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

Four teams vie to build Canada's new supply ships

RL206

Guest
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
60
By MURRAY BREWSTER

Monday, October 10, 2005 Posted at 5:24 PM EDT

Canadian Press

Halifax - Newfoundland and Labrador could be the big winner in Ottawa's plan to replace the navy's aging supply ships, as two of the four consortiums bidding on the project plan to utilize shipyards in that province.

Canadian North Atlantic Marine Partnerships and BAE Systems Inc. both say they intend to built the three 28,000-tonne ships in the province, if they are the successful bidders.

A third consortium, headed by General Dynamics Canada Inc., said it would place the work at the Davie Marine Inc. shipyard in Quebec.

The final bidder, SNC Lavalin ProFac Inc., has said its proposal would see the ships constructed in Victoria.

Last April, Defence Minister Bill Graham set in motion the $2.1-billion contract for the ships, which are expected to enter service in 2012.

"It's going to be a challenging project," said Frank Smith of Peter Kiewett Son Co., which is working with Canadian North Atlantic Marine Partnerships.

If awarded the contract next summer, Mr. Smith said his group will utilize the Marystown, N.L., yard, which is currently making topside modules for the White Rose offshore oil project.

The BAE Systems bid envisions using small yards in Newfoundland to construct portions of the ships, then assembling the components at the Bull Arm, N.L., site used for the Hibernia offshore oil platform construction.

The British company, best known in Canada as the builder of the navy's used Victoria-class submarines, held discussions with Irving Shipbuilding about reviving the mothballed yard in Saint John, N.B.

"We've had quite a lot of interest," said Jonathon Cody, marketing manager for BAE, in an interview from Barrow-in-Furness, Scotland.

"But we've taken at face value the statement that they aren't in the shipbuilding line any more."

The Saint John shipyard, which was the lead contractor in the construction of Canada's patrol frigates, was closed a few years ago.

In June 2003, the federal government gave the Irvings $55-million to establish new uses for the site.

Instead of partnering with the British, the Irvings chose to align themselves and their Halifax shipyard with the bid by General Dynamics Canada, which plans to construct the vessels in Quebec.

Irving spokeswoman Mary Keith confirmed the company's Halifax shipyard would not be doing the construction, but would carry out whatever support and maintenance is required on the ships once they're in service.

"There was no consideration of Halifax (as the builder) because the partnership with General Dynamics involved another builder," she said.

Calls to SNC Lavalin were not returned.

On the drawing board for almost 11 years, the federal government announced in last spring's budget that it was moving forward with replacements for HMCS Preserver and HMCS Protecteur.

Aside from the fact the two supply ships are over 35 years old, both vessels lack the ability to be able to move trucks and armoured vehicles.

That is a key requirement for the army, which has spent an increasing amount of time overseas in the last few years.

The navy proposal would see the new ships acting as supply stations for frigates at sea and as heavy-lift transports, said Capt. Peter Ellis, director of maritime requirements for the navy.

The 200-metre vessels would also act as floating headquarters for army units, but they would not have the capability of carrying troops.

The navy, like other branches of the service, is facing a manpower crunch and the specifications call for the ship to be highly automated, with "30 to 50 per cent" fewer crew members than the 290 sailors aboard each of the current supply ships.
 
hamiltongs said:
Fall of 2008.

Sounds reasonable I guess but funny how in a war things go a bit faster. ::) Still don't know how simply DECIDING has to take 3 years, considering they've been pondering this for over 10 years.......
 
http://www.forces.gc.ca/admmat/dgmepm/pmojss/links_e.asp


Tonnes of good information on that site, it also has some drawings of the proposed vessels
 
daniel h. said:
Sounds reasonable I guess but funny how in a war things go a bit faster. ::) Still don't know how simply DECIDING has to take 3 years, considering they've been pondering this for over 10 years.......
Most of the time is spent taking all of the stuff industry proposes to them and trying to figure out what's needed and what isn't - it's a chore that developed countries go through whenever they design a ship that advances the state of the art.  It's easy for Qatar order six corvettes next year because they're basically buying off-the-shelf and pointing at an existing ship saying, "Give me that."  I agree the process should be faster, but that's HQ manning cuts for you.
 
Sub_Guy said:
http://www.forces.gc.ca/admmat/dgmepm/pmojss/links_e.asp


Tonnes of good information on that site, it also has some drawings of the proposed vessels

Requirement 7782 is the one that matters the most!!
 
Back
Top