- Reaction score
- 4,331
- Points
- 1,120
RC,
Which yard to you represent?
NS
Which yard to you represent?
NS
Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS
- Thread starter Privateer
- Start date
Stoker said:
What performance aspect of HMCS Labrador is not met by the AOPS? At a glance, they have relatively similar mission profiles and dimensions, with AOPS being a little lighter, faster, longer, and a lot more modern.
Two of the main differences will be range and survivability, with range going down and survivability going up. New cleanship regulations for the Arctic mean that there is no fuel against the shell, which naturally means quite a bit less fuel onboard. And the requisite double hull to meet that regulation, combined with much better stability regulations means better survivability.
Also, with an aft helideck, the Labrador lacked the flexibility of an aft working deck and crane and the benefit of setting the helo down closer to the CG of the vessel in rough weather.
Both have 4 positions for boarding and lifeboats, but the AOPS can be pushed to 6 with all of them protected from the elements and having better launch cover. AOPS can also carry and launch a raft, truck, and snowmobiles as required, which I don't believe was the case with the Labrador.
The Wind-Class ice-breakers also had a very high draft, which would make access to a lot of areas in the Arctic problematic, increase the likelihood of ice grounding, and make ridge penetration more challenging. They did have the forward propeller to help with milling, ramming, and clearing, but I think they were usually not mounted as they must have been a pain to maintain.
To be honest though, they'd look quite similar if the AOPS boats and foredeck weren't covered.
I would think that a updated CCGS Henry Larsen would be far better than a Labrador type. But this ship is probably a lot more ice capable then called for in a AOPS. Also a ships hull maximized for ice is usually terrible seaboats in open ocean. Although the Larsen has plenty endurance , nice accomidations and small crew. I think that suggested design's are a compromise of various factors mostly $$$$.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 12,402
- Points
- 1,160
Building a new copy of the HMCS Labrador would be like building a new Centurion tank. It was an excellent tank for it’s day, but technology has moved on.
- Reaction score
- 8,483
- Points
- 1,160
Lazarus rising:
In light of the Resolute Bay air crash, the Air Force report on deploying Trenton Griffons or Pet Chinooks by CC-177s for Majaid, and the pending decision on shipbuilding procurement I thought it was time to re-open this thread.
The particular point of interest is the availability of air assets north of 60.
It occurs to me that the AOPS is designed to supply a platform to maintain a presence north of 60 year round, even if restricted to movement at the ice-edge and in young ice.
The AOPS as currently configured, is designed to carry a CH-146 or a CH-148 and be able to launch and recover a CH-149. I personally think the deck should be big and strong to launch and recover the CH-147 as well.
Having said that:
Assume that we are 7 years down the road and there are 2 AOPS permanently on station north of 60 but at the ice edge, one in the Baffin Bay area and the other in the Beaufort Sea area.
With those two platforms in place how would their organic CH-146s influence Majaid planning?
How about if the CH-146s were replaced by the more operationally expensive CH-148s?
Or if a pair of CH-147s were based at Resolute or Nanisivik to work in conjunction with the AOPS and the Polar Icebreaker?
On another tack:
How do the AOPS hospital and hotel accomodations stack up against the existing land-based infrastructure in terms of quality and availability?
In light of the Resolute Bay air crash, the Air Force report on deploying Trenton Griffons or Pet Chinooks by CC-177s for Majaid, and the pending decision on shipbuilding procurement I thought it was time to re-open this thread.
The particular point of interest is the availability of air assets north of 60.
It occurs to me that the AOPS is designed to supply a platform to maintain a presence north of 60 year round, even if restricted to movement at the ice-edge and in young ice.
The AOPS as currently configured, is designed to carry a CH-146 or a CH-148 and be able to launch and recover a CH-149. I personally think the deck should be big and strong to launch and recover the CH-147 as well.
