Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CPV Replacement

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

  • Well there are very few similarities between the P51s/P61s and the Peacocks!

    If they were intending to get similar vessels to the P51s/P61s (or Rivers or anything in the 1800 t plus region) they would have said similar to them or that the CPVs will be replaced by 2 OPVs.

    I would have liked to see 2 X MRV and 7 X OPV, but that isn't what the WP suggests.

    But either way we should know within 36-48 months when it (should) go to tender.
    Last edited by DeV; 5 January 2016, 14:00.

    Comment


    • That is the DF/DOD's stance. However this thread is asking us what we think is best to replace the Peacocks, so if someone wants to suggest we should replace the Peacocks with Aircraft carriers as long as they are will to argue their case and accept the ridicule it is perfectly legitimate to discuss it on this thread.

      Comment


      • has it not occured that the use of the word 'similar' was entirely deliberate? what does similar mean? grey, gun at one end, propeller at the other?

        similar could mean absolutely anything, and perhaps that is the idea - perhaps it means that the NS/DF/DoD want to ditch the CPV task/requirement/platform and go for an all OPV/EPV/MRV fleet, but they needed to use understated language while they prepare their business case before it goes to cabinet...

        thinking that similar must mean similar tonnage/capability/size/crew etc... is silly - HMS Invincible was grey, carried aircraft, had propellers at one end and a ramp at the other. how similar is she to the 65,000 ton HMS Queen Elizabeth? HMS Queen Elizabeth has two seperate control towers - does that make her similar to Tower Bridge?

        Comment


        • I agree with Ropebag et al that there was deliberate vagueness regarding the Orla/Ciara replacements. I wonder was this at the behest of the new CoS? It must have become apparent that the problems with the build of the Beckett class was likely to spell the end for new contracts for Appledore.

          I suspect thye thinking was let's see how the Appledore contract finishes, see what might come on the market new or secondhand, but concentrate most effort on advancing the EPV concept. In the same way that it was never planned to purchase the Flycatcher systems or RBS systems, they came on the market at a price that was impossible to ignore so we went for them. If the Beckett class is now at an end, the same applies, so who knows what we might end up with?

          Comment


          • Requirements of NSDS Diving Tender (or at least a hired one)


            Dynamic positioning / stern anchor
            Crane (lifting up to 8t on and off vessel)
            Carry up to 15 divers for up to 10 days
            Carry 3/4 TEUs (the LARS unit is bigger than a TEU (3 of the 4 they make fit in a TEU, the dims provided could be when in operation) with the appropriate power.

            Obviously this doesn't include any special counter-mine/counter-IED equipment (although 1 of the containers holds a ROV and SSS)

            But it gives an identication of what would be required from the CPV for the new role (probably a different ROV and maybe less divers etc)
            Last edited by DeV; 13 January 2016, 12:40.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by DeV View Post
              The RNZN Protector class IPVs could be a baseline to model the new CPVs on (potentionally), and I think Tenix where involved in Roisin.

              They are small but can survive in SS8. The issues would be:
              - limited endurance (~7 days)
              - lack of TEU capacity
              - poor armament (probably limited to 20mm)

              But they didn't have the issues of MRV or OPVs (only issues I can find are noise in the area of the RHIBs and ladder up to the davits.
              The only other designs that I can find that are anywhere near what IMHO are the requirements (and therefore could potentionally be used as a basis of a new Irish CPV) are:

              Lurssen Victory class (dated design and very little info available)
              Lurssen CM65 / Muray-Jin class (dated design and very little info available)
              Rolls-Royce 70 Skadi class (not a lot of info available)

              Or modify the Peacock class design
              Last edited by DeV; 22 January 2016, 18:21.

              Comment


              • Excellent article.

                Comment


                • Or alternatively Roisin evolved from the PV75 Vigilant, adapt the design again?

                  Comment


                  • In the interests of economy, modifying an existing design might, in this limited knowledge maritime buff's might be the best option, but to be honest the P40/Peacock design is the rank outsider, have you been on one? not serving, but only visiting, it brings a new understanding of claustrophobic, 11 [?] people sharing a compartment not much bigger then the 1/2 bedroom of a modern 3 bed semi, Peacock is way past it's sell by date, the fairest thing to say about it is it's the modern equivalent of a Motor Torpedo boat. |I wonder what might be the potential of a shrunken P50 class. just an idle thought, based on the idea that a ship such as this would not necessarily be out in the deep blue as often or for as long as the rest of the fleet.
                    "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


                    • Off the shelf design isn't an option - everything is too small in length and/or displacement (seakeeping and/or ability to carry 3 TEUs for C-IED), too slow (16-18 kts), too low endurance (at economical speed and/or in terms of days), too deep a draft, etc etc

                      It is a chose of design from scratch (very risky) or modify (possibly considerably) an existing design (not quite so risky).
                      Last edited by DeV; 22 January 2016, 18:14.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Turkey View Post
                        In the interests of economy, modifying an existing design might, in this limited knowledge maritime buff's might be the best option, but to be honest the P40/Peacock design is the rank outsider, have you been on one? not serving, but only visiting, it brings a new understanding of claustrophobic, 11 [?] people sharing a compartment not much bigger then the 1/2 bedroom of a modern 3 bed semi, Peacock is way past it's sell by date, the fairest thing to say about it is it's the modern equivalent of a Motor Torpedo boat. |I wonder what might be the potential of a shrunken P50 class. just an idle thought, based on the idea that a ship such as this would not necessarily be out in the deep blue as often or for as long as the rest of the fleet.
                        Well say with a Peacock 2 class design, the modifications could include increase length by 10 m, increase beam by 1 m, max 4 crew per cabin, wet room for boarding parties, gym, newer smaller powerful engines (just pulling examples out of the air here) etc

                        I'm not recommending it - just putting it out there

                        Comment


                        • Vard have some interesting smaller designs on their site, including an update to our PV80 including an interesting, if flimsy looking, heli deck (looks more like an aftermarket part than anything);

                          Comment


                          • Love to know the wind tunnel results for that.
                            For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                            Comment


                            • If Like for Like was a consideration for the CPV replacement, maybe it is worth considering VARDs other designs?


                              For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X