are paying them again to re-establish a shipbuilding industry in Halifax.  Tell me how that makes sense  :facepalm:



Wait... So the contracts awarded in 2011 are only going being cutting steel in 2015/16 for ships that will take 5 years to build? What the hell is taking so long? They have designs already?


----------



## Humphrey Bogart

RedcapCrusader said:
			
		

> Wait... So the contracts awarded in 2011 are only going being cutting steel in 2015/16 for ships that will take 5 years to build? What the hell is taking so long? They have designs already?



Well we have no capacity to build ships in Canada anymore because the Chretien government paid Irving to close the Saint John shipyard down in the early 2000's which was the largest shipyard in Canada and the only one capable of building large warships.  The problem is that now that we want to build ships again, we now have no capacity (because we closed the yards down) so we need to rebuild the capacity, hence the 10-15 year time frame to actually build ships... the Yards in Halifax and Vancouver were selected for the NSPS back in 2011 with full knowledge that they did not have the capacity to build the ships we wanted but that the government was going to pay to have the yards upgraded so that we would have the capacity in the future.

edit:

Mil Davie is actually the largest yard in Canada but hasn't really been up and running since the end of the Frigate Program.  
Basically, we closed a shipyard down and paid to have it decommissioned only to turn around 10 years later and say "Wait a second!  We really needed that after all!"


----------



## SeaKingTacco

This is basically why we cannot have nice things.


----------



## Edward Campbell

It wasn't just Jean Chrétien; and, arguably, his government was not the most cavalier with things like defence and ship building.

(The _notion_ that governments can use their programmes to create jobs in regions is very, very old. There are some very reputable historians who will tell you that e.g. Elizabeth I had her popular 'base' in the West Country and that she spent money on shipbuilding there to reward them.)

For many years the main *aim* of the _national_ shipbuilding strategy (that's a sad misuse of the word strategy) was to ensure that Quebec got 25%+ of all contracts. It created expectations and encouraged fat, idle management.

I don't know to what degree shipbuilding is a viable industry in North America, or even in Western Europe, without massive, and generally unproductive government support. We are, essentially, whenever we build a warship or coastal ferry or cruise liner, running a welfare programme for less than well educated people in selected seaport towns. And jobs for those people is a 'holy grail' of modern, democratic politics as countries try to make the transition from low skill, high wage, coal fired, metal bending economies to something else.

And, by the way, there were naval officers (RAdm Ed Healey comes to mind) and senior civil servants (Bob Fowler) and even a few elected politicians who understood the problems (the plural matters) and proposed solutions (again, plural) ~ not always or even usually in concert and not always the same solutions ~ but the political imperatives always won.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

The Westcoast yards are a bit leaner as we never really on the list for many goodies. They are good for doing repairs and such, but they need new builds every so often to renew Capital assets so they can compete. Not getting the ferry contracts certainly did not help the yards here and had as much to do with the current Provincial governments anti-union stance as it did costs. The politicization of the Fast ferry contract and the  politicization of their disposal did not help either.


----------



## Tibbson

RedcapCrusader said:
			
		

> Wait... So the contracts awarded in 2011 are only going being cutting steel in 2015/16 for ships that will take 5 years to build? What the hell is taking so long? They have designs already?



It was my understanding that things were even worse since before they can start to cut anything they still need to settle on a final design since anything they had now was still in the concept stage.  I'm sure though there is a sailor out there who can shed even further light on the subject.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

I thought I heard on the news the engineering/design contract went overseas (Denmark perhaps?).


----------



## MSEng314

How is this even news? Iroquois is scheduled to decommission soon anyways, sounds like they just want to make the Navy look bad...


----------



## Tibbson

MSEng314 said:
			
		

> How is this even news? Iroquois is scheduled to decommission soon anyways, sounds like they just want to make the Navy look bad...



I don't think the reporter "wanted to make the Navy look bad".  The system does a great job of that as it is otherwise ships like the Iroquois would have been replaced long before they developed stress cracks.  Making a story out of nothing is one thing but I don't see this issue as that.  Imagine the article though if the damage hadn't been observed when it was and during the next big storm the escort ships are saying "Where did the bridge of the Iroquois go?"  As it stands now though, our older ships due for replacement but still serviceable have been turned into old ships that can't be used in rough seas.


----------



## Navy_Pete

This article is only half right; these are minor cracks that aren't in the primary structure and aren't limiting the ships operations.  Pretty common to get cracking, particularly after 42 years of bending back and forth.  Depending where it is and whether or not it's growing, you don't necessarily have to do anything other then just regularly monitor it.

The rest is surprisingly accurate though; wonder who had a beer with a reporter? :cheers:


----------



## RedcapCrusader

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I thought I heard on the news the engineering/design contract went overseas (Denmark perhaps?).



AORs will be Berlin class ships as QUEENSTON class here in Canada. As for combat vessels... Speculation is they'll be similar if not identical to Norway's SVALBARD class Arctic patrol ship, and Denmark's Iver Huitfeldt class air defence frigate; but no design has been selected.


----------



## Stoker

From what I understand the source of the cracking has come from when during TRUMP the Que yard scalloped cut pieces from their keel weakening it to allow the installation of the water compensated fuel system. These cracks have existed since and have been continuously monitored and repaired. if there is now a operational limitation placed on the max sea state the ship is allowed to operate in then its pretty serious. I suspect this may be a temporary restriction until an comprehensive assessment is done and repairs may be made.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

RedcapCrusader said:
			
		

> AORs will be Berlin class ships as QUEENSTON class here in Canada. As for combat vessels... Speculation is they'll be similar if not identical to Norway's SVALBARD class Arctic patrol ship, and Denmark's Iver Huitfeldt class air defence frigate; but no design has been selected.



Roger.  I recall seeing a CTV or CBC NS news report that Irving had contracted out or got the go-ahead to contract out some design work to an overseas company;  IRCC it was late last fall?


----------



## donaldk

Hull condition surveys are an ongoing process over a vessels life, and with IRO at 42 years old this should come to no surprise that hull issues will come up  (in this case a a 48M PM hull survey routine is still awaiting completion).  With the pay-off of the IROQUOIS expected sometime early 2015, the balance must be struck with how much does the gov't want to get out of this asset before divestment and amount of resources/financials (taking into consideration current fiscal restraints) required to have the platform ready to sail for the navy's requirements until divestment.

I am curious though who set off the media for get this out, but one can only hold the cat in the bag on this for only so long, considering most of the goodies on this are in DRMIS.  I am only speculating... sometimes a ship not sailing leads to a FOIA request from local/national media outets.


----------



## Tibbson

When FOIA requests only cost the person making the request the princely sum of $5....there are plenty that get submitted just on the hopes of "uncovering" something.   Seems like a fair return on their investment.  $5 and a bit of time to submit each request while the department involved spends a month or so rounding up, vetting and sending off the info.  Our tax dollars in action.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

The $5 only covers up to 5 hrs of searching and about 2" of copying. After that the price goes up according to a schedule. 

    7. (1) Subject to subsection 11(6) of the Act, a person who makes a request for access to a record shall pay

        (a) an application fee of $5 at the time the request is made;

        (b) where applicable, a fee for reproduction of the record or part thereof to be calculated in the following manner:

            (i) for photocopying a page with dimensions of not more than 21.5 cm by 35.5 cm, $0.20 per page,

            (ii) for microfiche duplication, non-silver, $0.40 per fiche,

            (iii) for 16 mm microfilm duplication, non-silver, $12 per 30.5 m roll,

            (iv) for 35 mm microfilm duplication, non-silver, $14 per 30.5 m roll,

            (v) for microform to paper duplication, $0.25 per page, and

            (vi) for magnetic tape-to-tape duplication, $25 per 731.5 m reel; and

        (c) where the record or part thereof is produced in an alternative format, a fee, not to exceed the amount that would be charged for the record under paragraph (b),

            (i) of $.05 per page of braille, on paper with dimensions of not more than 21.5 cm by 35.5 cm,

            (ii) of $.05 per page of large print, on paper with dimensions of not more than 21.5 cm by 35.5 cm,

            (iii) of $2.50 per audiocassette, or

            (iv) of $2 per microcomputer diskette.

