UNOLS
Fleet Improvement Committee Meeting
Tuesday, February 26, 2002, 8:30 a.m.
Jacksonville University
2800 University Boulevard
Reid Medical Science Center, Room 201
Jacksonville, FL
A copy of these minutes and appendices can be downloaded by clicking: <200202ficmi.pdf>.
Appendices
III. FIC Presentation: Fleet Renewal and Utilization Trends
IV. Navy’s Oceanographic Ship Common Scalable Hull Study
V. KILO MOANA Mission Trial Outline
VI. CAPE HENLOPEN Replacement Status
Tuesday, February 26, 2002
The Fleet Improvement Committee met on Tuesday February 26-27, 2002 at Jacksonville University (JU). The second day of the meeting will be a joint session with the UNOLS Council. The meeting opened at 8:30 am. The host for the meeting, Dr. A. Quinton White, Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at Jacksonville University, gave the introduction and welcomed everyone. Dr. White said that JU has a very good marine program with a focus on estuary sciences. They are also user of UNOLS ships.
Participant introductions were then made around the room.
Introductory Reports and Comments
Larry Atkinson, FIC Chair, reviewed the agenda. The agenda is attached as Appendix I and a list of attendees is included as Appendix II.
Larry began by saying that there has been a lot of activity pertaining to fleet renewal the last couple of days and this is impacting the today’s agenda. The FIC’s goal for the meeting will be to draft a recommendation to the Council for initiating the fleet renewal process.
Larry went over the FIC goals and the current situation. His viewgraphs are included as Appendix III. The Committee’s current goals include:
· Establish a Fleet Renewal Implementation plan in concert with Navy.
· Provide suitable material (SMRs, white papers) to NSF, Navy, NOPP, other agencies and the community
· Continue to urge agencies to develop capitalization plans.
· Keep the community involved via letters to EOS etc.
The current activities relating to fleet renewal are:
· Long-Range Planning for the UNOLS Fleet - NORLC Federal Oceanographic Facilities Committee (FOFC) Report has been published.
· Analysis of Utilization Trends
· Fleet Renewal Efforts in Progress:
– KILO MOANA – Science testing of vessel’s SWATH characteristics to be considered.
– Alaska Region Research Vessel (ARRV) – preliminary design phase.
– CAPE HENLOPEN replacement efforts underway
– R/V SAVANNAH entered the fleet
– N. Atlantic and N. Pacific Oceans Class Vessels (OSU/URI effort)
Larry and Annette DeSilva reviewed the Fleet Utilization Charts and provided explanations. These charts are included in Appendix III. The charts include statistics for UNOLS vessels greater than 150 feet in length. The first chart shows utilization from 1972 until 2002. Utilization fluctuates year to year, very roughly 3500 days plus or minus 300 days. The fleet has been able to successfully accommodate these fluctuations. Larry showed the utilization charts for the Fleet by Class for the years 1991 until 2002. The large ship use has increased over this period while the intermediate/Ocean class ship use has generally declined. Use of the Regional Class ships has been relatively level while the smaller vessel use has increased slightly. The attendees commented that it would be helpful to see the ship utilization in terms of percentages. Discussion centered on the charts. Utilization from all funding sources is included in the totals. It appears that there seems to always be a “one-ship” excess in the Fleet. This excess provides flexibility. Bob Knox stated that the scheduling of ships is always a challenge, and pointed out that flexibility is needed and that this flexibility is what allows programs to get scheduled. The FOFC plans calls for one less ship in the future. Based on past trends and practices, it appears that it will be difficult to accommodate peak loads (ship requests) in the future. In 2002, utilization figures show an excess capacity of one to 1.5 ships, yet some programs needed to be deferred because of scheduling conflicts.
A statement was made that flexibility in fleet scheduling (excess capacity) is essential. However, too much over capacity (i.e. ships operating half year) is not good and makes it difficult for crew retention.
Joe Ustach and Chris Measures were tasked with drafting a statement regarding fleet capacity and the need for some excess capacity. Flat growth (no ship additions to the fleet) will lead to no ship time excesses. Anything less that flat growth (subtracting one ship) will lead to under capacity, especially if the projections of increased ship use are considered.
Annette displayed charts that project when there will be shortages in fleet capacity based on average fleet utilization over the past six years and estimated vessel retirement dates. The charts show this by class as well as total Fleet. Current trends project that by 2008 there will be a shortage in overall fleet capacity if no ships are added to the fleet and the ships are retired as scheduled. For Regional Class ships, a shortage can come as early as 2005 if no ship additions are made. By 2008 an Ocean Class shortage is projected.
Annette provided a ship design and construction timeline for Regional and Ocean class vessels. The timeline includes funding request and appropriation steps. Assuming that funds are appropriated, and the design and construction are carried out in a process similar to those used in the past, a new Regional Class vessel may be ready to enter the fleet by 2007. This is two years later than the projected date for Regional Vessel capacity shortage. The new Ocean Class vessel is estimated to enter the fleet in 2008, approximately the same time frame that we would begin to experience a shortage in capacity. In both scenarios, we are assuming that the design/construction effort begins today. Timing is critical.
There was some discussion surrounding the definitions of the Fleet Classes. The question was asked whether the current ships should be reclassified to the FOFC definitions of “Global, Ocean, Regional and Local.” It was determined that the existing vessels do not conveniently fit into these classifications and that their existing definitions should be retained.
NAVY – Tim Pfeiffer gave a brief history of who is who within the Navy: NAVSEA, Office of Naval Research (ONR), and the Oceanographer. Tim said that in parallel with the FOFC plan, the Oceanographer is looking at new Navy survey ships. He then went on to report on the Navy’s interest in possibility conducting a Common, Scalable Hull Study. The Study proposal is included as Appendix IV. The study would consider the Navy Survey ships, UNOLS Ocean Class vessels and perhaps others. It was noted that there is a large difference in size between the TAGS vessels and the new Ocean Class ships. KILO MOANA (AGOR 26) is approximately 2500 tons and the current TAGS vessels are approximately 5000 tons. The new TAGS could even be larger, but how much larger is unknown. The Navy would like to determine whether or not there could be a common approach to design of these. The Navy cannot ignore the two efforts.
This study will have a short time frame and will be funded by ONR. The Navy has some construction funding for the survey ship and would like to identify funding for the Ocean Class vessels. The Common Hull Study is not intended to produce a concept design. The FIC and the Navy will work together to define the vessel missions. It can only by a success if FIC participates.
In Summary: FIC will need to provide the general characteristics of the Ocean Class and the Navy will provide general characteristics of the survey ship. The architect will then go over these to determine if there are any common areas that can result in cost savings for construction. An outcome of the process may be that it is concluded that there are no similarities between the designs and that they should be separate efforts.
Joe Ustach pointed out the mode of operation is very different between the two ships and that TAGS operate with huge crews.
Tim also said the timeline for the Common Hull Study is six months from time of award. ONR may be willing to fund a workshop for establishing a community-working group. It is hoped that the outcome of this project will be useful for the UNOLS fleet renewal effort.
Annette asked about the status of the Navy construction funds. Tim said that the construction funds for the Navy survey ship are in the appropriations stage. Work began a year ago to get SCN funds in the FY2006 budget. Question: “Does this mean that the ARRV is not addressed by this study?” Tim responded that the study does not address the ARRV.
Tim said that the intent is for FIC and the Oceanographer to work with the Naval architect to develop a set of mission requirements. This can and should be part of the UNOLS process to develop Science Mission Requirements (SMRs). Even if the Common Hull study shows that a scalable design is not feasible, the results will provide useful information in the process of developing SMRs and concept designs.
Bob Knox voiced concern over designing ships now, that may not be built or enter the Fleet for many years. Obsolescence can be a real problem. Tim commented that the Admiral is aware of this situation. New science demands require new designs. Tim indicated that these are real concerns.
