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 na grohmití View Post
    ...Trying to get one ship to do both jobs seems to be impossible...
    absolutely. moreover, from what i can see the reality of what the 'landing' ship would look like would give even the the most Flint-eyed FG-er the wobbles - well deck, massive flight deck, CWIS etc..

    obviously thats a political judgement to far better made by those with a greater grip of the political scene than i, but i'd be concerned that the NS, and wider DF might spend a fortune, and spend years changing doctrine and waste untold political capital on a project that was well supported by the wider body politic, but who then react like scalded cats when the finished design/models are unveiled.

    the advantage of the point class is that they don't look particularly 'warry', and without the combat/defence/surveilance systems they'd be cheaper - and at more that 2,500 lane meters theres no scrimping on what you can take...

    Comment


    • Any chance of organising an enhanced "Batch 4" EPV order for the RN ropebag? Stretched, CIWS, 76MM... Good sports we are, we'll take two and one of them there Point Class.

      Comment


      • On the mention of big boy navy stuff like Frigates, considering the Kiwis are running two of them, is it something that a navy of our size should be looking at now, or in the near future?
        What are you cackling at, fatty? Too much pie, that's your problem.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by ODIN View Post
          On the mention of big boy navy stuff like Frigates, considering the Kiwis are running two of them, is it something that a navy of our size should be looking at now, or in the near future?
          Those two (meant to be four) came from a joint buy with Australia, and as I pointed out they are from a period of higher spending on defence, while they are getting a mid life refit now, I wonder how and with what they'll be replaced with at the end of their lifespan.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
            Those two (meant to be four) came from a joint buy with Australia, and as I pointed out they are from a period of higher spending on defence, while they are getting a mid life refit now, I wonder how and with what they'll be replaced with at the end of their lifespan.
            Considering Vlad is throwing around terms like "New Cold War", and pumping money into the Russian military, I think the period of high spending on defence could be coming back. Maybe not to an extent that was seen in the past, but it might be on the horizon.
            What are you cackling at, fatty? Too much pie, that's your problem.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
              Those two (meant to be four) came from a joint buy with Australia, and as I pointed out they are from a period of higher spending on defence, while they are getting a mid life refit now, I wonder how and with what they'll be replaced with at the end of their lifespan.
              They are a MEKO "off the shelf" design in use by Turkey, Greece, South Africa and Portugal in addition to Australia and New Zealand. All have slightly different weapon and sensor fit, based on a standard hull shape.
              ThyssenKrupp continue to design off she shelf warships, their CSL being the latest 45knot design.
              For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ODIN View Post
                Considering Vlad is throwing around terms like "New Cold War", and pumping money into the Russian military, I think the period of high spending on defence could be coming back. Maybe not to an extent that was seen in the past, but it might be on the horizon.
                Vlad and Russia are going to face plenty of issues if the price of oil stays where it is for a protracted period, and lets face it, they still have two decades of lack of investment to deal with, I mean replacing the heavy surface units for example is going to be difficult without Ukraine (example, having to sell 3 brand new frigates due to lack of engines). And lets not forget that even with the lack of spending from the European NATO members they still combined vastly outspend Russia, if all of them went to the 2% Vlad couldn't match them.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                  yes.
                  Can you provide a link for that ?

                  Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                  In this defence force an MRV is a cavalry variant of the Mowag Piranha.
                  CIWS can engage all fast moving inbound targets, regardless of size. it puts up a wall of lead(or DU) which the incoming projectile will struggle to fly through. Most warships combine CIWS with passive and active defence such as chaff or radar decoy.
                  Its a layered system, not standalone.
                  The ships you see armed only with CIWS are usually located well inside a layered defence, outside which sits multiple warships armed with anti air and surface defence.
                  Read the WP

                  Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                  DEV look up Royal Navy Weapon Systems. CIWS Phalanx is for dealing with in-coming anti ship missiles. All ships are fitted with 7.62mini-guns for swarm attack defence. They also use 30mm Fire controlled units. For RPG and ATGW you have to maintain launch platforms outside 3000/4000 yards and engage preemptively with fragmenting ammunition from the OTO-Melara. Taking the Piss does not help either.
                  I'm not talking about swarm attacks. Someone said that due to that threat you may want to stay offshore in order to avoid it in harbour while unloading (possibly a lone wolf).

                  Originally posted by pym View Post
                  The point shouldn't have to be re-made every few pages that if we're willing to put the best trained personnel, with the best equipment, on a vessel which will be as vulnerable to attack from a TOW/C802-YJ82 (weapons that are proliferating around the worlds trouble spots) as a RO-RO ferry, then just hire a ferry. If the threat assessment says that's ok, and will be forevermore, that is the only cost effective solution.

                  I think we can forget ASW, Medium range SAMs and AESA radars.

                  But an oversized OPV, equipped only for policing its own territorial waters, lumbering in to a trouble spot, where just one lucky hit could potentially take out both the biggest vessel and pointiest end of a modern European Army... eggs, one basket...

                  As ropebag said, if we're not prepared to do this right, we'd just be getting in the way.


                  Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                  Here's an Idea.

                  The State purchase a vessel similar to Hurst Point, use it to ship vehicles and freight to wherever it wishes for overseas missions, while at the same time training it's merchant seamen, and providing employment for others, who were forced off irish flagged ships when cheaper workers were hired in. (Irish Ferries).
                  And either buy a larger OPV for OPV duties, or a low end Frigate sized vessel (with nothing too complicated, lest DEVs head might explode) to escort this vessel into hostile waters. BAM class opv or Karel Doorman class Frigate for example. Netherlands recently sold 2 of theirs (Built in early 1990s) to its Neighbour Belgium, another 2 to Portugal, 2 to Chile and there are 2 more still in service, no doubt soon to be sold when the rest of the Hollands are fully in service.
                  The Hurst Point type ship can send our foreign aid wherever it needs to go, or send and recover our defence forces equipment when required, and the rest of the time, can find plenty of work on the Irish sea freight routes.
                  Trying to get one ship to do both jobs seems to be impossible.


                  Originally posted by Tempest View Post
                  After 38 pages, this is potentially the most sensible proposal I have read. We have to dip our toe into a proper naval vessel sometime, it may as well be a second-hand Dutch frigate. And if the lads have to sleep 6 to a room, well hey, welcome to the real world of having a navy rather then a naval service. Depending on the price of a used Hartland Point type vessel, why not consider having it operated by the military? If you can devise 7-10 months of useful work for it annually it could be a real asset.
                  Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                  absolutely. moreover, from what i can see the reality of what the 'landing' ship would look like would give even the the most Flint-eyed FG-er the wobbles - well deck, massive flight deck, CWIS etc..

                  obviously thats a political judgement to far better made by those with a greater grip of the political scene than i, but i'd be concerned that the NS, and wider DF might spend a fortune, and spend years changing doctrine and waste untold political capital on a project that was well supported by the wider body politic, but who then react like scalded cats when the finished design/models are unveiled.

                  the advantage of the point class is that they don't look particularly 'warry', and without the combat/defence/surveilance systems they'd be cheaper - and at more that 2,500 lane meters theres no scrimping on what you can take...
                  Well the Government have decided otherwise

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
                    Vlad and Russia are going to face plenty of issues if the price of oil stays where it is for a protracted period, and lets face it, they still have two decades of lack of investment to deal with, I mean replacing the heavy surface units for example is going to be difficult without Ukraine (example, having to sell 3 brand new frigates due to lack of engines). And lets not forget that even with the lack of spending from the European NATO members they still combined vastly outspend Russia, if all of them went to the 2% Vlad couldn't match them.
                    With Vlad we have a government that is increasing military expenditure while banging the nationalist drum to maintain support despite deteriorating economic conditions. Having decided to ride the nationalist tiger, he's going to find it very hard to get off. This is exactly the situation in which such a government can decide that a short glorious war is the answer.

                    Comment


                    • What the NS primarily needs is a large flexible OPV with helipad and a freight capacity to contribute to ops at home and overseas.

                      That vessel will spend the vast majority of its time doing fishery protection etc in the North Atlantic in all weathers (this is the major reason it has to be larger). It also needs to have the capability to conduct the NS's other roles at home.

                      There is an annual need to land a Coy Gp at a friendly EU port. There is a need to land a Coy Gp (possibly up to Bn) further afield (most likely at a secure port and always with a UN mandate) on average every 3 years or so. This task being assigned to the NS depends on the MRV, if they don't get a suitable vessel it will be chartered or another navy).

                      There may also be a need to conduct policing (eg counter pirate or embargo enforcement) type ops in foreign waters or land humanitarian equipment & supplies (at most likely a secure port).

                      Comment


                      • Are were forcing a ship into a mission or a mission into a ship? There is a real danger of a total balls up here, tryin to cover multiple roles with one ship, perhaps it might be better if we continued with the NS doing what it has done very well for the last 40 odd years, Patrol, Fishery protection, smuggling interdiction, etc, with increased capacity, maybe enough to take some of the slack off the British Isles forces, who seem to be comparatively weak in some of these aspects, and then when we need to move a battalion somewhere, give the RN a tinkle and say ''we need a lend of HMS Whatever for a couple of days, to plonk a few troops in Outer Fantaisa, How ya fixed? ''
                        After all, the NS has served the taxpayer brilliantly in it's current capacity, as well as, or better then anyone else in the western world, our Army is the finest light infantry force in the known universe, Ranger wing have been described as the most dangerous thing ever likely to break down your front door, we will keep silent on the flyin club for the moment, but the point is; are we in danger of damaging the system by looking for a role that just may be a step too far?

                        Just some stray thoughts, I'm only on my 2nd cup of coffee.
                        "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
                        Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
                        Illegitimi non carborundum

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                          What the NS primarily needs is a large flexible OPV with helipad and a freight capacity to contribute to ops at home and overseas.

                          That vessel will spend the vast majority of its time doing fishery protection etc in the North Atlantic in all weathers (this is the major reason it has to be larger). It also needs to have the capability to conduct the NS's other roles at home.

                          There is an annual need to land a Coy Gp at a friendly EU port. There is a need to land a Coy Gp (possibly up to Bn) further afield (most likely at a secure port and always with a UN mandate) on average every 3 years or so. This task being assigned to the NS depends on the MRV, if they don't get a suitable vessel it will be chartered or another navy).

                          There may also be a need to conduct policing (eg counter pirate or embargo enforcement) type ops in foreign waters or land humanitarian equipment & supplies (at most likely a secure port).
                          On Message at Last. Post Tenebras, Lux.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                            On Message at Last. Post Tenebras, Lux.
                            I've repeatedly said this in this thread

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Turkey View Post
                              Are were forcing a ship into a mission or a mission into a ship? There is a real danger of a total balls up here, tryin to cover multiple roles with one ship, perhaps it might be better if we continued with the NS doing what it has done very well for the last 40 odd years, Patrol, Fishery protection, smuggling interdiction, etc, with increased capacity, maybe enough to take some of the slack off the British Isles forces, who seem to be comparatively weak in some of these aspects, and then when we need to move a battalion somewhere, give the RN a tinkle and say ''we need a lend of HMS Whatever for a couple of days, to plonk a few troops in Outer Fantaisa, How ya fixed? ''
                              After all, the NS has served the taxpayer brilliantly in it's current capacity, as well as, or better then anyone else in the western world, our Army is the finest light infantry force in the known universe, Ranger wing have been described as the most dangerous thing ever likely to break down your front door, we will keep silent on the flyin club for the moment, but the point is; are we in danger of damaging the system by looking for a role that just may be a step too far?

                              Just some stray thoughts, I'm only on my 2nd cup of coffee.
                              Ships are in essence multi-role. RN has been sending RFA vessels to do a job in the Carribean that used to be done by mainly by destroyers.

                              The State has claimed more of the Continental Shelf, which we now have to take responsibility for policing. Part of the reason why we need a bigger vessel.

                              Any vessel with some armament, speed, endurance, seakeeping and RHIBs can do a OPVs job. It may not be the best or the most efficient at it but it can do it.

                              There is ships out there that mix the 2 - Absalon being an example.

                              Comment


                              • The six POINT type RO-ROs were chartered in to provide sea lift capacity for the British Forces. Recently two were released back to their owners while four continue as sea lift available. MV. HURST POINT has recently loaded with construction materials and equipment to build a new barrack unit to replace Portacabin type structures on The Falklands. There is a scheduled run to Falklands for sea containers using Point vessels. The ships are 23,000 tonnes on a length of 169metres and a beam of 26metres.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X