[Post Reply] [*]  Page 8 of 12  [ 115 posts ]  Go to page « 16 7 8 9 1012 »
Author Message
heuhen
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 12th, 2018, 6:59 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 8265
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
Latest update:

- Gulliver is now in Germany, to lift something.
- Lift of Helge Ingstads is set to earliest 25. December.

The big news is: the police have started to investigate Fedje VTS (traffic control), due to Fedje VTS have broken it's own regulation (a VTS central should work in similar way as an air traffic control, they are boss in the area, then they have to act as boss in that area):

- they hadn't marked the frigate on there radar at all.
- no one was informed that the frigate was there, even when the frigate had informed them earlier!

Several minutes was lost due to this, might have avoided collision.

- they didn't use "marker"-words when warning or informing.

"Marker"-word can be: "Warning"... Message; "Recommend"... Message; "information"... Message; etc.

- similar accident had happened with a 167 meter long cargo-ship, they was left alone by a VTS central, that VTS central talked in such way that the cargo-ship crew felt safe... and ended up on land, losing more that 2000 ton of fuel-oil and killing around 2000 birds.

It's also now being investigated, due to the frigate accident.


Police in Norway is always involved, when it's a work-related accident.


The bridge crew is also being investigated, for "mess"- communication.

But when comparing Fedje VTS communication up to radar picture, the frigate reacted only when Fedje VTS gave out collision warning... Right before the collision.

But the big question is how and why the frigate crew believed the tank-ship was land!?!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 14th, 2018, 6:06 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 8265
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
Norwegians minehunters removing NSM canister from Helge Ingstad and filming the damage to her:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peQjN0L ... =Dagbladet


The damage doesn't look to bad, when thinking about hull section, she going to need to replace that hull section and parts of the hangar but also 1 of there stabilisator fins.
The Navy have confirmed that all compartments should be looked under travel, so that means that many areas of the ship hasn't received water damage, cutting down the repair cost, except of the electrical systems. The electrical system consist of two systems (one for aft generator room and one for forward generator room)

The Government have quit strongly hinted that the Navy should always operate minimum 5 frigates, but they have to look into cost of things before come to a decision on what they want to do:

- order a new frigate. the argument is that it will be expensive, more expensive then when they build the class, since it will practically be a one of ship. (unless someone get the idea to jump on a program to someone else, for example US, if they chose correct type of frigate)

- repair the frigate, and rebuild damaged areas and replace what can't be salvaged. would be cheaper than a new build since it's only a major section that would have to be replaced and can be put under the annually Heavy "long term" service. at the moment HNoMS Fridtjof Nansen are in to heavy service (until April), and will get problem areas on the ship, redesign/rebuild after new specification, all other frigates have received a temporary solution consisting of balloons and some type of expanding gel.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Shipright
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 16th, 2018, 3:11 pm
Offline
Posts: 397
Joined: February 15th, 2013, 2:16 pm
There is no way that they are going to repair her. It was a maybe when she was awash up to her deck. Once her combat system suite went under that was all she wrote.

She has been under water for a month now. Even if they did get all the water tight doors shut she is not a submarine. there are always small leaks anyway, but at this point cable ways and other fittings are probably deteriorated and the topside portions are never designed to be fully water tight anyway, not to full submergence since that would mean exactly what happened here (she already sank!).


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 16th, 2018, 4:33 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 8265
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
Shipright wrote: *
There is no way that they are going to repair her. It was a maybe when she was awash up to her deck. Once her combat system suite went under that was all she wrote.

She has been underwater for a month now. Even if they did get all the watertight doors shut she is not a submarine. there are always small leaks anyway, but at this point cable ways and other fittings are probably deteriorated and the topside portions are never designed to be fully watertight anyway, not to full submergence since that would mean exactly what happened here (she already sank!).
well the Navy look it a bit different, the Navy doesn't call it a salvage mission, they call it a rescue mission. Heck if the government are able to save some bucks, they restore rather than build a new one. todays list price for an Anti-submarine-multi-role wareship is almost the double than back then.

- the frigate watertight compartment are water tight they are also air tight, chemically tight etc. due to operation area of this ship, heck even our coast guard ships are build to be exposed to chemically and airborne radioactivity. if the watertight compartment didn't work.... oh wait
- as long the ship is under water, it's not a problem, it's when areas of the ship that have come in contact with air that will rust. so the priority for the Navy, when they lift here up is to wash here down with fresh water and chemicals, thuse the barge that going to transport here have been modified to catch all that chemical.
- the physical damage looks to only be the first rooms toward the hull and the hallway behind is water exposed.
- even if they can salvage 50% of the ship, it's cheaper than building a new one, 18-20 years after. you have to start up an entire new production line for that and that is expensive.
- yes electronics are write of, everybody knows that even the radar are. but you still have a ship that is still intact. except for the engine area.
- radar are expensive, for example SPY-1 radar. but it's only the outside that are exposed, all the electronics that are on the inside are still intact.
- all here systems will be dismantled and cleaned.

