EPV for naval service

[expat01]

A circular argument develops. We don’t need ships for such roles because we don’t do such roles because we don’t have ships for such roles therefore...
Consider, if Verolme hadn’t been a mess and the economy so mismanaged, we would now be looking to replace four P30 class ships and their helicopters. Inertia would be pushing us to keeping and expanding that capacity.
Now the issue of crews, pay and time at sea is different.
It simply points out the fact that the government is underspending on defence -on what we need to maintain our stated role, establishment and capacity - to the tune of half a billion.
That’s not a wishlist, that’s clearly, if we can’t recruit and keep sufficient crews and soldiers, a bare minimum requirement to pay for what we say we have.

That’s your family man saying he has a sedan but can’t find the money for insurance, new tyres or brakes but it’s all ok.

[DeV]

Just to point out that the WP doesn't define what multi-role actually means, just:

- will not carry a helo but "enabled for helicopter operations"
- "freight carrying capacity"
- "flexible and adaptive"...."wide range of maritime tasks" .."home and overseas"

[expat01]

Just to point out that the WP doesn't define what multi-role actually means, just:

- will not carry a helo but "enabled for helicopter operations"
- "freight carrying capacity"
- "flexible and adaptive"...."wide range of maritime tasks" .."home and overseas"

I wonder how it and it’s crew is going to be enabled for helicopter operations if it doesn’t regularly operate a helo. That’s like being enabled for tank operations because you have a place to park them if they ever turn up.

[morpheus]

CIWS
Air search radar
Naval air wing
ASW
are probably all things that we need to consider investing in.
At the minute were procuring ships with a main gun, 2 .5s and a few stations for 7.62, a pretty average radar and limited war fighting or self defence capability with virtually nil air or sub surface defence

[DeV]

iirc it was either the chartered vessels MV Edamgracht and Edisongracht that sealifted the Suai district.

HADR situations in the West Indies or West Coast of Africa will continue with some regularity so yeah it is not just useful to have sealift capabilities for the occassional Chp VII event.

I do seen to recall a beach landing possibly via LCVP

[DeV]

I wonder how it and it’s crew is going to be enabled for helicopter operations if it doesn’t regularly operate a helo. That’s like being enabled for tank operations because you have a place to park them if they ever turn up.

It does define what "enabled" means either

[expat01]

CIWS
Air search radar
Naval air wing
ASW
are probably all things that we need to consider investing in.
At the minute were procuring ships with a main gun, 2 .5s and a few stations for 7.62, a pretty average radar and limited war fighting or self defence capability with virtually nil air or sub surface defence

“Limited” meaning “only against enemy vessels that don’t mount missiles or carry helicopter with the same” as our ships will never even see the thing that kills them.

Theoretically, one RNZN OPV could take out the entire fleet with Maverick missiles from its Kaman helicopter.
Better hope we never beat the All-Blacks.

[Sparky42]

Better hope we never beat the All-Blacks.

We did.

[expat01]

Americans kept the peace

[ancientmariner]

Building in facilities in ships increases options. FDO and HCO courses are readily available in UK. Firefighting for flight deck crews can be done at home using tubular steel Heli mock up on a land based Flight Deck, as in other Navies. In our earlier Days we were an all arms Navy with full on shore training facilities. Our goal should be to replicate that Naval ability to today's standards.

[DeV]

Building in facilities in ships increases options. FDO and HCO courses are readily available in UK. Firefighting for flight deck crews can be done at home using tubular steel Heli mock up on a land based Flight Deck, as in other Navies. In our earlier Days we were an all arms Navy with full on shore training facilities. Our goal should be to replicate that Naval ability to today's standards.

The initial training isn't probably as much as an issue currency

[ancientmariner]

The final say on the shape and direction of all of our Forces should come from an informed Service Group who must persuade the decision makers that Ireland has not maintained pace with modern conventional arms and it's associated technology. At some stage the professionals must insist on standards for all units/ships being deployed to enforcement areas.

[hptmurphy]

Every serving member would disagree with you. If the MRV is to be used sparingly for FP then great. It can be a secondary role for the vessel rather than primary role.
A crew would much rather be deployed on anything other than FP. Its time to stop thinking as the Navy as a FP only organisation.

Not for one minute do I believe that FP is the only mission of the NS but I do believe that the step taken in OP Pontus and Sophia are the direction we need to be going in with suitable ships .

(a) I don't believe that an MRV is the best vessel to be used in these type of ops

(b) I don't believe that the army will commit to moving troops by this method except in small scale packets for exercise purposes while larger movements will still be deployed by commercial means.

UNIFIL has a naval component
UNMIL including landing Irish MOWAGs by Dutch LCUs
EUNAVFOR Med is a naval operation
INTERFET saw Irish troops being landed by Australian craft I think

We could commit to UNIFIl with existing ships, we don't need an MRV

Unmil, the vehicles had been deployed by commercial means, the NS was ready to move MOWAGS on Eithne, the mission was declined.

INTERFET, yes they were deployed by Australian Landing craft in Australias back yard. Would have made no sense to seand an Irish Vessel todeploy one company of troops 12000 miles away when they were flown there in the first place.

A crew would much rather be deployed on anything other than FP.

I have no doubt , and there are missions available to specific types of vessels if the government moved outside of their safety zone and permitted participation in other missions, but these are defined by the ship available, again backing yourself into a corner with something such as a troop landing ship, which is all it is really is not really where you want to be.

Are the Army or the AC be as enthusiastic as these will be the primary users of such a vessel and history shows third party commitment often proves to be the success or failure of such projects.

Bank the money, add to it and buy two Type 31e frigates when they become available ( E for Export) . Have a look what the RN are looking from the type and see how compatible it is with our current constabulary type role and how it is the next step we have to take in increasing our overseas foot print.

The MRV concept has been around for nearly twenty years and its only now they are going to have a look? Either past management weren't completely sold on the idea or someone is just taking a look to please political wishes .

If it happens it will be at least 5 years before we see it operational, but until we overcome the current manning and pay related issues keeping existing ships at sea will be more problematic than acquiring new ones.

[hptmurphy]

CIWS
Air search radar
Naval air wing
ASW
are probably all things that we need to consider investing in.
At the minute were procuring ships with a main gun, 2 .5s and a few stations for 7.62, a pretty average radar and limited war fighting or self defence capability with virtually nil air or sub surface defence

And incorporate it on a frigate rather than an MRV!!!!

[DeV]

UNMIL, the vehicles had been deployed by commercial means, the NS was ready to move MOWAGS on Eithne, the mission was declined.

long range patrols included deploying MOWAGs across the beach using landing craft from HNLMS Rotterdam.

INTERNET, yes they were deployed by Australian Landing craft in Australias back yard. Would have made no sense to seand an Irish Vessel todeploy one company of troops 12000 miles away when they were flown there in the first place.

IRCON was a Pln

I'm talking about deployments within the theatre not to the SPOD.

The MRV concept has been around for nearly twenty years and its only now they are going to have a look? .

Ever hear of the Blue/Green ship or EPV tender ?

[hptmurphy]

Ever hear of the Blue/Green ship or EPV tender ?

First mooted about 2003 myself and another member saw reference to it on a naval open day!

I'm talking about deployments within the theatre not to the SPOD.

Yeah I'm sure there will be loads of deployments that will put a 250 million euro ship in harms way to deploy a coy sized unit!

IRCON was a Pln

Again, so why would we need a 250 million ship 12,000 miles away to operate when we were already deployed as part of a New Zealand Battalion drawing support from the RAN

Its not so much a 'must have' as it would be 'nice to have' and in time it would be nice, but to my mind until we have vessels that can enhance current ops its should be no more than that,

After all Simon Coveney did mention Frigates a time back so there is a political will to up size. MRV might be the only way to keep the looney left and tree huggers in check given Frigates might appear to be more war like...but it doesn't mean its right!

[expat01]

I do believe that Ireland needs an MRV because, absent alliances, we should be capable of landing and supporting troops by ourselves. Even if a small number, even, contingency wise, on our own shores.
But, absent alliances, vessels that are primarily contingency or overseas co-operation in role are things we should acquire after we have the means to protect them. Unless we stump up for an Absalon type ship, an MRV will likely either be no use as a troop carrier/support vessel, or no use in patrolling our waters.
The RNZN has a task force concept. Support vessels like the Canterbury and their replenishment ship are back up to and backed up by frigates. Our three Defence arms have already shown they don’t play well enough together. The navy should be a navy until that culture changes, the state puts its money where its mouth is and we can actually have such a vessel with a permanently attached helicopter, backed up by firepower.
But in the meantime, with no chance of real spending for another five years, what sounds like the UN’s mini car ferry is a waste of our money.

[DeV]

First mooted about 2003 myself and another member saw reference to it on a naval open day!

yes I remember and that's why I pointed it out

yeah I'm sure there will be loads of deployments that will put a 250 million euro ship in harms way to deploy a coy sized unit!



Again, so why would we need a 250 million ship 12,000 miles away to operate when we were already deployed as part of a New Zealand Battalion drawing support from the RAN

Its not so much a 'must have' as it would be 'nice to have' and in time it would be nice, but to my mind until we have vessels that can enhance current ops its should be no more than that,

After all Simon Coveney did mention Frigates a time back so there is a political will to up size. MRV might be the only way to keep the looney left and tree huggers in check given Frigates might appear to be more war like...but it doesn't mean its right!

I'm responding to you saying there were 2 missions were a naval element could have been required. I'm pointing out there were 4 where they were actually used (in role if you like (across the beach)). I'm not suggesting that there was or is a need for an Irish vessel being capable of doing it. I'm just pointing out it has happened.

Obviously I'm excluding Niamh resupplying UNMEE, Niamh I think it was on the recce to Liberia and numerous resupplies to UNIFIL.

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with you but these have happened.

I do believe that Ireland needs an MRV because, absent alliances, we should be capable of landing and supporting troops by ourselves. Even if a small number, even, contingency wise, on our own shores.

the NS have done so a number of times as far north as Donegal I think.

[Anzac]

iirc it was either the chartered vessels MV Edamgracht and Edisongracht that sealifted the Suai district.

HADR situations in the West Indies or West Coast of Africa will continue with some regularity so yeah it is not just useful to have sealift capabilities for the occassional Chp VII event.

I double checked the paperwork via CDRE Cummins 2002 post ET report into maritime ops as not to completely trust memories of events from 18 years ago. To update for accuracy the MV Edamgracht and Edisongracht did the strategic sealift into theatre staging base at Darwin but the tactical sealift across the Timor Sea into Suai harbour was done by FNS Scirrocco, the USS Belleau Wood and the RAN Toobruk (which piggybacked a LCM to do it via a stern-bow transfer). They all did the job but what really impressed was the Bealleau Wood an LHA which set the RAN on its LHD acquisition pathway. The then RNZN sealift vessel the Upham was deemed not up for it as predicted.

This does raise a point. With a proposed MRV / EPV what is been aimed for? Is it strategic sealift from the Cobh to the theatre staging area where specialist tactical vessels can take it those last nautical miles or is it long range tactical sealift? They will define the capability just as much as whether it is weighted for HADR/SASO taskings or for ET type Chp VII events where there maybe an opposed force like the TNI.

[DeV]

I double checked the paperwork via CDRE Cummins 2002 post ET report into maritime ops as not to completely trust memories of events from 18 years ago. To update for accuracy the MV Edamgracht and Edisongracht did the strategic sealift into theatre staging base at Darwin but the tactical sealift across the Timor Sea into Suai harbour was done by FNS Scirrocco, the USS Belleau Wood and the RAN Toobruk (which piggybacked a LCM to do it via a stern-bow transfer). They all did the job but what really impressed was the Bealleau Wood an LHA which set the RAN on its LHD acquisition pathway. The then RNZN sealift vessel the Upham was deemed not up for it as predicted.

This does raise a point. With a proposed MRV / EPV what is been aimed for? Is it strategic sealift from the Cobh to the theatre staging area where specialist tactical vessels can take it those last nautical miles or is it long range tactical sealift? They will define the capability just as much as whether it is weighted for HADR/SASO taskings or for ET type Chp VII events where there maybe an opposed force like the TNI.

Again there is no definition of what the "freight carrying capability" is, it could be say 6 TEUs on a flight deck (when not is use and that's it) or it could be a LPD

[ancientmariner]

Again there is no definition of what the "freight carrying capability" is, it could be say 6 TEUs on a flight deck (when not is use and that's it) or it could be a LPD

Even small Navies have an ability to serve their state in disaster relief and support operations. having a specific method is an advantage with a suitably designed vessel which can also cover troop and stores movement. Such a ship would provide a sustained training platform to reinforce interoperability with other forces. Putting TEU's on OPV's is a make do undertaking.

[DeV]

Even small Navies have an ability to serve their state in disaster relief and support operations. having a specific method is an advantage with a suitably designed vessel which can also cover troop and stores movement. Such a ship would provide a sustained training platform to reinforce interoperability with other forces. Putting TEU's on OPV's is a make do undertaking.

I agree but it depends on DoD and what the DF are actually looking for

[hptmurphy]

Obviously I'm excluding Niamh resupplying UNMEE, Niamh I think it was on the recce to Liberia and numerous resupplies to UNIFIL.

And the point being these and the UNIFIL e supplies ove rthe years were well catered for by the then existing ships.

The new P60 class are that much bigger and thus could carry out the same mission .

This does raise a point. With a proposed MRV / EPV what is been aimed for

I don't think they have grasped that nettle yet. I get the impression its a case of build one and lets see what we can do with it because its free money so to speak!

Is it strategic sealift from the Cobh to the theatre staging area where specialist tactical vessels can take it those last nautical miles or is it long range tactical sealift

There within lies the issue, we can't deploy enough people on a tactical basis to significantly support any mission as we don't have a deployable all arms capability to include suitable air cover.

[DeV]

And the point being these and the UNIFIL e supplies ove rthe years were well catered for by the then existing ships.

The new P60 class are that much bigger and thus could carry out the same mission .




I don't think they have grasped that nettle yet. I get the impression its a case of build one and lets see what we can do with it because its free money so to speak!

i very much doubt the specs in the tender will say anything along the lines of we have no idea give us whatever you want

None of us (afaik) are in NSHQ, SPO, HLIG, the high level procurement group (can't remember what it's called), contracts branch etc

There within lies the issue, we can't deploy enough people on a tactical basis to significantly support any mission as we don't have a deployable all arms capability to include suitable air cover.

Very few countries can, which is why they are a multinational ops

[ancientmariner]

[QUOTE=DeV;455323]i very much doubt the specs in the tender will say anything along the lines of we have no idea give us whatever you want

None of us (afaik) are in NSHQ, SPO, HLIG, the high level procurement group (can't remember what it's called), contracts branch etc

After clarifying an interservice wish list of how much, how many, how far, for how long, the procurement board draws up an outline ship's specification which is sent to an agreed list of potential ship builders. Some assistance with the specification can be fortified by using a Ship building Bureau such as Nevesbu Holland. The potential builders are asked to submit a builders specification based on the outline specification and submit quotes. After selecting a successful Yard, meetings are held to sift through the specification. The first stage will be model building and tank testing to establish speed and power required. Thereafter it is all building, supervised by Naval personnel backed up by the main technical contractor, and a Quality control Officer from the Yard. On going Survey is supplied by Llyods and all guarantees are reinforced to maximise duration of those guarantees. Specialist agencies are used to install and line up all naval equipment.