Irish Military Online is in no way affiliated with the Irish Defence Forces. It is in no way sponsored or endorsed by the Irish Defence Forces or the Irish Government. Opinions expressed by the authors and contributors of this site are not necessarily those of the Defence Forces. If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Any replacement for CPVs -when the time comes- must represent an advance on current caps. CPVs are twin screw, twin engine room, 76mm armed, FCS- and-IR-equipped fighting ships with multiple system redundancies including comms, conning, propulsion, generation. They mix sprint capability with slow single engine running or (in calm weather) loiter. Their draft gives them full coastal access but their seakeeping means they can work offshore. No need to list their disadvantages...we are all familiar with them too. But it would be a disaster to willingly replace these vessels with - as mentioned above- an 'ocean going tug' with some sub-calibre infantry support weapon as a main armament. Replace like with like, improve upon it in the process and -yes- we will take that ocean going tug as well, thank you very much.
Looking at naval technology to be honest I don't think there is anything out there that fits the bill. In the main everything available is either OPV sized, fast attack craft, designed for much more sheltered waters, too small etc. The best all weather option is something like the Tamar or Safehaven but they are not really designed to be at sea longer than 24 hours.
I am all for the NS getting new ships but these damen ships are fairly ugly. Not as sleek as the current class of ship being delivered. Surely the new drones can venture in where the P60's can't. Bigger is better
I am all for the NS getting new ships but these damen ships are fairly ugly. Not as sleek as the current class of ship being delivered. Surely the new drones can venture in where the P60's can't. Bigger is better
Have you ever boarded a half decker with a drone?
For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
My opinion is the Damen vessels less than 50m, with small crews, typically 12/15, are sortie craft, and not sustainable over long periods at sea. Their scantlings would be quite light and draft shallow for a West Coast winter pounding. With small fleet numbers we need a commonalty of capability, unless we decide on creating another inshore weather dependent, Force 7 or below squadron.
Given that Haulbowline is a base constrained by basin size and draft we are always restricted to vessel draft less than 4.5 meters. Even that draft at LWS might need an hour of making tide to get out of the mud.
We must NOT get hung up on requiring low freeboard for ease of boarding. An Ocean vessel needs higher freeboard in the forward half-length to reduce wetness and give maximum seakeeping qualities. Water coming on board should not be free to pass aft of the bridge.
Damen have some interesting designs but most are not really tested. Niamh and Roisin have been tested especially the former with voyages to the Far East and circumnavigation of South America. Roisin on the other hand had her Chicoutimi incident in heavy seas. An analysis of these two voyages might trigger a design concept for the ideal WNA capable vessel. Any decision on replacement vessels must always consider our need for MULTIROLE operability
Last edited by ancientmariner; 28 April 2015, 10:46.
Reason: ommission
AC currently assist NS with salmon patrols so no reason why a OPV couldn't deploy UAVs to assess if RHIBs (and boarding teams) should be deployed into places the OPV can't go.
She and her sister Meerkatte are powerful ships designed for FP and fiscal coastwatch duties. The hull type looks good and may be adaptable to naval use also. The draft may be excessive at 5m+. The original Seefalke, now a research vessel , cost 94m$ to convert in 2009 to RV Falkor. They are pricey ships.
My opinion is the Damen vessels less than 50m, with small crews, typically 12/15, are sortie craft, and not sustainable over long periods at sea. Their scantlings would be quite light and draft shallow for a West Coast winter pounding. With small fleet numbers we need a commonalty of capability, unless we decide on creating another inshore weather dependent, Force 7 or below squadron.
Given that Haulbowline is a base constrained by basin size and draft we are always restricted to vessel draft less than 4.5 meters. Even that draft at LWS might need an hour of making tide to get out of the mud.
We must NOT get hung up on requiring low freeboard for ease of boarding. An Ocean vessel needs higher freeboard in the forward half-length to reduce wetness and give maximum seakeeping qualities. Water coming on board should not be free to pass aft of the bridge.
Damen have some interesting designs but most are not really tested. Niamh and Roisin have been tested especially the former with voyages to the Far East and circumnavigation of South America. Roisin on the other hand had her Chicoutimi incident in heavy seas. An analysis of these two voyages might trigger a design concept for the ideal WNA capable vessel. Any decision on replacement vessels must always consider our need for MULTIROLE operability
I meant that the draught was too deep to act as a CPV.
According to the below the current CPV are limted to within 80 nm of the coast, with the expanding area of responsibility IMHO it may be better to get 1/2 x OPVs to replace them:
According to the 2007 Annual DoD/DF Report, inshore salmon patrols accounted for 8 operations for a total of 60 days in 2007. That hardly justifies 2 x CPVs does it (especially when aircraft are also tasked) ?!
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Comment