New Canadian Shipbuilding Strategy

[Kirkhill]

Perhaps that was the issue. I do know that the video taken that was in the media was before they took measures to mitigate the water and this has been an ongoing issue since HDW came out. I also know they tried some metal covers that helped a bit. I was told now that they have inflatable bags that they jam down the hawse pipe to reduce the water ingress and larger drains to get the water out. It appears a more permanent solution is forthcoming during their first major refit. The trick now is to keep up on PM and corrosion in that area. We have MB leaving early next week on her transfer to the WC and I reached out to see how much the mitigations are going to help.

That hawsehole on the HDW doesn't seem to me to be further forwards as the HDW bow seems to be "clipped" when compared to the Svalbard. She is more bluff than the Svalbard. I'm guessing that has to do with her conventional ice-breaker form and the decision to go with a conventional shaft arrangement.

Svalbard, by contrast, was built with Azipods as a Double Acting Ship.

Svalbard is a Double Acting Ship (DAS) type of ice-breaking vessel designed to operate in open waters and thin ice. It retains better open water manoeuvrability than traditional ice-breaking ships.

KV Svalbard (W 303) Icebreaker / Offshore Patrol Vessel (OPV) - Homelandsecurity Technology

www.homelandsecurity-technology.com

The Svalbard's bow was raked and she had a bluff stern. She was designed to present her bow to the waves and her stern to the ice.

When the ice got too thick for a bow presentation she could turn around and make progress going astern.

Here are some old clips of a Double Acting Tanker backing through ice.

Double acting ship - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Cloud Cover]

Government wonks are always saying if we raised the defence budget to 2% of GDP we'd have a hard time spending the money. I think we could spend a goodly portion of that extra money on infrastructure and spares, no problem.

I wonder that too, but even spare parts have a shelf life and require proper storage.

 

[dapaterson]

I wonder that too, but even spare parts have a shelf life and require proper storage.

To say nothing of ammunition. Adequate war stocks mean continual stock rotation and disposal (as annual use in peacetime is dramatically less than wartime consumption). That also turns into a plan to keep industry production at (annual demand + total warstock holdings/lifespan + ability to surge).

Just CFAD Angus and CFAD Dundurn could probably absorb nine figures in infrastructure upgrades and replacement, and growth to hold adequate warstocks. Add in adequate MHE and transportation capacity as well.

 

[suffolkowner]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1765725423604822487

running out of spare icebreakers on the world market apparently

 

[KevinB]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1765725423604822487

running out of spare icebreakers on the world market apparently

Better on Global Warming

 

[KevinB]

That was supposed to be betting- I got autocorrected and didn’t catch it till after the edit period.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

The Aivik was the ship that Davie / Federal Fleet proposed to purchase and mod to Canadian Coast Guard standards to provide Canada with an "interim" replacement for the Saint-Laurent, but the proposal was turned down by Ottawa. This was before Davie got brought in to the Shipbuilding Strategy as the center for icebreakers.

 

[Stoker]

The Aivik was the ship that Davie / Federal Fleet proposed to purchase and mod to Canadian Coast Guard standards to provide Canada with an "interim" replacement for the Saint-Laurent, but the proposal was turned down by Ottawa. This was before Davie got brought in to the Shipbuilding Strategy as the center for icebreakers.

No they declared themselves the "national icebreaker center" in Canada despite other yards building icebreakers.

 

[Dana381]

running out of spare icebreakers on the world market apparently

Because Canada bought them all up 3 years ago!

 

[suffolkowner]

Yeah we bought the 3 Vikings and the Mangystau-2 I guess leaving the
Aiviq for the USCG
Polar Circle for the Swedes
leaving one left on the market according to Aker

https://twitter.com/x/status/1765725431347515569

and now we have
Seaspan building one Polar Icebreaker and 15 MPV
Irving building 8 AOPV
and the "national icebreaking center" building 1 Polar and 6 mediums

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Those MPV's will replace the 1100 Class at 4660DWT and Arctic Class 2 (PC-5ish) with a 8550DWT vessel that is PC 4.

It's a toss up whether the AOP's or the 1100 are better ice breakers, they are close in classification, but the 1100's have a ice knife, but the AOP's are newer and their hulls are in better shape.

