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.
I think the incorrect draught figure comes from a misunderstanding of the dimensions given on http://www.afm.gov.mt/p61 which then made its way to the Wikipedia article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diciot..._patrol_vessel. You might want to update the Wikipedia article or, if you have a source I can cite, I'll do it.
Off topic I suppose but do you know if the AFM have any idea what they might want as the new patrol vessel they are hoping to buy with EU funds? Maybe Ireland and Malta could buy 3 CPV types (2+1) and get a discount? The Damen 5509/P580 class might serve both countries needs.
Touche! Will get our PI gurus onto it. As for the second part, not completely clear yet but in a world where I made the final decisions I would actually want to go for something like this:
The sea axe bow of the Damen 5509 does go a long way to decreasing slamming and evening out the vertical accelerations. The only problem with it is that it does so by using a very large travel in the bow. This heave/pitch is very bad news for helo operations and RHIB launch from a stern ramp.
The point is we are talking about replacing CPVs, not RHIBs on OPVs.
I assume that the EPV would be tasked to the edge of 200 mile limit (and beyond)
The CPV's were a unique class built for the Far East. We need to replace them but not with CPV's but rather with vessels that can operate and survive in WNA out to 200/300 miles and more. The question raised was would it be possible from one platform to patrol both offshore and inshore, including harbours. The answer is yes if you use a semi-independent daughter craft returning to mother a number of hours later. We are too small to diversify ship types rather have ships mutually capable and vary their roles by add ons.
The current wisdom on operating DC's from a mothership is 4 hours duration from launch to recovery with a range level of 10nm. There is a study by HSE (UK) RR307 which examines the expanding use of a range of DC's with extended duration and range. The fit of the craft and the ability of the coxswain and crew has to be upgraded in communications, medical, and navigational skills. Weather restrictions apply and also effect duration of deployment due to wear and tear on crew. They are very useful especially at the 9m size.
In both cases you'd need to take nearly 2 metres off the draft
Don't get that. The Damen 1000 has a summer draft of 3.25 meters. The moulded Depth at 4.5meters is the height of the first OPEN deck surface measured vertically to the Keel. It is telling you that freeboard aft is 1.25meters ie 4.50m minus 3.25m. The draft is fine but wouldn't be minus two meters even for the AFMalta.
Don't get that. The Damen 1000 has a summer draft of 3.25 meters. The moulded Depth at 4.5meters is the height of the first OPEN deck surface measured vertically to the Keel. It is telling you that freeboard aft is 1.25meters ie 4.50m minus 3.25m. The draft is fine but wouldn't be minus two meters even for the AFMalta.
Sorry looked up incorrect figure, 0.55 metres for that vessel
So to be replaced with 2 similar vessels with counter-mine & C-IED capabilities (I assume that means MCMVs)
But practically all MCMV designs are about 2/3rd the size (length and displacement) and have a max speed of 60% of the Peacocks. While also have less than 50% of the firepower.
So to be replaced with 2 similar vessels with counter-mine & C-IED capabilities (I assume that means MCMVs)
But practically all MCMV designs are about 2/3rd the size and have a max speed of 60% of the Peacocks. While also have less than 50% of the firepower.
Has the RN released the details for their new MHC platform? Just a quick look on wiki, that after the 2010 REview it was going to be in the 2000 ton range, though with the Batch 2 Rivers maybe that's dropped in size.
Either that or could we end up getting second hand ships?
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