Little Honking Ships......

[Colin Parkinson]

Excellent more recreational and commercial fishing boats to get run over, not to mention no more avoiding marine mammals or at least attempting to.

 

[Kirkhill]

Unmanned can mean lots of things.

It can mean being towed to and from docks with only a line handling detail on board.
It could mean an escort vessel with the pilot driving the vessel by remote control while positioned off her beam.
It could mean a man-in-the-loop satellite relay.
It could mean full autonomy.

It could mean some combination of any and all of the about with or without a reduced complement aboard.

Perhaps it means blue-water autonomy with satellite intervention but a piloted/tow escort in narrow waters.

 

[Sailorwest]

Diesel fuel will be relatively cheap and abundant for decades to come, even if we only depend on Canadian sources. The oil sands are the second largest deposit of hydrocarbons on Earth, and new technologies like fracking are bringing new sources of oil production on line. Just read the "No Oil" thread.

Although I think it might be somewhat abundant, I'm not convinced it's going to be cheap. The cost of building the oilsand projects, whether mined or in-situ not to mention the pipeline projects to get the oil to refineries are enormous and the unconventional sources of oil that are being found, tend to be more expensive to develop as well. I think that we are years away from getting to "Peak oil" but I am also sure we are years past "cheap oil".

Synthetic diesel created from GTL technologies or using LNG all have significant costs associated with them as well, not the least of which, an almost complete lack of infrastructure in Canada.

 

[Journeyman]

I gather from the link provided, the option of choice is.....

It could mean a man-in-the-loop satellite relay.

360o video feed to a ship-handler sitting in an office driving the vessel (kind of like UAVs on Ops -- only with more cameras and moving even slower [although responding slower too] ).


Not my area though.  :dunno:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I can imagine the insurance premiums for the first batch are going to be huge and likely barred from many ports. I also doubt their fancy systems would cope with a normal day of Hong kong marine traffic!
If you intend to man them as they come close, then how do you get crews onto them? Just ask the pilotage authorities how much fun that is to get 1-2 guys aboard in a seaway. Then what are they going to eat when aboard? The water will be stale. You will also have to automate the ballast water exchange systems, tankage measurements, rodent free certificates, etc. then you are also going to have to hold the ship in port where you pay moorage /anchoring fees to have a crew carry out the maintenance on it and equipment certifications.

 

[Kirkhill]

If an elderly but distinguished scientist says that something is possible, he is almost certainly right; but if he says that it is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

Arthur C. Clarke


Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/arthurccl100793.html#oKxrPoFebAjxOjrH.99

Or, restated

Every revolutionary idea seems to evoke three stages of reaction. They may be summed up by the phrases: (1) It’s completely impossible. (2) It’s possible, but it’s not worth doing. (3) I said it was a good idea all along.

  ;D

 

[Colin Parkinson]

It's technically doable, but it does not take into account the whole web of things that go one to get a ship from port to port and to keep it running. Ship owners have a long history of being cheap, they might bite at this idea at first, but eventually hiring a 3rd world crew to run the ship and keep things operating is cheaper then keeping the ship, plus the computer system, plus the myriad of sensors required operating. Plus the risk of just one major incident putting a end to the scheme, means significant financial risk. What you will see is more and more gradually automation and likely robotic help.

 

[a_majoor]

For the purposes of this discussion, having some remote cargo ships that can follow the Little Honking Ship and carry additional supplies for the deployed battlegroup (or for that matter a naval task force) might be a possible force multiplier for the RCN in the mid term, as that technology develops. Since these would be explicitly Naval vessels and under the control of the Navy, Naval personnel would be engaged to man the ship at critical junctures (like entering/exiting a port) and do inspections when the ship arrives back in home port.

 

[Kirkhill]

I figure if Volvo can get a bunch of cars to play follow the leader on a Spanish highway then we can't be too far from the millenium

http://phys.org/news/2012-05-autonomous-driving-volvo-convoy-road-spain.html


Or Komatsu running autonomous trucks in an Aussie mine

http://www.komatsu.com/ce/currenttopics/v09212/

 

[Journeyman]

I figure if Volvo can get a bunch of cars to play follow the leader on a Spanish highway ......

Too easy a test; let's see them drive in Kingston, where if they're not taken out by the anti-tank ditches pot holes, they'll quickly fall victim to the Queen's/SLC students who are too busy texting to signal/shoulder check while turning left from right-hand lanes....

/non-Navy tangent

 

[Colin Parkinson]

keep in mind that automating a merchant ships has to stay within the profit margins, if the costs to get the ship from point A to b and back again out weigh the normal crewing costs, it ain't going to happen. Also these are 3rd world crewing costs as well, not first world. BC ferries here is hoping to set up a cable ferry in the salt chuck to reduce crewing costs, I suspect the idea will quietly fizzle after a few years of trials.

I can see specialized automated ships such as insertion/pickup boats, mine hunters/layers and small boat hunters for the navy

For civilian world,  fireboats, survey launches and oil spill cleanup vessels. Also perhaps vessels to respond to nuclear accidents (not that anyone would foolishly build a plant near a coast line known for tsunami events)

 

[Kirkhill]

The French may be approachable on their Russian Mistrals......

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/152493/france-may-scrap-russian-warship-deal-over-ukraine.html

Vlad is buying two for 1.4 Bn Euros.  The French now don't want to sell them to him but they need the money (and the jobs) more.

I'm not sure how many more jobs there are currently. 

Even if we paid the full asking price it would be a deal in comparison to building in Canada.  And we might even get a discount.

We end up with two ice-strengthened LHDs, save the French some embarrassment and deny Vlad substantive assets.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Canada could "lease it" and have a NATO contingent onboard. Might make an interesting experiment, have different countries take turns providing the helo's, maybe a couple of platoons of Royal Marines. Might be a way to explore future force concepts. 

 

[Journeyman]

Canada could "lease it" and have a NATO contingent onboard.

Having just withdrawn from the NATO AWACS and AGS programs, I doubt if you'll see much enthusiasm for tying ourselves into a similar arrangement any time soon.


.....although Russia has just provided NATO with a new-found sense of utility, so who knows    :dunno:

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

The French may be approachable on their Russian Mistrals......

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/152493/france-may-scrap-russian-warship-deal-over-ukraine.html

Vlad is buying two for 1.4 Bn Euros.  The French now don't want to sell them to him but they need the money (and the jobs) more.

I'm not sure how many more jobs there are currently. 

Even if we paid the full asking price it would be a deal in comparison to building in Canada.  And we might even get a discount.

We end up with two ice-strengthened LHDs, save the French some embarrassment and deny Vlad substantive assets.

You were reading my mind....had the exact same thought and was going to post the exact same thing. 

Would be a great move by Harper because on one hand it takes pressure off France to not sell to Russia, and on the other dramatically improves our capabilities.  I'd have no problem substituting one (or more) of these vessels into the fleet mix even if it took a couple of CSC's off the longer term order sheet.

The problem from our end is I don't think our Naval leadership has any interest in being a bus for the army.  They want cool new CSC's for blue water operations even though it could be argued that Mistral's would be far more valuable to our foreign policy objectives (not to mention if we had any disaster issues along our coastlines if they were properly equipped with Chinook, etc.)


Matthew.

 

[Kirkhill]

Having just withdrawn from the NATO AWACS and AGS programs, I doubt if you'll see much enthusiasm for tying ourselves into a similar arrangement any time soon.


.....although Russia has just provided NATO with a new-found sense of utility, so who knows    :dunno:

I think there is a different sense of purpose between Eastern NATO and Western NATO....

 

[Journeyman]

I think there is a different sense of purpose between Eastern NATO and Western NATO....

Absolutely. Poland is mightily concerned, while it's still Sangria time in Spain.

 

[prairefire]

http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-france-britain-russia-sanctions-20140318,0,7110071.story

France is thinking of cancelling the Russian purchase of two new Mistral Class of amphibious support ships.............

Not really knowledgeable about ships but would they work for us if the opportunity arose.............?

 

[AirDet]

While it looks great and there is an opportunity for a deal here the timing is off. We just don't have the cash.

 

[GR66]

This sounds like a totally bass-ackward way to equip our military.  Wait and see what goes on sale and buy that capability because it might be useful?  This thought process totally highlights why we need a complete review of Canadian foreign and military policy.  We need to clearly define our foreign policy objectives and then determine what structure and assets will allow us to meet those goals.  If an opportunity then comes along to fill one of those defined needs with a bargain then of course we should go for it.  However, if we're not currently in the market for a Mistral-type vessel for the RCN then we shouldn't buy it.  The tail shouldn't wag the dog when it comes to our military capabilities.

:2c: