Author Topic: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)  (Read 964073 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 178,980
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,601
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2325 on: June 18, 2020, 19:54:40 »
I doubt they really want to sell to others.  One big fat customer that pays is easy.  Sorry to be a downer but really.  How much did Irving really try to sell to the Saudi's the CPF's?  How much are they trying to sell the AOPS to RNZN?  Plus how much does the CDN Gov really help? Other nations really go out of their way to make deal, and a Canada deal does not help most countries geo politically (cough, cough SC Seat)  ....I know I'm being negative.

they may make money by selling the updated design, I doubt we can directly compete with South Korea, however if the ships have minimal teething issues, it may make them more attractive. I would not be surprised if New Zealand, Chile or Argentina expressed interest in the AOP's, either built here or a licenced build. 

Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 31,775
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,173
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2326 on: June 18, 2020, 21:34:10 »
they may make money by selling the updated design, I doubt we can directly compete with South Korea, however if the ships have minimal teething issues, it may make them more attractive. I would not be surprised if New Zealand, Chile or Argentina expressed interest in the AOP's, either built here or a licenced build.

Naval allies always take a good look at what each other are building.  NZ has a desire for an ice-resistant patrol boat.  RNZN visits Canada and does an Irving tour, seeing what we are doing and the problems/solutions we have and developed.  RNZN goes home and uses that info to develop its own requirements.

Not that big of a deal.  There is a reason RNZN ANZACs did the upgrade they did.  Because they comparative shopped, looked at their own requirements and then chose a HCM type upgrade vs the Australian refit (with the CEAFAR etc...).   UK is looking at JSS for similar reasons.

To say we are trying to sell the boat (as I may have stated earlier in this thread but have now changed my position) might be premature.  Happy to provide the glossy brochure but its more of a car show and less a dealership visit.

Online Dana381

  • New Member
  • **
  • 1,180
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 41
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2327 on: August 23, 2020, 22:57:47 »
I have not heard anything on this in a while but is the RCN still planning on ending the lease on MV Asterix when the JSS come online? I have been hoping they keep her and build the second ship that Davie proposed.

I see pictures of RCN vessels RASing (sp?) with foreign oiler ships frequently on combat camera. Would it not be more cost effective to provide our own support whenever possible? I'm sure RASing from foreign navy's must be expensive as we are slave to whatever they wish to charge for fuel and supplies. What do we do when our JSS need repairs or refits? Would MV Asterix and even the second ship that Davie proposed save us a lot of money in the long run?

Forgive me if these questions were asked and answered already but is the Protecteur class going to be ice capable? How do we support our shiny new AOPS ships if not? I did not see any mention of ice class on the wiki page. To me it would make little sense for Canada to build navy support ships that were not ice capable. But what do I know.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 178,980
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,601
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2328 on: August 24, 2020, 13:10:54 »
I doubt anyone knows for sure, by the time the 2nd JSS comes online, Astreix is going to need a good refit. I personally believe we need 4 AOR's. I believe it's time that we had a proper Fleet Auxiliary Arm like the RFA, and that manning model solves manpower issues for the RCN. I have heard that the Fleet Services deal is pricey, but they were the only Canadian option on the table. Once the JSS is online, then we can negotiate a better deal. I also think by the time the 2nd JSS goes into service, the preferred postings will be to the AOP's and AOR's as the Halifax's will be very long in the tooth and the bunking arrangement less than stellar compared to the newer ships.   

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 66,609
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,230
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2329 on: August 25, 2020, 08:03:06 »
I doubt anyone knows for sure, by the time the 2nd JSS comes online, Astreix is going to need a good refit. I personally believe we need 4 AOR's. I believe it's time that we had a proper Fleet Auxiliary Arm like the RFA, and that manning model solves manpower issues for the RCN. I have heard that the Fleet Services deal is pricey, but they were the only Canadian option on the table. Once the JSS is online, then we can negotiate a better deal. I also think by the time the 2nd JSS goes into service, the preferred postings will be to the AOP's and AOR's as the Halifax's will be very long in the tooth and the bunking arrangement less than stellar compared to the newer ships.   

The bunking arrangements on Asterix are phenomenal! Every one gets their own pricate cabin, every cabin ha their own bathroom AND shower with heated floors. Every cabin has a tv and WiFi and all the cabins are networked so you can jsut sit in your cabin and skype with family, watch Netflix by yourself, or play video games against others around the ship. Or you could go to the mess, which are also as nice. The gym is HUGE, and the unclass internet is top notch. Not sure how good the food is though, just haven't heard about it.
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 746,192
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,184
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2330 on: August 25, 2020, 08:25:07 »
I have not heard anything on this in a while but is the RCN still planning on ending the lease on MV Asterix when the JSS come online? I have been hoping they keep her and build the second ship that Davie proposed.

I see pictures of RCN vessels RASing (sp?) with foreign oiler ships frequently on combat camera. Would it not be more cost effective to provide our own support whenever possible? I'm sure RASing from foreign navy's must be expensive as we are slave to whatever they wish to charge for fuel and supplies. What do we do when our JSS need repairs or refits? Would MV Asterix and even the second ship that Davie proposed save us a lot of money in the long run?

Forgive me if these questions were asked and answered already but is the Protecteur class going to be ice capable? How do we support our shiny new AOPS ships if not? I did not see any mention of ice class on the wiki page. To me it would make little sense for Canada to build navy support ships that were not ice capable. But what do I know.

As it stands Asterix more than likely won't be retained, by the time the Protectueur Class is operational the ship will be nearing 20 years old and used extensively. As people have mentioned 3 AOR's would be great, I just don't see it happening given resources and political climate. There are other considerations that make Asterix different from a total RCN crewed vessel, one of which as its a civilian owned vessel you more than likely won't see it past 60 degrees north.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Online Dana381

  • New Member
  • **
  • 1,180
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 41
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2331 on: August 25, 2020, 08:42:49 »
As it stands Asterix more than likely won't be retained, by the time the Protectueur Class is operational the ship will be nearing 20 years old and used extensively. As people have mentioned 3 AOR's would be great, I just don't see it happening given resources and political climate. There are other considerations that make Asterix different from a total RCN crewed vessel, one of which as its a civilian owned vessel you more than likely won't see it past 60 degrees north.

I don't think I am the only one that hoped with how well Asterix has been performing the RCN would have a change of heart and either buy it or extend the lease. I know the Navy would never consider her a full Navy vessel so buying is likely out of the question, but the arrangement currently seems to be working very well. I believe many hoped to see Asterix and maybe her sister working alongside the Protectueur class someday. I am aware that she will never be sent north, I was asking about the ice class of Protectueur class. Is the plan to make it ice capable?

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 746,192
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,184
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2332 on: August 25, 2020, 10:01:52 »
I don't think I am the only one that hoped with how well Asterix has been performing the RCN would have a change of heart and either buy it or extend the lease. I know the Navy would never consider her a full Navy vessel so buying is likely out of the question, but the arrangement currently seems to be working very well. I believe many hoped to see Asterix and maybe her sister working alongside the Protectueur class someday. I am aware that she will never be sent north, I was asking about the ice class of Protectueur class. Is the plan to make it ice capable?

It will have some ice rating but won't be able to operate in heavy ice. We don't RAS above 60 and we have a naval refueling depot in the Arctic to refuel AOPS and other vessels.

The problem of a leased vessel is that its incredibly expensive and if the civilian master decides that his civilian crew has worked their max hours then operations could be shutdown. The kind of accommodations onboard are not realistic for RCN personnel and have issues when Jr personnel were posted pack to the fleet.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 22,830
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,221
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2333 on: August 25, 2020, 11:41:11 »
Asterix different from a total RCN crewed vessel, one of which as its a civilian owned vessel you more than likely won't see it past 60 degrees north.

As I understand it, Asterix actually took part in Operation Nanook this year.

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 746,192
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,184
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2334 on: August 25, 2020, 11:57:56 »
As I understand it, Asterix actually took part in Operation Nanook this year.

It did, just not North of 60 which is Arctic waters. AIS tells the tale
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 22,830
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,221
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2335 on: August 25, 2020, 13:23:45 »
It did, just not North of 60 which is Arctic waters. AIS tells the tale

Thanks - I wasn't sure exactly what taking part meant.

Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 31,775
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,173
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2336 on: August 26, 2020, 08:30:08 »
The problem of a leased vessel is that its incredibly expensive...

And its over budget.  Not the perfect success story Davie would have you believe.  Still, love to keep it or have something similar in the process.

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 746,192
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,184
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2337 on: August 26, 2020, 08:51:27 »
And its over budget.  Not the perfect success story Davie would have you believe.  Still, love to keep it or have something similar in the process.

Yes keep it but with a RCN crew so we don't keep paying through the nose. Davie is very deceptive with their PR, the latest is a graphic for their "national" icebreaking center. They claim AOPS won't be able to operate in the NWP.  They are more than likely a 7 to 8 years away from delivering a new vessel, kind of premature.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 150,990
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,857
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2338 on: August 26, 2020, 09:14:10 »
A few things need clarification here, I believe.

First, as Chief Engineer pointed out, the RCN does not RAS in Arctic waters (to be in compliance with the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act). So the question becomes what is the point of even taking one up there at all then? And that is the reason they don't go past 60 degrees North.

This is not related to any capacity/incapacity to go. Asterix's hull is much more capable of taking hit s by ice than the frigates or MCDV's we send up there. There is no requirement for any specifically reinforced hull to operate there in the "ice-free" navigation season. The Arctic villages are resupplied in that navigation season by ships, mostly from the Desgagné group, and they use standard cargo ships with no special hull reinforcement of any kind.

Second, before we call leased vessels "expensive" or "over budget", we better be looking at true cost for the RCN. The leased vessel is known fixed price to start with and includes everything provided by the contract. It is only when the RCN choose to ask that the supplier exceed what is provided by the contract that the costs increases. So if you are over budget, it's probably because the RCN wants more done by the ship than what was originally negotiated.

As for being "expensive", you have to compare to a RCN owned and operated vessel on equal terms: you have to include the actual cost of the ship, all it's refits, the cost in salary and employment related costs (pension, medical, insurance, etc.) of the RCN crew, the cost of shore support facilities related t the ship, it's maintenance, upkeep and operation cost, calculated on an annual basis. You can't only look at fuel because all these other costs are "sunk" costs. When you do that, I am not convinced the leased vessel is more expensive than a RCN owned and run ship.

Finally, nobody in the thread is proposing that Asterix should remain a leased vessel. What I read above is that just about everybody proposes that Asterix be acquired (the fixed cost to do so is in the contract, should Canada want to exercise that option) by the GoC and turned over to the CFAV (CNAV today?), i.e. that it become operated by merchant mariner employed directly by the crown as employees of DND, who then answer to the RCN for support requirements. That would be cheaper in terms of personnel and operations costs than a RCN operated vessel.

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 746,192
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,184
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2339 on: August 26, 2020, 19:14:46 »
A few things need clarification here, I believe.

First, as Chief Engineer pointed out, the RCN does not RAS in Arctic waters (to be in compliance with the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act). So the question becomes what is the point of even taking one up there at all then? And that is the reason they don't go past 60 degrees North.

This is not related to any capacity/incapacity to go. Asterix's hull is much more capable of taking hit s by ice than the frigates or MCDV's we send up there. There is no requirement for any specifically reinforced hull to operate there in the "ice-free" navigation season. The Arctic villages are resupplied in that navigation season by ships, mostly from the Desgagné group, and they use standard cargo ships with no special hull reinforcement of any kind.

Second, before we call leased vessels "expensive" or "over budget", we better be looking at true cost for the RCN. The leased vessel is known fixed price to start with and includes everything provided by the contract. It is only when the RCN choose to ask that the supplier exceed what is provided by the contract that the costs increases. So if you are over budget, it's probably because the RCN wants more done by the ship than what was originally negotiated.

As for being "expensive", you have to compare to a RCN owned and operated vessel on equal terms: you have to include the actual cost of the ship, all it's refits, the cost in salary and employment related costs (pension, medical, insurance, etc.) of the RCN crew, the cost of shore support facilities related t the ship, it's maintenance, upkeep and operation cost, calculated on an annual basis. You can't only look at fuel because all these other costs are "sunk" costs. When you do that, I am not convinced the leased vessel is more expensive than a RCN owned and run ship.

Finally, nobody in the thread is proposing that Asterix should remain a leased vessel. What I read above is that just about everybody proposes that Asterix be acquired (the fixed cost to do so is in the contract, should Canada want to exercise that option) by the GoC and turned over to the CFAV (CNAV today?), i.e. that it become operated by merchant mariner employed directly by the crown as employees of DND, who then answer to the RCN for support requirements. That would be cheaper in terms of personnel and operations costs than a RCN operated vessel.

Its true that due to environmental considerations we don't RAS about 60 degrees, however apparently the reason why Asterix doesn't go above is because the company who owns the ship is not insured to go above. If the RCN owned the ship, the RCN would assume the risk and operate up there if needed ie filling up the tanks at the Arctic fueling depot. I imagine the insurance company not willing to insure a large ship filled with fueling in an environmentally sensitive area with ice.

As for cost, I suspect the cost wasn't as cheap as the RCN had hoped.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 178,980
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,601
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2340 on: August 26, 2020, 19:22:49 »
Lack of planning on the part of DND and their political masters comes at a price.

Online Dana381

  • New Member
  • **
  • 1,180
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 41
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2341 on: August 26, 2020, 19:47:27 »
Ok. so I Just realized my notifications for this thread were going to my junk folder but all the other threads were not, Weird!

Thank you Oldgateboatdriver and Chief Engineer, your posts are very informative.

When the original lease was drawn up the GOC was in a bind and Davie had them by the gonads, I bet when the JSS come online the lease could be renegotiated with much more favorable terms. Davie faced with selling the ship or taking a less profitable lease would likely choose the later. Does the GOC already operate ships like mentioned here?

i.e. that it become operated by merchant mariner employed directly by the crown as employees of DND, who then answer to the RCN for support requirements. That would be cheaper in terms of personnel and operations costs than a RCN operated vessel.

If not renegotiating the lease would likely be cheaper than setting up a new department and all the red tape that would go with it.

My main reason for asking the question was because people on here seem to be in the know of things early, I was wondering what the rumor mill was saying about it. If the DND likes what they see and are considering keeping Asterix on i'm sure we'll hear about it here first!  ;)

Offline Underway

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 31,775
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,173
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2342 on: August 27, 2020, 10:12:57 »
Second, before we call leased vessels "expensive" or "over budget", we better be looking at true cost for the RCN. The leased vessel is known fixed price to start with and includes everything provided by the contract.

This is a provision of service contract not a lease, the distinction is important.  There was a budget in the RCN for that contract and it's been completely blown through. Much of that cost was the unfinished nature of the construction that the Asterix was in when she arrived and the fixes were paid for by the RCN.
 Ship builders never ever pay for their own mistakes or errors.  Canada does.

Quote
It is only when the RCN choose to ask that the supplier exceed what is provided by the contract that the costs increases. So if you are over budget, it's probably because the RCN wants more done by the ship than what was originally negotiated.

Given that its a provision of service contract yes I would agree with this to an extent.  And its a complicated one where I suspect the government hasn't done their homework as much as Davie had, which means we're probably overcharged for quite a few things.

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 746,192
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,184
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2343 on: August 27, 2020, 11:42:38 »
This is a provision of service contract not a lease, the distinction is important.  There was a budget in the RCN for that contract and it's been completely blown through. Much of that cost was the unfinished nature of the construction that the Asterix was in when she arrived and the fixes were paid for by the RCN.
 Ship builders never ever pay for their own mistakes or errors.  Canada does.

Given that its a provision of service contract yes I would agree with this to an extent.  And its a complicated one where I suspect the government hasn't done their homework as much as Davie had, which means we're probably overcharged for quite a few things.


Yes she was in quite a state when she came to Halifax and was no coincidence that she had to make it by the 31st of Jan as per the agreement, hell the painting wasn't all done. All to for Davie to proclaim "on time and on budget".
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline Patski

  • Guest
  • *
  • 500
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2344 on: August 28, 2020, 08:58:35 »
For my personal info, and it might be interesting for some other people too I guess,  Is operating the Asterix more expensive than using the services of other countries for that kind of stuff?  I mean, obviously, we only have one of these, so we need to ask other countries for supplies on the way?

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 200,695
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,869
  • Freespeecher
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2345 on: September 21, 2020, 14:59:58 »
A bit out of left field, but perhaps a "small honking ship" might be worth considering. While the"Stem Landing Vessel" is really a landing craft, the idea of having a rear ramp leading into a clear deck space would make it much quicker and easier to load and offload a ship at dock, especially with containerized or modular cargos. The picture in the USNI article shows a large helicopter deck, so moving cargo around via helicopter becomes a possibility, or you could fit it with derricks or other devices to lift and transfer cargo as well.

This also becomes interesting since the USMC is also considering this for their Littoral Force, which is supposed to go ashore and fire long range anti ship missiles at enemy ships (preumably Chinese, in the current context). Being able to quickly load "containerized" missiles eliminates the middleman, and then the ship becomes a combatent - linking to off board sensors to aim and fire. Nothing to stop you from using anti air missiles, or rockets to launch long range torpedoes to make the ship more versatile.

The current design obviously has limitations, mostly becasue it is slow, but using a different hull form and engineering plant should net a modular hull capable of being used for multiple purposes.

https://news.usni.org/tag/stern-landing-vessel
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 178,980
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,601
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2346 on: September 21, 2020, 19:56:16 »
or a couple of these. They could support domestic training with LAV's and tanks. Loaned to NATO, PacRim events, supporting DND and other government agencies in the Arctic and the ever sellable UN  and Humanitarian ops. run them with a mix of Reg, reserve and civilian crews, slowly increasing the Reserve side as capacity grows. Plus you can use them for training Merchant Marine Cadets as well, helping to maintain Canada's rep for good Merchant Marine Officers.

  Damen LST 120     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCTPSoaUtwk

Offline FMoore7

  • Guest
  • *
  • 360
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2347 on: September 22, 2020, 12:12:43 »
The bunking arrangements on Asterix are phenomenal! Every one gets their own pricate cabin, every cabin ha their own bathroom AND shower with heated floors. Every cabin has a tv and WiFi and all the cabins are networked so you can jsut sit in your cabin and skype with family, watch Netflix by yourself, or play video games against others around the ship. Or you could go to the mess, which are also as nice. The gym is HUGE, and the unclass internet is top notch. Not sure how good the food is though, just haven't heard about it.

Hi there, as far as we know so far, will the new JSS ships have the same accommodations?

Thanks,

Offline Dolphin_Hunter

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 20,050
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,421
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2348 on: September 22, 2020, 12:36:44 »
Hi there, as far as we know so far, will the new JSS ships have the same accommodations?

No. I'm sure the accommodations will be better than the old replenishment vessels, but there's no way they'll match what is on the Asterix..



Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 746,192
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,184
Re: AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)
« Reply #2349 on: September 22, 2020, 14:00:20 »
Hi there, as far as we know so far, will the new JSS ships have the same accommodations?

Thanks,

They'll be nice but not that nice.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر