Thanks Thanks:  41
Likes Likes:  65
Dislikes Dislikes:  2
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 127
  1. #76
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,762
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by expat01 View Post
    There are costs and benefits to any decision regarding purchasing and production. In keeping a warship-building industry the UK is proving to have a long-term view that is obscured by short-term drawbacks. The long-term view is that not having a domestic defence industry puts you at a disadvantage right when it hurts the most and that expensive mistakes form part of a learning curve. You may save money and even gain capacity by buying abroad, but in times of international crisis, that option disappears.
    Obvious example: in 1939 Ireland suddenly realised it needed to arm itself. Money was found.

    If we couldn't build it, we couldn't get it. We couldn't manage anything more than scratch armoured cars and the assembly of hand grenades IIRC.

    To this day everything from the weapons used to the bullets they fire has to be imported to Ireland. That's short-sighted.


    Quote Originally Posted by Galloglass View Post
    I could never understand the govts. antipathy to allowing construction of Timoney designs in Ireland....It had absolutely no relevance to Neutrality.

    The DF had actually predicted a European war breaking out in 38/39 and recommended the it should rearm....A mission to the US in 1940 secured 30,000 Springfield rifles and ammo but an offer of "any amount" of up to date US aircraft with immediate delivery was rejected by the Army which expressed a preference for British aircraft. While the British War Office would have been willing to supply much more military equipment to Ireland during the early years of the war....any such sales were vetoed personally by Churchill.....whose attitude to Ireland was "at war but skulking"
    Ironically when the German govt offered Ireland whatever it wanted of the BEF discarded equipment post Dunkirk, De Velara politely declined saying that he was confident that should it be required "German ingenuity" would find a way to deliver it.

    We did what we could from our own resources....manufacturing sea and land mines amongst other things....some of the more interesting "innovations" were in the LDF which had a company (Meath I think) armed with muzzle loading muskets obtained from a local "Big House" formerly the property of some Yeoman Militia and a unit in Dublin made up of Irish Jews who (reputedly) adorned their uniform with the Star of David.....of course we also had the Swastika laundry....(smiley)
    You can't possibly Ireland's defence industry with a larger country. Any kind of arms industry is very often dependant on large (and expensive) orders from the host country.

    Say for example the DF buys 2 million 5.56mm ball a year. Should the DF buy the Irish made ones at €1 each or the UK made ones at 25c each?

    Often the foreign companys have been running for decades (if not 100s of years). Ireland was largely missed by the industrial revolution and there is comparatively little heavy industry here.

    There simply isn't the demand!

    The DF did see the war coming ..... Finance didn't care .... they didn't even care when there was the biggest threat to Ireland.

    Why did we want British aircraft instead of US? Spares!

    Timoney is a strange one. Already.

    But Ireland does have a fairly big arms industry. Granted a lot of it is probably dual-use (even anti-virus software is dual use).... But look at it this way, WW3 is going on, Ireland is neutral. UK says no you can't have BAe made ammo..... meanwhile in the Department of Trade in Dublin a military export licence for Intel to Lockheed Martin is refused ..... wonder how many missiles say Intel Inside on them?

  2. Likes Sparky42, Galloglass liked this post
  3. #77
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    moving rapidly away.......
    Posts
    2,536
    Post Thanks / Like
    Dec, British aircraft if the 30's were vastly superior to anything the yanks were building..
    "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

  4. Likes DeV liked this post
  5. #78
    C/S Galloglass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    388
    Post Thanks / Like
    I don't know why they didn't want US planes Dev but the Aer Chór Commanding officer was against US aircraft too.....though they made good use of Hudson 91 when they salvaged it from a bog......A few squadrons of P40s would have been nice.

  6. #79
    Major General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,342
    Post Thanks / Like
    Well, there's good news and bad news. The bad news is that Neil will be taking over both branches, and some of you will lose your jobs. Those of you who are kept on will have to relocate to Swindon, if you wanna stay. I know, gutting. On a more positive note, the good news is, I've been promoted, so... every cloud. You're still thinking about the bad news aren't you?

  7. Thanks Galloglass thanked for this post
  8. #80
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    504
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    You can't possibly Ireland's defence industry with a larger country. Any kind of arms industry is very often dependant on large (and expensive) orders from the host country.

    Say for example the DF buys 2 million 5.56mm ball a year. Should the DF buy the Irish made ones at €1 each or the UK made ones at 25c each?

    Often the foreign companys have been running for decades (if not 100s of years). Ireland was largely missed by the industrial revolution and there is comparatively little heavy industry here.

    There simply isn't the demand!

    The DF did see the war coming ..... Finance didn't care .... they didn't even care when there was the biggest threat to Ireland.

    Why did we want British aircraft instead of US? Spares!

    Timoney is a strange one. Already.

    But Ireland does have a fairly big arms industry. Granted a lot of it is probably dual-use (even anti-virus software is dual use).... But look at it this way, WW3 is going on, Ireland is neutral. UK says no you can't have BAe made ammo..... meanwhile in the Department of Trade in Dublin a military export licence for Intel to Lockheed Martin is refused ..... wonder how many missiles say Intel Inside on them?
    I agree that a munitions factory in Ireland is currently not an economically sound prospect, but not on the cost of ammunition based on guesswork. I reload 9mm and 5.56mm ammunition for myself at less than €1 per round*. Granted I don't buy much brass, but I buy propellant, primers and bullets at retail rates in small quantities so get no economies of scale. Ireland has a well-developed chemical industry, including explosives, and would not have to import any components.
    The problem is that even a small factory could probably supply the annual small arms needs of the DF with three or four months production at most - then what do you do for the rest of the year? The only other nearby market is the relatively small NI sport shooting market, and just imagine the hullaballoo if ammunition was exported anywhere else. (Mind you, I can find you a ready market in SA!). I suppose the scale of production without significant exports would then drive up the price of the ammunition compared to imports just to justify the wage bill.
    Why it wasn't done during the 1940s is a question.

    Timoney..ah, Timoney. The book of missed opportunities has a chapter devoted to that.

    * A lot less. Something around 9c for 9mm and I think about 16c for 5.56. Which is depressingly close to what I can buy that round for.
    Last edited by expat01; 16th August 2016 at 22:23.

  9. #81
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    504
    Post Thanks / Like
    Still--selling 5.56 to Israel instead of buying 5.56 from Israel would be much preferable in my, assuredly minority, opinion.

  10. #82
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    351
    Post Thanks / Like
    I'd prefer to do neither

  11. Likes Galloglass liked this post
  12. #83
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,762
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by expat01 View Post
    I agree that a munitions factory in Ireland is currently not an economically sound prospect, but not on the cost of ammunition based on guesswork. I reload 9mm and 5.56mm ammunition for myself at less than €1 per round. Granted I don't buy much brass, but I buy propellant, primers and bullets at retail rates in small quantities so get no economies of scale. Ireland has a well-developed chemical industry, including explosives, and would not have to import any components.
    The problem is that even a small factory could probably supply the annual small arms needs of the DF with three or four months production at most - then what do you do for the rest of the year? The only other nearby market is the relatively small NI sport shooting market, and just imagine the hullaballoo if ammunition was exported anywhere else. (Mind you, I can find you a ready market in SA!). I suppose the scale of production without significant exports would then drive up the price of the ammunition compared to imports just to justify the wage bill.
    Why it wasn't done during the 1940s is a question.

    Timoney..ah, Timoney. The book of missed opportunities has a chapter devoted to that.
    That could be a way to make it more economical (dealing in reloads). You'd need to have the process very much automated to keep it economical (is anyone doing that on an industrial scale?).

    The sorting of thousands of mixed cases, cleaning, checking their quality etc could be an issue.

    Not saying it is impossible (again not sure if anyone is doing it on an industrial scale). But for it to be liable you need guaranteed sources of sufficient casings of the right type and quality in a timely manner.

    The other issue could be export licensing.

  13. #84
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    504
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    That could be a way to make it more economical (dealing in reloads). You'd need to have the process very much automated to keep it economical (is anyone doing that on an industrial scale?).

    The sorting of thousands of mixed cases, cleaning, checking their quality etc could be an issue.

    Not saying it is impossible (again not sure if anyone is doing it on an industrial scale). But for it to be liable you need guaranteed sources of sufficient casings of the right type and quality in a timely manner.

    The other issue could be export licensing.
    I've only seen small-scale industry, but put it this way, there are half a dozen little industries here dealing only in reloads, pumping out thousands of rounds an hour from Dillon presses in "factories" that aren't much more than large garages. Some firing ranges even make their own. My own press could make 1000 rounds an hour if I wanted to quit my job, get divorced and invest in an automatic case-feeder. And that is still hand-cranking the thing for every round! With reloading, quality is an issue - de-capping, cleaning and inspecting cases looking for the ones that have cracked or are finally too thin to be re-used. The speed and safety goes up - as does the cost- with new brass. Ammunition is in fact piss-easy to assemble in large quantities, and military grade rounds are not as accurate with load measure as civilian sport rounds. The cases are easily milled.
    The tricky bit is left to whoever manufactures the rifle bullet. SS109, which I imagine the DF uses as it is NATO standard, as opposed to the original 5.56 lead round with a copper jacket, has a steel core with a lead base and requires a dedicated manufacturing process. But it's not rocket science and is also made all over the world.

    But as you say, let an Irish munition manufacturer try to get an export licence in order to butter his bread...

    Add: Serious thread drift, I'll stop now.
    Last edited by expat01; 16th August 2016 at 14:20.

  14. #85
    C/S
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,031
    Post Thanks / Like
    there was a plan back in the 1930's to build a munitions factory in Clare.

    They also had plans to build the landsverk tank here as well.

  15. #86
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    921
    Post Thanks / Like

    Fast build drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmití View Post
    Working on the principle that a well equipped advanced OPV can carry out most of the duties being done by Frigates and some of the Duties being done by Destroyers there is an operational need for up to six OPV's before the RN can deploy an operational carrier fleet to sea. It can take up to a 12 ship fleet train to defend and supply the carrier . Typically out ahead you have a nuclear attack submarine, and over head a CAP flying a race track circuit ahead of the carrier's track. Within the screen there would be at least two destroyers, and six frigates plus other supply and logistics units.
    If both carriers were deployed then most of the RN front edge would have to go in support leaving a need for an effective reserve to carry out remaining tasks as they arise. They need to build fast as nobody knows yet the curtailments on friendly assistance post BREXIT.

  16. Thanks na grohmití thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  17. #87
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    945
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Working on the principle that a well equipped advanced OPV can carry out most of the duties being done by Frigates and some of the Duties being done by Destroyers there is an operational need for up to six OPV's before the RN can deploy an operational carrier fleet to sea. It can take up to a 12 ship fleet train to defend and supply the carrier . Typically out ahead you have a nuclear attack submarine, and over head a CAP flying a race track circuit ahead of the carrier's track. Within the screen there would be at least two destroyers, and six frigates plus other supply and logistics units.
    If both carriers were deployed then most of the RN front edge would have to go in support leaving a need for an effective reserve to carry out remaining tasks as they arise. They need to build fast as nobody knows yet the curtailments on friendly assistance post BREXIT.
    I very much doubt the UK would be able to field a USN style Carrier protection force unless there's a marked escalation with sufficient timeframe to assemble the units (even more so the chances of ever having both Carriers deployed at the same time). More likely it will be 1 45 and a couple of 26's (whenever they get built). As to the OPV's they are a) as the MOD wanted something for the money they had to hand over and b) to show the flag in the low end areas (anti-piracy, drugs, Falklands patrol (but not the Guard ship). They aren't going to be able to do any high end war fighting operations or keep up with a taskforce either. Given the choice I have no doubt the Admirals would have wanted the 26's actually built rather than OPV's they didn't want/plan for.

  18. Likes DeV liked this post
  19. #88
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    921
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    I very much doubt the UK would be able to field a USN style Carrier protection force unless there's a marked escalation with sufficient timeframe to assemble the units (even more so the chances of ever having both Carriers deployed at the same time). More likely it will be 1 45 and a couple of 26's (whenever they get built). As to the OPV's they are a) as the MOD wanted something for the money they had to hand over and b) to show the flag in the low end areas (anti-piracy, drugs, Falklands patrol (but not the Guard ship). They aren't going to be able to do any high end war fighting operations or keep up with a taskforce either. Given the choice I have no doubt the Admirals would have wanted the 26's actually built rather than OPV's they didn't want/plan for.
    OPV's have become major acquisition items for medium sized Navies. In peacetime and Low intensity aggression, an adequately armed OPV can do the job assigned, to frigates and even Destroyers. Why is Dauntless replacing an OPV off Falklands? At this time it is ANY increase in Fleet strength that will assist in plugging holes and allow for tasks to be properly assigned. The Flag Officers will no doubt have priorities but will be glad of tonnage as it arrives.

  20. #89
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    945
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    OPV's have become major acquisition items for medium sized Navies. In peacetime and Low intensity aggression, an adequately armed OPV can do the job assigned, to frigates and even Destroyers. Why is Dauntless replacing an OPV off Falklands? At this time it is ANY increase in Fleet strength that will assist in plugging holes and allow for tasks to be properly assigned. The Flag Officers will no doubt have priorities but will be glad of tonnage as it arrives.
    From memory Falklands has had an OPV (Clyde replacing the Dumbarton Castle/Leeds Castle) stationed there since the invasion, however throughout that time they were just patrolling the EEZ area, whereas the RN also had a Warship for that station (be it a Frigate or Destroyer) through the same periods. The Clyde wouldn't have been able to do much without such support. And while the OPV's can do some of the taskings the RN has without question (though there is a question as to why they are still doing some of them), don't forget that to some degree the 42's for example were reduced to OPV's at the end of their lifespan (helipad and gun, with Sea Dart out of service).

    Again given the RN manning issues (with one 45 being a harbour ship due to engine and manpower issues), and the fact that these hulls come at the cost of the 26's being delayed and reduced, I'm fairly sure the Admirals if given the choice would have wanted the 26 order started, what value the River's give will always be less than either the 26 or the 31 (hell moving forward on the 31 design would have been a better value investment than them).

  21. #90
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    At this stage the RN must be well down the rankings for first rate navies. I wonder if the Mandarins in Whitehall would reconsider matters if there were persistant incursions in areas of UK interest by uniits of a large Russian fleet.

  22. #91
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    945
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by danno View Post
    At this stage the RN must be well down the rankings for first rate navies. I wonder if the Mandarins in Whitehall would reconsider matters if there were persistant incursions in areas of UK interest by uniits of a large Russian fleet.
    The SSN's and the QE's buy them the rankings still, but I hope they keep the skippers driving them up on rocks to a minimum cause at this stage they running out of numbers. Honestly I think the RN should have accepted some degree of compromise and gone for a common hull between the Frigates and Destroyers (given the sizes of both the 45 and 26), and get more than this current mini fleets with the knock on costs.

  23. #92
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    A common hull might be difficult if the FFG version has different propulsion system.

  24. #93
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    945
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by danno View Post
    A common hull might be difficult if the FFG version has different propulsion system.
    The Burkes seem to manage it to a degree? I mean the FFG's have more silencing installation, but couldn't that be made to work anyway on a DDG. From memory the top speed of the 45's and the 26's are going to be similar. If the UK had retained the larger numbers (12 Destroyers + the total number of Frigates) then it would make sense to keep them separate but now at a confirmed 14 High end hulls and whatever the 31 ends up being it doesn't make sense, I mean even with the "trick" of sinking costs into the 23 upgrade (something the Admirals wanted to avoid when they designed the 23's), they are still too expensive for a full 1 for 1.

  25. #94
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Has any navy given any thought to an FFG escort being the weapons platform dealing with targets detected/selected etc by the DDG. It would save on duplication of sensor and weapon fit for escort purposes but pretty useless for indepedent operation.

  26. #95
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    945
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by danno View Post
    Has any navy given any thought to an FFG escort being the weapons platform dealing with targets detected/selected etc by the DDG. It would save on duplication of sensor and weapon fit for escort purposes but pretty useless for indepedent operation.
    Isn't that what the Cooperative Engagement Capability is meant to help with?

  27. #96
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    To the extent units have limited capability in their own right?

  28. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  29. #97
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    945
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by danno View Post
    To the extent units have limited capability in their own right?
    I suppose it would come down to the engagement and the weapons fit, (for example what type of VLS and SAM they had anyway (and thus impacting cost)) from memory the 45's were once touted as going to get it as an upgrade but that got dropped for budgets I think.

  30. Thanks danno thanked for this post
  31. #98
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    921
    Post Thanks / Like
    We are where we are because of SDR mathematics. The Global combat ship, F26, was originally 13 hulls, but the costs for the package were reduced by the Strategic Defence Review to 8 F26 and make up the numbers by the 5 advanced OPV's. The proliferation of three new hull types, with different task suites, and many engineering prototype concepts in power and propulsion has led to a lot of falling between stools AND stop start budget allocations to keep builders on the start line for production some time soon!!

  32. #99
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    945
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    We are where we are because of SDR mathematics. The Global combat ship, F26, was originally 13 hulls, but the costs for the package were reduced by the Strategic Defence Review to 8 F26 and make up the numbers by the 5 advanced OPV's. The proliferation of three new hull types, with different task suites, and many engineering prototype concepts in power and propulsion has led to a lot of falling between stools AND stop start budget allocations to keep builders on the start line for production some time soon!!
    The Decision to go for the Batch 2's predates the 2015 SDR, and was made as the 26 wasn't signed off on for production in 2013 (and it's kind of hard to blame the 2015 Review given that the 26 design has been underway long before that ( and the issues regarding costs/spec had been flagged in the 2010 Review). The 2015 SDR instead created the 31 spec (which nobody knows anything about short of "cheaper than the 26"), it's just another false economy by the UK just as cutting the 45 numbers or the Astute delays.

  33. #100
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Cent Med
    Posts
    141
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by danno View Post
    Has any navy given any thought to an FFG escort being the weapons platform dealing with targets detected/selected etc by the DDG. It would save on duplication of sensor and weapon fit for escort purposes but pretty useless for indepedent operation.
    The concept is unstable. If you build a ship designed as a weapons platform only, then you have to accept that it is somewhat disposable. If you can't live with that, then you start up-arming it for self-defence with adequate sensors and effectors. At that stage you've built a full-blown frigate with associated costs. Look at what happened with the LCS.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •