Author Topic: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)  (Read 743011 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 112,825
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,344
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2000 on: April 17, 2018, 10:14:08 »
Suggestions for the mods, the "Further adventures of the Asterix" might warrant a thread split now that she is in service?

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 112,825
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,344
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca

Offline Swampbuggy

  • New Member
  • **
  • 820
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2002 on: April 18, 2018, 16:46:14 »
My God is Davie’s media department worth it’s weight in gold! Their productions are almost Hollywood level slick. Beautiful ship...

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 120,590
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,322
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2003 on: April 18, 2018, 17:22:50 »
I agree: Very slick. We should hire their PR firm to design CAF recruiting publicity strategy and adverts.  :nod:

Two small things I like: The coffee machine on the bridge - just behind the captain's chair  ;D; and the big, aft located bridge that lets you see over the frigates and with all RAS operations happening in front of you, instead of behind as in the previous AOR's. One quick look and you take all that matters in without having to look forward, then go to each bridge wings and look aft from each as we had to do on the old Protecteur class.

Offline jollyjacktar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 157,307
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,297
  • My uncle F/Sgt W.H.S. Buckwell KIA 14/05/43 21 YOA
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2004 on: April 18, 2018, 19:05:12 »
I also like that the bridge wings are enclosed and give a view over the side.  The RNA WAVERULER, I toured in Martinique had that feature as well.  Very nice.
Annoying Liberals, apparently I'm doing a good job of it =)

Offline Swampbuggy

  • New Member
  • **
  • 820
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2005 on: April 18, 2018, 19:42:58 »
I wonder if the benefits from the aft bridge location was one of the main reasons why the Navantia bid was passed over in favour of the BERLIN class, for the JSS project. Certainly that style seems to be the preferred design for many new oilers, including the TIDE class and the new NZ AOR.

Offline Underway

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 15,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 715
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2006 on: April 20, 2018, 13:15:37 »
Both those designs were compliant.  I don't think the "view" from the bridge would be good enough reason to pick one bid over another.  It probably came down to cost of accessing/refining the design.

Offline Swampbuggy

  • New Member
  • **
  • 820
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2007 on: April 20, 2018, 16:11:40 »
Fair enough. From a casual observer POV it just looks like most modern AOR’s are designed bridge aft. I guess what I mean is that if the CANTABRIA and BERLIN were the same $ with similar amounts of work required to meet Canada’s needs, I suspect you’d pick the latter style for the benefits mentioned above.

Offline Underway

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 15,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 715
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2008 on: April 20, 2018, 18:34:41 »
Fair enough. From a casual observer POV it just looks like most modern AOR’s are designed bridge aft. I guess what I mean is that if the CANTABRIA and BERLIN were the same $ with similar amounts of work required to meet Canada’s needs, I suspect you’d pick the latter style for the benefits mentioned above.

I've never stood a watch (or sailed on) and AOR so I don't even know if a view of the refueling deck is even important for those who drive the ship.  You need to see where other ships are in relation to yourself, and observe their approaches and break aways, but actually watch the deckwork doesn't seem like it would be that important for the watchkeeper, as long as good comms are being used to pass info (when lines are across etc...).  But I'm not really the expert to ask about this.

Offline jollyjacktar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 157,307
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,297
  • My uncle F/Sgt W.H.S. Buckwell KIA 14/05/43 21 YOA
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2009 on: April 20, 2018, 18:41:23 »
I think it would be very desirable to the OOW, CO during a RAS.
Annoying Liberals, apparently I'm doing a good job of it =)

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 33,775
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,502
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2010 on: April 20, 2018, 19:24:10 »
I've driven PRO during many RAS's and it would have been very nice to be able to see everything going on in the dump at a glance while you are scanning the horizon for oncoming issues. You can have the greatest communications system in the world but being able to see things with your own eyes will give you an extra dose of comfort.

I'm happy that they went with the house aft and all the working gear forward.

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 120,590
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,322
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2011 on: April 20, 2018, 20:00:24 »
As I indicated, it's something I think is nice and that I liked, I didn't say it was essential.

Look at FSTO's post. I never "drove" PRO when I served onboard, but at RAS station, I was 2OOW, FixO or "secondary" Seaguard ( With Captain Guy, we always had a JO on the bridge closed up on a second radar to watch for contacts at long range)

Underway: Many things can go wrong on deck on an AOR even before the refuelling ships are alongside. Remember - we're the mother ship: we have the heavy gear, the high power pumps and all the high tension lines and high power winches. Also, as mother ship, we always took our responsibility for watching out for traffic and calling out the scratch runs, changes of speed or courses for the whole evolution seriously (obviously). Finally, also remember those pressure and suction zones they teach you about for making your approaches on destroyers/frigates? Well, even though the AOR has a lot more weight - and thus inertia - they still work both ways and we get sucked and pushed also, so being able to keep an eye on the helmsman at the right moment is useful, especially with ships on both sides at different stages of their approach.

Anyway, as FSTO alluded to, good comms is one thing and necessary (probably even more so in my days when we didn't have deck cameras with the picture displayed on bridge monitors), but its damn nice to have that extra capability to spot trouble immediately and for yourself when watch keeping on the bridge.

   

Offline whiskey601

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 20,575
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,472
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2012 on: April 26, 2018, 22:13:29 »

Anyway, as FSTO alluded to, good comms is one thing and necessary (probably even more so in my days when we didn't have deck cameras with the picture displayed on bridge monitors), but its damn nice to have that extra capability to spot trouble immediately and for yourself when watch keeping on the bridge.

In sense, like the warning your vehicle side and rear view mirror: "Objects are closer than they appear".   



*mod edit to fix quote link
« Last Edit: April 28, 2018, 15:32:44 by Good2Golf »

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 112,825
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,344
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2013 on: May 02, 2018, 11:02:05 »
Interesting side note, we just had a new volunteer show up at our Navy League Cadet hall last night, he is a CPO that is going to be attached to Vancouver Shipyards to oversee planning and work on the new supply ships for the next couple of years.

Offline AirDet

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 7,855
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 317
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2014 on: May 02, 2018, 14:03:45 »
The Karel Doorman is my favourite Joint Support Ship... I wish we had 2-3 of those :P For how Canada would use them, we would never even need to look in the direction of an LHD.

Agreed. It would also be easier to sell the idea to the public compared to an LHD or other honking ship. Doorman would have been very handy on the Somalia, East Timor and Haiti missions. However our faithful old AORs did us proud.
Just because an opinion differs doesn't make it any less valid. Remember those who gave their ALL to guarantee freedom of speech.

Offline whiskey601

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 20,575
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,472
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2015 on: May 02, 2018, 18:47:52 »
A favourite out of how many? Isnt  Karl Doorman the sole and only purpose built  Joint Support Ship.  Others appear to be “multi-role” which is a significant difference.

Offline Dolphin_Hunter

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 12,255
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,233
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2016 on: May 03, 2018, 05:03:37 »
You know what grinds my gears?  The term “Joint Support Ship”.

These are not JSS vessels, they are nothing more than Auxiliary Oiler Replenishment vessels. 

Might as well call our frigates, helicopter carriers..

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 33,775
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,502
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2017 on: May 03, 2018, 06:26:23 »
You know what grinds my gears?  The term “Joint Support Ship”.

These are not JSS vessels, they are nothing more than Auxiliary Oiler Replenishment vessels. 

Might as well call our frigates, helicopter carriers..

You have to use the word "joint" to get anything built these days.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 112,825
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,344
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2018 on: May 03, 2018, 11:39:29 »
You know what grinds my gears?  The term “Joint Support Ship”.

These are not JSS vessels, they are nothing more than Auxiliary Oiler Replenishment vessels. 

Might as well call our frigates, helicopter carriers..

Well we could follow the Japanese with their Izumo-class helicopter destroyer

Offline NavyShooter

    Boaty McBoatface!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 177,191
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,843
  • Death from a Bar.....one shot, one Tequilla
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2019 on: May 03, 2018, 12:47:30 »
Do we really want to pay Irving another $290 Million dollars to 'Canadianize' another country's ship design?

Insert disclaimer statement here....

:panzer:

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 112,825
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,344
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2020 on: May 03, 2018, 13:20:47 »
You have to use the word "joint" to get anything built these days.

We can make it revenue neutral by moving product from Jamaica, when not needed by the military. Just taking a new twist on "Joint"  8)

Offline garb811

  • MP/MPO Question Answerer
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 48,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,107
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2021 on: May 17, 2018, 20:58:40 »
Quote
The federal government has approved plans to start some work on the navy's new support ships in the coming months in a bid to keep delivery of the much-needed vessels from slipping farther behind schedule.

Seaspan Shipyards is expected to begin cutting steel on some parts of the two vessels in Vancouver this summer during a lull in the construction of two science vessels for the Canadian Coast Guard, several sources told The Canadian Press.

The science vessels will still be delivered first, but officials are hoping that the head start will result in the first Protecteur-class joint support ship, as the naval vessels are officially known, being delivered 2022.

More at link:  Feds OK early start to construction of navy's new supply ships


Offline Underway

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 15,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 715
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2022 on: May 18, 2018, 10:40:32 »
Thought this was going to happen.  Seaspan had identified a number of blocks they could start building concurrently that will not change as the design is finalized.  IIRC it was the bow section that didn't require any changes from the Bohnn design.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 112,825
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,344
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2023 on: May 20, 2018, 15:05:02 »
Good plan the 2 remaining OFSV will be finished soon, the SV design has some sort of issues that people don't want to talk about, I but going by other Federal designs, I will assume stability being a major factor.