Stroppy Chippie wrote:
"The repair bills have to be staggering and absolutely must be a huge concern for defence". Noting that they rarely (if ever) allocate additional funding over an extended period, I wonder what platforms (or Class programs) have been losing funding to support these?
From a historical perspective and offered in WIKI:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Manoora_(L_52)
"The now controversial refit cost for the two ships increased A$400 million, with half of the funding taken from repair and refit allocations for other ships."
In 1998 as the NQEA Follow On Support manager for the navy's two new Hydro Ships I visited the Newcastle company that was supplying the flume-type ship stability system. During many discussions with them the subject of Manoora and Kanimbla came up and they - being a local company in the marine world - divulged a whole heap of incidents and problems that both vessels had encountered, and they were just staggering in their complexity, range, and volume.
Further, they were known locally as HMAS Towards 2,000 and HMAS Beyond 2,000 (to mimic a popular TV show at the time), and the ridiculous figures being quoted by contractors to fix the many defects/alterations/conversions/upgrades were of epic proportions.
Yet all were approved by the project senior naval officers who - according to the local - did not have a clue as to what they were paying for, much less what the job entailed.
It was an interesting visit, for sure!
_________________
Chris O'Keefe
R43136
Ex WO Chippy
19th MOBI Intake
July 65 to July 85
HMAS Nirimba X 4 -Penguin-Sydney-Queenborough - Creswell - Moreton - Stalwart - Platypus - Coonawarra Reconstruction Team 76 - Platypus - Hobart - Cerberus - FHQ - Coonawarra.
Anyone can be ordinary. Shipwrights choose to be extraordinary!