Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CPV Replacement

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

  • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
    To be fair, the 9th ship was part of their election manifesto from the outset.

    http://forum.irishmilitaryonline.com...l=1#post437769
    Sure but how much attention did it get in the media? Or FF's plan for increasing the Army numbers, hell the "neutrality Referendum" stunts got more attention.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by danno View Post
      My point is what the electorate were concerned with; not what the parties/politicians perceived as the key concerns. There is no defence industry here hence no jobs etc compared to the US UK etc. Unfortunately defence spending will not get priority here until the country has been Pearl Harboured by hostiles.
      And it's national policy not to develop any "EVIL" Arms industry here so that's sadly not going to change.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
        And it's national policy not to develop any "EVIL" Arms industry here so that's sadly not going to change.
        Nobody mention Pentium chips

        Comment


        • Originally posted by sofa View Post
          Nobody mention Pentium chips
          Ah the PANA types have been waffling about "dual use" exports for years but haven't got much traction on it.

          Comment


          • Sure anti-virus software is considered dual use

            Comment


            • I looked through my Jane's Fighting Ships 1986/87 yesterday, and there on page 234 in its discussion of the replacement of the Tons it stated that they were looking at acquiring 2 Alkmaar class Mine hunters from the Dutch.

              Fast fowards 30 years and all those "Tripartite" minehunters needing replacement there might be a common european design that the NS might seek to acquire.

              Comment


              • It might be a bit of a stretch from the CPV topic I admit, but I see that New Zealand has issues with their IPV's with suggestions that they will be sold off (the Government is claiming performance issues, some claiming it's crewing issues) and replaced with an OPV:


                Honestly I never really understood the logic of the IPV's for their position.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
                  It might be a bit of a stretch from the CPV topic I admit, but I see that New Zealand has issues with their IPV's with suggestions that they will be sold off (the Government is claiming performance issues, some claiming it's crewing issues) and replaced with an OPV:


                  Honestly I never really understood the logic of the IPV's for their position.
                  Ouch! Their latest batch of ships all round for the past 10 years have been an an un precedented disaster, Starting with a Frigate force with very limited capabilities, a car ferry with a flight deck that loses it boats and rolls on wet grass and OPVs that were less than optimal.

                  Who is at fault, Navy , Politicians or designers?

                  And don't forget buying reconditioned anti submarine helicopters that the USN moved on from 20 years ago.
                  Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
                    Ouch! Their latest batch of ships all round for the past 10 years have been an an un precedented disaster, Starting with a Frigate force with very limited capabilities, a car ferry with a flight deck that loses it boats and rolls on wet grass and OPVs that were less than optimal.

                    Who is at fault, Navy , Politicians or designers?

                    And don't forget buying reconditioned anti submarine helicopters that the USN moved on from 20 years ago.
                    Here's a rebuttal from the NZ Labour Spokesman blaming the crew issues:


                    Staff shortages - not lack of need - is why the Navy’s inshore patrol vessels are not being put to sea, Labour’s Defence spokesperson Phil Goff says.

                    "Defence Minister Gerry Brownlee is deliberately misleading New Zealand in suggesting otherwise. Half of the new fleet has languished at port and have not gone to sea for years. ...

                    "Gerry Brownlee knows these facts and is therefore being dishonest in saying that the patrol vessels are not being used because they are not needed. ...

                    "Gerry Brownlee is arrogant and out-of-touch. It’s time the Government put in charge of Defence a minister who shows some interest in the portfolio and a commitment to our armed forces being able to carry out the roles the country needs it to," Phil Goff says.
                    In relation to the Seasprites, they are actually getting new old ones, decommissioning their 5 and replacing them with 8 I models from the cancelled Australian order

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
                      Here's a rebuttal from the NZ Labour Spokesman blaming the crew issues:


                      In relation to the Seasprites, they are actually getting new old ones, decommissioning their 5 and replacing them with 8 I models from the cancelled Australian order
                      http://www.defensenews.com/story/def...ters/83020886/
                      I think the Australians have given up on trying to get those Seasprites operational, if memoiry serves me right. or 'am I thinking of something else.?
                      Last edited by sofa; 16 April 2016, 00:03.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by sofa View Post
                        I think the Australians have given up on trying to get those Seasprites operational, if memoiry serves me right. or 'am I thinking of something else.?
                        Cost of upgrade exceeded the value. Australians have Seahawk so why would they want to back pedal to a 50 year old design!
                        Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by sofa View Post
                          I think the Australians have given up on trying to get those Seasprites operational, if memoiry serves me right. or 'am I thinking of something else.?
                          yeah they cancelled their order a few years back, and the company has been stuck with them, so New Zealand might have got a "bargain" compared to the costs of going to the Seahawk or equivalent. I've said it before here but I really do wonder when it comes time for replacing some of their major capital equipment (the Frigates, the C 130's, the P-3's) just what they are going to decide?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
                            Cost of upgrade exceeded the value. Australians have Seahawk so why would they want to back pedal to a 50 year old design!
                            They were going with them until the project went pear shaped, they cancelled it and went with the Seahawks, leaving them with the company that have now managed to get New Zealand to buy them.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
                              They were going with them until the project went pear shaped, they cancelled it and went with the Seahawks, leaving them with the company that have now managed to get New Zealand to buy them.
                              It didn't go pear shaped, the Australian Navy started laying out additional performance requirements that the Seasprite could never have fulfilled being, after all, a 50-year old design. For a navy with a rather simpler set of operational demands, as is the RNZN, they are fine helicopters. If they suffer from anything, it is the fact that they were designed and built for one purpose, that of an embarked multirole tactical helo and they excel at this.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
                                It might be a bit of a stretch from the CPV topic I admit, but I see that New Zealand has issues with their IPV's with suggestions that they will be sold off (the Government is claiming performance issues, some claiming it's crewing issues) and replaced with an OPV:


                                Honestly I never really understood the logic of the IPV's for their position.
                                To refer to that article, how could 200 miles offshore be referred to as Inshore (as in IPV)?

                                Interesting:

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X