• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

You would have thought they would of tackled that at their last docking but as mentioned they probably want to do the very least on the ship to maximise profits. If we did purchase we probably would obligated to correct this as the excess free surface effect and any restrictions that resulted would allow for expanded helo operations.
I mean, the profit margin on that contract is fairly high already, so probably a business cost for the extra downtime.

We're still in the short DWP cycles for downtime, so doing ECs that extends DWPs probably hits their operational charge out. Suspect that impact drops off as they get into the 10-15 years out from the inital refit and start having to do larger repairs, but unless we pay for it all they won't do anything unless they need to do an upgrade to stay within class.

The threshold for staying within class can be surprisingly low, and also seems to vary dependign on who is paying the invoice when they give an opinion.
 
I mean, the profit margin on that contract is fairly high already, so probably a business cost for the extra downtime.

We're still in the short DWP cycles for downtime, so doing ECs that extends DWPs probably hits their operational charge out. Suspect that impact drops off as they get into the 10-15 years out from the inital refit and start having to do larger repairs, but unless we pay for it all they won't do anything unless they need to do an upgrade to stay within class.

The threshold for staying within class can be surprisingly low, and also seems to vary dependign on who is paying the invoice when they give an opinion.
Much better to cut her loose after the JSS are operational and build two more at a later date. Sounds like they're positioning themselves to be a rental tanker company and you'll no doubt see more videos and PR making the ship seem better than it is. I know they are mentioning the Arctic a lot in their videos, they never been in Arctic waters as of yet.
 
Much better to cut her loose after the JSS are operational and build two more at a later date. Sounds like they're positioning themselves to be a rental tanker company and you'll no doubt see more videos and PR making the ship seem better than it is. I know they are mentioning the Arctic a lot in their videos, they never been in Arctic waters as of yet.
Yeah, I think it's a great stopgap, but their marketing has always been a lot better than their actual delivery, and always found a lot of the lies they keep repeating about their NSS bid fairly offputting (the whole NSS was delayed so they could submit a bid, they just lost).
 
Fully agree. There is lots of work for Seaspan getting the CCG back to new ships. We'll have our hands full with fleet expansion from other directions for the next 10 years.

Having them hit the water and join the fleet just as PRO/ PRE get ready for mid life would be perfect timing.
2027 HMCS Protecteur
2028 HMCS Preserver
2033 HMCS Fraser
SSKs?
 
Or order 2-3 much simpler oilers, next, to be shuttle tankers.

Or follow the Aussies again?

"The Royal Australian Navy (RAN) purchased the commercial tanker MT Delos in 2004, converting it into the fleet replenishment vessel HMAS Sirius (O 266). Converted in Western Australia and commissioned in 2006, this project provided a cost-effective alternative to a new build, serving until its decommissioning in 2021."

A year or two to bring into service.
15 years service from the hull.
 
It's docking dependent steel work, but frankly a lot easier than the extent of the repairs we routinely do during dockings, as the scope would be planned ahead. The only tricky bit would be figuring out how much of the skin to take off the double hull to get the plating into tanks, and making sure you don't pull off so much the ship strength is compromised. Normal access is only via small tank openings, so pretty normal to cut access holes for tank work for schedule, and cheaper than trying to get it in via the 2'-3' access hatch that's 4 decks down in the ship (which is too small for any of this anyway).

That's normal for repairs as well, as some equipment doesn't actually have removal routes, but generally that's things like huge engine blocks or very large air flasks. Those are expected to have a similar lifespan to the ship, barring catastrophic failures (which is why maintenance is important), but the kind of thing you would like at doing as part of a lifespan extension.

Usually the killer part of all those jobs is interference items in the way that need to be pulled out, especially anything with power connections, or wire routing along the way where you need to disconnect it (with LOTO and tracking, so it gets reconnected). There really is nothing in the tanks, and pretty minimal stuff in the double hull (if anything) so it's almost exclusively steel work and painting. So time consuming but not difficult.
That’s such an unfortunate oversight in the execution of the vessel. As far as I know, and I certainly stand to be corrected, the propulsion, hotel systems and accommodations as well as the ability to transfer and store provisions (without a native help, notwithstanding) are all successfully done or otherwise reliable.
 
Asterix did what it was supposed to do at a time when we had no other options. It did great service. Yes it was expensive and yes there were some bad design decisions that lead to not idea seakeeping (including an accident with a Cyclone). Good and bad.

Kept us in the Pacific and relevant, and allowed the new Pacific strategy to be realized. We have connections and relationships we didn't have when Asterix was new. One of the criticisms was that were were fair weather friends. The last 8-10 years we've been a constant presence, and Asterix has a lot to do with that.
 
Back
Top