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 Turkey View Post
    2 helicopters Paul, the other 2 were not suitable for shipboard operations.
    Then how can chile operate term from opv

    Comment


    • Originally posted by paul g View Post
      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.
      "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 paul g View Post
        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.
        For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
          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...
          "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 Turkey View Post
            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
            Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

            Comment


            • Originally posted by DeV View Post
              And how long does it take to go from cadet day 1 to officer with NWC or day 1 apprentice to qualified ERA ?
              I'll get you exact figures yet roufly 3.5 years for Cadet NWC and at the mo 6.5/8 years for an ERA, the longer figure can happen if they get screwed for college places.

              You could crew the 9th ship in the morning, it shaving the reliefs available for them in two years time.

              At the mo about 80 leave a year and let's say 100 join, the young folk (the actual workers) are not staying long

              Comment


              • I would repeat that an open door recruitment policy over 3 years would build up numbers and allow for 1st year intakes to make junior NCO in their third year. The current Naval Service reserve could be encouraged to volunteer for 6 month deployment to sea duties AND offer joining full time where suitable and appropriate

                Comment


                • Is it pointing towards the 5 year sailor contract and 3 year SSC not being long enough?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                    Is it pointing towards the 5 year sailor contract and 3 year SSC not being long enough?
                    The overall dead hand on recruitment are the Dept. of Finance controls which are exclusively fiscally driven. Recruits and new entries, re-entries, should be available when needed.
                    When a person is enlisted there must be a return of service period to cover costs and obtain a manpower value. If the enlistment period was 5 years then the return of service should be in the order of two years plus a one year notice of intention to leave. This gives both sides decision time and allows for training of replacements. This doesn't preclude discharge for service reasons or not being finally approved.
                    The RN operate a 12year engagement, with a 4 year return of service and one year notice to leave. Overall the ability to recruit as needed is the crucial factor in maintaining strengths.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                      The overall dead hand on recruitment are the Dept. of Finance controls which are exclusively fiscally driven. Recruits and new entries, re-entries, should be available when needed.
                      When a person is enlisted there must be a return of service period to cover costs and obtain a manpower value. If the enlistment period was 5 years then the return of service should be in the order of two years plus a one year notice of intention to leave. This gives both sides decision time and allows for training of replacements. This doesn't preclude discharge for service reasons or not being finally approved.
                      The RN operate a 12year engagement, with a 4 year return of service and one year notice to leave. Overall the ability to recruit as needed is the crucial factor in maintaining strengths.
                      AFAIK recruitment is dissolved again (DPER approval no longer required).

                      Personally I think there is an issue in that NS officers are commissioned into a 3 year SSC which is the duration of their training, so in effect they only have to stay while in training?!

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                        The overall dead hand on recruitment are the Dept. of Finance controls which are exclusively fiscally driven. Recruits and new entries, re-entries, should be available when needed.
                        When a person is enlisted there must be a return of service period to cover costs and obtain a manpower value. If the enlistment period was 5 years then the return of service should be in the order of two years plus a one year notice of intention to leave. This gives both sides decision time and allows for training of replacements. This doesn't preclude discharge for service reasons or not being finally approved.
                        The RN operate a 12year engagement, with a 4 year return of service and one year notice to leave. Overall the ability to recruit as needed is the crucial factor in maintaining strengths.
                        The RN also have a much wider age profile for recruits. Particularly those with trades. I believe our upper age limit is quite restrictive. (RN is 37, INS is 27). They also offer a waiver to those re-joining. Many young recruits leave for any number of wrong reasons (mostly domestic, temporary reasons) and forever regret the choice that was often forced on them. However the NS has still trained them, and could benefit from allowing them to return, should they reach the fitness criteria.
                        There are way too many young, ex NS crew in the civilian workforce who would have given a far greater contribution to the NS once they had matured. Luckily An Garda Siochana seemed to have been happy to sweep many of them up over the years.
                        For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                          AFAIK recruitment is dissolved again (DPER approval no longer required).

                          Personally I think there is an issue in that NS officers are commissioned into a 3 year SSC which is the duration of their training, so in effect they only have to stay while in training?!
                          That seems to be your interpretation of it, at least. The SSC is to ensure they successfully complete training. In the past the DF has been forced to retain people who did not succeed in their non-military training, be it in Air Corps Flight Training or NS Officer watch-keeping. Normally they ended up in an army unit as a transport officer or similar until their 12 years was up, at which point they were free to leave the job they did not want.
                          For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                            AFAIK recruitment is dissolved again (DPER approval no longer required).

                            Personally I think there is an issue in that NS officers are commissioned into a 3 year SSC which is the duration of their training, so in effect they only have to stay while in training?!
                            This stuff seems to be" out of Thread". However, I am aiming at a period of continual recruitment aided by frequent TV and media ads in popular papers. If SSC refers to Short Service Commissions, the three year basic enlistment should not initially involve more than 14 weeks basic and Branch training. I also presume there is a permanent commission on offer to suitable SSC Candidates.

                            Comment


                            • EITHNE's MRV REPLACEMENT

                              Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
                              So from Kevin Marum's Dail Questions thread here's Kenny's answer in regarding hull numbers:

                              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.
                              When ships are being built in more than singletons, there will always be a point on the timeline, when you are up a ship until hulls are disposed of by selling or scrapping. Looking at the numbers rescued lately in the Mediterranean , it highlights the benefit of having a suitable handy ship on task. I don't believe such numbers can be humanely carried for periods longer than 24 hours in any dignified sense on ships with no sheltering structures such as Eithne's flight deck and hanger. The Navy need a Logs/MRV vessel to meet such tasks on a worldwide basis. Right now such a vessel should be in an advanced state of planning on Naval desks, especially since pen to sword can take many years.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                                If we use NATO style Role levels, then a logistics ship , in an anticipated environment, should be equipped and manned, for specific periods, to a Role 2 level with four/six adaptable beds, and a theater. I would expect that units forward would do their own Role 1, including triage, and send those for further treatment back to the most appropriate service, or to home hospitals. Manning would have to be selective to cover anticipated use.
                                It is my understanding that the Medical Corps posess a modular field hospital, based around a number of TEUs. Given the original plan was a vessel that could hold a specific amount of TEU on deck, could this still be a concept runner? When not in use as a hospital ship, the deck would carry other items.
                                For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X