Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Naval training and retention of skills

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Naval training and retention of skills

    In the early days of the Naval Service we had an in-house Training School covering all the basic skills required for training Ratings of all Branches. Most advanced Technical Artificers came to the Navy via The Army Technical School at Naas and completed Naval Training at Haulbowline , with some additional courses at CTI. In general we produced Gunners, Radar plotters, Tactical Sonar operators, Underwater weapons operatives, ,Stokers, Ships carpenters, Catering and Q personnel and Medical Attendants. When the CMS's arrived we set to and developed skills in Minesweeping and categories of Diving.
    The Naval School had it's many training bays for most shipboard specializations and a Diving School was added. School courses were always augmented in Specialist areas with courses both Naval and general in the UK and overseas as required.
    In the 1970's a new building program brought major Fleet changes including a helicopter operating ship equipped with Air Warning radar, Fire Control. Laser Range finding, Infra red camera, and Active Sonar . Since then three new ships have been added with two more to follow.
    Intermixed with this ongoing regeneration The National Maritime College of Ireland came into being and has provided major segments of Navigation and technical Training.
    It seems with this constant change of ships being replaced or reduced in capability ,as in the case of Eithne, we are loosing old skills which should be nurtured and regenerated throughout the fleet. Our newer ships should have had Air Warning and Sonar equipments so that they could patrol and observe activity at sea , below surface, surface and in the air space above. The Mission must dictate the type of Fleet we need , Training and equipments.

  • #2
    The Mission must dictate the type of Fleet we need , Training and equipments.
    But the mission has dictated the role and the training is catered for.

    In fact the training which was most overlooked in the past is now that which takes precedence such as Sea Survival, Fire Fighting etc.

    A half day down the back of the TT bay with a couple of extinguishers during the 80s was class as Fire Fighting training..box ticked.
    These days its on par with that offered internationally.

    Gunnery is now a very sophisticated module with weapons being able to sim fire using computer along with transportable elements.

    We do not operate anti submarine frigates of anti aircraft units so why waste time money and effort training for roles we aren't equipped to do, and never have to do.
    Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

    Comment


    • #3
      The mission must include Defence to include Sea patrol, Surveillance in three dimensions, Fishery protection Duties, certain detention duties in aid to the civil power, and overseas duties as ordered. All weapons carried by our ships have a CRAA function including the 57MM and the 76mm weapons. It would seem logical to give modern OPV's an all round surveillance capability even if not fitted with associated weapons so that they can detect intruders and over time build up incursion data. Training already achieved in these areas, at cost, should be ongoing, and associated equipments maintained. By encouraging Training and study in all professional areas , those tasked with creating and building our Navy will be encouraged to build in capability into future ships. Sonar is available as a demountable facility for smaller vessels.
      Wasting time and money as a concept can be applied to most things we do in the Uniformed Services but as they say "break glass in the case of fire". BE READY.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
        The mission must include Defence to include Sea patrol, Surveillance in three dimensions, Fishery protection Duties, certain detention duties in aid to the civil power, and overseas duties as ordered. All weapons carried by our ships have a CRAA function including the 57MM and the 76mm weapons. It would seem logical to give modern OPV's an all round surveillance capability even if not fitted with associated weapons so that they can detect intruders and over time build up incursion data. Training already achieved in these areas, at cost, should be ongoing, and associated equipments maintained. By encouraging Training and study in all professional areas , those tasked with creating and building our Navy will be encouraged to build in capability into future ships. Sonar is available as a demountable facility for smaller vessels.
        Wasting time and money as a concept can be applied to most things we do in the Uniformed Services but as they say "break glass in the case of fire". BE READY.
        Might have been a valid arguement 20 years ago when Roisin was being planned and there was money available.

        The reality now is we have ships doing the job they are tasked with and that we can afford to operate and that fill the role they are designed to carry out. The training requirements are built around that reality across the board.

        The concept of our modern operations have moved on from a search role to where all most all interceptions are carried out as intelligence based operations so our modern communications devices and methods negate the requirement for anything other than the existing equipment fitted.

        Be ready for what?.......Our Naval Service does what its published to do and does it well daily....
        Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
          The mission must include Defence to include Sea patrol, Surveillance in three dimensions, Fishery protection Duties, certain detention duties in aid to the civil power, and overseas duties as ordered. All weapons carried by our ships have a CRAA function including the 57MM and the 76mm weapons. It would seem logical to give modern OPV's an all round surveillance capability even if not fitted with associated weapons so that they can detect intruders and over time build up incursion data. Training already achieved in these areas, at cost, should be ongoing, and associated equipments maintained. By encouraging Training and study in all professional areas , those tasked with creating and building our Navy will be encouraged to build in capability into future ships. Sonar is available as a demountable facility for smaller vessels.
          Wasting time and money as a concept can be applied to most things we do in the Uniformed Services but as they say "break glass in the case of fire". BE READY.
          Is this written in some sort of code .
          Don't spit in my Bouillabaisse .

          Comment


          • #6
            I'm at a loss to see what point is being made here.

            From memory the Sonar on Eithne was removed many years ago, probably around the same time as Helicopters stopped landing on it, and its location in the Ops Room is now an odd gap where clearly something used to be.
            Having sonar (as example) like Heli-ops, is pointless unles sit is kept current. Is it possible to train in anti submarine tactics if you have no sub to train with? Our "Neutrality" means we can't do like other non sub operators do (Belgium) and try to find someone else's, with their cooperation. It is not unusual to see Belgian frigates chasing Dutch and German subs in the North Sea. If you don't keep the skills current, you lose them.
            But anti sub weapons, that you have no political intention of using are an expensive pointlessness.
            Better off doing as the Naval Service are already doing and concentrate your underwater skills on using towed search sonar and submersibles, so that when the unfortunate inevitability of having to search for wreckage of a sunken vessel or aircraft, you are ready to act immediately and not, as happened in 1985, wait for the arrival of a donated towed sonar that can be strapped to the deck of Eithne, so its not just HMS Challenger searching our corner of the Atlantic for the Black Box of the victim of a Sikh Terrorist attack.

            The in-house training that the Naval Base once provided was good up to a point. It was based mostly on the experiences of those who had been sent on courses with the RN, or what the old officers had learnt in the early days of their career before they joined the NS, when they learned the skills aboard Irish and Foreign Merchant vessels. We trained our crews to operate the equipment on the ships the state had managed to get, whether it was relevant for our purpose or not.
            The Navy of old had a ship designed from the keel up to hunt and kill submarines. We trained to hunt and kill submarines... or went through the motions, while using the ship to stop illegal fishing up to 7 miles from our coastline. Then we progressed to a smaller ship again, designed from the keel up to hunt mines at sea. So we trained how to hunt mines at sea, even though the mines we encountered had already been hunted and located by our fishermen.
            The 70s came, and we built a ship that was designed from the keel up to carry out fisheries protection. To train the crews we decided to get a former lighthouse tender. It showed our engineers.. sorry Mechanicians, how to maintain and operate a steam powered ship, even though the last steam powered Patrol vessel had gone to the breakers some years before this ship entered service, and the remainder of the fleet were all propelled by diesel internal combustion engines. Oh and here is a second hand Stern Trawler. Lets paint it grey and pretend it is a naval vessel. No I don't know what we were supposed to do with it either.
            The 80s came and we decided (correctly at the time) that the 200 mile limit required a ship capable of patrolling the larger area assisted by a ship based helicopter. So we built a fisheries protection vessel from the keel up with a helideck, and the associated navaids and firefighting equipment. Our Minesweeping ships also got too old to be useful. When these ships retired we waited to see what would replace them in use next door. In Hong Kong, the RN replaced their minesweepers with a similar sized coastal patrol vessel. They came on the market, we bought them, and the heavy artillery they were fitted with. Ignoring completely that they were designed to fight off the Communist Hordes from invading the shelter of a British Hong Kong Harbour, while at the same time giving the Marines somewhere to sleep, and not really ideal for boarding half deckers in dingle bay during salmon season.

            The ship based helicopter arrived many years later, and when it did the Government and the Air Corps decided it had better thing to be doing than sitting on a ships deck. So instead Our Shipboard helicopter spent its days doing Search and Rescue and VIP transport, with occasional visits to the Helicopter Patrol Vessel when the weather suited and the ship was not too far from the Air Corps Officers Mess.
            Once our crews were trained, their skills were recognised only in the Naval service. It took a long time before their qualifications were recognised by the established civilian equivalents. It was common for someone to be qualified to command a Naval Vessel, but could only do watch on a civilian vessel under supervision of a civilian qualified watchkeeper.
            So you'll forgive me perhaps if I don't long for doing things the way they used to be done.
            Lets see what we are doing today in contrast.
            Our 1980s ships are almost all retired, except for 2 ex RN Hong Kong patrol boats. The Helicopter Patrol vessel without helicopter, and the last remaining purpose built fisheries protection vessel. The other half of the fleet consists of a ship designed in Canada for EEZ patrolling in North Atlantic waters, incorporating all the lessons learnt in Ireland operating the unsuitable ships of the past. So successful is this design that New Zealand also use a Version. After 15 years experience of this type, we improved it further and are in process of taking deliver of the 2nd of 3 lengthened versions of the same type, which has incorporated even more improvements, such as a space aft to take not a helicopter which will never come, but instead 3 Standard 20 foot Containers, that can hold whatever you want to put in them such as a mobile hospital, a towed search sonar, a portable water treatment plant, a submersible and its topside control cabin, etc.
            Its crews train in the same internationally recognised courses as those in the civilian maritime world. Useful when the DoD decides after 21 years service that they are surplus to requirements.
            It also trains the Military Naval skills to international Naval standards, and have written the rulebook in some areas. Our crews were doing armed boardings from rugged Rigid Hull inflatables in all weathers leaving the mother ship from single point launchers while the USN and RN were still putting their crews at risk launching them from small Gemini inflatables swinging on the end of a derrick when conditions were favourable. Sure the Naval Exercises lack missiles and torpedos, but that would not be a skill we would expect to use, in the current security environment. I'm sure however if things changed, the NS are in the right position to adapt training and doctrine to suit.
            The NMCI facilities, which were put in place on the advice of the Naval service are to use an oft overused expression, "second to none". Numerous simulators give the student mariner the opportunity to fine tune their nautical skills before setting foot on a ship, making the transition to a useful member of crew a much shorter one.
            Because there is nothing more dangerous aboard ship than someone who doesn't know what they are supposed to be doing.

            Or am I missing something?
            For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
              The mission must include Defence to include Sea patrol, Surveillance in three dimensions, Fishery protection Duties, certain detention duties in aid to the civil power, and overseas duties as ordered. All weapons carried by our ships have a CRAA function including the 57MM and the 76mm weapons. It would seem logical to give modern OPV's an all round surveillance capability even if not fitted with associated weapons so that they can detect intruders and over time build up incursion data. Training already achieved in these areas, at cost, should be ongoing, and associated equipments maintained. By encouraging Training and study in all professional areas , those tasked with creating and building our Navy will be encouraged to build in capability into future ships. Sonar is available as a demountable facility for smaller vessels.
              Wasting time and money as a concept can be applied to most things we do in the Uniformed Services but as they say "break glass in the case of fire". BE READY.
              Would this "all round surveillance capability" be covered by the use of drones, or are you referring to radar, or a shipborne helicopter?
              Or all of the above?

              I am a little ignorant of the capabilities of a heli versus a drone, as I am not a swabbie or of that background (would the drone have the same range?)
              For instance, a drone can't complete a rescue of a person in the sea, would be one obvious difference between a drone and a helicopter
              "Well, stone me! We've had cocaine, bribery and Arsenal scoring two goals at home. But just when you thought there were truly no surprises left in football, Vinnie Jones turns out to be an international player!" (Jimmy Greaves)!"

              Comment


              • #8
                A modern OPV will have it's own air, surface, and sub surface surveillance capability. It should have a flight deck available for operational land-on of a helicopter or use of own drone if carried. It can also provide space for emergency tasks as missions dictate. Drones transmit real time film of the area they are flying over. The only time they do anything is when they are armed with missiles or bombs. In that case they are large and launched from carriers or airstrips.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Best synoptic history of the Naval Service I've seen for some time and gives a broad sweep of the training tasks undertaken in the past. The task now is to keep the future training needs relevant to the duties we are expected to do such as detecting incursions from whatever source. We should refrain from redacting capabilities from our ships . As we develop we must try to add Naval potential to our Defence role.

                  I would like to add that I also believe current training is of high standard and meets the requirement dictated by the Fleet in being. The caliber of personnel both educationally and technically aware is light years ahead of from where the Naval Service started. Given the comparative market of OPV's in use, we should try to emulate the best in class and meet good surveillance and self defence standards.
                  Last edited by ancientmariner; 25 March 2015, 10:07. Reason: Current Training

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Laners View Post
                    Is this written in some sort of code .
                    Yes. It's a plea not to reduce useful capability, in any of our ships, and to add it to new ships as standard.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      @nagromti, that was excellent! can you do one on the Don and Army as well? I have a sneaking feeling that you are doing a Masters or something?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Until the threat level rises (or submerged subs start sinking trawlers again) it is unlikely.

                        We have multi-purpose OPVs with a limited defensive/offensive capability (that realistically meets our current needs and the threats we face.

                        If you are talking about a proper defensive & offensive capability then we are talking about:
                        - military grade air / surface search radars (and fire control radars/sensors)
                        - SAMs and/or CIWS
                        - SSMs
                        - military grade sonar and torpedoes
                        - possibly helos with sonar, radar, torpedoes and ASMs

                        Guess what if we could persuade the Government, you'd have 1 P60 equipped as above, not 3!!

                        From what I've seen of costs, the weapon and sensor fitout could double the price of a P60

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by DeV View Post
                          Until the threat level rises (or submerged subs start sinking trawlers again) it is unlikely.

                          We have multi-purpose OPVs with a limited defensive/offensive capability (that realistically meets our current needs and the threats we face.

                          If you are talking about a proper defensive & offensive capability then we are talking about:
                          - military grade air / surface search radars (and fire control radars/sensors)
                          - SAMs and/or CIWS
                          - SSMs
                          - military grade sonar and torpedoes
                          - possibly helos with sonar, radar, torpedoes and ASMs

                          Guess what if we could persuade the Government, you'd have 1 P60 equipped as above, not 3!!

                          From what I've seen of costs, the weapon and sensor fitout could double the price of a P60
                          If a ship, or ships, were to be assigned to an enforcing theater I would make a case for a 30mm Bushmaster with FCS to be added ,to supplement the 20mm's. There are other small ship weapons that add defensive layers such as the Multibarreled 7.62mm minigun, much favored by the RN new build OPV's. Our new expensive ships are dependent on the 76mm , 20mm and 12.7mm's The latter two are just on the edge of the launch range of known pirate shoulder fired missiles. A 30mm gun would add considerable stand off range. The RN OPV on duty , off Falklands, was equipped with a 30mm and 2 mini-guns. Cost is an element and should be tailored to ship protection and passive detection in three dimensions. The other solution is to tailor mission choice to suit the ship selected.
                          The British package for three new OPV's including strengthened flight decks and HIFR for global deployment stands at GBP's 347m. Just one would provide a new at sea training academy for all our young men and be a worthy replacement for p 31!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The notion of a sea training academy or training ship is old hat. These days its all done on simulators.
                            The British OPVs are overpriced and underarmed and exist purely to keep british shipbuilding alive until the UK Gov are ready to order the Frigate replacement in the 2020s.
                            For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                              If a ship, or ships, were to be assigned to an enforcing theater I would make a case for a 30mm Bushmaster with FCS to be added ,to supplement the 20mm's. There are other small ship weapons that add defensive layers such as the Multibarreled 7.62mm minigun, much favored by the RN new build OPV's. Our new expensive ships are dependent on the 76mm , 20mm and 12.7mm's The latter two are just on the edge of the launch range of known pirate shoulder fired missiles. A 30mm gun would add considerable stand off range. The RN OPV on duty , off Falklands, was equipped with a 30mm and 2 mini-guns. Cost is an element and should be tailored to ship protection and passive detection in three dimensions. The other solution is to tailor mission choice to suit the ship selected.
                              The British package for three new OPV's including strengthened flight decks and HIFR for global deployment stands at GBP's 347m. Just one would provide a new at sea training academy for all our young men and be a worthy replacement for p 31!

                              Ah but they don't have the SAMs, SSMs etc that you want?!

                              So we buy a Type 26 frigate..... Of course we could buy 10 x P60 class for the projected cost of 1 Type 26

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X