I was looking over the Navy’s budget request for FY’17 and saw 4 new T-ATS ships over the next 5 years. Not knowing what a T-ATS is I googled some and saw that these will be replacements for the current ATF’s and ARS’ (tugs and salvage ships).
They apparently don’t have a set of prints yet, but want something based on existing deep sea tug/workboat design. I was thinking, maybe some of the oil field companies might want to sell some of their new big, expensive, multipurpose boats they just had built and are just sitting around losing money. Have to be the big ones since manning will be at least 60 people.
Careful now we don’t want to learn anything here. Would all depend on the procurement strategy they want to use. Is commercial off the shelf good enough or does it have to be gen spec / mil spec type program. Contract operated or with USN sailors? Good idea though.
please post the link to the MSC solicitation if you can
I am wondering it MSC wants to own and operate these vessels themselves or to time charter them? Obviously, the latter would see very competitive bidding by the big OSV companies although I believe ECO would be the one to expect has the greatest chance to be the big winner since they can offer the most big AHTS vessels with the greatest HP which I well imagine the Navy would want. One thing about the current T-ATS class is that they are woefully underpowered.
[QUOTE=c.captain;179636]please post the link to the MSC solicitation if you can
I am wondering it MSC wants to own and operate these vessels themselves or to time charter them? Obviously, the latter would see very competitive bidding by the big OSV companies although I believe ECO would be the one to expect has the greatest chance to be the big winner since they can offer the most big AHTS vessels with the greatest HP which I well imagine the Navy would want. One thing about the current T-ATS class is that they are woefully underpowered.[/QUOTE]
Read the rfp on the link. 60MM per ship with design by yard or yard+design subcontractor but yard must be prime. Initial rfp is easy except for seakeeping study, which to be genuinely valid, needs a tank test methinks… So the 200k for prelim design is either too low to do it, or they have an existing yard and design already in mind. Ahem…
they already embark CG for law enforcement, why not do the same thing for icebreaking? If that’s the only way to get the goods… Like I said, never would happen, but seriously should be considered.
The tasking issued by NSWCCD CISD was to provide an affordable adaptable auxiliary mono- hull concept vessel that would replace the T-ATF and the T-ARS.
[QUOTE=Irish Pennant;179754]Auxiliary Salvage Tow and Rescue (T-STAR)
The tasking issued by NSWCCD CISD was to provide an affordable adaptable auxiliary mono- hull concept vessel that would replace the T-ATF and the T-ARS.[/QUOTE]
thanks for the link and in reading the report see that the Navy is looking for a military version of a offshore IMR subsea with towing capabilities. Why on earth don’t they just put out solicitations for the offshore companies to supply their vessels as they had HOS supply their stock vessels to be the submarine escort ships? This would be a win/win with an offshore company like ECO being able to sell off some of their equipment but more importantly saving the taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars? But of course this is the Navee we’re talking about here and the savings of hundreds of millions of dollars is of no concern to them.
[QUOTE=c.captain;179756]thanks for the link and in reading the report see that the Navy is looking for a military version of a offshore IMR subsea with towing capabilities. Why on earth don’t they just put out solicitations for the offshore companies to supply their vessels as they had HOS supply their stock vessels to be the submarine escort ships? This would be a win/win with an offshore company like ECO being able to sell off some of their equipment but more importantly saving the taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars? But of course this is the Navee we’re talking about here and the savings of hundreds of millions of dollars is of no concern to them.[/QUOTE]
Dollars were of no concern, but alot has changed with cuts. Have been with this particular fleet and have nothing to add in regard to what will be done to fulfill this need. I agree that the new GOM vessels are near suitable for what we do. BUT from experience with what/where we are working with presently, I would hope they also include rolling chocks, bulb bow, a beaver tail and DP to assist deck evolutions and position keeping. Whoever designed the tugs should be kicked right square in the nuts for their sea keeping ability alone.
Commercial builds won’t work. Not enough berthing, would need room for secure communications, embarked security including ordnance storage and so forth. By the time all that was added there would be no space for mission stuff and the cost benefit would be lost. Conversions suck. New builds are better then a Frankenstein.
Besides, shipyards need work which is the most likely reason.