5 ms·
Separate to the build-quality problems of the Collins class, Australia has struggled to crew the ships. Some reports say that the Collins class has 60 people o
by cturner 10y ago
Separate to the build-quality problems of the Collins class, Australia has struggled to crew the ships.
Some reports say that the Collins class has 60 people on board. These recent articles have had me thinking - I doubt you need so many people.
With the space/storage situation, there is even less excuse to avoid automation than anywhere else. You should be able to shift the bridge with six or seven people (including officers). You'd need some people to maintain systems, and that should be cross-skilled work. Medical, kitchen.
- DanBC 10y ago:-) I like to think there's a submariners forum somewhere and they're asking why Twitter needs thousands of programmers. Like, what do all those people do all day? I mean, with your minimal crew who's going to feed the badger? http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/aug/21/life-on-board-nuclear-submarine http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/aug/21/life-on-board-nucl...
- tajen 10y agoAs a programmer, I also wonder about Twitter ;)
- ethbro 10y agoI think everyone wonders about Twitter's head count. But, you know, nuclear reactors at 1,500 ft are child's play compared to 140 character messages. Kidding aside, it'd be interesting to get Twitter's ops team headcount for comparison.
- vacri 10y agoReading about old battleships in WWII with complements of over 2000, I've always wondered what you need that many sailors for. Obviously they're necessary, but it's still a lot of people.
- dingaling 10y ago> Consider a submarine where everything is automated. We're not quite there yet but there have been some interesting developments. The Soviet Project 705 ( Alfa ) class was highly automated with a crew of only 30. All were top-tier officers ( no NCOs or ratings ), partly due to systems-mangement training requirements and partly because most of their shoot / no-shoot decisions would have been war-starters due to the types of missions assigned. The Swedes are also keen on automation for their small littoral submarines; the Näckens had only 19 crew, but without the need for long endurance at sea.
- gaius 10y agoWarships have historically been over-crewed for normal operations, because when one catches fire you really, really need as many people as you can get to fight it.
- burger_moon 10y agoThis would be a good example of why you need a large crew besides normal operations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_George_Washington_(CVN-73)#Transit_and_fire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_George_Washington_(CVN-73)... The fire lasted 12 hours. You need more than one group of people to fight fires for that long. You can't realistically man hoses that long with a small crew not to mention everyone is at battle stations during something like that and putting out fires primarily relies on the people on duty that day since everyone can't just stop doing their jobs in scenarios where for example they're already in a combat mission.
- bjelkeman-again 10y agoThe Collin class is based on a scaled up version of the the Swedish Västergötland-class, which has a complement of 18 officers and 6 conscript. I could imagine the Collin class to need more personnel if it sails longer, but I don't know if 60 is excessive or not.