Having said that:
Assume that we are 7 years down the road and there are 2 AOPS permanently on station north of 60 but at the ice edge, one in the Baffin Bay area and the other in the Beaufort Sea area.
With those two platforms in place how would their organic CH-146s influence Majaid planning?
How about if the CH-146s were replaced by the more operationally expensive CH-148s?
Or if a pair of CH-147s were based at Resolute or Nanisivik to work in conjunction with the AOPS and the Polar Icebreaker?
On another tack:
How do the AOPS hospital and hotel accomodations stack up against the existing land-based infrastructure in terms of quality and availability?
- Reaction score
- 6,969
- Points
- 1,140
RC said:
Not to pick fly s**t from pepper, but the RCN has forecasters aboard all of their ships that have an air det. Eventually when the Met trade is up to strength all of the frigates and destroyers will have two forecasters.
- Reaction score
- 17,806
- Points
- 1,010
Kirkhill said:
AOPS will not carry anything besides a Cyclone. Trying carry a non-marinized army helo on a naval ship (especially one wth skids) is a disaster in the offing.
There is a misconception that landing on a moving ship is so easy, anyone can do it. It is not (speaking with over 500 deck cycles on HMC and allied ships).
A ship carrying a helo the size of Chinook would have to be much, much larger than what we are planning the AOPs to be. A Chinook, all up, is about double a Cyclone in weight.
- Reaction score
- 573
- Points
- 810
Quote from: Kirkhill on August 24, 2011, 12:08:52
The AOPS as currently configured, is designed to carry a CH-146 or a CH-148 and be able to launch and recover a CH-149. I personally think the deck should be big and strong to launch and recover the CH-147 as well.
Both incorrect:
Ref: http://www.forces.gc.ca/aete/documents/DRAFT%20AOPS%20Helicopter%20Interface%20Requirements%20Rev%204.pdf
3.2 Canadian Coast Guard Helicopter
The AOPS will operate a Cnadian Coast Guard helicopter during deployments to the Canadian Arctic. Characteristics of Canadian Coast Guard helicopter are listed at Appendix A.
The AOPS may operate a Canadian Coast Guard helicopter on occasion during deployments in other Canadian waters, including: the Atlantic Ocean, the Pacific Ocean, the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the Great Lakes.
...
The AOPS shall provide the facilities and services required to maintain one Canadian Coast Guard helicopter for deployments of up to 120 days duration, during which the helicopter is assumed to fly for a total of approximately 150 hours.
...
3.3 CH-148 Cyclone Helicopter
The AOPS will support limited operations of a CH-148 Cyclone helicopter on occasion and for short periods during deployments in the Atlantic Ocean, the Pacific Ocean and in international waters...
...
The AOPS will have limited ability to support the CH-148 Cyclone ... (no C_RAST, no MPAS, no IVHMS, no ADR, no workshops, no munitions)...
3.4 CH-149 Cormorant Helicopter
The AOPS will provide an emergency flight deck and refuelling services for the CH-149...
The CH-146 or CH-147 or not included. My preference would be to operate (within appropriate limits), but not necessarily embark, all CF helicopters. However, that would come with a cost, and there is little wiggle room in AOPS.
The AOPS as currently configured, is designed to carry a CH-146 or a CH-148 and be able to launch and recover a CH-149. I personally think the deck should be big and strong to launch and recover the CH-147 as well.
SeaKingTacco said:
Both incorrect:
Ref: http://www.forces.gc.ca/aete/documents/DRAFT%20AOPS%20Helicopter%20Interface%20Requirements%20Rev%204.pdf
3.2 Canadian Coast Guard Helicopter
The AOPS will operate a Cnadian Coast Guard helicopter during deployments to the Canadian Arctic. Characteristics of Canadian Coast Guard helicopter are listed at Appendix A.
The AOPS may operate a Canadian Coast Guard helicopter on occasion during deployments in other Canadian waters, including: the Atlantic Ocean, the Pacific Ocean, the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the Great Lakes.
...
The AOPS shall provide the facilities and services required to maintain one Canadian Coast Guard helicopter for deployments of up to 120 days duration, during which the helicopter is assumed to fly for a total of approximately 150 hours.
...
3.3 CH-148 Cyclone Helicopter
The AOPS will support limited operations of a CH-148 Cyclone helicopter on occasion and for short periods during deployments in the Atlantic Ocean, the Pacific Ocean and in international waters...
...
The AOPS will have limited ability to support the CH-148 Cyclone ... (no C_RAST, no MPAS, no IVHMS, no ADR, no workshops, no munitions)...
3.4 CH-149 Cormorant Helicopter
The AOPS will provide an emergency flight deck and refuelling services for the CH-149...
The CH-146 or CH-147 or not included. My preference would be to operate (within appropriate limits), but not necessarily embark, all CF helicopters. However, that would come with a cost, and there is little wiggle room in AOPS.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 12,402
- Points
- 1,160
SeaKingTacco said:
Coast Guard has had the labs land on the deck of the CCGS Darby which was an ex-oil rig resupply vessel, I think they did the same with the Terry fox, but not 100% sure. A leased oil rig supply vessel would be an excellent way to provide a mobile helicopter support platform. would be worth trying out just for the experiance it would bring. I regularly see a Chinook operating off a 200' foot barge on the central coast as part of a logging operation.
Mind you all of the above are limited to decent weather or sheltered waters.
- Reaction score
- 8,483
- Points
- 1,160
Baz said:
With Respect to all concerned - From the same document
From the statement that the Coast Guard helicopter is assumed to be the primary tenant while the AOPS is in the arctic, where the AOPS is to spend 2/3 of its time, and that the lead candidate for the Coast Guard helicopter is given as the Bell 412, which (I stand to be corrected) is the civilian designation of the CH-146 Griffon, I assumed that the Griffon would be able to operated from the AOPS.
Lots of assumptions. I'm sure at least one of them is wrong.
- Reaction score
- 8,483
- Points
- 1,160
Not to put too fine a point on it:
Canadian Coast Guard helicopter (MBB Bo105) on skids, on a ship (USCGS Healey) at sea, in the ice.
And also we have this:
http://www.stxmarine.com/lib_cowley.html
Describing the CCGS Leonard J. Cowley, which patrols the Grand Banks, as being capable of supporting those same MBB Bo105s.
The Cowley displaces 2080 tonnes and is 72m LOA.
I am going to guess, because I have no knowledge, that an ice-covered sea does not generate the same wave motion as open waters - even if the ice is just slob.
On the other hand, the Cowley operates in the open waters of the North Atlantic without benefit of RAST equipment (as I understand).
The Cowley is broadly in the same class as the Danish OPV Rasmussen, which see
- Reaction score
- 573
- Points
- 810
Kirkhill said:
Nope, none of them are wrong. But your original port said "designed to operate" a CH-146, which is wrong. Operate and embark have differnet meanings, and just because a similar type can operate and/or embark, doesn't automatically make a fleet capable of doing so.
AOPS theoritcally could operate the CH-146, but we have no intention of training CH-146 crews to do so. Coast Guard crews are already trained in Maritime Ops.
As I said, I would like to see all of the CF helicopter inventory able to operate to *some* extent with all CF ships, but the resources required aren't available. Well, not completely true - the HOSTAC (Helicopter Operations from Ships other Than Aircraft Carriers) may allow some degree of operation, which is TBD.
By the way, VU-32 Hueys operated from, but did not embark on (AFAIK), HMC Ships up until 1992:
http://www.shearwateraviationmuseum.ns.ca/aircraft/twinhuey.htm
They obviously had their own section in the SHOPs (Shipborne Helicopter Operational Procedures).
Editted to Change AOPS could carry...
- Reaction score
- 6
- Points
- 430
Kirkhill said:
The Cowley is capable of embarking a helicopter, as are the 1100 class ice breakers, some others, and all the larger ships (Larsen, Radisson, Louis, etc, with the exception of the Fox, no hanger facilities), but does not regularly operate with one. It's only embarked as required by mission.
With regards to the ice breakers/arctic ops, the helicopters typically fill the ice recce/resupply role.
- Reaction score
- 6
- Points
- 430
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not.
I only point it out as I know many people assume because the coast guard ships have a hanger, they carry a helicopter (+pilot and mechanic), while reality is they seldom do. Just as often, if not more often, the hanger is used as a cargo deck.
Assuming that the Cowley is operating with a helicopter in the North Atlantic on a regular basis is a bit of a stretch, and comparing coast guard helicopter operations/requirements to naval helicopter operations/requirements would be a bit of a further stretch.
I only point it out as I know many people assume because the coast guard ships have a hanger, they carry a helicopter (+pilot and mechanic), while reality is they seldom do. Just as often, if not more often, the hanger is used as a cargo deck.
Assuming that the Cowley is operating with a helicopter in the North Atlantic on a regular basis is a bit of a stretch, and comparing coast guard helicopter operations/requirements to naval helicopter operations/requirements would be a bit of a further stretch.
- Reaction score
- 8,483
- Points
- 1,160
I know this is a bit tangential to the matter at hand but:
The Northwest Passage seems likely to be more of a canal maintained by Transport Canada Ice Breakers and policed by the RCMP with the Navy standing Gate Guard at both ends. To my eye it seems that that chunk of real estate is more likely to be accessed by planes, helicopters, ATVs and OSVs than it is by ships.
Is it realistic to suggest that perhaps all civilian vessels over a certain size that intend to operate in ice covered Canadian waters should be required to have a large Helicopter Landing Pad - both for their own safety and also to increase the number of "lily pads" available to aircrew and the number or "refuges" available to distressed survivors or disasters..... But I digress.... A lot.
The thought was prompted by seeing a few minutes of a Mighty Ships episode on the Voisey Bay AC4 Ice Capable Bulk Carrier Umiak 1 of some approximately 30,000 DWT. That led me to Canship Ugland, which led me to FedNav, which led me to a fleet of ice strengthened bulk carriers and tankers, some of which already are equipped with helicopter pads. Umiak 1 apparently has an older cousin of roughly the same capabilities: Arctic.
I presume that in addition to servicing the odd northern mine, ( like Voisey Bay, Rankin, Polaris and Nanisivik ) that the bulk of the freight carried is grain and ore on the Great Lakes and, more importantly for this discussion, on Hudson Bay out of Churchill.
The Northwest Passage seems likely to be more of a canal maintained by Transport Canada Ice Breakers and policed by the RCMP with the Navy standing Gate Guard at both ends. To my eye it seems that that chunk of real estate is more likely to be accessed by planes, helicopters, ATVs and OSVs than it is by ships.
Is it realistic to suggest that perhaps all civilian vessels over a certain size that intend to operate in ice covered Canadian waters should be required to have a large Helicopter Landing Pad - both for their own safety and also to increase the number of "lily pads" available to aircrew and the number or "refuges" available to distressed survivors or disasters..... But I digress.... A lot.
The thought was prompted by seeing a few minutes of a Mighty Ships episode on the Voisey Bay AC4 Ice Capable Bulk Carrier Umiak 1 of some approximately 30,000 DWT. That led me to Canship Ugland, which led me to FedNav, which led me to a fleet of ice strengthened bulk carriers and tankers, some of which already are equipped with helicopter pads. Umiak 1 apparently has an older cousin of roughly the same capabilities: Arctic.
I presume that in addition to servicing the odd northern mine, ( like Voisey Bay, Rankin, Polaris and Nanisivik ) that the bulk of the freight carried is grain and ore on the Great Lakes and, more importantly for this discussion, on Hudson Bay out of Churchill.
Similar threads
