OPV Replacement

[sofa]

When will the design be released for all to see.?

[easyrider]

So do we move on to negotiating the EPVs now, or is that on hold until the two new OPVs are actually delivered?

Next step is a replacement for the CPVs. I'd Suggest the Damen 4807, which is currently being built for the US coast Guard; we should get four of them.

[Goldie fish]

Why do you think the CPVs should be replaced? Surely it would be better off to have lots more OPVs with longer ranges and better seakeeping?
Leave the inshore work for the other agencies?

[Lordinajamjar]

Suppose that means we are now officially not interested in the T&T vessels.

Finally.

Oh look..right again....

Murph why are you so keen on those T&T vessels man? They don't fit the bill, never will fit the bill and would sink with the first swell from a rubber ducky in a bath tub.

[Laners]

Murph why are you so keen on those T&T vessels man? They don't fit the bill, never will fit the bill and would sink with the first swell from a rubber ducky in a bath tub.

Reading his last post it seems he is not keen on them .

[Lordinajamjar]

Reading his last post it seems he is not keen on them .

Thanks for straightening me out.

[hptmurphy]

Murph why are you so keen on those T&T vessels man? They don't fit the bill, never will fit the bill and would sink with the first swell from a rubber ducky in a bath tub.

Wrong end of the stick dear sir, I'm the guy who argued against then under any conditions.

Another thread....

Why do you think the CPVs should be replaced? Surely it would be better off to have lots more OPVs with longer ranges and better seakeeping?
Leave the inshore work for the other agencies?

Goes back to we never had enough PVs in the first place.We should have had at least seven of them.
OPVs as contracted now will have to work as hard as their predeccessors even if we do end up with more ships.

The sweepers proved we needed inshore vessels, it was a long summer in '86 trying to manage with out sweepers and the PVs ran into all sorts of problems.

So the argument is , yes we need the peacocks again experience shoes that the force has to have these capabilities.

the second point...

Not so sure.In the case of the customs there would be acse for the NS operating these vessels witha customs presence on board or naval personel with the same powers as C&E. It would be far cheaper pay wise and the operation would be more flexible given a greater pool of people available.

Leave the fisheries boards to themselves.

The survey vessels would eat the hell out of a budget , leave them alone and the coast guard work nicely alongside the NS but again would be too expensive to encorporate into the NS..bottom line..Navy gets Customs boats alongside peacocks and increases their role to become inshore PVs , Customs cutters and a bit of fisheries thrown in.

Given the Cutters are bought and paid for I'm sure the NS would love them.

[Lordinajamjar]

Wrong end of the stick dear sir, I'm the guy who argued against then under any conditions.

Murph I'm going back to my knitting because my wit has been whittled.

[Jetjock]

Murph I'm going back to my knitting because my wit has been whittled.

Don't worry Lordinajamjar, for some of us the stick was correctly aligned!

[DeV]

So do we move on to negotiating the EPVs now, or is that on hold until the two new OPVs are actually delivered?

Next step is a replacement for the CPVs.

Still no word on the EPV, the next step should be the replacement of the 3rd OPV!

The sweepers proved we needed inshore vessels, it was a long summer in '86 trying to manage with out sweepers and the PVs ran into all sorts of problems.

So the argument is , yes we need the peacocks again experience shoes that the force has to have these capabilities.

As I see it there are 2 problems with the Peacocks:

- Not able to put to sea in all weather, would this be a problem with all shallow draft vessels?

- The accomodiation

Not so sure.In the case of the customs there would be acse for the NS operating these vessels witha customs presence on board or naval personel with the same powers as C&E.

Under existing legislation, a PO (and above) has the same powers as Customs.

[Goldie fish]

Still no word on the EPV, the next step should be the replacement of the 3rd OPV!


As I see it there are 2 problems with the Peacocks:

- Not able to put to sea in all weather, would this be a problem with all shallow draft vessels?

- The accomodiation



Under existing legislation, a PO (and above) has the same powers as Customs.

The official line has always been the next stage of the tender process for the EPV would commence as soon as contracts had been finalised for the OPVs. I wouldnt expect any word on exercising the option for OPV3 until OPV1 is delivered. That seems to be how options have been exercised with the DoD so far, with the APCs and the AW139s.

The P50 are also quite shallow draft. They handle quite well, but some have said a bit of extra draft would assist stability. The P40 class were designed to operate in Hong Kong Harbour, with the crew being accomodated ashore when the ship was in port. The accom is fine for short durations, a week max at a time. Even the Customs cutters have better accomodation.

Powers are merely one element of the Picture. Customs officers have access to a wide range of job specific information that a NS PO would not. Remember, the customs don't just chase drugs.

[hptmurphy]

Thanks for reitterating the point on the Peacocks and clearing up the misconceptions of the customs Vs Ns role.

We would have had the same problems with the sweepers as they were evn smaller than the Peacocks.Not being able to put to sea in certain conditions is the remit of the captain and his knowledge of the capabilities of his ship.

if you refer to the incident off the Waterford coats from a couple of years ago where lives were lost and the NS couldn't put to see one would have to question the fishermens expectations of their own vessels for having been at sea in such conditions.

Back to the point shallow draft vs Stability an issue, not to much of a issue once you stay within perameters of the vessels capabilties.

[easyrider]

P50s have the same draft as the RN River class. Do the P50s have active fin stabilisers?

[Goldie fish]

P50s have the same draft as the RN River class. Do the P50s have active fin stabilisers?

Define Active?
They are fitted with Fin Stabilisers, though the technology may be different. The fin stabilisers only work when the ship is in motion, and unlike eithne, they are not retractable. More recent types will also provide stability at rest.

There should be a photo of the ship in drydock somewhere in the gallery. And you should be able to see the fins amidships, between the bilge keels.

[DeV]

Powers are merely one element of the Picture. Customs officers have access to a wide range of job specific information that a NS PO would not. Remember, the customs don't just chase drugs.

Correct but at sea it would be what they spend the vast majority of their time doing