    (2) Where the record requested pursuant to subsection (1) is a non-computerized record, the head of the government institution may, in addition to the fee prescribed by paragraph (1)(a), require payment in the amount of $2.50 per person per quarter hour for every hour in excess of five hours that is spent by any person on search and preparation.

    (3) Where the record requested pursuant to subsection (1) is produced from a machine readable record, the head of the government institution may, in addition to any other fees, require payment for the cost of production and programming calculated in the following manner:

        (a) $16.50 per minute for the cost of the central processor and all locally attached devices; and

        (b) $5 per person per quarter hour for time spent on programming a computer.

    SOR/86-454, s. 1;
    SOR/92-687, s. 1.


----------



## MarkOttawa

A/OPS, May 2013:



> ... the design of Canada's new ships is based upon a Norwegian vessel whose design Ottawa has already bought for just $5 million.
> mi-norwegian-ship300
> 
> The KV Svalbard, an offshore patrol vessel belonging to the Norwegian Coast Guard, is the parent design for Canada's Arctic offshore patrol ships. It was built for about one-third of what Canada is paying just to design, not build, a similar ship. (Marcus Bengtsson/Wikipedia)
> 
> The Norwegian ship, the Svalbard, was designed and built for less than $100 million in 2002...
> 
> Although Irving will manage the design project in Nova Scotia, it has subcontracted the actual production of final blueprints to a Danish firm, OMT. Seventy Danish ship architects will work on those.
> 
> The job of designing the systems integration is going to Lockheed Martin and the propulsion system will be designed by General Electric, both U.S. companies...
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/shipbuilding-contract-holds-250m-mystery-1.1300816



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## MarkOttawa

CSCs--gov't still deciding on how to do the design:



> Procurement Models for Surface Combatants
> http://www.frontline-defence.com/Defence/index_archives.php?page=2110



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Navy_Pete

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> From what I understand the source of the cracking has come from when during TRUMP the Que yard scalloped cut pieces from their keel weakening it to allow the installation of the water compensated fuel system. These cracks have existed since and have been continuously monitored and repaired. if there is now a operational limitation placed on the max sea state the ship is allowed to operate in then its pretty serious. I suspect this may be a temporary restriction until an comprehensive assessment is done and repairs may be made.



Not sure where that rumour started but that's simply not true.  Steel that cycles through bending fatigues and eventually forms cracks.  Ships are made of steel and are always bending.  43 year old hulls have lots of fatigue, so cracks happen.  Some cracks (like weather deck or main strucutral girders) are show stoppers.  Some minor cracks in secondary/tertiary structure aren't.  As long as they aren't growing, you don't necessarily have to do anything other then keep an eye on them.  Really not a big deal or all that unusual in an old vessel.  Or a newer vessel.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> A/OPS, May 2013:
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa



Thanks, I think that is what I was referring to.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> Not sure where that rumour started but that's simply not true.  Steel that cycles through bending fatigues and eventually forms cracks.  Ships are made of steel and are always bending.  43 year old hulls have lots of fatigue, so cracks happen.  Some cracks (like weather deck or main strucutral girders) are show stoppers.  Some minor cracks in secondary/tertiary structure aren't.  As long as they aren't growing, you don't necessarily have to do anything other then keep an eye on them.  Really not a big deal or all that unusual in an old vessel.  Or a newer vessel.



Apparently the Swedish high speed cats had welders on board to keep up with the cracking for the first few years.


----------



## Stoker

Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> Not sure where that rumour started but that's simply not true.  Steel that cycles through bending fatigues and eventually forms cracks.  Ships are made of steel and are always bending.  43 year old hulls have lots of fatigue, so cracks happen.  Some cracks (like weather deck or main structural girders) are show stoppers.  Some minor cracks in secondary/tertiary structure aren't.  As long as they aren't growing, you don't necessarily have to do anything other then keep an eye on them.  Really not a big deal or all that unusual in an old vessel.  Or a newer vessel.



It was told to me by a Chief Hull tech no was on ATH during TRUMP, I guess he may be lying. Its not unusual for cracking in superstructures or hulls to occur. It occurred to the steamers quite frequently.


----------



## chrisf

Ive seen hull stress monitoring systems installed on older vessels, presumably for the same reason, metal fatigue. Its just another result of an aging fleet.


----------



## Navy_Pete

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> It was told to me by a Chief Hull tech no was on ATH during TRUMP, I guess he may be lying. Its not unusual for cracking in superstructures or hulls to occur. It occurred to the steamers quite frequently.



It's not that there wasn't structural work done during TRUMP, but have done a lot of work in the last five years that involved looking at the construction/TRUMP drawings of the uptakes specifically, and the changes in the uptakes started about two feet off the deck.  There were some modifications to the exhaust trunking below that relating to the cruise engine mods, but that was pretty minor (relatively).  

Maybe a case of rumour becoming legend becoming facts after long enough (like AFFF being corrosive)?

Have heard from a few people that in their final years on a few steamers you could see the sky through various cracks sometimes when the ship was in rough seas, so we're still quite a bit better off then that!


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Hmm without knowing what, where and how much they found, hard to tell, but looks at least like it will be a drydock job

HMCS Iroquois indefinitely sidelined after rust found in warship’s hull  http://www.news1130.com/2014/05/07/hmcs-iroquois-indefinitely-sidelined-after-rust-found-in-warships-hull/

HALIFAX – The Royal Canadian Navy has lost the use of one of its warships on the East Coast after rust was found in its hull.

HMCS Iroquois was tied up in Halifax about two weeks ago and will not sail until a complete assessment is done on the air defence vessel.

Cmdr. Jay Harwood says it’s not clear how long that will take, but it leaves the fleet further diminished as more than a dozen of its vessels undergo regular maintenance, modernization and repairs.

Harwood says the rust problems were found in a machinery space on the vessel in mid-April during a routine inspection ordered after cracks were discovered on the 42-year-old ship in February.

He says the navy will have to decide whether to spend money to repair the aging command and control destroyer, which is due to be retired in a few years.

This latest problem has forced the navy to juggle some of its assets and pull Iroquois out of scheduled operations, including one last week in Norfolk, Va.

Note to readers: This is a corrected story. A previous version said HMCS Iroquois was 40 years old.


----------



## MilEME09

I wonder how safe Canadians would feel if they realized over half our navy is in dry dock for repairs/upgrades and not keeping our waters safe.


----------



## jollyjacktar

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> I wonder how safe Canadians would feel if they realized over half our navy is in dry dock for repairs/upgrades and not keeping our waters safe.



I'm willing to bet that many of our fellow citizens aren't even aware we have a navy and there are those who do who couldn't care less.


----------



## NavyHopeful

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> I wonder how safe Canadians would feel if they realized over half our navy is in dry dock for repairs/upgrades and not keeping our waters safe.



Most of my old high school friends think that the Navy exists to assist the Coast Guard in SAR and FishPats...  Only when they see TOR and REG in the news for drug busts do they say "Oh, we do that too?"   :facepalm:

If only they knew what we are _supposed_ to be here for...


----------



## Tibbson

It wasn't all that long ago there were articles questioning why we even needed a Navy and an Air Force of the (small) size we do when we can just buy drones to bo the job cheaper.  For the average John Q Public the fact ships are down for repairs will, I suspect, cause more concern over the money that must be spent to repair then over any lack of operational capability.


