jollyjacktar said:
Sure, it's fine to have a crew of 13. Until something major breaks at sea or you have an engineering emergency (fire/flood) or you go into action. You've also neglected to account for daily maintenance of the vessel and it's components. The various systems (weapons, engineering, logistics) have their requirements in manpower to make it go.
I'll agree that the IPMS systems being integrated into the HCM refits will (in theory) allow for a reduction in watch personnel to oversee the engineering needs in the MCR and is a reflection of technology marching forwards into the sunny 21st Century. It is possible that one person could run the whole show from one location, in theory. I don't know if they could effectively monitor all the systems and pages with one pair of eyes once all the bugs were worked out of the system and she could run as imagined/designed. I know I damn well couldn't keep up with the necessary pages if all the different bells and whistles started going off at once.
I'm sorry but from my experience and POV, I just don't see the engineering side of the house being covered adequately by what would be a couple of guys full time. Even if it was 1/3 of the compliment to be the whole engineering department (4.29 sailors) there's no way you'll have all the watches covered 24/7 and do the necessary maintenance (both corrective and planned) and mount an effective damage control team etc etc etc.
I'm sure that others from the different trades here both MSE, Combat and Logistics will be able to give additional input into this conversation. From a Hull standpoint, I'm not convinced or comfortable with what you're proposing.
JJT:
I wanted to take my time getting back to you because I don't feel comfortable challenging those that have the T-shirts. I respect and appreciate the answers that those of that ilk supply.
On the other hand I continue to try to understand the difference between the operating conditions of the Navy vice my limited knowledge and experience of the Civilian world.
I can understand the need for hands when things go pear-shaped, and trained hands at that. It makes sense to me that a Combat vessel will require more bodies than a "ruddy great barge". Equally it makes sense to me that sonar, radar, comms and weapons systems will all require spares, repairs and maintenance, as well as operators. Those also will drive manning upwards.
What I am wondering though resolves itself into two questions:
What is the minimum number of personnel necessary to operate a vessel?
What number or personnel are necessary to supply redundancy over and above that minimum?
My intent is to discover, for my own interest, if it is possible and desirable to design and operate large ships with small crews safely. The civilian world seems to supply examples of success in that regard.
The Maersk ships operate with crews of 13 to 19 while at sea for 270 days out of the year and only in port while trans-shipping loads. Those ships have a design life of 25 to 30 years.
At the other end of the spectrum are factory trawlers displacing 5000 to 10000 tonnes, recovering 150 tonne bags of fish over the stern 2 to 3 times a day and dumping them into wet holds (fish tanks). That is done in some pretty high seas 24/7 for weeks, if not months, at a time. The wheelhouse, engine room and deck crews in total number on the order of 20 to 30 people. Everybody else is down below cutting up fish. Those ships are very gear intensive: from the nav and comms systems, to the fish finding sonar that can see a halibut on a sand bottom, to the cameras that can see the nets, to the trawl winches that allow the fish master to fly a net as wide as a 747 a mile or so behind him and control the location and shape of its mouth. And I haven't addressed my part of ship: all the conveyors and pumps and fish filleting machines; the fish meal and oil plants and the surimi (japanese fish paste) systems; the RO water systems. Those systems keep another 70 or so "passengers" employed 24/7, again for weeks and months at a time.
The desire for the small crew comes from: my sense that recruiting sailors, especially engineers, is a challenge; that those that are available are a valuable commodity; that small crews permit the available personnel to be spread across a larger fleet that can be in more places simultaneously and be performing more tasks; and finally, that small crews reduce the number of lives that are put at risk on any one platform.
Corollaries to the last are that small crews can be evacuated more easily, are less likely to suffer casualties when distributed around a large volume than compressed into a small volume and additional vessels means that rescue is more likely to be close at hand.
At least so it seems to me.
