# Question about Navy response to natural disasters



## Bass ackwards (13 Jan 2010)

I've always had a fascination with ships. 
Some time ago I looked through the threads on Katrina for information on this -to no avail-  and hopefully the topic is a bit more germane in light of the earthquake in Haiti.
My question is this:

When combatant ships (CPFs, 280s) are responding to a natural disaster, what are they capable of carrying as far as supplies go? 
From my limited knowledge, warships aren't noted for having a lot of unused space.
So what can/do they carry with them in terms of foodstuffs, portable shelter, medical supplies, etc?


----------



## armyvern (13 Jan 2010)

We cleaned out our MSA in Gagetown. Tents (of all types), cots, sleeping bags, blankets, IMPs, generators, etc etc and trucked it all to Halifax for loading - Op Unison.

Perhaps there's a sailor about the forum who was actually involved in the loading process ... but I do know that it was CCGS Sir William Alexander that was laden down with a vast array of the stuff that our base sent. It's our AORs that can carry extra eqpt, stores etc ... but none were avail for Katrina. ... BHS - haven't heard anything on those Big Honking Ships we decided we needed years ago.  :-\

But, the following link does contain some points on the logistics of it all, starts on page 30.

http://naval.review.cfps.dal.ca/archive/5636123-4882858/vol1num4.pdf

http://geo.international.gc.ca/world/site/includes/print.asp?lang=en&print=1&url=%2Fcan-am%2Fmain%2Ffront_page%2Fkatrina-en.asp

http://www.johnmckaymp.on.ca/newsshow.asp?int_id=80290

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina



edited for page #


----------



## Antoine (13 Jan 2010)

Interesting question, by "googling" HMCS Halifax, HMCS Athabaskan and following the news you'll find some of the goods they are going to ship.

Also in the following thread:

http://forums.navy.ca/forums/threads/91568/post-904363#new

quoted from today's [ur=http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/9014787.htmll]Chronicle Herald[/url] in Halifax

and more might appear in other threads later on.


----------



## Bass ackwards (13 Jan 2010)

Hi Vern.
Thanks very much for the links. 
I figured during Katrina that the Alexander would be carrying a lot of the supplies (IIRC, the larger Canadian Coast Guard ships generally have cargo holds).

I'll be curious to hear from some of the Navy guys as to how they go about cramming stuff into a frigate or destroyer. 

Antoine: Thanks. I've been following the thread here, on the disaster. I'll try your google suggestion re the actual ships.


----------



## Otis (13 Jan 2010)

Bass ackwards said:
			
		

> I'll be curious to hear from some of the Navy guys as to how they go about cramming stuff into a frigate or destroyer.



You use as much space as you can, everywhere you can.

I have heard stories of Navy people (Supply Techs) on course catching hell when planning usage of a warehouse because the exercise was designed to force you to use outside space or resources and the Navy guys always make it all fit on the one warehouse.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (13 Jan 2010)

How much room is left in the hanger on the flight deck after the air det is there?


----------



## Occam (13 Jan 2010)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> How much room is left in the hanger on the flight deck after the air det is there?



Not a hell of a lot.  Between the helicopters themselves, and the associated spare parts boxes that get aeroquip-strapped to the bulkheads, there's very little room.  However, I have only seen reports that HMCS Halifax is taking on a helicopter - I haven't seen anything indicating that HMCS Athabaskan will.  If she doesn't embark helos, that's space for two helicopters that can be used for storage, and that's a lot of storage space.

As well as space in the existing storerooms on the ships, other spaces can be used for storage.  For example, there are decontamination stations (airlocks and cleansing stations for going through a CBRN environment) that can be used to store stuff.  There are equipment rooms that have a fair amount of free space.  Stuff can always get strapped to the upper deck, so long as it doesn't interfere with linehandling or other seamanship evolutions and can be exposed to the weather.


----------



## Bass ackwards (13 Jan 2010)

Occam said:
			
		

> Stuff can always get strapped to the upper deck, so long as it doesn't interfere with linehandling or other seamanship evolutions and can be exposed to the weather.



Can you do much of that before you start to have stability issues?
I can look at the specs and see the displacement of a vessel, but I have no idea how that relates to how much you can stack on the upper deck. 
I do recall reading that the Tribals (280s) were pretty top-heavy at the best of times.

Again (if it needs to be said), I'm asking out of sheer curiosity -not to argue the point.


----------



## armyvern (13 Jan 2010)

Otis said:
			
		

> You use as much space as you can, everywhere you can.
> 
> I have heard stories of Navy people (Supply Techs) on course catching hell when planning usage of a warehouse because the exercise was designed to force you to use outside space or resources and the Navy guys always make it all fit on the one warehouse.



LOL. Matters not the element - we ALL try to do that during that particular bit of the course when building the warehouse ... and the staff doesn't take well to us trying to use our "extra space inside the warehouse [cause there is lots of that extra space]" to store generators, heaters etc that by regulation need to be stored in an out building quite seperate from MSA/rations etc.

I tried too. As did everyone else - it makes for a whole lot less "contractors" to hire, a whole lot less"security and fire inspections" to book/do, an easy ability to ensure we stayed within our approved budget, and about 60 less power point slides to go through when you're in front of the Comdt and all his guests presenting your "new" warehouse.  >


----------



## Nfld Sapper (13 Jan 2010)

Even if the generators, heaters, etc are purged and in thier shipping crates/ transport boxes?


----------



## armyvern (13 Jan 2010)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> Even if the generators, heaters, etc are purged and in thier shipping crates/ transport boxes?



Food & water, hazmat, radioactive ... we have shitlods of items that can not, by regulation, be stored within "X feet etc" of Commodity Y.

In order to actually do what we all try ... you have to cheat on that "proximity of storrage" bit.  8)

And, because the actual square footage of the warehouse we have to plan and build is a "GIVEN" ... they damn well know that we can't put it all in.  Also "GIVEN" are all the SNs, qtys etc. So they know we have incompatable commodities and are going to have to plan for outside storrage too.


----------



## Occam (13 Jan 2010)

Bass ackwards said:
			
		

> Can you do much of that before you start to have stability issues?
> I can look at the specs and see the displacement of a vessel, but I have no idea how that relates to how much you can stack on the upper deck.
> I do recall reading that the Tribals (280s) were pretty top-heavy at the best of times.
> 
> Again (if it needs to be said), I'm asking out of sheer curiosity -not to argue the point.



Yep, the 280s were, and still are pretty top-heavy, although I _think_ they mitigated some of the problem by going with water-compensated fuel tanks post-TRUMP.  I would be way out of my area of expertise to tell you if extra kit would end up being a factor, but I do know that the MSEO and the Hull Techs have all sorts of stability formulae which I'm sure could be used to figure it out.  They have to have formulae like that available in the event that a compartment got flooded due to grounding or battle damage.  They would also have a pretty good idea of how much extra stuff (by weight) is brought aboard.


----------



## Bass ackwards (14 Jan 2010)

Thanks Occam. 
I'm glad I finally posted this question -it's been an interesting discussion. I'll look forward to picking it up again tomorrow evening (I have to get up at oh-dark-hundred for work). 
Good night all.


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (14 Jan 2010)

The 280's are ok with two helos in a fairly bad storm. As long as you kept the supplies in the hangars/flight decks to the 20 ton range, they'd be fine.

20 tons isn't much though.


----------



## Navy_Blue (14 Jan 2010)

I still don't understand why we're not sending the tanker or our JSS....Wait that's right the tanker is a museum piece that can barely start her boiler without a seance...Darn we didn't think we needed to start building ours JSS yet.  Oh well maybe next Earth Quake


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (15 Jan 2010)

drunknsubmrnr said:
			
		

> The 280's are ok with two helos in a fairly bad storm. As long as you kept the supplies in the hangars/flight decks to the 20 ton range, they'd be fine.
> 
> 20 tons isn't much though.



The 280s have not deployed with 2 helos in a long time.

20 tonnes can be a lot depending on what it is. Don't be so dismissive of our efforts and the hard work we all did getting the Athabaskan and Halifax ready for their deployment to Haiti.



> I'll be curious to hear from some of the Navy guys as to how they go about cramming stuff into a frigate or destroyer.


You do it creatively and as long as you secure it properly and place in where it will not interfere with other evolutions onboard ship, you can store a lot more then some will lead you to think.



> From my limited knowledge, warships aren't noted for having a lot of unused space


You would be surprised on how much space we actually do have, its a lot more then most think.


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (15 Jan 2010)

> The 280s have not deployed with 2 helos in a long time.



No, but helos have broken down while they're "visiting", and left the 280's carrying two of them.



> 20 tonnes can be a lot depending on what it is. Don't be so dismissive of our efforts and the hard work we all did getting the Athabaskan and Halifax ready for their deployment to Haiti.



20 tons is about 2% of an AOR's dry cargo capacity. I'm sure you worked hard, and it'll help the Haitians a lot, but it's a comparatively small amount.


----------



## Bass ackwards (15 Jan 2010)

Just to pick on one item: water*.

The news article mentions bottled water being carried. I take it we're talking about the normal, round, 5 gallon bottles that you see in office coolers everywhere. 
Would these have to be stored low in the ship or is this less of an issue with something the size and displacement of a frigate?
If they are stored below the waterline, do you have hatches (trunks? is that the proper term?) and hoists available to get them below or is it all done by a human chain? Down all those bloody steep ladders!?
Is there a way of palatalizing them so they can be stacked (yet still gotten aboard at all)?

In a similar vein, do the ships themselves have the capability of purifying extra water (beyond the needs of the crew) and is that even feasible while in a harbour?

*If I'm being annoying here, someone tell me to shut up and I will. As I mentioned, it's a subject that really interests me and unfortunately I'm not in the *geographic * position to be able to pour rum into Navy.ca members while I ask ten thousand stupid questions about every little detail.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (15 Jan 2010)

They are bring water as in the 500ml bottle variety, the DART team should/will bring in the Advanced ROWPU  and hopefully the water bagger too.....


----------



## Occam (15 Jan 2010)

Bass ackwards said:
			
		

> Just to pick on one item: water*.
> 
> The news article mentions bottled water being carried. I take it we're talking about the normal, round, 5 gallon bottles that you see in office coolers everywhere.
> Would these have to be stored low in the ship or is this less of an issue with something the size and displacement of a frigate?
> ...



More than likely, the water would be in 1 litre or 650 ml bottles like you buy in the supermarket.  In a case, wrapped in plastic.  The bottles are easily carried and refilled.  Those large jugs would be impossible to store on a ship, and dispensing the water is problematic.

There is a conveyor which will bring caselot items from the weatherdeck level down to fridge flats, but it's only convenient if that's where you're storing it.  If it's going anywhere else, everyone forms a line, and the stuff gets passed hand to hand wherever it's going in the ship.  Ladders are easy to negotiate, you just put one or two people on them, and stuff gets passed between them.  Rotate the guys on the ladders as necessary.

The ships have desalinators for domestic water.  I'm not sure if they're bringing them along, but there are also portable reverse osmosis desalination units (aka "RODs") available which can be fed from an upper deck fire hydrant (which is fed from a seawater firemain system).  The clean water is dumped into a huge portable tank for later use.  The RODs can be taken ashore for use as well, if there is a water supply available.  I can't recall if they require power or not...



			
				NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> They are bring water as in the 500ml bottle variety, the DART team should/will bring in the Advanced ROWPU  and hopefully the water bagger too.....



The one(s) the Navy has (had?) were somewhat simpler than that - although they may have gone the way of the dodo and something more modern put in its place.  Last time I saw a portable ROD on a ship was 17 years ago.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (15 Jan 2010)

Occam said:
			
		

> The one(s) the Navy has (had?) were somewhat simpler than that - although they may have gone the way of the dodo and something more modern put in its place.  Last time I saw a portable ROD on a ship was 17 years ago.



No Occam, I'm talking about the ones the Army have....


----------



## Occam (15 Jan 2010)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> No Occam, I'm talking about the ones the Army have....



I know.  That's not what Bass ackwards was inquiring about, though.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (15 Jan 2010)

> No, but helos have broken down while they're "visiting", and left the 280's carrying two of them


Not since I been on them and I have been doing back and forth on both east coast ones for several years now. I would like to see your proof.

We would not use our ROD plants in harbour due to contamination from sewers and silt.



> 20 tons is about 2% of an AOR's dry cargo capacity. I'm sure you worked hard, and it'll help the Haitians a lot, but it's a comparatively small amount


Preserver ain't moving, deal with it! Halifax and Iroquois class ships are really not meant for this type of work but guess what every little bit helps. The tools, medical supplies, water etc we crammed onboard will help make a difference.


----------



## Bass ackwards (15 Jan 2010)

Dang. I didn't even think about small bottles of water in cases. 
Thanks for the replies gents. I noticed from one of the Chronicle Herald videos that they were even loading stacks of orange plastic traffic cones. I'd love to see a list of what actually got loaded and how much. And where. 



			
				Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Halifax and Iroquois class ships are really not meant for this type of work but guess what every little bit helps. The tools, medical supplies, water etc we crammed onboard will help make a difference.



Hence my original question. I sure hope I wasn't the catalyst for a pissing contest here(though that might help the water situation once that 19,000 pound ROWPU gets on scene). 
Either way, I'd have to say that the Navy's doing us pretty proud with the speedy response.


----------



## Bass ackwards (15 Jan 2010)

Occam said:
			
		

> _There is a conveyor which will bring caselot items from the weatherdeck level down to fridge flats,_ but it's only convenient if that's where you're storing it.  If it's going anywhere else, everyone forms a line, and the stuff gets passed hand to hand wherever it's going in the ship.  Ladders are easy to negotiate, you just put one or two people on them, and stuff gets passed between them.  Rotate the guys on the ladders as necessary.



The only detailed deck plans I have of warships, is for the Flower and Castle class corvettes. And apart from a tour of the upper deck of Halifax when she was in Thunder Bay a few years ago, the only warship I've ever been "inside" is HMCS Haida.
I guess things have changed a bit...


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae (16 Jan 2010)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> The 280s have not deployed with 2 helos in a long time.
> 
> 20 tonnes can be a lot depending on what it is.


+1


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (16 Jan 2010)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Not since I been on them and I have been doing back and forth on both east coast ones for several years now. I would like to see your proof.



What proof?

We had "our" helo break down on Atha-B on Northern Lights '96. The CTG wanted to go for a conference on another ship, so he got another TG helo to come pick him up. It broke too, and then a storm came up before the AOR could RAS over the spares to fix both helos. We went through the storm with both helos in the hangars. The roll preriod was a bit slower than normal, but it wasn't that bad.



			
				Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Preserver ain't moving, deal with it! Halifax and Iroquois class ships are really not meant for this type of work but guess what every little bit helps. The tools, medical supplies, water etc we crammed onboard will help make a difference.



You might want to dial the aggression back a bit.

I agree that every bit helps. All I'm saying is that the classes aren't really suited for this, and can't carry much.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (16 Jan 2010)

> The 280s have not deployed with 2 helos in a long time.


Hello....I said they have not deployed with _two_ helos in a long time, had I known you would bring in a temporary situation that is no longer the norm in the Navy then yeah, I would have agreed. :


----------



## Stoker (16 Jan 2010)

As for stability, bigger ship's don't usually strap equipment to the upper decks due loss of stability. You have to remember this is also winter, and there's always the danger of icing during the transit south and extra weight doesn't always help.
The 280's and Halifax class do have ROD plants and they can be operated alongside, however frequent changes of membranes. Most likely the ship's will drop off there supplies and go to sea every few days to make water and top up their tanks. I suspect some of the bottled water embarked will be used by on board personnel if they are utilized as rescue workers.
The MCDV's were also considered to go as crazy as that sounds, they could carry several portable ROD plant's or gen sets. They were ruled out due to manning.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (16 Jan 2010)

> The 280's and Halifax class do have ROD plants and they can be operated alongside


Thanks for that clarification. Using them alongside I take it would be during extreme circumstances then?


----------



## Stoker (16 Jan 2010)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Thanks for that clarification. Using them alongside I take it would be during extreme circumstances then?



That's right the Rod's the dart team use are made for throwing a hose into a dirty ditch of water and making fresh water. The one's we operate on the ship, we have regs that include operating them in certain depths of water and so far off the coast. Area's were is a outfall  say from a pulp and paper mill is to be avoided. 
That being said they can be operated in Halifax for instance, however the frequency of membrane change outs and cleaning go way up.
When we head south I have our ROD's shutdown at least 100 NM from New York city because the area around it is one big dump especially after a storm and everything gets churned up.


----------



## Snakedoc (16 Jan 2010)

Stoker said:
			
		

> The MCDV's were also considered to go as crazy as that sounds, they could carry several portable ROD plant's or gen sets. They were ruled out due to manning.



How unfortunate, would've been neat to see them head down there.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (16 Jan 2010)

Wouldn't it take forever and a day for one of them to actually sail down there though??  I seem to recall that they can only do 12-15 knots or there abouts, considerably less than a CPF or 280?


----------



## Nfld Sapper (16 Jan 2010)

Stoker said:
			
		

> That's right the Rod's the dart team use are made for throwing a hose into a dirty ditch of water and making fresh water. The one's we operate on the ship, we have regs that include operating them in certain depths of water and so far off the coast. Area's were is a outfall  say from a pulp and paper mill is to be avoided.
> That being said they can be operated in Halifax for instance, however the frequency of membrane change outs and cleaning go way up.
> When we head south I have our ROD's shutdown at least 100 NM from New York city because the area around it is one big dump especially after a storm and everything gets churned up.



Even the ROWPU's the Army has, has limits as to what we can process...... POL contaminated water is no-go as is feed water with a TDS level in excess of 30,000 PPM.


----------



## kratz (16 Jan 2010)

The MCDVs have sailed over to Europe for NATO's Exercise Blue Game a few times over the past 12 years. So getting to Haiti would not be unthinkable.


----------



## Occam (16 Jan 2010)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Wouldn't it take forever and a day for one of them to actually sail down there though??  I seem to recall that they can only do 12-15 knots or there abouts, considerably less than a CPF or 280?



Top speed for a MCDV is 15 knots.  But, HFX and ATH are only doing 20 knots on their way down, so they actually arrive there with fuel remaining and don't need to gas up on the way.  20 knots is a slow gallop for both ships' main engines - not as economical as the cruise engines on the 280 or the PDE on the CPFs, but they top out at 15 knots.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (16 Jan 2010)

Tks for the answers guys.


----------



## brandon_ (16 Jan 2010)

I know this isn't exactly a navy/ship question but, Could reservist's or even regF soldiers be sent there too help out? Just had a conversation with my parents about this, and well we have no idea. Anybody know?


----------



## Stoker (16 Jan 2010)

We do have several reserve Bosn's off our ship's sailing on the Halifax and Athabaskan. There was talk as of Fri to spend the funds to get the tanker off the wall as well as another Halifax class, perhaps the VDQ. You have to remember though we are cash strapped right now, as bad it ever was. This money we just spent will have to come from somewhere.


----------



## George Wallace (16 Jan 2010)

brandon_ said:
			
		

> I know this isn't exactly a navy/ship question but, Could reservist's or even regF soldiers be sent there too help out? Just had a conversation with my parents about this, and well we have no idea. Anybody know?



I guess you don't read or watch the News.  OP HESTIA - Haiti Earthquake 2010 may cut your research time by 90%.


----------



## Stoker (16 Jan 2010)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Wouldn't it take forever and a day for one of them to actually sail down there though??  I seem to recall that they can only do 12-15 knots or there abouts, considerably less than a CPF or 280?



Took us about 6 days to go from Ireland to St.John's, so it could be done.


----------



## George Wallace (16 Jan 2010)

Stoker said:
			
		

> Took us about 6 days to go from Ireland to St.John's, so it could be done.



That is quite a respectable time.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (16 Jan 2010)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> That is quite a respectable time.



Yup not like when they use to cross with oars and sails eh George?


----------



## Occam (16 Jan 2010)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Yup not like when they use to cross with oars and sails eh George?



Well, now I know what it feels like when you shoot rum & Coke out your nose...


----------



## Bass ackwards (16 Jan 2010)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> Even the ROWPU's the Army has, has limits as to what we can process...... POL contaminated water is no-go as is feed water with a TDS level in excess of 30,000 PPM.



Sorry. Most of this I understand, but I have to ask: what does TDS stand for?

Regarding the MCDVs: I read that this operation is expected to last a couple of months. Are these vessels capable of being refuelled and resuppllied at sea? (or are there viable port facilities close enough at hand to negate that problem -had it arisen?)


----------



## kratz (16 Jan 2010)

Yes, the ships (including MCDVs) can RAS (Replenishment At Sea).

Here are some RAS photos from Combat Camera.

There are also major ports in the USA within a couple days sail if needed.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (16 Jan 2010)

TDS = Total Dissolved Solids.

Total Dissolved Solids (often abbreviated TDS) is a measure of the combined content of all inorganic and organic substances contained in a liquid in molecular, ionized or micro-granular (colloidal sol) suspended form.


----------



## Bass ackwards (16 Jan 2010)

Thanks kratz. I _was_ specifically asking about the MCDVs. I'd never seen anything in my searches that indicated that they had that capability.
(EDIT: from the photos you linked: 
A C-7/M-16 line-throwing gun?? I've seen 12 gauge Mossbergs purpose-built for that but I've never heard of a 5.56 calibre weapon doing the job. Interesting...) 

NFLD Sapper: Gotcha. Thanks for that.


----------



## Stoker (16 Jan 2010)

Bass ackwards said:
			
		

> Sorry. Most of this I understand, but I have to ask: what does TDS stand for?
> 
> Regarding the MCDVs: I read that this operation is expected to last a couple of months. Are these vessels capable of being refuelled and resuppllied at sea? (or are there viable port facilities close enough at hand to negate that problem -had it arisen?)



We can get fuel from another ship while anchored but realistically that's all. We could send 3 MCDV's , have them anchored off and send mobile work parties in to help, I doubt that would happen though.


----------



## Stoker (16 Jan 2010)

Bass ackwards said:
			
		

> Thanks kratz. I _was_ specifically asking about the MCDVs. I'd never seen anything in my searches that indicated that they had that capability.
> 
> NFLD Sapper: Gotcha. Thanks for that.



We are capable to a stern to stern fueling, however as far as I know was never attempted.


----------



## Bass ackwards (16 Jan 2010)

Stoker said:
			
		

> We can get fuel from another ship while anchored but realistically that's all. We could send 3 MCDV's , have them anchored off and send mobile work parties in to help, I doubt that would happen though.



Can the MCDVs (or, for that matter, the "heavies") transfer fuel to smaller ships? Specifically, say, fishing vessels or other shallow(er) draft vessels that might be pressed into service as auxiliaries?


----------



## Stoker (16 Jan 2010)

Bass ackwards said:
			
		

> Can the MCDVs (or, for that matter, the "heavies") transfer fuel to smaller ships? Specifically, say, fishing vessels or other shallow(er) draft vessels that might be pressed into service as auxiliaries?



Certainly, no problem.


----------



## Bass ackwards (16 Jan 2010)

Stoker said:
			
		

> Certainly, no problem.



To be more specific (I should have put this in the original question -sorry), they can do this via hose and pump (insert proper Navy terms here) a la the local PetroCan station -as opposed to handing over an endless string of jerry cans?


----------



## Stoker (16 Jan 2010)

Bass ackwards said:
			
		

> To be more specific (I should have put this in the original question -sorry), they can do this via hose and pump (insert proper Navy terms here) a la the local PetroCan station -as opposed to handing over an endless string of jerry cans?



The only thing we are able to provide is diesel, since we have a limited quantity of gasoline aboard. All ship's have upper deck connection to receive/discharge fuel. It would be just a matter of being able to regulate the amount of diesel being pumped to the upper deck and have the appropriate connection.


----------



## Bass ackwards (16 Jan 2010)

OK. Thanks for the patient replies to a landlubber, Stoker. 
No doubt I'll have more dumb questions tomorrow.


----------



## Pat in Halifax (17 Jan 2010)

Just to clarify an earlier error by someone (cannot recall who). Shipboard RODs cannot make water while alongside IAW Naval Engineering Manual. This has been argued many times with Ottawa (you know, the place with NO NAVY) to no avail. The original manufacturer (Zenon) had even stated in the past that they could be utilized alongside or in coastal outfalls with an increase in Bromine injection but the bean-counters say no. 
I was CERA on HAL during that 2007 GLD someone mentioned and I was still fighting about this long after that trip was over - and why you say - This deployment is ``the`` perfect example. If 2 RODS were running (albiet working perfectly), IRO and HAL class could produce in excess of 70 tonnes a day with ships crew (with pusser showers) only needing about 10-12 of that. I would say then,  in a perfect world, these vessels should be ideally suited to this type of deployment.


----------



## Stoker (17 Jan 2010)

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> Just to clarify an earlier error by someone (cannot recall who). Shipboard RODs cannot make water while alongside IAW Naval Engineering Manual. This has been argued many times with Ottawa (you know, the place with NO NAVY) to no avail. The original manufacturer (Zenon) had even stated in the past that they could be utilized alongside or in coastal outfalls with an increase in Bromine injection but the bean-counters say no.
> I was CERA on HAL during that 2007 GLD someone mentioned and I was still fighting about this long after that trip was over - and why you say - This deployment is ``the`` perfect example. If 2 RODS were running (albiet working perfectly), IRO and HAL class could produce in excess of 70 tonnes a day with ships crew (with pusser showers) only needing about 10-12 of that. I would say then,  in a perfect world, these vessels should be ideally suited to this type of deployment.



Yes NEM's is quite clear, however it also states water can be produced for consumption in those area's in an "emergency", but as a practice we don't. What could be considered an emergency your guess is as good as mine.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (17 Jan 2010)

I think that they might waive those regulations .... mainly because the army ROWPU's are being deployed and will be used to make salt water to fresh but will produce only 25000 l /day and the maintenence of the machines have now increased by 50%. Salt water is detremental to our machines.


----------



## Pat in Halifax (17 Jan 2010)

Possible but unlikely - Stranger things 'have' happenned though. I will see what I can find out tomorrow. If not, it'd be a crying shame.
Back to work after 4 days off - Gonna be rough!!!


----------



## Monsoon (23 Jan 2010)

The ROD questions aside, the better course would probably just be to bring down a bazillion little chlorine tablets to hand out to people.

As for MCDV fueling requirements in a situation like Haiti, it would probably be easiest to have them detach once every couple of weeks to fuel by truck at an unaffected port in the Dominican Republic - which is probably what the heavies are going to do in the absence of an AOR.


----------



## Stoker (24 Jan 2010)

Was talking to a few people in the know and found out one of the ships have one of those water bagger machines embarked. I guess they will lay off, make and bag water to send in.


----------



## Pat in Halifax (25 Jan 2010)

Was talking to someone on HALIFAX Friday and they were dropping off work parties and going out to "patrol" (aka make water). He didn't say anything about a bagger - could be ATHA-B. I guess Ottawa wouldn't lift the restriction. HALIFAX too has a schedule to keep for HCM/FELEX so just waiting to see who is relieving them - their tentative relief is 'broken' but may be back on their pins soon??


----------

