Author Topic: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy  (Read 650009 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 110,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,287
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca

Offline Underway

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 15,300
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 688
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2201 on: February 22, 2018, 15:45:49 »
How long was it between this stage and launch for the first one?  Just interested about the timings, as we might be able to extrapolate JSS timelines from actual yard space at this rate.

Offline Spencer100

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 6,740
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 289

Offline Underway

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 15,300
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 688
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2203 on: February 23, 2018, 14:22:46 »
Updates to the NSS schedule. 

Harry DeWolfe is expected in the water in June 2018, so six months behind original schedule.  Delivery to the RCN in 2019.   Margaret Brooke will be brought out of the shed when HDW goes into the water for her megablock assembly.  3rd AOPS steel is already being cut.  There were significant efficiencies found in production between AOPS #1 and AOPS #2.  The new schedule will be able to make up time with the efficiencies found so ship #5 will only (assuming no other issues) be 2-3 months behind the original schedule.

Seaspan is looking at building some of the blocks for the JSS in the gap between the OFSV and the OOSV (this has been in the media).  The idea here is to build blocks for parts of the ships that will not change as the design is refined (like tanks and bow).  These blocks will be built for both ships at the same time and stored until the OOSV is complete.  This is also expected in move up the timetable for when the JSS will be delivered and keep Seaspan from laying off people in the gap.

« Last Edit: February 23, 2018, 21:47:40 by Underway »

Online whiskey601

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 18,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,430
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2204 on: February 23, 2018, 18:24:59 »
Just a question for the people formerly known as Hull Techs. When these ship sections are mated and welded together, other than the weld and some longitudinal bracing, what guarantees the hull integrity on each side of the weld? Is there plating to prevent twisting and shearing?

Offline jollyjacktar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 154,337
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,234
  • My uncle F/Sgt W.H.S. Buckwell KIA 14/05/43 21 YOA
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2205 on: February 23, 2018, 22:31:47 »
Just a question for the people formerly known as Hull Techs. When these ship sections are mated and welded together, other than the weld and some longitudinal bracing, what guarantees the hull integrity on each side of the weld? Is there plating to prevent twisting and shearing?

To answer your question, they are using stronger bulb bars.  What is of some concern is the decks are not staggered between blocks to give some extra strength but straight.  The bow was apparently 60mm out when they trued to mate the bow on.   Irving tried to get away with it but it was picked up by our QA and attempts are now being made to bring the side shells closer together. 

https://youtu.be/3m5qxZm_JqM
Annoying Liberals, apparently I'm doing a good job of it =)

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 110,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,287
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2206 on: February 26, 2018, 14:14:01 »
Seaspan lawsuit

https://biv.com/article/2018/02/vancouver-shipyards-launches-lawsuit-against-federal-vessel-subcontractor

Rumour mill out here is that there will be delays of the OFSV going into service due to issues possibly related to this lawsuit.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 60,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,880
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2207 on: March 06, 2018, 14:33:06 »
Piece by Dave Perry of CGAI--read between the lines of gov't reports and optimism will be greatly tempered (note at chart slipping to right of delivery dates);

Quote
How is the National Shipbuilding Strategy Going?
http://www.navalreview.ca/wp-content/uploads/public/vol13num4/vol13num4art5.pdf

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 110,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,287
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2208 on: March 08, 2018, 10:46:34 »
Mind you I remember the Henry Larson being delayed 6 month after launch due to a failure of a large electrical component during sea trials. I wonder how NSS compare to other large ship programs in Canada's history?

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 21,660
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,193
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2209 on: March 08, 2018, 11:09:08 »
Piece by Dave Perry of CGAI--read between the lines of gov't reports and optimism will be greatly tempered (note at chart slipping to right of delivery dates);

Mark
Ottawa

You have a lot of criticisms of the program, but not all that many proposals.  Should we just stop building the ships that we're already building?

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 60,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,880
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2210 on: March 08, 2018, 11:22:48 »
jmt18325:  To be realistic would have Irving complete the (how many in reality?) RCN A/OPS and Seaspan the first four CCG vessels.  Then would simply buy everything else abroad at what I believe would be very substantial cost savings with much earlier delivery.  If need to keep some shipyards on west and east coast going for maintenance/repairs just subsidize them directly if necessary.

But that won't happen for obvious political reasons.

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 21,660
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,193
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2211 on: March 08, 2018, 11:29:42 »
Obvious political and strategic reasons.  There's no question that the plan was too late and too slowly implemented.  Now it is, and abandoning it would be a costly idea.

Offline Uzlu

  • New Member
  • **
  • 770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 37
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2212 on: March 08, 2018, 11:52:32 »
Mind you I remember the Henry Larson being delayed 6 month after launch due to a failure of a large electrical component during sea trials. I wonder how NSS compare to other large ship programs in Canada's history?
On 22 December 1977, it was decided to order six frigates of a projected twenty-ship programme.  HMCS Halifax was commissioned on 29 June 1992.

Offline Uzlu

  • New Member
  • **
  • 770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 37
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2213 on: March 08, 2018, 12:05:19 »
To be realistic would have Irving complete the (how many in reality?) RCN A/OPS and Seaspan the first four CCG vessels.  Then would simply buy everything else abroad at what I believe would be very substantial cost savings with much earlier delivery.  If need to keep some shipyards on west and east coast going for maintenance/repairs just subsidize them directly if necessary.
https://army.ca/forums/index.php/topic,120223.msg1517415.html#msg1517415

Online whiskey601

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 18,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,430
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2214 on: March 08, 2018, 19:03:23 »

Offline Underway

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 15,300
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 688
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2215 on: March 14, 2018, 12:22:00 »
Obvious political and strategic reasons.  There's no question that the plan was too late and too slowly implemented.  Now it is, and abandoning it would be a costly idea.

I would argue that its not bad money.  It's delayed by 6 months for CSC.  In the grand scheme of things that's really nothing for a project this big.  There are going to be delivery issues from a large number of subcontractors that are beyond the control of Irving and the gov't that will push the program back even more.  Long lead items may run into issues.  It's only going to get pushed back further. 

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 198,307
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,072
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2216 on: March 15, 2018, 19:39:16 »
This is the full article, because it's just too brilliant to only post a teaser.

I've not confirmed the prices, though...

http://www.newsoptimist.ca/opinion/columnists/hello-newport-news-shipyard-i-d-like-to-buy-an-aircraft-carrier-1.23201637

Hello, Newport News Shipyard? I’d like to buy an aircraft carrier

From the Top of the Pile

Brian Zinchuk/Battlefords News-Optimist

March 14, 2018 01:28 PM

“Hello, Newport News Shipyard? I’d like to buy an aircraft carrier.

“No, I’m not joking. I represent the Canadian government. I would like to buy a Ford-class nuclear powered aircraft carrier. You know, the one with the fancy schmancy electromagnetic catapults and arresting wires. Not one of those old Nimitz-class ones. They’re soooo 1970s. I want a 21st century carrier.

“Yes, I know it’s nuclear powered. We mine uranium in Saskatchewan, remember? We can handle that.

“What’s the cost you say? US$13 billion? That’s about C$17 billion? Okay. I’ll just keep talking Yankee Doodle Dandy money here so we don’t get confused, then convert to Monopoly money at the end, eh?

“Very good. Okay, so, like, when I go buy my pickup, they always have these bells and whistles, so can you tell me what those might be? Oh, yes, planes. I might need some of those. About 75, you say? And you call that an air wing? I thought those older Nimitz carriers carried 90 planes. Don’t need that many anymore? Okay, fine 75. I might get a few more. Where do I get them from? Call Lockheed Boeing and Grumman, then call you back about some other stuff I might need, like floor mats, undercoating and escort vessels? Okay. Be right back.”

>Click<

“Hello Lockheed? I’m from the Canadian government. I was just talking to your good buddies down in Newport News about buying a new carrier, and they tell me I need some planes, so I should call you first about some F-35Cs. Yeah, I need 36. That’s right, 36. Yes, I know that’s about half of what Canada was talking about for buying for the whole country, but we want this to be a gooder, so give me the full 36. Three squadrons. Right. US$121 million a pop, eh? So that’s $4.4 billion, give ’er take? Okay, put us down for 36.

“Oh, and you now own Sikorsky, too, right? I need 19 of those Seahawks helicopters. No, not those piece of crap Cyclones you sold us. Seahawks, got it? R and S models. About US$45 million each? About US$855 million. Okay, put me down for that, two. I might have to get back to you, cause I’m buying some escorts that will need choppers, too. Okay, bye.”

>Click<

“Boeing, old buddy! Yeah, it’s me, your Canadian hoser! Yeah, that guy. Remember we got all pissy about that Bombardier C-series tariff thing? Well, we’re over that, and we need some Super Hornets. Yeah, that’s right, the whole shebang – F-18E, F and G models. That’s right, G for Growler. I want a couple 12-plane squadrons of Es and Fs, and another five Growlers. How much? US$70 million each? So that’s US$2 billion? Okay. Get ‘em to me quick and we’ll throw in a case of Crown Royale. Later, gator.”

>Click<

“Grumman! How’s it going? I’m calling from Canada! We’d like to buy some of your planes. Yes, I know it’s been a very long time since Canada flew Grummans off a carrier. We’re trying to make up for that now. We need four E-2D Hawkeyes and two C-2 Greyhounds. You say they’re US$176 million and US$40 million a crack, eh? US$784 million. Okay. Get ‘em here quick.

>Click<

“Okay, Newport News, you said you had some escorts for me? You can relay a message to your other division of Huntington Ingalls in Maine? Okay. We’re going to need some escorts for a carrier strike group. I guess we can’t get any more of those Ticonderoga Class Aegis cruisers, so we’re going to keep it simple and use Arleigh Burke Class Aegis destroyers instead. No, I don’t want any frigates, that’s the whole reason we’re in this mess in the first place. How many do I need? Five? At US$2.2 billion each? Done. And I need two choppers each? Okay, I’ll call Lockheed back and add them.

And you say I might want a couple subs for escorts. How about the ones we already have? Too slow, eh? Okay. I’ll call Electric Boat.

“Yes, we have a new supply ship. We’re good, but thanks for offering.”

>Click<

“Electric Boat? Yeah, Canadian government here. We need two Virginia-class subs. How much? US$2.7 billion? Done. Build ‘em, please. Yes, we’re polite that way.

>Click<

Muttering to self: “Okay, carrier, US$13 billion; air wing, US$8.5 billion; surface escorts, US$11 billion; sub escorts, US$5.4 billion. That comes to US$37.9 billion. We’re going to need some bombs and bullets for all this, so let’s throw in another, oh, US$6 billion. That should cover it. So about US$43.9 billion gets a new and fully armed carrier strike group. What’s that in Canadian? C$56 billion.

“And the Royal Canadian navy figures it’s now going to cost us C$60 billion, give or take, for just 15 surface combatants, i.e. big frigates or small destroyers.

“Something’s not right here…”

Brian Zinchuk is editor of Pipeline News. He can be reached at brian.zinchuk@sasktel.net

Offline CBH99

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 18,095
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 580
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2217 on: March 15, 2018, 19:46:20 »
I'm impressed with the amount of effort & wit he put into that, and still kept it fairly accurate & relevant!    :)
Fortune Favours the Bold...and the Smart.

Wouldn't it be nice to have some Boondock Saints kicking around?

Offline jollyjacktar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 154,337
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,234
  • My uncle F/Sgt W.H.S. Buckwell KIA 14/05/43 21 YOA
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2218 on: March 15, 2018, 20:01:34 »
Something stinks in Denmark, as they say...   :tsktsk:
Annoying Liberals, apparently I'm doing a good job of it =)

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 118,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,278
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2219 on: March 15, 2018, 20:36:06 »
Here's where his math fails, however: we don't have the 8.5 B$ Canadian in the annual budget to operate that carrier group, in every given year.

Offline jollyjacktar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 154,337
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,234
  • My uncle F/Sgt W.H.S. Buckwell KIA 14/05/43 21 YOA
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2220 on: March 15, 2018, 20:47:43 »
But it does illustrate how garbage our procurement system is, value for money.
Annoying Liberals, apparently I'm doing a good job of it =)

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 198,307
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,072
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2221 on: March 16, 2018, 00:34:52 »
Here's where his math fails, however: we don't have the 8.5 B$ Canadian in the annual budget to operate that carrier group, in every given year.

Maybe we could rent some out to pay for the rest. Perhaps Germany might be interested.

Offline Spencer100

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 6,740
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 289
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2222 on: March 20, 2018, 14:53:10 »
You place that order right now and the NAFTA things goes away :)

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 198,307
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,072
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2223 on: March 21, 2018, 13:40:28 »
Unless we could get an even better deal in Mexico.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 110,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,287
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy
« Reply #2224 on: March 21, 2018, 14:14:30 »
Seasapn twitter shows that OFSV #2 modules are all together, now for fitting out.