52' MLB Replacement

[BMC Robert Ornelas]

I know there will never be a "Replacement" for the four legacy Motor Lifeboats, but how long can we keep on extending their lives. I know they still look extremuly well for being over 40 years old. My question is, do you think we should be looking or creating a plan for a suitable replacement for them? I know there a "RUMOR" about the creation of a project, but we all know how that goes.

What do you think of creating something like this?

Newest RNLI Lifeboat- Tamar Class

Length- 16m (48ft)
Speed- 25 kts
Displacement- 39 tons
Construction- Fiber Reinforced Plastic
Range- 250 nm
Crew- 6-7

Cheers

Rob:cool:

[BMCS Eric Guerette]

Nice looking boat. How much better would that be than the 47'? It seems that the reason we keep the 52's around is for their range, that RNLI boat has only half the range of the 52' and only a little better than the 47'. It may be able to carry more passengers than the 47'. There has got to be a good option already designed and in use somewhere, saving a whole bunch of R+D money for just 4 hulls.
I do believe that the 52's replacement needs to be identified before it is a "need right now" item. Every platform should have a replacement identified prior to the end of its service life, which is allot sooner than we traditionally have done. The first 49' hits 10 years old this year, it was designed for 20. If we start now it may get replaced as scheduled. Of course no one will even look into that until they are going over thier service life.

[BMCS Dave Considine]

Rob

The whole problem with those boats - no gun mounts. You have to have a gun mount! Hell, even the new aton small boats have a gun mount!

Seriously though, I have the last 44' MLB still operating in the Coast Guard. She is still in pristine condition because she was well taken care of. If you want my opinion, build four more 52' MLBs. Proven design, works well. When ADM Collins was here 1.5 years ago he asked, "what can we do for you?" I said, "Build me two more of these (44' MLB)". He said, "I wish we could!" I countered, "Why not, we own the plans!"

Those with the "need for speed" maybe a jet propulsion plant could be built into the new 52' MLB. If a 100 ton fast ferry can get up and go, the 52' could probably be built with the newer technology.

Rob - What's your e-mail over there, or send me an e-mail
Dave

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

It seems that the reason we keep the 52's around is for their range

I musst confess, I'm not up on all the ranges of the MLB's, but wouldn't a WPB be used on something so distant? Doesn't the CG have limitations on how far out they send the 47's & 52's? Is range even an issue here?

Wray... :cool:

[BMCS Dave Considine]

I musst confess, I'm not up on all the ranges of the MLB's, but wouldn't a WPB be used on something so distant? Doesn't the CG have limitations on how far out they send the 47's & 52's? Is range even an issue here?

Wray... :cool:

Don't think the range is the issue, it's the sea state capability. 52's can handle 30 foot seas, the WPB's are stuck to the dock in anything over 12' unless they get a waiver. Much rather be on the bridge of a 52' then on the bridge of a 87' in 15 footers.

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

I didn't think it was a range issue either.. just going on Eric's post.... Of course I didn't know the WPB's had a 12' cap either.. Didn't have it when I was on one.. a long time ago...

Wray... :cool:

[BMC Robert Ornelas]

Good points guys, but away from tradition.

How many can still say they are part of the "100 mile" club? I've been to two 52' stations and the furthest I got out was 80nm. Do we still need the huge range? I think the days of the week long tow and the FS aboard making pancake breakfast are gone.

Not pushing the Tamar, because she has her own demons (ran on computers). Lets just say the sea chest and all valves are computer ran so the engineer just has to hit one button before he/she puts on their gear and the boat will start and monitor all systems. Not to mention the ergonomical shock seats for everyone on the crew and cameras to monitor the engine room.

My point is should we be taking a long range look at the production of boats like the RNLI? For instance the newest RNLI experiemental lifeboat is the FCB-2 (Fast Carriage Boat). It is based on the same hull as the RB-M (Response Boat- Medium...our new jet drive) They have been running tests on this boat for a couple of years; switching jets, engines, seats, electronics, etc. The production isn't going to come online until 2013. That is 8 years of testing! to make the best boat they can for their crews. Which 90% are volunteer!!

I'm lucky enough to be part of their MET for this hull, and I must say it is going to be mint when she is done. Attached are some pics from the last trials I went on.

Don't get me wrong; personally I think the RB-M will be good if alot of the things we ( Mission Effectiveness Team ) said during the trials is taken to heart.

