The Missile Defense Agency acquired the platform from a Norwegian company in 2003 and had it towed across the Atlantic to a shipyard in Brownsville, Texas. There, it was fitted with a propulsion system, a helicopter landing pad and living quarters for a crew of about 100. Cranes lifted the radar and its pearl-white protective dome into place.
No mention of the fact that the bare deck unit was built in Russia. Why??
Maybe they paid Moss Maritime AS the eqv. of what it would have cost to build it in the US?? (I think not)
[QUOTE=ombugge;194362]No mention of the fact that the bare deck unit was built in Russia. Why??
Maybe they paid Moss Maritime AS the eqv. of what it would have cost to build it in the US?? (I think not)[/QUOTE]
From the article:
Then-Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld exempted the Missile Defense Agency from standard procurement rules, freeing it to buy new technology without the customary vetting.
When you give a government agency that kind of procurement freedom and couple it with no doubt urgent requirements for results why wouldn’t they just buy what’s out there on the market. If time was not a factor. This speaking purely from a program management perspective. If time was not a factor I’m sure they could whip up a semi at a US yard and yes it would have cost more than building it elsewhere but it would have kept shipbuilding jobs up and perhaps could have avoided the USCG and later USN improvements needed as retro fits. So what’s your point, cheaper is always better? We shouldn’t spend the defense budget in our own country?
However, clearly they could not stop flushing good money after bad and now they are buying land based radars that this unit was supposed to be cheaper. And that’s the real point isn’t it? The whole thing was ill conceived What a mess and a waste. This defense contractor shunt to the treasury only enriched them, diverted resources from other domestic spending projects (can you say rotting infrastructure?)
But why are you concerned about the Russian angle? Are you looking for a conspiracy? What was a Norwegian company doing owning a Russian built vessel? Are you Putin sympathizer?
Except for the radar that possibly could be mounted ashore somewhere, we’d be better off if it left Pearl (with no one onboard of course) in some Maersk tandom tow arrangement about to become a fishing reef off Guam or somewhere.
Except for the radar that possibly could be mounted ashore somewhere, we’d be better off if it left Pearl (with no one onboard of course) in some Maersk tandom tow arrangement about to become a fishing reef off Guam or somewhere.[/QUOTE]
It’s really really deep around Guam. Like thousands of them fathom thingy’s.
Replenishing this ship underway while she is on station would be simple. Replenishment via helicopter (VERTREP) would be my choice. Bunkering I’d consider streaming a floating hose (astern refueling) or maybe use a non-tensioned rig. That said I’d bet she wouldn’t need to bunker too much. I can see no reason she would have logistic issues.
[QUOTE=KPChief;194375]Except for the radar that possibly could be mounted ashore somewhere, we’d be better off if it left Pearl (with no one onboard of course) in some Maersk tandom tow arrangement about to become a fishing reef off Guam or somewhere.[/QUOTE]
Doesn’t Mr. Gary have a big tugboat sitting around the Northwest that has a lot of practice towing stuff in the North Pacific? Maybe one of his highly experienced captains could tow the thing from Hawaii up to the Aleutians. If they made it that far it would be a lot closer to the action. If not then the taxpayer gets a reprieve.
[QUOTE=KPChief;194375]From the article:
When you give a government agency that kind of procurement freedom and couple it with no doubt urgent requirements for results why wouldn’t they just buy what’s out there on the market. If time was not a factor. This speaking purely from a program management perspective. If time was not a factor I’m sure they could whip up a semi at a US yard and yes it would have cost more than building it elsewhere but it would have kept shipbuilding jobs up and perhaps could have avoided the USCG and later USN improvements needed as retro fits. So what’s your point, cheaper is always better? We shouldn’t spend the defense budget in our own country?[/quote]
I believe this refer to Donald Rumsfeld giving permission to go ahead with a lot of untested technology around this project.
The bare deck unit purchased from Moss Maritime was only a small part and not “untested”. They are a well known Ship Design company, maybe especially for their “Moss Spherical LNG Tanks”. Moss CS-50 Semi-submersibles design is well recognized and still being built today: http://www.mossww.com/about.php
BTW They also designed the “Sea Launcher”, which is stationed in San Diego, I believe?
Vyborg Shipyard is also a well reputed builders of vessels for Offshore and Arctic deployment. This unit was intended for a project in Russian Arctic that was cancelled. It was “knocked together” in 17 months: Vyborg Shipyard — official site
I don’t think it is in any manner inferiour to anything that could be built at a US shipyard.
However, clearly they could not stop flushing good money after bad and now they are buying land based radars that this unit was supposed to be cheaper. And that’s the real point isn’t it? The whole thing was ill conceived What a mess and a waste. This defense contractor shunt to the treasury only enriched them, diverted resources from other domestic spending projects (can you say rotting infrastructure?)
But why are you concerned about the Russian angle? Are you looking for a conspiracy? What was a Norwegian company doing owning a Russian built vessel? Are you Putin sympathizer?
My point?? No conspiracy, just curiousity. Why didn’t this detailed article mentioned the fact that the hull was built in Russia? It should not be anything to hide, or be ashamed of, Russia was regarded as a friendly nation at the time.
No, I’m not a Putin fan, but I cannot understand the paranoia that is prevailing among some Americans about Putin and Russia. What are you afraid of? Russia is not in a position to start a 3rd World War, I would be more afraid about Potus#46 doing something stoopid. (I don’t mean on Twitter)
Except for the radar that possibly could be mounted ashore somewhere, we’d be better off if it left Pearl (with no one onboard of course) in some Maersk tandom tow arrangement about to become a fishing reef off Guam or somewhere.
No keep it. When the good times return it will make an excellent Arctic Drilling Rig or Production Platform. Maybe the Russians would want to buy it back??
[QUOTE=ombugge;194401]Let’s see how they cope when the lowland period is over. Going north and into the mountains at -30C or below will test their stamina.
[/QUOTE]
Oh, I think they will do just fine. The USMC already has a 2000m high mountain warfare training center in the California Sierra Mountains. They use it year round. The Norwegians just needed a cover story.
Funny thing I remember when Manson went up to Adak and installed the anchoring system for that thing, massive anchors! But it’s yet to ever use it some 5-7years later…
just an update for anyone interested but it appears that Maersk will now be the operator managing the SBX grey elephant
Contract Award Date:
January 12, 2017
Contract Award Number:
N32205-17-C-3101
Contract Award Dollar Amount:
The firm period fixed-price value is $3,677,674.98. The total fixed-price value if all options are exercised is $32,329,966.23.
Contractor Awarded Name:
U.S. Marine Management, Incorporated
Contractor Awarded DUNS:
101728280
Contractor Awarded Address:
2510 Walmer Ave Ste C
Norfolk, Virginia 23513
United States
btw, $3.6M a year is equal to $100k/day…pretty sweet for Maersk to man something that sits at the dock. bet if it gets underway that $100k ratchets up pretty fast
[QUOTE=c.captain;194605]…btw, $3.6M a year is equal to $100k/day…pretty sweet for Maersk to man something that sits at the dock. bet if it gets underway that $100k ratchets up pretty fast
more Federal WASTE![/QUOTE]
$3.65M divided by 365 days is 10000 or $10k/day… a bit less sour…