----------



## MilEME09

> *Rusting HMCS Iroquois remains tied up: 'she will not sail'*
> 
> Alison Auld, The Canadian Press
> Published Monday, June 23, 2014 7:13AM EDT
> 
> HALIFAX -- The Royal Canadian Navy has decided to keep one of its few destroyers tied up after assessing a string of rust patches on its hull and concluding it may not be safe to send out to sea.
> 
> Capt. Peter Ryan said naval engineers and architects reviewed the corrosion in an area that stretches between a couple of decks on HMCS Iroquois, which was sidelined in April after the rust was detected.
> 
> They are now trying to determine if the aging ship should be repaired or retired, leaving the navy fleet further diminished as more than a dozen other vessels undergo regular maintenance, modernization or repairs.
> 
> "They are looking at what they can consider for possible repair options ... (and) whether it can be fixed," Ryan said in an interview.
> 
> "Until they can figure out what to do for repair options, she will not sail."
> 
> He said the destroyer will be used for training until the navy determines its fate.
> 
> Images and video taken by divers and obtained by The Canadian Press through access to information legislation show more than a half dozen rust spots on the exterior of the ship and inside in an area behind the solid ballast. Many appear to be a few inches in length.
> 
> Another photo from the mezzanine deck indicates an average loss of thickness in the plate of up to 30 per cent and cautions that there is an "allowable loss" of only 20 per cent, according to the Naval Architecture and Material Engineering Non-Destructive Ultrasonic Inspection Report.
> 
> Ryan could not say how extensive the corrosion is or where it's exactly located, but said officials can't guarantee the ship or crew's safety so it won't leave the dock. He also couldn't say whether the navy has had to reassign other ships or withdraw from operations as a result of the problems with HMCS Iroquois.
> 
> Underwater video shows a swath of rust spots that appear to start about 0.6 metres below the waterline.
> 
> Cmdr. Jay Harwood, who oversees the fleet's engineering state, said in May that fixing the 42-year-old ship before it is due to be decommissioned might prove too expensive.
> 
> Analysts have said the loss removes a vital asset and certain capabilities from the fleet. The destroyers serve as command and control vessels, but are also the only naval ships that have long-range air defence missile systems.
> 
> With HMCS Iroquois unavailable and its sister ship, HMCS Algonquin, undergoing repairs from an accident in February, the navy has only one destroyer at the ready.
> 
> The navy is also without many of its Halifax-class frigates, which are undergoing a lengthy modernization program to add radar and command and control systems, while upgrading radar and missile capabilities.
> 
> This latest problem comes after fatigue cracks were found on HMCS Iroquois in February when the ship was in Boston. An engineering team travelled to the U.S. to inspect it and deemed it safe to return to its home port in Halifax.
> 
> Officials acknowledge that the rust problem could lead to the early decommissioning of the ship, which is due to be retired in the next few years and before any successor ships are in place.



http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/rusting-hmcs-iroquois-remains-tied-up-she-will-not-sail-1.1881404


----------



## The Bread Guy

There WAS a rumour ....This from the Halifax Shipping News blog:


> I have heard a rumour that HMCS Iroquois' final sail past will occur tomorrow (today 7 Nov 2014). Due to cracks in her structure, she is due to be de-commisioned, and has already be de-amunitioned.
> 
> If anyone has more details, Please email Info@halifaxshippingnews.ca
> 
> UPDATE: It appears there will be no sailpast. A Call to QHM revelealed they had no knowledge of it, and a former crew member emailed to say he talked to a current crew member who said there will not be one.


----------



## The Bread Guy

This from the Shipfax shipping news blog out of Halifax ....


> Although a paying off sail past is not in the cards for HMCS Iroquois - the government does not want to call undue notice the occasion of her decommissioning - there will be a dockside ceremony sometime this winter. Among the invited guests are members of La Corporation du site historique maritime de Sorel-Tracy. That group hopes to provide a new home for Iroquois once it is retired.
> 
> With the support of the city, and the promise of berth#2 on the Richelieu River, the group is looking to have the ship in place and open to the public in 2017 for the 375th anniversary of the founding of the town.
> The ambitious plan would have as much as possible of the ship's naval equipment intact (but disarmed) so that visitors could see it in its ready state ....



A bit more, from earlier this month, from the back-yard media (in Google English - original in French here):


> The chances of reducing the air defense destroyer HMCS Iroquois in Sorel-Tracy look better than ever.
> 
> It is believed that Martin Germain, one of the project sponsors, after meeting the second ranking officer of the Royal Canadian Navy, Admiral against Gilles Couturier.
> 
> Guest Friends of goodwill to talk to more than 200 people of challenges faced by the Canadian Navy, the latter did not fail to mention that the Iroquois, built in 1970 at Marine Industries Ltd., is currently docked in Halifax since we had to repair a crack in its superstructure.
> 
> "The useful life of such a boat is 25 to 30 years. The more it will seagoing more hull will be affected. It is now time to remove this well-built ship class to replace them with very different combat ships. "
> 
> 2017
> 
> Recall that Messrs. Guy Durand, Denis St-Martin, René Cournoyer and Martin Germain formed the "Corporation of Maritime Historic Site Sorel-Tracy" that would acquiring the boat.
> 
> They want and highlight a witness ship shipbuilding and industrial heritage Sorel and the work of thousands of Sorel assigned to shipbuilding over the years.
> 
> In early October, they got also a unanimous commitment of council Sorelois the destroyer will be moored at one of the municipal wharf - Wharf # 2 or Richelieu dock ....


----------



## jollyjacktar

There is talk that she would be towed over to NAD as a floating part source for ATH.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

She already is!


----------



## jollyjacktar

That will make turning her into a museum a bit more challenging then if they rob all the bits to keep ATH in the game.


----------



## Navy_Pete

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> That will make turning her into a museum a bit more challenging then if they rob all the bits to keep ATH in the game.



Due to past experiences with other ships, plus ITAR issues, that's not even in the cards.  She can't float if fully demilitarized.


----------



## jollyjacktar

I was thinking more along the lines of the engineering side of the house not the combat, which isn't my part ship, at any rate.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

Understood but if it comes down to it, the priority is to maintain ATH's operational state with one of only two 'parts stores'. An engine or generator missing here or there will mean nothing to a potential community looking at her as a Museum piece though provided the structure is sound.
I was on board yesterday and a seemingly pretty happy bunch although much uncertainty on the role of uniformed personnel beyond May. From a DC/engineering perspective, until further notice the ship's mandate is 'safe alongside' and enough crew will be retained to meet this. The side bar role is also a manning pool for ATH sailing shortages. As former IRO class sailors endorse/requalify to HAL class and the tempo and RegF manning of KIN class accelerates, trained IRO class personnel (current and fresh) will be hard to come by.


----------



## jollyjacktar

I would have expected no less when it comes to ATH.  I was more surprised at the talk of turning IRO into a floating museum somewhere.  Not sure if she would have been the best choice.  I would have preferred a steamer saved as they were special in their day.

As for the happy faces.  Who wouldn't be, with a sea pay "shore bilet"?


----------



## Pat in Halifax

I am pretty certain SDA will cease 'shortly'.
Plus, yesterday was the world famous "IROQUOIS burger" Wednesday so that was part of the reason for all the smiles! (And, NO! That is not why I was on board!)

Interesting roads ahead as this one will be quite different from any divestments done in the past. Hoping to know a little more in the New Year.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

It cost around 1.2 million to strip potential pcb contaminated wire from HMCS Annapolis and then another million to remove the insulation that contained various odds and ends. That was to make her clean enough to sink.


----------



## Good2Golf

Colin P said:
			
		

> It cost around 1.2 million to strip potential pcb contaminated wire from HMCS Annapolis and then another million to remove the insulation that contained various odds and ends. That was to make her clean enough to sink.



Honest question here, would a ship destined to be a museum need the same level of remediation as one intended to serve as an artificial reef?

Regards
G2G


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Nowhere near.

There would be very limited remediation as far as "dangerous" products are concerned. So long as you don't touch the insulation (and the museum would likely want the ship to remain insulated) there are no concerns with it. As for the wiring and other electrical that can contain PCB, again the museum would likely want to keep them. As far as petroleum based products go, you would likely simply empty the tanks and then, without a cleanup, refill them with either water and fuel stabilizer or (for oil) with sorbent granular material and just "fix" any residue oil product in the tank for ever.

The most complex portion of the work , which would be done in any event of disposal, is removing all ammunition and piece of gear that can be considered classified technology.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

The problem will be that the museum will last about 20 years and then the costs of keeping it floating on in safe enough condition will overwhelm them and then the government will have to deal with it. That's not to say it should not happen, but the government should have a long term plan to assist in upkeep and if they want to spend money to keep a shipyard afloat, maintaining heritage vessels is a decent idea and great training tool.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

You can keep it afloat, at great cost, of course (as in the case of HMCS SACKVILLE and HAIDA) or you can "land" the ship, as was done with HMCS BRAS D'OR and HMCS/S ONONDAGA.

Marine Industries has been closed of a long time now in Sorel. As a result, they have lots of wharfage that is not otherwise required. So it would be fairly easy to "land" the IROQUOIS by tying her alongside on the Richelieu River side (which is what they intend to do, if I recall the wharf numbers correctly), erect a complete cement wall all a around, plastify the outside of the hull and displace the water with packed sand. Voila, it is now earth bound and all that nasty hull maintenance / danger from shipboard fires / jittery museum goers are taken care of once and for all at a fairly cheap cost. 

You can even cut out side entrances in the hull to make for much easier access to the various decks from external properly "civilian" sized stairs.


----------



## quadrapiper

Colin P said:
			
		

> The problem will be that the museum will last about 20 years and then the costs of keeping it floating on in safe enough condition will overwhelm them and then the government will have to deal with it. That's not to say it should not happen, but the government should have a long term plan to assist in upkeep and if they want to spend money to keep a shipyard afloat, maintaining heritage vessels is a decent idea and great training tool.


From my corner of the service, a "preserved" vessel would be of great value to sea cadet corps.

Would there be any value to the Naval Reserve in such a vessel?


----------



## bLUE fOX

While with RCSCC LION in Hamilton, we made regular use of HMCS HAIDA which was docked right across the road behind HMCS STAR. To the best of my knowledge, the reserves made little if any use of it. I would think that the reserves would get the same use out of such a ship as cadets. Limited damage control training, practicing line handling and light jack stays, and maybe some other basic shipboard functions. My experience with HAIDA, SACKVILLE and BRAS D'OR is that engines are either disabled or missing so even as a dock side stationary engine room trainer, I wouldn't think IROQUOIS would be of much use.


----------



## Occam

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> The most complex portion of the work , which would be done in any event of disposal, is removing all ammunition and piece of gear that can be considered classified technology.



I'm pretty sure she's already been deammunitioned.  Removing classified gear would be pretty easy, actually.  Now getting rid of anything that's Controlled Goods, however...that's going to be pretty painful and will leave a lot of spaces empty.


----------



## Navy_Pete

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I was thinking more along the lines of the engineering side of the house not the combat, which isn't my part ship, at any rate.



There's a surprising number of ITAR parts in the MSE side as well; some of it was cutting edge in the 1960s I guess!  Plus a lot of common fasterners, valves, pumps etc that happen to be used on fancy whizbangs as well that got caught under the 'ITAR the whole system' CYA approach.

The big issue the americans have with ITAR is that there is no 'expiry date' so it's a huge amount of workload to handle, hence why they are reducing what they actually consider ITAR down to something probably close to the original intent, but still have to go and get individual items taken off the list, which will probably take decades.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Actually, all four IRO are from before ITAR came into effect and, even originally, had very little in terms of US content.

Other than the missiles and their fire control or the Phalanx, they have very limited use of US technology for which we are covered by ITAR. That is actually the very reason Canada tends to use European electronics when we can nowadays.


----------



## Navy_Pete

I've worked on developing the list of all CG onboard the IRO class; there are many line items where they are Controlled goods - ITAR.  Some of them are original to build (ie pre trump).  You'd be surprised how pervasive it is. A lot of it for us we don't notice because of the Canadian exclusions.

