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

Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,059
Points
1,040
After all the images I've seen of these ships, I just noticed that the bow anchor(s) well (or whatever it's called - not a sailor) is right down at the waterline. It seems that it would be right in the middle of the bow wave and be susceptible to ice damage. Just curious if there is a reason or if it really matters.
Ice no. When icebreaking you aren't bouncing up and down like in seas and ice is pushed aside or under the bow, not up it.

There is a problem during heavy seas that when a wave hits the anchor at the right angle the pressure shoots water up the hawsepipe into the covered foc'sle. They have had to do some waterproofing for things they didn't expect to get that wet. They also put rubber stoppers around the cable but really that just changes the trajectory of the water spout.
 

TacticalTea

Sr. Member
Reaction score
850
Points
910
Ice no. When icebreaking you aren't bouncing up and down like in seas and ice is pushed aside or under the bow, not up it.

There is a problem during heavy seas that when a wave hits the anchor at the right angle the pressure shoots water up the hawsepipe into the covered foc'sle. They have had to do some waterproofing for things they didn't expect to get that wet. They also put rubber stoppers around the cable but really that just changes the trajectory of the water spout.
So, one of the hawse pipes had a purpose-built metal plate with a semi-circle cut-out (for the anchor cable) you could slide into two horizontal slits along the hole to reduce water ingress. So did the other, but it had a badly-built metal plate instead. Hah! So it got stuck and took a while to get dislodged and thus, wasn't used again.

So it was replaced by logs, rope, and a fender.
 

newfin

Member
Reaction score
21
Points
180
Strange but true..... Today, while vacationing with my family on the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico, I looked offshore and saw what looked like a naval vessel in the distance. I said to my son, "That looks like a Harry DeWolf class ship!" I instantly recognized the two large recesses in the side of the ship that house the blaze orange life boat and Multi-role rescue boat. I thought to myself that I had to be mistaken since....What are the odds that I'm in Mexico and so is the HDW AND I actually see and recognize it so far from shore? Well, I borrowed my daughters' phone to check a vessel tracking app and sure as sh!t there it was.... the HDW herself a few kilometres offshore making her way south between the Yucatan Peninsula and Cozumel Island . Since I live in Niagara Ontario I have never had the chance to see an AOPV myself but this first sighting was quite a treat. I hope the RCN brings her on a Great Lakes tour soon for me to board her visit.
 

Rainbow1910

Guest
Reaction score
39
Points
280

Rainbow1910

Guest
Reaction score
39
Points
280
283149601_387623506738297_5669515496378171759_n.jpg

281467249_5326830837375603_7253219273092692682_n.jpg

HMCS Harry DeWolf and HMCS Margaret Brooke recently alongside in Key West, Florida. DeWolf is operating as part of Operation CARIBBE and Brooke is conducting warm weather trials.
 

calculus

Member
Reaction score
127
Points
630
I see that the future HMCS William Hall is due to finish the move to the landside assembly area at Irving sometime tomorrow.


So, that's the fourth of what is to be an 8 ship class, and it took 7 years to get here. I know things are progressing faster now, but is a 2024 timeframe for start of construction on CSC actually realistic, given four more of these vessels (two RCN, and two CCG) need to be built?
 

suffolkowner

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
726
Points
1,060
I see that the future HMCS William Hall is due to finish the move to the landside assembly area at Irving sometime tomorrow.


So, that's the fourth of what is to be an 8 ship class, and it took 7 years to get here. I know things are progressing faster now, but is a 2024 timeframe for start of construction on CSC actually realistic, given four more of these vessels (two RCN, and two CCG) need to be built?
Maybe the two CCG ships get postponed or cancelled depending if they feel they can start cutting steel on the 1st CSC?
How long do they need to decide on whether they need an enclosed final assembly building and how long to build it?
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,059
Points
1,040
AOPS #3 Max Bernay's (MAX) will be doing sea acceptance trails end of this month. Depending on how those go will determine when the ship is handed over to the navy.

Some changes to MAX from the other two ships that are fixing defects/issues with the design (as one does with a new ship class).
  • new anchor housing design
  • changes to some internal/external drains
  • HVAC upgrades/improvements
  • more robust RAS arrangement

The number of manufacturing defects found during inspections continues the downward trend from HDW now that we are on ship three. I'm expecting ship five to be the "ideal" design with no need to go back and adjust.

HDW and MAR are doing OP NANOOK this summer. William Hall (WIL) expected delivery date will be Fall 2023.

I'm not going to lie, it's a little exciting to see the ships starting to hit a bit of a stride. I'm expecting OP CARIBBE, OP PROJECTION, EX TRADEWINDS, EX CUTLASS FURY and of course multiple OP NANOOKS in the next few years with HDW and MAR taking the lead.
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,618
Points
1,040
We are still working through 'first of class' issues though, so will likely need to be changes that run through the rest of the ships.

Once we are through the learning phases though and shake out the bugs, the status quo with AOPs will be a nice change to CPFs falling apart. Going to be a big learning curve for the RCN though where there isn't really any redundancy on the ships and 'built to SOLAS' means ships need systems working when they leave to meet SOLAS. The navy is far too used to running around with multiple systems degraded because combatant standards allow that so is a bit of a system shock.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,059
Points
1,040
We are still working through 'first of class' issues though, so will likely need to be changes that run through the rest of the ships.

Once we are through the learning phases though and shake out the bugs, the status quo with AOPs will be a nice change to CPFs falling apart. Going to be a big learning curve for the RCN though where there isn't really any redundancy on the ships and 'built to SOLAS' means ships need systems working when they leave to meet SOLAS. The navy is far too used to running around with multiple systems degraded because combatant standards allow that so is a bit of a system shock.
For sure, hawsepipe redesign and rescue boat crane fix are two that come to mind immediately as things that will be corrected by ship five and have to be adjusted on the previous three or four when the opportunity arises. Might have a VDQ quarterdeck situation here or there... lol

There are also procedural changes that are helping. The fluid system particle contamination issue has been resolved with better systems flushing and preservation during construction and prior to operation. That should help out the pumps significantly.

What is good for MAX is the in-service support contract will be just about running full steam with a lot of the kinks worked out. Calling them before getting ISI to fix something can save quite a bit of money.

Fun fact: The AOPS will be the only ship in the RCN to always carry the new Ranger Rifles (SARTECH variant) in their Small Arms lockers.
 

Swampbuggy

Full Member
Reaction score
81
Points
380
For sure, hawsepipe redesign and rescue boat crane fix are two that come to mind immediately as things that will be corrected by ship five and have to be adjusted on the previous three or four when the opportunity arises. Might have a VDQ quarterdeck situation here or there... lol

There are also procedural changes that are helping. The fluid system particle contamination issue has been resolved with better systems flushing and preservation during construction and prior to operation. That should help out the pumps significantly.

What is good for MAX is the in-service support contract will be just about running full steam with a lot of the kinks worked out. Calling them before getting ISI to fix something can save quite a bit of money.

Fun fact: The AOPS will be the only ship in the RCN to always carry the new Ranger Rifles (SARTECH variant) in their Small Arms lockers.
Question re:VDQ…As she’s in the shop at the moment, are they doing any of the hull or fatigue issues at this point? I’ve seen in other threads how the FELEX didn’t cover much beyond the combat systems, to the detriment of the vessels. Are they able to address that stuff now in refit periods or is it a matter of too far gone without stripping everything out?
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,508
Points
1,060
Some changes to MAX from the other two ships that are fixing defects/issues with the design (as one does with a new ship class).
  • new anchor housing design
  • changes to some internal/external drains
  • HVAC upgrades/improvements
  • more robust RAS arrangement

The number of manufacturing defects found during inspections continues the downward trend from HDW now that we are on ship three. I'm expecting ship five to be the "ideal" design with no need to go back and adjust.

This process is something that I don't gets enough attention in general procurement. Accountants love having all the answers up front. But this process is typical for any piece of equipment in any industry or application. It makes more sense to concentrate on building a small batch of units, beyond the prototype stage, debug them, and then build to the new spec that will fall out from that original effort.

It is true for ships, planes, tanks, trucks and radios.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,059
Points
1,040
Question re:VDQ…As she’s in the shop at the moment, are they doing any of the hull or fatigue issues at this point? I’ve seen in other threads how the FELEX didn’t cover much beyond the combat systems, to the detriment of the vessels. Are they able to address that stuff now in refit periods or is it a matter of too far gone without stripping everything out?
They try to address it. But it's very challenging. I remember Freddie had 30m of hull plate replaced. Toronto was supposed to get 02 deck replaced but ended up with the CSE flats being replaced instead as that was way worse and they ran out of time. Only so much money and time before the ship has to get back in the water.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,808
Points
1,160
They try to address it. But it's very challenging. I remember Freddie had 30m of hull plate replaced. Toronto was supposed to get 02 deck replaced but ended up with the CSE flats being replaced instead as that was way worse and they ran out of time. Only so much money and time before the ship has to get back in the water.
To bad we don't have leadership to say "This is not acceptable and needs to be repaired before going to sea and damm the inconveniences"
 
Top