The Skandi Bergen is an offshore Multi Purpose Support Vessel equipped with a 140 tonne crane, 7.2mx7.2m moon pool, helicopter landing deck, accommodation for 100 personnel and an open deck area of 1,100 m2.
At just under 106m long, 21m beam and with a draught of 6.6m she has a gross tonnage of 6,600 tonnes.
Skandi Bergen
Australian Customs Vessel Ocean Protector
All very interesting but why is this on Think Defence?
The Skandi Bergen is now the property of the Royal Australian Navy.
19 March 2012
Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced that the Government had agreed to purchase the Offshore Support Vessel MSV Skandi Bergen.
The Skandi Bergen will add to the Royal Australian Navy’s current amphibious ships, HMAS Choules and HMAS Tobruk. The 6,500 tonne ship is 105m long and 21m wide. It has accommodation for up to 100 people, more than 1000 metres of deck area, and a helipad.
The purchase of the Skandi Bergen – at a cost of less than $130 million – will ensure that Defence has the humanitarian and disaster relief capability required between now and the arrival of the two new Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) ships in the middle of the decade.
It will primarily be used to transport troops and supplies in support of humanitarian and disaster relief operations domestically and in the region.
The purchase of this vessel will also provide a long term capability for Customs and Border Protection.
After Defence introduces the LHDs into service, the vessel will be transferred to Customs and Border Protection.
The Skandi Bergen will be able to undertake patrols in the Southern Ocean providing surveillance, detection and apprehension of any vessels operating illegally. The vessel is able to operate in sub-Antarctic weather conditions.
The commercial off-the-shelf vessel will require minimal modifications and will enter into service in the middle of the year and will be operated under a civilian crewing arrangement.
The Skandi Bergen is the sister ship of the ACV Ocean Protector, currently operated by Customs and Border Protection.
The Skandi Bergen will join the RAN’s rapidly growing amphibious capability, supplemented by the surplus HMS Largs Bay.
When the new Canberra class LHD are introduced into service the Skandi Bergen will join her sister ship, the ACV Ocean Protector, in service with the Customs and Border Protection.
At less than $130 million AUD or £87m pounds she is very good value for money.
With lots of good news coming from the South Atlantic courtesy of HMS Protector, another offshore support vessel derivative is it time to dust off the plans for SIMSS?
Shows what having potential threats to national security on the doorstep does for defence thinking.
Good price too.
Very interesting. Support to the amphib force AND useful for maritime security operations. I think your SIMMS concept just got a boost TD.
and I thought the army had brought themselves a new sort of rucksack…
The biggest question that strikes me is regarding an aircraft hangar. If the ship is deploying away for some months with a helicopter, then there’s a need to do quite some maintenance. How about grafting a big hangar onto one of the Bays for a new HMS Unicorn?
Hannay,
Wonder if it’s possible to graft the “helicopter shelter” Bays have used on WINDIES station.
X,
Yup.
Boss,
Effing brilliant. Drive a bargain and you might gwt the lot for £275m. FFBNW Bofors 57mm in A position and MSI SIGMA up there aft of the bridge. No guns on the Antarctic ship, guns on FI guardhsip, one home in dock. Add high-pressure firefighting (also for crowd control) and I could live without a frigate on FI guard after all — handles all manner of disobedience at sea and makes ARA warships look like bullies. I see a new Castle class in the offing.
@ Hannay re Unicorn
The way things are going the new PoW could be a new Unicorn or Triumph………
Hannay, back pack and hanger, you beat me to it on both accounts!
Also, having a landing pad that far up can only cause a seriously rolling flight deck even in moderate seas. The lower the flight deck is to the keel, the less the roll.
HMS Protector was a similar design, but when the RN took it over they shifted the helipad to the stern.
x,
Courage, chum. Three hundred years to build a tradition and all that. We’ll make something work with them yet and not just with 12 jets. But a new Unicorn that does *not* displace 65k t would be good fun.
Ace,
I suspect that’s exactly what the RN would go for, particularly since shooting even a little RFA-issue Oerlikon through that lot as a guardship would be, shall we say, unpleasant….
@ Jackstaff
Well I suppose some enterprising soul will come up with rules for mega-super-deck-hockey.
Forgive my ignorance, but a couple of questions:
What is the crane useful for?
Is the helicopter deck not going to be unusable in lumpy seas? Seems a bit high above the CofG to me, particularly for a boat with a draught of only 6.6m. If there’s no use for a crane, why not move the HLS backwards and downwards to a more traditional position?
And what on earth is a “moon pool”? I treated the Mrs and I to a holiday in Kenya at a place that had an “Infinity Pool”, but I didn’t expect such hedonistic luxury to turn up in a military vessel. I’m with Hannay on this – here was me tuning in to read an exciting article on personal load carrying equipment, and I get an odd-shaped Australian ship wearing a helicopter quiff and some serious profligacy on the crew entertainment.
I have just Wiki’d moon pools. As far as I can work out, a means for the crew to have a bit of a swim around without diving over the side.
Just for once I’d seen the story elsewhere before it appeared here. Is TD slacking off?
Some interesting Australian defence stuff (Gareth can add them to his voluminous collection) at http://www.aspi.org.au
I’ve read a few and these were interesting:
“Pay Your Money & Take Your Pick: Defence Spending Choices for Australia”
“Special Report Issue 42 – Three views of risk: Selecting and acquiring military equipment”
“Strategic Insights 48 – How to buy a submarine: Defining and building Australia’s future fleet” (All of the submarine papers look to be relevant to the debate about Astutes and successors)
“Strategic Insights 45 – Strategic choices: Defending Australia in the 21st century”
And, my favourite so far “Special Report Issue 25 – We’ll have six of them and four of those: Off-the-shelf procurement and its strategic implications”
James…I used to work on that vessel its really nice.
This is vessel designed for oil field work.. The crane is mainly used for lowering used item subsea (to the sea bed.) And the moon pool is an opening in the ship through which you can lower items.
A moon pool originated in the oil industry as a way of providing a somewhat sheltered way of getting things into and out of the water. ROV’s for example.
TD, complements on your fast pickup.
The Australian Customs Service has leased a series of vessels over the last few year as unauthorised fishing in Antartic waters has become a bigger problem. This looks like a good solution for all. The problem with leasing is you generally cannot do major modification unless you are prepared to put humpty back together at the end of the lease. Owning something is entirely different.
I agree about the Helly pad upfront. I also don’t think its a good idea operating a £27 million helicopter with out a hanger in the S Atlantic. However other than that it seems ideal. Given the fact one of these cost less thna a Typhoon it really makes me wonder what we could have done. I think instead of spending around £1.8 bn on 8 of the new MMCM vessels we could buy a fleet of 18 of these to supplement the rest of the navy.
James – On moon pool think of the movie Abyss the moon pool is the place where they bring subs in and out of the water. Great for under water knife fighters.
Welcome to TD James
All, STX have just won another order for a well equipped offshore support vessel
http://gcaptain.com/adds-backlog-sends-newbuild-order/
£72m
12 of these plus the same amount again for ‘systems’ and still less than the budget for replacing the survey and MCM fleet
Hi Martin,
I agree, this ” I think instead of spending around £1.8 bn on 8 of the new MMCM vessels we could buy a fleet of 18 of these to supplement the rest of the navy.” Meter for meter the cost is the same as for the BAM design (but tonnage is 2.5 times)
- now that the Americans UOR’ed the same mine hunting kit the RN has been using for ages, they call them robots…so moon pools, mine-hunting robots (all in the spec)
The large crane will be useful for lifting LCM 8 and other boats for disaster relief.
The flight deck is in the normal position for offshore sector vessels. No aircraft will be permanently embarked, strictly visitors since there is no hangar. If movement in bad weather precludes landing, any visiting aircraft can still winch and HIFR.
RE: TD’s STX link
- they are the biggest builder of OPVs globally, so should not have problems deriving one (cum mine hunter)from a supply vessel hull
And to speed up it’s introduction why not man it with RNR on FTRS terms – straight to Aberdeen/Invergordon/Peterhead/Montrose/Leith/etc and you should find a (British) crew well used to operating said type of vessel?
In fact base one in the north of Scotland and it could do standby rescue tug/Coastgaurd cover too! And BUTEC range support. And Hebrides range too. And help out NLHB with navigation and met buoy deployments.
Baldrick, stop coming around here talking common sense, it won’t get you anywhere you know
Has anyone proved over the horizon mcm work yet? Im all for cheap ships to release the mcm fleet but they still have to work and these have a draft nearly 3x that of the mcm. The us have spent a fortune so far unsuccessfully attempting to get a system on to LCS.
These are nice an all but a hms Clyde modified river with a 57mm cannon would be my cheap choice.
@ Mark
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Class_box_Seehund_class_TROIKA_Plus
OSV have their uses, but it is good not to get too carried away. Hull utility only goes so far. Utility is secondary to designed purpose. I would be laughed at here if I suggested using an AS90 as a tank just because it has a big gun, tracks, and turret or I suggested using a G6 to replace Typhoon. Still it is awesome buy for the Ozzies.
“Some interesting Australian defence stuff (Gareth can add them to his voluminous collection) ” – Linky Goodness!
*best Johnny Five impression* “Iiiinnnffffoooo!”
http://gcaptain.com/nato-considers-active-protection-of-offshore-assets/?74
- a role for this type of vessel/TD’s SIMMS?
my money is still on the ulstein SX119 for this role:
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCgQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ulstein.com%2Fkunder%2Fulstein%2Fmm.nsf%2Flupgraphics%2FSX119.pdf%2F%24file%2FSX119.pdf&ei=uZxoT-mDGYXf8AOv8cCoCQ&usg=AFQjCNEG-CaJBjMLpEzU-3DD3ZKR3OBU9g&sig2=kAqJaCC_jGfswoluAYM3uw
X, “I would be laughed at here if I suggested using an AS90 as a tank just because it has a big gun, tracks, and turret.”
Not by me you wouldn’t, out of the box thinking (apologies for the bullshit bingo cliche) is what defence always needs. Its an interesting point, could an SPG and an MBT be married into the same system/chassis?
I’m sure its a comment that should be on the ‘Do we still need a 60 tonne MBT thread’ but while we’re on the subject….
2000t for good seakeeping
21kt so it can get a shuffle on
215m sq container space
heli-deck in a sensible place
comes with hanger
draught of 6.0m (max)
put a couple of 30mm automated guns on it, and perhaps a RAM launcher and we have a winner!
oh yes, and it appears to come with a dock and loads of boat davits!
Baldrick,
It is indeed a cunning plan. And in home waters at least I’d like to see the RNR more involved. It was their role for a long time and in this period of slimming at all costs (God rot all slimmers as Horace Rumpole once said) you’d create a positive feedback in the maritime community using them this way.
JBT,
I like that design as well, and suspect a shared build contract with the Norse neighbours would not be too hard to knock together. 57mm up front, SIGMA a little abaft where there’s some height and you’re on to concentrating on mission gear. Also has the virtue (unlike the Holland class, as remaarked on over at Sir H’s place) of not looking too fighty for its own good.
X,
I agree that design matters, and a place may remain (despite attempts to reduce hull types) for classical, small-displacement minehunters. But in a combination role, as UUVs come along in development (in which I have actually a bit more faith than UAVs because of the operating environment and the fact we’ve been at it longer below waterline) to have a workhorse sloop/MCM mothership class. Wouldn’t sell or scrap the Hunts yet but this could be useful in its own broader but slightly different niche (as an alternative to a BAE or BMT design, much as I swear by Venator, that looks fighty enough for MoD to **** about with the design and jack up costs.)
Sorry TD!
But ……
….. how about an AS90/MLRS/BigNastyTubeThing on the deck? Can stuff be driven onto it from the dockside via a ramp or could the crane just lift them on?
Oh and Angus,
Glad you’ve found, and like, aspi. Its good reading, innit? I particularly like their papers on future spending on security. I’ve read the RUSI, American, and Canadian equivalents and theirs is better on every point of detail and many in terms of philosophy (the American paper on “Small Wars 2.0″ is their only real rival and it doesn’t measure up once you get beyond concept to comparative budget design.) Well done your countrymen, Aussie Johnno.
Baldrick,
As of now, all off-resevation suggestions for NGS here at ThinkDefence should be labeled BNTTs (Big Nasty Tube Things.) Rock on. Won’t work in this case bc of stabilisation issues but, hey, if the Swedes can bodge AMOS onto a modified CB90, put turrets fore and aft and you might be on to something.
@ Ace
Just to be clear I was saying different functions sometimes result in forms that look ostensibly to the layman look the same.
@ Jackstaff
Yep. Perhaps the way we do things (MCM) is because that is the way it has “always” been done? Probably! I am onboard with remotely controlled vessels. I just think the infrastructure to do MCM is a bit beyond throwing a couple of TEUs onto the quarterdeck.
X,
To some degree, maybe, but (and I think this puts us more in agreement than not) this is a case where there are real differences in environment and topography/sonography between sweeping at sea or even along the roads into a given patch of coastal water, and that coastal water itself. I see no practical reason why a modern line-of-battle destroyer (and by that I mean a warship with at least some really substantive capacity to take whatever the enemy dishes out) can’t have a TAS trailing off the back. But there are some meaningful differences between deep- and shallow-water MCM or hydrography. The Ulstein’s likely better at the former, plus patrol sloop/light relief work duties.
To clarify: “to some degree” is about turning it over to UUVs. But one of the good things about the Ulsteins’ design is you can support a bit of infrastrcture when needed: another reason if one was needed to rebuild RNR mine warfare training, so you can ship them and their kit out when needed while the remaining regulars and a clutch of Hunts tackle things like sweeping before beacheads or other terrifying jobs like that.
“heli-deck in a sensible place” (JDBTx)
…whaaaa??? I’m no expert at all, beyond the O level physics, but is it not going to get a bit problematic with a 10 tonne helicopter parked up that high in lumpy seas? I’m not sure the budget people are going to like the news of yet another £20M helicopter dumped in the drink and now parked up in Davy Jones’ Locker because it got a bit rolly and the restraining shackles broke.
Plus, the boat looks like Jedward. Maybe that’s a positive in some parts of the RN, but it does look very odd.
JDBTx is proposing a different ship, a green one that doesn’t look like Jedward. Chick the link a few comments higher up.
James,
Tsk, tsk
But I think the helideck Jedi was referencing is on the Ulstein design he hotlinked, rather than the Skandi Not-a-Rucksack. I’ve had good explanations from folk who worked up in those waters (echoed in the thread by Anixtu) about why this is considered all right, but it’s always looked more Heath Robinson than I’d want to try. Let the pilots carry on bragging down the local in Inverness, they’re welcome to it doing touch and go on those.
Jackstaff,
thanks for that. Bit of an ND and not reading JDBTx comment properly.
But you are really going to have to learn the difference between a rucksack (of German derivation) and a bergen (of Norwegian derivation). I could really go on for hours about loading on hips or shoulders or both, CG, body posture, intended purpose. However, I read in the Torygraph today about the new design of the naval uniform which includes such horrors as “non-operational” laces in the boots, being “informed by” USN practice, and baseball caps for officers. Velcro as well, with is seriously non-tactical and immediately replaced by proper buttons on combat soldiers’ smocks (perhaps the RN may not miss that improvement, what with being stuck on a large floaty thing that makes a bit of a noise that would probably mask a velcro cuff being adjusted). It leads me to conclude that the Senior Service has really lost its’ way, and thus would not appreciate the finer details of personal load carriage.
No, what you want is a sailor in some ridiculously bell-bottomed trousers and a pork pie hat, some odd traditions about the napkin on the back of the shoulders, the campest drill routine ever, and a total failure to salute properly. You know where you are then.
Says man who wears red trousers……
I was just glad RN didn’t go for blue pixelated camouflage or one piece overall.
Is this not just a modern RFA Dilligence ?
http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/The-Fleet/Royal-Fleet-Auxiliary/Forward-repair-Ship-RFA-Diligence
James,
Well snarked, sir! I do actually know the difference (had a classic old one passed down to me as a boy and my anorakish tendencies put me right on to finding out about it — despite the fact I’m not at all the outdoorsy type except round my mum’s family farm or on the water.) But I was sure the bait would merit something in return, by which you exceeded my hopes in both style and detail. And any rate (a nautical phrase) bergen or rucksack it doesn’t really matter, whn the pongos lug ‘em aboard and then off again to do whatever it is they do they all look the same. Same as the pongos. As for failure to salute, the RN is a curiously democratic institution in many ways, thanks as you say to the basic sailor’s dilemma of being in a steel sardine can at the mercy of Poseidon chucking you about like a toddler with poor impulse control in Sea State Mumblety-twelve.
As for the baseball caps, I am actually horrified a bit. The Navy in paricular doesn’t need to just ape the kid cousin made good, any more than the Koniklijke Marine, the Armada (they still call it that), or Le Royale would. I’m related to a fair number of Americns by birth and marriage but not everything need be Americanized. Especially if, to quote Sir Terry Pratchett, they follow “the classic British approach of taking an American idea, removing the thing that was good about it, and keeping the rest.”
Campy drill? You have seen the Household Cav mount guard on foot, haven’t you? And let’s declare peace for a moment to consider the existence of RAF Regiment parade drill… Shudder… Sometimes there really are greater, common evils to face.
No worries ref: JBT. Happens to me constantly– the Non-Zero Number of Daughters took my short term memory and cheekily refuse to give it back.
X,
The girls* find them stylish, which when you are girl hunting professionally with a bit of cavalry-ing on the side, is what it’s all about…
* the Sloaney sorts anyway, who were on the High Value Payoff Target List. Not so much the German students or teachers posted to the BFES schools in BAOR, who were acceptable for some mid week fun but not on an enduring basis.
I’m probably going to regret that comment. Someone is going to find it disgracefully non-PC.
If you are horrified at creeping Americanisms with baseball caps and zip up boots (my nan used to have a pair of those) it seems we don’t have sailors or even naval personnel any more but ‘navy warfighters’.
Page 24 of this, put your coffee down before reading it though
http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/BC92C2AF-B013-4BB5-BE18-460DD307238D/0/desider_43_December2011.pdf
Warfighters, I feel sick
Jackstaff,
we can unite in double horror at the RAF Regiment drill. The way they persist in actually being in the RAF but pretending to be infantrymen, wearing their chinstraps…. It’s not so much camp as comic.
Despite my comments, I had three hugely enjoyable and educational deployments on grey floaty boats, total time about 9 months, and have a little-admitted respect for the Andrew and indeed the USN. 2 months on Leander as a Regimental exchange, in the early 80s, 4 months on Bristol in the late 80s firstly as part of an AMF experiment for a recce squadron integrated, then teaching Brittania cadets how to conduct themselves in a battle zone, and 3 months on the USS Mount Whitney in the mid 90s as part of a CENTAG staff. I perpetuate this in that my cooking skills extend to Cheesy Eggy Hammy, which my children love.
TD
The Bergen in the title got me.
I thought you were discussing an up-market rucksack.
However it is good to see the Colonial Sloop back on the agenda.
Main issue with this type of vessel is the equipment that would be surplus to requirements to a long range patrol vessel.
Cranes x 2
Moonpool
As for the ship itself, to make it really useful in the real world its performance would have to be improved – consequently it would be Q+D design process with lot of CFD to make its bow more hydrodynamically efficient to get 22 knots on the same or similar powertrain.
An extra 15m in length should do the trick – 500 tons of worked steel.
On the engine front another 7 MW wouldn’t go amiss.
Add in a hangar amidships and a helo deck out back.
Again nothing expensive just worked steel.
Looking at £40mill for the basic patrol vessel.
Any thoughts
@ Jackstaff
Le Royale’s rouge pom-pom sur le chapeux always makes me grin.
@ James
Surely you mean the gals?
@ TD
Are you sure it doesn’t say bar-fighter?
TD contd.
Stuff on the Bergen not needed on a Colonial Sloop / Global Patrol Vessel.
Cranes x 2
Moonpool