HMCS Athabaskan

[The Bread Guy]

This from MERX:

.... The Department of National Defence has a requirement for a refit of HMCS ATHABASKAN, an IROQUOIS Class Destroyer based in Halifax, Nova Scotia. It is anticipated that the refit work will commence April 2012 with a completion date of December 2012.  Issuance of the Invitation to Tender (ITT) is scheduled for July 2011.

Pre-Qualification of bidders will occur prior to the issuance of the ITT documentation.

Only companies that meet all mandatory requirements as shown on the attached Global Rating Guide will be invited to submit a Tender for the refit of HMCS ATHABASKAN. Verification of the requirements may be conducted at the discretion of the Crown ....

A bit more detail in the attachment.

Also, some broader discussion on "New replacements for HMCS Iroquois, HMCS Algonquin and HMCS Athabaskan?" here.

 

[jollyjacktar]

That will go, IMO to Irving, as usual.... :

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Another long refit in 2012! What a beautiful 40th anniversary gift for the old girl.

Would you give your mother a face lift as her 80th anniversary gift? I wouldn't. Isn't this the same?

And if they give her such a refit, they are planning on keeping her around at least another 5 years. How much more service can this nation ask from the old girl.

However, mark my words: This refit may start on time, but it will stretch way past the deadline for return to service and will cost huge extras because they will find tons of extra work required on her hull and on many other pieces  of equipment that are subject to stress and fatigue.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Another long refit in 2012! What a beautiful 40th anniversary gift for the old girl.

Would you give your mother a face lift as her 80th anniversary gift? I wouldn't. Isn't this the same?

And if they give her such a refit, they are planning on keeping her around at least another 5 years. How much more service can this nation ask from the old girl.

However, mark my words: This refit may start on time, but it will stretch way past the deadline for return to service and will cost huge extras because they will find tons of extra work required on her hull and on many other pieces  of equipment that are subject to stress and fatigue.

DND will realize one of these days you cannot keep trying to suck water out of stones.

 

[RC]

DND will realize one of these days you cannot keep trying to suck water out of stones.

Apologies in advance for the mixed metaphors, but isn't DND, with missions to undertake and no replacement in the books, rather stuck between a stone and a hard place?

 

[Sigs Pig]

That will go, IMO to Irving, as usual.... :

Maybe Davie Yards will bid (and get it) they are only a stones throw away....

ME

 

[The Bread Guy]

DND will realize one of these days you cannot keep trying to suck water out of stones.

One hopes....

 

[chrisf]

Would you give your mother a face lift as her 80th anniversary gift? I wouldn't. Isn't this the same?

Put it to tender, get yourself a new mother...

 

[Pat in Halifax]

Put it to tender, get yourself a new mother...

Ha Ha!!
Actually, two HAL class (TOR and STJ) did their DWPs at NEWDOCK in St John's in 2000. I was on TOR and the only issue was a Navy imposed time constraint to get the ship home for Christmas. I think HSL will be a "little busy' in 2012.
Not sure how this will pan out. I have never sailed on the class but suspect she will need substantially more than the proverbial coat of paint.

 

[jollyjacktar]

She is one of the girls my team looks after.  Yes, she is tired and will need more than a lick of paint.  As much as I like older women, they really do need to get the finger out of the orifice and do something, anything about the next generation.  It won't be for me, but for the guys/gals who come after me.

 

[ekpiper]

Well, on the plus side, I may actually be lucky enough to serve on a 280 when I finish university and Phase Training in 2013!  If she ever comes out of refit, that is.  Varied training platforms should be a plus!

I don't know when the government will realize that refitting 40-year-old ships gets far less value than purchasing new vessels in a timely manner, but they've already done this with Protecteur and Preserver.

Also interesting is whether IRO and ALG will get the same treatment, or if we're going to be left with one 280 serving the fleet.  Perhaps IRO, being the oldest of the 4 will be the next to be decommissioned.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Well, on the plus side, I may actually be lucky enough to serve on a 280 when I finish university and Phase Training in 2013!  If she ever comes out of refit, that is.  Varied training platforms should be a plus!

I don't know when the government will realize that refitting 40-year-old ships gets far less value than purchasing new vessels in a timely manner, but they've already done this with Protecteur and Preserver.

Also interesting is whether IRO and ALG will get the same treatment, or if we're going to be left with one 280 serving the fleet.  Perhaps IRO, being the oldest of the 4 will be the next to be decommissioned.

The Navy and DND and, indeed, the whole government does know all that but defence spending ranks right down there with symphony orchestras and opera houses on Canadians' list of spending priorities, and politicians - who tell government how much (or little) it can spend on this, that and the other thing - respond to Canadians' desires, however ill-informd and wasteful they may be.

Don't blame government: look in the mirror, and a Mom and Dad and Aunt Florence and the next-door neighbours and at the girlfriend's parents; they, not government, are the ones who say refit a 40 year old DDH rather than implementing a coherent national shipbuilding strategy.

 

[ekpiper]

The Navy and DND and, indeed, the whole government does know all that but defence spending ranks right down there with symphony orchestras and opera houses on Canadians' list of spending priorities, and politicians - who tell government how much (or little) it can spend on this, that and the other thing - respond to Canadians' desires, however ill-informd and wasteful they may be.

Don't blame government: look in the mirror, and a Mom and Dad and Aunt Florence and the next-door neighbours and at the girlfriend's parents; they, not government, are the ones who say refit a 40 year old DDH rather than implementing a coherent national shipbuilding strategy.

Yes, E.R. Campbell,  I'm sure that you are right.  The issue was addressed to an extent with the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy, but the process is still painfully slow, and as you say, the money just isn't there.  I wonder if some kind of show promoting the Navy and it's actions would help boost the public image for the Navy; Something along the lines of Sea Patrol for the Austrailians.

 

[Edward Campbell]

As I read the polls, and I've been wrong plenty of times in the past, we you the CF enjoyed a brief flurry of public support for more spending from circa 2003 until about last year; now "support" for the military has fallen back to its normal level - about the same as the public's support for ballet and the opera.

Despite all the red T-shirts and Don Cherry's rantings, Canadian public support for the military is, always, a mile wide but only an inch deep (1.6 km and 2.5 cm, respectively).

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I agree E.R.C.

But the unfortunate fact is that where defence spending is concerned, our politicians are incompetent salespersons. They just do not know how to properly present things and put them in proper perspective.

They present the defence spending as if it was new programs for everyone's benefit. Present all the following in the same way: "Today, we are introducing a new national day care program - free daycare for all Canadian's, that will involve an investment of 20 B$"; "Our government will beat this recession with a $30 B$ new investment in municipal infrastructure!"; or, "Today, we have contracted for the purchase of 65 new F-35 jetfighters at a cost of 19 B$, because we believe in a strong Canada."

I too would be livid to think the government would want to spend that much EXTRA money in one shot!

Compare to this presentation:

" Good morning everyone. As you know, our government is dedicated to maintaining a strong national defence for Canada. Our fleet of CF-18 fighter jets, which have served, and are still serving Canada well, is coming soon to the end of its usefull life. We must therefore provide for its replacement. I am happy to announce that we have contracted for the acquisition of 65 F-35 jetfighters for that purpose. This programme has an expected cost of 19 B$ over its full life cycle of 30 years. We expect costs of  a few hundred millions in most year, with annual expenditures around 1.5 B$ in the five years where the program will be at its peak. As this funding will come out of the annual capital acquisition budget of DND - since it will be that program's turn at its lion's share - we only expect an extra increase in defence spending of approximately 1 and 1/2 percent in those five peak years. Any questions?"

I think Canadians would have no problem with this second scenario.

 

[The Bread Guy]

" Good morning everyone. As you know, our government is dedicated to maintaining a strong national defence for Canada. Our fleet of CF-18 fighter jets, which have served, and are still serving Canada well, is coming soon to the end of its usefull life. We must therefore provide for its replacement. I am happy to announce that we have contracted for the acquisition of 65 F-35 jetfighters for that purpose. This programme has an expected cost of 19 B$ over its full life cycle of 30 years. We expect costs of  a few hundred millions in most year, with annual expenditures around 1.5 B$ in the five years where the program will be at its peak. As this funding will come out of the annual capital acquisition budget of DND - since it will be that program's turn at its lion's share - we only expect an extra increase in defence spending of approximately 1 and 1/2 percent in those five peak years. Any questions?"

I think Canadians would have no problem with this second scenario.

Another problem:  even if that's what the politicians say, how much of that do you think ends up on TV/radio/in the paper?  I would hope most of it, but no guarantees...

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Well, on the plus side, I may actually be lucky enough to serve on a 280 when I finish university and Phase Training in 2013!  If she ever comes out of refit, that is.  Varied training platforms should be a plus!

You know, Ekiper, I think we should make a rule: When more than 75% of a ship's company had not yet been born when the ship commissioned originally, the ship should be retired from service.

 

[Edward Campbell]

You know, Ekiper, I think we should make a rule: When more than 75% of a ship's company had not yet been born when the ship commissioned originally, the ship should be retired from service.

Good idea, generally ... but there are exceptions that prove your good rule:

HMS Victory - still in commission.

 

[CombatDoc]

I wonder if some kind of show promoting the Navy and it's actions would help boost the public image for the Navy; Something along the lines of Sea Patrol for the Austrailians.

Although not a television program the Navy did, in fact, put on some kind of show to promote its relevance to Canadians.  IIRC it was called the Naval Centennial and was held for an entire year in 2010.  They even invited some special guests to the celebration, such as ships from foreign navies and Queen Elizabeth.  It didn't seem to do much to increase public support for our "over the horizon" (perhaps synonymous with "out of sight, out of mind") branch of the CF.

 

[The Bread Guy]

A bit more time for interested vendors, and a bit more information, in the attached bid document update.