PDA

View Full Version : End in sight for the Peacocks?



Farel'
2nd July 2004, 03:35
My source in the dockyard,who has provided me with some gems in the past,informed me that replacments for the Peacocks may come sooner than first thought. And worse,Women are to blame!!

The legendary crewing arrangments are not suitable for the females in the NS,according to the powers that be. Eager to maximise the available crews at sea the NS are keen to either refit the accomodation (which is no longer practical) or replace the vessels,selling them possibly to the Baltic states are eager to Involve their Naval forces with Nato.
So you have a great second hand ship market,and ships that need to be replaced,sooner,rather than later.

Do females regularly crew the Peacocks? I imagine it creates problems.

hptmurphy
2nd July 2004, 04:02
having witnessed the accom for ratings on the peacocks I can't see how women could be practically accomadated aboard them . it would be a disgrace if these ships were to be lost just because a very small minority of the female intake could not be accomadated...... the messing facilities are not intersexual compatible unless the females want to live under such conditions...I believe the canadians take no such diferences into consideration. maybe this maybe the way to go/

If the ladies want to serve aboard the peacocks maybe they might get used to messing with the men

Or maybe the Peacock title is somewhat forboding!!:mad: :mad:

Farel'
2nd July 2004, 04:22
I think the women "messing"with the men could be the problem :)

ForkTailedDevil
2nd July 2004, 05:11
I've heard various stories myself about women serving on RN and USN ships.In the USN cases it was on one of the carriers and resulted in some unplanned pregnancies and also in both cases male sailors kept abandoning their duties to give women a hand to lift heavy items and stuff like that.Are there enough women recruits for an all female crew?

Farel'
2nd July 2004, 05:26
No,its about 10% at the moment,but the seniority is not there. They only got their first LS recently. The most senior female is a LT(2 of them)
Give them one of those new customs type boats.... :)

DeV
2nd July 2004, 16:08
What the problem with the accomodiation on the Peacock's?
Do females have to have a separate mess in the NS?, why?

On a separate point, do we need an class of vessel, similar to the Peacocks, or would it be better to replace them with vessels as described in the other threads or something along the lines of the Niamh.

Goldie fish
2nd July 2004, 19:15
The Problem I believe with the Peacocks is the confined nature of the crew accomodation. I believe its 15 to a room or something,in bunks 3 high?
"Messing" in naval terminology describes the daily living routine. Eating,sleeping,washing etc. On the peacocks this is confined. Even officers have to share a cabin.

hptmurphy
2nd July 2004, 19:35
The peacocks operate the mess deck system where all the junior rates share the same accomadation by divisions whereas the PVs and the HPV operate a cabin system!
It the old RN way ..although this has changed on the new type patrol vessels . Its done this way in the INS to provide crew comfort on long patrols. It also means the rates who live in have some privacy while alongside.
The peacocks along with the sweepers were never designed to have the crews living in while alongside. The RN provided accomadation blocks and accomadation ships for this purpose. the INS never copped on to this.

Dogwatch
11th July 2006, 23:47
Photos of ORLA & CIARA's sister ships in the Philippine Navy. It would appear that they have held onto the old RN Fire Control System for the 76mm.



http://www.navy.mil.ph/gallery/ships/originalimages/37.2.JPG

http://www.navy.mil.ph/gallery/ships/originalimages/Jacinto%20Class.jpg

http://www.navy.mil.ph/gallery/ships/originalimages/37.3.JPG

http://www.navy.mil.ph/gallery/ships/originalimages/PS37.1.JPG

http://www.navy.mil.ph/gallery/ships/originalimages/FP1%20188.JPG

http://www.navy.mil.ph/gallery/ships/originalimages/FP1%20192.JPG

http://www.shipspotting.com/uploads/photos/1465.jpg

hptmurphy
12th July 2006, 09:26
Can you date this photographs?

I have notes ome where that these hace been recently been upgraded with a missile fit?

ODIN
12th July 2006, 14:56
Great pics though

Dogwatch
12th July 2006, 15:59
All photos (except the last one) taken from the Philippine Navy website. The last one was taken from the shipspotting website. It was a recent post, so I would hazard a guess that it was fairly recent.

armedboarder
7th January 2007, 00:01
So more of the Roisin class then, or possibly the RN River Class PV... or maybe something completely different.

As regards the 120m, that's the Meko 200MRV from the presentation. Is there anything else in that size class?

Peacock class are a waste of money when P50 class can do both. IE drop N.S. boarding teams within range of Tango whether it be river based in the shallows or 250nm N, S or W. Their only advantage is their speed to an emergency callout.

DeV
7th January 2007, 15:36
Peacock class:
Max speed: 25-30 knots
Draught: 2.7 metres

P50 class:
Max speed: 23 knots
Draught: 3.8 metres

Peacocks are faster and can operate in shallower waters. They are the only real warships in the Naval Service (the rest being designed to civilian standard) but then again the accomodiation is poor and they aren't able to operate in as bad weather or as far out to sea as the P50s (or P21s for that matter).

DeV
8th January 2007, 17:25
Response to armedboarders post. The Peacocks are not just faster they are the only NS vessels built to naval as opposided to civvy maritime standard and have a swallower draught.

Aidan
8th January 2007, 17:37
have a swallower draught

Freudian slip!(way).

Just how important is draught? Once salmon is finished, there won't be much need for coming that close ashore surely?

DeV
8th January 2007, 17:55
SAR, Interdiction/surveillance, it allows the vessel to anchor in a wider range of ports / estuaries.

Goldie fish
8th January 2007, 18:56
Dev. Stop now.

You won't anchor anywhere if you have less than 1m clearance to the keel.
The newer Ribs can work further away from the Patrol Vessel, allowing an over the horizon capability.
The Fisheries board now have enough small craft of their own to operate in the shallow inshore areas. Also consider that while the Peacocks may have a shallower draft than the P50 class, if they are working in confined waters, they use the loiter drive which when extended, protrudes about 1m below the keel.

So no difference.

Also Armedboarder maybe knows a little more than yourself(or myself) about the capabilities of the naval vessels?

hptmurphy
8th January 2007, 19:35
Peacocks were purchased because they were available at the time at the right price at the right time. The last of the Sweepers had departed for the breakers in January of that year..Emer and Aoife were long overdue refits and we were effectively back to operating with a 4 ship navy as Emer was in tatters.


The only other contender was the french P400 class but these were deemed to be too small. The goverenment wasn't interested in Defence spending and Verolme had closed 4 years earlier so home builds were out of the question. The Peacocks for all their faults were bought with a sense of urgency for 10 million quid for the pair..they cost more than that to build and were only 5 years old.

The RN had specifically designed them as patrol vessels and as a replacement for TON class sweepers that had been converted to PVs so it was a natural progression in the DFs eyes that we should purchase to successor of the sweepers.

yes they have their faults but they were able to work in shallow waters where the PVs couldn't because of the single scews...and limited manouverability. The accomadation is a night mare but again we made the same mistake as we had with the sweepers in that when tied up these ships were supposed to put there cews ashore in accomadation blocks..this has never been the case in The INS and has caused much debate over actual time spent living in ships.

Yes they are classed as true warhips but commonailyt with the pielstick engines and the use of seariders made them aceptable to the powers that were in place at the time.

They were unique design and would never be repeated as a purchase..seeing new build seems the way forward..but they were a force multiplier that the service needed ack in 1988...when there was no other option.

The were built to RN short term patrol standards with accomadation which was similar to other serving major warshps at the time. The RN has only recently progressed to the type of accomadation we use with our patrol vessels...in their own vessels of this type.


A lot has changed since these were bought... ad a lot has been learned and seemingly forgotten...but as I said in the last two years of the 80s the NS were in deep trouble regarding hulls in water...availabilty of crews..and these to some extent..however limited did help with a reversal of fortunes. It was the fact that they were bought with the OTO BREDA 76mm gun that it became the feature main armamnent for newer classes of vessels.... they were the fore runners of PVs carrying seariders as only Eithne had done so up to this.


Yes they have their faults ..but they got us out of a deep hole at the time...

regarding their future....who knows?

Stoker
8th January 2007, 21:56
[





Peacocks are faster and can operate in shallower waters. They are the only real warships in the Naval Service (the rest being designed to civilian standard)

God we are at this again!
Naval Spec./ Civilian Spec. (should be Merchant Spec.) are not black and white. It is a very technical subject and I suspect some people are not quite sure what they are talking about.
Large Navies used to have a large Naval Constructors department, in 1935 the RN had 100,000 men but they had over 8000 civilian employees,( by 1954 they had over 33000 civilian employees). A large number of them were employed looking at drawings and reading specifications. In recent years the numbers involved in new ship design and construction have been slashed and the Clasification Societies (lloyds, Det Norske Veritas etc) have produced their own specifications for naval construction, each has several Naval specs. This is because they want the work, approving drawings and equipment, supervising building etc. all at great cost to the Navies who employ them but still representing a saving on the cost of having their own Dept. of Naval construction.The Indonesian Sigma corvettes built by De Schelde were built under Lloyds supervision.
Many Merchant vessels are in some respects built to a higher standard than Naval vessels, especially Cruise liners and Passenger ferries.these vessels are all built to the two compartment rule, ie the two largest compartments can be flooded and the vessel will float one meter above the margin line ie the main watertight deck, when you remember the largest compartment on a big Ferry could be 3000 M cube, X 2 = 6000 tonnes of water, thats a lot of reserve buyoncy, I won't get into freesurface effect. Most of these vessels have the essential services duplicated, propulsion, elecrtical power, steering, etc. they also have power operated, centrally controlled watertight doors and comprehensive Damage control rooms.Very few warships have ice classificarion but all ferries in Northern Europe are strenghtened even on the Irish sea!
The bottom line is you get what you pay for, hopefully that is also what you want.

pym
9th January 2007, 08:03
Peacock class are a waste of money when P50 class can do both. IE drop N.S. boarding teams within range of Tango whether it be river based in the shallows or 250nm N, S or W. Their only advantage is their speed to an emergency callout.

Ok, slight confusion which has caused all the subsequent dredging up of Peacock talk.

I was referring to these Royal Navy Vessels: http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.2157

They're called the River class.

I wasnt promoting the idea of getting further shallow draught vessels.

mikeym
9th January 2007, 17:27
I think the top brass are more interested in replacing the pv's than the peacocks.

Heres my bright idea make one of the peacocks a female crewed ship!

hptmurphy
10th January 2007, 00:23
But the NCos AND OFFICERS
don't hold the nessca appointments to make it work

Turkey
10th January 2007, 00:47
Apart from it being a daft idea, whats it supposed to prove anyway?

Goldie fish
10th January 2007, 08:57
If i'm not mistaken, there are no female senior rates in the NS. There may not be any Female Lt Commanders either, though that may change shortly.

So until the above changes dramatically, lets put the whole notion away please?

armedboarder
10th January 2007, 13:06
If i'm not mistaken, there are no female senior rates in the NS. There may not be any Female Lt Commanders either, though that may change shortly.

So until the above changes dramatically, lets put the whole notion away please?

In the next 2 years the sinior 2 will be promoted

hptmurphy
16th January 2007, 17:59
The two peacocks HMS Swift And HMS Swallow were only three years old and built by hall Russell in Aberdeen are were the last two in the class to be sold. The class were built with 75% cost and mainatance funding being supplied by the hong kong government.hence the RN was so miffed at them being sold. the Class were also the fits RN warships to be equiped with the 76mm OTO MElara gun system.They did not mount a .5 HMG in RN service and secondary armamant was 4x7.62mm machine guns.They were orignally rated at 662 tonnes not the previously quoted 700 tonnes.

The remaing three were passed on to the philipinnes in August of 1997.( Peacock Plover and Starling)

Given that they were only 3 years old at the time of handover to Ireland October 1988..that would mean they have until about 2015 left to serve under the NS thirty year policy...7 years left..loadsa time for an all female crew.

sparky
27th January 2007, 12:14
Given that they were only 3 years old at the time of handover to Ireland October 1988..that would mean they have until about 2015 left to serve under the NS thirty year policy...7 years left..loadsa time for an all female crew.

I might stand corrected but i dont think they have any female ERA's and Trish is their only EA. Who would do watches in the MCR.

ELVIS
28th January 2007, 17:18
There are more than 2 female LT's in the INS. I can count 5 off the top of my head. What would be the point of an all female crew? it solves nothing. Whats wrong with the all male set up at the moment? It gets the job done.

We must also give Charlie Haughey a lot of praise for obtaaining the 2 peacocks

discostu
29th January 2007, 15:56
Theoretically you could have three female appointments onboard as three have their own cabins. Coxswain... not gonna happen anytime shortly!!! XO... relief XO has been done by female Lts in the past and Captain... not for a few years certainly!!!

thebig C
18th March 2007, 21:46
"...Its well known for example that the smaller vessels in our current fleet must go to anchor at night..."

Is that a joke?

Goldie fish
18th March 2007, 22:13
No. Why?

thebig C
22nd March 2007, 09:29
Orla and Ciara anchor for a number of reasons. First and foremost is fuel consumption - up to a tonne an hour per engine so makes no sense to leave them at sea overnight. Secondly as they usually work coastal they dont have to stay offshore near concentrations of trawlers so they can afford to go to anchor at night. Thirdly due to the living conditions onboard i.e. 11&8 berth cabins. To be honest anything over a force 7/8 they become uncomfortable so while they are fast and can get into ports and bays that the bigger ships cannot they are not designed for the harsh weather on the West Coast. This is not to stay they dont ever steam overnight if they have to for operational reasons they will.


Thanks for that interesting information… Makes me wonder..

Are the ships uncomfortable in a gale because of their hull design and/or relatively shallow draught? Do they have bilge keels? Active stabilisers? If not, would it help it these were fitted?

Could the berthing arrangements be improved by partitioning the large cabins? Could crew numbers be reduced to make them more habitable?

If they don’t usually steam at night, would the crews not be lacking in training and/or experience when the time came that they had to….?

As for fuel consumption, is the normal cruising speed optimised for maximum fuel efficiency?

Goldie fish
22nd March 2007, 10:52
The Peacocks are speedboats. I think they have 2x 18 cylinder engines. Their minimum speed is 6-8 knots. For working in confined waters they use a retractable electric propellor, a loiter drive.(there is a photo of it about somewhere... Partitioning cabins would merely reduce the available space. Bunks are stacked 3 high, unique for an irish vessel. Safe manning levels are just that. Bilge keels are fitted, they don't have the room for active stabilizers, and at this late stage in their lives it would be uneconomical to fit them.

http://gallery.irishmilitaryonline.com/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=2222&g2_serialNumber=1

http://gallery.irishmilitaryonline.com/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=2221&g2_serialNumber=1

http://gallery.irishmilitaryonline.com/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=2215&g2_serialNumber=1

Test Pilot
22nd March 2007, 18:56
I don't see any reason why the females can't serve aboard the Peacocks!

The ERA's cabin on the main deck, St.Bd side, is a four berth and has its own heads and shower! What's the big deal! Where to hang the washing?
A few clothes pegs and a few 'frillies' hanging on the after deck or in the engine room wouldn't be the end of the world!

hptmurphy
22nd March 2007, 22:47
carrington if you were familiar with the internal layout of these ships you would understand how cramped the living quarters are...the date back to the Royal navy days of mess decking where the different divisions lived in different spaces....they were only a slight improvement on the sweepers as at least the dining areas and recreation space is seperate to sleeping quarters.

again it should be rememenbered that this type of ship was designed to put its crew ashore in barracks when not at sea.. a concept that never really caught on with the NS.

The peacocks were not specifically designed to work in Atlantic waters and so have none of the refinements of those ships that were.

They were an 'emergency purchase' soyou got what was on offer..not maybe what you really wanted but functional all the same.

I don't think the DF has eveolved enough in its attitude towards women..or women in their attitude toward fellow serving members of the Df to allow sharing confined living spaces...

I reckon these ships will have passed by the time the minds open up.

thebig C
23rd March 2007, 17:58
Many thanks for that info. and the pics. Am I right that the Peacocks will be around until 2015, when they will be 30 years old?

I see from the official NS website that these vessels have a crew of 39. That's a reduction from the original RN complement of 44; they also were supposed to be able to accommodate a small detachment of Royal Marines. Has that reduction not freed up some accommodation space? Is there any potential to further reduce the size of the crew, without of course compromising safety? What type of watch system do they operate?

Test Pilot
23rd March 2007, 18:49
I don't think the DF has eveolved enough in its attitude towards women..or women in their attitude toward fellow serving members of the Df to allow sharing confined living spaces...

I reckon these ships will have passed by the time the minds open up.[/quote]

Murph, thats exactly the point! Spot on!

hptmurphy
24th March 2007, 00:51
I really do wish that some people would research their questions before posting them..after all some of the questions have been answered even before they have been asked.

ZULU
24th March 2007, 00:54
I think we still have a Cylinder Head for one of those Pielstick Engines in the workshop?!

Anyone looking for an unusual coffee table? :tongue: :biggrin:

Goldie fish
4th March 2008, 17:48
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZbXh1sMPyQ4&rel=1&border=0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZbXh1sMPyQ4&rel=1&border=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent"width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Anyone recognise themselves? Looks recent enough(note new sat dome)

YankeeHotelFoxtrot
4th March 2008, 18:55
Single up for and aft!



Jesus, they are a horrible ship to go to sea on.

Test Pilot
4th March 2008, 21:01
Single up for and aft!



Jesus, they are a horrible ship to go to sea on.

Well, I waited to see what was going to happen, Single up for and aft? Waited and waited. After waiting through two thirds of the video I noticed that the radars still had not started. Was she going to sea? Emmmm. No.

Oh wait, there is something moving on all fours on the port deck. A rat ? No, a seaman.

Still waiting. Is something going to happen? Oh shit - the end!:frown:

Goldie fish
5th March 2008, 01:27
Yeah, over enthusaistic camera man. He should have at least waited for the crew to muster aft for their first fag of the day....

Test Pilot
5th March 2008, 14:32
Guys to answer a few of the points raised here.

1: The accom on the peacocks is not suitable for over night steaming, heavy weather or basic living it is CRAP full stop no other answer is required.
You arent allowed keep fecking criminals is such conditions.

2: The four berth belongs to the Senior NCO's who may have shit space but hey at least its better than the 11 berths.

3: The 11 berths now rarely if ever carry 11 bodys because of the dire state of crew numbers.

4: If you could give up an 11 berth to Females and give them the Seniors Rates Head. You would now have every other bloke on the vessel using the 2 toilets, 2 Showers and 2 Sinks in the Ratings Head.

5: Messing arrangements are not a problem because Messes are unisex everywhere.

6: We will never have a Unisex system onboard our vessels as in shared showers and heads, the bucket of worms such a thing would open can not be imagened. To do this would require a complete change of Irish Male attitude towards women. (NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN)

7: And if you dont think the accom on a Peacock is CRAP you dont have a clue what your talking about.

Hi Rosser,

1.Just to answer some of your points. I spent just over four years on the Peacocks. Yes they were tight, but NOT crap! We got used to them - thats the nature of these vessels.

2. I steamed on many an overnight and some in heavy weather. We survived -no big deal! So it is suitable for overnights and more!

3. I had the best time at sea on the Peacocks, so much so, that I requested a Peacock again after my first stint. What made it were the crew and the craic and looking out for each other. But if you adopt the view of 'doom and gloom' you may find that the other crew members will get pissed off'' with you and you may be left to wallow in your own depressed attitude and end up in a state of some isolation.

4. You do have the option to request a transfer to another ship or to leave. Thats your choice! I suspect though, that you may have come from a previous ship that had higher standards and that this current ship is a bit of a culture shock. Well if thats the case, stick with it for a while longer - you will adapt to it. Look for the positive side of things like anchoring most nights. I took that as a bit of a respite from the occasional sea sickness and as an opportunity to get some work done.

5. I don't think the Peacocks are crap, but then I do have more than a clue!

I wish you well on which ever course of action you choose. :smile:

Test Pilot
5th March 2008, 16:09
[quote=rosser;198697]I wonder did we ever serve together then Test lol.

Perhaps we did! I'll PM you!:biggrin:

Goldie fish
5th March 2008, 18:54
Fact is the Peacocks were designed to operate in and around Hong Kong. Coastal Patrol boats that could survive the odd typhoon if at anchor maybe.

easyrider
5th March 2008, 20:28
...and the accommodation was designed for 'local' crew, so that might explain the standard...

hptmurphy
5th March 2008, 21:16
They have the standard accommadation of All RN ships of the time of their build.

Only in recent years have the RN come to look at what we have had since the Deirdre with cabin acommadation.

It has to be borne in mind that they were designed with the same idea as the Sweepers short patrols live in baks while not a t sea.

We never got around to this frame of mind.

Its harder for guys who live in as this is their home 24/7 this is the point that has been missed time and time again,

The junior rates in the past did not live a shore and once sent to ships lived there... not just 9 to five and a few over nights but medium to long term..actually this was there semi permanent home

This contributes to some of the negativity..on the PVs etc you have some space especilly iof your cabin mates live out..in mess decks no chance of this.

The ideal would to have had an accommadation block in the basin for these crews to move into when the ships came alongside but it never came to pass.

even with Cabin spaces it should be considrred that the crews should be allowed to live off the ship when every it is possible with duty watches etc been drawn as shifts as opposed tothe guys living in taking the hits for duties all the time.

When leave periods and refits happen ships services can be serverly run down and no thought was ever given to those who lived in..

YankeeHotelFoxtrot
6th March 2008, 20:51
The Deirdre! Now there was a ship, all over the place even in the basin!:tongue:

marloy
8th August 2008, 13:31
The Deirdre! Now there was a ship, all over the place even in the basin!:tongue:

eithne a beautiful ship at sea but when at anchor rolled like a barrel on a hill

damo de muff diver
10th August 2008, 19:22
Have only just read this thread
In my time was sent from Eithne(newest) to Grainne(one of the oldest) in 1985 for salmon patrol as Test Pilot said earlier in this thread you adapted and just got on with it.
as Hpt has said living conditions were never ideal but then what in life is. :wink:
Are the Peacocks the same as the sweepers
First up---Best dressed :smile::smile::smile:

Goldie fish
20th November 2008, 19:40
They'll be out and about for a while yet.

Replacement Fridge systems - Coastal Patrol Vessels
Description of the goods or services required
Existing Fridge system on board the NS Vessels L.E. ORLA and L.E. CIARA to be decommissioned, stripped down and removed in accordance with all current legislation, including disposal of R22 gas.

A replacement system to be designed, installed and commissioned (detailed Technical Annex attached).

Potential Suppliers must view the ship prior to submission of tenders. Ship is available for viewing between 22nd November - 07th December.

A comprehensive operating and parts manual to be supplied (both soft and hard copies).

It is intended that the contract will be awarded in two separate lots, with the intended jobs to be completed as follows;

Lot 1 - L.E. CIARA - 05thJanuary - 13th February 2009.

Lot 2 - L.E. ORLA - 16th March - 24th April 2009.

Tenders are to offer a comprehensive breakdown of costs, to include as a minimum costings for the decommission and removal of existing system, fitting and commissioning of new system, and provision of required material (i.e. operating & parts manuals)


NOTE: Further information relating to this notice may be available on the eTenders Web Site at http://www.etenders.gov.ie/Search/Search_Switch.aspx?ID=73957.

hptmurphy
20th November 2008, 21:53
Looks like Cross refrigeration in Cork will be busy again as they carried out the refits on the PVs if I'm not mistaken

sparky
23rd November 2008, 20:14
I thought the Navy would be looking at cut backs and exchange R22 with a drop down gas, that would save the change till 2010 i think.

Goldie fish
23rd November 2008, 20:23
Depends on how knackered the old fridges are I suppose. Prob just as easy to rip the whole unit out anyway to get at the plant.

sparky
23rd November 2008, 20:34
And its work for somebody.

Joshua
23rd November 2008, 20:45
I thought the Navy would be looking at cut backs and exchange R22 with a drop down gas, that would save the change till 2010 i think.

Its "drop in" and it is not cost effective. ie R22 has to go.

Replacing the equipment with new environmentally friendly energy saving alternatives makes better sense in the long run.

YankeeHotelFoxtrot
29th November 2008, 20:24
eithne a beautiful ship at sea but when at anchor rolled like a barrel on a hill

Ballycotton, worst anchorage around Ireland. Bloody pints kept sliding off the table in the Rec!

delmonte
9th January 2009, 19:07
Id blame the Mavo Navo

Goldie fish
10th January 2009, 03:03
For Ballycotton?

Test Pilot
10th January 2009, 14:57
Ballycotton, worst anchorage around Ireland. Bloody pints kept sliding off the table in the Rec!

Always thought 'Hole Open' Bay was the worst for rolling myself. Strange name come to think of it!:smile:

Goldie fish
10th January 2009, 15:49
Not really, when you see the big hole... I always assumed it was named ironically, up to when I first saw it.

YankeeHotelFoxtrot
10th January 2009, 19:18
Always thought 'Hole Open' Bay was the worst for rolling myself. Strange name come to think of it!:smile:

Yeah, that's another that is not great when the conditions are against ya.

GoneToTheCanner
11th January 2009, 11:18
Hi all,
there was a clip on TV last night of an Israeli ship firing a shore bombardment using what appeared to be a 76mm Oto-Melara gun, with a crew loading a carousel by hand below the turret.Is that common practise?
regards
GttC

Victor
11th January 2009, 15:33
Hi all,
there was a clip on TV last night of an Israeli ship firing a shore bombardment using what appeared to be a 76mm Oto-Melara gun, with a crew loading a carousel by hand below the turret.Is that common practise?
regards
GttCI believe it has X rounds ready that can be fired automaticly, but then you have to start loading for sustained operations.

Dogwatch
11th January 2009, 17:53
Hi all,
there was a clip on TV last night of an Israeli ship firing a shore bombardment using what appeared to be a 76mm Oto-Melara gun, with a crew loading a carousel by hand below the turret.Is that common practise?
regards
GttC

Carousel is loaded before firing & will be emptied after one minute's firing for a 76mm, so it would have to be reloaded regularly.

Goldie fish
21st January 2009, 19:40
L.E. Ciara is due in a drydock in march. Tender details: http://www.etenders.gov.ie/Search/Search_Switch.aspx?ID=77211

I assume the fridge job will be done then.
I have not seen drydocking going to tender like this before.

Goldie fish
9th February 2009, 23:27
http://www.etenders.gov.ie/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=FEB113653

4 Award of Contract
4.1 Successful Bidders
4.1.1 Name and Address of successful supplier, contractor or service provider

Official Name:
Prime Air
Postal Address:
Unit 8, Swans Nest Business Park, Pouladuff

Nav Trooper
20th March 2009, 21:42
1. Single cabins CO(possible) XO(possible) Coxn(not for another10 years min).

2. Officers heads are shared on the 50s although the fem junior rates have their own.

3. Accomodation/Messes is a real culture shock to those from other class ships but many/most who have served on them prefer to return .

4. The best logo I had ever seen was on the polo shirts etc "Yorkie-Not for Girls" but was discontinued due to it being "sexist" and against A7. To this day it is not permitted although they were the most popular seller to my knowledge and are still requested but to no avail.

hptmurphy
21st March 2009, 02:34
4. The best logo I had ever seen was on the polo shirts etc "Yorkie-Not for Girls" but was discontinued due to it being "sexist" and against A7. To this day it is not permitted although they were the most popular seller to my knowledge and are still requested but to no avail.

This was the thinking 20 years ago still a valid arguement on some class of ships

Dogwatch
26th November 2009, 13:21
http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m109/40niner_com/Warships/carat-2008-a.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g56/adroth92/pn/090421-N-6692A-057.jpg
PHILIPPINES SEA (April 21, 2009) – The forward-deployed amphibious assault ship USS Essex (LHD 2) leads ships formation during photo exercise (PHOTOEX) with Philippines Navy ships BRP Rajah Humabon (PF 11), BRP Leopoldo Regis (PG 847), BRP Dagupan City (LC 551), BRP Artemio Ricarte (PS 37), and U.S. Navy ship USS Tortuga (LSD 46) (not included in the picture), during Balikatan 2009 (BK09), which is an annual combined, joint-bilateral exercise involving U.S. Military and Armed Forces of the Philippines personnel as well as subject-matter experts from Philippine Civil Defense Agencies. BK09 is the 25th in the series of these exercises, directed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and requested by the Government of the Republic of the Philippines. Essex, commanded by Capt. Brent Canady, is the lead ship of the Navy's only forward-deployed Amphibious Ready Group and serves as the flagship for CTF 76.

