AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

[Kirkhill]

Further to my last....

U.S. and UK Are Sidelining Fleet Auxiliary Ships Because of Crew Shortages

Both the Royal Navy's Royal Fleet Auxiliary and the U.S. Navy's Military Sealift Command are sidelining some of their ships because of crew sh...

maritime-executive.com

A big contributor may be the loss of the fleets of Coasters and Tramps around the world. Now everything is done in containers in ultra-large ships and by rail and truck. The break bulk Coasters, with their stevedores, have gone the way of the dodo. An example of when the market fails and a government monopoly may again be appropriate, or at least government intervention in the form of subsidies.

Those fleets of small, break-bulk ships not only provided the training ground, and holding pond, for skilled sailors, they also provided opportunities for the unskilled to find sea-going and portside jobs.

Canada still has need for "Coasters". It still has a widely distributed population poorly served by road. Air is still too expensive. A fleet of ships serving coastal communities still serves Canada's national purposes. That same fleet could also serve our friends and allies in times of disaster and war.

 

[Stoker]

Aren't Spearhead class designed embark forces for a limited amount of time and for short distances?
I got a tour on one a number of years ago in Florida I believe. It reminded me of a fast cat ferry.

 

[KevinB]

Aren't Spearhead class designed embark forces for a limited amount of time and for short distances?
I got a tour on one a number of years ago in Florida I believe. It reminded me of a fast cat ferry.
View attachment 87644View attachment 87645View attachment 87646View attachment 87647View attachment 87648View attachment 87649View attachment 87650View attachment 87651View attachment 87652

I believe the USMC loads 2 Companies on them as well as part of a BN HQ. So 300-350 troops. Probably more able to be jammed in for very short duration.

I was more impressed it was designed to take a CH-53 on the deck and house a MH-60 in the hangar.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

They were built off a Incat design, so basically a repurposed Fast Cat ferry hull.

 

[Maxman1]

A Mistral does all that and better.

 

[Underway]

Canada still has need for "Coasters". It still has a widely distributed population poorly served by road. Air is still too expensive. A fleet of ships serving coastal communities still serves Canada's national purposes. That same fleet could also serve our friends and allies in times of disaster and war.

What? No it doesn't. Ferries deliver trucks which carry goods, not coasters. And then almost exclusively on the west coast islands. There is no place I can think of on the East Coast that doesn't have road access from ferry terminal or major port.

 

[Kirkhill]

What? No it doesn't. Ferries deliver trucks which carry goods, not coasters. And then almost exclusively on the west coast islands. There is no place I can think of on the East Coast that doesn't have road access from ferry terminal or major port.

Is that still true once you get past Goose Bay?

I can agree that there is little use for the old break-bulk coasters in a containerized world but a modern containerized coaster, somewhere between a RoRo and an OSV might find useful work in the fleets serving the Bay and the Arctic.

 

[Underway]

Is that still true once you get past Goose Bay?

There is a highway (500) directly into Quebec from Goose Bay, and then a ferry that goes to all the outports. Also one that goes south to Cartwright (along with a road to Cartwright). Coasters make no sense.

 

[KevinB]

A Mistral does all that and better.

I think it really depends on what one wants to do. The Mistrals don’t go nearly that fast.
Wasps are much bigger.

 

[Stoker]

There is a highway (500) directly into Quebec from Goose Bay, and then a ferry that goes to all the outports. Also one that goes south to Cartwright (along with a road to Cartwright). Coasters make no sense.

View attachment 87654
View attachment 87655

There is a highway (500) directly into Quebec from Goose Bay, and then a ferry that goes to all the outports. Also one that goes south to Cartwright (along with a road to Cartwright). Coasters make no sense.

View attachment 87654
View attachment 87655

My dad used to do that run on charter from Marine Atlantic.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

A coaster would be good for certain products, but the ferries have killed the bread and butter stuff that makes them viable. But shipping stuff on ferries comes with it's own pain in the ass stuff. A smaller combo container/ product tanker would be good, but would need a subsidy to stay in business.

 

[Kirkhill]

A coaster would be good for certain products, but the ferries have killed the bread and butter stuff that makes them viable. But shipping stuff on ferries comes with it's own pain in the ass stuff. A smaller combo container/ product tanker would be good, but would need a subsidy to stay in business.

Highways, bridges, railways and airports are all subsidized as are pipelines, powerlines and waterways. As are telecoms and satellitres. If shipping has value then why not subsidize it as well?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

BC Ferries is partly subsidized as are the BC Highway ferries.

 

[lenaitch]

Highways, bridges, railways and airports are all subsidized as are pipelines, powerlines and waterways. As are telecoms and satellitres. If shipping has value then why not subsidize it as well?

The common definition of "subsidize", particularly in terms of government support, is to reduce the cost of something, usually a service, to make it more viable to the consumer. Most highways and bridges aren't subsidized, they are publicly owned, as are waterways. As far as I know, grid powerlines are all publicly owned. Even for some highways and bridges that are tolled, it is essentially the user subsidizing the government. The privately-owned boondoggle Hwy 407 in Ontario is not subsidized by public funds. CN and CPKC are not subsidized (VIA is).

Marine Atlantic is subsidized. I don't know commercial sealift to Nunavut is subsidized but a whole lot of public money goes into shore-based services and facilities.

I assume the type of coastal sealift being used serves the needs of the communities and shippers. It seems to make little sense to spend public money to modify that simply to have a 'just in case' military capability somewhere else. If these ships were needed for some strategic purpose, are the communities expected to starve in the dark?

 

[Underway]

The privately-owned boondoggle amazing Hwy 407 in Ontario is not subsidized by public funds.

Fixed that for you.

 

[dapaterson]

There can be direct subsidies or indirect subsidies.

Giving Marine Atlantic money is a direct subsidy.

Day and Ross driving on highways maintained by the state is an indirect subsidy - railroads pay to maintain their rails.

 

[Kirkhill]

The common definition of "subsidize", particularly in terms of government support, is to reduce the cost of something, usually a service, to make it more viable to the consumer. Most highways and bridges aren't subsidized, they are publicly owned, as are waterways. As far as I know, grid powerlines are all publicly owned. Even for some highways and bridges that are tolled, it is essentially the user subsidizing the government. The privately-owned boondoggle Hwy 407 in Ontario is not subsidized by public funds. CN and CPKC are not subsidized (VIA is).

Marine Atlantic is subsidized. I don't know commercial sealift to Nunavut is subsidized but a whole lot of public money goes into shore-based services and facilities.

I assume the type of coastal sealift being used serves the needs of the communities and shippers. It seems to make little sense to spend public money to modify that simply to have a 'just in case' military capability somewhere else. If these ships were needed for some strategic purpose, are the communities expected to starve in the dark?

As is my wont I painted with a broad brush.

I used the term "subsidize" to include public monopolies and taxpayer funded services which benefit the public at large. The individual user does not pay the full cost of the service on demand.

In that sense the RCN is a publicly subsidized monopoly dedicated to supplying security for Canadians on the water.

Those taxpayer dollars can be diverted to the task of marine transport by way of the RCN, the Coast Guard, crown corporations or government support to commerce by means of either direct funding and tax breaks or by way of government furnished equipment such as navigation aids..

Rather than re-write the tax code I opted for "subsidized".

With respect to the "just-in-case" vs "starve in the dark":

The point of subsidizing the service would be to ensure that there was surplus capacity, capacity beyond that which makes commercial sense, so that some capacity could be withdrawn from service to meet the needs of the government while still meeting the core requirement of ensuring that communities don't "starve in the dark".

....

When I referred to the old Coasters, and copied a picture of an old break-bulk vessel, I was not specifically suggesting that that style of vessel would be appropriate to the modern market. I was thinking more in terms of the vessel as being a short haul cargo carrier of low tonnage and a small crew. A vessel that would engage in the Coastal Trade doing short hops from community to community either on a schedule or direct charter.

The RoRo ferries and cargo carriers with their mexeflottes and lighters serve that same trade currently. I am suggesting that there is merit in putting more of those hulls in the water, at public expense, to supply the north, to train sailors and to supply a surplus capacity which can be employed by the government of Canada on public duties.

The same rationale applies to the subsidy of large cargo aircraft and crews for Canada's north.

 

[Czech_pivo]

The common definition of "subsidize", particularly in terms of government support, is to reduce the cost of something, usually a service, to make it more viable to the consumer. Most highways and bridges aren't subsidized, they are publicly owned, as are waterways. As far as I know, grid powerlines are all publicly owned. Even for some highways and bridges that are tolled, it is essentially the user subsidizing the government. The privately-owned boondoggle Hwy 407 in Ontario is not subsidized by public funds. CN and CPKC are not subsidized (VIA is).

Marine Atlantic is subsidized. I don't know commercial sealift to Nunavut is subsidized but a whole lot of public money goes into shore-based services and facilities.

I assume the type of coastal sealift being used serves the needs of the communities and shippers. It seems to make little sense to spend public money to modify that simply to have a 'just in case' military capability somewhere else. If these ships were needed for some strategic purpose, are the communities expected to starve in the dark?

I love driving on the 407 and use it whenever I need to go from the west end of the GTA to the north end or east of the GTA. I rarely, rarely have to deal with trucks, stop and go traffic, using my brakes or driving less than 110-115km during my entire trip on it. I gladly pay for the stress-free, hassle free, idiotic driving free experience. Its like being on the French auto-routes or the German autobahn - fast, quick, efficient driving.

And as an FYI, the majority owner is now the CPPIB, so the profits are doing directly to fund your and my CPP current/future payments.

 

[KJK]

There can be direct subsidies or indirect subsidies.

Giving Marine Atlantic money is a direct subsidy.

Day and Ross driving on highways maintained by the state is an indirect subsidy - railroads pay to maintain their rails.

Not exactly correct.

Trucking companies pay 10s of thousands of dollars per vehicle in road taxes and vehicle licensing fees. What may not be commonly known is that every month the mileage in each jurisdiction a commercial vehicle drives is totaled up and the road taxes have to be corrected for that versus the actually amount paid from the fuel purchased in that jurisdiction. Likewise vehicle licensing fees are prorated against the mileage you run in each area to ensure tax fairness. I have been out of trucking for over 15 years now but when I sold my iron it was costing around $5100/year/truck for licensing. Not a small sum.

 

[lenaitch]

I love driving on the 407 and use it whenever I need to go from the west end of the GTA to the north end or east of the GTA. I rarely, rarely have to deal with trucks, stop and go traffic, using my brakes or driving less than 110-115km during my entire trip on it. I gladly pay for the stress-free, hassle free, idiotic driving free experience. Its like being on the French auto-routes or the German autobahn - fast, quick, efficient driving.

And as an FYI, the majority owner is now the CPPIB, so the profits are doing directly to fund your and my CPP current/future payments.

The "boondoggle" part was selling if $3.1Bn when two years later, SNC-Lavelin's sale valued it at over $6Bn. It's now estimated to be worth about $40Bn. I realize the book value of fixed infrastructure is fairly meaningless, but tolls income is now about $1.5Bn/year. That might put a few more imaging machines in smaller hospitals, or maybe funds them so they don't have to close their ER.

Sorry, I just don't buy government math. The government (Ontario Liberals this time) sold Ontera, the telecom division of Ontario Northland, for $6.3Mn, a loss of about $61Mn from its assessed value.