EU stuff comes with it's own restrictions as well; it's not necessarily any better then US origin.  ITAR is less onerous then people think once you understand the system, but it is painful to try and have something that obviously shouldn't have been cataloged as ITAR (like common fasterners) changed.

The plus side is US defence contractors noticed a big hit, as people try and avoid it.  It's been working through the US DoS for a couple of years, but they are limiting it back to a more sane level of just the equipment specific to weapons, ammunition, etc.

The other wrinkle for becoming a museum is the PCB regulations changed a few years ago, so we aren't allowed to transfer anything with PCBs outside of their cables and control cabinets.  So remediation would be required, although not to the same extent as for an artificial reef or a target.  It gets pretty complicated pretty quickly.


----------



## Occam

ITAR deals with the import/export of items from the USA.  The problems more likely to be encountered with turning one of these ships into museums deals more with Controlled Goods (as defined under Canadian legislation) aboard them, and the requirement to prevent access to Controlled Goods to unauthorized persons.



			
				Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> I've worked on developing the list of all CG onboard the IRO class; there are many line items where they are Controlled goods - ITAR.  Some of them are original to build (ie pre trump).  You'd be surprised how pervasive it is. A lot of it for us we don't notice because of the Canadian exclusions.



When items were reviewed in anticipation of Canada's required compliance date with US regulations for Controlled Goods, if they hadn't previously been challenged, they were assigned a Demilitarization Code (DMC) of D or F, indicating they were Controlled Goods.  That was to ensure that CG weren't inadvertently disposed of as regular scrap.  The only way to have the DMC changed to A or Q (not CG) was to challenge the DMC of that item.  Many of my NSNs remain unjustified (not challenged)...we simply don't have the time to devote to doing them all at the same time.  As items come up for disposal, we challenge the DMC then.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Bumped with the latest -- wanted:  someone to take 'er apart:


> ... The Department of National Defence has a requirement for the safe disposal of an Iroquois-class guided missile destroyer (DDG) that has reached the end of its operational life, the former Her Majestys Canadian Ships (HMCS) Iroquois. The contractor will be required to prepare the ship for transfer, transfer it to the Approved Site, demilitarize the Controlled Goods, return the museum material, and subsequently dismantle (dispose/recycle) the vessels in an efficient and environmentally responsible manner that is conforming to Canadian Laws and the terms of the contract ...


Dismantling specs (65 pg PDF with lotsa drawings/diagrams) here (via dropbox.com).


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> I've worked on developing the list of all CG onboard the IRO class; there are many line items where they are Controlled goods - ITAR.  Some of them are original to build (ie pre trump).  You'd be surprised how pervasive it is. A lot of it for us we don't notice because of the Canadian exclusions.
> 
> EU stuff comes with it's own restrictions as well; it's not necessarily any better then US origin.  ITAR is less onerous then people think once you understand the system, but it is painful to try and have something that obviously shouldn't have been cataloged as ITAR (like common fasterners) changed.
> 
> The plus side is US defence contractors noticed a big hit, as people try and avoid it.  It's been working through the US DoS for a couple of years, but they are limiting it back to a more sane level of just the equipment specific to weapons, ammunition, etc.
> 
> The other wrinkle for becoming a museum is the PCB regulations changed a few years ago, so we aren't allowed to transfer anything with PCBs outside of their cables and control cabinets.  So remediation would be required, although not to the same extent as for an artificial reef or a target.  It gets pretty complicated pretty quickly.



Talking to State Department people at SHOT I said 'ITAR" is the best thing the US could have done for China, you develop it and then China copies it and sells it to the world while you are filling out forms for a bolt and nut. For awhile the grip screws for a sig were controlled items.....


----------



## The Bread Guy

This, from the Shipfax blog ...


> There will be many sad faces on the waterfront at 5 pm Thursday November 24 when the decommisioned HMCS Iroquois is towed away from HMC Dockyard to the scrappers in Liverpool ...


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Weren't the Sisters (of the space age, for those who remember) beautiful with their five inch guns and bunny ears  :nod: (bottom picture only).

 IRO:


----------

