[QUOTE=Jolly Tar;156581]Just so I’M clear; if say HARVEY GULF, OTTO CANDIES or SEACOR had built boats to spec for the Navy and they were offered the exact same set-up, you’d be just as upset?[/QUOTE]
These four were built as ordinary OSVs plus why are you supporting Todd Boss instead of the taxpayer?
[QUOTE=c.captain;156578]
let’s keep this thread about the sub escorts and not about the boats ECO charters to the Navee. There is a new vessel contract coming to the West Coast for a vessel to tend the SSRV…I imagine that one is going to get some competition for that one. Lots of surplus vessels these days. Maybe that is why the ROSS CHOUEST in in San Francisco to show it to the Navee and be ready to pounce.[/QUOTE]
Why is our government seeking bids for the SSRV?
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=list
[QUOTE=coldduck;156514]Buy them!!![/QUOTE]
Why would he want to buy ECOs cast offs? He builds very well thought out, state of the art, handcrafted new boats in his own yard.
They weren’t built as four regular OSV’s. They are a special design built to requested Navy specs. The original four boats years ago were plain old OSV’s. They wanted new state of the art special design vessels and we built them as contracted.
[QUOTE=Wrecker3;156583]Why is our government seeking bids for the SSRV? [/QUOTE]
according the the solicitation it is to tend the submergence rescue vehicle and to offer training out of San Diego. It requires a DP2 class US coastwise trade and at least 98’x34’ of clear deck. Five years of work to the lucky winner which will be ECO you can bet.
[QUOTE=Fraqrat;156597]They weren’t built as four regular OSV’s. They are a special design built to requested Navy specs.[/QUOTE]
seriously? and how exactly are they different are they from a standard OSV? They have all been tied up at Lake Union Drydock recently and they all look like pretty standard OSVs to me except for added house.
I can’t discuss it…
[QUOTE=c.captain;156598]according the the solicitation it is to tend the submergence rescue vehicle and to offer training out of San Diego. It requires a DP2 class US coastwise trade and at least 98’x34’ of clear deck. Five years of work to the lucky winner which will be ECO you can bet.[/QUOTE]
So the US bought the SSRV from Singapore?
I’m calling BULLSHIT on you!
SEPTEMBER 1, 2014 — Hornbeck Offshore Services, LLC, Covington, Louisiana, is being issued a $19,754,900 modification under a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N00033-08-C-2007) to exercise a 180-day option to extend services for the long-term time charter of U.S.-built, U.S.-flagged, contractor-owned and -operated surface escort vessels HOS Black Powder, HOS Westwind, HOS Eagleview, and HOS Arrowhead.
All four are HOS 240 class OSVs.
The vessels are used to escort U.S. Navy assets transiting into and out of U.S. Navy ports.
Work will be performed on the U.S. East coast (50 percent) and U.S. West coast (50 percent), and is expected to be completed by February 2015. Navy working capital funds in the amount of $19,754,900 will be obligated in fiscal 2014, and will not expire at the end of the fiscal year.
The U.S. Navy’s Military Sealift Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity (N00033-08-C-2007).
Why would you give out real info on a top secret operation you ding dong? Trust me they are different than any of the other 240/250 design OSV’s.
sorry wrong acronym…it is the SRDRS that the vessel will tend
I am still calling BULLSHIT on you. They look like standard OSVs and I say that is what they are. Prove me wrong and I will eat my words but the maritime press sources say I am right.
even ABS says they are OSVs
don’t try to challenge me on ships and ship classes…these are NOT purpose built for the USN
here’s something…why are these being classed and operated as OSVs when they aren’t supporting offshore energy extraction? These should be subchapter I cargo and miscellaneous vessels. I bet they are running them without enough manning? You can’t man as an OSV but operate in a different service. HOS is breaking the law here and the Navee and USCG are letting them get away with it!
.
Fraqrat,
C.Captain just doesn’t understand that if you have a clearance and know information that has not been published by the controlling authority, then you can NOT speak of it. Maybe if C.Captain would have ever served in any capacity that required him to have a clearance and remembers the papers that he signed then he would stop arguing this.
Why don’t you address your concerns to this P.O.C.
Contracting Office Address:
914 Charles Morris Court, SE
Washington Navy Yard
Washington, District of Columbia 20398-5540
United States
Primary Point of Contact.:
Clarice J Turner,
Contracting Officer
clarice.turner@navy.mil
Phone: 202-685-5963
Fax: 202-685-5942
[QUOTE=Wrecker3;156608] C.Captain just doesn’t understand that if you have a clearance and know information that has not been published by the controlling authority, then you can NOT speak of it. Maybe if C.Captain would have ever served in any capacity that required him to have a clearance and remembers the papers that he signed then he would stop arguing this.[/QUOTE]
I found the original contract solicitation (N00033-08-C-2007)and it did not call for purpose built vessels so you and your HOS apologist buddies are full of shit.
You’d rather your “company of choice” make bank than the taxpayer get FUCKED out of more than $100M!
TYPICAL SOUTHERN SELFISHNESS I SAY! I WANT MINE!
They are being crewed properly. Vessels change class all the time from OSV to I class and when it’s done it’s denoted in the log book. There is nothing nefarious about their manning. Even in I class, it can still be operated by limited licensed Mariners. You should be happy Americans have these jobs. McCain would prolly want to sub this out to the Chicoms. As far as proving you wrong I’m not a liberty to discuss it but I will say they are over designed in certain areas to just be a plain old OSVs. Lemme guess the full blueprints can’t be found on the Internet?
[QUOTE=c.captain;156582]These four were built as ordinary OSVs plus why are you supporting Todd Boss instead of the taxpayer?[/QUOTE]
There were other design changes from the normal OSV. C.captain can’t handle the fact he doesn’t have all the info.
No, just the basic general arrangement. Even from those, it’s easy to see there are some subtle difference. The biggest one, a bulbous bow. From what I can tell, the other 240s don’t have this. They are also longer than normal 240s. They are 250, but called 240 class.
And my question remains unanswered…
[QUOTE=gulf_engineer;156616]No, just the basic general arrangement. Even from those, it’s easy to see there are some subtle difference. The biggest one, a bulbous bow. From what I can tell, the other 240s don’t have this. They are also longer than normal 240s. They are 250, but called 240 class.[/QUOTE]
I say that they were built as OSVs and then modified to Navy requirements but they were not built keel up for the Navy. There is a huge difference.
[QUOTE=Jolly Tar;156622]And my question remains unanswered…[/QUOTE]
which is? please restate it for us… I’ve lost track of what you are asking in all this hullabaloo over nonsense
They might be modified from an existing OSV design but they were built keel up for the navy so far as I’ve been told. A couple of the 240ed class boats worked the contract while the current four we’re built to navy requirements.
[QUOTE=c.captain;156624]which is? please restate it for us… I’ve lost track of what you are asking in all this hullabaloo over nonsense[/QUOTE]
Just so I’M clear; if say HARVEY GULF, OTTO CANDIES or SEACOR had built boats to spec for the Navy and they were offered the exact same set-up, you’d be just as upset?
