National Academies say U.S. research fleet needs rebuilding

sure…finding all the money to build these is no problem. We can finance all of them with BitCoin!

National Academies say U.S. research fleet needs rebuilding

WHY IN THE FUCK MUST EVERYTHING THE GOVERNMENT BUYS BE THE MOST EXPENSIVE OPTION POSSIBLE! I have said it before and will say it again…convert nearly new OSVs to be research vessels!

Given the current administration’s lack of interest in science, i.e. the EPA chief announced yesterday he was replacing all of his science advisors with more like minded individuals. I’m going to say this plan will take a back seat behind “the wall.”

1 Like

CC: I would completely agree. They are just about perfect for most of the stuff we do.

One of our ships is a former Navy tug and it’s doing fine. Now, do I think anything will be built, replaced, or improved, given the current political climate? No. Glad I will be retiring in a few years.

1 Like

Converting some of those new OSVs sounds like a great idea.

We both know it will never happen.

Back in the '70s, we operated the DSVs TURTLE and SEACLIFF and the RUWS on converted mud boats. Many seismic and core sampling vessels. UT in Galveston had a couple of old Dearborn boats.

Obviously they don’t want to convert any nasty old Gulf mudboats, but they could convert some of those nice Norwegian vessels.

Do you want a long tirade by ombugge? Because that’s how you get it.

No tirade, but why convert anything, when you can build new??
Skipsteknisk design the best Research vessels for all other countries:
Either for building at a yard in USA, or anywhere else of your choice.

because building new COSTS TOO MUCH MONEY which the US does not need to spend! The whole idea is for the US government to start looking for lower cost options for everything.

1 Like

Yes to buy an OSV would be CHEAP these days. Even to convert it to something that MAY be used as a Research Vessels MAY be CHEAP, but will the end result be usable for the tasks it is intended to perform?

One of the MAIN considerations when designing and building Research Vessels are the noise it produces in the water. If I remember right the typical OSV is not built to be silent, above or below water.

So, if you do a CHEAPO conversion of a CHEAP OSV you may not get any good Scientific results. But at least it is CHEAP!!!

Little Faroe Islands can afford to build a modern and efficient Research Vessel, but USA??:

While we are talking about Research Vessels, here is a presentation of some of the equipment that will be fitted on board Kjell-Inge Rokke’s new toy, the super expedition yacht and research vessel REV:

No, he will not be commanding this one himself.

Estimate cost is NOK 2 Bn. (Approx. USD 250 Mill. at today’s rate of exchange) according to a local source.

Harrumph … doesn’t even put it in the top 10. Must plan on interior design by Ikea.

So it is free, right? Fantastic vessel.

No, not free. Some loose change required.

No cheap shit IKEA here. Only the best American steel bunk beds and lockers in the crew quarters.

1 Like

That made in America stamp means “built for crew comfort” above and beyond cruise ship standards.

1 Like

They must be talking about the civilian fleet? They just fielded the Dyson class mistakes for NOAA. AND, yes, during the big redesign of the fishing fleet there were a lot of new ships that would of been perfect for converting to research vessels but NOOOoooooo! Anyone notice the Dyson class is chock full of german and scandanavian infrastructure? it wasn’t a boon to US Shipyards, it was a $$ ‘outreach’ program for the EU.

You want CHEAP or do you want equipment that works and give good science results??
At least they were built and outfitted at US yards. (Without any imported pre-bent steel plates, I assume?)

YES and we can have both CHEAP and give good results. Pray tell me how a 270’ OSV can’t be able to deliver scientific data which will be as good as if with a purpose built vessel? If you say noise then use electric drive vessels or modify the props, machinery mountings and shaft couplings to yield a low noise signature. Been done before and can be done again.

I believe they are speaking of both NOAA and UNOLS fleets and not the Navy’s which is comprised of relatively recently constructed ships (90’s and later). I do agree with you that the DYSON class was an abominable failure of design and construction. I have heard that NOAA has been so discredited with being able to oversee the construction of ships for themselves that Congress will only authorize new vessels for their fleet if the Navy manages the construction.

did you know that once upon a time that the Maritime Administration designed all research ships for NOAA (or the predecessor agencies that became NOAA after 1970). I was master on the r/v MT MITCHELL after she left NOAA and her plans were all generated by MarAd.