Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS

[NavyShooter]

I'd just be happy to see them settle down on a plan, and order up some ships of ANY sort for the Navy.

Get cutting some steel!

NS

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Well any sort of ships within reason NS. Careful you will have some of the forum members salivating at the thought of aircraft carriers or battleships....

 

[Jack Stratton]

Where in all the literature regarding the the AOPs does it state they will not be capable of blue water operations? As for keeping the price down, we tend to trade off so we will be able to get them in the water sooner rather then later. Off topic, the JSS was a nightmare of a ship that did everything but ended up not getting built. If the AOPV can get the job done, then IMO thats what we need it to do.

My concern is that the specification for AOPS seems to produce a ship that will neither be really good in ice nor have enough legs for effective EEZ patrol capability and to top it off, the list of things AOPS is not allowed to be is very lengthy - using it in a fleet operation would be challenging. Do not get me wrong I think the Navy should have a ship that can operate in the NW Passage, but my interpretation of the design info out there is that AOPS will only be able to operate part of the year on the periphery of the ice. If the JSS spec was too broad, I think AOPS is going the otherway and not asking for enough.

If the choice is AOPS as currently envisioned or nothing then AOPS is the better choice - but could we do better without breaking the bank?

Like I said I'm new around here and I'm thinking outloud.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

I still am not sure where you are getting that the AOPS will not be able to conduct its mission as envisioned by Ottawa. Everything I have seen seems to indicate it will be able to do what you fear it will lack.

Jack I am wondering if you read all the posts in this topic, in particular the ones that have illustrated what the AOPS will be able to do?

 

[Stoker]

My concern is that the specification for AOPS seems to produce a ship that will neither be really good in ice nor have enough legs for effective EEZ patrol capability and to top it off, the list of things AOPS is not allowed to be is very lengthy - using it in a fleet operation would be challenging. Do not get me wrong I think the Navy should have a ship that can operate in the NW Passage, but my interpretation of the design info out there is that AOPS will only be able to operate part of the year on the periphery of the ice. If the JSS spec was too broad, I think AOPS is going the otherway and not asking for enough.

If the choice is AOPS as currently envisioned or nothing then AOPS is the better choice - but could we do better without breaking the bank?

Like I said I'm new around here and I'm thinking outloud.

The specs call for a 6500 nm range and 4 month at sea capability, I would call that pretty effective. When you said that using it in a fleet operation would be challenging, what do you base that on?
I also found it interesting that a ISSC maintenance support contract will be looking after the maintenance requirements of the ship.

 

[Jack Stratton]

Could be I thought out loud too soon, the more digging I do on the Svalbard class that seems to the the most likley model for AOPS to be deveoped from the more it looks like a neat little ship.

Cheers

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Thats why its always best to read the entire thread before wading in....

 

[Stoker]

Reading the statement of requirements for the proposed platform, the ship will be quite nice to sail on. I wonder what will be the crew mix percentage of reg/res/civ after all is done?

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Reading the statement of requirements for the proposed platform, the ship will be quite nice to sail on. I wonder what will be the crew mix percentage of reg/res/civ after all is done?

Volunteering for our eventual Arctic port?

 

[Stoker]

Actually I would love to do a bit of sailing up north. I've already done a couple of OP NANOOK's and I found them a blast. I already sail half the year anyways and going from a MCDV to a AOPS won't be that much of a stretch. If the Arctic port ever gets built, I might even get ashore a bag a muskox or two ;D

 

[Jack Stratton]

Will the MOMT (Musk Ox Management Technician) be a Reg, Res or Civ job?

By the way I freely admit to somehow missing the discussion on hull form in the middle of the posts. My error. Still getting another 2.5 knots out of an AOPS compared to the Svalbard is going to take some doing.

Cheers

 

[aesop081]

nor have enough legs for effective EEZ patrol capability

The EEZ only extends to 200nm......from what i have read in the specs, its not much of a stretch for the proposed ship.

 

[Jack Stratton]

The EEZ only extends to 200nm......from what i have read in the specs, its not much of a stretch for the proposed ship.

Pray forget I mentioned it - no one else seems to think a max speed of 20 knots is a concern for EEZ patrolling and I am apparently out of my depth.

 

[aesop081]

Pray forget I mentioned it - no one else seems to think a max speed of 20 knots is a concern for EEZ patrolling and I am apparently out of my depth.

20 Kts isnt much but most merchants in the EEZ travel at less than that. It may take additional time but the AOPS will catch up /outrun them. I could be out of my depth as well and i'm not an expert on boats but i do see the EEZ alot.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

20 Kts isnt much but most merchants in the EEZ travel at less than that. It may take additional time but the AOPS will catch up /outrun them. I could be out of my depth as well and i'm not an expert on boats but i do see the EEZ alot.

No you have summed it up nicely.

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

The EEZ is only 200 nm out at this point...It looks like we'll be asking for more up to 350 nm based on seabed topography. In any case, the EEZ may be shallow, but it's pretty freaking long. Just making it to the far end of the NW Passage is 3400 nm, and that's only patrolling a 40 nm wide strip to get there.

Also, the 20 knot spec is for only 5% (ie 6 days) of a patrols duration. It looks like the AOPS is intended to make long stern chases if they intend to spend 6 days on them.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Knowing that an area of patrolled and the possibility that your ship might be boarded and your crew may be arrested tends to give honest seafarers pause before they encroach into someone elses territorial waters in most cases.

 

[Sailorwest]

Knowing that an area of patrolled and the possibility that your ship might be boarded and your crew may be arrested tends to give honest seafarers pause before they encroach into someone else's territorial waters in most cases.

At a certain point it comes down to what is territorial water and what might constitute innocent passage. Although the NW passage narrows to maybe 20 nm at only one point, generally it is wider than 50nm and maybe 100. Being that the islands form an archipelago, it is difficult to see these an an internal waterway that we would have the authority to prevent innocent passage. I would think that our only provision regarding boarding such a vessel would be from an angle of pollution prevention and environmental protection.

 

[Kirkhill]

Knowing that an area of patrolled and the possibility that your ship might be boarded and your crew may be arrested tends to give honest seafarers pause before they encroach into someone elses territorial waters in most cases.

I think the motivation is stronger than that for commercial sailors.  Their insurance companies will jack their premiums if they are sailing through contested waters, even if the threat is just from pirates.  I THINK that just demanding right of inspection would NOT scare off commercial traffic, knowing that they would be dealing with Canadian Courts.  However if somebody showed up with a gunboat to contest our right to board their ships then you might see some impact on decision making.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

For your perusal:

http://www.casr.ca/bg-icebreaker-aops-aker.htm