CPV Replacement

[hptmurphy]

That's the way it was described to me.

So it isn't to the standard of the P51 or P61 class then (they are max 4 per cabin)

I believe so, which would be the same as Eithne

[Medsailor]

Sorry for weighing in on something that is clearly not in my bailiwick but just a couple of observations from personal experience.
I personally think that attempting to combine a CPV and MCMV is neither straightforward nor the best of ideas. Having grown up on Fulda and Frankenthal class minehunters and subsequently spent a bunch of time on CPVs (including re-roled minesweepers), there are a number of basic differences that are hard to reconcile. Suffice it to say that a minehunter will generally be optimised as a platform for sonar operations which has a significant impact on hull-form, speed and seakeeping. Furthermore, once you expect a vessel to go into harm's way, proofing it against underwater explosions in close proximity becomes a must but adds significantly to the cost. At USD 150 million a pop back in the mid-90s, the Frankenthal class cost what in today's money is probably close to 2-3 times your new OPVs, all of which went towards making the vessels fit for the minehunting role in terms of acoustic and magnetic signature and shock resistance. One of the obvious examples that I can remember is that every piece of vital kit was shock-mounted at great expense.
Speed is another issue. The Frankenthal class were lauded as being 'fast' minehunters, being capable of 18 knots. Many modern commercial vessels, which may be of interest to a CPV trying to insert a boarding team for instance, are now capable of 20+ knots. The bog standard minesweeper/hunter of today tops off at anywhere between 14 and 16 knots, mostly because the hull selected is designed to be a stable platform at 2-4 knots while hunting. Propulsion also plays a big role with various types of azimuthing or directional thrusters being selected for MCMVs to provide that pinpoint positioning that is required. I can remember nothing more challenging than trying to hold position in the old Fulda class during ROV ops with nothing more than two big electric motors, 2 CP props and Becker (compound) rudders.
Every attempt to combine the two roles effectively has failed. The LCS solution was to make the MCM module so dammed smart that it could have been deployed from a barge and still have been effective. Despite all the money thrown at it, it has been deemed unfit for purpose.
If the desired solution is a CPV, then by all means design a CPV and have sufficient space for a couple of TEUs capable of housing an ROV and diver support systems. But the CPV side of business requires a degree of speed, decent surveillance and weapons systems and boat launch/recovery gear. Trying to be the swiss army knife of inshore ops will inevitably result in something that does nothing properly.

[DeV]

Medsailor I agree, the only thing I would say that modular type kit (including brand new ROVs and containerised kit) was deployed by MCMVs successfully in the Gulf (or be it probably in addition to their own sensors).

[Galloglass]

Run them from a P60 then....What is the problem?
Still convinced that "similar sized to the CPVs" was inserted as a time-waster to remove the logical ordering of 2 new P60s to "save" money ...........Rivers anyone?
Happy New Year all.

[DeV]

Run them from a P60 then....What is the problem?

They have the capability but a CPV may be able to get to places a P60 can't ?!

Still convinced that "similar sized to the CPVs" was inserted as a time-waster to remove the logical ordering of 2 new P60s to "save" money ...........Rivers anyone?

Well they obviously wanted a mixture of MRV, OPV and CPV



We have already looked at the Rivers on this thread (there is a good chance the RN will be keeping them)
Happy New Year all.

[danno]

The threat /risk level for mines has to be rated low and the DS has always done the bizz with legacy mines. The biggest risk from legacy mines arise when the finders draw them into harbour instead of dumping them on the spot suitably marked. Other than being in a position to confront Russian carrier groups dumping oil during a RAS the most noticable lack of ability on the part of the NS in recent times appears to be in three areas, lack of sonar for wreckfinding, lack of towing ability for vessels not under command and lack of a stable platform for recovery ops. An armed ex oil industry unit could fill the gap in these areas and still do general patrol ops. Not a having a big flank shouldnt be a problem with trawlers with gear out.

[DeV]

A low threat is still a threat ?!
There could be a terror threat to Irish ports and passages of navigation (however low) and it could be deployed overseas as part of an international force.

I agree that Ireland needs access to an ETV (which if the NS had it could do other jobs as well (NS roles and on behalf of IRCG but chances are it would be comparative slow and have relative poor armament which would hinder it in other roles (even if new)).