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g56/adroth92/pn/090421-N-0120A-017.jpg
SOUTH CHINA SEA (April 21, 2009) The Armed Forces of the Philippines Navy patrol boat BRP Artemio Ricarte (PS 37) maneuvers into position in a formation exercise with the amphibious assault ship USS Essex (LHD 2) during exercise Balikatan 2009. Artemio Ricarte is participating in Balikatan 2009, an annual combined, joint-bilateral exercise involving U.S. and Armed Forces of the Philippines personnel, as well as subject matter experts from Philippine civil defense agencies.

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o216/john_andal/PS37/DSC01699.jpg

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o216/john_andal/PS37/IMG_5916.jpg

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o216/john_andal/PS37/IMG_5961.jpg

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o216/john_andal/PS37/IMG_6031.jpg
Females onboard??!
http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o216/john_andal/PS37/IMG_6042A.jpg

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o216/john_andal/IMG_7287.jpg

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o216/john_andal/IMG_7288.jpg

Dogwatch
18th March 2011, 00:11
http://www.shipspotting.com/photos/middle/0/3/6/1268630.jpg
BRP Apolinario Mabini PS-36

hptmurphy
18th March 2011, 20:51
Whats the weapon mounted on the funnel deck where we have Rh202s mounted.?

I assume the weapon on the after deck is a 25mm of some description.

Rhodes
18th March 2011, 21:26
Whats the weapon mounted on the funnel deck where we have Rh202s mounted.?

Two 20mm Oerlikon cannons.


I assume the weapon on the after deck is a 25mm of some description.

A 25mm Bushmaster cannon mounted on the same remote controlled system as used on the New Zealand Protector class ships.

hptmurphy
18th March 2011, 21:55
Two 20mm Oerlikon cannons

Don't look like Oerlikons.....I was thinking . Browning,5s ..given the low height of the mount in realtion to the size of the average Filipino


But oerlikons it is.

That 25mm Bushmaster is a very serious looking piece of kit.Does it have its own fire control system or is it slaved to the 76mm FCS.

Are all 3 remaining ships still in service.

Time to have a look around google I think


http://tuguireng.blogspot.com/2010/06/jacinto-class-corvette-philippine-navy.htm

Rhodes
18th March 2011, 23:14
Don't look like Oerlikons.....I was thinking . Browning,5s ..given the low height of the mount in realtion to the size of the average Filipino

It has what looks like Browning .5s on the bridgewings, hard to see in the small pictures.


That 25mm Bushmaster is a very serious looking piece of kit.Does it have its own fire control system or is it slaved to the 76mm FCS.

This looks like the fire control system on the right in the picture below, as the black plaque says MSI on it for MSI Defense System who the manufacture 25mm gun system.

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o216/john_andal/IMG_7287.jpg


Are all 3 remaining ships still in service.

All three are still in service and are continually being upgraded not just with new weapons but also to increase there service life.

Dogwatch
22nd October 2015, 21:21
http://www.janes.com/images/assets/077/55077/0588289_-_main.jpg

The Philippines Department of National Defense (DND) has relaunched a programme to upgrade the Philippine Navy's (PN's) three Jacinto-class corvettes.

Invitation to bid notices published by the DND on 6 October show the programme - worth PHP854.6 million (USD18.5 million) - features the upgrade of the vessels' weapons and fire-control systems.

The programme was launched in January 2015 but shelved by the DND following a failed bidding process, in which nine companies reportedly expressed interest in competing but none submitted formal bids.

The contract involves restoration and sustainment of the vessels' Oto Melara 76 mm and MSI-Defence Systems 25 mm guns, the installation of new electro-optical fire control systems and sensors for two vessels, and the upgrade of existing fire control systems for one vessel.

The programme also includes the supply of ammunition for the three vessels, which were commissioned into PN service in August 1997, having previously served with the UK Royal Navy's Hong Kong Squadron as the Peacock class. The vessels were sold to the Philippines when the United Kingdom handed Hong Kong over to China.

http://www.janes.com/article/55077/philippines-relaunches-corvette-upgrade-project