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

FELEX - Halifax Class Modernisation

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,834
Points
1,160
Oldgateboatdriver said:
25 to 30 years is not a fast rule but a NATO average service time for the smaller ships (that is cruisers and smaller - 45 to 50 years for aircraft carriers and large phibs is pretty standard), with the Brits and American closer to 25 and the French and German closer to 30. All of this is, however without major redesign, like we do with our life extension programs all the time. The Brits tend to use ships for about 12 years in commission, then lay them up for a mid-life refit, where some aspects are modernized, but mostly all the machinery is taken apart and repaired/refurbished over a year, then go back in commission for another 10 to 12 years.

If, as I suggested (and was proposed by the Navy) we had started replacing the HAL's in 2010 (after replacing the IROs), and replaced them at a rate of one every 12 to14 months, the first ones would have been retired near 20 years of age - without the need for extensive life extension -and the last one would have been retired around 2023 after 27 years of service. The number of operationally available ships (15) would have been maintained throughout,  with a reserve of 5 or 6 of the best retired HAL's on hand for a bit of quick expansion or replacement here and there as required due to long refits or major breakdown/accidents.

Such an idea is to sound, it would mean a constantly busy yard with trained employees passing on corporate knowledge and skill sets. It would also allow such a yard to reinvest in more modern equipment and basically outdo all the other yards in the country. How would you spread the pork around?
 

FSTO

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,511
Points
1,090
Oldgateboatdriver said:
If, as I suggested (and was proposed by the Navy) we had started replacing the HAL's in 2010 (after replacing the IROs), and replaced them at a rate of one every 12 to14 months, the first ones would have been retired near 20 years of age - without the need for extensive life extension -and the last one would have been retired around 2023 after 27 years of service. The number of operationally available ships (15) would have been maintained throughout,  with a reserve of 5 or 6 of the best retired HAL's on hand for a bit of quick expansion or replacement here and there as required due to long refits or major breakdown/accidents.
:rofl:
That is just crazy talk! That idea makes no sense at all. You must never have been to Ottawa.
 
J

jollyjacktar

Guest
Colin P said:
Such an idea is to sound, it would mean a constantly busy yard with trained employees passing on corporate knowledge and skill sets. It would also allow such a yard to reinvest in more modern equipment and basically outdo all the other yards in the country. How would you spread the pork around?
Pork aside, this is exactly what some countries do just for these reasons.  We should do the same it would also give us the added benefit of incorporating new design changes and modifications as they come to pass.  Take the Spitfire as an example, there was I believe 24 different Mks and variants of this aircraft which enabled it to be in production until 1947 and front line service into the 1950's.
 

Oldgateboatdriver

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
405
Points
880
FSTO said:
:rofl:
That is just crazy talk! That idea makes no sense at all. You must never have been to Ottawa.

I have so been to Ottawa: wonderful museums.

… Oh! You mean at HQ!!! No, never, Thank god. :)
 

Spencer100

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
666
Points
1,040
hmcs-st-johns.jpg


Interest picture of a ship in FELEX

They really do a lot of work on these midlife updates.  Maybe as I have read earlier on these boards would it be better to just use the ships for 20 years and buy new?  It would keep the ship yards open and the knowledge base going. 
 

Spencer100

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
666
Points
1,040
Also as a person who has some knowledge of manufacturing and processing....that shipyard could use could TPS, Lean and 5S processes!  And yes I can say that from one picture.
 

Occam

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2
Points
430
Spencer100 said:
Also as a person who has some knowledge of manufacturing and processing....that shipyard could use could TPS, Lean and 5S processes!  And yes I can say that from one picture.

Unless you've actually seen how much hull work gets done, and hardware and cabling gets removed/installed during one of these refits, you really can't offer credible comment on the refit based on one picture.  I have one Engineering Change being installed during the refit, and it's staggering how much work has gone into a seemingly minor little project.  I have a whole new appreciation for the level of effort that goes into projects like this.  I've seen the shipyards on both coasts, and while the VSL yard tends to be a little neater, they don't have to contend with the winter that Halifax has seen so far.
 

Oldgateboatdriver

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
405
Points
880
Spencer100 said:
Also as a person who has some knowledge of manufacturing and processing....that shipyard could use could TPS, Lean and 5S processes!  And yes I can say that from one picture.

First of all, I will assume you meant to say 6S (i.e. the Six-Sigma process).

Second of all, as I look at the picture I see a fairly well organized shipyard, a ship in mid refit that looks particularly tidy compared to what they sometimes look like and all the proper safety measures in place.

You claim a knowledge of manufacturing processes, but a ship refit is not akin to a manufacturing process. It is not chain of actions or combination of chains of actions leading to a single product as final result. It is more akin to an extreme building renovation project, with all the trades on top of one another trying to simultaneously carry out their part of the work while working around other trades. In the same compartment, the pipe fitters may want to replace the lube-oil piping at the same time the mechanics are opening the diesel engine to resurface the inside of the cylinders, while the electricians are updating the main switchboard, etc.

So the coordination to make all these actions as efficient as possible takes place in the engineering office, not at the ship level.

The comparison, to put it in manufacturing terms, would not be on how the Ford plant works in Mississauga, but how that plant looks like while they are retooling it, especially if they also pick that moment to renovate the building.   
 

Spencer100

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
666
Points
1,040
5S, one of the tools of TPS or Lean if you don't like Toyota :).

1. Seiri (Sort)
2. Seiton (Systematic Arrangement)
3. Seiso (Shine or clean)
4. Seiketsu (Standardize)
5. Shitsuke (Sustain)


 
 

Spencer100

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
666
Points
1,040
Thank you for you comment, I do understand that the refit is more of a "building" process that a "manufacturing" process.  My point is that many of the tools can be used in both. Ie, WCM, TPS, Six Sigma. 

Getting back to the pic, I have seen better yard side housekeeping in European yards.  I was just making a small point on one picture in one point in time.  Also taking into account the winter we have had. 

Hmm...maybe they can hire me as a consultant...... ;D ::)

 

Cdn Blackshirt

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
36
Points
530
Kind of amazing that given the aggressiveness of Russia that this topic has not been touched in a year.

With only one ship left to complete its refit (Toronto) has the Navy made any urgent requests to address the new higher threat environment?

Adding active component to towed sonar?

Replacing Phalanx with RAM?

It would seem that such discussions should be had and given that with certain projects being delayed that cash should be available for such prioirity projects.

Of note if someone other than me with infinitely more knowledge could propose what you would recommend to our new defense minister if given a forum, that would definitely be of interest as well.

Cheers all, Matthew. :salute:
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
1,747
Points
1,060
With construction supposed to be starting in 2020, any sort of major project (like adding those things) would likely take until mid 2020s to get off the ground and start work, meanwhile we'd be taking the first deliveries of the CSC at that point. If they didn't think they needed it in FELEX, they likely won't get it.
 

Cdn Blackshirt

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
36
Points
530
PuckChaser said:
With construction supposed to be starting in 2020, any sort of major project (like adding those things) would likely take until mid 2020s to get off the ground and start work, meanwhile we'd be taking the first deliveries of the CSC at that point. If they didn't think they needed it in FELEX, they likely won't get it.

On that note, is there not a precedent in European Navies to "upgrade as needed" then transfer those upgraded components to new hulls?

It would seem that if new towed arrays or RAM launchers are deemed to be required now, buying, integrating and training on upgraded Halifax Class prior to transferring those systems to CSC would make a lot of sense.

It's not like you would install RAM or new towed arrays on Halifaxes for 6-10 years, then just throw them out as the hulls are retired.  The components would still have minimum 15-25 year service lives - they would just be split over two hulls.
 

ringo

Member
Reaction score
4
Points
180
Canada should be trying to sell the Halifax class off at a rate of 1 per year, funds from sale used to bring forward CSC.

When CSC has totally replaced the Halifax's, the oldest of the new CSC should be offered for overseas sales, thus enable CSC construction to continue. I don't believe Canada will every find a overseas market for newly built Canada warships. 
 
J

jollyjacktar

Guest
What makes you think anyone wants our tired and worn out hulls?  We couldn't interest anyone to buy some when they were a new design.
 

MarkOttawa

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
136
Points
710
Mulroney then Chretien governments tried to sell to Saudis and failed:
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2457&dat=19940302&id=YBwzAAAAIBAJ&sjid=XzgHAAAAIBAJ&pg=5833,405252&hl=en

Mark
Ottawa
 

Sub_Guy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
460
MarkOttawa said:
Mulroney then Chretien governments tried to sell to Saudis and failed:
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2457&dat=19940302&id=YBwzAAAAIBAJ&sjid=XzgHAAAAIBAJ&pg=5833,405252&hl=en

Mark
Ottawa

They were going up against the La Fayette at the time IIRC. 
 

Oldgateboatdriver

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
405
Points
880
Dolphin_Hunter said:
They were going up against the La Fayette at the time IIRC.

Correct.

And even though the La Fayette's are less capable than the Halifax's, when you sell to countries like Saudi Arabia, looks count - unfortunately.

And Colin, I would add Argentina and even possibly Brazil to your list.
 
Top