Originally posted by EUFighter
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
EPV for naval service
Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostThe functionality of the ship is about right. However those doors look difficult for operation and continued watertightness. The amount of power installed seems low. Pity it's only an artist's view.
Comment
-
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostI agree especially the forward UNREP door which needs to open while at sea although I could think that there would be a bulkhead behind it. But the size seems a good one and the 2 35mm Millennium guns are good for self-defence against missile and small craft.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparky42 View PostGiven the difficult process the Polish Navy went through getting their OPV built, I'd be reluctant to go with them to be honest.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparky42 View PostGiven the difficult process the Polish Navy went through getting their OPV built, I'd be reluctant to go with them to be honest.
The reluctance on this design concept would be that the lane metres are somewhat lacking if the goal was the capacity to sealift a company group sized combined arms maneuver taskforce. (One of the shortcomings of the Canterbury is that it sealifts only 95% of what a company group sized light all armed maneuver taskforce requires in a material sense if it were to be self sufficient for 40 days)
It is a pretty interesting design nevertheless - a mini Absalon that will likely come at a cheaper price point than the Damen Cross-over's. With Thales i-Mast 400 all it would need would be a couple of LM 3 Cell ExLS banks with Sea Ceptor quad packed, a couple of Sea Protector 12.5mm RWS and Terma soft decoys then it could be a very useful and self sufficient addition in a coalition environment.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostWhy not give the task to OTO MELARA to refurbish and install the 76mm in order to have some period of guarantee and factory attendance in at least the first two years.
Equipments controlling acquisition, bearings, ranges, recoil shock, safety angles, need to be as new with future life of 36 years minimum.
- Likes 6
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dogwatch View PostOTO have been given the task, it's in all respects a new gun, same as on the other P60s. OTO & the FCS OEM are tasked with supply, fitting and commissioning. The NS have conducted the commissioning shoots, however the OEMs are all there for such evolutions.
Comment
-
Ship@s defence
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostIf it is so then one has to be content that OTO will do a good job.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostI note that the standard, mostly extra Defence, fit for ships is 30mm cannons auto controlled. In 2005 the BMOD approved a £16m package to fit all the type 23 frigates. The US favours twin 30mm mounts. The p60's , p50's would benefit from such an addition given current difficulties on the edges of Europe.
As for what we should fit the MLG27 would be my preferred option, being a revolver cannon as opposed to a chain gun it has a much higher rate of fire which is extremely useful when dealing with small swarming craft attacking. The alternative would be the Oto Melara 30mm Marlin which has the advantage that it uses the same 30mm bushmaster II cannon used by the Mowag MRV.
Comment
-
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostIndependent of the size there is also a move toward have all guns remotely controlled and stabilised, even 0.50cal have gone this way. Having a stabilised mount can have a big increase on the effectiveness of the weapon and extend no only the effective engagement range but that they normally include LLTV/IR cameras the night engagement abilities are massively increased.
As for what we should fit the MLG27 would be my preferred option, being a revolver cannon as opposed to a chain gun it has a much higher rate of fire which is extremely useful when dealing with small swarming craft attacking. The alternative would be the Oto Melara 30mm Marlin which has the advantage that it uses the same 30mm bushmaster II cannon used by the Mowag MRV.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
If it fits the dimensions of the specs I don't see why not. As it stands it has capacity for 8 TEU. Without a complex missile and sensor suite there would be other available space.
But we still don't know what this tender will specify. Maybe we will have a clearer picture by year end?For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
Comment
-
Originally posted by na grohmití View PostIf it fits the dimensions of the specs I don't see why not. As it stands it has capacity for 8 TEU. Without a complex missile and sensor suite there would be other available space.
But we still don't know what this tender will specify. Maybe we will have a clearer picture by year end?
Comment
-
[QUOTE=Sparky42;460343]I'm just wondering if the timeframe added up could it be tacked on to the RN build (if they won of course) which might help both keep the price down. I mean to me looking at the stuff they've put out the design seems fairly good, but as you say we still have to wait for the tender, is that still likely this year or has it slipped with the CASA's in play?[/QUOTE
The UK design is for a ship with a longer length than proposed in the first Outline announced by our side ie 140metres v 135metres. The vessel at 140 metres is described as a wide -bodied ship which means that her draft is likely to be in the region of 3.5metres on a probable beam of 23metres. Such dimensions would rule out drydocking in this state. They are a bargain at £250m . The large bays on the side would need careful consideration and also safe access to them from within the ship. A lone ship redesigned for HADR and our other stated needs might not be attractive to the F31E Builders.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostThe UK design is for a ship with a longer length than proposed in the first Outline announced by our side ie 140metres v 135metres. The vessel at 140 metres is described as a wide -bodied ship which means that her draft is likely to be in the region of 3.5metres on a probable beam of 23metres. Such dimensions would rule out drydocking in this state. They are a bargain at £250m . The large bays on the side would need careful consideration and also safe access to them from within the ship. A lone ship redesigned for HADR and our other stated needs might not be attractive to the F31E Builders.
Comment
Comment