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

Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)

Orcas had a significant corrective maintenance (wouldn't call it a midlife) around 2021, when Topshee was Commander Maritime Forces Pacific. There were significant deficiencies from an inspection found with various systems, most of them safety related. Topshee grounded the entire fleet until it was overhauled and/or sorted out. Took a year or so to fix.

I don't know the details just watercooler info.
When something like that occurs, the "significant deficiencies from an inspection found with various systems", that doesn't sound like 1 issue found with 1 ship and another issue found on another ship, it sounds like there was issues found across multiple ships occurring across the same systems/platforms.
If it was this, would this be caused by a lack of funding to address the issues as they were presenting themselves, thus the documented decision was to 'note it and do nothing' multiply times?
Would this have been caused by "insufficient skills/training" by those maintaining the ships and their inability to properly identify these issues, thus they were allowed to smolder until they failed or were about to fail?
Or, the worst scenario, would this be a case of 'dereliction of duty'?
 
When something like that occurs, the "significant deficiencies from an inspection found with various systems", that doesn't sound like 1 issue found with 1 ship and another issue found on another ship, it sounds like there was issues found across multiple ships occurring across the same systems/platforms.
Yes
If it was this, would this be caused by a lack of funding to address the issues as they were presenting themselves, thus the documented decision was to 'note it and do nothing' multiply times?
Would this have been caused by "insufficient skills/training" by those maintaining the ships and their inability to properly identify these issues, thus they were allowed to smolder until they failed or were about to fail?
You're hitting around the mark. Those ships don't have core crews and are used for training. Training officers are usually fairly Jr. and may or may not have the experience or expertise to recognize the issues.
The issues were not with the float/move systems, they were with the safe navigation systems (at least that's what I heard third hand).
Not sure where the error chain failed (probably in multiple parts), but it garnered a bit of pleasant surprise from the engineering community when they were essentially grounded until fixed.
 
Yes

You're hitting around the mark. Those ships don't have core crews and are used for training. Training officers are usually fairly Jr. and may or may not have the experience or expertise to recognize the issues.
The issues were not with the float/move systems, they were with the safe navigation systems (at least that's what I heard third hand).
Not sure where the error chain failed (probably in multiple parts), but it garnered a bit of pleasant surprise from the engineering community when they were essentially grounded until fixed.
Safety for the crew should always come paramount in my humble non-military mind, especially in the times that we are not at war.
 
Safety for the crew should always come paramount in my humble non-military mind, especially in the times that we are not at war.
I think of it like a aircraft situation. If you find a significant problem with one or two, you halt flights and check them all out. That's pretty much what happened.
 
In reality, it really is only 5 ships, 5 major combatants, that would be able to answer the call if needed.

These 1,300 individuals are responsible, from a maritime perspective, in keeping the other 41 million Canadians from harms way.
Do we actually have the crew for that many and will we be able to retain them with the way things are going?
 
We love to do stupid things.
"All available hands, muster flight deck; storing ship". (or ammunitioning)

I like how we could cut those numbers in a fraction by planning to crane things onto the focsle, or if we had figured out the conveyor belt setup that came with the 280s for storing ship quickly in home port, but nope, we're doing it like Nelson.

I don't think there is a business on the planet that would take 100+ trained personnel with a core job to manually pass boxes/ammo etc along a human chain for a few hours at a regular basis, but I guess we're special.
 
"All available hands, muster flight deck; storing ship". (or ammunitioning)

I like how we could cut those numbers in a fraction by planning to crane things onto the focsle, or if we had figured out the conveyor belt setup that came with the 280s for storing ship quickly in home port, but nope, we're doing it like Nelson.

I don't think there is a business on the planet that would take 100+ trained personnel with a core job to manually pass boxes/ammo etc along a human chain for a few hours at a regular basis, but I guess we're special.

On CPFs we store food from the FX. And use the lift, when it works. We only need 30 or 40 for the port breezeway and the bottom of this lift.

On the tanker all we used was storesmen and bosns. And bosns only because they worked the cranes and forklifts onboard.

The old conveyors we had in the DKYRD we so slow to move it would take hours to get from BLog to NB. They weren't worth the hassle.

We also used the PS dockyard workers to crane food on board but they would steal the food and rifle through it, while demanding that we give them blocks of cheese and tubs of PB for they to do their job.
 
Back
Top