Thanks Thanks:  198
Likes Likes:  403
Dislikes Dislikes:  6

View Poll Results: (Realistically) What best to replace the Peacock CPVs with?

Voters
61. You may not vote on this poll
  • Like for like (a similarly capable CPV)

    19 31.15%
  • 1-2 x OPVs (2 defending on available funds)

    39 63.93%
  • Larger number of much less capable patrol craft)

    3 4.92%
Page 1 of 22 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 547

Thread: CPV Replacement

  1. #1
    CQMS spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,492
    Post Thanks / Like

    CPV Replacement

    I've been a follower of the debate on here around the re-building programme for the Irish Navy...the need for an EPV...the fact that CPV's are probably needed to police the inshore fisheries around the various bays and inlets etc etc.

    Then the recent refugee crisis in the Mediterranean...and the decision to deploy the UK Border Agency Cutters got me looking at the Damon Stan vessels.

    Operated by services as diverse as the UK Border Agency...the United States Coastguard...the Mexican Navy...are these or a version of them a potential replacement for LE Orla and LE Caira?

    They seem to be reasonably priced ($5.37 million per US Ship 4.94 million Euros) ...could these be an option to allow funds to be diverted into the much required larger patrol vessel / EPV?

    Are they capable of doing the job...I've attached a couple of youtube videos showing their handling in moderate seas...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xftrxGL8S48

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruZGPJoxOUA

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9uj028MH5E

    The US Coastguard version is armed with a 25mm Bushmaster canon...but only has a 5 day endurance as opposed to the unarmed UK version of 12 - 14 days.

    http://www.oig.dhs.gov/assets/Mgmt/2...2-68_Aug12.pdf

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKBF_42m_Customs_Cutter

    I have photos somewhere of one of the UKBA Cutters alongside Belfast docks...I'll try to find them.

    I'll leave any discussion in the hands of those who know what they are talking about
    'History is a vast early warning system'. Norman Cousins

  2. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  3. #2
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    885
    Post Thanks / Like
    CPV replacement would require something capable of patrolling all waters of the Irish Coast while operating independently. They would need a basic range at 12 knots of about 2250 n.m or 7 to 8 days continuous steaming. They would accommodate up to 30/35 crew and trainees. Carry suitable inspection/interdiction craft. Be capable of speeds up to 25knots. Armament suggested 30mm Bushmaster with FCS and 2x20mm. Full navigation and detection suite for surface and air. Length probably 60 metres. Adaptable for containerized systems as required.

  4. Likes Turkey, DeV liked this post
  5. #3
    Major General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,283
    Post Thanks / Like
    Ocean Going tug or something in that ilk seems the ideal option to me.

    They have excellent manoeuvrability in confined waters, and many are already in service in other navies and coast guards, mostly those with an emerging Oil industry.

  6. #4
    CQMS spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    So is there anything 'off the shelf'...or are we talking a custom built design.
    'History is a vast early warning system'. Norman Cousins

  7. #5
    Major General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,283
    Post Thanks / Like
    There are off the shelf designs. Damen do a larger type, however many of the offshore support ships would be suitable. All are fitted with daughter craft as standard, all are stable in horrible seas, though the Damen are 90m, but there are similar smaller types in use. Like KV Nornen for example.


    Or a similar type SHV Olav Tryggvason

  8. Thanks spider thanked for this post
    Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  9. #6
    CQMS spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Looks good...two (or more) birds...one stone etc

    Therefore easier to justify to the bean counters (hopefully)
    'History is a vast early warning system'. Norman Cousins

  10. #7
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,634
    Post Thanks / Like
    16 kts max speed
    12% bigger draught than the Peacocks
    20 tonne bollard pull

    Not suitable
    A PV needs 20 kts min, if we want a CPV then a similar draught to the Peacocks and we would be looking at a 500 tonne bollard pull to be anyway useful (1000 tonne is what we need)

  11. #8
    Major General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,283
    Post Thanks / Like
    Why say you so?

  12. Likes The real Jack liked this post
  13. #9
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,634
    Post Thanks / Like
    Which bit?

    20 kts? Deirdre had a speed of 18 kts and was the slowest vessel

    Draught - didn't you say on another thread that the OPVs had too deep a draught to put into many Irish harbours?

    All the reports that have been commissioned say 150-200 tonne bollard tow required for a ETV, something with 20 tonnes is smaller than a harbour tug
    Last edited by DeV; 27th April 2015 at 13:39.

  14. #10
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    885
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Which bit?

    20 kts? Deirdre had a speed of 18 kts and was the slowest vessel

    Draught - didn't you say on another thread that the OPVs had too deep a draught to put into many Irish harbours?

    All the reports that have been commissioned say 1000+ bollard tow required for a ETV, something with 20 tonnes is smaller than a harbour tug
    Just to clear the air Bollard pull is the pulling strength one vessel has in Tonnes in order to overcome the inertia of a floating or grounded structure. It is roughly calculated on the Formula BHP X 0.9 X1.25 divided by 100 for a vessel with freewhelling CPP's ie NO Kort nozzles. Therefore a 5000BHP ship can only have a bollard pull of 56 Tonnes. Most ocean tugs would be bollard pull under 100tonnes. The Celtic Isle that towed a 3500tonne in an Atlantic gale last year had a bollard pull of 56tonne and a winch brake capacity of 100tonnes. To achieve 500Tonne bollard pull you will have to build a ship that at the moment doesn't exist.
    The theory is once you move a ship, overcoming it's inertia, moderate power is needed otherwise you bust the weakest link ie the tow ropes. An 8inch circumference tow rope has a breaking strain of 64 tonnes and a Safe Working load of 32Tonnes. In my opinion a ship with a bollard pull of 50/60 Tonnes is more than adequate.

  15. Thanks na grohmití, Turkey thanked for this post
    Likes hptmurphy, Turkey liked this post
  16. #11
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,117
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    CPV replacement would require something capable of patrolling all waters of the Irish Coast while operating independently. They would need a basic range at 12 knots of about 2250 n.m or 7 to 8 days continuous steaming. They would accommodate up to 30/35 crew and trainees. Carry suitable inspection/interdiction craft. Be capable of speeds up to 25knots. Armament suggested 30mm Bushmaster with FCS and 2x20mm. Full navigation and detection suite for surface and air. Length probably 60 metres. Adaptable for containerized systems as required.
    Hang on... sounds like a Ton Class minesweeper witha bit of pep in the speed stakes!
    Just visiting

  17. Likes Turkey liked this post
  18. #12
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    885
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Hang on... sounds like a Ton Class minesweeper witha bit of pep in the speed stakes!
    Try a Fassmer 60m CPV. They are a German group. I think Chile has an 80m version. The other short term solution are the RN River class which will be surplus next year. They were mostlly built post 2003 and could carry on to 2033/34. Fit them out , weapon wise ,the same as the Falklands ship HMS Clyde.

  19. #13
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,634
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Just to clear the air Bollard pull is the pulling strength one vessel has in Tonnes in order to overcome the inertia of a floating or grounded structure. It is roughly calculated on the Formula BHP X 0.9 X1.25 divided by 100 for a vessel with freewhelling CPP's ie NO Kort nozzles. Therefore a 5000BHP ship can only have a bollard pull of 56 Tonnes. Most ocean tugs would be bollard pull under 100tonnes. The Celtic Isle that towed a 3500tonne in an Atlantic gale last year had a bollard pull of 56tonne and a winch brake capacity of 100tonnes. To achieve 500Tonne bollard pull you will have to build a ship that at the moment doesn't exist.
    The theory is once you move a ship, overcoming it's inertia, moderate power is needed otherwise you bust the weakest link ie the tow ropes. An 8inch circumference tow rope has a breaking strain of 64 tonnes and a Safe Working load of 32Tonnes. In my opinion a ship with a bollard pull of 50/60 Tonnes is more than adequate.
    Yes, slight typo 150-200 bollard pull

  20. #14
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    909
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Try a Fassmer 60m CPV. They are a German group. I think Chile has an 80m version. The other short term solution are the RN River class which will be surplus next year. They were mostlly built post 2003 and could carry on to 2033/34. Fit them out , weapon wise ,the same as the Falklands ship HMS Clyde.
    Except there is still zero confirmation that the RN is going to sell them, nor will they be available next year as the Batch 2's are being built to cover the gap in orders due tothe 26's issues. At best it will be only after the next Defence review post election that anyone will know what will happen to them, and given the lack of numbers in the RN cupboard I don't see the Admirals being willing to give them up, even if they are getting 3 new ones they didn't want.

  21. Likes hptmurphy, Turkey liked this post
  22. #15
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    885
    Post Thanks / Like
    You would achieve a bollard pull of 150 Tonnes with a suitable ship of 13,500 BHP using CPP's. The same ship with fixed pitch would achieve 133 Tonne pull. Some of our ships were fitted with Tortion meters on their shafts so that you wouldn't overload the Main Engines while towing. The Icelandic THOR has two 10,500 BHP engines and in excess of 150Tonne bollard pull. The four Brits ETV's average 165 Tonne pull.

  23. Likes Shaqra liked this post
  24. #16
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,634
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thor however has a draught of 5.8 metres

    Samuel Beckett is 3.8 metres
    Ciara is 2.72 metres


    A CPV could be a dive tender as well but not an ETV
    Last edited by DeV; 27th April 2015 at 15:44.

  25. #17
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,117
    Post Thanks / Like
    Fassmer 60m CPV
    Outsorce the builds to Poland and we'll have them in 12 months. Nice looking vessel.

    The other short term solution are the RN River class which will be surplus next year
    Not as a suitable replacement for the CPVs if you want to downsize as they are closer in capabilty to Roisin and Niamh
    Just visiting

  26. #18
    Legate
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Cork
    Posts
    103
    Post Thanks / Like
    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.

  27. Thanks na grohmití, Turkey, DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV, hptmurphy, Herald, Galloglass, Turkey liked this post
  28. #19
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,634
    Post Thanks / Like
    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.

  29. #20
    CQMS
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    625
    Post Thanks / Like
    I believe that a former FOCNS used to refer to the CPVs as "the motorbikes"

  30. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  31. #21
    CQMS spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    How about the bigger brother of the 4207...


    Damen_Stan_Patrol_6011_Sea_Axe.pdf
    'History is a vast early warning system'. Norman Cousins

  32. #22
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    237
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by spider View Post
    How about the bigger brother of the 4207...


    Damen_Stan_Patrol_6011_Sea_Axe.pdf
    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

  33. #23
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,634
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by spider View Post
    How about the bigger brother of the 4207...


    Damen_Stan_Patrol_6011_Sea_Axe.pdf
    Draught?

  34. #24
    Major General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,283
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ibenji View Post
    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?

  35. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  36. #25
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    237
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmití View Post
    Have you ever boarded a half decker with a drone?
    Nope. Couldn't even tell you if it is possible. Must google what a half decker is.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •