Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CPV Replacement

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

  • And obviously so is OPV

    So I'll pose a question, what does the P50 (never mind P60) class have in common with the Peacock class that would allow them to be classed as "similar" vessels?

    P50 class:
    Length 78.84m
    Beam 14m
    Draught 3.8m
    Speed 23 kts
    Range 6000 nm @ 15 Kts
    Main Armament 76mm

    Peacock class:
    Length 62.6m (20% shorter)
    Beam 10m (nearly 30% narrower)
    Draught 2.7m (nearly 30% shallower)
    Speed 25+ kts (over 8% faster)
    Range 2500 nm @ 17 Kts
    Main Armament 76mm (same)

    Based on this the new CPVs are likely to be 20-30% smaller (in all aspects) than the P60 class.
    Last edited by DeV; 14 December 2015, 01:58.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
      Appledore are toast once P63 is complete. They have no further orders on the books, and no political will to get any. They were hoping for some of the Polar Research vessel work, but that seems to be heading for the Mersey. Cammel Laird got the nod for the £200m order. Appledore's inability to take larger ships also rules them out for potential offshore work. Their only hope is to build bits of the new frigates, whenever that gets going, if they are still in operation by then.
      The difficulties experienced with P61 and P62s build there will turn off potential orders too.
      "We are soon approaching a situation where the entire fleet is of the one design with engines from one manufacturer, with whom we have a long and friendly relationship.Why change that?"

      Does it really matter WHERE P60s are built anyway?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by DeV View Post

        So I'll pose a question, what does the P50 (never mind P60) class have in common with the Peacock class that would allow them to be classed as "similar" vessels?...
        a T45 AAW Destroyer displaces far more than half as much again as the T42's it replaces, and the T26 ASW Frigate displaces almost double the T23 it replaces - shit, the new CVF's displace three times as much as the CVS they replace.

        what matters is what they do, not what they look like, or how big they are - if the job is to tootle about the seas asserting Irish soveignty, or to support Irish interests further afeild, then they are similar in purpose.

        Comment


        • [QUOTE=DeV;
          So I'll pose a question, what does the P50 (never mind P60) class have in common with the Peacock class that would allow them to be classed as "similar" vessels?

          "A rose by any other name...." Nice picture of a Japanese Destroyer here.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
            a T45 AAW Destroyer displaces far more than half as much again as the T42's it replaces, and the T26 ASW Frigate displaces almost double the T23 it replaces - shit, the new CVF's displace three times as much as the CVS they replace.

            what matters is what they do, not what they look like, or how big they are - if the job is to tootle about the seas asserting Irish soveignty, or to support Irish interests further afeild, then they are similar in purpose.
            Giving that a coastal patrol vessel operates near the coast that means shallow draft (compared to the OPVs) which then constrains the length, beam and displacement.

            I'm strongly of the opinion that if DoD intended that Orla and Ciara were to be replaced by vessels double their size (which would make them around the size of the P60s and therefore wouldn't be suitable as CPVs), that they would have said that they will be replaced by 2 OPVs (IMHO they should have!).

            I'm not saying that, that the new CPVs won't be bigger!
            They will have to be/should be for 2 major reasons:
            - to allow the to operate in higher sea states
            - to allow for accommodation similar to the rest of the fleet

            Most CPVs worldwide would be smaller than the Peacocks (I really hope we don't go down that road) but we need something big because of the weather, the size of the AO and our small fleet size.

            Comment


            • [QUOTE=Galloglass;435633]
              Originally posted by DeV;
              So I'll pose a question, what does the P50 (never mind P60) class have in common with the Peacock class that would allow them to be classed as "similar" vessels?

              "A rose by any other name...." Nice picture of a Japanese Destroyer here. [ATTACH
              8124[/ATTACH]
              Isn't there a treaty to say they can't have carriers and why they are called a Self Defence Force?

              Comment


              • [QUOTE=DeV;435636]
                Originally posted by Galloglass View Post

                Isn't there a treaty to say they can't have carriers and why they are called a Self Defence Force?
                Yeah their constitution still bans them from having Carriers from memory,though the PM has managed to loosen the restrictions on what they can deploy, and how they can use military force.

                Comment


                • The RN had 'through deck cruisers' ..aka Carriers to get around the attempt to get rid of the a carrier mentality.

                  It could be as simple as building two P60s and relegating the two P50s to 'inshore work'

                  A newer CPV will have to be at least as capable as a a P21 class there will have to be similar to a P61.

                  But the white paper has spoken, but then paper never refused ink and these things can change. As the nature of our missions change and the inclusion of the Med,type ops become more frquent and the futility of CPV sized vessels becomes more apparent , buying into the concept of more P60s might being easier.

                  Does it really matter WHERE P60s are built anyway?
                  Theoretically no, but builders like to do their own thing even with laid down designs...bit like Opel Vs Vauxhall.......

                  The Rivers are on a par size wise with the P50s, so technically they ain't CPVs...speaking of which the three new build rivers are being built with imported Swedish Steel, even though UK steel is quite good..so how long before they outsource the building of this type of vessel altogther?

                  Any way.....New builds only , no more second hand stuff please.

                  As was pointed out the Japanese moratorium on building ACC was self imposed in their constitution.
                  Last edited by hptmurphy; 14 December 2015, 15:16.
                  Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                  Comment


                  • "As was pointed out the Japanese moratorium on building ACC was self imposed in their constitution".......Which was imposed on them by the Yanks I think.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Galloglass View Post
                      "As was pointed out the Japanese moratorium on building ACC was self imposed in their constitution".......Which was imposed on them by the Yanks I think.
                      Interesting

                      Renunciation of war (Article 9)[edit]
                      Main article: Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution
                      Under Article 9, the "Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes". To this end the article provides that "land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained." The necessity and practical extent of Article 9 has been debated in Japan since its enactment, particularly following the establishment of the Japan Self-Defense Forces, a de facto military force, in 1954. Various political groups have called for either revising or abolishing the restrictions of Article 9 in order to permit collective defense efforts and strengthen Japan's military capabilities.
                      Last edited by hptmurphy; 14 December 2015, 20:45.
                      Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                      Comment


                      • This is all very interesting, as well as way off topic.

                        Having said that, as far as I can remember, it was Mc Arthur, who came up with the compromise called the Self Defence Force, when the Provisional Japanese government originally proposed no armed forces at all.
                        "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
                        Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
                        Illegitimi non carborundum

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Galloglass View Post
                          "We are soon approaching a situation where the entire fleet is of the one design with engines from one manufacturer, with whom we have a long and friendly relationship.Why change that?"

                          Does it really matter WHERE P60s are built anyway?
                          Not at all. As long as they are built on budget and on time.
                          For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                          Comment


                          • CPV Replacements

                            Originally posted by DeV View Post
                            And obviously so is OPV

                            So I'll pose a question, what does the P50 (never mind P60) class have in common with the Peacock class that would allow them to be classed as "similar" vessels?

                            P50 class:
                            Length 78.84m
                            Beam 14m
                            Draught 3.8m
                            Speed 23 kts
                            Range 6000 nm @ 15 Kts
                            Main Armament 76mm

                            Peacock class:
                            Length 62.6m (20% shorter)
                            Beam 10m (nearly 30% narrower)
                            Draught 2.7m (nearly 30% shallower)
                            Speed 25+ kts (over 8% faster)
                            Range 2500 nm @ 17 Kts
                            Main Armament 76mm (same)

                            Based on this the new CPVs are likely to be 20-30% smaller (in all aspects) than the P60 class.
                            We must not paint ourselves into a corner by seeking to replicate ships of limited operability. A larger vessel can do Coastal Patrol duties but can also go offshore and on long range International voyages. The current CPV's were transferred to us by HM Government to bolster our dealing with the enemy within. Their origin was associated with Hong Kong patrol duties in the Far East in mostly calm waters. Our current needs require vessels to operate in WNA sea states. Remember CMS's were limited to Force 6 nominally and OPV's start ship minding after Force 9. The latter is acceptable but Force 6 is restrictive for West Coast patrols.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                              We must not paint ourselves into a corner by seeking to replicate ships of limited operability. A larger vessel can do Coastal Patrol duties but can also go offshore and on long range International voyages. The current CPV's were transferred to us by HM Government to bolster our dealing with the enemy within. Their origin was associated with Hong Kong patrol duties in the Far East in mostly calm waters. Our current needs require vessels to operate in WNA sea states. Remember CMS's were limited to Force 6 nominally and OPV's start ship minding after Force 9. The latter is acceptable but Force 6 is restrictive for West Coast patrols.
                              I agree but it isn't what the WP says

                              Comment


                              • i'd be interested to know, in practice, where a CPV can go that an OPV with its sensors and weapons, including UAV and RIB's, can't.

                                i imagine that the list is rather short, and very easily surpassed by the list of things than an OPV can do - and that the has NS needed vessels to do this year - that a CPV can't...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X