Author Topic: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)  (Read 797361 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MTShaw

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • New Member
  • *
  • 1,885
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 40
  • Dont believe everything you say.
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1900 on: February 24, 2018, 21:33:51 »
FFS has a contract to perform. Davie better not be giving the Libs an opportunity to terminate for breach.

But if they build a giant piece of crap or that simply doesn't meet the qualifications of the contract, it's the government's obligation to terminate. You intimate that it would be preferable for the government accept an unqualified ship.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 198,605
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,363
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1901 on: February 24, 2018, 22:02:34 »
Who is responsible for supplying and fitting the Government Supplied Equipment?
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 19,520
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 863
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1902 on: February 24, 2018, 22:05:47 »
But if they build a giant piece of crap or that simply doesn't meet the qualifications of the contract, it's the government's obligation to terminate. You intimate that it would be preferable for the government accept an unqualified ship.

We do that all the time, and fix it ourselves.  Why would we change now?  We are into big political movers and shakers when you turn a ship back.  The Irving family has every MP, MPP and probably municipal politician from the Quebec border east on speed dial and/or donates to their campaigns.  You go ahead and tell the #3 people on the Canadian most wealthy list the bad news.  The RCN can't do that.  That's a minister to prime minister level gonadal fortitude requirement.  And I doubt the RCN leadership is able to speak truth to power on that one.

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 28,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,733
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1903 on: February 24, 2018, 22:32:15 »
Other way around MT Shaw, : if the ship and the services fail to perform as per whatever the contract is, then terminate. Although buying duds and crappy services is a signature hallmark of Canadian defence procurement,  Davie nor Irving nor Seaspan are remarkable in that regard.

Offline MTShaw

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • New Member
  • *
  • 1,885
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 40
  • Dont believe everything you say.
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1904 on: February 24, 2018, 22:43:50 »
Other way around MT Shaw, : if the ship and the services fail to perform as per whatever the contract is, then terminate. Although buying duds and crappy services is a signature hallmark of Canadian defence procurement,  Davie nor Irving nor Seaspan are remarkable in that regard.

And we're all kind of stuck with that. Unless we have NATO yards with notable building excellence build our ships. Or Korea.

Offline Occam

    Go RRRRRRRREDBLACKS!

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 93,015
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,005
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1905 on: February 25, 2018, 10:42:29 »
Who is responsible for supplying and fitting the Government Supplied Equipment?

The GFE is, obviously, being supplied by DND.  Installation of GFE is being carried out by subcontractors to FFS.  I'm providing two systems, to be installed by L-3.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 198,605
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,363
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1906 on: February 25, 2018, 11:05:18 »
The GFE is, obviously, being supplied by DND.  Installation of GFE is being carried out by subcontractors to FFS.  I'm providing two systems, to be installed by L-3.

Thanks for the info Occam.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1907 on: February 25, 2018, 11:17:22 »
And there are items I'm supplying as well.

Offline Occam

    Go RRRRRRRREDBLACKS!

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 93,015
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,005
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1908 on: February 25, 2018, 11:21:30 »
Anytime.  FYI, from my perspective (which is pretty low on the totem pole), I hope we never do this again.  The sheer volume of e-mail and paperwork generated by the need to set up Technical Assistance Agreements (TAA) and Third Party Transfer (TPT) agreements to allow DND to share technical data and transfer Controlled Goods equipment to third parties has been nothing less than a pain in my backside for months.  It has been quite unpleasant, and taken me away from my normal job taking care of the existing fleet.  It's a lot easier to say "Fleet Maintenance Facility Cape Scott, install this.  Specification, tech data and pubs are attached", and they just pull the necessary materiel from the CF Supply System.  No figuring out the logistics of sending GFE to subcontractors outside of Canada for pre-assembly, then shipped to the coast for installation by another subcontractor.

Offline NavyShooter

    Boaty McBoatface!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 180,301
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,918
  • Death from a Bar.....one shot, one Tequilla
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1909 on: February 25, 2018, 14:54:44 »
But if they build a giant piece of crap or that simply doesn't meet the qualifications of the contract, it's the government's obligation to terminate. You intimate that it would be preferable for the government accept an unqualified ship.


We accept crap all the time from ISI and spend thousands of hours fixing it why would we expect this one to be any different?
Insert disclaimer statement here....

:panzer:

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 127,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,936
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1910 on: February 26, 2018, 10:29:09 »
Seaspan is in a lawsuit with one of it's sub-contractors, for failure to fulfill the terms of the contract. Seems the first OFSV needs to be fixed before acceptance.

Offline Uzlu

  • Member
  • ****
  • 1,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 101
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1911 on: March 06, 2018, 06:54:26 »
Quote
DND wants early start on construction of already delayed navy resupply ships

The plan would see some work on the two support ships begin later this year, keeping the scheduled delivery to 2022 and 2023, rather than 12 months later

OTTAWA — The Department of National Defence wants to get an early start on cutting steel for the navy’s new support ships, hoping to keep the multibillion-dollar project from slipping farther behind schedule.

The plan would see some work on the two support ships begin in Vancouver later this year, taking advantage of a lull in the construction of two science vessels for the Canadian Coast Guard.

While the science vessels would still be delivered first, officials are hoping the head start will prevent another 12-month delay to the Protecteur-class joint support ships, as the naval vessels are officially known.

Defence officials are now talking to counterparts from other federal departments about the plan, which was initially pitched by Seaspan Shipbuilding in Vancouver.

Seaspan is responsible for building the two Protecteur-class vessels as well as four science ships and a polar icebreaker for the coast guard.

“The final shipyard proposal for the construction of the joint support ships will be presented for government approval in the coming year,” Defence Department spokesman Daniel Le Bouthillier said in an email.

“Discussions are underway on an early start to construction of the ships in 2018. This would result in the delivery of the first ship in about four years, with the second ship being delivered one year later.”

The plan is the latest twist in what has been a decade-long odyssey to equip the military with new support vessels, which are considered some of the most essential ships for a modern navy.

Canada has been without a permanent support ship since 2015, when the navy was forced to retire its existing vessels due to an unexpected fire and corrosion.

The gap will get a little smaller Tuesday when the Royal Canadian Navy formally welcomes to the fleet the converted civilian freighter MV Asterix, which will be leased to the government for five years, with a five-year option.

Navy commander Vice-Admiral Ron Lloyd was set to participate in a ceremony Tuesday in Halifax, after which the Asterix is expected to participate in a major U.S.-led exercise before heading to Asia.

But defence officials have said Asterix, which is owned by Quebec-based Davie Shipyards, won’t be deployed into harm’s way and is not a true military vessel like the Protecteur-class — an assertion that Davie has refuted.

“This ship has a robust force protection capability for when it deploys outside of Canadian waters,” said Spencer Fraser, head of Davie’s sister company, Federal Fleet Services. “So to say the ship is defenceless is a complete exaggeration and misnomer.”

Construction on the first support vessel was supposed to start in 2016, with delivery slated for 2019. But the project has been plagued by delays and cost uncertainty; the government says its $2.3-billion budget is also under review.

The most recent concern was a warning from Seaspan that it might have to lay off workers during a gap in construction between the third and fourth science vessels, which are completely different designs.

That prompted fears that experienced workers would move to other shipyards and be unavailable when it came time to ramp up production on the last science vessel and the support ships.

Starting some work on the support ships would prevent layoffs, said Seaspan vice-president Tim Page. It would also keep the scheduled delivery of the support ships to 2022 and 2023, rather than 12 months later.

“This opportunity will support the needs of our navy customer and enable us to retain the shipbuilding knowledge and experience of our workforce,” Page said in an email.
http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/national-defence-aims-to-save-time-by-cutting-steel-on-resupply-ships-early

Offline Privateer

    Looking for the bubble.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 18,860
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 351
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1912 on: March 06, 2018, 12:48:46 »
Happened across this recent federal government direction:

Quote
Direction Made Pursuant to Section 224 of the National Defence Act Respecting Civilian Crews on Auxiliary Vessels

Short Title

1 This Direction may be cited as the Civilian Crews on Auxiliary Vessels Direction.

Application

2 It is hereby directed that the Government Vessels Discipline Act shall apply to civilian crews engaged for service on auxiliary vessels of the Canadian Forces.

Edit to add:  That Act is not an easy find. It looks like it wasn't carried forward into the current consolidation of the statutes.  Indexed at R.S.C. 1970, c. G-12
« Last Edit: March 06, 2018, 13:34:02 by Privateer »

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 739,057
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,874
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1913 on: March 06, 2018, 16:09:36 »
I went on a tour of Asterix last night given by Spencer Fraser CEO of Federal Fleet, enjoy the pictures.

https://www.facebook.com/pg/GOCANADANAVY/photos/?tab=album&album_id=1774026875989368

"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 28,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,733
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1914 on: March 06, 2018, 16:18:33 »
Nice gym!!

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1915 on: March 06, 2018, 16:50:48 »
Thanks, Chief.  Very nice looking girl.

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 38,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,640
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1916 on: March 06, 2018, 17:55:50 »
The best part? The Trudeau picture seems to have disappeared!

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 739,057
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,874
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1917 on: March 06, 2018, 17:58:39 »
The best part? The Trudeau picture seems to have disappeared!

No sadly several of them are still there.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 38,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,640
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1918 on: March 06, 2018, 18:07:21 »
No sadly several of them are still there.

Ah crap. I was hoping some sanity had prevailed.

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1919 on: March 06, 2018, 18:31:00 »
No sadly several of them are still there.

As Dartboards?  He asked hopefully...

Offline MTShaw

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • New Member
  • *
  • 1,885
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 40
  • Dont believe everything you say.
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1920 on: March 06, 2018, 19:08:38 »
As Dartboards?  He asked hopefully...

Holy sh!t, they're seriously putting the Prime Minster's picture on military vessel. What happened to our monarch, or at least the commander of our military.

The longer I'm a liberal, the more conservative I become.

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1921 on: March 06, 2018, 19:19:49 »
Strictly speaking, Asterix isn't military.  We're just leasing her services and crew.

Offline Patski

  • Guest
  • *
  • 370
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1922 on: March 07, 2018, 10:05:20 »
At Least it's not a Trump Picture... I wanted to go see it in Levis's yard when they launched it, but during the week, it wasnt possible to get free time...

Offline Pusser

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 85,490
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,777
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1923 on: March 07, 2018, 10:10:49 »
Strictly speaking, Asterix isn't military.  We're just leasing her services and crew.

In that case, it should be a picture of the company president...
Sure, apes read Nietzsche.  They just don't understand it.

Offline Furniture

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 23,747
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 338
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #1924 on: March 07, 2018, 11:14:08 »
Being a privately owned ship they could festoon it with pictures of My Little Pony, Carebears, etc.. and it bears no reflection on the CAF, or it's CoC.

If Davie wants to suck up to the PM let them. Maybe it will result in more ships for the federal fleet that they can't, or shouldn't have to wait for any longer.