Wilf Gardner said that Congress is concerned about the number of ships that the Navy is building. He asked how the Navy is dealing with this. Tim deferred the question until tomorrow’s discussion with the Council.
There was discussion on the status of FOFC’s plans for implementing the Fleet Renewal Plan. Jim Yoder will discuss the FOFC plan tomorrow during the joint session with the Council. Dolly indicated that NSF has an interest in building new ships, but there are no construction funds. Ship construction is not even in the queue for the Agency’s Major Research Equipment (MRE) budget. Beth White reported that she has not officially been appointed as the Chair of the FOFC Working Group. Since the FOFC Fleet Renewal Plan was just recently published just two months ago in December 2001, plans for implementation have not been specifically addressed as a group.
NSF has tried to consider ways in which ship construction could be accomplished outside of their MRE process. By keeping construction costs below $25M, this may be possible. The Regional Ship cost may be able to be built at that funding level. Funding for the construction would come from taxing Geosciences across all programs. Margaret Leinen and Jim Yoder are supportive of this process.
Wilf asked if there is any experience with buying used ships and converting them as necessary to serve as research vessels. He indicated that they often receive offers of used vessels. He questioned if this could this be a viable option, and if so, should it be further explored? Steve Rabalais pointed out that if the answer is yes, then this is the time to do it. Oil companies are moving their work to deeper water and as a result, their small, coastal ships are being tied up and can be purchased. Steve indicated that some vessels are very new.
Fleet Renewal Efforts in Progress – Gulf Regional: Wilf Gardner reported that he and Steve Rabalais have been asked to put together a Steering Committee and a plan for an SMR Workshop to be held for the Gulf of Mexico region in the near future. Scientists from other areas that work in the region will need to be included. Wilf displayed the graph showing R/V GYRE projected retirement date of 2005. When this ship goes offline, there will be no large ship home-ported in the Gulf for deep-water work. He went on to say that they would like to hold the Gulf SMR Workshop in the spring. Wilf proposes that they have the meeting in Houston at one of the Texas A&M University (TAMU) offices to avoid meeting room expenses. He suggested a two-day meeting.
Questions and Discussion on the Gulf of Mexico/Regional SMR Workshop followed:
The science needs for the region will need to be defined. There are exciting things happening in the deep water of the Gulf of Mexico. There are also strong currents, oil rigs, and environmental questions. There is also a lot of interest in shallow water research. Steve commented that the oil companies as well as the Mineral Management Service often use the research vessels in the Gulf region. Additionally, there are a lot of ship users from institutions outside of the region. These people need to be part of the SMR development process.
It was recommended that a questionnaire be sent to ship users prior to the Workshop. They should be asked to define their needs/science mission requirements for the Gulf region. It was commented that these SMRs might not represent a “Regional” vessel.
Wilf suggested the workshop be held in April 2002, but realized that this is probably not feasible. The workshop should include approximately 25 people. A steering committee should be identified to coordinate the effort. The NSF construction funding constraint of $25M for a Regional Ship should be considered as a parameter. Steering Committee members were identified and include Tom Shipley, Dennis Hansell, Dennis Wiesenburg, Steve Rabalais, Wilf Gardner, a new FIC member, and an outsider.
R/V KILO MOANA (AGOR 26) – Chris Measures (University of Hawaii) reported on KILO MOANA and plans for science testing. Chris reported that the ship is scheduled to arrive in Hawaii on June 13th. Science testing will take place during transit from Panama to Hawaii. Chris stated that we need to expand the group who evaluates the cruise to all cruise participants to increase objectivity. We need to encourage evaluation of the platform, especially as a new hull design for science. Chris questioned whether this is possible through the normal UNOLS Post Cruise Assessment form.
Terry Whitledge commented that a list of systems to be tested is needed. Tim Pfeiffer reported that the University of Hawaii submitted a proposal to instrument the ship to examine how its hull structure performs. ONR would appreciate outside input on the need for this instrumentation. The proposal will need review and letters of endorsement. The proposal requests stress analysis, motion analysis, etc. It is to study ship performance.
Bob Knox said that it would also be good to hear from the crew and get their feedback on operations.
The ship inspection is planned for June 2002. There will be time set aside for science system testing and the University of Hawaii will take the lead. Steve Poulos reported that there are people within the university that are working on various elements of the science testing. He noted that they need to finalize a test plan and identify areas where outside help might be needed. Annette said she had envisioned a HEALY type of science systems test plan, however, is realized that HEALY’s testing had significant financial support, while KILO MOANA testing is minimally supported.
Steve has drafted an outline of the testing. The KILO MOANA mission trial outline is included as Appendix V. Prior to the Panama Canal transit vendor tests will be conducted. Other testing will be conducted once the ship is in the Pacific. Many people have been identified to assist in the testing, but there are still some missing slots. Terry Whitledge indicated that the system should undergo testing under unique conditions, such as, high sea states to examine the SWATH hull performance.
In summary of the KILO MOANA testing plans:
- A proposal for instrumentation to evaluate ship performance of ship has been submitted to ONR.
- There will be ongoing evaluations of operations.
- Steve Poulos is drafting a pre-science operations test plan and he should request input as needed.
- Mike Prince reported that post-cruise evaluations/de-briefs of HEALY operations have been very useful to the crew, operator, user, and agency. These should be considered for KILO MOANA.
FIC is interested in finding out how this ship works and if it should it be considered as a model for future hull designs. It was recommended that Post Cruise Assessments by FIC members be conducted. Bob indicated that it would be good to ask them specific questions about the performance of the ship. A form can be put together for evaluating the ship. Terry and Dave Hebert will prepare a draft form for the evaluation of science operations of R/V KILO MOANA
Alaska Region Research Vessel (ARRV) - Status and FIC's Role in design review – Terry Whitledge reported that the ARRV Concept Design was completed in August 2001. They are now in the preliminary design phase. A request for comments on the design was sent to the community and they have started to receive some comments.
As part of the Preliminary Design phase, model testing will be performed. Bids have been received and a firm has been selected to conduct the model testing. They hope to have the results in May. A meeting is tentatively planned for the second week in June to disclose the results of the model testing and preliminary design. The meeting will be in the Washington, DC area. Terry said that he needs input on who to invite to this meeting.
Terry reviewed the ARRV poster, which includes the concept design parameters. The poster is posted on the UNOLS website at <http://www.unols.org/committees/fic/arrv/ARRVposter.pdf>. There was discussion of the tradeoffs within the design and the impacts on quietness. NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is still interested in the ARRV and its ice-capable fisheries research capabilities. The concept design phase addressed the hull features and propulsion system. In the preliminary design phase, space requirements will be addressed. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) has been contributing to the design development, particularly Bob Dinsmore.
The azipod propulsion system is being strongly considered in the design. The preliminary design is scheduled to be complete by August 2002. All of the SMRs have been incorporated into the design. The only parameter that has been exceeded is ship’s length. The ship stability looks very high. The vessel will likely exceed ICES requirements for noise. The tradeoff for noise is the ability to work in ice.
The big unknown is funding for construction of the ARRV. The FOFC renewal plan calls for the ARRV as the first new vessel. How can this be implemented?
Terry emphasized that they would like to have a good community turnout at the June ARRV design review meeting. The concept design, preliminary design, and model test results will all be available for review. The model tests will examine the ship’s maneuverability capabilities.
CAPE HENLOPEN Replacement Status – Matt Hawkins provided a written report on the status of efforts to replace CAPE HENLOPEN. His full report is included as Appendix VI. The project is progressing on schedule. They will be seeking private funding for the ship’s construction.
R/V SAVANNAH – Skidaway replaced their vessel BLUE FIN with R/V SAVANNAH. The ship arrived at its homeport at Skidaway in September and completed it outfitting. A number of shipyard deficiencies required corrections. The ship began science operations in the fall with a busy schedule.
Science Mission Requirements (SMRs) and Conceptual Design Development
The FIC discussed the need to identify SMRs that will be needed to support the fleet renewal process. SMRs will need to be developed for the new vessel classifications. Additionally, the FIC needs to identify the geographic regions where SMR and design efforts should be initiated. As a starting point, it was recognized that the Gulf of Mexico region would need to initiate a design process. Additionally, since many of the intermediate vessels are scheduled for retirement by the end of the decade, the new Ocean Class requirements should be addressed. The ARRV SMRs have been developed, but the design phase is still underway.
Ocean Class SMR Process – The FIC discussed the activities that need to be initiated for development of Ocean Class SMRs. There will be need to be two parallel activities, The Navy’s Scalable, Common Hull Study and the community’s development of SMRs. A Naval Architect will conduct the Navy’s study. Input from UNOLS will be required to assist in this project. The Navy will be requesting general science parameters. For their study, required design ranges would meet their needs.
To initiate the Ocean Class SMR development process it was recommended that a steering committee be formed. The steering committee would include individuals located at the following institutions: URI, OSU, SIO, WHOI, and the SE Atlantic. Dave Hebert, Tim Cowles, Joe Coburn and Bob Knox were volunteered for the committee. It was recommended that additional members from HBOI and a non-operator institution be added. The steering committee’s task will be to develop a process for getting broad community input to SMRs. An additional effort would be to work with Tim Pfeiffer to provide input to the Navy’s common hull study. To summarize, tasking will include the following:
It was recommended that there be liaisons between the Gulf of Mexico, the Ocean Class, and the ARRV efforts.
Fleet Renewal Implementation Plan and Roadmap – Larry reviewed the fleet renewal implementation plan and roadmap that has been drafted and posted on the UNOLS website at: <http://www.unols.org/committees/fic/renewal/roadmap.html>. The draft plan includes an introduction, fleet construction schedule (2000-2020), an Implementation Road Map, ship construction efforts in progress, and 2002 Timelines.
The roadmap was developed to generate community comment. It attempts to identify the steps/responsibilities needed for fleet renewal. One of the first steps is forming steering committees and this is what we have done at this FIC meeting. Beth White said that FOFC would review the roadmap and let us know if this agrees with their plans. Dolly and Beth both emphasized that broad community input is needed.
FIC Membership – Two FIC seats are currently vacant:
· One Non-operator Institution representative, and
· One Representative from any UNOLS institution.
A call for nominations has been advertised in EOS. First terms for Dave Hebert and Mark Brzezinski will end on 9/02. Both are eligible for second terms and will be asked about their willingness to continue serving.
The FIC reviewed the nominations that have been made. A motion was made and seconded to nominate Niall Slowey to fill the FIC position to be represented by any UNOLS institution. The FIC then recommended candidates for the non-operator institution position. These people will be contacted to determine their willingness to serve.
Dave Hebert and Wilf Gardner were asked to draft their respective steering committee task statements for presentation to the Council at tomorrow’s meeting. Additionally, FIC’s statement regarding the need for excess fleet capacity will be presented to the Council. These statements are included as Appendix VII.
OTHER FIC ISSUES
A Coastal Ocean Observatory Workshop will be held in May 2002. Rick Jahnke and Larry will be hosting the meeting at NSF. They will address observatory ship needs. Larry is the liaison between UNOLS and DEOS. It seems that many of the observatories are still ramping up. We need to stay on top of their efforts. We will need to consider observatory needs when developing SMRs. Beth White suggested that Ken Johnson be asked to speak to FOFC regarding observatory needs.
The FIC meeting will resume tomorrow, February 27, as a joint session with the UNOLS Council. Minutes for the remainder of the meeting are posted at http://www.unols.org/meetings/2002/200202cnc/200202cncmi.html.
The meeting adjourned at 5:00PM.