So the CCG is going to get quite the step up in capability with the new ships, they be able to go further, carry more, break more ice. We are going from a fleet of light icebreakers to medium icebreakers. The downside is they won't be able to go into some places they currently do. The fixed hanger will be nicer than the current telescoping one.

 

[calculus]

The latest renderings of the Polar are quite impressive:

Polar Icebreaker - Seaspan

www.seaspan.com

If all these programs come to pass, Canada will have a world-class icebreaker fleet.

 

[calculus]

Coincidentally, today a contract for new Program Icebreaker design was announced:

Government of Canada awards initial contract for Program Icebreakers to Chantier Davie

/CNW/ - Through the National Shipbuilding Strategy (NSS), the Government of Canada is driving economic growth and creating good jobs, while ensuring that the...

www.newswire.ca

 

[Rainbow1910]

So the CCG is going to get quite the step up in capability with the new ships, they be able to go further, carry more, break more ice. We are going from a fleet of light icebreakers to medium icebreakers. The downside is they won't be able to go into some places they currently do. The fixed hanger will be nicer than the current telescoping one.

Between two Polar Icebreakers, six Program Icebreakers and up to 16 Multi-Purpose Vessels, the CCG isn't just looking at a step up but I'd say more of a major leap forward in capability.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Yea the Polar Class are likley to be PC 3-4, the Mediums likley PC 4. Challenge that our Mediums have to serve in the Arctic and then do river icebreaking in the winter, two very different ice beasts. Generally, open water icebreakers favour horizontal strength and river longitudinal strength.

 

[calculus]

Actually, the two Polars are rated PC2+. Very powerful machines.

Ice expertise for Canadian Polar Icebreaker

Aker Arctic has continued ship design to ensure the Canadian Polar Icebreaker meets the latest technical developments in icebreaking.

akerarctic.fi

Polar Class - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Rainbow1910]

Yea the Polar Class are likley to be PC 3-4, the Mediums likley PC 4. Challenge that our Mediums have to serve in the Arctic and then do river icebreaking in the winter, two very different ice beasts. Generally, open water icebreakers favour horizontal strength and river longitudinal strength.

As calculus mentioned above, the Polar Icebreakers (they really need better names for these lol) have consistently been listed as PC2 for as long as I can recall. The Program icebreakers are listed by Davie as being able to "maintain 3 knots in 1.4m of ice", which would put them handily into PC4. I will point out though that the Polar Icebreakers are listed PC2, which is actually in excess of their listed icebreaking capability in thickness. Perhaps closer to PC3 for the Program Icebreakers but that is just speculation. They are rated for summer Arctic operations so I would say that PC4 bordering into PC3 perhaps is sufficient for such a role.

The gamechanger is going to be the huge fleet of PC4 Multi-Purpose Vessels in my opinion, that is a large step up for the majority of the fleets capability.

 

[Maxman1]

I thought the Polar Class icebreakers were officially named the Diefenbaker class, after the lead ship, CCGS John G. Diefenbaker.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

As calculus mentioned above, the Polar Icebreakers (they really need better names for these lol) have consistently been listed as PC2 for as long as I can recall. The Program icebreakers are listed by Davie as being able to "maintain 3 knots in 1.4m of ice", which would put them handily into PC4. I will point out though that the Polar Icebreakers are listed PC2, which is actually in excess of their listed icebreaking capability in thickness. Perhaps closer to PC3 for the Program Icebreakers but that is just speculation. They are rated for summer Arctic operations so I would say that PC4 bordering into PC3 perhaps is sufficient for such a role.

The gamechanger is going to be the huge fleet of PC4 Multi-Purpose Vessels in my opinion, that is a large step up for the majority of the fleets capability.

Thanks for the correction, I went looking for ice class information on them before posting and could not find it, just vague statements like "Better than existing" so I had to make some assumptions which were too conservative. I am really pleased as PC2 is a big leap over PC 4

 

[calculus]

Hey Colin, looks like this program is picking up speed.

Seaspan proceeds with construction of CCG's multi-purpose vessels

Seaspan Shipyards (Seaspan) has been awarded the construction engineering (CE) and long lead items (LLI) contracts for the pre-construction work of the Canadian Coast Guard’s (CCG) first six multi-purpose vessels (MPVs).

www.navaltoday.com