AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

[Garbageman]

The BWK gives you the perspecitive of what the OOW has to do up there to ensure that you have a safe deck to land on. Or why the OOW is not giviing the LSO a green deck because of numerous other actions going on that has a higher priority than the helicopter,
 

By this logic then, shouldn't all MARS types go through Portage for lead-in flight training?  After all, it would give them the perspective of what the MH types are doing.

Let's get realistic here - MOCs have a specific role, and can't be expected to know how every other MOC that they interact with will behave.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

You guys can argue this all you want, but I can't ever see us undoing unification.   Should MH aircrew be OOW quailifed?   Technologically, it is a different era.   Aircrew have a much more complicated aircraft than ever before to learn and understand.   That takes time.   Ships are also much more complex than in the 1960s, so I think that it is much harder to be an OOW now.  

FTSO, I don't understand your points about OOW/aircrew relations.   On every ship I have ever sailed on, we have made it a point for the new aircrew to get a general feel for what an OOW is faced with.   We also take every OOW for a flight (it is in their req book) so they see our problems.

I fully understand the "crew rest" issue for BWKs and have always argued that the Navy needs to think about it, too.   I have seen some really stupid things happen on a ship because the OOW was exhausted.   The Navy chain of command, however, does not seem to be ready for these kinds of rules.

As for having pilots or Navs stand as OOWs while helo is broken- huh?   Every ship that I am aware of on the West Coast now sails a 1-in-8 rotation for BWKs (for non-naval types, that is 4 hours on the bridge in every 32 hours) because there are so many officers in the fleet who require consolidation time and no sea time to do it in.   You would like to see maybe a 1-in-10 rotation?

Look, for what it is worth, I consider myself to be more of a "naval aviator" than I do a member of the air force.   It has more to do with attitude than uniform colour, in my opinion.

Cheers.

 

[FSTO]

By this logic then, shouldn't all MARS types go through Portage for lead-in flight training?  After all, it would give them the perspective of what the MH types are doing.

Let's get realistic here - MOCs have a specific role, and can't be expected to know how every other MOC that they interact with will behave.

We can go on and on here and as I said before, this will never happen. But saying all that, if I was the PM or MND then this is what I would do,
(and this will ruffle a lot of feathers and mud ;D) The government finally decides that we will take a more acitvist role in the world (UN and Martins L12 concept) and asks how we could best get people to where they are needed and support them. The MND looks around and sees that the best way to project your nations intrest is with a (no surprise here coming from me) Navy.
Using the Royal Navy as the model.
The Fleet
Fleet Air Arm
Marines.

Cry Havoc and let loose the feathers and mud of environmental indignation!!!!

 

[Cloud Cover]

if I was the PM or MND then this is what I would do,

Ok, so you're not in politics. A little more info in your forum profile might go a long way.  Thx.

 

[Sam69]

Look, for what it is worth, I consider myself to be more of a "naval aviator" than I do a member of the air force.  It has more to do with attitude than uniform colour, in my opinion.

I really don't want to wade into this debate but I gotta say D that your last point brought a tear to my eye. 

Great post.

Sam

 

[Cloud Cover]

I think we have done the carrier approach to death don't you?

Couldn't resist: might this be a possible carrier option if the USN would be so kind as to sell it to us? Cheers.

 

[Inch]

FSTO, I never said OOW's didn't need crew rest, I'm not too sure where you came up with that. As for everything else, I'm with the rest of the boys, MARS do their job, we'll do ours. Every non-aircrew type seems to think that we should do more wrt to their trades yet they have no inclination to do a basic air ops course to know what we can and can't do. You yourself said it "full appreciation", so let me get this straight, only aircrew needs to have full appreciation? Well hell, why aren't we running the military then? I can't wait to be the CO of a ship since I'll be one of the few that understand MH ops and ship evolutions in detail, I should get there pretty quickly.

It was a MARS officer that said to me one time after hearing what we do, "man, I had no idea you guys did that stuff", I asked what he thought we did and his response was " I dunno, joyride for 2.5 hrs?".

When I see a MARS officer sitting in my AOI class, then I'll be a little more open to learning their job. After all, why should I know their job while they can be ignorant of mine?

PS, if you don't know what an AOI is, then you need to work on the full appreciation thingy.

 

[FSTO]

Never accused you of saying that  OOW's, didn't need crew rest. I'll leave it at that.

Nice things about forum like this is that ideas can be brought fwd and debated to an extent that would be unthinkable at the federal cabinet level.

What was this thread orig. about? Oh yea, Anphib capability of JSS.
From my conversations with some of the higer ups, there is a huge debate on weather or not there will be a stern ramp for LCVP's to enter to embark troops and equipment. There is a fair amount of space that is lost for the docking area and flooding tanks.

More on this later, off to Singapore for a week!

Been a pleasure.

 

[Kirkhill]

there is a huge debate on weather or not there will be a stern ramp for LCVP's to enter to embark troops and equipment. There is a fair amount of space that is lost for the docking area and flooding tanks.

Interesting parting shot FSTO.

The observation of course demands the question "How Joint is this Joint Support Ship?".    Or is it just another AOR by another name?

Cheers ;D

 

[Jungle]

The observation of course demands the question "How Joint is this Joint Support Ship?".    Or is it just another AOR by another name?

The more we discuss this, the more it seems like it cannot work... Not that we won't "make it happen", we always do...   :
But there seems to be so many compromises to accomodate everyone, I am not sure it is possible to make it work. I'm starting to think we need 2 different platforms for 2 very different sets of tasks. I know Ex-Dragoon, we don't have the manpower, (are we supposed to say personpower now ??) but that's not my problem...
In the end, the JSS will be a Navy asset, and the Army will only get one when the Navy is ORDERED to provide it... We are still very far from joint, and there is little push to improve things. We are still stuck in inter-service rivalry, almost 40 years after unification...  

 

[Kirkhill]

In the end, the JSS will be a Navy asset, and the Army will only get one when the Navy is ORDERED to provide it... We are still very far from joint, and there is little push to improve things. We are still stuck in inter-service rivalry, almost 30 years after unification...

The question then becomes who will do the ordering.  Who can rise beyond their uniforms and make such an order sure in the knowledge that it will be wholeheartedly accepted and implemented?

Or is this a case where the decision on war is too important to be left to the Generals and Admirals?  Do we need a politician to take charge of the DND and force Jointness on them?

It would need a politician that would be sympathetic to military culture, understanding of military needs but also be willing to impose discipline on the department.  There are few enough politicians in Canada that would fit that bill.

There might be one however.  Senator Colin Kenny - Chair of the Senate Committee on Security etc (can't remember the full title).  He seems to have grip on the problem and is friendly towards the forces at large.

It has been a while since we had a Senator in an active role in cabinet but it is not without precedent.

Rambling off topic and thread here,  perhaps DS want to put this into a separate thread but the obvious connection here is with Jungle's astute observation on imposing Jointness. Paul Hellyer tried it, unsuccessfully, in 1964. About the same time that the Brits tried to do it by abolishing the Admiralty and the War Department and creating the Ministry of Defence. 

Both the Brits and Canada have yet to achieve full "purpleness".  Donald Rumsfeld is striving manfully to "transform" the US military in a "purple" force and I have no doubt that Wes can find examples of anti-joint obstruction in Australia.

It seems that the only time advances are made in jointness is when forceful civilians, acting against the screams of those in uniforms, impose jointness.  Wouldn't it be better, if rather than waiting to be shoved into an undesirable position kicking and screaming that for once the uniformed side took the lead and set out a rational, considered, co-operative programme?

 

[Cloud Cover]

Above all else, and in the absence of any alternatives, this ship's primary mission has nothing to do with "jointness" at all. The fleet in it's present configuratin needs RAS, first and foremost. Unless and until the fleet changes in mission, and nobody knows for sure if it will or will not [not a subject currently being publicly discussed by the Navy, if at all] then RAS trumps all other missions. That is why two platforms makes more sense right now, but we won't do that because of money and manpower.

In the usual Canadian tradition, some capabiility will be sacrificed to make room for "jointness." I believe the sacrifice will be AAD, others would say " No!: AAD will be found in the single hull concept, becuase that's what the plan says." To which the counter argument is: "concepts are just that: show me something more." In light of that situation, why bother with   "jointness"   at all, lets call it what it is: a barge service. That proposition carries with it a hollow political response [and hence the military one] " we woudn't deploy without allies to provide AAD." To which my personal opinion would be: to heck with jointness, let the army figure it out, becuase the loss of a full spectrum Navy would essentially be the end of the game for Canada as a maritime nation.

This is not a question of staying relevant to the current international situation, it's a question of long term priorities and making choices, and nobody is really sure what those prioroties are, and hence what choices have to made.    "Sucks to be the Navy"   right now, somebody needs to come out swinging, problem is Navy floated the JSS/ASLV 14 years ago as a complimentary vessel to the fleet, and not a primary role. Problem was then, and is now, " selective hearing", in and outside of the Navy.

As Nelson said before the Trafalgar: "if I should die today, let "want of frigates" be written across my chest." 

Cheers.  

 

[Kirkhill]

Above all else, and in the absence of any alternatives, this ship's primary mission has nothing to do with "jointness" at all. The fleet in it's present configuratin needs RAS, first and foremost. Unless and until the fleet changes in mission, and nobody knows for sure if it will or will not [not a subject currently being publicly discussed by the Navy, if at all] then RAS trumps all other missions. That is why two platforms makes more sense right now, but we won't do that because of money and manpower.

To which my personal opinion would be: to heck with jointness, let the army figure it out,

Fair enough whiskey.  The Navy shall do as it pleases.  The Army shall do as it pleases.  Presumably you would give the same freedom of manoeuvre to the Air Force.  You didn't really need those CP140s and Sea Kings after all?

As to Canada being a Maritime Nation.  We aren't a Maritime Nation.  Haven't been for a long, long time.  Not since that chap McKay took his designs down south from Nova Scotia and started building "Baltimore" Clippers in the 1850's.

Canada doesn't have a merchant fleet.  It never has.  Its merchant fleet was an extension of the British fleet.  Most of the money that financed it came from Britain 

Canada's naval contribution, has never been adequate (except for a hiccup between 1943 and 1945) to defend its coastal waters and the trade routes that its merchandise was transported on.  Canada's trade first was sheltered by the Royal Navy and British taxes and then by the US Navy and American taxes.

Canada's Navy, like Canada's Army has had the luxury of not being required to actually build a force to defend against threats and preserve the sovereignty of the nation.  It has been able to pick and choose missions that it likes/can afford.  It has never been backed into a corner and forced to take up a defensive posture against something that actually threatens Canada and Canadians directly. 

The more I think about this the more it seems likely that this is the real problem with the CF.  In the absence of a real threat (like the prospect of a hanging in the morning) both Canadian Officers  and Politicians have had the luxury of playing games.  And the games continue....

 

[Cloud Cover]

Kirkhill, you are quite correct. Modify maritime nation to negligent country with three resource rich oceans ripe for plunder, and sea lanes of approach currently unsurveilled after 5pm. I don't disagree with the merchant marine observations, the Income Tax Act never provided incentive for one outside of the Great Lakes. It follows that the RN never actually defended Canada, it defended British commercial interests located in Canada which exported/imported   to/from the motherland.

If the JSS swiss army knife comes at the price of sacrificing current fleet capabilities, then why proceed? If there is only X amount of dollars available, build or buy smaller AOR's and more frigates/destroyers/subs.

The Navy needs FFG/DDH capabilities along with MH's, and the MACC is tasked with providing those aircraft. The inverse is not true WRT to the Navy, in fact I would think the circumstances would be rare where the navy supports an air command function, providing of course the tactical thinking still exists that shipborne ASW is still a naval prerogative.* They should just build a straight AOR replacement and get it over with. The army will be no worse off in terms of it's relationship with the Navy, and certainly the country will be no less defended by the army whether the ship is built or not. But, to sacrifice overtretched AOR functions for new army missions is meritless in terms of planning for purely naval ops, which constitute the bulk of deployments. Unless of course the JSS is intended primarily for domestic operations, which presumably would alter the surface fleet matrix as you described above in an earlier post.

In any event, the JSS will likely need the protection of frigates and destroyers when delivering army gear, and those same ships require lots of fuel and supplies if the mission is for a measure of time beyond a few weeks at any distance away from home port. If the JSS is going to deliver army gear in benign environments only, then why have frigates and ddestroyers and friends with same, at all?    I'm not saying the army shouldn't have access to a sea to shore capability, it just shouldn't be in the form of a reduced gas tank apparently rendered undefended by a reduced FFG fleet.

A quad set of small 4500 tonne LPD's located in one port, perhaps manned by the reserves as required, would be the better option, along with a six pack of 12000 tonne tankers, split equally on each coast. Total tonnage = ~ 90, 000. Same as three fully loaded JSS.   Arguably, with a bit of legislative tinkering, these ships could be manned by reserves [LPD] and civvies [AOR].

As for Canada not having to defend itself, I never once saw a Delta IV or Victor come up to the surface and have a BBQ within sight of Vancouver or Whidbey Islands, or   47 °44'45"N 122 °43'40"W, but I know we had a few steaks on the quarterdeck looking for them!! Couldn't speak to whether that's the case right now, but it would be imprudent to risk it just so another country might be blessed with the guys in green arriving in theatre courtesy of the Navy.    Those are just my thoughts, unpopular as they are. Cheers.        

* I don't think the CP 140 ever was a navy asset per se: those squadrons formed from the RCAF Maritime Air Command Argus-Neptune lineage. The Sea Kings and Trackers came from the former RCN Fleet Air Arm.   I could be wrong, but I think until the 1980's, even the Trackers had FAA VF squadron numbers until their mission changed from ASW. [not sure why Sea Kings went 400 series, but somebody will explain, I'm sure]  

 

[Kirkhill]

Now we start to agree Whiskey.

But instead of 6x12000 AORs + 4x4500 LPD (Reserves) = 90,000 how about 4x12000 AORs and 3x14,000 LSD (Reserves) = 90,000?  Actually to get started I would even settle for 6x 12000 AORs and 1x 18,000 LSD.

And no, I don't think we should be out of the sub-hunting business but we have a lot more to do than just hunt subs.

All the best.

 

[canuck101]

What about 4 The Patino auxiliary oiler and multi-product replenishment ships at 17040 full load
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/patino/

and 2 LST 4001 Osumi at  8900ton
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/osumi.htm

What do you think of those as different options.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Okay, I'm getting worried.   Kirkhill annd W601 are beginning to agree on things...

 

[Kirkhill]

Shhh.  Don't tell anyone else.

 

[STONEY]

1. I believe that jss is still  pretty much a concept and or a work in progress, the final configuration  is by no      means anywhere near final. Requests for proposals haven't been issued yet and may not be for years yet. Then a final design has to be worked on and a contractor picked and a build plan set out so we have many moons still to go.
2. Can it be built in Canada?  God knows. Weather a yard has a large floating dock or not means nothing as we have to build the thing not fix it. Warships built today are put together using pre outfitted mega modules or building blocks of several hundred tons requiring large cranes to lift them in place. The yard requires plasma welding machines and steel plate shaping machines and the workforce to operate them plus all the CAD/CAM design shops to run everything. Too bad Saint John Shipbuilding who built the present AOR'S & most of the CPF'S and had all the expertise is now closed due to lack of buisness. If the west coast yards can't build a ferry on time and budget this could be their chance to tackle a JSS and  go over time and over budget & create another Defence boondoggle.
3. If you can remember back that far , when the present AOR'S were built they were touted as having the capability of embarking troops . They carried landing barges and had cranes to offload vehicles and equipment but over the years when this was exercised it proved of very limited use. i.e. with the flight deck covered with vehicles it proved difficult to operate helo's. 
4. The JSS will be at best a compromise. Naval planners know they stand a snowballs chance in hell to get 3 AOR'S & a couple trooplift ships out of the GOV.  so they settle for JSS just as they knew they would not get new subs so begged for second hand one's and refitted them on a shoestring budget.
5. I wonder how the AUSSIES are managing to get 3 new air-defence & command ship destroyers + a new tanker + 2 new LHD's (they look like aircraft  carriers but they ane not just as everything with a track isn't a tank as the media seems to call them)  + new main battle tanks + new lav's  + new subs  and the list goes on & on .  This from a country smaller than Canada in both population and GDP.

Just a few points i thought i'd throw in the discussion pot.

CHEERS 

 

[bossi]

I was just wondering has anyone seen or heard anything new on the JSS ships since the election promises were made.

Oh, what a coincidence ... a Brit-built ship just "happens" to be conducting cold weather trials in our neighbourhood... and so ironic, too:  

"... The trials are an important milestone on the road to completing full acceptance of the ship's novel all electric power plant.   ..."

(... sigh ... and the V-22 Osprey just finished some cold weather trials here, too ... what a pair THEY'D make ...)

http://www.herald.ns.ca/stories/2005/01/19/fMetro118.raw.html

Wednesday, January 19, 2005 Back The Halifax Herald Limited

British ship to visit port

The Royal Navy's amphibious assault ship HMS Albion will arrive in Halifax on Thursday for a four-day visit.

Albion acts as the command platform for the navy's amphibious task force.

The warship transports, deploys and recovers troops, and their equipment and vehicles, that form part of an amphibious assault force. It usually travels with a crew of about 370.

The ship is capable of taking 256 staff or troops (with an additional 405 troops in overload) and their associated vehicles and combat supplies.

Its vehicle deck can hold 31 large trucks and 36 smaller vehicles and their trailers. Albion can also carry armoured vehicles, including the 70-tonne Challenger II tank.

The vessel also has a flight deck capable of operating two helicopters at a time, with a third aircraft parked.

The warship sailed from the U.K. on Jan. 12 and is going to Canada and the United States for cold-weather trials.

It is the Royal Navy's on-call amphibious flagship and can be sent anywhere in the world at short notice.