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 ropebag View Post
    i think your premise is far too short sighted - given the effect on sea states due to climate change, as well as more overseas/crunchy taskings, bigger ships are going to be the norm. yes a new graving dock or floating dock is expensive for the first ship that needs it, but does anyone here seriously believe that in 2060 or so the state will be ordering P60 sized vessels?

    would anyone here be that surprised if, in 2060, the average OPV+ that will make up the bulk of ships being ordered/delivered will touch 4,000 tonnes - would anyone be that surprised if perhaps a third of the fleet was at around 8,000 tonnes?

    does anyone believe that the Irish state will, for the forever future, never need/use a ship with a greater beam than 21m?
    Is it shortsighted? I mean the Holland class which is 3750 tonnes still has a beam of only 16m, fully capable of fitting into the current dock, if it's rated to operate a NH-90 hellicopter, would our needs for a OPV+ need something that adds over 5m to the Beam for an OPV? I mean the Batch 2 Rivers are able to land Merlin's on a beam under 14m? Even the Type 23 frigates are still under that beam for nearly 6000 tonnes. So we have ship designs ranging from 3-6 thousand tonnes that would still fit, hell even the Endurance class still has a margin to fit at nearly 9500 tonnes...

    Put it another way, if we had a large/long term plan that would lay out purchases of hulls that need a 21+m beam, fine, but right now we are just talking about maybe 1 that might have a design issue fitting into the dock and then an unknown?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
      DEV all your points but in addition an integrated 360 deg Defence system to included usual heavy and light mgs, and in addition something in the 30mm calibre range to cover beam to aftermost arcs. We also need two LCP's launched by a rigid frame Davit with in boat manual release or Absalon equivalent. If we spend 100m ++, we must give it every chance to be successful and come home.
      I was outlining the minimum requirement

      If you specify that it will not conduct over the beach and/or opposed landings then you don't necessarily need heavier armament (eg SAMs, CIWS etc), 20mm's and MGs could cover it. As could a higher number of RHIBs.

      I do agree but it comes down to cost, manning and size.


      Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
      Obviously all docking is relevant to useage, especially unplanned use, as in we need it NOW. Our dry docking requirements covers 8 ships . No reason why other state or NGO users couldn't be included eg Maritime institute, and CIL. That would add another two big vessels. Floating Docks are readily available on the Market in Europe and Far East at around 3/5 USD. You need one with its own power, and not less than two travelling cranes capable of twin lift at 10tonne each. Four 500m3 ballast pumps would be ideal, some have only two. So if the drydock refurbished cannot handle a ship up to 120metres X 18metres/ 20metres at a draft of 5/6metres at an overall cost of 4.5m Euro, then buy a graving dock for use in Cork Harbour.
      Does the MRV need to fit in the basin for any reason? If it does that will limit the specs, unless you do a lot of work on the basin.

      Are you going to continue to drydock in Ireland? Soon Cork Dockyard will be the only 1 big enough to take an OPV in Ireland (never mind an MRV). Of course, what if they close down?

      Your then left with 2 options:
      (a) drydock overseas
      (b) refurbish the Haulbowline drydock

      The NS doesn't currently have the expertise or personnel to drydock ships. So do you then ask a private contractor to do something like a Public-Private partnership to build and operate it?

      what limitations will its size impose on the MRV design and if you make it bigger you then may need to make the basin bigger as well (I've no idea if this would even be possible).

      If you want to reduce the cost for the NS your going to have to run it at a profit which means use by other navies/merchant vessels. The NS utilisation would be less than 10% annually, so that is a lot of work to bring in.

      This of course would mean it's in competition with Cork Dockyard, which would possibly result in it closing. Unless the State buy it and run it at a loss.

      The are a lot of implications and decisions.

      Comment


      • Closing cork dockyard would see the owners breathe a sigh of relief. They have put nothing into it for years, continue to strip it of its assets, yet they keep getting work.
        For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
          DEV all your points but in addition an integrated 360 deg Defence system to included usual heavy and light mgs, and in addition something in the 30mm calibre range to cover beam to aftermost arcs. We also need two LCP's launched by a rigid frame Davit with in boat manual release or Absalon equivalent. If we spend 100m ++, we must give it every chance to be successful and come home.
          What ever ship replaces EITHNE, irrespective of the landing scenario, she will need most of the Defence capabilities that DEV proposes we exclude. The nature and speed of offence/defence is such that the old firing for range is gone. You can no longer accept that you might knock out an aggressor with the second or third round. It must be the first which entails, guided weapons and guns with an integrated FCS. The ship with the better FCS and weapons wins earlier and more often.

          Comment


          • Except what about ROE?

            Your going to have to positively identify (visually) it as an incoming missile or aircraft or vessel or any other threat that is actively attacking friendly forces beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it isn't a light aircraft or fishing boat on legitimate business. That is even more true of asymmetric threats like boats/aircraft loaded with explosives. And not replying to signals (radio or visual) isn't good enough. Missiles can't fit warning shots.

            It would be great to have and add potential/flexibility to the ship but if you uparm it your going to make it unaffordable and you'll be given the choice of a small frigate with all the bells and whistles or a MRV as I've described.

            The DF are never going to operating alone, there will always be someone else around (even on humanitarian ops). If the threat is such that we are looking at putting a ship into a war zone where there is a high threat to the ship you don't put it in. If we have a suitable vessel (or can team up with another vessel with that capability) we put them in by smaller craft and/or helo. If that isn't an option, you unload at nearby safe port and someone else moves you from there.

            Look it isn't ideal, it isn't prefect but if the beam and draft are limited due to what we discussed above then what you are going to be able to fit on it is going to be limited.

            If the MRV is traveling to say Somalia to

            Comment


            • Originally posted by DeV View Post
              Except what about ROE?

              Your going to have to positively identify (visually) it as an incoming missile or aircraft or vessel or any other threat that is actively attacking friendly forces beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it isn't a light aircraft or fishing boat on legitimate business. That is even more true of asymmetric threats like boats/aircraft loaded with explosives. And not replying to signals (radio or visual) isn't good enough. Missiles can't fit warning shots.

              It would be great to have and add potential/flexibility to the ship but if you uparm it your going to make it unaffordable and you'll be given the choice of a small frigate with all the bells and whistles or a MRV as I've described.

              The DF are never going to operating alone, there will always be someone else around (even on humanitarian ops). If the threat is such that we are looking at putting a ship into a war zone where there is a high threat to the ship you don't put it in. If we have a suitable vessel (or can team up with another vessel with that capability) we put them in by smaller craft and/or helo. If that isn't an option, you unload at nearby safe port and someone else moves you from there...
              the problem is that what you're describing might well be affordable, but by not having the most basic self defence capabiliies - anti-missile/projectile - you're also describing something that is unusable.

              if your MRV is so constrained in where it can go and and in what circumstances it can operate that it is, in its usability, no different to any commercial sealift, then you may as well not have an MRV, buy another OPV that will be better at the patrolling tasks, and use the change to hire in the sealift when you need it.

              if there is a danger within an op of a vessel being targeted by ATGW, mortar etc.. then any ship that can't defend itself against those threats simply won't be allowed into the threat area. those threats are so intimate, so close ranged, and so dependant on the defences having line of sight in order to engage them, that there is no such thing as 'baby-sitting' - you could put a T45/Horizon/AB in the bay with the LSL's/MRV's/whatevers and it could not defend those ships against short range missiles, particularly given that the LSL/MRV/whatevers would probably be between the guardship and the incoming missile.

              its simple, unless the MRV can put a full Mech Inf Coy and all its logs ashore without help from the shore, and defend itself against what are low end, cheap threats, then it is simply not worth buying. end of.

              if the cost of that is too great, then you need to look at other avenues for expanding capability in the Maritime sphere - bigger, more powerful OPV's for example.

              Comment


              • Relevant points from both DEV and ROPEBAG. The detachment of any vessel to overseas Naval Operations, especially against local terrorist/piracy AO's , needs a unit capable of sole operations. In unwritten ROE's a potential enemy might be allowed a free shot but after that it is full weight until their aggression stops. As regards size of MRV, if we require a length to say, 125 metres then our beam would be in the order of 17.8metres. Cork Drydock has an OPEN width of 21.3 metres. Absalon is 137metres with a beam of 19.5 metres, so a ship in the range of 125/135 X 17.8/19.5 would fit into the local Drydock. The Naval Dock has a stated dimension of 608ft by 94ft, or 184metres X 28metres. The latter would require money spending on the pumps and gates WEEEE scrapped, and the employment of a multirole qualified Dockmaster and assistants.

                Comment


                • Well if you want to land from offshore you need a dock and LCUs (a LCVP won't take a MOWAG or DROPS)

                  All the RN landing ships (apart from the civilian RoRo's are designed to stay offshore and their heaviest armament is CIWS (in a number of cases only a single mount).

                  If you add a dock, the vessel is a more complex design and must be somewhat larger that leads us back to the budget and size argument.

                  Comment


                  • As Dev has pointed out, the Amphibs of most navies aren't heavily armed to defend themselves, with RAM type defences or 57mm-76mm the only other defences than CIWS. But to me the greater point is that we seem to be back to the discussion we had a few pages back. Are we looking for a ship that can deploy troops over the beach in which case we are talking about an Amphib (Endurnace), or transporting troops to a harbour facility (Absalon type) or just an OPV that can carry some troops (Holland type)? I mean they duties are we speccing for?

                    Comment


                    • Actually, European amphibious vehicles are fairly lightly armed with CIWS being the heaviest armament (there is the odd exception like Absalon which is a hybrid), but most of them only have up to 30mm armament.

                      IMHO, something like Absalon is what we want - fast enough and with the fit to be an OPV and it can carry a sizeable load. A LPD can't do the OPV job and a big OPV can't carry a useful load.

                      The NS does have the manpower (it can't keep what it has) to run a drydock operation. Even if there was it would be waste of manpower. The utilisation of a NS drydock would be a waste of taxpayers money (be it putting the Haulbowline drydock back into operation, purchasing a floating dock or purchasing Cork Dockyard. It has to be a commercial (quite possibly loss making) operation.

                      Comment


                      • As a total amateur reading this thread, it strikes me that what is needed is two vessels, one for troop/amphib, one as an OPV. There seems to be too much expected from one ship.

                        Would the total budget for two be that much greater than one that can do everything? Given that two would have greater utility than one.

                        Also, I can't follow the reason why Ireland would need the capicity to put troops ashore on a hostile beach? Is the plan to invade Malta back on the agenda, or is one of the Aran Islands going to go down the UDI route?
                        'He died who loved to live,' they'll say,
                        'Unselfishly so we might have today!'
                        Like hell! He fought because he had to fight;
                        He died that's all. It was his unlucky night.
                        http://www.salamanderoasis.org/poems...nnis/luck.html

                        Comment


                        • fast enough and with the fit to be an OPV and it can carry a sizeable load. A LPD can't do the OPV job and a big OPV can't carry a useful load.
                          10 out of 10,

                          The utilisation of a NS drydock would be a waste of taxpayers money (be it putting the Haulbowline drydock back into operation, purchasing a floating dock or purchasing Cork Dockyard. It has to be a commercial (quite possibly loss making) operation.
                          Again 10 out of 10.....
                          Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Flamingo View Post
                            As a total amateur reading this thread, it strikes me that what is needed is two vessels, one for troop/amphib, one as an OPV. There seems to be too much expected from one ship.
                            Absalon proves that it is possible

                            Would the total budget for two be that much greater than one that can do everything? Given that two would have greater utility than one.
                            OPV €50-60m
                            MRV probably €120-150m

                            In the past, the utilisation of the MRV in role of a transport vessel would liking be 1 return voyage every year, if 2 vessels were purchased (it would be throwing WP policy out the window and leaving a vessel tied up alongside for 11 months of the year. Unless they deployed it overseas (eg the Med) for a long period.

                            Also, I can't follow the reason why Ireland would need the capicity to put troops ashore on a hostile beach? Is the plan to invade Malta back on the agenda, or is one of the Aran Islands going to go down the UDI route?
                            I suppose it is if there is a asymmetric threat really.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Flamingo View Post
                              ...Also, I can't follow the reason why Ireland would need the capicity to put troops ashore on a hostile beach? Is the plan to invade Malta back on the agenda, or is one of the Aran Islands going to go down the UDI route?
                              theres a big different between Iwo Jima and San Carlos, and - for example - Freetown in 1999 and Benghazi in 2011. no one is suggesting putting an Irish Coy ashore at Iwo Jima or San Carlos, however the profusion and lethality of ATGW, its ease of use and the direction of travel with regards to both UN/EU missions and the attitudes of non-state actors totards UN missions (6 Ginean UN Peacekeepers killed yesterday in an attack on their base in Mali) would suggest that deciding that no one will have a pop at a UN/EU mission even when the 'government' of that country has asked for that mission, and its arrival is widely welcomed, would be (to use the words of the ever wise Sir Humphrey Appleby) courageous...

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
                                10 out of 10,



                                Again 10 out of 10.....
                                According to the MfD in the Irish Examiner we are heading for a Nine ship Navy. We need at least an undertaking that Cork Dockyard will be retained, and maintained for the future. We recently did major hull repairs to at least two naval vessels, not just mandatory "short back and sides". Dublin dockyard is soon to be part of Dublin port development and expansion and will no longer have a drydock. If the Naval Dockyard was usable then an inhouse team could be trained to operate the procedures for dry docking ships. Those to work on ships are already on the naval dockyard establishment.

                                The Absalon concept would allow carriage port to port with flexibility to land personnel adjacent by LCP to secure safe docking--take ropes, tie up ship, defend tie-up area etc.?

                                Finally we HAVE to plan for No civilian Dry Dock in ROI. What are the strategic alternatives? Should civilian agencies be curtailed in making choices that effect the strategic welfare of elements of National Security? How do we ensure continuity of a Dry dock Facility.?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X