I didn't have an input into the WP

[Medsailor]

Medsailor I agree, the only thing I would say that modular type kit (including brand new ROVs and containerised kit) was deployed by MCMVs successfully in the Gulf (or be it probably in addition to their own sensors).

Agreed but all as a supplement to existing capabilities. The Germans could ship an additional module for mix gas or hard helmet diving if they were off to places deeper than 30-35 metres. They could also add single use disposal vehicles when required. But the basic search, detect and classify capability was part of the core vessel.

On another note, wishing all of you here a prosperous 2016!

[DeV]

According to A history of the Irish Naval Service (Aidan McIvor) - I know I know!!:

The NS looked at the French P400 class and considered it too small in size and displacement (55 metres & 373 tonnes).

According to the book (again I know), the NS requirements for a inshore patrol vessel were similar to RN (it doesn't say who's these were but):
- able to operate in close quarters with other vessels at sea
- able to operate in SAR capacity up to 400 miles offshore
- endurance of 2500 miles at economical speed
- ability to operate at low speed speeds (0-5 kts)
- ability to remain afloat with 2 adjacent compartments flooded
- ability to take up to 100 passengers

[hptmurphy]

The NS looked at the French P400 class and considered it too small in size and displacement (55 metres & 373 tonnes).

We had a very narrow escape there as the problems encountered with this class afterwards far exceeded the cost of build per unit

[DeV]

And remember too that the Royal Navy wanted and indeed needed these more capable platforms.

Something borne out in the 2015 SDSR...they've ordered an extra two hulls giving five in build.

Cheaper than frigates

[restless]

Getting back to the INS question at hand and considering that the yard in devonport appear to have nothing major on its books, shouldnt the dod at least open informal negotiations re pricing on 2 more 60 class before all the tooling and templates are disassembled? Is there really an arguement that the 60 class cant access harbours that the cpv's do on a regular basis? whats the draught difference between the 60's and cpv? cant be that much surely. all im saying is that babcocks may be willing to cut a deal and we would end up with two more, larger, more capable ships with 3 fast rhibs each to get up shallow harbours etc where the cpv's cant go anyway.

[restless]

Getting back to the INS question at hand and considering that the yard in devonport appear to have nothing major on its books, shouldnt the dod at least open informal negotiations re pricing on 2 more 60 class before all the tooling and templates are disassembled? Is there really an arguement that the 60 class cant access harbours that the cpv's do on a regular basis? whats the draught difference between the 60's and cpv? cant be that much surely. all im saying is that babcocks may be willing to cut a deal and we would end up with two more, larger, more capable ships with 3 fast rhibs each to get up shallow harbours etc where the cpv's cant go anyway.

[DeV]

shouldnt the dod at least open informal negotiations re pricing on 2 more 60 class before all the tooling and templates are disassembled?

EU tendering legislation? (Although never stops most EU countries)

Is there really an arguement that the 60 class cant access harbours that the cpv's do on a regular basis? whats the draught difference between the 60's and cpv? cant be that much surely. all im saying is that babcocks may be willing to cut a deal and we would end up with two more, larger, more capable ships with 3 fast rhibs each to get up shallow harbours etc where the cpv's cant go anyway.

There is over 1 metre in the difference

TBH I think they should be replaced by OPVs, however the Government (based on the advice of DoD, DFHQ and the NS) that CPVs are required.

Under the 35 year rule, Orla and Ciara are due for replacement (by CPVs) in 2019 and Eithne (by a MRV) in 2018.

The priority will be replacing them, if more OPVs are to be purchased they will be to increase the size of the fleet to over 8 vessels, that will only happen once the economy has significantly improved (and probably after every other department has got enough money).

[restless]

EU tendering legislation? (Although never stops most EU countries)



There is over 1 metre in the difference

TBH I think they should be replaced by OPVs, however the Government (based on the advice of DoD, DFHQ and the NS) that CPVs are required.

Under the 35 year rule, Orla and Ciara are due for replacement (by CPVs) in 2019 and Eithne (by a MRV) in 2018.

The priority will be replacing them, if more OPVs are to be purchased they will be to increase the size of the fleet to over 8 vessels, that will only happen once the economy has significantly improved (and probably after every other department has got enough money).

I hear what your saying dev but its far from joined up thinking from the dod / ns. just look at the current spell of storms hitting us, weather like this may suit the likes of safehaven marine for testing pilot boats but was there a cpv able to go on any serious patrol over the past 5 weeks? i doubt it.