National Defense 1*1 Defence nationale New Insert! Maritime The Journal welcomes Engineering CNTHA News Journal CANADA 's NAVAL TECHNICAL FORUM June 1998

Looking Back: The story of how the DDH-280s began Also: • Forum: Clearing the Air on Alternate Service Delivery • Simulation and Training in the Canadian Navy Canada HMCS Athabaskan Extended Work Period:

Port Weller Diary - A detachment commander's journal Maritime Engineering

Journal Established 1982

JUNE 1998 DEPARTMENTS Editor’s Notes by Capt(N) Roger Westwood ...... 2 Commodore’s Corner by Cmdre J.R. Sylvester ...... 3 FORUM Some Concerns with Alternate Service Delivery by LCdr Robert W. Jones ...... 4 Points to Consider on ASD by Capt(N) I.D. Mack...... 4 Systems Engineers as Leaders Director General by LCdr Sean Midwood ...... 5 Maritime Equipment Program Management FEATURES Commodore J.R. Sylvester, CD Looking Back: How the DDH-280 Began by Hal Smith and Shawn Cafferky...... 6 Simulation and Training in the Canadian Navy Editor by LCdr S.W. Yankowich ...... 11 Captain(N) Roger Westwood, CD Director of Maritime Management and Port Weller Diary Support (DMMS) by LCdr Robert W. Jones ...... 15 Editorial Adviser East Coast MARE Graduation Mess Dinner Speech Cdr Don Flemming by Capt(N) (ret.) Sherm Embree ...... 21 DGMEPM Special Projects Officer GREENSPACE Production Editor / Enquiries The Hydromem™ Bilgewater Treatment System Brian McCullough by LCdr Mark Tinney ...... 22 Tel.(819) 997-9355 BOOK REVIEWS Fax (819) 994-8709 Cadillac of Destroyers Technical Editors Reviewed by Roger Sarty ...... 24 LCdr Mark Tinney (Marine Systems) The Maritime Defence of Canada LCdr Marc Lapierre (Combat Systems) Reviewed by Lt(N) Greg Alexander ...... 24 Simon Igici (Combat Systems) LCdr Ken Holt (Naval Architecture) NEWS BRIEFS ...... 25 Journal Representatives NEW INSERT! CNTHA News — Newsletter of the Cdr Jim Wilson (MARLANT) Canadian Naval Technical History Association...... 29 (902) 427-8410 CPO1 G.T. Wall (NCMs) Our Cover: (819) 997-9342 HMCS Algonquin in 1979. The design for Canada’s four Iroquois-class destroyers Art Direction by built during the 1970s grew out of politically doomed plans for a “general purpose” CFSU(O) Creative Services frigate. When Iroquois was commissioned in 1972, she became the first destroyer-sized ship in the western world to have all-gas-turbine propulsion. (CF photo) Translation Services by Public Works and Government Services The Maritime Engineering Journal (ISSN 0713-0058) is an unofficial publication of the Maritime Engi- Translation Bureau neers of the Canadian Forces, published three times a year by the Director General Maritime Equipment Mme. Josette Pelletier, Director Program Management. Views expressed are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect official opin- ion or policy. Mail can be sent to: The Editor, Maritime Engineering Journal, DMMS, NDHQ, MGen The Journal is available on the DGMEPM Pearkes Building, 101 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario Canada K1A 0K2. The editor reserves website located on the DND DIN intranet at the right to reject or edit any editorial material. While every effort is made to return artwork and photos http://skeena.d-ndhq.dnd.ca/ in good condition, the Journal can assume no responsibility for this. Unless otherwise stated, Journal ar- ticles may be reprinted with proper credit. A courtesy copy of the reprinted article would be appreciated.

MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 1 Editor’s Notes Welcome CNTHA News! Partners in the naval technical support effort By Captain(N) Roger Westwood, CD Director of Maritime Management and Support — Editor

his is my first opportunity to his committee, volunteers his time and the present soon becomes the past. In address the Maritime Engineer- effort to the cause. The association re- other words, keep in mind as you do your Ting Journal readership as the ceives no budget from DHH, and in April day-to-day work that you are in the best Journal’s new editor. Before I get to the the CNTHA faced a dilemma when it had position to maintain an accurate historical current topic, the incorporation of the to take over responsibility for funding its record of significant decisions and activi- Canadian Naval Technical History Asso- newsletter. DGMEPM, who had been ties as they pertain to your area of exper- ciation newsletter into the Journal, I working behind the scenes to prepare for tise. Your conscientiousness on a daily would like to acknowledge the important this eventuality, quickly agreed to RAdm basis will ensure that the story of Cana- work of the Journal’s authors and edito- Saker’s formal request to bring CNTHA da’s ongoing naval technical effort will be rial staff in maintaining a first-class publi- News under the Journal’s funding um- faithfully preserved for generations to cation. As a faithful reader over the past brella. come. 15 years, I recognize that these dedicated It was a win-win decision if ever there Here’s to a long, happy association. individuals have ensured that the Journal was one. Apart from solving the continues to provide an essential forum CNTHA’s immediate publication funding for our community. I salute the efforts of crisis, our teaming-up like this serves sev- all those who have made a personal con- eral purposes. To begin with, the oppor- tribution to the Journal’s success and tunity for exchanging ideas and offering strongly encourage all members of our input to each other’s efforts has now community to participate actively in this grown. This may be most people’s first The Journal welcomes unclassified vital forum. exposure to the naval technical history submissions, in English or French. The Maritime Engineering Journal is newsletter, but CNTHA News subscribers To avoid duplication of effort and to pleased to welcome a new strategic part- have been receiving the Maritime Engi- ensure suitability of subject matter, ner to the publishing fold, in the form of neering Journal with their subscriptions prospective contributors are CNTHA News — the newsletter of the for over a year now. Already, we in the strongly advised to contact the Canadian Naval Technical History Asso- serving technical support community Editor, Maritime Engineering ciation. Beginning with this issue, have benefited from this exposure Journal, DMMS, National CNTHA News will appear as a regular through CNTHA-sponsored seminar Defence Headquarters, Ottawa, “feature” piggybacked in the centre sec- presentations and historical articles in the Ontario, K1A 0K2, Tel.(819) 997- tion of the Journal. Although our two Journal. (Our cover story on the begin- 9355, before submitting material. publications share close editorial ties with nings of the DDH-280s is a perfect case in Final selection of articles for one another, we will continue to maintain point.) publication is made by the Journal’s separate editorial decision-making boards. editorial committee. Letters of any The CNTHA, on the other hand, length are always welcome, but only It was nearly two years ago that the stands to reap huge dividends by having signed correspondence will be Maritime Engineering Journal first an- more direct access to the serving naval considered for publication. nounced DGMEPM’s “synergistic part- technical community. And here I appeal nership” with the newly formed Canadian to you. If you think you can contribute in Naval Technical History Association (see any way to the documentation of Cana- “Piecing together our technical history,” da’s post-war naval technical history with Editor’s Notes, October 1996). As we told stories, documents, drawings, photos — you then, the CNTHA was established to please get in touch with the CNTHA at support the Directorate of History and the numbers listed in their newsletter. Heritage’s effort to pull together the offi- But there is more to it than that. And cial version of Canada’s post-1945 naval this is where it all comes together. By po- technical history. sitioning the CNTHA newsletter as a The association is chaired by former high-profile insert in the Maritime Engi- Assistant Deputy Minister for Engineer- neering Journal, it serves as a permanent ing and Maintenance RAdm (ret.) Mike reminder to everyone serving in Canada’s Saker who, like virtually everyone else on naval technical support community that

2 MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 Commodore’s Corner The Role of the MARE

By Commodore J.R. Sylvester, CD Director General Maritime Equipment Program Management

y now I think we have all had tion, human relations and administrative substitute for the broad range of MARE the opportunity to reflect on specialists — to name a few. experience, achieved at sea and ashore, in the good news that our Cana- keeping the many conflicting require- B While professional engineering ac- dian submarine service will continue with ments and industrial objectives in balance creditation for the MARE is not at all dis- the acquisition of four British Upholder while never losing sight of the primary couraged, it is not absolutely necessary. submarines. Of course, with deeper reflec- operational need. This is but one high- The essential contribution — more com- tion comes the awareness of the chal- profile example of the type of employment plex ashore — is to ensure that opera- lenges we now face in the operational and that MARE officers (and many others in tional requirements continue to be materiel support community to prepare for the naval technical community) are doing satisfied via the direct action of our own and accept these most welcome new ele- every day in Ottawa, on the Coasts, and, workforce or via work instruments con- ments of our renewed navy. As I men- for a lucky few, around the world! tracted to the private sector. tioned in closing the last Commodore’s It would be remiss of me, though, not Corner, work indeed does remain, oppor- Consider for a moment the magnitude to highlight that there are other employ- tunities for interesting challenges do of yearly fleet support. Canada’s military ment options available to professional abound, and the navy does continue to and civilian naval support team, in part- military officers. MAREs are encouraged require our support. nership with industry, delivers approxi- to pursue these positions as they are ab- mately $300 million in direct, or con- Ironically, as I continue to visit and solutely necessary in ensuring that indi- tracted, goods and services via the Fleet meet with the members of our Maritime vidually, and collectively, we develop as Support Plan, and anywhere from $100 to Engineering community, I am challenged part of the broad fabric of the CF general $600 million in capital acquisition, de- regarding both the employment opportu- service officer — not simply as civilian- pending on the number of active major nities for, and even the role of, the Mari- accredited specialists in uniform. Crown projects. The scope of this sup- time Engineer. While I am aware that there port is huge — the maintenance of docu- Our particular technical backgrounds are significant concerns at all levels of the mentation, procurement of spares, the and practical problem-solving skills posi- community, as private sector employment repair and overhaul of equipment, the de- tion us very well to excel at a wide range opportunities once again open up it is sign/procurement/installation of configu- of non-traditional opportunities such as perhaps appropriate to comment now on ration changes, delivery of maintenance serving in diplomatic and UN missions the MARE role within the materiel team work periods, deficiency diagnosis/rectifi- around the world, providing technical and also to discuss the ever-present cation, operational testing/certification, insight to the intelligence service, formu- schism between the profession of arms and even (when we are fortunate) acquir- lating CF/international policy, serving as and engineering accreditation. ing new weapon systems like submarines. equerry and escort to members of the There is a very natural inclination to Royal Family — even orbiting the earth in Administering this work is a complex question the professional value of the the space shuttle. The list goes on. While undertaking. The variety of technologies MARE. Having been around this consid- I can safely guarantee you that your serv- is enormous, from the most basic sewage eration several times in my own career, I ice to the public will never make you rich, treatment plant to the most sophisticated can but simply reinforce that the MARE is I cannot think of a more enriching and command and control system. The par- a professional military officer — with a varied experience within many complex ticular role of the MARE in all this is to salty persuasion, of course. At sea, and interesting support partnerships. act as the interface between the warrior MAREs are integral members of the naval and the civilian materiel community — a combat capability embodied in a warship unique, necessary and continuing role. (or submarine). Their particular contribu- tion at sea, as ashore, is to translate the Returning to the Upholder acquisition, operational requirement into materiel ac- most of you are now familiar with the in- tion or materiel capability. MAREs con- novative features of this deal (see News tribute to the “management of violence,” Briefs in this issue). What is less evident a singular role that separates them from is the often difficult, “behind-the-scenes” other specialist officers who share in the efforts that took place over the past four risk of violence. It is this role, incidentally, years to make this incredible opportunity that binds us to the naval operations a reality for Canada and the navy. MAREs community. Ashore, however, the MARE were intimately involved and responsible, is but one element of the larger “collec- with others, for this success. I can tell tive” that includes engineering, technical, you personally, as the lead negotiator procurement, financial, logistic, produc- over the final few months, that there is no

MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 3 Forum

[Editor’s Note: The following two articles were developed from correspondence between LCdr R.W. Jones and Capt(N) I.D. Mack. In the true spirit of “keeping the dialogue open,” the authors kindly agreed to prepare their comments for publication in the Journal.] Some Concerns with Alternate Service Delivery Article by LCdr Robert W. Jones

want to thank Capt(N) Mack for ing and operating independently of the ment of the members of the naval engi- his article, “Speaking the Unspeak- navy’s authorized structure; neering team (both uniformed and civil- Iable...” (Maritime Engineering • Accountability — ASD promotes the ian). Journal, October 1997), discussing the attitude, “Get the job done and deal with I know that I could be accused of turf issues of trust and teamwork and the re- the consequences later,” often with little protection in this issue...to which my re- sponsibility of senior MARE officers to sponse would be, “You’re absolutely enhance the dialogue. “In the current climate, right!” In the current climate, many man- One issue that I believe needs a thor- many managers are embrac- agers are embracing new concepts be- ough airing within our naval team is the cause they are in deep over their heads implications of alternate service delivery ing new concepts because with little direction. The MARE Council on the exercise of authority, accountabil- they are in deep over their is an excellent forum for our leadership to ity and responsibility within maritime en- heads with little direction.” wrestle with the implications of ASD, gineering support activities. Since 1995 stake its position, and then broadcast it to I’ve been told to embrace change and the navy team. If we are to embrace ASD, risk, adopt a business approach to my visibility on the situation from the author- then let us, as Capt(N) Mack says, “en- professional life (which conflicts with our ized chain of command; hance the dialogue” and go forward with military ethos), and make way for ASD as • Responsibility — ASD assigns roles our eyes wide open to its consequences. it will bring about unimaginable efficien- to contractors which conflict with those cies in naval support activities. roles mandated to existing naval engi- neering support organizations. I further My experience with ASD causes me believe that ASD affords greater opportu- concern in the following areas: nities for contractors to play meaningful LCdr Jones is a Marine Systems Engi- • Authority — ASD promotes the es- roles in engineering support activities at neer with DQA 5 at NDHQ. tablishment of mini-fiefdoms, stove-pip- the expense of the professional develop- Points to Consider on ASD Article by Capt(N) I.D. Mack, OMM, CD

Cdr Jones’ concerns regarding vate sector when an external provider has military and civilian jobs we need to de- the impacts of alternative serv- been determined to be more cost effective velop and maintain the expertise for as- Lice delivery in the delivery of using the departmental ASD Methodol- suring value from the private sector. But maritime engineering services are not ogy and Business Case Analysis.” How perhaps the old models are too expensive. unique to MAREs. As Base Commander of is this in conflict with our military ethos? Given that the ASD policy was only CFB Halifax, I have wrestled with ASD Surely, non-core support services must enunciated in 1995 and has yet to lead to across a wide spectrum of services, and the be delivered as cost-effectively as possi- the transfer of major responsibilities to same questions are germane throughout. ble to maximize our profit margin in terms industry (CFB Goose Bay only now ap- of the funding available for front line op- LCdr Jones states as fact that “a busi- proaching such status), it is premature to erational defence capability (e.g. war- ness approach...conflicts with our military conclude that it drives DND/CF entrepre- ships, tactical air support and airlift, and ethos,” that it leads to the establishment neurs to operate outside of the navy’s soldiers). However, where such support of “mini-fiefdoms...operating independent authorized structure. Many argue that, services are “core,” perhaps we have not of the navy’s authorized structure,” that it soon after industry shoulders much of been rigorous enough in clearly identify- encourages “getting the job done and our traditional workload, the navy will not ing those posts, or in selling our position dealing with the consequences later,” that have the expertise to be the “real” techni- as critical enablers ashore for MAREs it encourages the transfer of MARE re- cal authority. I see the ASD challenge as and the technicians they lead to be able sponsibilities to contractors at the ex- one of ensuring we have a system of pro- to do their jobs well at sea. Furthermore, pense of our own professional develop- fessional development for MAREs and the ASD policy does not in any way ab- ment. DND civilians which gives us the experi- solve CF or DND members from being ence and education needed to solicit and DND’s ASD policy states: “All non- responsible for what contractors deliver assess advice from industry and/or larger core activities shall be moved to the pri- as services, so “core” must include the navies on our navy’s technical issues. I

4 MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 Forum admit that this is no small challenge as the will always be someone in the navy re- easier said than done. It requires study complexity, pace of change and costs of sponsible for the delivery of maritime and trial development before we can be defence systems increase exponentially. technical services, whether by our own confident of retaining enough “check and Change is the key. internal service provider or by the private balance” in MARE knowledge and experi- Naval engineering has always included sector. However, I can envisage a new ence to deliver on our unique account- risk analysis, a form of meeting today’s ability. requirements based on an evaluation of “My vision is a structure in- In the final analysis, LCdr Jones has the potential consequences. When I tegrated with our maritime concluded that inadequate resource joined the navy, refits of the “cadillacs” (a.k.a. ASD) is leaving many “over their occurred every two years using in-house private sector brethren.” heads.” I accept that we cannot do our resources. With experience, reliability- jobs the way we have in the past, that we centred maintenance tools and an accept- role in how we discharge these duties. must create a new vision for doing our ance of greater risk, we increased the time My vision is a structure integrated with essential work differently, given the re- between refits to five years and con- our maritime private sector brethren. sources we will be allowed. And here tracted-out the refit workload. Admittedly, Rather than maintaining positions in large LCdr Jones and I are in complete agree- ASD is inherently more risky in a busi- DND teams, we would fill positions in ment — this is priority work for the senior ness where the consequence of error can maritime industries at various times in our MARE leadership. As a member of the be huge. Therefore, we must entertain careers. This was done to some extent MARE Council, I will propose ASD as an mandated ASD activity by selecting ap- during the TRUMP project under the agenda item at the next meeting. propriate response strategies to mitigate “Training with Industry Program” (TWIP). increased risk, such as insistence on ISO As we have all learned at sea, it is the 9000 certification and avoidance of mo- educated engineering mind coupled with nopoly situations. Again, “for every ac- experience that allows us to be held ac- Capt(N) I.D. Mack has been promoted tion, there needs to be a reaction.” countable for technical readiness, not commodore and appointed Assistant I reject the notion that ASD encour- our ability to do every job therein. I know Chief of Maritime Staff at NDHQ. ages the transfer of responsibility. There that the approach I have suggested is Systems Engineers as Leaders Article by LCdr Sean Midwood he purpose of this paper is to factory solution that is necessarily heav- schedule, and performance. It is our job to address leadership within the ily biased by cost, schedule and perform- know the relative strengths and weak- Trealm of systems engineering ance parameters. Since this process con- nesses of our individual team members, and how this pertains to us as MAREs. tinues for the entire life of a system, the and correct shortcomings where neces- Systems engineers need to recognize that vision and outlook of those involved sary. We must recognize the need for for- the absolute key to their project’s success must be virtually prophetic in nature. ward thinking, and have the ability to en- is strong, dynamic leadership. I don’t By necessity, systems engineering vision our product and the overall system know how often I have heard from fellow must be multidisciplinary and fully inte- through the complete life cycle. It also MAREs that they just want to do engi- grated. No “islands,” or sacrosanct ele- means that we have to ensure that our neering — that leadership is of lesser im- ments must be allowed to exist (including IPTs, at whatever level of responsibility, portance. This perspective runs contrary classified programs, which are too often understand the goals of the project and to how I perceive the MARE’s role. kept hidden behind veils of secrecy only are kept highly motivated toward achiev- Systems engineering is the foundation to be doomed to failure for lack of an ef- ing those goals. THIS IS A LEADERSHIP upon which all projects are set. It is the fective systems engineering process). It ROLE! It is not for the weak of heart, or key to a project’s ultimate success or fail- is this systems engineering process, via a for those with narrow vision. As systems ure. Conceptually, systems engineering well-led integrated product team (IPT), engineers it falls to us to ensure our sys- brings together all the necessary people, that ensures the customer gets what he tems engineering is made effective by products and processes to ensure a wants in the shortest possible time and at planning, implementing and controlling project’s success, which is definitively a realistic cost. The ability to put aside this highly integrated process along the validated through customer satisfaction. personal and team egos in favour of the lines of its tenets, and by infusing our This is not a one-shot deal. The need for ultimate lifelong success of the project is team members with both the confidence the systems engineering process is usu- paramount. and the will to fully participate. ally articulated through a customer’s ex- What does this mean for us as sys- pressed desire for a new or modified sys- tems engineers? To begin with, it means tem, or through demonstrated deficiencies we have to be able to see the big picture (ops, support, training, etc.) in an existing — to understand the relative importance LCdr Midwood is the project manager system. The challenge, then, is to itera- of all facets of a project (including com- for the Canadian Towed Array Sonar tively define, refine and settle on a satis- promise) and how they relate to cost, System.

MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 5 Looking Back How the DDH-280 Began Article by Hal Smith and Shawn Cafferky [From a paper presented to the 1998 West Coast Naval Engineering Seminar, Jan. 21-22, 1998]

The General Purpose Frigate An important feature was a major im- troversy became widely known outside n April 1963 a federal general elec- provement in communications, particu- DND, and had the lasting and very unfor- tion resulted in the return of a Lib- larly HF communications, and in elec- tunate effect of creating considerable dis- Ieral administration led by the Right tronic warfare equipment. Anti-submarine trust between the navy and the Depart- Honourable Lester B. Pearson, overturn- warfare (ASW) equipment, however, was ment of Defence Production on the one ing the previous Conservative administra- to be considerably less extensive than in hand and the Deputy Minister and Treas- tion of the Rt. Hon. John Diefenbaker. the DDHs; hull-mounted and towed ury Board on the other. This event was to bring to an end a brief search sonar, but only a single mortar and The basic difficulty — one that would period of relief — admittedly only moder- a small weapon-delivery helicopter rather continue — was the impracticability of ate — from the fiscal restraint that had than the larger and more capable Sea fitting up-to-date fighting equipment in a characterized naval shipbuilding pro- King. The design was further complicated modified St. Laurent hull and the virtual grams in the late 1950s. by the requirement to transport, land and impossibility of estimating the cost of provide initial support to 200 troops (with At the time, the RCN was heavily en- fighting equipment accurately when much 13 tons of vehicles) for United Nations gaged in shipbuilding programs. Two of it was still in development and would style operations. ships of the four-ship Mackenzie class not be delivered until four years or more were still building and would commission The preliminary design of the GP frig- from the date of program approval. This later in the year. The conversion of the ate was a searching test of the 1961 reor- was coupled with the unwillingness of the St. Laurent class to DDH type ships ganization of Naval Technical Services Government to recognize that warship equipped with variable-depth sonar was from a professionally-based organization costs were inherently high. Even the cost well advanced, with the first ship (constructor, engineering, electrical, ord- of the Restigouche class ($26 million per (Assiniboine) to commission during the nance and supply branches) to a func- ship) was regarded as grossly excessive, summer. Annapolis and Nipigon, laid tional one (ships, fighting equipment, air- and these ships were only a modest de- down as Mackenzies, would complete in craft, support facilities, naval supply). velopment of a 1948 design. 1964 as DDHs. Provider, the first of a The Naval Staff was also reorganized with A Time of Indecision planned three operational support ships, “requirements” directorates closely linked The new government had a very differ- would complete in the fall. The purchase to the corresponding technical divisions. ent attitude toward Defence policy than of three Oberon-class submarines from After a settling-down period, this proved its predecessor. In 1960 the previous gov- the Admiralty had been approved in prin- very effective in bringing staff, ship and ernment had very reluctantly accepted the ciple, although negotiations were stalled fighting equipment people together in new military policy of NATO, calling for while industrial offsets were being worked working out a preliminary design (al- increased conventional forces and the out. Plans were in train for the conversion though it caused other problems we will forward ASW posture that it implied. The of the Restigouche (and, in time, the Mac- not pursue here). The sketch design of new government, on principle and (more kenzie) classes to DDHs. The centrepiece January 1962 described a 3300-ton ship pressingly) because of the financial plight of the program, however, was the con- capable of 27 knots, at a cost of $33 mil- of the country, was not at all willing to struction of eight “general purpose frig- lion per ship. continue along this path. Further, the new ates,” the first truly new design under- Unfortunately, as the design devel- defence minister, the Hon. Paul Hellyer, taken by the RCN since 1948. oped further, the ship grew. Largely be- was intent on reorganizing the armed These ships were intended to replace cause of fighting equipment require- forces and was willing to accept a twenty- the aging destroyers built between 1943 ments, particularly the need for sufficient five percent reduction in the Defence and 1948, maintaining a measure of flex- space for antennas forward of the flight- budget imposed by the Finance Minister ibility in the fleet and providing a measure deck and clear of the weapon firing arcs, in return for a relatively free hand within of air defence which had been lost with the missile system weight and the need the department. It came as little surprise, the withdrawal of fighter aircraft from for greater generator capacity, by June therefore, when the Minister announced Bonaventure in 1962. For the time, the 1962 the ship’s displacement had grown two days after he took office that he design was reasonably advanced. Al- to 3800 tons and the projected cost had would take a “cold hard look” at the De- though the proven Y-100 steam machin- escalated to $42 million per ship. This at- fence programs being planned, singling ery was retained, automatic machinery tracted the ire of the Deputy Minister and out the controversial GP frigate for special control was planned. A twin 5-inch gun Treasury Board staff, and a protracted attention. A freeze on new capital pro- for surface action and bombardment, a battle at very senior levels ensued before grams and a reduction of the Defence Tartar medium-range and two Mauler compromises on all sides settled on some budget followed in the next six months. short-range missile systems for air de- fighting equipment changes and the ac- The naval budget reduction was sav- fence, and a digital tactical data system ceptance by the Government of an aver- age (a five-year freeze at $284 million in with automatic data link were to be fitted. age cost of about $36 million. This con- 1963 dollars, rather than $307 million in-

6 MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 Looking Back creasing to $516 million by 1967). Aside 505 sonar (but no helicopter) and a top The result was startling. In the words of from its immediate implications (paying speed of 30 knots, possibly with Y-100 LCdr (later Commander) P. D. Barnhouse, off four Tribal-class ships, all ten mine- machinery and gas turbine boost. Equally on the staff of Director General Fighting sweepers, and reducing complement by impressively, the cost was estimated at Equipment at the time, four percent), it threw all future programs $68 million a copy. Sometime [in September 1964] LCdr into confusion. This was increased by the The DDH-280 is Born Dan Mainguy of DNFER wandered Minister’s not unexpected announcement into our offices with a photocopy in November 1963 cancelling the GP frig- In the end all this effort came to noth- of an envelope with some hiero- ate, largely on cost grounds, but in terms ing. On Sept. 2, the defence minister glyphics on it. This apparently had that also cast doubt on its purpose and, wrote to the chief of the defence staff been the musings of Admirals Dyer by implication, the wisdom of the navy in (CDS), Air Chief Marshal F. R. Miller: and Welland...the previous evening proposing it. The navy thus embarked on ...it is important that the principal in which they had sketched out a far-reaching review of its future building elements of the Maritime Forces be plans for a repeat Annapolis program. considered at an early date, and I class....This became the DDH 280 — The next several months were marked request specific recommendations a ship that “grew like Topsy” from by what may politely be called indecision. and options. the original concept. The navy’s efforts were not helped by the Minister’s forma- VAdm Mainguy has tion of a parallel Maritime Sys- confirmed this account, tems Study Group independent adding that at a meeting of the armed forces, and his shortly afterward with the proposal of a new force struc- Chief of Naval Technical ture (for all three services) of Services, RAdm J. B. his own devising, which he Caldwell, and Director required the services to cost. General Ships, Cmdre (later The Defence white paper of RAdm) S. M. Davis, it was March 1964 was of little help, decided to make provision being primarily concerned with for a future point-defence the Minister’s plans for integra- missile system by adding tion of the three service head- 25 feet to Nipigon’s quarters and the eventual length. unification of the three armed In any event, the enve- services. Studies considered lope appears to have been alternatives from helicopter translated quickly into the carriers to nuclear submarines. appropriate staff papers, However, opinion eventually considered by a CDS Staff coalesced on the necessity for meeting, and transformed guided-missile destroyers HMCS Athabaskan: sprucing up in 1980 (Canadian Forces photo) into a recommendation (DDG), an opinion shared by from CDS to a Defence the Minister’s study group. Clearly the Exactly what followed is rather puz- Council meeting in October 1964. The design would draw heavily on the GP frig- zling, and will no doubt keep naval histo- staff paper stated that there was a require- ate, although the Assistant Chief of Naval rians occupied for some time. In the ment: Staff (Air and Warfare), Cmdre A. B. F. immediate aftermath of headquarters inte- • in the defence of North America, to Fraser-Harris, warned his staff, “One gration, any formal structure for provid- improve our...ocean surveillance capabil- thing is quite certain and that is the words ing strictly naval advice to the CDS had ity and to demonstrate a capability to lo- ‘GP frigate’ must never be used again.” largely vanished. Furthermore, only the cate and track submarines...in peace; and Operational requirements, ship charac- CDS had access to the Minister and was • in NATO, to improve our capability to teristics and three possible sketch de- well placed to know his views. We con- defend Atlantic sea communications and signs were prepared during June and July jecture that the CDS knew that the Minis- protect shipping in our area of responsi- 1964 and approved by the Naval Board a ter was likely to reject the DDG proposal bility. few days before its extinction by the inte- on both policy and financial grounds, and These seem modest enough aims, im- grated Defence staff on Aug. 1. By the made this clear to the remaining senior plicitly redefining the primary role of the end of August, a proposal for four ships naval officers in CFHQ — VAdm K. L. navy as ASW operations in the north- was ready for submission to the Chief of Dyer, Chief of Personnel in the new dis- west Atlantic. The proposed program for the Defence Staff. The proposed DDG pensation, and RAdm R. P. Welland, 1965-70 begins: was a more powerful version of the GP Deputy Chief of Operational Readiness. frigate in all but name, without any com- He must have suggested that they would To improve our ASW capability and promises imposed by troop lift. It incorpo- be wise to propose something different replace overage ASW ships, four rated a sophisticated 5-inch automatic — something that could be laid down DDH class ships [should] be built gun, three missile systems, ASROC, SQS- quickly to put work into the shipyards. based on a lengthened Nipigon hull

MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 7 Looking Back

the superstructure. However, since Nipigon itself had only marginal roll sta- bility in the operational light condition, it was not surprising that the result failed to meet accepted stability criteria given the added top-weight of a heavy gun and a missile system. The naval architects in- creased the beam and draught of the ship by a moderate amount, and relocated the flight-deck to forecastle deck level — a proposal already developed for an early version of the Restigouche conversion. The proposed lowering of the flight- deck caused considerable anguish to the naval aviators. It was pointed out that experience with helicopter trials in Assiniboine indicated that the amount of water and spray reaching the lowered HMCS Algonquin: helicopter operations (Canadian Forces photo) flight-deck would expose the helicopter to enough corrosion damage to make on- fitted for CHSS2 helicopter opera- No decision was made at the meeting, board maintenance unsustainable for tions and with space allowance for as the army and air force proposals had long deployments. Projections close to later installation of a suitable point yet to be examined. However, the Minister and above the flight-deck posed an unac- defence missile system when avail- seems to have been pleased, for his mem- ceptable flying hazard. Further, if the heli- able. The program would commence oirs quote his diary of the time: copter were in its ready station on the late 1966 [and] complete 1971 at a unit It is a big improvement on the staff flight-deck, the A/S mortar could not be cost of $35.5 million — excluding heli- work we have been getting. The pres- fired without damage to the aircraft. There copters and the missile system. entation on Provider is something I was also serious concern that the ship’s The remaining items were the upgrad- have been waiting for. It clearly dem- short roll period of 6.5 seconds might ing of seven of the Restigouche class in onstrates that an extra Provider on make it impossible to haul down the heli- 1965-70 ($65 million), the refit and im- each coast will increase our ‘on sta- copter safely in heavy weather. They provement of Bonaventure in 1966-67 tion’ capability more for the cost asked for a roll period of at least 9 sec- ($8 million), the building of one more re- involved than anything else we onds — preferably longer. plenishment ship in 1966-69 ($18 million), could do. The DDH seems to make As RAdm Davis wrote later with com- and the procurement of an added eight sense. Also the updating of the bal- mendable restraint, CHSS2 helicopters ($13 million). ance of the fleet with better sonar, ASROC, etc. All in all not a bad pro- ...this presented us with a dilemma. The proposed DDH is described as gram. We had just increased the beam to having: give us adequate stability...and now The Minister recommended the pro- • hull and machinery equivalent to the fliers were asking for less stabil- gram to Cabinet in November, adding an present Nipigon (sic) class with ad- ity so that the roll would have a additional replenishment ship and an- ditional length of 25 feet to permit longer period. Practically, all that can other Oberon for good measure. And, future fitting of missile system; be done to achieve these diverging with the exception of the extra submarine, • the CHSS2 helicopter system; demands is to increase the size of this is what Cabinet approved. We can the ship. • the AN/SQS-505 integrated vari- only marvel that a proposal sketched on able-depth and hull-mounted sonar the back of an envelope could be trans- Meanwhile, as the fliers asked for a system; formed into superior staff work in six slower roll, the fighting equipment mer- • five-inch gun for anti-surface and weeks. chants were pleading for a longer ship. shore bombardment; This grew out of the long gapless range The DDH-280 grows...and grows • [provision] for an AA missile sys- requirement for high-frequency communi- It now remains to sketch the develop- tem to await future development of cations and the extensive electronic war- ment of the design to mid-1965, and to an appropriate system...at an esti- fare installation, leading to requirements explain how and why the “repeat mated cost of $2 million; for a large amount of antenna space. With Nipigon” that so pleased Mr. Hellyer be- the helicopter precluding any antennas • improved command and control came the much larger and more advanced system, appropriate communica- abaft the hangar and the gun and missile ship that was eventually built. The naval firing arcs precluding them forward of the tions and electronic warfare equip- architects set about what RAdm Davis ment; and superstructure, there was nowhere to lo- describes as the relatively simple task of cate the required antennas. So length, • Jezebel passive sonar system. inserting 25 extra feet into a Nipigon hull, beam and displacement grew so much finally settling on locating it forward of that, to quote RAdm Davis again,

8 MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 Looking Back

we were now close enough [to the turbine boost had been raised. As was its type....Unless steam plant manufac- GP frigate hull] that it was sensible job, the Naval Engineering Design Inves- turers bring about significant im- to capitalize on the earlier work and tigation Team (NEDIT) had been investi- provements [in] warship steam proceed on this basis....As a per- gating gas turbines for use in future plants, they may well become obso- fectly innocent inquiry, I noted designs for some time, necessarily involv- lete for small warships in the next that...the beam was now adequate ing talks with UAC among others. After a few years. to accommodate a double hangar briefing by the company attended by sen- with space for two helicopters. And ior operational and technical staff and by When the report was circulated for was anyone interested in this? Alas, representatives of DDP, the Director of comment, the criticisms were muted. The this simple explanation was never Marine and Electrical Engineering Director of Fleet Maintenance, a very ex- accepted and I was [later] (DMEE) and NEDIT began a detailed in- perienced (and conservative) marine engi- accused...of deliberately increasing vestigation of the alternatives proposed neer of the old school, commented the beam...to provide the additional by UAC. ...the military, operational and tech- hangar space. Capt R.G. Monteith (DMEE), a young nical advantages together make the gas turbine plant attractive....The By the end of March 1965 the ship had captain whose career had been spent two main dangers — the transmis- the hull (though not the internal arrange- mostly in air engineering, summarized sion/reversing problem and the fact ment) of the despised GP frigate — and some 60 pages of technical analysis when that navies around the world have two helicopters. There was more to come. reporting in April that neither proposed or truly evaluated With the Y-100 machinery of Nipigon, the An all-gas-turbine propulsion plant a GT as a base load marine turbine increased size of the ship would reduce offers great potential advantages for — are mentioned in the paper, but its top speed to at best 27 knots (DG use in small warships and in particu- in [my] opinion are not sufficiently Ships’ more pessimistic engineers lar for the DDH class. It is consid- stressed. thought it would more probably be below ered that the special qualities of the 26 knots) and the operators still wanted gas turbine such as gain in perform- DFM was correct. While gas turbines 30 knots if they could get it. ance and efficiency at low tempera- were widely used as boost engines in The Gas Turbine Power Plant tures, inherent simplicity, ease of conjunction with a steam or diesel main plant, no western navy had yet made the At this point someone remembered operation and low requirements for watchkeepers, and a potential for leap to all-gas-turbine machinery. Capt that United Aircraft Canada had submit- Monteith has since recorded that he was ted an unsolicited proposal for all-gas- low ship staff maintenance, together with the exceptional military advan- advised during visits to Admiralty and turbine machinery for “the proposed new BuShips in early 1965 that an all-gas-tur- class of ships, the DDG” in November tage of the potential low noise sig- nature, make the all-gas-turbine bine plant was premature. However, there 1964, and had amplified it in February are advantages to being a small navy. 1965. There seems little doubt that, al- plant the optimum propulsion ma- though no formal request for the proposal chinery for the DDH....Main propul- DG Ships, in making a recommendation had been made, UAC was prompted to sion gas turbines have already been to CNTS, laid relatively little stress on the submit it. During the development of the adopted for more than 50 warships advantages of increased range, quick earlier DDG design, the question of gas of the frigate and destroyer starting, better working conditions and economics, although he recognized that gas turbines “would probably be the power plant of the future.” Possibly prompted by DGFE, he wrote ...the pre-eminent factor governing a move from steam propulsion is that of improved operational perform- ance by significantly reduced ma- chinery and radiated noise. It is believed, therefore, that the deci- sion must be based on whether or not a significant noise reduction can be achieved with reasonable ex- penditure of time and money and with appreciable confidence that a working plant can be achieved. For much the same reasons, he pre- ferred a transmission arrangement com- bining turbine-electric drive at base load with all-mechanical drive for the boost plant to a simpler and safer all-mechanical Huron and Iroquois in 1981. (Canadian Forces photo) transmission, both with controllable-pitch

MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 9 Looking Back propellers. If difficulties were encountered The submission also mentioned a re- A Note on Sources in the early stages of design, he said, it duction in complement of ten men per This paper is informal, and purposely would be relatively easy to go back to ship, increased ship availability obtained not ornamented with the usual historians’ mechanical plant, the main reduction gear- by overhaul through replacement, and the footnotes. A more detailed and fully refer- ing being identical in both. He concluded advantages of quick start-up and im- enced historical narrative can be provided unequivocally that there should be a proved safety. For the Minister’s further on request. We have based this account change to gas turbines for the DDH. With edification, four technical annexes pro- so far as possible on material in Naval brutal frankness he remarked that since vided some 70 pages of detailed informa- Central Registry files and on CDS Staff only four ships were at risk, “if misfortune tion. And finally it provided information and Defence Council documents now in arises it will be relatively limited,” though on cost (an increase of $5 million over an the National Archives and the Directorate he stressed the necessity for shore-test- unchanged basic ship cost of $142 mil- of History and Heritage, DND. We are ing the prototype plant. The RCN was lion) and impact on the shipyards (a delay grateful to the archivists who provided us willing to accept a degree of technical risk of six months, with the first ship to be laid with copies of documents at very short that larger navies, with their more exten- down in August 1967 and to complete in notice. sive building programs, found too high. October 1970). This paper could not have been writ- In the new headquarters organization, Perhaps because the matter was the ten without access to unpublished there was no clear way of submitting the second of two agenda items — the first postdoctoral studies by RAdm (ret.) S. proposal to the judgment of the naval being an exhaustive and argumentative Mathwin Davis, DG Ships from 1961 to operators. CNTS therefore submitted the examination of a new officer structure for 1965. We and all other historians of Cana- proposal to a “naval advisory group” — the coming unified force — the debate dian naval technology are greatly in his composition unknown, but undoubtedly was brief. After a presentation by DG debt. We also acknowledge the valuable including admirals Dyer and Welland — Ships and some discussion of the effect contributions of other former naval offic- in late May. This group accepted the rec- of the change on the ship’s Canadian ers and civil servants who have recorded ommendation for change, although insist- content by the DDP representative their recollections of the time in the Cana- ing on the less risky all-mechanical present, the Minister approved the dian Naval Technical History Collection, transmission. From this point the pro- change. DHH. These contributions take on par- posal wended its way through the Vice- Envoi ticular importance because several impor- Chief of Defence Staff to a CDS Staff tant files relating to the DDH-280 are And so the basic shape of the DDH- meeting, which took the opportunity to missing from the National Archives — we 280 class was determined. When Iroquois review and approve the operational re- hope temporarily. quirement as it had now developed, as commissioned in July of 1972, she was well as the gas turbine proposal. Pru- the first destroyer-sized ship with all-gas- dently, both the Deputy Minister and turbine propulsion in the western world. CDS questioned the cost of the ship The DDH design was to encounter further changes, primarily in its fighting equip- modifications, and asked that the cost be Dr. Hal Smith (MIT, 1961) served in the reviewed before presentation to the Min- ment, which will not be followed further here. The resulting costs and delays RCN from 1947 to 1966 before joining ister in Defence Council. And so a CDS the staff of the University of Toronto, recommendation for a change to gas tur- caused the program to become the sub- ject of very considerable controversy be- where he taught until 1993. Since bines reached Defence Council in July retiring, he has taken up naval history 1965. tween the navy and the financial mandarins of the Treasury Board and the as a hobby, and is research director of It is interesting to note that the Deputy Minister’s office. The designers the Canadian Naval Technical History grounds for change presented to the Min- were accused — somewhat disingenu- Association (CNTHA). ister were somewhat different from those ously, but not entirely without justifica- Dr. Shawn Cafferky (Carleton, 1996) is a given to CNTS by DG Ships. He was told tion — of warping the Government’s historian, formerly on the staff of the that gas turbines: decision to build small, cheap ships into Directorate of History and Heritage, who • can increase the maximum speed of an opportunity to build ships even more now teaches at the University of Victoria. the DDHs from 27 knots to slightly more advanced than the detested GP frigate. His book on the RCN’s development of than 30 knots; the helicopter-carrying destroyer is • can increase the endurance range at This controversy was a significant factor in the establishment of “civilian- currently being reviewed for publica- economical speed (14 knots) by over 25 tion. percent; ized” control of National Defence Head- • can reduce the underwater noise sig- quarters in the early 1970s, with far-reach- nature by a significant amount, thus re- ing effects that are still coming to light. ducing an enemy submarine’s detection However, in the possibly biased view of capability and improving our own detec- one of us, the building of the DDH-280s, tion ranges; and described in 1977 as “among the finest • will provide increased plant reliability ships in NATO,” saved the navy from with anticipated operating costs being 80 perhaps permanent technical obsoles- percent of similar costs for steam plants. cence through the difficult 70s.

10 MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 Simulation and Training in the Canadian Navy Article by LCdr S.W. Yankowich

ver the past decade, the Cana- dian Navy has undergone a Feedback Ocomprehensive equipment Trainee(s) modernization program. While the intro- duction into the fleet of complex and ex- pensive equipment systems enables the MMI potential for substantial enhancement of operational capability, full realization of this potential is contingent upon the Stimulation availability of system specific, high qual- Instructor Mil-Spec Equipment System ity training processes. Traditional reliance on academic instruction reinforced with prolonged “at sea” experience is a costly and increasingly inefficient means for im- Stimulation parting satisfactory training. System com- plexity and capability, coupled with Control Inputs reduced operational budgets and fewer Simulation Sub-System available sea days, have necessitated im- plementation of more efficient and cost- effective training processes. This paper Figure 1. Mil-Spec Simulation/Stimulation Trainer Architecture examines the potential of simulation- based trainers employing commercial the context of an interlocking simulation Level 2 (subteam) training imparts ad- technology to better meet the training based training infrastructure, every naval vanced procedural skills for use within requirement. training task and objective must be sys- the confines of the subteam occupational Policy tematically addressed and exercised. The structure. At Level 2, the operator learns In recognition of the potential of simu- end result will be better overall prepared- how to perform his or her individual tasks lation to increase training efficiency and ness and lower training/maintenance within a limited team environment. Exam- reduce long-term training and mainte- costs. Effectively, since well-designed ples of Level 2 trainers are the Naval nance costs, both NDHQ and Maritime trainers enhance realism by providing Combat Operator Trainer (NCOT), the Command have implemented policies re- substantial flexibility in a diversity of IMCS Shore Based Simulator Trainer and quiring maximum application of simulation training scenarios, less operational sea the Blind Pilotage Trainer (BPT). Most for the purpose of training: time will be spent “refreshing” basic and Level 2 trainers are also capable of pro- intermediate skills, while more time can be viding Level 1 training. “Simulators may be introduced as a part dedicated to higher value training and Training Levels 3, 4 and 5 build on the of an operational equipment acquisition operations. or as a stand alone project. It will be skills learned in Levels 1 and 2 with the normal, however, for simulation to be As of today, more than 30 trainers are aim of integrating the individual opera- included as part of the normal opera- either in service, under construction, or tors into a cohesive operations room tional equipment acquisition process.”1 submitted for approval. When completed, team. At Level 3, the operator is trained the training infrastructure will be com- in how to perform his or her individual “….maximum use is to be made of prised of two broad categories of trainers tasks within a single ship operations room simulators, synthetic trainers and re- — operator trainers and maintenance team environment. Examples of Level 3 configurable display technology within trainers. trainers are the Halifax-class Combat the facilities of the naval training Systems Training Centre (CSTC) and the Operator Trainers infrastructure. Opportunities for Iroquois-class Command and Control simulation emulation and promising Maritime Command has identified five Systems Trainer (CCST). emerging technologies shall be levels of operator training. Level 1 (indi- investigated whenever training plans vidual) training imparts basic occupa- Level 4 (multiunit) training expands on are developed or revised.”2 tional procedures for use within the Level 3 training by emphasizing proce- confines of the individual station envi- dural and tactical decision-making in a co- Expanding the role of simulation within ronment. At Level 1 the operator learns ordinated, multiship, multithreat the naval training infrastructure poses a how to perform specific tasks and operate environment. The generic Operations unique set of challenges. Individual train- assigned station equipment. Examples of Team Trainer (OTT) and the Halifax-class ers must target and enhance a subset of Level 1 trainers are the Tactical Acoustic Operations Room Team Trainer (ORTT) essential skills required by the operations Trainer (TAT) and the Junior Officer are examples of Level 4 trainers. and/or support occupations. Combined in Bridge Simulator (JOBS).

MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 11 Level 5 (Task Group) training empha- sizes procedures for co-ordinated Trainee(s) multiunit operations at a task group or joint operations level. The aim of Level 5 training is similar and complementary to Level 4 training with the distinction that Level 5 training must exercise a ship’s Communications SSDe CS Panels operations room team’s ability to support Task Group operations as directed by the (COTS Emulation) (COTS Emulation) (COTS Emulation) Task Group Commander. The Maritime Tactical Operations Group Simulator (MTOGS) and the proposed ORTT Level 5 Extension are examples of Level 5 train- ers. CCS - Unmodified Maintenance Trainers Maintenance trainers target and de- velop the skill sets required by individual or teams of equipment maintainers. Ap- CSS - Modified plication of simulation for this type of training facilitates implementation of nu- merous critical maintenance scenarios in a controlled environment which is difficult, dangerous and/or expensive to replicate Additional SGC Link -11 OOW Real-Time with operational equipment. By off load- Simulation Visual Monitoring ing maintenance training from operational equipment to dedicated trainers, hands- on training time is increased, wear and tear is reduced, and maintainers are ex- Instructor(s) posed to a greater diversity of faults. Ex- amples of maintenance trainers are the Maintenance Procedures Trainer (MPT) Glossary and the CANTASS Maintenance Simula- COTS Simulation S/W & H/W tor Trainer. COTS Simulation Network Infrastructure OTS Software Hosted on Commercialized CCS/CSS Hardware Simulation-Based Training SSDe Standard SHINPADS Display Emulation (COTS) The use of simulation for the conduct Simulation Interface of maintenance and operator training im- proves overall training effectiveness by expanding the diversity of training sce- Figure 2. ORTT Simulation Architecture narios, increasing trainee throughput and instructor/student ratio, improving opera- duce the desired equipment response. actual mil-spec equipment system to be tor/maintainer safety and reducing in- These stimuli are created either manually included as part of the trainer. service equipment wear and tear. or through a simulation subsystem dy- Weighted against these benefits are the In the operational context, this archi- namically controlled by the instructor. associated development, implementation tecture is useful for the provision of Training feedback is generally limited to and supportability costs. Factors such as Level 1 to Level 3 training (e.g. CSTC) and the instructor’s ability to directly monitor recurring and non-recurring engineering can be readily extended to enable ad- each trainee’s performance. An example costs, risk, life-cycle cost, and infrastruc- equate Level 4 and 5 training for ship- of a simulation/stimulation based archi- ture requirements must be carefully board systems employing rudimentary tecture is the SG-150 radar stimulator in evaluated against the training mission and command and control functionality (e.g. which the actual radar receiver is stimu- the existing capability of legacy trainers. OTT). However, the complexity of tech- lated via synthetic RF energy injected Depending on this cost/benefit analysis, a nology employed in the Halifax, Iroquois, into the waveguide. trainer architecture can be designed and Kingston classes of ships, and the which leverages available technology to By maximizing use of actual opera- extent to which this technology is inte- maximize the benefits of simulation while tional equipment, this architecture sup- grated into the operator and command minimizing overall cost. ports maintenance training on most team functions, have rendered this previ- standalone equipment systems. The ef- ously cost-effective trainer architecture Traditional trainers implement a combi- fectiveness, however, is limited by the cumbersome, expensive and impractical. nation simulation/stimulation based archi- capacity of the simulation/stimulation In the Combat Systems Training Centre, tecture requiring the mil-spec equipment capability to replicate desired mainte- for example, an entire Halifax-class CCS is system with which the trainee interfaces nance scenarios. For complicated and ex- replicated using mil-spec equipment iden- to be externally stimulated for the purpose pensive equipment systems such as a tical to the shipboard configuration. Inter- of training. With this approach (Fig. 1), shipboard CCS or IMCS, this limitation is faces to the CCS are either simulated or, discrete equipment interfaces are driven compounded by the requirement for the such as with the SG-150 and SPS-49 or stimulated in such a manner as to pro- radars, stimulated by the actual peripheral

12 MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 EVALUATION CRITERIA TRAINER ARCHITECTURE different equipment systems. A versatile scenario generation and control (SGC) Mil-Spec Sim/Stim COTS Simulation-Based capability enables instructors to create and dynamically execute training sce- Recurring Engineering Cost High Low narios while simultaneously monitoring the progress of all trainees. Individual Non-recurring Engineering Cost Medium Medium operators are trained through real-time Lifecycle Cost High Low interaction with high-fidelity simulation and prompt instructor feedback. Training Effectiveness Medium High ORTT Flexibility/Scaleability Low High ORTT is an operator Level 3 and 4 simulation-based dedicated Halifax-class Table 1: Comparison of Mil-Spec Simulation-Stimulation (Sim/Stim) and COTS operations room trainer. While it is possi- Simulation-Based Architectures. ble to satisfy this training requirement with a wholly COTS based trainer archi- equipment. This architecture provides the system, the flexible architecture ena- tecture (similar to NCOT), the complexity excellent maintainer and operator Level 3 bles integration of a COTS solution with of the Halifax-class CCS and the scope training, but its “wrap around” design is simulation/stimulation of the relevant and fidelity of simulation required for ef- expensive, difficult to support, and can- system interfaces. Dedicated simulation- fective real-time training necessitates a not facilitate provision of comprehensive based trainers such as NCOT, ORTT and different and more cost-effective ap- Level 4 and 5 training without substantial MPT and on-board simulation-based proach. Simulating the entire ship’s com- and costly modification to its architecture. trainers such as the proposed ORTT L5 bat system with COTS products would extension reflect this fundamental shift in Limited fiscal resources, escalating incur both significant program risk and design philosophy. Table 1 provides a equipment complexity and substantial substantial non-recurring development summary of the comparative advantages advances in commercial-off-the-shelf costs. As an alternative, the ORTT archi- and disadvantages of simulation-based (COTS) simulation technology have re- tecture minimizes these liabilities by trainer architectures to traditional mil- sulted in a shift of trainer design empha- leveraging in-service software and hard- spec simulation/stimulation trainer sis away from costly mil-spec simulation/ ware to the maximum extent practicable. architectures. stimulation architectures to more afford- Specifically, the ORTT uses unmodi- able and flexible simulation-based NCOT and MPT fied off-the-shelf (OTS) CCS software architectures implemented in either a dedi- NCOT and MPT are dedicated re- hosted on non-militarized AN/UYK-507 cated or On Board Training (OBT) con- configurable simulation-based trainers computers rebuilt with less expensive figuration. With simulation-based trainer designed respectively for the provision of commercial components. Rather than architectures, as much of the equipment operator Level 2 and maintenance train- reinventing the required sensor and system as possible is simulated using ing. Their architecture employs exclusive weapon simulation capability from COTS software and hardware. This ap- use of simulation software developed and scratch, maximum reuse is made of the proach minimizes life-cycle, recurring and hosted in COTS networked environments CSTC’s OTS Combat System Simulation non-recurring engineering costs and fa- wherein the specific system performance, (CSS) software and non-militarized hard- cilitates implementation of flexible, interface characteristics and man-ma- ware. All remaining CCS and CSS inter- scaleable and efficient trainers. In circum- chine-interface (MMI) are high-fidelity faces are simulated using COTS stances where, due to system complexity, emulations of the actual equipment sys- technology. Extensive simulation of re- the non-recurring development cost pro- tems. Reconfigurable COTS trainee sta- quired functionality (including Link 11, hibits complete simulation of all or part of tions enable seamless emulation of communications, SGC, panels, operator displays, and OOW visual), also imple- EVALUATION OBT ARCHITECTURE mented entirely with COTS technology, CRITERIA emulates required parts of the combat Built-in Simulation COTS Sim/Stim system and drives the simulated inter- faces. A comprehensive integrated real- Recurring Engineering Cost High Low time monitoring capability enables the provision of prompt feedback on trainee Non-recurring Engineering Low Medium performance and detailed post-exercise Cost debrief. Figure 2 provides an overview of Lifecycle Cost High Low the ORTT system architecture. On Board Training (OBT) Training Effectiveness High High In an OBT configuration, simulation Ease of Use High Medium software is used to emulate actual ship- board equipment systems. This simula- Fidelity High Medium tion capability is integrated either as a permanent capability of the operational Availability Medium High system (e.g. Halifax- and Iroquois-class Flexibility/Scaleability Low High CCS shipboard training modes) or, as shown in Fig. 3 for the proposed ORTT Table 2: Comparison of Built-In and COTS Simulation OBT Architectures. Level 5 trainer, hosted in a COTS environ-

MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 13 ment and interfaced to the operational system using COTS technology. In terms MMI MMI of recurring and non-recurring engineer- Trainee(s) ing cost, training value and ease of imple- mentation, both OBT options have respective advantages and disadvantages (Table 2). As a general rule of thumb, SHINCOM LINK-11 SHINPADS however, new equipment systems in the Terminals Displays procurement stage should make maximum CS Panels Emulation use of OBT through integration of the Radar Distribution desired training functionality into the de- CCS Unit liverable system. Where this approach is Status/Control not cost-effective, COTS based simula- tion architectures can be used to emulate Link-11 Communications CCS Radar the appropriate system. Data Circuits Messages Video Summary Multiplexer/Modem Simulation of Combat System Applying simulation technology to the Scenario naval training requirement is not a trivial Data undertaking. Simulated equipment sys- tems must elicit the desired thought proc- esses and responses from trainees without imparting negative training. Real- Scenario Generation and Control (SGC) Other Ships/Trainers istic, high-fidelity simulations of intricate real-time equipment systems, such as a MMI ship’s radar and CCS, are rarely available off the shelf and can be extremely difficult Instructor(s) to develop. Hardware, software and net- work architectures are in a constant state Glossary of evolution. Without adequate foresight, COTS Simulation S/W & H/W today’s state-of-the-art simulation system Operational Mil-Spec H/W & S/W could be insupportable tomorrow. Shipboard Equipment (Combination of Mil-Spec & COTS) Notwithstanding these liabilities, the COTS Wide Area Network Infrastructure advantages of providing simulation-based training through the application of OBT and/or COTS derived solutions are formi- Figure 3. ORTT Level 5 Extension Simulation Architecture (Proposed) dable. OBT, if specified early in the pro- curement process, enables the provision of effective, user-friendly training as a ability to maintain maximum operational built-in equipment system capability. readiness. Dedicated training architectures employ- References ing COTS technology are flexible, 1NDHQ Instruction 04/91 (1150-110/P56 scaleable and significantly less expensive (VCDS)) April 1991 than previous mil-spec simulation/stimu- lation architectures. 2MARCORD 9-47 - Maritime Command Training Policy Conclusion Current and emerging simulation tech- MARC 4500-7 (NO2 COS) 25 July 1995 nologies offer considerable potential for Operations Team Training Policy - the provision of efficient and cost-effec- MARC: 4985-1 (N3 P&O) 29 June tive training. Depending on the training 1993 mission, simulation-based trainers can be designed which maximize the advantages of COTS technology while retaining spe- cific functionality inherent in legacy train- LCdr Steve Yankowich is Combat System ers and/or mil-spec systems. With Trainers (CST) Project Manager for decreasing operational budgets and fewer PMO CPF available sea days, the role of simulation in the training process is, and will con- tinue to be, fundamental to the navy’s

14 MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 Port Weller Diary Article by LCdr Robert Jones Photos courtesy of Port Weller Dry Docks

n April 1997 while serving in the Directorate of Quality Assurance IHQ in Ottawa, I learned that I was to be appointed detachment commander for HMCS Athabaskan’s extended work period (EWP) scheduled for July 28 to Nov. 21 of that year. At the time there were three possible candidates for the EWP contract, collectively spread across the breadth of eastern Canada — Port Weller Dry Docks in St. Catharines, Ont., Dominion Bridge in Quebec City (Lauzon), P.Q., and Halifax Shipyards Lim- ited in Halifax, N.S. The EWP is designed as a compressed refit — a period of short duration and in- tense activity. The scope of known work for the Athabaskan EWP was estimated to be 80,000 direct labour hours, with the contractor possessing the ability to ab- sorb a further 10,000 hours of unsched- uled work. Work would focus on four main areas: • improvement of auxiliary machinery systems; • preventive maintenance on the ship’s Port Weller Dry Docks is just inside the Welland Canal between locks one and two. structure, hull and tanks; The approach can be tricky for a warship with an eight-metre draught. (Photo • improvement of habitability systems; copyright Wayne Farrar Photography, courtesy Port Weller Dry Docks) and Halifax geographical area. The award of the Welland Canal between locks one and • improvement of the combat systems the contract to Port Weller Dry Docks on two. suite. June 20, 1997 put the navy back into the Because of its location, PWDD was Recent changes to policy governing situation of the nineteen-eighties and seen to present the greatest risk as the the award of refits had a major impact on early nineties where East Coast contract EWP completion date of Nov. 21 was pre- where the Athabaskan EWP was actually refits could be carried out in commercial cariously close to the St. Lawrence Sea- conducted. Up until early 1997 it was as- yards anywhere between St. Catharines, way closing date (traditionally mid- sumed that no East Coast warship refit Ont. and St. Johns, Nfld. It was a good December). Any significant schedule de- activity would take place outside of the wake-up call. lay posed the risk of having the vessel Port Weller’s geo- stranded in Upper Canada until the fol- graphical location is lowing April, or having to tow it back to very interesting. Dig Halifax with incomplete work. It was fur- out a map of Ontario ther recognized that St. Catharines, as a — St. Catharines is refit site, would impose substantial addi- due south of Toronto, tional costs in terms of temporary duty on the southern shore assignments, logistics, engineering sup- of Lake Ontario. (Hav- port and administration for the navy. ing spent the best year During May and June while the of my life at Staff Col- DMCM/Iroquois-class desk officer in lege in Toronto, where NDHQ (Irek Kotecki) was refining the seeing the lake meant work package and preparing for (and then you were looking conducting) the bidders conference, I was south, it was strange involved with planning the EWP on-site to look out across the organization and assisting in writing the lake and see the CN letter of delegation giving me authority to Tower on the horizon act on DGMEPM’s behalf in St. Catha- to the north!) Port Vessel turnover: July 29, 1997. Athabaskan CO Cdr Lenny rines. My core on-site group was made up Edmunds with Mike O’Connor (PWGSC) and Port Weller Weller Dry Docks of five technical consultants headed by general manager Charles Payne (standing). (PWDD) is just inside Dave Jones, along with a QAR hull spe-

MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 15 cialist, a military supply technician re- support. The minimum on-site staff aug- the formal meeting broke up, EO LCdr sponsible for government supplied mate- mentation from Athabaskan’s crew will Randy Comeau took us on a tour of the rial, and five members of HMCS include a senior supply technician, two ship’s engineering spaces. Spent the re- Athabaskan’s crew. junior supply technicians, one Certificate mainder of the day in 1 CFQAR HQ.) During my time on the project I kept a 3 marine engineering technician, and one naval weapons technician. Next EWP Moncton (on leave)/St. Catharines daily record of events (no doubt thinking Wednesday, July 2 meeting is scheduled for 0815 Friday, it might come in handy should I ever What a long day! Good old Dad got up June 27. stand condemned before a naval board of at 0400 to take me to the Moncton airport. inquiry or a contract settlement review NDHQ Hull Reminds me of just over twenty years ago board). The following are edited excerpts Friday, June 13 when he took me over to CFB Moncton to from my journal recorded over the course Athabaskan DMCM/IRO Project Man- catch the bus which started me off on my of the five months I spent with the Atha- ager Irek Kotecki was ready for me to re- basic training. Arrived at Pearson Interna- baskan EWP. I be- tional Airport and lieve there is no waited for Cdr Dan more challenging McVicar (DMCM/ shore job for a mem- IRO) and Irek. ber of the naval en- Nearly missed each gineering other because I was community than waiting in Terminal being part of an on- 2 and they were site refit team. The arriving Terminal 3! issues are the same Arrived in St. Ca- as those experi- tharines at 1000. enced in a sea post- Dave Jones’ flight ing, with the added from Halifax was challenge of having delayed due to fog to form an effective and he arrived team from day one around 1130. We all in the contractor’s made it to Port facility, and estab- Weller Dry Docks lishing a relation- just in time for ship of trust with a lunch. Met PWDD’s commercial contrac- Athabaskan EWP: “There is no more challenging shore job for a member of the naval refit management tor who, at the end engineering community than being part of an on-site refit team. The issues are the team. After lunch of the day, must same as those experienced in a sea posting, with the added challenge of having to we toured the yard form an effective team from day one in the contractor’s facility.” balance customer and spent the re- satisfaction against view the QA portion of the bid submis- mainder of the afternoon discussing the bottom line. I hope my journal ex- sions. All bids were compliant from a QA agenda items for tomorrow’s kick-off cerpts offer some insight to the day-to- technical perspective. (When I was in- meeting. day challenges of refit life. formed later that Athabaskan would be going to Port Weller Dry Docks, I was St. Catharines Halifax Thursday, July 3 told to plan for a visit to Port Weller July Thursday, June 5, 1997 Met with the Crown’s team for break- 2-3 — right in the middle of my leave pe- In an effort to resolve the dispute (and fast at 0730. Arrived at the yard at 0845 riod!) avoid the painful process of the contract for an in-house meeting. The first thing settlement review board) between Halifax NDHQ Ottawa that struck me was that our PWGSC con- Shipyards Limited and the Crown over the Monday, June 16 tract officer was not aware I was the on- HMCS Iroquois EWP (Aug. 2- Nov. 17, 1 CFQAR (Halifax) regional com- site team leader — he believed that Dave 1996), PWGSC chaired a meeting of the mander in town today to discuss resource Jones was. (Three pages of my journal two groups. Both sides are willing to deal allocations for the three refits starting this were devoted to the EWP kick-off meeting and an agreement was reached on out- July (Athabaskan, Montreal and Quest). which covered such items as key person- standing defect advice notices, 1379s nel, lines of communication, the master (work arisings), and premium time issues. Halifax Friday, June 27 schedule, new work, material supply, and The lesson for Athabaskan is to develop technical issues. No big surprises, al- (Athabaskan EWP Planning Meeting) a system whereby work can be pro- though the Crown did introduce a new On board Athabaskan at 0755. The gressed while the 1379 price is being ne- work item.) gotiated. The time line for Athabaskan is planning meeting run by the XO (LCdr very optimistic. On a more positive note Brian Mosley) went very well. Items in- Hull I’m pleased to have George Holmes from cluded: schedule of events leading to Friday, July 18 MCDV Detachment Halifax join us as part turnover of custody (TD funds for FMF Martha (my long-suffering wife of of the Athabaskan team. engineering inspectors; docking officer; twenty years) drove me to the Louis Saint and crew repatriation); environmental Laurent Building this morning so I could Ottawa portfolio; load banks; storage of pyros pick up the specification package for the Wednesday, June 11 package; contractor’s request for a cable Athabaskan EWP. Received a draft of the Spoke with Dave Jones on the out- tagger; and catering requirements for Letter of Delegation (based on the HMCS come of his meeting in Athabaskan on ship’s staff during turnover period. (After Montreal docking work period). Our situ-

16 MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 manager of Port Weller Dry Docks. Brian Power, tomorrow (he will fly in from Mon- Bonwick (PWDD material control man- treal where Athabaskan is spending the ager) showed us around the facilities. night before beginning the Seaway leg of Very impressive — clean, bright and air- their transit). Hope the ship doesn’t think conditioned. Phones will be fully hooked I’m acting like “Chicken Little!” (Earlier in up by Wednesday. Cleaned out my desk the day I had raised the NAVO on Atha- (I think it was stored in a grit blasting baskan’s bridge cell phone to relay my bay). After lunch, met with Athabaskan’s concerns over the approach to PWDD’s advance party (CPO2 Dorion, PO1 Moore outfitting wall). There be dragons out and LS Byrnes). Finished the day putting there in the channel approach to the wall the office in order. at PWDD. Tuesday, July 22 Friday, July 25 Received our first defect advice notice A roller coaster day. Lt(N) Power ar- Port Weller contract manager Claude from PWDD. The contractor was missing rived around 0845. At first he was not Zucchet processed close to 500 work page 12 of 16 from the mechanical portion impressed with what he saw of the navi- estimate requests during the EWP. of a particular spec. I contacted the gational situation. He had no confidence LCMM and he faxed me the missing page that there was sufficient water to bring ation in this EWP is much different in that — page 12 of 15! I called the LCMM the ship alongside safely. The situation the PWGSC officer is not on site (I am the again — this time he faxed me page 12 of improved significantly once John met delegated PWGSC Officer for authorizing 17! (Eventually he faxed the entire me- with Captain Anil Soni, an experienced 1379s for work arisings or new work up to chanical portion of the spec — all 17 inspector from the Seaway Authority, and $5,000). I recommended to Cdr McVicar pages.) Dave Jones arrived today from received an updated chart of the ap- that he brief Cmdre Gibson (DGMEPM) Halifax. Spoke briefly with him this proaches (objective evidence, so to on this difference. I’m willing to do any- evening. He is very tired after a long day speak). In hindsight the project should thing in this brave new have sent John up here world of increased risk, but three weeks ago — “Time without an on-site PWGSC spent in recce is seldom officer we might find our- wasted.” selves falling behind in processing the big-ticket Saturday, July 26 1379s and losing control of One week down, the arisings budget. twenty left to go. Ship arrived today. What a Ottawa thrill to see the ship in the Saturday, July 19 approaches to lock 1 from Finally got the rental the PWDD tower. PWDD car. Spent all afternoon had all hands assembled pressing and packing. I for the arrival. It was will be glad to get down to amazing — at 1600 there St. Catharines. I’m very was nobody to be seen; fortunate to have this op- by 1640 everybody was portunity and am looking there. John Mens, the forward to the challenges. PWDD assistant dock I’ve had great support master, stood on the dock from the DQA administra- gate. At 1840 Athabaskan tion staff , especially Cpl Solar gas turbines being prepared for installation: Two large access ports (Cdr L. Edmunds) was se- Majewski. were cut into the side of the ship at the AMR to accept the machinery. cured alongside PWDD. Ottawa/St. Catharines of driving. We are going to have a tough Sunday, July 27 Sunday, July 20 time securing accommodations in St. Ca- Spent the first hour giving a tour of the Got on the road at 0935 (via the United tharines. (Niagara tourist region in sum- yard to the EO and XO. We discussed the States to avoid traffic from the Molson mer — weekly rates — nobody wants to concern that the ship could be towed out Indy Car race taking place in Toronto). know you — check again after Thanks- if PWDD can’t complete the job on time. Met Pierre Brousseau of my on-site team giving weekend. Have a nice day.) (The remainder of the day was a whirl- during supper at the hotel. He arrived Thursday, July 24 wind of activity devoted to destoring the from Halifax via Montreal a day early. Cpl ship.) Jim McDonald (GSM sup tech from 1 Another full day. Throw ten people CFQAR staff in Halifax) arrives late to- together 1500 kilometres from home and Tuesday, July 29 night. Time seems to have gone into slow expect an instant team — that’s the Vessel turnover occurred at 0900 and motion since I arrived at the hotel. We beauty of a DND organization! Gave was straightforward with no ceremony. face the world tomorrow at 0800. Andrea Lococo (detachment secretary) The Crown’s management team attended $45.00 to buy office supplies. I’ve got a the PWDD production meeting this morn- St. Catharines great secretary. Started to put together ing (first priority is pumping off the fuel Monday, July 21 office files — logs, work estimate re- and oily water in the water-compensating Arrived in the yard at 0800 and intro- quests and report folders. Will meet Atha- fuel tanks). Before heading back to the duced myself to Charles Payne, general baskan’s navigating officer, Lt(N) John hotel I went down to the ship to see how

MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 17 Thursday, Aug. 7 Tuesday, Sept. 2 The contractor informed us today At 1100 we met with the PWDD steel- about lead contamination in the paint and workers. They are frustrated over trying their efforts to quantify the impact. (The to cut seats and brackets out of GSM ship’s base coats of paint contained lead. steel and make sense of our documenta- PWDD went ahead and instituted a lead tion. (This was due to a mix-up. They control program to comply with Ministry were trying to work from a guidance requirements.) document rather than a specification.) George Holmes and Dave Yeomans Friday, Aug. 8 (FMFCS hull inspector) did a good job of Walked around the ship late this after- giving a visual presentation of the tank noon. A protective deck covering was structure work required. being laid down on the decks. Starting to see progress in the AMR stripout. Wednesday, Sept. 10 What a depressing day. The class desk Saturday, Aug. 9 in DGMEPM is not happy over my at- PWDD hard at work today preparing tempts to sort out our load bank require- the dock for Athabaskan. ment conflict with Preserver. (It appeared Monday, Aug. 11 that the Athabaskan EWP and Preserver It’s good to have Roger Barakett, the refit might require the use of load banks at FMFCS docking officer, on site to give the same time. DMCM/IRO eventually advice on getting the ship ready for dock- sorted this out.) The return stores prob- ing. The weather is very hot and muggy. lem seems to have a temporary fix. (We This morning there was an incident in the had been returning stripout materials — Preparing seatings for the torpedo i.e. electronics cabinets, valves, etc. — to handling system. forward pump room when a party of dock- yard workers came close to passing out in the supply system through CFB Borden, the pumping operation was going. There the space because of inadequate ventila- but the work had not been forecasted in had been a small flood in 12 mess because tion. We sorted this out with the produc- their estimates and the base balked at the a seabay inlet valve had inadvertently tion, QA and safety managers. mounting cost. DMMS procurement sup- port officer Peter Green made arrange- been left open. (Fortunately, Atha- Tuesday, Aug. 12 baskan’s upper deck ER — LS Butler — ments for us to return our stores to Irek Kotecki and Mike O’ Connor Halifax via commercial road transport.) had been retained to advise on fuel and (PWGSC contract officer) arrived on site oily water removal. This young man inter- by 1000. Ship docked today. (Everything Friday, Sept. 12 vened to prevent a small flood turning went very well thanks to genuine team- Met the Speaker of the House of Com- into anything worse.) Discussed PWDD’s work established between PWDD staff mons today (the Hon. Gilbert Parent — security arrangements for the ship. and Roger.) from Welland) when PWDD management invited me to attend a coffee reception in Wednesday, July 30 Tuesday, Aug. 19 The seagulls departed this afternoon. their boardroom. After coffee I gave the I’m really happy today because my Speaker a quick tour of Athabaskan. (I am referring here to the headquarters naval combat dress arrived — finally, I management types who swoop in, have pants that fit comfortably. Received Wednesday, Sept. 17 squawk a lot, eat your food, dump all over a couple of big 1379s today ($250,000). The better part of the morning was you, then fly off, leaving you to clean up Irek gave the OK for the contractor to spent updating the EO and XO and dis- the mess!) It was a productive day. I still order material. The propeller-lifting eye- cussing their visit early next week. The have some concerns over the commercial bolts are still not tested. XO will be briefing Cmdre Morse’s staff firefighting procedures, i.e. the defueling sometime in the near future on the refit scenario. PWDD seems to be genuinely Wednesday, Aug. 20 status and reactivation. We said goodbye grateful for the assistance of the on-site Dave Jones and I spent a good part of to PO2 Wilson today (Athabaskan’s team. the day with Joe D’Achille (PWDD plan- ship’s staff). We are going to miss him, ner and outfitting foreman) putting to- Thursday, July 31 but glad that we have PO2 McDonald and gether a network chart for the AMR. MS Arsenault on site to replace him. What a day trying to get a flight or- (This meeting went very well and paid big ganized for the upper deck ER. It was an dividends over the course of the EWP.) Wednesday, Sept. 24 administrative nightmare! (Notes from progress meeting:) Over- Wednesday, Aug.27 Saturday, Aug. 2 all, a very good day. LCdr Pierre Boulet Progress meeting was really interest- (MARLANT N37 staff officer) provided The laker Montrealais pulled in ahead ing. Rob Huston, PWDD’s senior planner, of Athabaskan (after moving the ship 120 some good guidance from the took the lead in stating Port Weller’s posi- MARLANT perspective. Mike O’Connor feet aft). The conditions for coming tion. PWDD claims it is on target (we alongside were bad — high winds. (PWGSC contract officer) runs a very disagreed). Claude Zucchet, PWDD’s good progress meeting — i.e. no sur- Montrealais had trouble exiting lock 1 contract manager, raised the issue that and damaged her propeller when the wind prises. PWDD is back on track with over- manhours for arisings are approaching all progress assessed at 46%, and 50% of blew the stern of the vessel against the 1000. wall. Prior to her coming alongside I rec- elapsed time. I estimate the ship will be ommended to the supervisor that he close delivered a week behind schedule. all “X” openings in Athabaskan.

18 MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 Friday, Sept. 26 Friday, Oct. 24 problems: pyrometers (four are duff) and A very busy day. Ship’s department PWDD fueled conventional tanks high differential pressure across the LO heads arrived at 1015. Ship will take the (86m3) with assistance provided by ship’s filter. This afternoon Cpl McDonald strawman set-to-work and reactivation staff. worked the phone with Cpl Jensen at plan and massage it for their input. Base Supply Halifax to try to get 12 ther- Tuesday, Oct. 28 mocouples shipped out to Toronto to- Wednesday, Oct. 8 The load bank team from FMFCS Pro- night. It will be another long day We all had lunch together today duction arrived today (Dean Wells, Ed tomorrow. (PWDD and the Crown’s management Olczwyk, Francis Rouselle and Carl team) and it has become clear that PWDD Crawford). Saturday, Nov. 1 will be forwarding some sort of impact Completed the heat run and governor Wednesday, Oct. 29 claim. Dave Jones believes it will cover trials on the D/G. PO1 Babineau and his Long day. The 1000-kW diesel genera- material, AMR specification deficiencies crew did a great job of picking up thermo- tor was flashed this evening, not without and set-to-work. Also informed this morn- couples in Toronto last night and getting a few hiccoughs. We discovered fuel ing by LCdr Comeau that the formation them installed by 0800 this morning. (Cpl lines and seawater cooling lines discon- staff have a concern over the liability for McDonald and Cpl Jensen really were set-to-work. There is no provi- instrumental in making this all sion in the contract for a set-to- happen.) The only minor disap- work team. To mitigate risk, navy pointment is that we could not watchkeepers must be involved achieve the time spec criteria for in testing and setting to work sudden application of full load. critical systems. D/G trials were completed only one day behind schedule. Set-to-Work Phase At this point the tempo of the Wednesday, Nov. 5 EWP changed dramatically with We had a setback on the Solar the focus on set-to-work activi- (gas turbine) trial. There appears ties — “putting Humpty Dumpty to be a short in the Girolami con- back together again,” as Dave troller’s 26-volt system preventing Jones would say. Set-to-work was initiation of the start sequence. a balancing act between two con- Also, we are going to hit a snag in flicting activities — finishing the superchlorinating our freshwater work in the AMR while trying to tanks — we can’t dump the water conduct machinery trials in that in the canal. same space. Fuel, HP air, load Friday, Nov. 7 banks, integral piping systems Black Friday. We experienced were all necessary prerequisites major problems with the LO sys- to this phase. But first, the ship tem on the starboard Solar gas needed to be back in the water. turbine. Friday, Oct. 17 Saturday, Nov. 8 Undocking meeting chaired by A long but successful day. PWDD’s John Moss. Well organ- “I experienced trust and teamwork at its best...” Discovered the problem with the ized and attended by all the key starboard Solar G/T. Focused our members. Three more of Athabaskan’s nected. We learned a few good lessons attentions on the port Solar while await- engineering staff arrived on site today in about checking out our systems with ing spares for the starboard from Halifax. preparation for the set-to-work. I also au- greater scrutiny. thorized 850 hours of premium time for Sunday, Nov. 9 Saturday and Sunday. Thursday, Oct. 30 Hurrah! We had a successful heat run Sunday, Oct. 19 After the production meeting I asked and speed droop trial on the port Solar G/T. to speak to PWDD management over the Carl Crawford (FMFCS) did a great job of Everybody was out in full force today issue of Athabaskan’s freshwater tanks. for the undocking — two days ahead of adjusting the governor and the droop trial (The ship was undocked without passing was completed in an hour. schedule! PWDD had the ship ready to a “holiday” test — objective proof of ef- move out of the dock by 1130, but Sea- fective paint coverage on structure and Monday, Nov. 10 way traffic caused a delay of three hours shell plating.) I explained that I spoke Very discouraging day. It looks like the (everybody is trying to get out of the with our technical experts who believed starboard Solar has a major problem with lakes before freeze-up). Only two minor our spec was achievable and I recom- its gearbox seal. The defect advice no- leaks were detected and they were mended another test be conducted. tices are really pouring in now. The class quickly repaired. The ship was secured desk gods are not happy about the pre- alongside by 1600. Friday, Oct. 31 mium time I authorized. I have no alterna- I’m beat — three days of set-to-work tive if we are to meet schedule. Wednesday, Oct. 22 down and another twenty-one to go. The Cold weather precautions must be put 1000-kW D/G has really turned into a Tuesday, Nov. 11 into effect. Hanger is critical. Set-to-work saga. Last night we were talking about Good news. When I left the yard we delayed as HP air-compressor trial now completing the heat run by 2100 and do- had about 90 minutes of the heat run on postponed to Monday. ing the droop trials at 1130 today. Two the starboard G/T remaining. The culprit

MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 19 finally got away from the wall at 0830 (de- layed an hour-and-a-half by Seaway traf- fic). It’s good to see the ship get away — the crew was anxious to get home to Hali- fax. After the ship left, the yard seemed completely empty. And so ended the on-site activity for Athabaskan’s extended work period. The following day I braved the Hwy 401 gauntlet through Toronto and arrived back in Ottawa in time for supper. Much more work remained with the FMF phase, but the focus shifted to the class desk distributing and analyzing the reams of refit data we had collected. Aside from my detachment commander’s report, my di- rect involvement in the Athabaskan refit ended and I resumed my duties within DQA . As I was writing this article, I learned that Athabaskan needs to be Sunday, Oct. 19 — Undocking day! redocked sometime this summer to rectify a problem of paint leeching into her fresh- for our LO problem was a seized scavenge Wednesday, Nov. 26 water tanks — a personal disappointment pump. Today was devoted to writing the as it disrupts Athabaskan’s ops schedule. cover letter on the 1148, cleaning up out- Wednesday, Nov. 12 standing 1379s, and writing a letter of ref- I consider myself most fortunate to Snowed last night — took me 15 min- erence for Andrea (our faithful secretary). have had the opportunity to work as an utes to clean the ice and snow off the car on-site refit detachment commander in a windows. PO1 Lacey discovered a major Friday, Nov. 28 commercial facility. I experienced trust and problem with the starboard standby lube Last day for Andrea. We held our last teamwork at its best, and gained a whole oil pump today (not associated with the production meeting at 0900. The work is new appreciation for the capabilities of EWP work package). LCdr Comeau and complete. We’ve had some good times both PWDD and the navy’s refit team of his CERA are aware of the problem and with the PWDD staff and I’m going to FMFCS engineering and production per- discussing options. (A replacement pump miss working with these men, especially sonnel, LCMMs, item managers, was installed by Port Weller the following John McWhirter and his team. At 1100 MARLANT N37 staff, and Athabaskan’s week.) the XO and I attended a coffee reception crew. Hopefully, the naval engineering held for the Ontario Minister of Trade, the Friday, Nov. 14 community will continue to be involved local MP, the old and new mayors of St. with on-site refit activities. LCdr Comeau and his basin trial team Catharines, and their respective staffs. arrived on site today. Captain Soni met with the NAVO this af- Sunday, Nov. 16 ternoon. I provided the NAVO with cop- Another red letter day. A successful ies of all correspondence between PWDD basin trial on the port side. and the Seaway on water levels for depar- ture. Monday, Nov. 17 LCdr Jones is a Marine Systems Engi- neer with DQA 5 in NDHQ. The Athabaskan crew is doing a good Saturday, Nov. 29 job of reactivating the ship. (The crew Ship opened for PWDD employee was watchkeeping on specific pieces of tours. equipment on a 24-hour basis.) Tuesday, Dec. 02 Wednesday, Nov. 19 Another glorious day in the banana The 1148 Report of Inspection domi- belt. Started off the day in Athabaskan’s nated the day’s discussion. wardroom waiting for the 0830 in-house meeting on ship’s departure. Captain Friday, Nov. 21 Barkhouse (QHM pilot) arrived while I The turnover ceremony (in the CO’s was waiting for the crew to be dismissed cabin) was simple but significant. Ship’s from divisions. At the meeting I was in- cleanliness is of a very high standard. It troduced to the new CO (Capt(N) Gauvin, was an honour to have lunch in the main who had just arrived the night before). cafeteria with the EO and XO among the Departure meeting was held on the bridge crew. Athabaskan’s crew has been terrific. again with a necessary cast of thousands. PWDD deserves a lot of credit. Thursday, Dec. 4, 1997 On board at 0615 to say goodbye to crew. Strange mix of emotions today. Ship

20 MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 East Coast Naval Technical Support Seminar: MARE Graduation Mess Dinner Guest of Honour Speech by Captain(N) (ret.) Sherm Embree [Capt(N) Embree retired from the navy this past spring after more than 32 years of service as a Marine Systems Engineer in ships, submarines and various squadron, dockyard and headquarters positions. His last appointment was as Director of Maritime Management and Support in NDHQ. As guest of honour at this year’s Naval Technical Support Seminar mess dinner on April 22, Capt(N) Embree delivered the following address which has been abridged and edited for publication in the Journal.]

hank you for your kind intro- I have also noted the tremendous im- ployment applying engineering, and more duction, and for your invitation provements we have made over the years career choices than any other employer. to attend the seminar and this in our professional development, social T As engineers we apply the scientific mess dinner. My congratulations to the behaviour and ethical values. Discus- method to whatever we do. Whether we MARE prize winners again — I hope your sions are now much more frequent on are refitting a submarine, writing an OPDP careers will be as wonderful a combina- such great dilemmas as: about the just war philosophy, or tion of idealism and pragmatism as mine • short- vs. long-term priority (e.g. the downsizing an organization, we apply an has been, and with some success too. fleet support plan) engineering thought process. This is true On that note I would like to give you in industry as well. We must simply rec- an overview of some of the themes that ognize that engineering discipline is not have been apparent to me during the past limited to heat balances and quadratic three decades, themes I was pleased to equations. see so well expressed and highly stressed You have enough challenges already in your seminar. The best part of my (as we heard during the seminar), but as I speech is that it will be shorter than any leave this career I must challenge the next of the seminar presentations! Hopefully, generation of naval officers. Our navy is though, I can leave you with some in great shape with new submarines con- thoughts to remember. tributing to the fleet mix, good leadership I want to talk about pride in ourselves, and good people in the technical commu- in our profession, in our navy/CF team, nity. But I must point out the two remain- and in our nation. I use the word “pride” ing challenges that, in my opinion, my cautiously because it can lead to un- generation of naval engineers is leaving healthy arrogance and other faults. But for you to overcome. They are: pride can also contribute to self-confi- • Block obsolescence — the expensive dence, team effectiveness and national prospect of potentially having to replace strength. 12 ships at one time. In the past this has contributed to an acrimony within the Let me first reflect on ourselves as in- Canadian shipbuilding industry that is dividuals. Through my work in the navy • the individual vs. community (i.e. ini- not apparent in industries supporting the and the Canadian Forces I have come to tiations) army and air force; and be proud of our common high sense of • loyalty vs. truth (i.e. whistle-blow- • The recurring boom or bust cycles in responsibility, initiative and co-operation ing), and our MARE branch and coincident strains — three characteristics which, even • hard justice vs. compassion (e.g. between occupations and organizations. though they go hand in hand with loyalty, drunkenness on the job). courage, honesty, adaptability, personal This does not mean that political cor- There are many ways to overcome development and integrity, I find to be all- rectness has eliminated team spirit or these hurdles, but we continue to trip our encompassing signs of a capable indi- characters from the navy, it just means way through. We must overcome the hu- vidual with innovative tenacity and a that we must have respect for others. man failings of jealousy, greed and envy human touch. If one of these three char- as we pursue personal advancement, and acteristics predominates without being And what about our role as navy engi- aim for responsible and aggressive team- moderated by the others, then we are not neers? Are we engineers? We must con- work. Our greatest professional disease complete as humans. Responsibility and tinually examine ourselves and what we could well be procrastination. I can only initiative without co-operation gets us are doing so that we may make choices encourage your on-going initiative and nowhere. By applying these characteris- we can be proud of. When you choose co-operation toward resolving these is- tics, we soon recognize when to lead, the navy, both you and the navy are bet- sues. when to follow, and when to get out of ter off by having made a conscientious You are the people I have worked and the way. choice. To me, the navy and CF offer en- gineers an unprecedented variety of em- played with. Keep up the traditions and

MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 21 the team spirit. The individual attributes Teams are built on mutual respect not selves in private or within Canada, but we of responsibility, co-operation and initia- on a hierarchy. Leadership of teams is have every right to be confident and tive working together with team spirit can built on respect as well, not on orders or proud in public and on the international only lead to success. Keep on working sarcasm. Good relationships also mean scene. that one navy team irrespective of your communication, personal contribution, Members of the Canadian Forces rec- current position. And whatever the work, trust, grace and forgiveness. Respect is ognize the greatness of our country re- know the value of public money and al- the foundation of trust, problem-solving gardless of the region of origin. J’aime ways respect the public perspective on and team-building. I believe that true re- mes amis québecois. Durant les années how it is being spent. We might well spect is given before it is earned. In my soixantes au collège militaire royal, spend $3 million dollars out of public view view, the respect we share as members of nous avons grandi dans notre fierte et on a minor shipalt, but to the public even the CF is one of the strongest unifying loyauté envers le Canada. National de- $400,000 of that would represent a great forces for all of Canada. fence and public service is high-value United Way campaign success. As Canadians we are fortunate — work that gives personal satisfaction and As we have heard so many speakers there are no wars in this hemisphere, the generates beneficial national pride. Keep say at the seminar, our navy and CF team economy is on the upswing, there is un- it up by combining your individual, pro- should be a harmonious relationship be- precedented respect for human rights in fessional and team abilities. Please keep it tween operations and support. We cannot Canada, and we have a social democracy up for Canada’s sake. separate operators from technicians, pro- second to none. Finally, we all need loyal friends like duction from engineering, or the coasts We have one Canadian weakness, you and those I have enjoyed throughout from NDHQ. We must have a perspective though, and that is a lack of respect for my career. It has been good sailing with of others’ views and a combined team government institutions. I haven’t figured you. May god bless you and this Canada. that I like to call “support to operations.” out yet whether that is Canadian idealism That is a team we are all involved in, con- wanting something better, or cynicism. I tributing our individual capabilities for the do know that we tend to criticize our- benefit of Canada.

Greenspace: Maritime Environmental Protection The Hydromem™ Bilgewater Treatment System Article by LCdr Mark Tinney

ver the next year or so the navy will replace the oil/water Emulsified Oil separators (OWS) on the Hali- O Free Oil fax- and Iroquois-class ships with new, more capable units as part of the Maritime Environmental Protection Project. This Bilge has become necessary due to spiralling Collection support costs for the filter elements in the Tank existing gravity-based separators, and Liquid/ Liquid more importantly due to the inability of Hydro- the units to comply with new, more strin- cyclone

gent certification criteria proposed by the Oil Free International Maritime Organization (IMO). Ultra- filtration The new Hydromem™ system is being Polymeric developed for the navy under a contract Waste Membranes Oil awarded in October 1997 to Water Technol- Recovery Reject Bag Filter ogy International Corporation of Burling- Tank Effluent ton, Ontario. The system was selected for Collection its ease of operation and maintenance, Oil Tank and its ability to reliably maintain effluent Content quality within the prescribed limit of 15 Discharge Monitor parts per million total petroleum hydrocar- bons (15 ppm TPH) required by the IMO, and (potentially) the more stringent regu- lations of 5 ppm TPH for inland waters demanded by the Canada Shipping Act. Fig.1. The Hydromem™ Process

22 MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 Greenspace

The new separator weighs in at 1000 kg and is modular in construction so it can be disassembled at pierside and brought into a machinery space in sec- tions and installed in the same footprint as the existing unit. The unit is designed to process 4000 litres of bilge fluids in a 12-hour period, after which an automated filter cleaning cycle will be initiated. The requirement to clean the filters will de- pend entirely on the bilge “cocktail” which has to be processed. Here’s how the system works. Through the use of the bilge stripping system, bilge fluids are directed to the bilge collection tank (Fig. 1) where some of the free oil separates naturally from the water and is drawn down to a waste oil recovery tank. A sensor monitors the level in the collection tank so that when the fluid level rises to a preset upper limit pumps are energized to draw fluid from the bottom of the tank, through a strainer and into the Hydromem™ system. The fluid is then fed through a liquid/liquid “hydrocyclone” centrifugal separator which will separate the free oil from the water and divert it to the waste oil recov- The new Hydromem™ oil/water separator system destined for shipboard installation this fall will fit in the same footprint as existing units. Some of the spindle-like ery tank. The remaining liquid is passed ultrafiltration membranes are visible to the left of the tall effluent collection tank at through a bag filter before entering the right. The PLC controller is on the left. (Photo courtesy Water Technology International ultrafiltration polymeric membranes to Corporation.) filter out any remaining emulsifications. The output of the membrane modules grates to the core. By applying back pres- preset amount. Another upgrade would is fed into an effluent collection tank sure to the water phase, the oil is forced add a solid/liquid hydrocyclone upstream where it is monitored continuously by an to flow axially up to the top discharge of the liquid/liquid hydrocyclone which, oil content monitor to ensure it meets the connection of the unit where it is diverted by removing and diverting the majority of 15 ppm quality limit before being directed to the waste oil tank. The separated water the solid matter to a solid waste collection overboard. If the output fails this test, it exits from the bottom connection and is chamber, would greatly improve the serv- is fed back to the inlet of the Hydromem™ then passed through a two-micron bag ice life of the bag filters. filter before being filtered by the mem- system to be reprocessed. Although the Given the problems that the fleet has brane modules. entire process is normally controlled fully had with the existing OWS it is not sur- automatically by a PLC, the unit can also Great care has been paid to designing prising that a great amount of interest has be controlled manually if necessary. the separator for easy maintenance ac- been shown by ships’ MSEOs wanting to The hydrocyclone is basically a cone- cess. Replacing the ultrafiltration mem- be first in line to receive the new Hydro- shaped miniature centrifugal separator branes should be a rare requirement, but mem™ system. The project staff are well with no moving parts, yet infinitely more when necessary it will be easy to perform. aware of the requirement and are endeav- efficient than a conventional separator. Cleaning the membranes is an automated ouring to get the units into all ships as Hydrocyclones function by separating process accomplished simply by pressing quickly as possible. Factory acceptance materials of differing densities based on a button on the control panel which will trials commenced at the end of May, after their difference in specific gravity. As initiate a back-flush procedure. In its cur- which the units will undergo IMO certifi- bilge fluids enter the unit at a designed rent configuration, the only consumable cation trials in June. If all goes well, instal- inlet pressure, the incoming velocity is component is the bag filter which will lations will commence this fall. converted to tangential velocity which have to be checked daily. imparts a centrifugal force on the feed. The project team is considering sev- The feed then moves down the cone sec- eral upgrades to the system which will tion of the hydrocyclone, the tangential even further improve operation and main- velocity increases and the centrifugal tenance. One involves the addition of an LCdr Tinney is the DMSS project force rises upward of 3000g. Water, being automated process to flush the mem- manager for the Maritime Environmental heavier, moves to the outer wall of the branes when the flow rate through the Protection Project. hydrocyclone while the lighter oil mi- ultrafiltration modules drops below the

MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 23 Book Reviews Cadillac of Destroyers: HMCS St. Laurent and Her Successors Reviewed by Roger Sarty Ron Barrie and Ken Macpherson, Life Extension Project of the 1980s — is Cadillac of Destroyers: HMCS St. Laurent the best I have seen in any book. and Her Successors (St. Catharines, Ont.: The bulk of the book includes photo- Vanwell Publishing Ltd, 1996), 104 graphs and histories of all 36 vessels, to- pages; numerous photographs; tables. gether with useful tables giving technical (ISBN 1-55125-036-5, $29.95) specifications and the full sequences of adillac of Destroyers is an ac- commanding officers. The histories of the count of the 36 destroyers and ships include snippets from personnel Cmodern frigates designed and who served in them and, from the engi- built in Canada since 1945. Readers of the neering point of view, mention accidents Maritime Engineering Journal will be and failures as well as the many achieve- particularly interested because the excite- ments. The photographs and their cap- ment of the story is primarily in techno- class frigates have continued technological tions are superb. Ron Barrie and Ken logical innovation — innovation in which leadership in gas turbine propulsion, engi- Macpherson have deftly selected shots the Canadian navy has led the world. neering control systems and tactical data that have good detail, capture key changes, and yet show each vessel to The sleek St. Laurent and near-sister processing and display. The production of beautiful advantage. classes that entered service in 1955 these frigates, as the text rightly declares, is through 1964 were the most advanced anti- “the largest and most complex project in Given the fact that these ships are vir- submarine destroyers of their time. This Canadian military history.” tually synonymous with the Canadian initial series of building programs had not The book begins with a tight introduc- navy as it has developed since the Sec- even been completed when the navy revo- tory chapter that is perhaps a bit too suc- ond World War, this compact, well-laid lutionized the capabilities of the destroyer cinct. In some cases equipment and out, splendidly illustrated book is a must type by integrating hangars and other systems are merely listed without descrip- for both serving and former members. equipment for handling heavy helicopters tion. That will not be a difficulty for the into the Annapolis class and similarly con- readers of this journal, but a more general verting the original St. Laurents. The audience might not fully grasp the Iroquois class of the early 1970s further achievements of the navy and industry. It developed the concept with twin hangars, Roger Sarty is Senior Historian at the must be mentioned, however, that the ac- Directorate of History and Heritage in and introduced gas turbine propulsion, count of DELEX — the navy’s Destroyer another world first. The current Halifax- Ottawa. The Maritime Defence of Canada Reviewed by Lt(N) Greg Alexander

“The Maritime Defence of Canada,” I found Sarty’s narrative very helpful Sarty documents the crushing effects Roger Sarty, The Canadian Institute of in two particular ways: first, for its abun- of peacetime on the adequate mainte- Strategic Studies, 1996, 223 pages with dant supply of details and interesting nance of maritime forces. Public opinion is biographical references and index, facts surrounding our defence heritage; seldom persuaded on the necessity of illustrated, ISBN 0-919769-63-2. and second, but more importantly, for its maintaining maritime defence readiness fresh perspective on where we are today until the time of crisis has arrived — or he Maritime Defence of Canada as a nation involved with maritime de- until it is too late. Now that we are in the is a collection of eight essays fence. As always, history provides the post-Cold War era, should we be sur- that cover the crucial years in T proper frame of reference for dealing with prised by the challenging times we face? Canada’s maritime development from the the present and facing the future. The 1890s through to 1950. Written by Direc- Read The Maritime Defence of dynamics at work today are much the torate of History and Heritage Senior His- Canada — and enjoy. same as they were a century ago as our torian Roger Sarty, this well-researched government continues to grapple with the work superbly weaves together the sur- politics, fiscal constraints and interna- rounding circumstances and the many tional relations associated with its deci- forces at work in the foundation and de- sion-making on defence issues. The velopment of maritime defence in Canada. Lt(N) Alexander is the Staff Officer for outcomes are often surprising, and not DGMEPM in NDHQ. always in line with what we think is best.

24 MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 News Briefs

“Upholding” our submarine capability ken in,” and Canada’s Acoustic Surveillance submarine capability is being renewed for A contract with MDA Halifax was roughly one-quarter the signed in February to improve the Cana- cost of designing and dian Acoustic Surveillance Work Station building brand new sub- (CASWS) fitted in the naval ocean surveil- marines. While the lance centre Trinity in Halifax. CASWS re- number of boats in- ceives beamformed time-series data from creases to four from the the Integrated Undersea Surveillance Sys- existing fleet of three tem (IUSS) arrays terminating in Argentia, Oberons, approximately Nfld., performs high-resolution narrowband the same total number of and broadband processing on the data and crew members will be displays the result via an advanced opera- employed because of the tor/machine interface. CASWS is based on reduced complement of commercial off-the-shelf technology and the Upholders (49 crew resides in a VME backplane. per boat compared to 67 A dual beamformer will be added to for each Oberon). CASWS to allow the simultaneous On April 6, 1998 the Honourable Art The Upholders are definitely more processing of two arrays. Associated with Eggleton, Minister of National Defence, spacious, too. When asked by The Ot- the new beamformer are modifications to announced that Canada will acquire four tawa Citizen to comment on the accom- the signal processing algorithms, including modern Upholder diesel-electric subma- modations, Chief Petty Officer Rouillard improved normalization for the detection of rines from the United Kingdom’s Ministry replied, “To start off with, the mattress is transients and selectable beam processing. of Defence. The decision comes none too going to be thicker and the head room is An automated cross-fixing tool will be soon. Canada’s three 1960s-vintage almost a foot more. You’ve got built-in added to the existing geographical plot to Oberon-class submarines have now ex- lockers and all these racks...They’re much assist in target localization. The exchange ceeded their expected service lifespan. nicer.” of contact data generated by CASWS will be made through a new interface to the The acquisition features new and inno- The submarines will be reactivated and Maritime Command Operational Informa- vative ways of doing business. For exam- certified “safe-to-dive” prior to their tion Network — MCOIN III. ple, the submarines will be obtained handover. The first boat is expected to through an eight-year lease-to-buy agree- arrive in Canada in the summer of 2000, This contract is partially funded by the ment. The lease payments will be bartered with the others following at six-month Chief of Research and Development, and for the ongoing use, by UK forces, of Ca- intervals. The trainers will be relocated to by the National Search and Rescue Secre- nadian training facilities in CFBs Wain- Halifax shortly thereafter. Once the modi- tariat which is interested in using CASWS wright, Suffield and Goose Bay. At the fications have been completed in Halifax, to detect and localize maritime emergencies end of the lease Canada will pay the UK these latest additions to the Canadian based on their acoustic signatures. Noises one pound sterling for full title to each fleet will enter operational service as the associated with the breakup of a ship, such submarine. quietest conventional submarines in the as an explosion, are detectable acoustically, but the existing IUSS equipment is not There is more to this acquisition than world, armed with (in our opinion) the best torpedo in the world — the Mk 48. optimized for this. It is this void in coverage just the four submarines. The Submarine and capability that CASWS will fill. — Capability Life Extension Project will de- The boats have not yet been renamed. LCdr Thomas Robb, DMSS 7-2-2, PM liver four submarines with essential Cana- All four Upholders will be given new CASWS. dian modifications, as well as a suite of names before they are recommissioned in land-based trainers, the complete techni- Canada. cal data package, an initial stock of Calling all Canadian spares, and conversion training in the The decision follows four years of of- USNPGS Monterey Grads ten difficult negotiations, and reaffirms UK, ashore and at sea for up to 360 Cana- The Canadian chapter of the alumni as- the government’s stated policy in the dian submariners. Along with the lease- sociation of the USN Postgraduate School 1994 white paper of maintaining multi- to-buy arrangement which spreads the at Monterey, CA is trying to contact all purpose, combat capable forces. The cost over eight years, savings from the serving and retired CF graduates. Please project team, which will employ up to 28 earlier-than-scheduled retirement of HMC contact LCdr Sean Midwood, DMSS 7-8/ people, is now planning for the chal- ships Provider, Nipigon, Annapolis, PM CANTASS (819) 994 -8532/fax 997-0494 lenges that will come in the implementa- Terra Nova and Gatineau will contribute ([email protected]), or Maj. Ian tion phase. — Cdr Richard Payne, to the project’s overall affordability. Glenn, DASPM/PM UASTAS (819) 997-9777 Project Manager, Submarine Capability ([email protected]). Graduates are also re- Why the Upholders? As Minister Life Extension Project, NDHQ Ottawa. Eggleton pointed out in his announce- quested to register at the NPS web site ment, these submarines are “hardly bro- http://www.nps.navy.mil/~alumni/

MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 25 News Briefs

MARE Training Awards (Photos courtesy CFNES Halifax) With the completion of every training year, MARE award boards are convened to identify those officers who have distinguished them- selves from their peers in the pursuit of engineering excellence and leadership. The following awards were made during this year’s West Coast (Jan. 21) and East Coast (Apr. 22) technical support seminars.

1996 CAE Award SLt Phil Gould receives the 1996 CAE Award during the West Coast technical 1997 Peacock Award seminar in January. The CAE Award goes SLt Phil Gould (HMCS Ottawa) receives to the candidate displaying the highest the 1997 Peacock Award before the Apr. standing in engineering excellence, 1996 Peacock Award 22 East Coast mess dinner from Dr. academics and officer-like qualities on George Xistris, director of NETE. the MARE 44B Applications Course. Lt(N) Mark Sheppard (Venture) receives Runners-up were SLt Ray Jonkers Capt(N) Dave Marshall made the the 1996 Peacock Award from company (CFNES), SLT Scott Garriot (CFB presentation on behalf of CAE’s president Randy Hammel during the Esquimalt Base Ops), and SLt Jody Hook marketing manager for marine control West Coast seminar. The award (HMCS Vancouver). (CFB Halifax photo systems, Wendy Allerton. recognizes the best overall MSE by Cpl. S. Gervais) achieving 44B qualification. Runners-up were Lt(N) Lloyd Cosby (HMCS Charlottetown) and Lt(N) Chris Edley (CFNES).

Northrop Grumman Canada Award MacDonald Dettwiler SLt Paul Mondoux (CSEAC 9701) picked up the 1997 Northrop Grumman Canada Award Award for achieving the highest standing Lt(N) Richard Rankin (HMCS Onondaga) Lockheed Martin Award of engineering excellence, both in receives the 1997 MacDonald Dettwiler SLt Rick Blythe (CFNES) receives the academics and officer-like qualities, Award from company representative 1997 Lockheed Martin Award from during the Combat System Engineering John Moloney for best overall MARE company rep Bruce Baxter for best Applications Course. Capt(N) Gerry achieving Head of Department overall CSE candidate having achieved Humby (CO FMFCS) made the qualification. Runners-up were Lt(N) 44C qualification. Runners-up included presentation on behalf of Northrop Sean O’Sullivan (RMC), Lt(N) Mark SLt Sebastien Richard (CPF Det.), SLt Grumman Canada general manager John Sheppard (Venture) and Lt(N) Norbert Gabriel Joseph (CFB Esquimalt BIS) and Murray. (CFB Halifax photo by Cpl. S. Duckworth (CFNES). (CFB Halifax photo SLt Pete Angel (NDHQ DDCEI). (CFB Gervais) by Cpl. S. Gervais) Halifax photo by Cpl. S. Gervais)

26 MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 News Briefs

CANTASS Update Progress Review Meeting no. 44 was held at Computing Devices Canada (CDC) during the first week of May. Work on CANTASS Baseline III is nearing comple- tion with the first installation slated for CFNOS this summer. The CANTASS array receiver replacement is scheduled for in- stallation in all units by the end of this year. The video graphics recorder replace- ment will be installed concurrent with the array receiver work to minimize disruption to the system and ship’s staff. HITASS Acceptance and Training: The PMO for CANTASS witnessed suc- cessful factory acceptance tests on the high-fidelity tactical acoustic sensor simulator (HITASS) at CDC in March. HITASS is a portable towed array mission simulator which enables operators to de- sign mission scenarios and execute them on any of the 14 CANTASS systems now (NETE photo by George Csukly) in service. Operator training was con- NETE Facilities Upgrade ture and the erection of a modern three- ducted in May for the East Coast users storey fireproof office and workshop The Naval Engineering Test Establish- and during the first week of June for the building. West Coast. Initial feedback on the sys- ment has supported the operation and tem was very positive. maintenance of naval equipment and sys- The inauguration of the renovated fa- tems since the building of the St. Laurent- cility took place on July 8, 1997. DND CANTASS Mission Simulator: Solid class destroyers in the early 1950s. Since guests present at the official ribbon-cut- progress continues on the CANTASS that time, NETE has been housed in an ting ceremony included Cmdre F.W. mission simulator (CMS) project. All adapted pre-1935 naval ammunition depot Gibson, DGMEM; Capt(N) S.B. Embree, hardware and software system-level tests located in Ville LaSalle, Quebec. Although DMMS; Mr. R.A. Spittall, DMSS; and have been successfully completed. Array NETE’s expertise has continually grown Capt(N) J.R. Sylvester, PM CPF, along Systems Computing Inc. is busy finishing and expanded into new areas of technol- with representatives from PWGSC, CFB off final system integration activities in ogy, the physical facility itself has re- Montreal and the City of Ville LaSalle. — preparation for factory acceptance tests mained relatively unchanged. In mid- Raeann Rose, Project Administrator, in June. Additional work will include an August 1995, planning began for the re- NETE. interface for a Sony DIR-1000 digital tape placement of the deteriorated roof struc- recorder to provide a common media stor- age device for transferring acoustic infor- mation between shore- and sea-based Update: Maritime Coastal Defence Vessel units. Preliminary draft documentation on HMCS Saskatoon (LCdr Mark Richardson, commanding) was delivered to the Com- CMS is available on the CANTASS DND mander, Maritime Operations Group 5 on May 27. Saskatoon is the tenth of 12 vessels internal web site: http://131.134.143.230/ to be furnished to the Canadian navy under the MCDV Project. Significantly, the ship dgmepm/dgmepm/dmss/dmss7. — was accepted with the smallest number of outstanding CF 1148 (Report of Inspection) LCdr Sean Midwood, Project Manager items so far in the delivery schedule. The last two MCDVs are not far behind. HMCS CANTASS, DMSS 7-8. Brandon is scheduled for delivery during the first week of September, while HMCS Summerside is expected by year’s end. — Cdr Dan Lorimer, Project Manager MCDV, Ottawa. Maritime Engineering Journal Objectives • To promote professionalism among • To present practical maritime engi- • To provide announcements of pro- maritime engineers and technicians. neering articles. grams concerning maritime engineering personnel. • To provide an open forum where • To present historical perspectives on topics of interest to the maritime engi- current programs, situations and events. • To provide personnel news not neering community can be presented covered by official publications. and discussed, even if they might be controversial.

MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 27 News Briefs

NETE awarded ISO 9001:94 certification

After 18 months of preparation, NETE clients continue to receive high-quality project raised by DMMS 2, and was obtained its ISO 9001:1994 quality system test and evaluation engineering services, spearheaded by an internal six-member registration on Feb. 6, 1998. NETE already and would facilitate examination of the quality engineering team assisted by con- had a well-developed set of individual quality system by external auditors. sultants from Groupe Conseil PENTACLE guidelines and standard operating proce- Inc. In consultation with practically all The effort to demonstrate the conform- dures in place, but it was felt that a more NETE personnel, the quality engineering ance of NETE’s engineering test and structured and comprehensive system team spent 12 months drafting work pro- evaluation services to the ISO standard would bring consistency to its opera- cedures for all essential elements of was performed under the auspices of a tions. The upgrade would ensure that NETE’s operations. Training in the new standards and trial implementations com- menced in July 1997, after which the com- plete quality system was subjected to a thorough precertification audit by a com- mittee consisting of personnel from CFQAR, Groupe Conseil PENTACLE Inc. and QETE. Formal auditing of the system was conducted in mid-December by Intertek Testing Services (formerly Warnock Hersey Ltd.). Adherence to ISO 9000 standards is recognized as an authoritative indicator of a distinctive competency, professionalism and level of quality in the workplace. For this reason, the Naval Engineering Test Establishment is justifiably proud to fol- low FMFCS as only the second DND unit to have achieved ISO 9000 certification. — Claudine Leblanc, Project Leader, NETE.

Cmdre J.R. Sylvester, DGMEPM, presents NETE’s Claudine Leblanc (above right) with the test establishment’s upgraded ISO certification. At left, the commodore unfurls the banner with NETE director Dr. George Xistris. (NETE photos by George Csukly)

28 MARITIME ENGINEERING JOURNAL JUNE 1998 JUNE 1998 CNTHA News — June 1998

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • CANADIAN NAVAL TECHNICAL HIS• TORY ASSOCIATION • • • • • • • • • • • Greetings to Readers• of the • • • • • Maritime Engineering• Journal • • • • • few years ago a handful of enthusiasts gathered• to discuss how they might pull Inside this issue: • • • Atogether the information required to tell• the story of the technical developments • of our naval service. They began by sending letters• to a few hundred retired personnel, Canada’s First Nuclear • seeking their support and direct input. Happily,• over forty respondents provided per- • • Propulsion Option ...... 2 • sonal anecdotes, ranging from one-page letters •to career reminiscences worthy of pub- • lication in their own right. Many more people sent• in notes, memos and old papers they A CNTHA Pilot Project ...... 3 • thought might be of interest. • • • Letters...... 3 • Encouraged by this early success the founders• of this movement expanded and for- • • The Collection...... 3 • malized their committee to become what is known• today as the Canadian Naval Tech- • nical History Association. In the summer of 1996• the CNTHA produced its first newsletter Help Wanted: • as a method of establishing two-way communication• (to solicit information from the • • Sonar History ...... 4 • community and to feed back some snippets in• return). To date, the CNTHA has pro- • duced four newsletters which, along with complimentary• copies of the Maritime Engi- • • • neering Journal, have been sent to our nearly 300• members under the auspices of the • Directorate of History and Heritage and our strategic• partner, DGMEPM. As you can • see, our newsletter is now happily situated in the• centre of the Journal, a position we CNTHA Chairman • • RAdm (ret’d) M.T. Saker • hope to occupy for many years to come. However,• that depends entirely on the continu- • ing support of contributors. • DHH Liaison • • Roger Sarty • To all our new readers, we hope you find our• endeavour interesting and we look for- • ward to hearing from you. • Secretary • • Gabrielle Nishiguchi (DHH) • • Mike Saker • • Executive Director • • LCdr (Ret’d) Phil R. Munro • • • • Research Director • • Dr. Hal W. Smith • • • About the CNTHA • DGMEPM Liaison • • Mr. R.A. Spittall • he Canadian Naval Technical History• Association is a volunteer organi- • • Maritime Engineering Journal Liaison • Tzation working in support of the Directorate• of History and Heritage (DHH) Brian McCullough • effort to preserve our country’s naval technical• history. Interested persons may • become members of the CNTHA by contacting• DHH. Newsletter Editors • • Mike Saker and Pat Barnhouse • A prime purpose of the CNTHA is to make• its information available to research- • • Newsletter Layout & Design • ers and casual readers alike. So how can you• get to read some of it? For the mo- Brightstar Communications, • ment there is only one copy of the Collection,• situated at the Directorate of History Kanata, Ont. • and Heritage located at 2429 Holly Lane (near• the intersection of Heron and • • CNTHA News is the unofficial newsletter of the • Walkley Roads) in Ottawa. DHH is open to the• public every Tuesday and Wednes- Canadian Naval Technical History Association, • day 8:30-4:30. Staff is on hand to retrieve the• information you request and to help published by the Director of History and Herit- • in any way. Photocopy facilities are available• on a self-serve basis. Access to the age, NDHQ Ottawa, K1A 0K2, telephone (613) • • 998-7045, fax 990-8579. Views expressed are • building requires a visitor’s pass, easily obtained• from the commissionaire at the • front door. Copies of the index to the Collection• may be obtained by writing to those of the writers and do not necessarily re- • • flect official DND opinion or policy. The editor • DHH. • reserves the right to edit or reject any editorial • • material. • Drop by. Give us a look. • • • Preserving Canada’s Naval Technical Heritage 1 CNTHA News — June 1998 Canada’s First Nuclear Propulsion Option • • he estimable Constructor • with it” as the team’s leader. However, as • not helped by a visit in the fall of 1959 by TCommodore R. Baker, on loan to • a gentle acknowledgment that I knew lit- • the RN’s Flag Officer Submarines who, • • the RCN from the Royal Corps of Naval • tle about submarines and even less about • perhaps with a view to selling British con- Constructors as Naval Constructor-in- • nuclear propulsion, I was sent to the UK • ventional submarines, spoke in very fa- Chief (1948-56) was inclined to assert to • to visit facilities and to attend the Senior • vourable terms of their continuing • • those in Operations that, “It’s not so much • Technical Executives Course at Harwell. • usefulness. This presumably contributed what you want as what we, in Technical • So in mid-October 1958 the work of the • to an aide memoire to CNS in November Services, are able to provide.” This exhor- • (very technical) NSST began in earnest • 1959 which reviewed the pros and cons • • tation was not always well received and • with the intent to finish in June 1959. • of conventional and nuclear submarines. it is interesting to see how it worked out • • It concluded: • To say the least, we got off to a shaky • in the case of an early Canadian nuclear • start. For some time we were unable to • Nuclear submarines are preferred propulsion option. • contact the USN until a high-level meet- • but as long as cost is the main con- • • Nuclear propulsion was an enthusiasm • ing developed a “Means & Extent” agree- • sideration, then the Service should of RAdm Brian Spencer (Chief of Naval • ment that would enable us to discuss • be equipped with conventional sub- Technical Services, 1958-1961). He had • relevant nuclear propulsion topics with • marines of proven US or UK design • • begun his naval service with the RN in (it • the appropriate authorities. Meanwhile, • constructed on the basis of equal is believed) the coal-fired Emperor of • we visited U.S. shipyards involved in sub- • priority with surface vessels of the • • India and hankered after a career that • marine construction and canvassed pro- • planned replacement program. would span the realm of fuel from coal to • posals from shipyards and machinery • There appeared to be a turning point nuclear power. Serving first as Engineer- • power companies in Canada, all of whom • • • in March 1960 when the RCN reiterated in-Chief (1955-57) he tried to persuade • were anxious to be considered. In all of • to Cabinet Defence Committee its desire the Naval Board of the desirability of • this period I don’t recall that we had any • to introduce its own submarine service, studying nuclear propulsion. Early in • contact with Operations branches — we • • • but noted that a unit cost of $65M “placed 1957 the Admiralty sought the RCN’s in- • had more or less shunted Assistant Chief • nuclear submarines beyond our reach terest for a joint team to work at the UK • of Naval Staff (Plans) aside. Understand- • • • without a substantial increase in the Na- Atomic Energy establishment in Harwell. • ably VCNS demanded that we produce an • val budget.” Not surprisingly, Cabinet It seemed that a plant for a fast tanker • interim report and that “ACNS(P) con- • Defence Committee accepted all this and would be appropriate to consider and by • tinue to co-ordinate the whole business.” • • • so began the lengthy and tortuous delib- year end the team was in place. • Alas, we took this rather lightly, particu- • erations that led, in 1963, to the acquisi- Now indeed the operators were heard • larly since there had been no evidence of • tion of three Oberon-class submarines. • any “co-ordination” from ACNS(P). • from, with regard to a need for Canadian • • On reflection it does not seem to me submarines and with the surprising obser- • At any event, we proceeded with the • • • that we in Technical Services were as ju- vation (no technical opinion having been • work and produced our lengthy report • dicious as we might have been. Certainly sought) that the submarines could be built • (nearly 200 pages) by end-June 1959. As • we worried away more or less success- in Canada. Needless to say, Spencer allied • well, we prepared two supplementary re- • • • fully at a range of technical, logistic and himself with these aspirations, and by • ports dealing with the selection of ship- • financial problems and, in so doing, be- early 1958 the Naval Board generally • builders and machinery contractors. • • • came submarine “experts” in a field that agreed to the requirement for nuclear pro- • Toward the end of July I made a report to • was not particularly crowded with rel- pelled submarines in the RCN, and to • Naval Board in which I reiterated our cost • evant talent. But we ought to have had study the feasibility of manufacturing • estimate of $65M per boat, with an ongo- • • • continuing access to operational experi- nuclear plants and submarine hulls in • ing annual program expenditure of about • ence relating preferably to underwater Canada. • $50M and more than $25M for logistic • vehicles. Probably this would not have • and training facilities. • By the fall of 1958 Spencer had be- • • made any difference to the final decision, come CNTS, and a Nuclear Submarine • Thus, in short, the RCN had indicated • but it might have given the team rather • • Survey Team (NSST) had been set up. Its • an interest in nuclear propulsion, the best • more legitimacy in the eyes of Naval membership included: Cdr(E) (later • opportunity being in submarines. The • Board. However, it was all very broaden- VAdm) R.St.G. Stephens, Cdr(L) (later • NSST had taken a year to study the mat- • ing, and since the Oberons are still in serv- • • RAdm) W.B. Christie, LCdr(L) C.R. • ter and concluded that building nuclear- • ice today the outcome was a good deal Nixon (later DM/DND), Const. LCdr • powered submarines in Canada was • better than we might have anticipated — • • J.M. Ashfield and Lt(E) (later Capt) S.E. • feasible but expensive. Naval Board’s • four decades ago. Hopkins. As well we were later joined by • reception, though cordial and complimen- • S. Mathwin Davis Phd.D; Rear CNTS’s first woman officer, Lt(W) R. • tary, was non-committal and they simply • • • Admiral (Ret’d) Dwyer, and by Mr. W. Mayo from Dept. • presented a submission to the Chiefs of • of Defence Production. • Staff Committee urging approval in prin- • • ciple. • As for my own involvement I was an • • [Who were the Canadians, if any, who unknown quantity to Spencer, but as his • Undoubtedly the cost implications • joined the team at Harwell? — Editor.] • • deputy it was largely left to me to “get on • were very demanding, but a decision was • 2 Preserving Canada’s Naval Technical Heritage CNTHA News — June 1998 A CNTHA Pilot Project • • he CNTHA has begun to develop • the projects, the introduction of major • Tan extensive collection of docu- • technical innovations, the key players, • ments, letters and anecdotes contributed • the organizations involved, the introduc- • Letters • • by individuals in response to our request • tion of support and training facilities, and • for ideas and information. Our curator, Phil • changes to the Supply system, etc. • hank you for the invitation to sit • • in on your meeting of Feb. 18. The Munro, has done a terrific job of sorting The third level activity will involve the T • • venue in the Bytown Naval Officers Mess and cataloguing the information. While • formation of a focus group to take a seg- • and the discussions were reminiscent of the documents have highlighted many • ment of the timeline, correct it, fill in miss- • • • the many meetings I attended there as Sec- significant decisions, events and projects ing issues and key decisions, identify • • retary to the Canadian Naval Aviation that have affected engineering and tech- • sources of information and solicit coor- • • Technical History (CNATH) Project from nical developments in our navy since • dinators to gather the data. Winding up • • 1992-96. World War II, they also show that there • this pilot project will be the evaluation • are many gaps in our data base and that • • • of the process and its application to the • I was involved with the Naval Aviation we have really only collected a very small • remainder of the CNTHA project. • Technical History Project in soliciting, col- portion of the information needed to ac- lecting and processing material from con- • The success of the project depends on • curately and justly portray our naval tech- • • tributors; coordinating material for • people like you. The CNTHA must cap- • nical history. processing as a manuscript; working with • ture the experiences of those of all ranks • • • a publisher and printer; and marketing, Time is taking its toll of those who led who have served and who are serving. It • • selling, and delivering our final product us through World War II and set the stage • may be our so-called Canadian psyche, • “Certified Serviceable — The Technical for the postwar Canadian design and de- • or just the innate modesty of naval per- • • • Story of Canadian Naval Aviation.” It is velopment of naval vessels. Recording sons, but people seem to be judging their • • with this background that I make the com- their recollections is a high priority. We • own roles as insignificant. “I was just • must accelerate the information collection • • ments below. • part of the team,” they say, yet when they • process, which requires that the CNTHA • relate their experiences it is very clear that • The time frames of the two projects are become more proactive. • • • their contributions were far from insignifi- • different. The aviation history dealt basi- Our first task is to develop a timeline • cant (even though they arose during what • cally with a 25-year period, late WW II from 1945 to the present which correlates • some might have regarded as routine en- • to unification. The CNTHA must cover • • major policy decisions, ship design and • gineering and technical work). These • from WWII to the present, and hopefully acquisition programs, innovative system/ • memories are critical to identifying the • be the genesis and catalyst for recording • • and archiving developments as they oc- equipment developments, and the people • people who participated and to whom • who participated. A pilot project will then • credit must be given. This includes our • cur rather than having to retrieve material examine a segment of the timeline, concen- • uniformed and DND civilian personnel, • from ever fading memories. • • trating on one discipline, e.g. combat sys- • as well as our other government depart- • The aviation history was fortunate to tems. Data will be gathered and • ment and industrial counterparts. • have the Canadian Naval Air Group, with catalogued, after which the process will • • • All information is valuable. When our • chapters across Canada, as a network be assessed and amended as necessary • team asks you about projects, events and • from which to solicit material and pur- to drive the collection of outstanding his- • • • people, please reach back into your • chase the final product. Your project torical information. • memory and help as much as you can. Let • seems to be even more fortunate, as in Activities will take place on three lev- • the CNTHA judge where it fits into the • addition to retired members you have cur- • • els, with much of the work going on in par- • overall picture. In the meantime, your let- • rently serving personnel who have be- allel. The first level encompasses the • ters, anecdotes and recollections are still • come involved. In addition, they can • • perhaps learn from the past. While new development of a macro timeline of the • much-needed and will be most welcome. • major ship design, development, acquisi- • Indeed, they are key to helping us flesh • technologies are available and continue tion and update projects since WW II. The • out the timeline and chart our course. • to develop, many of the problems of re- • • sources and politics will remain. How second level activity will expand on this, • Jim Dean • overlaying such aspects as the phases of • • these were overcome in the past by de- • • termination and ingenuity may well pro- • • • • vide valuable lessons. We’d love to hear from• you… • The availability in archives of the ma- • • If you have information, documents or• questions you’d like to pass along to the • terial which you compile will enable re- • • searchers to produce papers for your and Canadian Naval Technical History Association,• please contact: • • • other learned journals and symposiums, Roger Sarty, Senior Historian, • • articles for newsletters and content for Directorate of History and Heritage, NDHQ,• MGen George R. Pearkes Bldg., • training modules. It will provide data Ottawa, Canada K1A 0K2 • • • • which could be published in book form of Tel.: (613) 998-7045/Fax: (613) 990-8579• • specific endeavors, or broad histories of We look forward to hearing from you.• • • • (Cont’d) Preserving Canada’s Naval Technical Heritage 3 CNTHA News — June 1998 Letters (cont’d) • • various periods if someone wished to do • Those who become involved feel a well- • close to the inside story. As I had a keen so at a future date. • deserved sense of achievement. • interest in sports, I played on the ship’s • • The Naval Aviation History Project Yours aye, fastball team and got to know quite a few • • of the men. Often over a beer after the found that anecdotal material (from not • G.S. (Gord) Moyer • only naval and civilian technical officers, • • game we would talk about life in the Navy • LCol (ret’d) (former (E)(AE); 140-41; • of those times and their feelings about the but from the chiefs, petty officers and • AERE/MARE) • other ratings who had to “make it work”) • • future shape of the service and their ideas • • about how it should go. One of my retire- can add a lot of background to the more • [Editor’s Note: Committee meetings are • formal histories and papers. These inputs • open to anyone who wishes to attend. • ment occupations has been to ‘write up’ • Call our secretary at DHH to determine • my recollections of events in my life that should be sought, as many did not always • • see things the way the record might indi- • when the next one is scheduled.] • made my career so fascinating and re- cate. • • warding; I am enclosing a few samples • • which pertain to that period. If you find Soliciting and then receiving inputs • (To LCdr Richard Gimblett) • them helpful I would be pleased to dredge from volunteers can be a very long proc- • • • read with pleasure that you have • up some more. I think I might even re- ess. Commitments are always made with • • count the features of the very day of the good intentions, however in retirement • Ibeen assigned the task you describe • • in the CNTHA News of December 1997. I • mutiny. It was a memorable incident! there always seems to be more to be done • • than when one was working, and targets • may be able to help you in connection • I look forward to hearing from you in slip to the right faster than an inter-depart- • with the “lost years.” I was on the staff of • due course. mental government project. I got the feel- • the Manager Electrical Engineering HMC • Sincerely, • Dockyard, Esquimalt from 1946 to 1948 • ing there was a determined perseverance • • Melvin T. Gardner amongst your team that will result in the • and thence to the Crescent as Electrical • • Officer and made voyage to China and • 7 Rue de la Sapinière success of the CNTHA Project. Might • • 1340 Ottignies, Belgium even submit a bit myself! • back in 1949. I was responsible for pre- • • serving the electrical gear in Crusader • Email: [email protected] In a recent meeting with Rolfe Monteith • • • when she was paid off into the reserve fleet • I learned that he plans a cross Canada tour • and I have a few anecdotes about that ex- • in September. All those of his era who • ercise. • have not contributed as yet should be • • • The China cruise was one of the high- • Sonar History: forewarned to do so, or have a valid ex- • • planation ready. • lights of my early career; the way out and • Help Wanted • the way back; the mutiny in Nanking and • May the CNTHA Project exceed the • as one of those ordered to appear before • ’m currently working on the history Naval Aviation Technical History Project. • • • the Mainguy Commission I was pretty • Iof towed sonar 1949-64. The main • • sources will be material in the National • • • • Archives, and there is some valuable ma- • • terial in the CNTHA collection already. • • However, I’d like to hear from anyone with The Collection • • • • sea experience with AN/SQS-504, particu- he collection now stands at 335 items,• the most significant of the additions • larly during its development and evalua- • • tion in Crusader 1955-60, in Crescent after Tbeing a major contribution from Jerry• Proc. Jerry is a volunteer in the Haida • preservation group, and has made extensive• research into the ship’s radar, asdic, • 1960, and in the Improved St. Laurent IFF and, most importantly, communications• systems. Moreover, he has expanded • class, Annapolis and Nipigon after 1963. • • the research into general shipboard fittings• and operations both past and present. • I’d also like to hear from anyone who The result is a splendid compilation of naval• communications history. It is available • worked with the late Colin diCenzo, the • • on the Internet under: http://www3.sympatico.ca/hrc/haida• and subpages. • NDHQ project officer during the produc- Another item of interest is the Engineering• Officer’s report of the grounding of • tion of SQS-504 by EMI-Cossor, 1957 on- • • HMCS Huron, 13 July 1953 in Korean waters.• This report describes the efforts to • ward. All contributions are welcome, from refloat and effect damage control. It differs• in some respects from the story in Thun- • a couple of paragraphs to a brief essay. • • (Similar information on SQS-505 will also der in The Morning Calm, a book about Canadian• Naval Operations in the Korean • theatre. • • be needed later, so feel free to send notes on that as well.) Please send your input Any contributions from a single paragraph• to a book can be sent to me directly: • • • to Phil Munro so that it can be acknowl- • • • by mail: 673 Farmington Ave., Ottawa,• Ont., K1V 7H4 • edged and indexed as part of the Collec- • by fax: (613) 738-3894 • • tion, but get in touch with me directly at • • (250) 595-1867 if you have questions. • by E-mail [email protected] .ca• • • • Hal Smith • Phil Munro • • • Sonar Coordinator 4 Preserving Canada’s Naval Technical Heritage