Very, very few end users of anything can design the item they use, do car owners design their cars?, do airlines design their planes? do cruise lines design their ships?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
CPV Replacement
Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
-
"Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "
"No, they're trying to fly the tank"
- Likes 1
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostThere are a myriad of courses available for ship design to at least have in house an ability to define requirements of size, stability, range, speed, power levels of propulsion, generation capacity , operational use of ship, range of antennae in/out of ship,likely fits etc. You need to know your needs in accommodation and general level of crew comfort coupled with ambient and DB levels. We have tended to tailor our Navy to the ships we found eg MTB's, Corvettes, CMS's, OPV's. We now need to design our Navy.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostThere are a myriad of courses available for ship design to at least have in house an ability to define requirements of size, stability, range, speed, power levels of propulsion, generation capacity , operational use of ship, range of antennae in/out of ship,likely fits etc. You need to know your needs in accommodation and general level of crew comfort coupled with ambient and DB levels. We have tended to tailor our Navy to the ships we found eg MTB's, Corvettes, CMS's, OPV's. We now need to design our Navy.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparky42 View PostHow do you figure? In modern terms (say the P50's onwards, so near 20 years now) we tailor our buys to what politically is supportable/allowed the P60's had a lot of work done "in house", but that doesn't change the fact that we go out to see what the naval industry can do.
initially with no survivability in the case of P20 and she had a non sea-going condition in her stability book. We must not allow operational skimping , rather we buy reconditioned from the Defence Market.Last edited by ancientmariner; 6 August 2018, 15:00.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostThe nature of the Navy is in it's common mission - Defend, Protect etc. It doesn't say in one or two dimensions only. It is up to us to pursue and persuade Budget allocations to meet the stated mission.
Defence roles include defending territorial seas, deterring intrusive or aggressive acts, conducting maritime surveillance, maintaining an armed naval presence, ensuring right of passage, protecting marine assets and contributing to a blockade if required. The Naval Service must also be capable of supporting Army operations by sea lift and close naval support.
And as you said there is no mention that the role only includes FP or that it is limited to surface vessels.
Comment
-
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostI concure and although I have posted this before here again is the official mission satement for the NS:
Defence roles include defending territorial seas, deterring intrusive or aggressive acts, conducting maritime surveillance, maintaining an armed naval presence, ensuring right of passage, protecting marine assets and contributing to a blockade if required. The Naval Service must also be capable of supporting Army operations by sea lift and close naval support.
And as you said there is no mention that the role only includes FP or that it is limited to surface vessels.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
It is vital that alongside expensive amphibious assault ships a navy invests in mine warfare equipment and training, otherwise, the procurement of an amphibious capability will have been in vain. Naval mines are not going anywhere soon...nor will amphibious operations if they lack the ability to dea
Interesting link which explains the importance of mine countermeasures in a modern environment.For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
No-one doubts the importance of mine warfare what the article does miss is the need to be able to co-deploy MCMV alongside Amphibious vessels. The former have limted range and a speed between 12-16kts while the Amphibious vessels are long range at relatively high speed of 20kts. It was one of the reasons why the USN went for the LCS concept.
Comment
-
They've done "showing the flag" work out of Singapore, though I think only one of the two classes has actually had any hulls do so, none with the Mine systems, honestly I wouldn't use the LCS as anything other than "more money than sense".
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparky42 View PostThey've done "showing the flag" work out of Singapore, though I think only one of the two classes has actually had any hulls do so, none with the Mine systems, honestly I wouldn't use the LCS as anything other than "more money than sense".
The main problem with the LCS is not the concept but the solution. The USN was to have picked one design which it would have then developed and built, instead because of politics (the bain of many a program) they ordered both. Two little time, too few resources to ensure that both designs were mature before entering service. Had they gone the original plan they would most likely have a relatively good vessel at the moment. As well as the structures being different the sensor suites are also different, this all raises the level of development risk.
Already in the current batches of vessels there can be seen many upgrades being built into the vessels. And as for the follow-n FFG(X) program, my money would be on the Freedom class variant. And we must not forget that these are 44kts+ craft with a shallow draught of 4m but still with a 4000nm range. And when compared to the NSC of the Coast Guard the price is a snip $360m for the LCS and $735m for the NSC, different mission but similar weapons and sensor suite.Last edited by EUFighter; 13 August 2018, 07:32.
Comment
-
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostNo-one doubts the importance of mine warfare what the article does miss is the need to be able to co-deploy MCMV alongside Amphibious vessels. The former have limted range and a speed between 12-16kts while the Amphibious vessels are long range at relatively high speed of 20kts. It was one of the reasons why the USN went for the LCS concept.
be for high capability mines while the former might be field mines or barrier mines. The minelayers were often high speed like HMS Manxman capable of 30/40 knots. Mineclearance by sweeping , or swimmers aided by UUV's systems , is a slow persistent operation not requiring other than passage speed typically 14/16 knots, and that was restricted by weather. There is still a NATO standing Force dealing with some of the 200,000 mines etc deployed around the Baltic region.
Amphibious warefare has an immediacy about it in that it takes place on an unannounced day and cannot be telegraphed by days of noticeable preparations. The solution is to choose cleaner sites selected by covert teams.
Comment
-
HMS Manxman was retired in 1972, the USN retired their minelayers long before that and currently South Korea with the Nampol & Woosan classes, Poland with the Lubin class and Finland with the Hameemaa class are the only navies with dedicated minelayers. Until recently the German Navy did also have the capability to lay mine with their Gepard FAC which are now retired.
For the Baltic Sea estimates vary from 40,000 to 200,000 mines, but this is tiny compared to the total amount of UXO in the same area. As I said before in the North Channel between NI and Scotland there was 2,000,000t of UOX. Some has already exploded but no-one knows how much remains.
Comment
-
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostHMS Manxman was retired in 1972, the USN retired their minelayers long before that and currently South Korea with the Nampol & Woosan classes, Poland with the Lubin class and Finland with the Hameemaa class are the only navies with dedicated minelayers. Until recently the German Navy did also have the capability to lay mine with their Gepard FAC which are now retired.
For the Baltic Sea estimates vary from 40,000 to 200,000 mines, but this is tiny compared to the total amount of UXO in the same area. As I said before in the North Channel between NI and Scotland there was 2,000,000t of UOX. Some has already exploded but no-one knows how much remains.
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment