Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS

[Kirkhill]

More relevant to the Diefenbaker and the Coast Guard but posted here for Arctic and sovereignty relevance.

U.S., Canada Team on Project for Icebreaker
8/15/2017
By Yasmin Tadjdeh
The National Research Council of Canada simulates sea ice for testing.
Photo: National Research Council of Canada

With the United States facing the imminent retirement of its sole operational heavy-duty polar icebreaker, the U.S. Coast Guard is teaming with Canadian researchers to help conduct tests that will inform requirements for a new vessel.

The service is responsible for maintaining the nation’s fleet of polar icebreakers, but currently only has two operational ships in its inventory — the Polar Star, a heavy-duty vessel, and the Healy, a medium-duty icebreaker. With the Polar Star approaching the end of its service life in the next several years, the Coast Guard is working in earnest to field a new vessel.

This summer the service and the National Research Council of Canada teamed up to conduct ice testing for a potential new vessel. The experiments occurred at the NRC’s St. Johns, Newfoundland, facility, which has a large tank that can simulate sea ice.

“The way we build that ice sheet … is not just the way you would freeze ice cubes,” said Jim Millan, director of research at the facility. “We go through special processes to develop that ice so that it actually has the correct properties for us to test it. So it mimics basically sea ice at a model scale.”

At 300 feet in length, the tank is as long as the Statue of Liberty, he said. It is also 50 feet wide.

During the tests — which started in May and continued through August — the NRC conducted experiments with a heavy-duty polar icebreaker model that was 1/30 the scale of a normal vessel, he said. The model traversed the ice tank and simulated ice thicknesses up to eight feet.

Most of the testing focused on the powering and maneuvering of the vessel while breaking through ice, he said.

Naturally occurring sea ice is not flat, Millan said. “In nature it gets pressurized, and when two sheets of ice come together it’s almost like continental drift — you get pieces of ice flowing together with great force and you get these pressurized ridges that form and the ice gets pushed underwater and above the water into almost … a great big wall,” he said. Icebreakers can sometimes go around these obstacles, but occasionally have to batter through them, he added.

The ice tank is able to recreate some of these ridges, he said.

The St. John’s facility has been in operation since 1984. The NRC has in the past worked with the U.S. Coast Guard on research work for vessels such as the Healy, Millan said.

Canada’s coast guard is also working to procure new icebreakers. That makes the partnership between the two countries mutually beneficial, he said.

“It just makes sense for us to share in the development,” he said. “We are learning a lot from working with the U.S. Coast Guard. … Every ship model that we test is unique.”

The partnership will allow for commonality among the vessels, he added.


Topics: Maritime Security

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2017/8/15/us-canada-team-on-project-for-icebreaker

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I was recently fortunate enough to receive a "behind the scene" tour of Harry DeWolf and she is about 60% percent complete and is now out of the assembly area and will be mated with the bow mega block #3 and stern.
First impressions is that Harry DeWolf is a very large ship and everything seems over-sized, lots of storage, large flats, a large gym area among others. The bridge is quite large with plenty of viewing area and what would be expected of a Arctic Patrol Ship. Going through the ship in the various spaces I was impressed with the quality of construction and functionality. Machinery wise the four Man diesels are immense and all filter banks, centrifuges etc are piped away from the DA which makes running maintenance quite a bit simpler, All the machinery spaces are separated by automatic doors which makes rounds of the spaces a breeze.
The Caterpillar Emergency DA is impressive as well as the main motors which are quite large and impressive. A running theme to the entire ship I have found is that it well engineered for redundancy and to be self sufficient which is a must for operating in remote areas.
Accommodations are first rate with most having its own shower and wash place. The crew dines in an all ranks cafeteria and each has there own lounge with windows! For training and riders, there is a 20 man mess.
The world class environmental systems and waste disposal systems are impressive especially when operating in environmentally sensitive areas in the Arctic or the Caribbean and her exhaust has a scrubbing system to reduce its environmental footprint. From what I have seen with areas that allow ISO containers, there could be an argument made for a humanitarian capability.
For what I have seen first hand, I have come to the conclusion that comparing Harry DeWolf with the Danish or Norwegian equivalents is like comparing apples and oranges. Harry DeWolf is better acquitted and fitted out than the other patrol ships that I been on and operated with.

Any idea on what type of boats it can handle?

 

[Underway]

Two 8.5m multirole rescue boats each (one on each side).  It also looks like in the plans you can launch a large boarding party RHIB on the starboard side, a TEMPSC covered orange survival craft on the port side and one of a covered LCV or similar from the stern by crane to carry forces ashore.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Thanks, glad to see they can operate a proper landing craft, now if it can take a Viking or BV206 that be great.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Stern components of AOPS # 2 coming together

http://shipsforcanada.ca/our-progress/stern-piece-of-the-future-hcms-margaret-brooke-lowered-onto-skegs

Final Bow Module in place Nov 7th for the AOPS #1 Harry Dewolfe also coming together

http://shipsforcanada.ca/our-progress/installing-the-final-bow-unit-of-the-future-hmcs-harry-dewolf

 

[Underway]

If that was Nov 6th then we should be seeing the bow outside to be married to the rest of her shortly.  Seems they are still relatively on track for a Jan launch.

 

[jollyjacktar]

So my son tells me too.  He's on the DeWolfe build.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

If that was Nov 6th then we should be seeing the bow outside to be married to the rest of her shortly.  Seems they are still relatively on track for a Jan launch.

Hopefully by April we have the first OFSV and AOP's in the water with 4 more vessels under construction. Apparently there will be a delay starting the Science Vessel at Seaspan, but I don't know why or for how long. Once the SV is started, then they are supposed to start the JSS.

 

[Underway]

Hopefully by April we have the first OFSV and AOP's in the water with 4 more vessels under construction. Apparently there will be a delay starting the Science Vessel at Seaspan, but I don't know why or for how long. Once the SV is started, then they are supposed to start the JSS.

Fingers crossed.  I wonder what the expected time for the DeWolfe to be delivered to the Navy is.  I suppose once she's in the water they are going to add the mast and the Nav/Coms/combat suite which are going to be pretty straight forward.  Then there are builder's trials to do, which could take a while.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Anyone have a sense how long it will take HDW to go from the west coast all the way up to the western arctic? How many times will it have to refuel in the US? Could those AOPS from the west coast be based in Churchill instead, would that save any time and possibly extend their patrol time actually in the arctic?

 

[Stoker]

Anyone have a sense how long it will take HDW to go from the west coast all the way up to the western arctic? How many times will it have to refuel in the US? Could those AOPS from the west coast be based in Churchill instead, would that save any time and possibly extend their patrol time actually in the arctic?

It should take 3 weeks to transit as far as Tuk. It shouldn't have to refuel at all in the US. AOPS could be based in Churchill but it won't be. The fueling depot at Nanisivik will be used to fuel all AOPS.

 

[Czech_pivo]

It should take 3 weeks to transit as far as Tuk. It shouldn't have to refuel at all in the US. AOPS could be based in Churchill but it won't be. The fueling depot at Nanisivik will be used to fuel all AOPS.

Thanks for the reply and the info.
I was able to find an article from 2015 which talked about a pair of Kingston class ships doing a patrol up to Tuk where it talked about the trip being 6,500km - not sure if that was one way or round trip. If that’s the distance for one way, that would mean a min of say 16,000km for the entire patrol - is that considered a normal distance for a single patrol? Also, considering that large distances of the trip going and coming will be in water with a fair amount of Russian sub activity, will they have any ability to at least indentify if they are being tracked by a Russian sub? Will the helo on board be armed with sonar and mk48’s? It seems a long way to send a ship with only a little 25mm canon.

 

[Underway]

Also, considering that large distances of the trip going and coming will be in water with a fair amount of Russian sub activity,

Nope, the Russian sub thing in those waters is a bit overdone.  Subs are in those waters probably with less frequency than the bomber overflights that require NORAD intervention.

will they have any ability to at least indentify if they are being tracked by a Russian sub?

Nope.  They are big noisy icebreakers.  Their job is constabulary and to move military people and equipment around the arctic.

Will the helo on board be armed with sonar and mk48’s? It seems a long way to send a ship with only a little 25mm canon.

To the last question probably not.  The helo deck can land a Cyclone but the ship can't do sustained operations with one.  It's just too big.  The helo space is generally for ice navigation helos.  What possibly within Canadian arctic waters are you going to need something larger than a 25mm cannon for?  All the ships that are a potential threat in those waters are either a) underwater b) icebreakers themselves c) got there when there was no ice.

If there is no ice and a threat then we have these fancy things called frigates to deal with the problem.  If there is ice there are these people in the airforce who can help out.  AOPS are a security guard.  They aren't the police.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Thanks for the info, it just seems such an incredibly long way to go for an icebreaker before it actually sees any meaningful ice....it will be basically going entirely around Alaska twice during each patrol.  Probably better than 80% of the total distance traveled will be eaten up just getting to and from its patrol area.  It just doesn't make much sense, there's got to be a better location for those ships to be stationed on the west coast and charged with the responsibility of looking after the western arctic.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

It's roughly 3200nm trip, we did it from Coppermine to Victoria in a 4 week trip on a 1100 class icebreaker, it all depends on the ice though. Had we been 6 hrs later getting to Point Barrows, we would have had to turn around and go through the Panama to get home as the ice sheet from Siberia had closed the passage.

 

[Stoker]

Thanks for the reply and the info.
I was able to find an article from 2015 which talked about a pair of Kingston class ships doing a patrol up to Tuk where it talked about the trip being 6,500km - not sure if that was one way or round trip. If that’s the distance for one way, that would mean a min of say 16,000km for the entire patrol - is that considered a normal distance for a single patrol? Also, considering that large distances of the trip going and coming will be in water with a fair amount of Russian sub activity, will they have any ability to at least indentify if they are being tracked by a Russian sub? Will the helo on board be armed with sonar and mk48’s? It seems a long way to send a ship with only a little 25mm canon.

Yes going from Esquimalt is a long journey, its 4846NM from Esquimalt to Nanisivik and 2800NM from Halifax to Nanisivik so Halifax is certainly closer but well within AOPS range. Once on station in the western Arctic they will probably shuttle back and forth Nanisivik to get food, fuel and parts. The Russians is not a concern really as the ship was never built as a war fighter. The helo will probably be a griffon or more likely a CCG helo for ice detection and other utility work.

 

[Stoker]

Thanks for the info, it just seems such an incredibly long way to go for an icebreaker before it actually sees any meaningful ice....it will be basically going entirely around Alaska twice during each patrol.  Probably better than 80% of the total distance traveled will be eaten up just getting to and from its patrol area.  It just doesn't make much sense, there's got to be a better location for those ships to be stationed on the west coast and charged with the responsibility of looking after the western arctic.

Once they get up there they will stay there for the season and only transit back to Esquimalt at the end of the summer.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

yes, CCG Pacific works a 28day cycle. Some of the East Coast ships worked a 6 month cycle, not sure if they still do. So we would fly up and relieve the crew and vis versa. The vessel normally stayed up the whole season, to put the navigation buoys in and then take them out, once the resupply trips where done.

 

[Sub_Guy]

Also, considering that large distances of the trip going and coming will be in water with a fair amount of Russian sub activity, will they have any ability to at least indentify if they are being tracked by a Russian sub? Will the helo on board be armed with sonar and mk48’s? It seems a long way to send a ship with only a little 25mm canon.

Let's not get carried away here.  The only way a ship really knows if it is being tracked by a submarine is when they pick up sounds from the Torpedo. 

I highly doubt any foreign (unfriendly) submarine would bother shadowing one of our AOPS.

Warships give off ridiculous ranges..

Besides we have friends up there with boats that patrol for us, that's more than enough to keep the commies away.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Yes going from Esquimalt is a long journey, its 4846NM from Esquimalt to Nanisivik and 2800NM from Halifax to Nanisivik so Halifax is certainly closer but well within AOPS range. Once on station in the western Arctic they will probably shuttle back and forth Nanisivik to get food, fuel and parts. The Russians is not a concern really as the ship was never built as a war fighter. The helo will probably be a griffon or more likely a CCG helo for ice detection and other utility work.

Ok, I have to ask this question, if its 2,000NM closer to Nanisivik approaching from the east - all the while going through our own waterways, then why not base all of the AOPS out of Halifax and then just have them run up to Nanisivik and then push further west to the end of our area of responsibility and then turn back again towards Nanisivik.  They will be travelling a lesser distance. Why bother travelling over 3,500NM through US and International waters before even beginning to police our own backyard? What value is in it for us?