EPV for naval service

[Goldie fish]

I don't think ro-ro is practical, given the sea states you would be experiencing. The access ramp, or ramps, if provided would add to the ships complexity and maintenance schedule, as they wouldnt be in regular use. Better off if you intend carrying "cargo" to opt for lift on lift off, and include a proper crane on the vessel, of 80 T capacity or more.

Given that the vessel is termed "EXTENDED PATROL VESSEL" rather than Multi Role Vessel, it is quite clear from the RFP that the ship will have extra space by accident, rather than by design, and if you have that space, then you may as well make use of it. Most of our overseas Ops only require one vehicle drop, at the start of the mission. After that, all you bring are replacements, when required, but every resupply will make use of a TEU. Every Diving or survey op will use a TEU sized box,Field hospital, again TEU sized box.. any other use, would see a TEU, rather than a vehicle. So Flat decks, and easy crane access is the order of the day. It is a bad use of space to store TEUs below deck, on trailers.

[Goldie fish]

A reminder why a Larger type of PV is required... Waves are getting bigger.

Lots of data at the following links.

http://www.knmi.nl/onderzk/oceano/waves/era40/license.cgi

http://www.marine.ie/home/aboutus/newsroom/news/ResultsofWeatherBuoyReadings.htm

Do you know how high a 17.2m wave is?

[ackack]

Do you know how high a 17.2m wave is?

Oh oh oh oh me me me..............is it 17.2M????????

[Duffer]

Wave Height

about 1720 cms or maybe 17200mm I guess

[Goldie fish]

Retards.

[DeV]

A reminder why a Larger type of PV is required... Waves are getting bigger.

Lots of data at the following links.

http://www.knmi.nl/onderzk/oceano/waves/era40/license.cgi

http://www.marine.ie/home/aboutus/newsroom/news/ResultsofWeatherBuoyReadings.htm

Do you know how high a 17.2m wave is?

Almost 16 times higher than it is at that buoy now!

Mid Altlantic at 5pm today it was around 10m

Ever watch the "Deadliest Catch" ? Wave height at 6pm today was around 5/6 metres.

[easyrider]

There's an interesting discussion of the relationship between ship length and sea-keeping ability in the book 'Atlantic Escorts - Ships, Weapons & Tactics in World War II', by David K. Brown, a former Deputy Chief Naval Architect at the Admiralty.

Another link to the latest buoy reports: http://www.met.ie/latest/buoy.asp

[Sea Toby]

As far as the New Zealand Navy's Canterbury, Janes summed up the Coles Report very well. The Coles Report found more wrong with the Ministry of
Defence's managing of the project than what is wrong with the ship.

A NZ$20 million make good program, adding doors to the alcoves and adding proper forward ballast above sea level should correct most of the ship's problems including her bow slamming, not to mention propeller emergence and submergence. This make good program shouldn't take much more than a few weeks to accomplish.

http://www.janes.com/news/defence/naval/jni/jni081024_1_n.shtml

Considering the cost of the other ships offered, even with the added expense of the make good program, she was bought at a wonderful price. She has proved her usefulness as a sea lift ship during four different exercises this year.

For the price of around US$110 million, New Zealand has finally acquired a ship capable of lifting their army company abroad.

[Goldie fish]

SHould have some answers about the progress of the project in the Dail tomorrow.

[Goldie fish]

Latest news.

In relation to the larger EPV, the Department intends to undertake further analysis of the proposals received, following Stage 1, before the second stage is initiated. As with the OPVs, any decision to award a contract for the purchase of an EPV must be approved by the Government.

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/DDebate.aspx?F=DAL20081126.xml&Node=H19&Page=26

[Goldie fish]

Some new Images have appeared recently on the ThyssenKrupp Website. Some may find them interesting.

Sentinel


Guardian

ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems’ patrol boats of the GUARDIAN
and SENTINEL class are also based on the MEKO® concept. This makes them particularly versatile and flexible in anti-piracy and terrorism roles, for surveillance and for patrol duties.

Sea and airspace surveillance, troop and equipment transportation, humanitarian and combat missions – naval ships built by ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems are prepared for any kind of deployment – because the MEKO® technology permits the installation and removal of equipment modules without major interference with the ship’s structure. To this end, modules and devices are installed or removed through purpose built assembly openings. The system saves time, lowers costs and allows corvettes and frigates to be fitted for the most diverse missions.

The groups’ innovative approach, new concepts and developments are also evident in the design and construction of special purpose naval ships. The mine countermeasure vessels are particularly manoeuvrable and their “sandwich hull concept” makes them extremely impervious to water. ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems’ versatile multirole ships are specially designed for the quick transportation of people and equipment, including during humanitarian missions.

[paul g]

i thought that both these designs are more sutiable for the OPV.

[hptmurphy]

Specs dimmensions etc, look a bit tidy.

If the buiders who builder the OPVs were to work in tandem we caould almost build a ship to our own spec as happen with Roisin and Niamh.

Very free hand within the NS to get to this point

[thebig C]

Hey gang

Well, since the indications are that the EPV is being re-appraised, can we assume that anything along the lines of the NZ MRV or even a Frigate type design like a Meko 200 are out of reach?

With that in mind, a stretched OPV might suit our requirements ( and more realistically Dept of Finance beancounters) better.

Would something like this be suitable, 100m OPV, with additional capabilities, from VT. Forgive me if it has been posted before:

http://navy-matters.beedall.com/fsc.htm (Scroll right to the end of this article)

http://www.janes.com/events/exhibitions/dsei2007/sections/daily/day1/vt-unveils-new-fsc-concep.shtml

Ok, I know we probably won't need the MCM abilities or the hanger. But, using the basic hull, and striping away the Heli facilities etc, could be a nice platform?? Also, with a crew of only 76 it wouldn't be too demanding of resources.

C

[Goldie fish]

i thought that both these designs are more sutiable for the OPV.

Perhaps, however it was the quote that followed that interested me. The proposed specs for the EPV allow quite a lot of leeway. The OPV spec does not specify a helideck, the EPV does.
In the absence of dimensions for the above types, I have to speculate.
Also, I'm tired of being the only one to reply to the opv thread :redface: