Author Topic: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]  (Read 61961 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Greater_Ape

  • Guest
  • *
  • 50
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #250 on: February 13, 2019, 23:17:52 »
My issue with the ETVs  is not the day rate, it's the fact that we're leasing a capability that in my opinion is superfluous.  We're not in the business of towing oil rigs.  I don't think the CCG or the public is going to get their money's worth with these 16,000hp Offshore Supply Vessels that are likely going to sit idle at the dock for months on end.
I think the money could have been better spent elsewhere.  But I'm an engineer so what do I know. When you spend most of your days below waterline you don't get to see the big picture  ;).

Offline Not a Sig Op

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 58,532
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,816
  • I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear.
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #251 on: February 14, 2019, 08:59:43 »
We're absolutely in the business of towing oil rigs in an emergency... or anything else stricken and potentially a hazard to life or the environment...

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/02/business/energy-environment/shell-oil-rig-runs-aground-in-alaska.html

Oil rigs aren't the primary concern though, tankers are.

Despite all the tanker traffic on the west coast, the coast guard had no vessels capable of effectively towing one in an emergency, and with that, very little experience towing vessels that size.

I don't know the full details of the contract, but there's no reason to expect their sole task will be towing... they're quite capable of performing many of the tasks other coast guard vessels perform... the Grenfel manages... she even manages to lay bouys.

Though ironically, many of those other vessels spend months idling at the wharf as well when they're on primary SAR standby.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2019, 09:02:56 by Not a Sig Op »

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 130,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,077
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #252 on: February 14, 2019, 10:18:46 »
The problem is that the CCG on this coast has no large ship tow capacity and there are very few tugs that do. The last incident with the Russian freighter, none the tugs available were certified to go that far out to rescue her. If LNGCanada continues to go ahead that will change for the North Coast as there will be several large modern escort tugs. When we rigged up the Pearkes to tow the Exxon tanker, we felt at best we would be able to hold her in position and that was in fairly calm weather. There has been a few incidents with pusher tugs out here with oil barges. We been lucky so far. The last freighter I am aware of going aground in the Queen Charlotte Islands was around 1956.
 It would have been better to help Smit and Seaspan out here to acquire a large tug each that would do normal work within an zone and be able to go out to respond to calls. The other option is to buy and man with CCG personal, anchor handling vessels that could do CCG NavAid and SAR work as well. Problem with that is no one wants to work with CCG anymore, pays sucks compared to industry when they actually manage to pay you. When LNGC kicks in they are going to suck up even more ticketed CCG personal as well.

Offline Not a Sig Op

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 58,532
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,816
  • I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear.
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #253 on: February 14, 2019, 12:59:04 »
The other option is to buy and man with CCG personal, anchor handling vessels that could do CCG NavAid and SAR work as well.

Are those duties not included in the contract for these vessels?

No reason they can't do that work as long as they're within suitable range to respond for towing as well.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2019, 13:02:13 by Not a Sig Op »

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 130,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,077
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #254 on: February 14, 2019, 17:14:27 »
Not sure what the contract allows, but taking union jobs with non-PSAC employees would be seen as a threat to PSAC and the big ship CCG senior officers types alike.

Offline Not a Sig Op

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 58,532
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,816
  • I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear.
Re: Constructing the CCG Hero class [Merged]
« Reply #255 on: Yesterday at 01:21:52 »
Not sure what the contract allows, but taking union jobs with non-PSAC employees would be seen as a threat to PSAC and the big ship CCG senior officers types alike.

I haven't read the contract either, but I have read the solicitation  documents from the tender...

From the operations overview in appendix a...




"The contractor will provide two vessels crewed by certificated personnel and equipped to undertake emergency towing operations as per the contract.

The CCG will deploy and operate these vessels as units within the CCG fleet primarily tasked to the ER program to provide an emergency towing response when required.

The vessels will also be deployed to conduct preparedness activities related to the ER program such as exercising, training, community engagement, scientific assesment and monitoring, while maintaining the standby posture.

Concurrent with the ER deployment, the vessels will be multi-tasked to provide a level of SAR coverage within their area of operation will also support other programs and CCG activities."




The vessel itself was required to provide accomodations for for additional SAR equipment to be furnished by the government, as well as a 20' ISO container of environmental response gear.

2 FRCs with davit's were listed as a requirement, and bulwarks and a crane suitable for launch and recovery of bouys was listed as a desirable.

It also defines an operations area for the vessels, based on a suitable response time for towing.

Aside from the vessel, the other major deliverable was a training program on board the ship, to teach coast guard officers towing... minimum space on board for the program was 6 desirable was 12... the two vessels they got  should have far more bunk space available than that.



Really sounds like they're planning on doing a lot more then leaving them idling at the wharf...
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 05:52:46 by Not a Sig Op »