- Kongsberg have already received some electronic components fro the frigate and had them cleaned and fixed and they work as normal. It do help that Kongsberg is an expert in that area!



A country like Norway whit it's know-how shipyards and top notch engineers/experts. High end military industry, know 1 or 2 tricks that people have never considered before, this type of rescue and rebuild have been done before. for example the 166 meter long rock discharge vessel MV Rocknes capsized outside of Bergen after hitting an unmarked underwater-rock! it was salvaged-repaired and put back in service. It will be different with a NAvy vessels due to all the sensors and radars but also weapons.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 16th, 2018, 9:19 pm
Offline
Posts: 2734
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
It's possible she can be repaired and put back into service... apply sufficient dollars (or kroner) to the problem and the problem can be solved.

But the engineer in me says it would be cheaper to build a new ship.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 16th, 2018, 9:49 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7187
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
Well, building a new ship would be cheaper. However, Developing a new ship and operating a one off could be just as or even more expensive as repairing this one. The real question, most likely already being worked on behind the scenes, is if the repaired ship would have enough in common with the other 4 to not be a one-of anyways. If required components are no longer available......

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 17th, 2018, 3:16 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 8265
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
acelanceloet wrote: *
Well, building a new ship would be cheaper. However, Developing a new ship and operating a one off could be just as or even more expensive as repairing this one. The real question, most likely already being worked on behind the scenes, is if the repaired ship would have enough in common with the other 4 to not be a one-of anyways. If required components are no longer available......
yeah that is one problem. but all ships in the class is getting close to MLU and the Navy are complaining that they need to do a major overhaul and upgrade of the class, due to many parts on the class, they literally have to go on military version of ebay to get parts and they don't want that, they want of the shelf parts.

so after a major MLU and repair of one vessel, they would be somewhat similar, if the Navy get's it way, but that is a big what if.

But we just have to wait and see, the government and the Navy have agreed on that there should not be fever than 5 frigates in the Navy (that's the minimum), during the early stages of the frigate project, the Navy wanted up to 8 frigates but no les than 6, they got 5. so there will be a lot of pressure.


if they chose to build new, they could rather use it as a part of plane of future replace ment of the Nansen class. Basically a prototype in service.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
MitcheLL300
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 20th, 2018, 3:22 pm
Offline
Posts: 959
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 5:19 pm
Heuhen one thing.
A navyship is never airtight completely. Crew are lazy pulling down the handles above waterline. And also the doors dont shut completely after a while of use unless you replace the blocks where it locks in. (bars go over a brass block to lock it firm)
And thebpressure tests are done only in maintenance.
Plus most cbrnd ships use overpressure to keep dirty air out.
So dont get your hopes up, its to hard...

_________________
[ img ]
Embarked on: HNLMS Karel Doorman A833
To do list:
-Karel Doorman Class variants (Chile,Belgium,Portugal)
-Jacob van Heemskerck Class (90% done)
-Kortenaer Class (touch up for current standards)
-Sachsen Class Frigates (10% done)
-Johan De Witt L801 (updating to modern standard)


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 20th, 2018, 8:45 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 8265
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
it's better to be positive... but nah...


Although I have to be tru, I have never fully loved the Nansen class. They have some good things about them, but I do find that the focus on making here a multirole warship, went a little to far, specially on a ship that was designed to become a fully ASW ship. to many compromises.

- she is light armed to here size, heck even Skjold class carry more punch for it tonnage (but it suffer from range limitation, compared to Nansen class)
- rather short range, when thinking about that Norway have a long coast line and these ships is more or les an escort ship for NATO, also short range compared to other frigates that mainly isn't a escort even....
- okay here sensor platform are interesting, but the SPY-1F have an reduction in range of 54% compared to SPY-1D when the size is only reduced with 34%, the loss of range compared to loss of size, is ...interesting.
- ASW ship initially, but designed only to carry 1 helicopter.... on such a large hull.
- build for the 2000, for an country that genius in finding smart solution to reduce manpower in various operation... still need 120-140 persons to operate efficiently...
- most parts on the class are already outdated and most time the have to go on Ebay, just to get parts or send in a special order, if this was the industry, that machine would be out the door almost immediately!
- ordered by a government that didn't really understand what they was ordering and after a old military mentality (cold war)... a ship that are going to be in the military for 30++ years


But it have a something that are positive with them:

- 13 year after launch, still look modern
- simple lines not just another ship with thousand of angled surfaces
- rather small machinery compared to ship size and speed capability 26+ knots (28 knots)
- I can't find more... she carry depth charges, do that count!?


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Shipright
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 23rd, 2018, 10:00 am
Offline
Posts: 397
Joined: February 15th, 2013, 2:16 pm
heuhen wrote: *
- the frigate watertight compartment are water tight they are also air tight, chemically tight etc. due to operation area of this ship, heck even our coast guard ships are build to be exposed to chemically and airborne radioactivity. if the watertight compartment didn't work.... oh wait
Chemical and radioactive protection don't work like that. First of all, if this ship is at all similar to US/UK ships in how they do this, the barriers are only at the entrances/exists to the interior, which makes sense because this protection usually relies on double door airlocks for transit during those conditions. On an Burke, there are only two of these on the whole ship. There is no special protection compartment to compartment. In the case of this ship, with gaping holes in the side exposing multiple compartments to the open environment, whatever system was in place to provide chemical/radio-logical protection is completely bypassed. Second, the primary defense against these agents is not a seal, but as previously said double door airlocks to minimize air exchange during movement and positive over pressure of the interior space to ensure any entry vectors is expelling air not sucking it in. Its pretty obvious the ships A/C units are no longer providing this.

And I hate to have to point this out, but given the shaft sealing issues its pretty clear this ship's "watertight" fittings should not be assumed to be up to snuff. Nor are they designed to be watertight for months at a time, because again that would be a waste of money when those portions of a ship being underwater for that period usually indicates its sunk. A couple days or weeks to facilitate rescue? Sure, absolutely. Months? Maybe, but you are relyong on hope as much engineering the longer it remains submerged. The cold water and winter conditions probably help here, less growth and corrosion potential.

Its also important to realize that while you might not see it from our vantage point, in a collision like this a ship suffers warping and other stresses all along its structure, throwing all sorts of things out of alignment including any watertight doors. As someone said these require constant maintenance as it is (which I don't doubt the Norwegian Navy does), but nobody is doing that right now. Even a few millimeters of warping on a frame means leaky doors. This isn't a problem if the crew is onboard to compensate, and is perfectly adequate if you are trying to stop flooding long enough to let the crew abandon ship or to get the ship to dry dock promptly. In this case though, even a small amount of seepage or leak by an hour means flooded compartments on the timescale we are dealing with
Quote:
- as long the ship is under water, it's not a problem, it's when areas of the ship that have come in contact with air that will rust. so the priority for the Navy, when they lift here up is to wash here down with fresh water and chemicals, thuse the barge that going to transport here have been modified to catch all that chemical.
Think about what you just said...

It certainly is a problem. Maybe not manifested in the specific way you indicate when the ship is again exposed to air, but there are far more problems presented to ship preservation than that which will certainly manifest themselves under these conditions.
Quote:
- yes electronics are write of, everybody knows that even the radar are. but you still have a ship that is still intact. except for the engine area.
- radar are expensive, for example SPY-1 radar. but it's only the outside that are exposed, all the electronics that are on the inside are still intact.
- all here systems will be dismantled and cleaned.
This is just a fantasy. Again, we don't build the topsides of ships to handle total submergence, because there is really only one situation where this is likely to happen. The skin of the ship was certainly built to be watertight, but anyone who has been on a ship knows the interior of a ship above the waterline relies almost exclusively on false bulkheads within a level, though probably still has watertight doors between levels. I wouldn't be the slightest bet optimistic.

Steel is cheap, the cheapest part of the ship. The electronics suite is the essentially what constitutes the ship these days, not the keel. We are not talking about just the arrays, but all the consoles and cable ways and wave guides and electrical distribution boxes and spar parts and comms racks and antennas and etc. The hull is the least important consideration cost/benefit wise.

The most likely scenario is for Norway to eat the lack of hulls and wait for whatever the successor program is. I also don't see them accepting a one off, at least not one with the same capabilities/complexity of the ship lost. Maybe a more generic stopgap to cover down.

And BTW I would love to be wrong. I would be as happy as anyone else to see her restored and returned to service in short order and was advocating this as the likely scenario until the day her topside submerged.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 8 of 12  [ 115 posts ]  Return to “Off Topic” | Go to page « 16 7 8 9 1012 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]