Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CPV Replacement

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

  • Originally posted by danno View Post
    A Turbina moment at a modern Spithead Reviiew type of influential gathering could only gain commercial traction for such a promising product.
    What?

    Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
      To be fair to Frank & Co, they have got where they are based on the quality of their product. IMERC would be no advantage to him. He would be an advantage to them. His company has built all the pilot boats currently in service in Cork and Dublin Port, as well as many other european ports, as well as a number further afield.

      http://www.safehavenmarine.com/home
      agreed. he also has a nice 60ft cat for sale, already rigged for survey work, which would suit mine hunting work?

      Comment


      • Irish navy

        Originally posted by restless View Post
        agreed. he also has a nice 60ft cat for sale, already rigged for survey work, which would suit mine hunting work?
        .

        To be realistic, currently we are in no place to pander to one off experimental craft capable of unknown tasks, other than displaying high speed from A to B. It might have a place as a school craft to teach high speed handling, like the family dune buggy.
        A naval vessel is only as good as the Fire Power it can deliver and that's where we Must put our Money. Take a look at Naval Photo Archives and look at a side shot of an Old Corvette- 1 x 4 Inch Gun,1x AHTW(Hedgehog), 4x 20mm Oerlikons, 1x 2pdr AA Gun,4x DC throwers, 2x stern DC rails, 1x TAS system. We need to recover an ability to add punch to our Defence obligations.

        Comment


        • Comment


          • As for counter mine/IED mission the P60 class have been built with the capacity to load 3 TEU containers to expand their mission capability. This is similar to what the USN has tried with the extremely expensive LCS vessels and what the Australians will try with the new offshore vessels.
            An example of such a system is from Atlas Electronik and could easily be a way to give the NS back a counter mine capacity. Then it makes perfect sense to have a core fleet of 6 P60's and 2 P50's with an EPV/MPV to follow later as a replacement for the LE Eithne.

            https://www.atlas-elektronik.com/wha...ission-module/
            Last edited by EUFighter; 3 March 2017, 18:27.

            Comment


            • Do Babcock have a design for a CPV or an MRV?

              With a 4 TEU capacity you could take the necessary NSDS equipment
              Last edited by DeV; 4 March 2017, 10:51.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                Do Babcock have a design for a CPV or an OPV?

                With a 4 TEU capacity you could take the necessary NSDS equipment
                if the article has any semblance of truth in it, i would put good odds on the proposed C-IED capability being sacrificed on the altar of cost savings, commonality, and the NS wanting to get hulls in the water rather than taking the risk of the CPV replacements getting kicked into the long grass.

                Babcock might be able to do a fiddle of the existing design/build to get 4 rather than 3 TEU on, but any fiddle costs money to even explore, and any real change will cost lots - and one of the drivers of this proposed deal (assuming it exists) is that Babcock will be able to offer P65 and P66 for a bargain precisely because this will be the 5th and 6th time they will have built exactly the same design with exactly the same componants.

                in shipbuilding, as in every other industrial process, the first couple of times you do something there is a degree of trial and error. by the time you get to 5th and 6th the process has been ironed out, the whole build will be smoother, quicker, and less manpower intensive. that makes it cheaper...

                Comment


                • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                  Do Babcock have a design for a CPV or an OPV?

                  With a 4 TEU capacity you could take the necessary NSDS equipment
                  Why 4 TEU's?

                  For minehunting 1 TEU is needed, as for diving a single TEU can be fitted with all needed to support diving operation, if a Decompression Chamber is also to be carried this would take the third place currently available.

                  http://www.smp-ltd.com/category/cati...ms-Containers/

                  However a good modification would be to have a flex spot where the 3rd RIB is carried. This could be for a TEU and one of then we could have a TEU base for carrying the RIB when needed and for other mission pallets when something different is needed.

                  All this would only be possible if we have TEU mission systems and I have not seen that we have ordered anything along these lines. Knowing how we purchase things we will only order such flexible mission systems after an event when we find we do not have the capability.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                    Why 4 TEU's?

                    For minehunting 1 TEU is needed, as for diving a single TEU can be fitted with all needed to support diving operation, if a Decompression Chamber is also to be carried this would take the third place currently available.

                    http://www.smp-ltd.com/category/cati...ms-Containers/

                    However a good modification would be to have a flex spot where the 3rd RIB is carried. This could be for a TEU and one of then we could have a TEU base for carrying the RIB when needed and for other mission pallets when something different is needed.

                    All this would only be possible if we have TEU mission systems and I have not seen that we have ordered anything along these lines. Knowing how we purchase things we will only order such flexible mission systems after an event when we find we do not have the capability.
                    The vessel the NSDS hires for training has to carry 2 plus the LARS system:
                    1 Sub Surface (ROV and Side Scan Sonar)
                    1 Decompression Chamber
                    1 Surface Supply Diving Equipment

                    You will notice 3 above not 2, reason being the Sub Surface container isn't always carried for training (but you never know when you might need it).

                    It also needs to carry the SMP LARS unit which is approx the size of a 10ft container.

                    also bear in mind you need to able to open those containers, space to walk around (while in the diving kit)

                    Well the vessel that the NS hires for training is required to carry:

                    Comment


                    • We can all undo the knitting. The normal procedure is to make an expression of interest to relevant yards and see what the costs are. An MRV acquisition is part of Naval /Government policy. My only concern is the continuous reference to counter IED in the maritime environment. AFIK such threats to ships or installations is an in-port hazard and is spearheaded by strong Intelligence led analysis covering threat levels from improvised devices including RCIED. It is the duty of ships divers to examine ships hulls , while in port , for foreign attachments. The ship itself is not a counter IED vessel but it's specialists may get involved as outlined in searches. Basically any ship can be tasked to check for IED's if it has the divers with relevant expertise.

                      Comment


                      • Normally the unit will transit to the port by road and bring a rib etc. The depths in a port allow for cylinder diving.

                        Comment


                        • MOD: Moved to CPV thread

                          Ok moved here as we are discussing the reported additional 2 new OPVs being used to replace the CPVs.

                          Dedicated MCMVs are too small for all weather use even in coastal waters and too slow to be effective CPVs. They may also be too expensive considering how often they are likely to be used in role

                          The CPV designs out there are generally too small, too deep draft (if we are going for being able to put into small ports around the country (including to seek shelter), can't carry the TEUs.

                          So just go OPVs with CD and ROV etc capabilities?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                            [COLOR="#FF0000"]MOD:

                            So just go OPVs with CD and ROV etc capabilities?
                            An ETV which has lots of deck space for TEU's, DPS , can make 17kts can equally fulfill the role and has added utility.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                              MOD: Moved to CPV thread

                              Ok moved here as we are discussing the reported additional 2 new OPVs being used to replace the CPVs.

                              Dedicated MCMVs are too small for all weather use even in coastal waters and too slow to be effective CPVs. They may also be too expensive considering how often they are likely to be used in role

                              The CPV designs out there are generally too small, too deep draft (if we are going for being able to put into small ports around the country (including to seek shelter), can't carry the TEUs.

                              So just go OPVs with CD and ROV etc capabilities?
                              We need to be careful about ship types and designs. All ships have an almost critical relationship between Length. breadth, draft, freeboard, and Block Coefficient for their stability, speed, cost, and power required to reach designed speed. Reduction in draft will always limit a ships operability and usefulness in rough seas and heavy weather. The CPV draft of 2.72m is quite shallow and that of the new ships is shallower than the Corvettes, Deirdre class, and P31. Draft will determine how you are likely to perform in big sea environments. It is one of the reasons "big" Navies don't fully reveal displacements of their ships. Generally shallow drafters will be going into survival mode in Force 9 and above, and all tend to have low freeboard.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X