RNZN are getting a “new†diving and hydrographic vessel
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
EPV for naval service
Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
-
Originally posted by DeV View PostRNZN are getting a “new†diving and hydrographic vessel
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/...ic-vessel-navy
However I wonder about the wisdom of buying a 15 year old ship.
ShipSpotting.com
© eckhard uhrbrockFor now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by DeV View PostRNZN are getting a “new†diving and hydrographic vessel
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/...ic-vessel-navy
Glad that we can call on the Celtic Explorer and the ILV Granuaile III, which are around the same size.
Comment
-
Originally posted by EUFighter View Post€60m for a 15yr old ship, the driver can only be the urgent need. Personnally I think it would have been better to get a new purpose built ship even if it takes 3 yrs more.
Glad that we can call on the Celtic Explorer and the ILV Granuaile III, which are around the same size.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparky42 View PostHmm, 9000 tons does open up what it could be, but for €200 million you are still talking a "non frontline ship", there's nothing that would be that size and armed to modern level (ASM, SAM, CWIS, Radar/Sonar) that comes in at that price I'd say. As for where to dock hee, forget Cork City, the docklands area once the Port moves down river will end up as housing, there's no way that it would end up for NS usage. Next question is what about the Dockyard? What off the shelf 9K designs fits into the mouth of the Graving Dock? I don't suppose who ever it was gave any suggestion that we might see any formal movement on things?
1. The Hanger/LCVP module is a bit out-dated. I am surprised that Damen have not changed this to a modular mission bay combining their Cross-deck concept with the hanger and moving the stacks outboard. This would give much more mission flexibility.
2. The lower troop deck is not something we need in that size, we are not in the business of doing invasions (amphib assault). Most of our troops would be flown out to an AoO and not sea-lifted. Some capacity is needed but more of the 150-200 range rather than the 400-600 range currently offered as we would most likely be deploying a company sized force and need to transport all its equipment and initial stores to cover the first weeks of operation. The space would be better utilized in our case for more TEU storage including reefers.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by DeV View PostIsn’t the argument more that it wouldn’t be able to go alongside at Haulbowline?For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by DeV View PostOk not sure about services but if we purchased a MRV (or OPV) from a non-EU country under WTO rules there is 0% duty - HTC 890610 / 89069010
Edit - you got there before me
- Likes 1
Comment
-
National naval Berthage
Originally posted by na grohmit� View PostNot in the basin, but the Oli wharf could wasily accomodate such a vessel. It already can accomodate 5000t 130m vessels, such as the Canadian destroyer Algonquin, and many of the James Fisher & son Tanker fleet, most of which are in the region of 130m, at 12000DWT.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Are we better off just going straight for a frigate? Type 31e is looking to be coming in at roughly the same as what we have budgeted for the EPV/MRV, and we would benefit from the suppliers being mostly UK based.
Project director reveals 70% of Type 31e candidate will be British built
Up to 70% of the Project Leander supply chain is British, the project director tells the UK Defence Journal.
Cammell Laird yesterday announced that it has built a network of more than 2,000 suppliers as it steps up its bid to build the Type 31e frigate.
The shipyard and engineering services company says it is registering more than five new suppliers every week as it builds its Leander Frigate supply chain. After I contacted Cammel Laird, the Leander project director Tony Graham was able to tell me that ‘circa 70%’ of the supply chain is British.
He also confirmed earlier reports that Cammel Laird has received a ‘MoD Prior Information Notice’ to confirm the Type 31e programme has been restarted.
When asked whether the latest supply chain developments would have any impact on the per-ship cost, he simply stated that he’s ‘committed to achieving the customers’ £250M UPC’.
He finally told me that it could ‘take a couple of years’ before the supply chain is mature and complete. None of the 2,000 supplies he’s recruited will receive contracts from Cammel Laird until the MoD contract has been signed. He also stated that depending on when that is, he may have ‘export customers to consider at that time’Up to 70% of the Project Leander supply chain is British, the project director tells the UK Defence Journal.
For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
Comment
-
Originally posted by na grohmit� View PostAre we better off just going straight for a frigate? Type 31e is looking to be coming in at roughly the same as what we have budgeted for the EPV/MRV, and we would benefit from the suppliers being mostly UK based.
Up to 70% of the Project Leander supply chain is British, the project director tells the UK Defence Journal.
http://www.leanderfrigate.com/
As for what we should go for, again 200/250 million euros isn't going to fund a full capable hull, and would still be limited.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Rhodes View Post€160 million was the ballpark figure given by senior naval people not so long ago for the supposed MRV.For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
Comment
Comment