Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

EPV for naval service

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

  • Originally posted by DeV View Post
    I very much doubt that Ireland will ever lead a EUBG
    L.E. Eithne had this capability, I believe. Its 02 deck was almost exclusively for C2, flight ops etc. I do not know what this space is currently used for, with much of the equipment within becoming obsolete and removed.
    For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

    Comment


    • Medsailor's suggestion is not beyond Ireland's capabilities, or means. It's simply beyond our expectations of ourselves. The country has an inferiority complex that no longer matches its resources.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by expat01 View Post
        Medsailor's suggestion is not beyond Ireland's capabilities, or means. It's simply beyond our expectations of ourselves. The country has an inferiority complex that no longer matches its resources.
        Back in 2006 ireland commanded the multi national brigade centre in Kosovo, more than the equivalent of a BG?

        Comment


        • The EUBG means if your lead nation you provide the bulk of the troops and their equipment (which would be the more limiting factor).

          Comment


          • Originally posted by DeV View Post
            The EUBG means if your lead nation you provide the bulk of the troops and their equipment (which would be the more limiting factor).
            and do you believe that the current EUBG force generation concept is certain to be in force for the next 40 years? do you believe that the EUBG concept will be the only overseas missions that the DF will have taken part in by 2055?

            given that its already 2016, no real work has been done on the EPV/MRV project for nearly a decade, there are no bids on the table and no one can come up with either a satisfactory requirement concept or point to an existing design that fits the bill, imagining that such a vessel will be in service before 2020 looks like being something of a stretch. if a vessel is in service for 35 years, it will be 2055 at least before it leaves service - predicating what a vessel in service in 2054 will need based on the turgid minutae of a project that everyone involved in that project says needs changing, seems to be pretty poor and self defeating way of using your brain.

            Comment


            • Well I believe the day a EUBG won't be deployed until the next ice age TBH but I agree it would a nice to have (not essential).

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                A great picture. Quite apt. That is a Vroon Jack-up Rig. It is literally a ship on four jackable legs. They are the company doing patrols with Vos Grace in the winter migrant patrols near Samos.
                To be pedantic, VOS are not doing patrols, the UK Border Force has contracted VOS to provide a ship, VOS Grace, to carry UKBF personnel, RN Medics & RM Protection Team to conduct UKBF patrols. Apologies....... ;-)

                Comment


                • that is an huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgly ship.

                  Comment


                  • They actually aren't. It looks odd against that background.
                    For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                      that is an huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgly ship.
                      Capable ship though!

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Dogwatch View Post
                        To be pedantic, VOS are not doing patrols, the UK Border Force has contracted VOS to provide a ship, VOS Grace, to carry UKBF personnel, RN Medics & RM Protection Team to conduct UKBF patrols. Apologies....... ;-)
                        The ship design looks very similar to that of the Ulstein X-BOW while not the prettiest sight on the ocean it has great sea handling reduces slamming in heavy seas.

                        "When you arise in the morning, think of what a precious privilege it is to be alive - to breathe, to think, to enjoy, to love."


                        Marcus Aurelius Roman Emperor (161 to 180 A.D.)

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                          and do you believe that the current EUBG force generation concept is certain to be in force for the next 40 years? do you believe that the EUBG concept will be the only overseas missions that the DF will have taken part in by 2055?

                          given that its already 2016, no real work has been done on the EPV/MRV project for nearly a decade, there are no bids on the table and no one can come up with either a satisfactory requirement concept or point to an existing design that fits the bill, imagining that such a vessel will be in service before 2020 looks like being something of a stretch. if a vessel is in service for 35 years, it will be 2055 at least before it leaves service - predicating what a vessel in service in 2054 will need based on the turgid minutae of a project that everyone involved in that project says needs changing, seems to be pretty poor and self defeating way of using your brain.
                          Ships that fit the bill were mentioned as suitable or adaptable to our needs such as Norway's NORDKAPP or Denmark's ABSALON. The former is best on the "handy size" concept of fitting into our available harbour space. As regards Medsailor's comments, it is normal, when a large group of Naval vessels are assembled to project power, the group's commander and his staff will be carried on the most suitable vessel ,with space and comms for the HQ.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                            Ships that fit the bill were mentioned as suitable or adaptable to our needs such as Norway's NORDKAPP or Denmark's ABSALON...
                            i rather had the impression that their headline cost was just way out of what the DoD could possibly get through Cabinet - certainly you could save some of the cost by deleting/downgrading the weapons and surveilance fit, but not down to the kind of level that the IG could politically afford...

                            you're looking at €200m and change, and thats without a single weapons capability. you then have the very obvious issue that in having just the one ship of that capability, there will be significant periods during its service life when its simply not available due to re-fit etc.. so you find yourself having spent €200m on a capability that isn't available when you need it.

                            Comment


                            • Historically over the decades ships have increased in cost e.g. Deirdre 1 million , Eithne 26m, Roisin 40m, James Joyce 60m. Also historically ships are very durable, especially when propulsion and power are of reliable named manufacture, with good spares and technical support, throughout it's life. I think The Irish Naval Sevice has had full reliability especially from the Eithne and Deirdre class. Even if the Government moved to a Defence spend of 1.4% of GDP this would produce 2.7bn and even 1% would allot around 2bn. At the time of build every effort should be made to ensure an extendable life of estimated life plus 10%.. It is also necessary that ships, as outfitted, should retain their installed capabilities and not be neutered by exigencies created by shortfalls either in personnel or cash. Some countries have an emergency Defence Fund for such instances.

                              Comment


                              • I think we established the cost could be brought down to perhaps 125m or so - prev figures were for cost of two abalon sans removable missile units etc.

                                Nothing to sniff at, but manageable if spread over a few years. I assume any vessel capable of supporting land ops would be seen as an asset for the army as well.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X