My email addresses

Robert_Ornelas@RNLI.CO.UK
HDHOMBRE@GMAIL.COM

Cheers

Rob:cool:

[BMCS Eric Guerette]

The range thing was kinda of the point, do we still need a 52' at all? What do we do with them that can't be done with a 47' or a helo? I honestly don't know, never been around one. I agree with Dave, the 87' wasn't designed for big waves, even if those in charge think otherwise. Anything over 12' and your not performing the mission, your hanging on. The bridge is about the same hight as a 110's. I would love to see a 110, 95', 82', and 87' lined up next to each other. I bet that the newer the boat the higher the bridge. Same thing with the surf boats. http://www.briantague.com/4Surfboats.htmlAll that hight makes for a lively ride. Give me a 44' with better speed and I would be happy. With the 47' we wanted to give the crews some protection, but I never see anyone driving from inside. All we did was make the boat taller.

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

While range is one thing, towing capacity is another. When I was at YB in the mid 90's, there was a great many fishing boats in the fleet that we could only tow with the VICTORY because they were over 100 gross tons. One of my last good cases was bring in a 70' dragger in 12-15' seas and 50+ knots of wind. Wouldn't think about doing that in a 44. I can't speak to the 47' MLB. I have only fished off of them.

[BMCS Eric Guerette]

Towing makes sense. The 47' has 150 gross tons. What is the 52's?

[CWO Jay Greiner (BMC)]

The 52' MLB's have a towing capacity of 750 gross tons. And with the fishing boats getting bigger the extra towing hosepower is needed.
I feel all 4 52' MLB's are located in great spots and I hope they continue there honored tradition for many years to come!

[BMCS Eric Guerette]

750! That's unbelievable power. If the 47' is only 150 than I can't imagine what it would take to replace the 52'. It must have a huge towline. That is almost enough to tow an unloaded 175'.

[BMCS Nick Pupo]

Dave, where did you get your info. I've never heard of the 12' issue for the WPB. Is that a D1 thing?
Also, when I was at Montauk, 47279 went 72 miles off shore. I checked with the NMLB School and as far as they knew it was the furthest a 47' gone. That is until the brought the ones over from PR. Anybody know of any 47' that went further, without an escort?

[BMCM Deane Smith]

I've never been u/w on a 52' (I was on one once), but have heard they are a very reliable and sound platform.


I have a few questions for someone that knows:

How often is the 52' used for SAR?

How are they holding up (hull and engine)?

Which would you rather take out, the 47' or 52'?

[BMC Robert Ornelas]

Only speaking of where I've been (Grays/ Cape)

The 52's are launched quite often in the winter for SAR and Bar Patrols when it exceeds the limitations of the 47'; can't give you numbers from here.

They are still maintained and are in pretty good condition. I'm sure it is just like the day they reported to their units, the crew treats them with the utmost respect and they are the pride of the four station (Coos,Yaquina, Cape, Grays). The Invincibles super structure is pulling away from the datto in some spots, but still water tight. Engineering wise... they are like an old car, just need some TLC.

Between the 52' and 47' would depend on the case. If it was an immenent case, I would take the 47'. If it was sh£tty out, it would definenty be the 52'

Cheers

Rob:cool:

[BMCS Dave Jonason]

The other part is 60knts wind, 35' seas and 25'surf. Typical Washington Oregon Coast winter weather.

[BMCS Dave Considine]

Dave, where did you get your info. I've never heard of the 12' issue for the WPB. Is that a D1 thing?


Nick - SAR Addendum Table 5.5 (Chapter 5.4)

Max sea conditions 87' and 110' - 8-12 ft, CG wide.

The SAR addendum also lists the 52' as having a max tow capability of 100 tons - not 750. 47' MLB has limitation of 150 tons.

Dave

[BMCS Eric Guerette]

While I was on the IBIS we were looking for the max seas and only found the that it was designed for Beaufort force 6 or 7, I can't remember which. Since then the SAR Addendum was updated. A few times the B-6 87' in Cape May was put in B-0 to cover heavy weather for the stations. It didn't make much sense to us, to have a crew standing by to go out into conditions that we shouldn't be in.

Thanks Dave, I thought 750 gross tons was a bit much.

[BMCS Dave Jonason]

Thats an misprint in the Sar addendum Per the D-13 SOP its 750 tons.