Rendering of the new National Security Multi-Mission Vessel


#81

[QUOTE=LI_Domer;180661]Then they should take all that antique crap off of the USCG exam! I know working with break bulk cargo when I was on the training ship helped me conceptualize some of those things.[/QUOTE]
Thats the only reason why i mentioned it was because its on the test yet i have never seen one.


#82

[QUOTE=cmakin;180671]I believe that there is an issue with government funded school ships carrying any cargo that would otherwise be carried for a profit by commercial companies.[/QUOTE]

certainly carrying cargo purely within the private sector but I know of no statute or regulation which prohibits a government owned and operated vessel from carrying government owned cargo. If an MSC ship loads anything in the US and carries it either to a foreign base or to the fleet then it is in effect taking work away from a commercially run vessel but MSC ships do it all the time.

In these days of an emaciated US flag shipping industry, it would be difficult to ask the shipping companies to foot the bill for a training ship; or would it? Not sure if it is still the case, but some European and other shipping companies had ships that were used as training vessels and would also move cargo. If I am not mistaken, even Evergreen out of the ROC used to have one and may still.

again, I have theorized that a modified merchant/cadet training ship could be funded through the MSP giving an increased subsidy to a company willing to convert one of their ships to the role. A lot cheaper than building a new training vessel for sure

There certainly IS an interest in the US government to keep training maritime officers. Maybe the whole maritime academy idea (state and federal) needs to modernize and try and fit the current state of the US Merchant Marine, such as it is.

ABSOLUTELY! That is the central question to all of this. KP and the State schools are turning out too many “ship” officers for the nation to adsorb and in the case of KP, they cost WAY TOO MUCH to produce. We need to shrink all maritime training in the US and make it more workboat centric rather than ocean going because deepsea will never ever be what it once was, but all manner of workboats will remain a strong maritime force in the US for decades to come. Time to adjust to this reality!


#83

What is the typical cadet compliment onboard a training ship for a summer cruise?


#84

Wikipedia says the Cadet compliment for the TSES VI is 684. That sounds about right. They might take slightly less but almost every cruise is full, so much so that they divided the 2nd and 3rd class cadets into two 45 day cruises a few years ago.


#85

I dont know about suny but CMA is around 300 students one first cruise somewhere around 50 CMA on cruise 2 with the rest being Texas


#86

Sounds like an old cruise ship is what the schools need to buy. I didn’t realize it was that many cadets on a cruise. Is that like the whole school onboard or just like freshmen and juniors?


#87

That’s what a lot of the old school ships used to be anyway… Not all of them but a lot of them. The USNS Ancon, Upshur, and Comfort were all basically medium to small ocean liners in their day and all went on to become TS State of Maine at one time or another.

All of the academies are growing, or want to grow, and subsequently need more and more berth space all the time. While a cruise ship does provide berth space it doesn’t do quite so much to prepare cadets for the working environment of a modern merchant vessel. I’m all for minimizing tax payer expenses but I think this new unified ship class is a step in the right direction of bridging the gap between berth space and the right kind of training environment, while at the same time being useful for emergency services. They may not get everything right but I think they’re at least moving in the right direction.


#88

More then that, it’s the whole school, except the incoming freshmen. Basically the summer before Sophomore, Junior, and senior years. Juniors have the possibility of doing a commercial cruise but that’s 90 days instead of 45 and most of those spots go to KPers, the rest are fought over by the SMAs. Pretty much every school ship from the Empire State I through to today (VI) has been a government converted troop transport.


#89

Maine students do two cruises, one after freshman year the other after junior year. They go commercial shipping after the second year. I think they have changed it somewhat splitting some into winter break.


#90

[QUOTE=Fraqrat;180717]What is the typical cadet compliment onboard a training ship for a summer cruise?[/QUOTE]

Depends on the enrollment of the academy, and how many cruises each cadet has to go on. Some have their cadets do one assignment on a commercial ship and the rest on the training ship, others do it all on the ship. It could be over 500, or less than 100.

[QUOTE=z-drive;180739]Maine students do two cruises, one after freshman year the other after junior year. They go commercial shipping after the second year. I think they have changed it somewhat splitting some into winter break.[/QUOTE]

I think the winter cruise at Maine was a one-time thing to remedy gaps in the sea time they were giving, and what was required to meet STCW. One change to meet STCW was increasing the time that engineers do on commercial ships, it had been 60 days for engineers, and 90 days for deck. The 2010 amendments to STCW changed the program requirements for OICEW to be the same as for OICNW, so the engineers now do 90 days on a commercial ship also.


#91

Having lived through the delivery of TSES VI I am very hesitant of the terms “re-built”, “re-configured”, “transformed”, “converted” etc. Economics not withstanding, purpose built is much, much better. Now defining that purpose is a different story.
THE USN and USCG get all new hulls, although not always frequently enough. NOAA usually can claim the same. Why not the academies?


#92

[QUOTE=Eyegor;180784]Having lived through the delivery of TSES VI I am very hesitant of the terms “re-built”, “re-configured”, “transformed”, “converted” etc. Economics not withstanding, purpose built is much, much better. Now defining that purpose is a different story.
THE USN and USCG get all new hulls, although not always frequently enough. NOAA usually can claim the same. Why not the academies?[/QUOTE]

the Navy, Coast Guard and NOAA all end paying three to five times more for their vessels than any commercial company would ever pay for the same and end up getting lower quality for the bargain. Do you honestly believe the maritime academies all deserve the same? If they are to get new ships the procurement need be no different that when MarAd would acquire vessels for the RRF. Secondhand, on the world market and any new training ships should also be able to serve in a surge sealift if required. Use a nice ro/pax for God’s sake. Tons of cabins and space for instruction but also vehicle decks too!

something like this ship

bet a twenty year old vessel like this can be had for less than $10M these days! Why should the taxpayer pay close to $200M for something with less usefulness to the nation?


#93

Jesus Christ man, stop making sense!


#94

[QUOTE=z-drive;180787]Jesus Christ man, stop making sense![/QUOTE]

snd EFF EWE TWO!

actually thanks for seeing the simple logic to what I propose and why I am so dead set against the government spending money we don’t have on luxuries we don’t need. The day the Congress and the Federal Government learn and begin to practice spending discipline will be the first day our Nation begins its recovery to fiscal solvency! Sadly, I’ll be long dead by the time that ever happens.

.


#95

yes. If they build these things there will be backlash years later about why the gummint built such useless ships…mark my word.

Could have snatched this up for cheap I bet: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Nova_Star


#96

[QUOTE=z-drive;180790]yes. If they build these things there will be backlash years later about why the gummint built such useless ships…mark my word.[/QUOTE]

you’re preachin to the choir there son

Could have snatched this up for cheap I bet: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Nova_Star

could get several of these sisters to the SEWOL now REAL CHEAP!

and the owners will toss in the stability problems with the package! that’s a pity because otherwise I believe they’d make wonderful training ships…


#97

here’s one I found for sale in the Baltic. Built in 1980 in Finland with a full refit in 1993

ROSELLA

1,700 PASSENGER NIGHT CAR PASSENGER FERRY FOR SALE.
1,180 PASSENGER BEDS

BUILT 4/1980 FINLAND
CONVERTED/REFURBISHED 9/1993
REFURBISHED 2010

INDICATED PRICE EURO 15 MILLION.

ACCOMMODATIONS AIR-CONDITIONED

136.11 X 24.20 X 5.40 METERS DRAFT
CLASS D.N.V. FINNISH ICE CLASS 1A

DECKS 11
GRT 16850 / NRT 8245

PUBLIC SPACES:
RECEPTION
BUFFET (290 SEATS)
CAFETERIA (260 SEATS)
NIGHT CLUB (250 SEATS)
DISCO (50 SEATS)
PUB (43 SEATS)
SIX (6) CONFERENCE ROOMS (TOTAL 200 PERSONS)

LIFTS: 2 FOR PASSENGERS + 1 FOR GOODS

PIELSTICK 12PC2-2V-400 4 X 6,000 BHP (TOTAL 24,000 BHP)
ABOUT 18 KNOTS ON ABOUT 55.2 MTS
MAX SPEED ABOUT 21 KNOTS

GENERATORS WARTSILA 4 X 920 KW 400 V 50 HZ + EMERGENCY
1 X 225 KVW 400 V 50 HZ

TRAILERS (720LM) 60 X 40 FEET + CARS 153 ALTERNATIVELY
TRAILERS 12 X 18M + CARS 475 ALTERNATIVELY CARS 535

TWO DECKS IN GARAGE:
MAIN DECK (720LM FOR LORRIES) FREE HEIGHT 4.50M
SECOND DECK FOR PRIVATE CARS (514LM) FREE HEIGHT 2.43M

TWO STERN DOORS/RAMPS
BOW DOOR/RAMP

don’t try to tell me a vessel like this can’t be both a wonderful training platform AND a valuable defense asset at the same time!


#98

Looks like sharing is caring! If they do build some of them, 1 school gets it in the summer, one in the winter.

Here soon there will be some new, high tech, 300+ ft work boats hitting the market. Throw some Martin Quarters on them and there you go. Then you have the option of weekend trips and real boat handling. No, the DP time won’t count.


#99

If they keep the pub i would be willing to come back as a teacher in a few years


#100

[QUOTE=c.captain;180786]the Navy, Coast Guard and NOAA all end paying three to five times more for their vessels than any commercial company would ever pay for the same and end up getting lower quality for the bargain. Do you honestly believe the maritime academies all deserve the same? If they are to get new ships the procurement need be no different that when MarAd would acquire vessels for the RRF. Secondhand, on the world market and any new training ships should also be able to serve in a surge sealift if required. Use a nice ro/pax for God’s sake. Tons of cabins and space for instruction but also vehicle decks too!

something like this ship

bet a twenty year old vessel like this can be had for less than $10M these days! Why should the taxpayer pay close to $200M for something with less usefulness to the nation?[/QUOTE]

I remember some decades ago when MARAD had a big push to by ROROs for their use and they bought some real crap ships from the northern Europeans. Yeah, they got a deal, but so did the sellers who would have been happy getting scrap value for them. . . . was involved with them quite a bit in my ABS days. . . yet I digress yet again. . . back to what y’all were doing.