Re: StanFlex vs OUDF

On 13-Dec-01 at 13:35, Oerjan Ohlson (oerjan.ohlson@telia.com) wrote:
> Roger Books wrote:
> 
>  >>The Danish navy operates a number of STANFLEX ships, each of which
is
>  >>able to carry one or more payload modules. With the use of a
15-tonne
>  >>capacity crane these modules can be changed very fast - 30 minutes
for
>  >>the actual swap, plus a few hours to check the new module out.
>  >>(Unfortunately the crew often needs a refresher course to be able
to use
>  >>the new modules efficiently :-/ ) These were part of the
inspiration for
>  >>Alan's modular OUDF designs.
>  >
>  >How long is the refresher course? If it isn't much longer than
>  >module changeover times it shouldn't be a problem. I'd assume
>  >yard dogs do the changeover, not ships complement.
> 
> The article didn't say, except that they were "more lengthy". IIRC
you're 
> Navy, so you're far better placed to estimate how long it'd take to 
> re-train a crew from full-time customs patrol/SAR duties to full-time 
> sub-hunting or minesweeping?

This is just experience in the USN, but I personnally wouldn't trust
a crew of what were affectively newbies anyway.  I'm really curious
now how this would work.  In the USN you have a specialtiy (NEC/MOS/
whatever it can be called) and you work within this area.  I'm not
sure how you could avoid having a dedicated group of ASW on a
ship which is sub-hunting.  You have them play bosuns when the
module isn't in and they will lose skills.  Even with a refresher
course it would still be a while before they are up to speed.

I guess the way I would do it is staff 50% of my highly technical
modules.  If you need more than that online you mix the new people
in with those who are experienced.

Others may argue with this, but it has been my experience that
up to date training and experience is more important than any
other piece of the equation.  Quality personnel keep trash gear
working.  Quality personnel give the officers a chance to lead
or even prop up poor officers so the job gets done.