EPV for naval service

[hptmurphy]

Ooh that sent me googling. So a fourth P60 in two years...is Eithne slated to retire by then? Because if the CPVs are getting replaced in a "like for something like" manner, this sounds promising.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, the maths speak for themselves.

To retain the same numbers in the foreseeable future we need to build three ships of some description, based on the fact that Eithne will be in service 36 years in five years, the peacocks a year longer based on build date.

The two P50s will be 21 and 19 years old at that point, so replacement with like for like if the P60s sort themselves out and give the same amount of service as their predecessors would mean that anything along the lines of EPVs / MRVs as extras would be a long way off.

[expat01]

Why does someone always spoil my party with math? Been that way since school.

[Sparky42]

So from Kevin Marum's Dail Questions thread here's Kenny's answer in regarding hull numbers:

The current Naval Service ship replacement programme will have replaced three Naval Service vessels by July 2016. Last week, agreement was reached with Babcock International for the provision of an additional ship for the Naval Service to be built in their facility in Appledore, Devon. This ship will be the same class as the three newest vessels, LÉ Samuel Beckett, LÉ James Joyce and LÉ William Butler Yeats. The agreed contract value for the further ship is €54.3 million (€66.78 million inclusive of VAT) and delivery is expected within two years, which ties in with the project planning process in place under the White Paper on Defence which will determine the Defence Organisation’s maritime capability requirements.

The White Paper also provides for the replacement of the current flagship, LÉ Eithne, by a multi-roled vessel (MRV). LÉ Eithne was built in 1984. In addition, the two existing Coastal Patrol Vessels, LÉ Ciara and LÉ Orla are due for replacement in the coming years (also built in 1984). It is outlined in the White Paper that these ships will be replaced with similar type vessels with countermine and counter IED capabilities.

To me that suggests that P64 is a ninth ship and the replacement of Eithne and the Peacocks remains "tbd" rather than P64 replacing Eithne.

[Toolbox]

P64 is the ninth ship.

Orla/Ciara & Eithne are not going anywhere for a good while yet.

As another thread is already saying, expand the ships and you need to expand establishment.

We have an establishment for 7 ships crewing 8.

We don't have the bodies to crew 9 without expansion.

And pay restoration to keep the youngest staff longer than 6-12 months.

[Sparky42]

P64 is the ninth ship.

Orla/Ciara & Eithne are not going anywhere for a good while yet.

As another thread is already saying, expand the ships and you need to expand establishment.

We have an establishment for 7 ships crewing 8.

We don't have the bodies to crew 9 without expansion.

And pay restoration to keep the youngest staff longer than 6-12 months.

Well we have 2 years before P 64 comes online so we have time to build up, from memory when FG floated it in the Election platform they did talk about increased funding/ manning for the navy to take the increase into account.

[DeV]

And how long does it take to go from cadet day 1 to officer with NWC or day 1 apprentice to qualified ERA ?

[hptmurphy]

Orla/Ciara & Eithne are not going anywhere for a good while yet.

less or greater than five years?

P 64 will be the 9th ship within two years but within three years of that unless there is continual building regardless of type, potentially you could be back below that number quite quickly.

As another thread is already saying, expand the ships and you need to expand establishment.

We have an establishment for 7 ships crewing 8.

We don't have the bodies to crew 9 without expansion.

And pay restoration to keep the youngest staff longer than 6-12 months.

If these points are not addressed before delivery of the P64, might as well pack up and go home.

Those who have joined in the bigger recruitment drives in the past two years will be gone before the next build is finished, 100 recruits per year is not going to address the current shortfall never mind any forthcoming brain drain.

But as always as the economy improves the lack of parity between the public and private sector means people will be out the door in droves, and the more upskilling and education the NS provide the more attractive people become to the private sector.

[Sparky42]

And how long does it take to go from cadet day 1 to officer with NWC or day 1 apprentice to qualified ERA ?

Not disagreeing with you, but those issues along with others like accommodation/rates would still be present to a perhaps a lesser extent even without P64 being ordered. Of course the issues should still be made clear to the Minister/Politicians but at the same time if P64 does mark a start of a stated program to build up to 9 ships even if it causes more problems in the short to medium term then I don't see the issue. How often has the point been made about the EEZ size and the number of hulls?

[DeV]

With regard to the Damen XO131L which was spoken of here, it seems to broadly fit into the specs of the EPV RFT, it could carry the Irish elements of the EUBG ISTAR TF (it would mean that the helideck and hanger would be full).

[Graylion]

What helos would be used?

[Graylion]

With regard to the Damen XO131L which was spoken of here, it seems to broadly fit into the specs of the EPV RFT, it could carry the Irish elements of the EUBG ISTAR TF (it would mean that the helideck and hanger would be full).

I'd go for a version that carries a decent radar like Sea Giraffe 4a or Smart-S and VLS for Sea Ceptor (-ER) and VL Spear 3. Also 127mm OTO with Volcano.

[DeV]

What helos would be used?

Well as Ireland is providing the recce element, it states to reason that Irish troops should/would be among the first elements on the ground.

If it is the Swedish Battlegroup, the Swedes provide 4 x NH90 to the battlegroup. Also there are UAVs to consider.

[hptmurphy]

What helos would be used?

None.......If the NS are to field helos in the future ships with helos capacity will have to be built. No current plans to do so.
And then a suitable naval compatable helos sourced and let all the training begin......again

[Graylion]

http://warships1discussionboards.yuk...ell-Slazak-OPV

Attachment 8311

[Herald]

http://warships1discussionboards.yuk...ell-Slazak-OPV

Attachment 8311

???

Thats a post about a 95m vessel approximately the same weight as one of the Becket class OPV's, That has cost about 1/2 a billion to build, with a fairly high spec sensor/radar/combat management system, but without very many weapons to ..............you know .........manage?

How, in any way, does this fit even the widest spec for an EPV/MRV?

[Turkey]

None.......If the NS are to field helos in the future ships with helos capacity will have to be built. No current plans to do so.
And then a suitable naval compatable helos sourced and let all the training begin......again

It's my opinion that the NS should be allowed pick, operate, and maintain it's own helicopters, independent of the Air Corps.

[hptmurphy]

It's my opinion that the NS should be allowed pick, operate, and maintain it's own helicopters, independent of the Air Corps.

You won't find anyone who had an opinion on the matter from a naval perspective disagree with you.

Don't think we will see it in our lifetime though

[paul g]

It's my opinion that the NS should be allowed pick, operate, and maintain it's own helicopters, independent of the Air Corps.

They had four helicopters that with a bit of work were ideal for air ops from a ship of about 80 metres, and what did they do but sell them to Chile for a song who use them for exactly that.

[hptmurphy]

The concept in question was a support to FP ops and technology took over and made the concept of using a helicon FP ops redundant and overly expenaive especially when there was no inward investment in the aer corps and helicopter purchase only came about as a necessity as opposed to an option.

Even if flight ops from Eithne had continued to the day the Dauphin had retired we would have had options. Sadly again the foresight was missing and we no longer have the option.

[Turkey]

They had four helicopters that with a bit of work were ideal for air ops from a ship of about 80 metres, and what did they do but sell them to Chile for a song who use them for exactly that.

2 helicopters Paul, the other 2 were not suitable for shipboard operations.

[paul g]

2 helicopters Paul, the other 2 were not suitable for shipboard operations.

Then how can chile operate term from opv

[Turkey]

Then how can chile operate term from opv

To be honest, I expect that was part of what was a massive refit, ya know, the one we should have given them.

[na grohmití]

They had four helicopters that with a bit of work were ideal for air ops from a ship of about 80 metres, and what did they do but sell them to Chile for a song who use them for exactly that.

They were never NS helicopters. That was made clear from the outset.

[Turkey]

They were never NS helicopters. That was made clear from the outset.

Yup, they spent too much of their time being charlie haughy's personal taxis...

[hptmurphy]

To be honest, I expect that was part of what was a massive refit, ya know, the one we should have given them.

No all the 'Naval Stuff ' was end user specific and the electronic fit outs were over kill. The crashproof tanks again were an end user spec. So Chile in effect had all the high end out date stuff ripped out...put back in a reasonably basic kit. Fitted a basic retrieval system and operate all four from a shore based unit that deploys them to ships as required. They!are not ASW machines..just hacks