Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

EPV for naval service

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • That's all very well, but LE Shit Frigate just rolls off the tongue.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
      10 TEU's, to use your example, simply aren't worth the compromise to the ship their stowage would require - at what point should the NS staff just say 'actually, don't bother with the Happy Shopper sealift capability, just give us another OPV'?

      if you want Logs capability you need a Logs ship - either something akin to a scaled down Bay Class or an AOR - and accept that its ability to chase fishing boats is going to be a bit compromised, if you want a patrol ship you buy a patrol ship and accept that if you want stuff moved you'll have to ask someone else.

      i still take the view than an AOR is the answer - its far easier politically than anything fighty or landy, you get a lot more for your money, and you'll have an asset that is actually in demand and whose use will earn browny points, which, to be frank, a shit frigate won't.
      Thing is a lot of what is on the market (i.e. Flex decks, modular etc) is around the 10 TEU mark. Even with 130 lane metres we are going to be looking to others (civvy or military) to do a lot of work (e.g. EUBG exercises) but something bigger will be unaffordable. We don't need a well dock, that is overkill.

      An AOR will be even more expensive and arguably less capable. We don't need it.

      IMHO if we can get the right design of flexible MRV at the right cost I believe we are aiming about the 130 lane metre mark.

      Of course we haven't asked what other roles could the MRV be asked to undertake....... could we end up with a ETV with helipad and ability to take 20 TEUs?
      Last edited by DeV; 12 October 2017, 14:20.

      Comment


      • Err...
        Navy considers €200m multi-role ship

        A delegation is set to visit New Zealand shortly to look at a warship which could become a blueprint for the new ship — and could cost up to €200m to construct.

        A small group consisting of Department of Defence officials and experts from the Defence Forces have been invited by the New Zealand government to inspect HMNZS Canterbury, which was designed by the New Zealand navy.

        An MRV could measure up to 150m in length, dwarfing the navy’s largest vessel which is 90m long.

        It is intended that it will replace the ageing LÉ Niamh as the navy’s flagship.
        The Naval Service could have a new multi-role vessel (MRV) built and operational wthin the next three years.




        (I know.. I know...)

        Comment


        • I do remember reading that they had sorted out some of the initial problems with the hull but what's the current views on her? Also I suppose the difference is the RNZN has a couple of frigates and an AOR to create a more credible and functional force structure...

          Also a PDF on Canterbury:
          Last edited by Sparky42; 12 October 2017, 15:07.

          Comment


          • A/ Its based on the Ferry Ben Mo Chree, so why do they need a jaunt to NZ to check it out? And didn't they keep an eye on it previously anyway, when it was being built and commissioned?
            B/ I can see that rolling like a barrel in the North Atlantic if you're using it to do FP.
            D/ Its the bleeding Canterbury.
            E/ You can't bring it anywhere remotely dangerous without giving it adequate protection......properly tooled escorts.
            F/ We Don't have properly tooled Escorts.
            G/ €200M for a car ferry?

            Comment


            • Hopefully the visit is so the RNZN can explain to the INS why the concept of converting a truck ferry into a patrol vessel failed.
              In case some numpty in dod sees early praise for the idea on Google and decides to take it off the RNZN' s hands.
              For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Herald View Post
                G/ €200M for a car ferry?
                Well this is BAE remember - and worse - Aussie BAE, so we'd be lucky to get it for <€300M.

                And yes, the logic of putting a very large percentage of the best troops and equipment into harms way on a ferry is kinda worrisome.

                If it's not intended to go into harms way, the existing arrangement of hiring the services of a civvy ferry seems fine.
                Last edited by pym; 12 October 2017, 15:32.

                Comment


                • Based on what has previously been said here the requirements are to be able to carry an advance party and their equipment in a secure Naval fashion. Liberia being the recent example. A naval vessel brought a recce unit to AO, unloaded them at a secure port AND stood off providing c3 until the operation was fully established. It also provides basic medical facilities until a proper hospital equipped ship arrived.
                  At home the same vessel can be used for island relief when no aircraft can access.
                  For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                  Comment


                  • Let's remember that although DF elements could potentially be part of an early entry force, they are unlikely to be engaged in an over the beach invasion without the express consent / invitation of the country they are landing in. This vessel will operate in a relatively permissive environment, that isn't to say there is always the unexpected and other elements.

                    If we are we are also highly unlikely to be operating alone.

                    If the environment they were putting into was let's say operationally and/or logistically challenging there is often a friendly safe port or if need be country nearby.

                    I'm not saying that we don't need the AD missiles, CIWS, SSMs etc etc but if we can't afford the ship to put on them....


                    Why go to New Zealand? Why not? Learn from their mistakes!

                    Comment


                    • Look up Review and Functionality Report on HMNZS Canterbury available on the internet. The vessel is lively but has been rejigged to meet the report recommendations. . Ships that carry loads need to be at their designed draft so they require a Sea Water Ballast system to load the ship to that draft. An honest visit to see things first hand and a chat with the Boatswain about her daily use would be very worthwhile. This ship should be exclusively built under Naval control with advice as necessary from Navies that operate rotary aircraft and carry marine trained troops for shore tasking.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                        At home the same vessel can be used for island relief when no aircraft can access.
                        How many times has that been a needed requirement?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                          Based on what has previously been said here the requirements are to be able to carry an advance party and their equipment in a secure Naval fashion. Liberia being the recent example. A naval vessel brought a recce unit to AO, unloaded them at a secure port AND stood off providing c3 until the operation was fully established. It also provides basic medical facilities until a proper hospital equipped ship arrived.
                          At home the same vessel can be used for island relief when no aircraft can access.
                          If that's the goal, then I guess it'll be a stretched OPV design/baby frigate design, probably not a million miles from Babcock's Arrowhead, albeit without all the fancy weapons systems - extra accom, c3, medical facilities etc.

                          It will offer a very limited lift capacity versus Canterbury, Absalon etc - but if it's going to spend 95% of its lifetime in the OPV role, it makes sense.

                          The bulk of the gear - if it's to travel by sea - will travel as on civilian vessels as before.

                          Comment


                          • I can't find the blue/green ship thread but there was a pic of a proposed EPV with MOWAGs etc being loading (pics also appeared in An Cosantoir) - anyone know what design it was based on?

                            Edit


                            Read the concept (and look who wrote it)
                            Last edited by DeV; 12 October 2017, 18:20.

                            Comment


                            • MEKO 200 MRV, I believe. By Blohm and Voss (now ThyssenKrupp).
                              For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                                MEKO 200 MRV, I believe. By Blohm and Voss (now ThyssenKrupp).
                                Did anyone ever buy that variant of the MEKO?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X