Thanks Thanks:  485
Likes Likes:  1,045
Dislikes Dislikes:  30
Page 64 of 71 FirstFirst ... 14546263646566 ... LastLast
Results 1,576 to 1,600 of 1759
  1. #1576
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    342
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Whats option 'b'?
    Option B for what? The RIB position or for the EPV?

  2. #1577
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    888
    Post Thanks / Like
    US Navy Oilers of slow non-combat replenishment capability are classified as AOR's. I'm not sure this is the type of one stop ship that is required. The minimum speed should be 18kts to support our existing ships.
    The standard naval ship takes fuel by closed gravity feed and is directed to relevant tanks by opening and closing valves. Fuel can be moved between tanks and also to service tanks above the engine manifolds, however the system is not designed to pump oil outwards or ashore without some re-engineering, and then it is at a very low tonnage rate. Two OPV's cannot transfer fuel to each other underway but individually should be equipped to take it from any Nato Replenishment ship. I have some doubts if our fuelling stations can be adapted for such operations due to design and constricted space. It should be forward of the bridge with all necessary eyebolts, strong points, and communications.

  3. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  4. #1578
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    350
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    [...]

    Realistically, to be useful, for ops where harbour facilities are lacking you need LCUs and a well dock (otherwise your constrained by sea state trying to load a LCU via crane). [...]
    Or the steel beach of the Damen ships, like the Karel Doorman

  5. #1579
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    350
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmití View Post
    I like it.
    4 tanks and 4 trucks and 500 pax? We might want to rebalance that a bit for our purposes, no? We probably also want her a bit faster I think.
    Last edited by Graylion; 9th July 2017 at 11:40.

  6. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  7. #1580
    Major General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,288
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Whats option 'b'?
    Tarlac. Rib station is open. but at main deck level. Canterbury had it a deck below main deck.
    Well, there's good news and bad news. The bad news is that Neil will be taking over both branches, and some of you will lose your jobs. Those of you who are kept on will have to relocate to Swindon, if you wanna stay. I know, gutting. On a more positive note, the good news is, I've been promoted, so... every cloud. You're still thinking about the bad news aren't you?

  8. Thanks hptmurphy thanked for this post
    Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  9. #1581
    Sergeant
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    76
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post

    After the New Zealand experience I'd be interested in the freeboard between the RHib Stations and the waterline and should these be closed off?
    That whole sorry tale is outlined here:

    http://www.nzdf.mil.nz/downloads/med...canterbury.pdf

    It is what happens when political and bureaucratic expediency overrules and at worst ignores professional naval advice.

    There are a couple of HHI designs on page 14 of this pdf below that may be of interest with respect to a EPV - HDL 7000 and 10000 LPD's.

    http://www.hyundaiheavy.com/img/cont...peclal_NSD.pdf

  10. Thanks na grohmití, hptmurphy, DeV thanked for this post
  11. #1582
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,641
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    Or the steel beach of the Damen ships, like the Karel Doorman
    ?

    What you mean? Rear ramp?

    Still weather dependant

  12. #1583
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,641
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Anzac View Post

    There are a couple of HHI designs on page 14 of this pdf below that may be of interest with respect to a EPV - HDL 7000 and 10000 LPD's.

    http://www.hyundaiheavy.com/img/cont...peclal_NSD.pdf
    Any specs on those?

  13. #1584
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    342
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Any specs on those?
    The HDL7000 is an LST class called the Cheon Wang Bong-class. It carries 2 LCM's on the fore deck and has a helicopter deck aft. No deckwell or hanger.

  14. Thanks na grohmití thanked for this post
  15. #1585
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    342
    Post Thanks / Like
    There has been a debate about the need for having a manned helicopter and associated support facilities on-board a ship. It has been suggested that with advances in technology this is no longer necessary. I beg to differ.

    From the beam counter corner will come that we can track every ship with AIS......well that only works when it is turned on and if you are entering an area to illegally fish you would want to be extremely stupid to do this. Without a transponder signal there is no was except with an airborne radar to detect anything at ranges greater than the line of sight from your patrol vessel. There is no magic all seeing eye out in space that can detect and track fishing vessels and all other vessels in our waters and in the adjacent NAFO waters. So an airborne system carrier is necessary, it is the reason why we have 2 CASA MPA's.

    Then will be the argument that a UAV can do the job, and here there is some validity but more as a complement to a manned helicopter rather than a replacement. The first issue is the size and payload capability of most UAV's such as the CAMCOPTER S100. They can carry a decent sized EO unit and a datalink but that is about it. Being able to fit a search radar as well as EO, datalink etc requires a much larger aircraft more like the MQ8B Fire Scout or even its much larger sister the MQ8C. This craft have almost the same demands in terms of maintenance with the additional burden of space and personnel for their control centre. The main driver for the larger is the replacement of manned units in high threat zones rather than a real desire to replace a helicopter. But this is not to say that a small UAV cannot complement a helicopter and is becoming one of the favoured options in the wider world outside our small island. However these are small aircraft and are very much influenced by weather conditions, also most are not equipped with an deck harpoon system so the amount of time such a craft could operate in service on one of our vessel would be limited. There will be advances and as the UAV's get bigger then their flexibility will improve so that they become a valuable addition to a ship, but they will not replace helicopters in the near to medium term (next 30 yrs).

    A helicopter today as implied above is an airborne platform that can be easily fitted with a wide range of sensors to improve the tactical awareness of its mothership. They can be fitted with 350deg AESA radar, with EO devices, searchlights, AIS receivers and much more if you want to go to a warfighting machine (ASW/ASuW). But it is not limited to just being an airborne eye it can perform other roles as well. The first is an extension of SAR coverage as an aircraft on a vessel 200nm offshore can have a distinct advantage over a shore based helicopter both in terms of range and time of response. It is one of the key roles they play aboard USCG cutters. Then there is law enforcement, a door mounted machine gun on a helicopter has proved to be very useful during anti-piracy operations off Africa being able to reach out far to defend ships under threat. Similarly a helicopter can carry a boarding party further and faster than a RIB. The for humanitarian missions and VERTREP their utility has prove time and time again to be extremely useful.

    Naturally all of this then drives the size of a helicopter and thus the facilities aboard the ship. Here there seems for most to be a convergence on an 11t helicopter, larger than the Dauphin/Panther/Lynx that had been popular during the 80's and 90's. Aircraft in this class are the NH90 and the MH60R/S. Each has there advantages and disadvantages but the capability they can bring to a ship is immense. Not only for the EPV but also the follow-on class to the WBY class should be design with the ability not just to land but to operate such a class of helicopter.

  16. #1586
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,119
    Post Thanks / Like
    Not bad.. five paragraphs of waffle on why you should have a helicopter........

    Fact is the cost exceeded the result and given the shortage of suitable helos, other means were available and legislation around landing and selling of fish were a game changer.

    From a fishery protection point of view basing a helo on ship is a proven excessive cost both in ship build, provision of helo and operation.

    From an SAR point of view... the helo had to be on the vessel to be effective and then was limited in the sea states it could operate in and given the size of the patrol areas ..often neither the twain would meet.

    But then again you had to be there.....and I'm one of a very few along with two others here that were during the period when the Naval Service could operate a helo from a ship.

    Anything into the future is pure conjecture based on what others do with their ships and helis
    Just visiting

  17. Likes na grohmití liked this post
    Dislikes DeV, Graylion disliked this post
  18. #1587
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,641
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Not bad.. five paragraphs of waffle on why you should have a helicopter........

    Fact is the cost exceeded the result and given the shortage of suitable helos, other means were available and legislation around landing and selling of fish were a game changer.

    From a fishery protection point of view basing a helo on ship is a proven excessive cost both in ship build, provision of helo and operation.

    From an SAR point of view... the helo had to be on the vessel to be effective and then was limited in the sea states it could operate in and given the size of the patrol areas ..often neither the twain would meet.

    But then again you had to be there.....and I'm one of a very few along with two others here that were during the period when the Naval Service could operate a helo from a ship.

    Anything into the future is pure conjecture based on what others do with their ships and helis
    typo liked

  19. Likes Graylion liked this post
  20. #1588
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    342
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Fact is the cost exceeded the result and given the shortage of suitable helos, other means were available and legislation around landing and selling of fish were a game changer.
    What shortage of suitable helos? The fact we do not have any does not mean that there are not suitable helicopters available on the market.
    Yes there has been a tightening of some legislation and it has helped but do not be fooled that this has stopped illegal fishing, the number of black boats has remained the same. There have been a number of cases of black boats transferring to a processing ship which then lands the fish. Another way they have is not to land in the EU which gets around all the checks we have in place.

    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    From a fishery protection point of view basing a helo on ship is a proven excessive cost both in ship build, provision of helo and operation.
    If the only reason is FP then yes the VFM is probably not the best which is why you have to look beyond this narrow tasking. Even if today the majority of it time at sea is FP this is not the only mission it is tasked with and would like to perform. I say like as we both know it has neither the resources, equipment or funding to do all in its mission portfolio.

    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    From an SAR point of view... the helo had to be on the vessel to be effective and then was limited in the sea states it could operate in and given the size of the patrol areas ..often neither the twain would meet.
    Yes this is a no brainer, yes the vessel has to be on the vessel. As for SS, most helos such as the MH60/NH90 ranges operate fully at SS6 with landings and take-offs from patrol vessels. As I pointed out the USCG, one of the most respected organisation world wide has operated shipborne helos for decades in this mission.

    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    But then again you had to be there.....and I'm one of a very few along with two others here that were during the period when the Naval Service could operate a helo from a ship.
    I have the greatest respect for your experience and views. We tried and failed but to dismiss the operation of a helicopter from a ship based purely upon this is a bit short sighted. We know many things combined to cause this failure, some technical, some operational, some financial and some political. There are plenty of questions which need to answered and properly debated. For example would the situation had been different is all 5 Dauphins had been transferred under NS control rather than AC made a difference? Would the additional P30 class vessels (so 3 ships operating helos) made a difference? I ask these questions with the premise that when the 3 vessels were at sea they would have had their organic helicopter on board.

    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Anything into the future is pure conjecture based on what others do with their ships and helis .
    No-one pretends to know the future but it helps to look around and see what others are doing, it is called benchmarking! Back in the early 80's we were setting the benchmark with the Eithne class, it is something others have followed and developed. They have taken some lessons from our experience and their own experience and developed patrol ships suitable for the operation of helicopters.

  21. #1589
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,641
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    What shortage of suitable helos? The fact we do not have any does not mean that there are not suitable helicopters available on the market.
    its a shortage of DF helos and more importantly personnel

    Yes there has been a tightening of some legislation and it has helped but do not be fooled that this has stopped illegal fishing, the number of black boats has remained the same. There have been a number of cases of black boats transferring to a processing ship which then lands the fish. Another way they have is not to land in the EU which gets around all the checks we have in place.
    +1
    And it is going to get worse with BREXIT

    If the only reason is FP then yes the VFM is probably not the best which is why you have to look beyond this narrow tasking. Even if today the majority of it time at sea is FP this is not the only mission it is tasked with and would like to perform. I say like as we both know it has neither the resources, equipment or funding to do all in its mission portfolio.
    +1

    Yes this is a no brainer, yes the vessel has to be on the vessel. As for SS, most helos such as the MH60/NH90 ranges operate fully at SS6 with landings and take-offs from patrol vessels. As I pointed out the USCG, one of the most respected organisation world wide has operated shipborne helos for decades in this mission.
    it is more to do with vessel's stability than the helo

    There are plenty of questions which need to answered and properly debated. For example would the situation had been different is all 5 Dauphins had been transferred under NS control rather than AC made a difference? Would the additional P30 class vessels (so 3 ships operating helos) made a difference? I ask these questions with the premise that when the 3 vessels were at sea they would have had their organic helicopter on board.
    we got 1 vessel for the price of 2 ordered, a 3rd wasn't going to happen! Also only 2 of the 5 Dauphins were navalised.

    Again the DF is too small to justify a naval air component. If we get a vessel with a flight deck and start using it we need AC helos, AC flight and ground crew. And we need to increase the establishment (and strength). The also need to be paid SAR allowance, naval pay and PDA while at sea.

    Back in the early 80's we were setting the benchmark with the Eithne class, it is something others have followed and developed. They have taken some lessons from our experience and their own experience and developed patrol ships suitable for the operation of helicopters.
    we did and in the 00s got Roisin which also became a benchmark

  22. #1590
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    888
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    its a shortage of DF helos and more importantly personnel

    +1
    And it is going to get worse with BREXIT

    +1

    it is more to do with vessel's stability than the helo

    we got 1 vessel for the price of 2 ordered, a 3rd wasn't going to happen! Also only 2 of the 5 Dauphins were navalised.

    Again the DF is too small to justify a naval air component. If we get a vessel with a flight deck and start using it we need AC helos, AC flight and ground crew. And we need to increase the establishment (and strength). The also need to be paid SAR allowance, naval pay and PDA while at sea.

    we did and in the 00s got Roisin which also became a benchmark
    Overall 80/90 metre vessels will have NO stability problems with helos in the range of 5/10 tonne. The more relevant problem is designing the ship to minimise pitch, roll, and accelerations to open the window for helicopter operations. if we ever do go down the road of helos at sea, then NO AC involvement is a good starting point. We should follow USCG Heliops profiles.
    If an MRV is developed then her flight deck should take a couple of large helos. The Naval Service on an Island country needs to be developed to provide an all arms capability including Air and dare I say marines. On a mathematical division strength should be about 3,500 or 1/3rd establishment. Costs are always relative to times and the nature of the decision processes. Our last 6 ships are costing about 300m Euro that represents 12 P31's or two high end Corvettes that could sink the lot. It's a matter of VFM.

  23. Thanks EUFighter, hptmurphy thanked for this post
  24. #1591
    Major General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,288
    Post Thanks / Like
    Your last line is a matter of inflation rather than VFM.

    Based on annual inflation increases, If P31 was built today, she would have cost €78m So €300m would only get you almost 4 P31s. Also don't forget P31 and her sisters were only supposed to cost £12m each.
    Well, there's good news and bad news. The bad news is that Neil will be taking over both branches, and some of you will lose your jobs. Those of you who are kept on will have to relocate to Swindon, if you wanna stay. I know, gutting. On a more positive note, the good news is, I've been promoted, so... every cloud. You're still thinking about the bad news aren't you?

  25. Thanks pym, CTU, DeV thanked for this post
    Likes Sparky42, DeV, hptmurphy liked this post
  26. #1592
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    342
    Post Thanks / Like
    Ireland is one of the richest nations per head of population in the EU and thus the world. If you just look at the rate at which the current property bubble has developed then you can see that finding the 2% should not be a problem if the political will was there. Also if every time something beyond the current capability is discussed it is shot down with the same resource/manning arguments then there can be no discussion on the needs.

    As pointed out the operation of a helicopter from a ship is to be considered at overall system level, the ship and helicopter have to taken together. The capability to launch and recover a helicopter from a ship needs the helicopter to have the capability and the ship also. On the helicopter side this means plenty of excess power, high floatation wheeled landing gear and a method to secure the helicopter to the ship such as a harpoon. On the ship side it needs to be able to provide a platform in terms of pitch and roll that the helicopter can cope with. Naturally in rough conditions we find the need for a compromise as you want the deck high enough that it does not get swamped by waves but not too high as it increases the amount of absolute roll. Then there needs to be something for the harpoon to attach to and a means to transfer a helicopter to a hanger should one be on board.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYzIWngs_T8
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3A_noXLzuo

    Looking at what is available it is easy to find two family offerings from yards not to far away.
    From DAMEN there is the OPV2 range of vessels with a number of large OPV's from 80m to 105m each of which can operate a suitable helicopter.
    http://products.damen.com/en/ranges/...-patrol-vessel

    Then there is Lurssen who offer 3 length variations of there OPV, from 80 to 90m
    http://www.luerssen-defence.com/cate...atrol-vessels/
    Last edited by EUFighter; 13th August 2017 at 13:01.

  27. #1593
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,641
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    Ireland is one of the richest nations per head of population in the EU and thus the world. If you just look at the rate at which the current property bubble has developed then you can see that finding the 2% should not be a problem if the political will was there. Also if every time something beyond the current capability is discussed it is shot down with the same resource/manning arguments then there can be no discussion on the needs.

    As pointed out the operation of a helicopter from a ship is to be considered at overall system level, the ship and helicopter have to taken together. The capability to launch and recover a helicopter from a ship needs the helicopter to have the capability and the ship also. On the helicopter side this means plenty of excess power, high floatation wheeled landing gear and a method to secure the helicopter to the ship such as a harpoon. On the ship side it needs to be able to provide a platform in terms of pitch and roll that the helicopter can cope with. Naturally in rough conditions we find the need for a compromise as you want the deck high enough that it does not get swamped by waves but not too high as it increases the amount of absolute roll. Then there needs to be something for the harpoon to attach to and a means to transfer a helicopter to a hanger should one be on board.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYzIWngs_T8
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3A_noXLzuo

    Looking at what is available it is easy to find two family offerings from yards not to far away.
    From DAMEN there is the OPV2 range of vessels with a number of large OPV's from 80m to 105m each of which can operate a suitable helicopter.
    http://products.damen.com/en/ranges/...-patrol-vessel

    Then there is Lurssen who offer 3 length variations of there OPV, from 80 to 90m
    http://www.luerssen-defence.com/cate...atrol-vessels/
    In the current socioeconomic and political environment is seeing the current budget for the DF prioritising equipment being over DF pay and strength. The result is that in the arena of being able to put aircraft in the air and naval vessels at sea we are at very serious risk of not being capable of being of utilising existing (never mind additional) assets. In the case of the AC, it has contributed to the loss of accidents (including a number of fatal ones).

    There is substantial pressure on public services across all departments due to lack of funds, we are talking about essential services like health, education, transport, communications, housing etc. Some of those are staff intensive and some are capital intensive. At the same time, we (the taxpayers) are demanding tax cuts. In the meantime, the biggest threat to the Irish economic since the 1930s is fast approaching, BREXIT.

    I'm not saying that we shouldn't invest more in defence but it needs to be prioritised and deliver VFM.

    You'll often find many of the OPVs are geared towards the Middle East kind of region than the North Atlantic.

    With regard to the MRV design, my 2 cents are it is essential that it has a helideck capable of taking min 1 medium lift helo. If funds are available it should have a hanger but in all likelyhood it won't be a DF helo on the deck or if it is it won't be there for long. The deck can therefore be used for vehicles, containers etc when it is unlikely to be used.

  28. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  29. #1594
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    888
    Post Thanks / Like

    Cost of ships

    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmití View Post
    Your last line is a matter of inflation rather than VFM.

    Based on annual inflation increases, If P31 was built today, she would have cost €78m So €300m would only get you almost 4 P31s. Also don't forget P31 and her sisters were only supposed to cost £12m each.
    The price of P31 less Government Furnished Equipment was 24 Million equivalent in various currencies. The other vessels started at 1million for P 20 and about 5million for P21 and so on but subsidised by EU funding. The P31 cost using 1983 to 2017 is 24m X2.5= 60million. As I said it is relative to the time of purchase and VFM must include it's ability to contribute to Defence and not just ATCP/ Fisheries.

  30. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
    Dislikes DeV disliked this post
  31. #1595
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,641
    Post Thanks / Like
    Have the EU provided any funds since Eithne?

  32. #1596
    Lord Chief Bottlewasher trellheim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Cathal Brugha
    Posts
    9,098
    Post Thanks / Like
    I very much doubt the govt will raise Defence spending as % of GxP to fund any of this unless severe political pressure from the EU26 others, or the Brexit forces some hands.
    "Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "

    "No, they're trying to fly the tank"

  33. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes hptmurphy, DeV liked this post
  34. #1597
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,119
    Post Thanks / Like
    Back in the early 80's we were setting the benchmark with the Eithne class, it is something others have followed and developed. They have taken some lessons from our experience and their own experience and developed patrol ships suitable for the operation of helicopters.
    It would seem the only people who didn't learn from the experience was us......but then again we did, we learned that it wasn't feasible to operate another arm of states helo, when they themselves were compromised in what they were expected to do with the type, without having full control of that asset on a vessel which was very much limited in size to that type of helo and that having one vessel to do was so was a hugely limiting factor.

    Was Eithne VFM, as a multifunction learning platform yes.

    As a helicopter capable vessel. No Heli ops had ceased within 6 years of the first landing

    With regard to the MRV design, my 2 cents are it is essential that it has a helideck capable of taking min 1 medium lift helo. If funds are available it should have a hanger but in all likelyhood it won't be a DF helo on the deck or if it is it won't be there for long. The deck can therefore be used for vehicles, containers etc when it is unlikely to be used
    Absolutely!

    if the political will was there
    At the root of all the problems within the DF, The state failed after WW2 to move on and the DF has suffered as a result ever since.

    The also need to be paid SAR allowance, naval pay and PDA while at sea.
    The rules and regulations around the payment of PDA is quite straight forward and only those whose unit is the vessel could be paid PDA, those on attachment are not paid PDA..even for NS people

    Naval Pay...whats this...am I due back pay?
    Just visiting

  35. Thanks Turkey thanked for this post
    Likes Turkey liked this post
  36. #1598
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,641
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    The rules and regulations around the payment of PDA is quite straight forward and only those whose unit is the vessel could be paid PDA, those on attachment are not paid PDA..even for NS people
    so if someone from a shore appointment is detached to a vessel due to crew shortages they don't get PDA ??

    No wonder they have such wastage!!!

    No wonder the AC didn't play (€45 a day gross)

    Naval Pay...whats this...am I due back pay?
    Princely sum of €2.76 gross a day

  37. #1599
    Non Temetis Messor The real Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    3,191
    Post Thanks / Like
    I commented in the migrants thread that steel and air is cheap before bods jumped in saying you need fuel handling and extra radars/whatever. My point was that it'll be a massive mistake if the EPV is not fitted for & not with Helos, all you have to do is leave room for the necessary stores & handling equipment. The deck can be used for Cargo, the hanger could be used for anything but it's an awful lot cheaper to design the ship for a future capability than have to drydock it to make it longer. ( Yes I know i'm oversimplifying but the ships designers do this for a living so should be able to figure it out)

    If the only purpose of the NS is fisheries patrol what's the point in the white elephant gun on the front? A 8 or 9 ship fleet that's purpose is to "protect" irish fish stocks for an industry that's a rounding error in the Irish economy to help the poor tax dodging illegal immigrant employing drug trafficking fishermen. If the main mission is now ferrying migrants across the med just buy a ferry and dock in Libya.

    We all have heard ad nauseam about the Eithne experiment disaster but how is it that the NS is the only operator of grey ships that thinks they're pointless? What good is a NS ship on any op apart from the med when their only means of moving bods is a RHIB? I looked at the ships involve in the Nato counter piracy mission and I struggled to find one without a hangar. This conversation has happened many times before , 64 pages later have any tender docs even been drawn up? MM will sail off into retirement with a NS undermanned and still devoid of aviation capabilities - all the NS guys had so much hope for his tenure here!

    These are shorter than the dead writers class and can take a whirlybird, some even got involved in the counter piracy patrols
    Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

  38. Likes DeV, ias liked this post
    Dislikes hptmurphy disliked this post
  39. #1600
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,641
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by The real Jack View Post
    I commented in the migrants thread that steel and air is cheap before bods jumped in saying you need fuel handling and extra radars/whatever. My point was that it'll be a massive mistake if the EPV is not fitted for & not with Helos, all you have to do is leave room for the necessary stores & handling equipment. The deck can be used for Cargo, the hanger could be used for anything but it's an awful lot cheaper to design the ship for a future capability than have to drydock it to make it longer. ( Yes I know i'm oversimplifying but the ships designers do this for a living so should be able to figure it out)

    If the only purpose of the NS is fisheries patrol what's the point in the white elephant gun on the front? A 8 or 9 ship fleet that's purpose is to "protect" irish fish stocks for an industry that's a rounding error in the Irish economy to help the poor tax dodging illegal immigrant employing drug trafficking fishermen. If the main mission is now ferrying migrants across the med just buy a ferry and dock in Libya.

    We all have heard ad nauseam about the Eithne experiment disaster but how is it that the NS is the only operator of grey ships that thinks they're pointless? What good is a NS ship on any op apart from the med when their only means of moving bods is a RHIB? I looked at the ships involve in the Nato counter piracy mission and I struggled to find one without a hangar. This conversation has happened many times before , 64 pages later have any tender docs even been drawn up? MM will sail off into retirement with a NS undermanned and still devoid of aviation capabilities - all the NS guys had so much hope for his tenure here!

    These are shorter than the dead writers class and can take a whirlybird, some even got involved in the counter piracy patrols
    There are other Tenders due as well, and he has overseen (at least partially) the most expensive defence purchases in the history of the State (ie the Writer class).

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Naval air ops no more?
    By Goldie fish in forum Navy & Naval Reserve
    Replies: 303
    Last Post: 29th December 2015, 13:01
  2. Naval Wishlist(realistic)
    By Goldie fish in forum Navy & Naval Reserve
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 10th April 2007, 22:54
  3. Naval Training Ship?
    By Goldie fish in forum Navy & Naval Reserve
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 4th February 2003, 00:19

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •