# New organization, DGFSC, prepares RCN for future ships



## OceanBonfire (12 Jul 2018)

> _By Darlene Blakeley_
> 
> A new organization, designed to better support the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) as it receives the ships it needs for the future, plans to introduce them into service smoothly and with a view to driving naval innovation.
> 
> ...



https://ml-fd.caf-fac.ca/en/2018/06/14885


----------



## Halifax Tar (12 Jul 2018)

OceanBonfire said:
			
		

> https://ml-fd.caf-fac.ca/en/2018/06/14885



Oh good!


----------



## Eye In The Sky (12 Jul 2018)

Was there a need for a 'new organization'?   ???


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (12 Jul 2018)

Looks to me to be more along the lines of grouping together under a single umbrella the four different types of orgs that were used to deliver the transition from the steamers to the Halifax's in the eighties (training: trades and sea; logistics: new needs for the new vessels over their lifetime; combat: tactics and strategy for employment; engineering: manning, maintenance and upgrading over lifetime). The transition at that time had to overcome many bumps in the road that arose because these four orgs did not always talk with one another as much as they should. one such main result was that, while the trade's training for transition got set up, no one looked at the need/usefulness of integrating some trades with one another, or splitting some function from one trade to another, etc, until after some experience was gained. 

If a new centralized org charged with transitioning from one type to another for all new vessel types can foresee many of these situations and preemptively deal with them, then it's a good thing. If they only become one more layer of management, it will be  a disaster.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (12 Jul 2018)

Copy, thanks!  Sounds somewhat similar to what the RCAF did when 434 Sqn stood up recently.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (12 Jul 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> If a new centralized org charged with transitioning from one type to another for all new vessel types can foresee many of these situations and preemptively deal with them, then it's a good thing. If they only become one more layer of management, it will be a disaster.



Having been in the "matrix" many years ago, I can see a benefit for centralizing responsibility in dealing with new projects, however the expectation should be that as centralization occurs the assets that supposedly were OPIs/OCIs for those aspects of new requirements would be gathered into the new organization, including the highest levels of management.  However, scanning through the last GOFO promotions it seems that this is the creation of a new two star without any offset by elimination/under-ranking of another position.

https://army.ca/forums/threads/127512/post-1523356.html#msg1523356


> B. COMMODORE C.P. DONOVAN WILL BE PROMOTED TO THE RANK OF REAR- ADMIRAL AND BE APPOINTED INTO A NEW POSITION AS DIRECTOR GENERAL CANADIAN SURFACE COMBATANT, AT NDHQ, IN OTTAWA ON


----------



## Colin Parkinson (13 Jan 2021)

And of course that 2 Star will need staff.....


----------



## Underway (14 Jan 2021)

I can see the benefits of this approach.  One of the issues that PMO is running into is that few at the traditional organizations are aware of what they need to do to get ready for JSS and CSC.  AOPS really hammered home that there needs to be some sort of clearinghouse where information and direction can get passed to and from.  It's not that the traditional organizations don't want to change is that they don't often even know what to prepare for or where the projects are going.  Or that they are so busy with their day to day it's difficult to plan for all of the new things that will be introduced.
There are second and third-order effects that the RCN is realizing with this massive recapitalization that are affecting the priorities of how the fleet spends it money going forward.  For example, with AOPS it required the construction of a brand new jetty, which of course required the expenditure of updating power and internet support infrastructure in Halifax.  This wasn't a surprise, but it did change priorities for base infrastructure development.


----------



## dimsum (14 Jan 2021)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Copy, thanks!  Sounds somewhat similar to what the RCAF did when 434 Sqn stood up recently.


Not really.  It's more high-level than the stuff 434 does.  From my first pass, it sounds like what the Air Warfare Centre does, plus some bits of 434 (the MIT seems to sound like that) and bits of what DNR currently does (?).


----------



## Navy_Pete (14 Jan 2021)

Underway said:


> I can see the benefits of this approach.  One of the issues that PMO is running into is that few at the traditional organizations are aware of what they need to do to get ready for JSS and CSC.  AOPS really hammered home that there needs to be some sort of clearinghouse where information and direction can get passed to and from.  It's not that the traditional organizations don't want to change is that they don't often even know what to prepare for or where the projects are going.  Or that they are so busy with their day to day it's difficult to plan for all of the new things that will be introduced.
> There are second and third-order effects that the RCN is realizing with this massive recapitalization that are affecting the priorities of how the fleet spends it money going forward.  For example, with AOPS it required the construction of a brand new jetty, which of course required the expenditure of updating power and internet support infrastructure in Halifax.  This wasn't a surprise, but it did change priorities for base infrastructure development.


From a practical perspective it was nice to have all that known stuff coming from a MARS bar than the PMO, IT, etc. It's stupid, but all those things that were already well known and understood on infrastructure, manning etc. got a lot more traction when the message wasn't coming from the 'boffins'.

Plus it integrates them closer in the project delivery, so they can understand the frustrations first hand and stopped a bit of the crap chucking in the mess for engineers not delivering projects on time.


----------



## Underway (14 Jan 2021)

All that is true.  All of us need to pull the rope in the same direction.  If everyone is aware of the risks you can plan to mitigate or avoid them. And of course the operations side see risk differently than the material side.


----------

