- Reaction score
- 2,443
- Points
- 940
:suffolkowner said:
Engine Room Fire in HMCS Protecteur
- Thread starter Edward Campbell
- Start date
Jarnhamar
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 5,763
- Points
- 1,160
If the CF chooses to retire the ship would it be a dumb idea to suggest turning the ship into some kind of training vessel? It can't sail but considering what happened it could be turned into a good simulator to train crews how to fight an epic fire in the dark, no electricity etc..
They could also section off an area of the ship put up some rubber walls and make a live fire kill house type range on board for boarding party training.
They could also section off an area of the ship put up some rubber walls and make a live fire kill house type range on board for boarding party training.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Oh yeah that works .
"You have reached the RCN, please be advised that we will be unable to assist you and/or conduct major naval operations for the next 4 years. If you would like to speak to one of our allies please use your touch tone key pad.
For the USN prsss 1
For the RN press 2
For the RAN press 3"
:
- Reaction score
- 727
- Points
- 1,160
ObedientiaZelum said:
At one point in time the RCN actually had old ships that they did controlled burns for shipboard fire fighting. We now have environmentally friendly ship simulators on each coast to conduct DC/FF training. HMCS Protecteur is so full of hazardous materials that turning it into a training simulator wouldn't work, she'll end up at the breakers at some point.
- Reaction score
- 1,049
- Points
- 1,060
Chief Stoker said:
Thanks Chief
It seemed a reasonable question to me
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 280
Further to this, I am now being told that junior PRO personnel are already being picked up for support to this summer's MARS training in the ORCAs. This is fine but remember that there is more to FG than MARS training. As was mentioned, the west coast ships are at a manning level that is unprecedented. The problem is, if PRO actually gets decommissioned; that would send all those positions back to VCDS. We learned that the hard way with HURON's decommissioning. Figure out who is close to finishing their training, get them sailing with PRE to finish and move the remainder to HAL and KIN class to begin the transition. Some would say that it is not that simple but you know what?...It actually is...The archaic policies in place and mixed priorities which will actually hamper this are what is not simple.
- Reaction score
- 18,739
- Points
- 1,360
The difference being that HUR was being struck from the fleet as part of directed structural drawdowns, thus an establishment reduction vice REMAR redistribution, whereas PRO is the current embodiment (REMAR, if you will) of an ongoing AOR capability (justified establishment).
Cheers
G2G
Cheers
G2G
- Reaction score
- 2,443
- Points
- 940
Yes, because our initial reaction to CAF personnel exposed to a catastrophic incident is to release them.suffolkowner said:
- Reaction score
- 9,113
- Points
- 1,360
Journeyman said:
:rofl:
We actually treat it like a baseball team, the members get placed on waivers!
J
jollyjacktar
Guest
I can't speak for the west coast as I don't know where they bunker PRO, but if this was to happen to PRE it could be possible to use her as an alongside fuel depot. They have electric pumps which are supplied from shore power that are used to fuel other ships in harbor. Imperial Oil is just across the harbour at Dartmouth for top ups etc.
In addition, if they do decide that PRO is beyond economical repair then she will become a source of parts for PRE until she is retired as well. For many of the engineering systems the companies that made the original parts are no longer in business or OEM parts are not available. We once had to find a head for the joy air compressor in a scrap yard in northern Texas.
In addition, if they do decide that PRO is beyond economical repair then she will become a source of parts for PRE until she is retired as well. For many of the engineering systems the companies that made the original parts are no longer in business or OEM parts are not available. We once had to find a head for the joy air compressor in a scrap yard in northern Texas.
FSTO
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,793
- Points
- 1,210
jollyjacktar said:
Our fuelling facility is across the harbour in Colwood.
Since it will be an unmanned tow from Pearl to Esquimalt, all our disposal issues and an honourable end to a great lady would be solved about midway between Hawaii and BC.
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 280
Oh I see PRE guys punching their screens right now for you even suggesting such a thing!!
I am sure that is one of the COAs being discussed though.
I am sure that is one of the COAs being discussed though.
- Reaction score
- 22,501
- Points
- 1,090
Chief Stoker said:
Or do hot crewing - Halifax crew six months, take the canal, change to Esquimalt crew, six months, take the canal, back to Halifax... lather, rinse, repeat.
- Reaction score
- 5,347
- Points
- 1,040
There is a big cost to transit the canal, plus it takes a fair bit of time. They'd leave one coast, get stuck on breakdowns along the way, maybe get through the line eventually (assuming they get a waiver for single hull tankers to go through the canal), break down and travel up along the west coast, then do a crew swap, a work period (with no available parts), then turn around and try and get her back....
Plus the PRO would still need some min crew/maintenance if they shelve her to keep her safe alongside while they are working out the disposal contract (requires extensive environmental and controlled goods surveys) so not something that gets done overnight.
Plus the PRO would still need some min crew/maintenance if they shelve her to keep her safe alongside while they are working out the disposal contract (requires extensive environmental and controlled goods surveys) so not something that gets done overnight.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 460
Navy_Pete said:
Not really, a fully loaded container ship can expect to pay around 500,000; which isn't much in the big picture. As for it taking a fair bit of time, the tanker should be able to do it in a month or less (considering a fully loaded container ship can get to NY from China in 26 days).
Disposal yards out east? The west coast is more than capable to handle disposing of vessels.
- Reaction score
- 5,347
- Points
- 1,040
Chief Stoker said:
Single hull tankers older then 25 years old no longer allowed to transit the Panama Canal (PTR class is cat 2 oiler);
https://www.pancanal.com/common/maritime/advisories/2011/a-17-2011.pdf
If they get a waiver, guessing there will be a big cost (escort tugs, etc). Also, last time one of our tankers went through it got no special treatment and wasn't considered a warship.
Also, there aren't many disposal yards at that size/draft. Disposal isn't worth enough money for anyone with that kind of facility in BC to care, as they make far more money building/repairing ships. You need to find a marine scrap yard, and there are only a few in Canada (Sault St Marie, Port Colburne and on in NS). Environmental disposal is also a big deal, so also need to be able to handle PCBs and a few other legacy hazmat items.
Few in the US (few in Maine/Oregon, one in California), but the US has some interesting rules wrt taking any other countries HazMat, or even going through their territorial waters, so they are cost prohibitive (may need to remove all hazmat, which includes some of the primers in the old coatings, gaskets, etc). There is a spot in Mexico, but then there is the CG aspect, plus politics of doing it outside of Canada.
Ship disposal is a lot more complicated then you may think, if you do it IAW our laws. We could always tow the ship the other way (ie further west), assuming we are okay with ignoring our own laws and a number of international treaties.
Similar threads
