Thanks Thanks:  70
Likes Likes:  114
Dislikes Dislikes:  2
Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011 LastLast
Results 226 to 250 of 265

Thread: Drydocking?

  1. #226
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,339
    Post Thanks / Like
    "Irish" ferries in name only lately. Got rid of the irish crews to replace them with lower paid foreign workers.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  2. Thanks Flamingo thanked for this post
  3. #227
    Space Lord of Terra morpheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Metropolis
    Posts
    3,137
    Post Thanks / Like
    But at any level of govt, are you aware of anyone who is supporting this kind of joined-up forward thinking? What about the industry?
    "He is an enemy officer taken in battle and entitled to fair treatment."
    "No, sir. He's a sergeant, and they don't deserve no respect at all, sir. I should know. They're cunning and artful, if they're any good. I wouldn't mind if he was an officer, sir. But sergeants are clever."

  4. #228
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,217
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by morpheus View Post
    But at any level of govt, are you aware of anyone who is supporting this kind of joined-up forward thinking? What about the industry?
    Industries in general look to the bottom line and will diversify employment and conditions to improve profits and neutralise trade union interference or meddling. As far as joined up thinking goes out of 90000 jobs created some 40,000 went to New Migrant labour , at labour rates of 1.60 to 3.60 Euro per hour. The latter rate was paid then to Latvian crew in Irish Ferries. The Irish Government havn't ratified the EU conventions on Seafarers Rights or similar rights for EU migrant workers. Statistics will laud job creation but who got jobs and at how much is not revealed.
    The States bottom line must be to create maritime infrastructure to meet growing capacity needs and provide for normal and emergency repair of ships. We need quay walls with afloat berths and we badly need 3 drydocks, at 150 M + ( Cork ) at 225 M (New ) and at 300 M ( New ).

  5. #229
    Private 3*
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    46
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    The State may have to takeover Cork Dockyard.
    I can't see the EU allowing that to happen.

  6. Likes DeV liked this post
  7. #230
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,339
    Post Thanks / Like
    I can't see DSG allowing that happen either.
    Things have changed in this post-thatcherite society. The state manages very little in the way of infastructure. Everything is operated by semi-state or private enterprise. (Roads, Rail, Airports) Seeing as it let the last state owned shipping company fade away in the 80s, I do not see it sees any importance in maintaining any ship repair facility.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  8. Thanks hptmurphy thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  9. #231
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,217
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 25 pounder View Post
    I can't see the EU allowing that to happen.
    Exigencies could dictate otherwise and history proves that the State, under Lemass did it before. In 1941 on the foundation of Irish Shipping Ltd, that company took over Cork Dockyard and brought it up to full use, and continued to do so until the arrival of Verholme in Cork. Major infrastructure such as Docking and repair of ships is critical to the well being of a state, leaving capabilities to the whims of expediency and bean counters, leads to amputation and "crippling" results.

  10. #232
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,339
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Exigencies could dictate otherwise and history proves that the State, under Lemass did it before. In 1941 on the foundation of Irish Shipping Ltd, that company took over Cork Dockyard and brought it up to full use, and continued to do so until the arrival of Verholme in Cork. Major infrastructure such as Docking and repair of ships is critical to the well being of a state, leaving capabilities to the whims of expediency and bean counters, leads to amputation and "crippling" results.
    Different times. Very different times. You'll be hard pressed to find any state operated ship repair facility anywhere in the world any more, except perhaps maybe in Communist China.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  11. Likes Sparky42, DeV, hptmurphy liked this post
  12. #233
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,217
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmit View Post
    Different times. Very different times. You'll be hard pressed to find any state operated ship repair facility anywhere in the world any more, except perhaps maybe in Communist China.
    Shipbuilding and repair facilities in both the USA and Great Britain depend on State demands/needs and all have umbilical connections back to the State. Even Appledore have connections back to Devonport Dockyards and remain committed to naval shipbuilding whole or in part.

  13. #234
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,998
    Post Thanks / Like
    Best hope, I'd guess, of something along those lines happening would be Cork being viewed as a strategic asset in EU Defence planning.

    Of course while NATO remains the real mutual defence organisation and our neighbours know that we'll cherry pick what we're involved in, they may be, eh, hesitant.

  14. #235
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,339
    Post Thanks / Like
    Depend on.
    A large term for two relatively small words. One would suggest that the US Navy exists purely to keep work in US owned shipyards, with their inbuilt state supported protectionism and inefficient work practices. They could not survive in a free market economy, so the US government gives them plenty of work to do, building overpriced ships that face no real threat.
    Equally the UK has decided to create an unnecessary class of OPV, disposing of the ship it will replace prematurely, purely to keep sipyards open until the RN knows what its future frigate will look like. Appledore has almost closed many times since Niamh was built there. It is only the charity being offerred by HM government that keep it open. Again it cannot compete in the open market and is kept open purely for political reasons, i.e vote winning. They get work to support the industry, without the government work they would have nothing. They are not there to support shipping, more like shipping, in the form of government contracts, are there to support shipbuilding.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  15. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  16. #236
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,245
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmit View Post
    Depend on.
    A large term for two relatively small words. One would suggest that the US Navy exists purely to keep work in US owned shipyards, with their inbuilt state supported protectionism and inefficient work practices. They could not survive in a free market economy, so the US government gives them plenty of work to do, building overpriced ships that face no real threat.
    Equally the UK has decided to create an unnecessary class of OPV, disposing of the ship it will replace prematurely, purely to keep sipyards open until the RN knows what its future frigate will look like. Appledore has almost closed many times since Niamh was built there. It is only the charity being offerred by HM government that keep it open. Again it cannot compete in the open market and is kept open purely for political reasons, i.e vote winning. They get work to support the industry, without the government work they would have nothing. They are not there to support shipping, more like shipping, in the form of government contracts, are there to support shipbuilding.
    There's that, I mean when you look at it, the UK went to South Korea for their RFA hulls since the UK yards didn't/couldn't offer a price that equaled them. The history of BAe's yards is so bad that the new ship building strategy is actively trying to get the 31 built somewhere else. When you compare it to some of the European yards that do much higher volume of business. The reality is a) there's no shortage of yard space in the EU or partners that could mean Cork could compete, b) we'd never have enough orders to keep a modern yard in business (and all the supply chains/training/certification etc).

  17. Thanks na grohmití thanked for this post
  18. #237
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,270
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Exigencies could dictate otherwise and history proves that the State, under Lemass did it before. In 1941 on the foundation of Irish Shipping Ltd, that company took over Cork Dockyard and brought it up to full use, and continued to do so until the arrival of Verholme in Cork. Major infrastructure such as Docking and repair of ships is critical to the well being of a state, leaving capabilities to the whims of expediency and bean counters, leads to amputation and "crippling" results.
    Is the Register of Shipping available on line I dont see it on the MSO website?

  19. #238
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,217
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Is the Register of Shipping available on line I dont see it on the MSO website?
    THE REGISTER OF SHIPS is published by LLyod's Register of Ships on a biennial basis ie. 1987-1988 etc. Assuming a ship's notional life might be 15 years to 20 years, if you built up a library of a set for every twenty years then you have a good chance of having every Merchant ship that floats in your library. They need to be about fifteen years old when you buy as the set cost will be at least 100 plus postage or new about 450. The Register can be researched on Line.
    Getting back to the anguishing need to maintain ships within the state you must start with the Solas requirement that all ships should be drydocked twice every five years that means we should plan to drydock 18 times every 5 years for 9 ships. Since all ships interface at sea there is a need to conform.

  20. Thanks DeV, Turkey thanked for this post
  21. #239
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,245
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    If true, then it is in the LPD range in terms of displacement and cost but it also matches HMNZS Canterbury; that is something we should not follow. Better a purposed design vessel from bottom up such as the Damen Enforcer family than something based upon an Isle of Man ferry. If Far East ship builders are excluded then in Europe at the moment that leave Damen & Navantia with smaller versions of the Enforces class or Fincantieri with the Improved San Giusto class.
    I think any of the Enforcer designs are wider than the Cobh Graving Dock though?

  22. #240
    BQMS EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    621
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    I think any of the Enforcer designs are wider than the Cobh Graving Dock though?
    The smaller Enforces have a beam of 24.8m, even the Canterbury has a beam of 23.4m so vessels of this size will not fit in any Graving dock in the state at present. But is this a real issue? If so then that is something the state would have to provide as there is no commercial justification at present. While good for a navy to have such a facility at its main base we are small and so must determine if this for us makes sense or we use a dock outside the state?

  23. Likes DeV liked this post
  24. #241
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,217
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    The smaller Enforces have a beam of 24.8m, even the Canterbury has a beam of 23.4m so vessels of this size will not fit in any Graving dock in the state at present. But is this a real issue? If so then that is something the state would have to provide as there is no commercial justification at present. While good for a navy to have such a facility at its main base we are small and so must determine if this for us makes sense or we use a dock outside the state?
    There is evidence that many maritime aspirant nations see strategic difficulties in not having sufficient drydock capacity within their states. In some cases a 12 month delay for service is not uncommon. We are an island nation trying to encourage ships of large tonnages to use our ports in 100 ship evolutions per year. Commercial justification requires only one incident to trigger a consequential loss of service, due to lack of facilities. We need a Review of Port Development , Management , Capability , and Services. There are companies in Netherlands skilled in the environmental and cost effectiveness of providing port installations , including drydocks. Perhaps our increasing Naval tonnage warrants a new look at the OLD drydock in haulbowline.

  25. #242
    BQMS EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    621
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    There is evidence that many maritime aspirant nations see strategic difficulties in not having sufficient drydock capacity within their states. In some cases a 12 month delay for service is not uncommon. We are an island nation trying to encourage ships of large tonnages to use our ports in 100 ship evolutions per year. Commercial justification requires only one incident to trigger a consequential loss of service, due to lack of facilities. We need a Review of Port Development , Management , Capability , and Services. There are companies in Netherlands skilled in the environmental and cost effectiveness of providing port installations , including drydocks. Perhaps our increasing Naval tonnage warrants a new look at the OLD drydock in haulbowline.
    I agree that it is a worthy aspiration but is it justified? It is not just about having a facility but the people to work in it and maintain it. If we did get a drydock which was lets say 200m x 30m in order to be able to handle the 9000t EPV/MRV then we would also need a workforce capable of performing the required work on the ship while in drydock. These people need to be maintained so that the dock could provide the immediate service needed otherwise it makes no sense. It is similar to the argument across the water about maintaining a warship building industry!

    Even if we ignore drydocks in the UK there is not too far away in the Brest naval yard 3 drydocks #8, #9 (250m x 36m) & #10 (300m x 46m) which could handle the EPV/MRV.

    If we were to decide that this is a strategic need then there are more than a number of large floating drydocks on the second hand market; cost point $10-20m.
    Last edited by EUFighter; 23rd August 2018 at 07:33.

  26. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  27. #243
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,217
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    I do like the Enforce family especially as they are based upon a proven design which so far has produced 4 different variants in service today. I would tend to the Enforcer 10000 as a big more ship at little more cost would be good and the larger welldeck is useful. The only two complaints I would have are;
    1. The Hanger/LCVP module is a bit out-dated. I am surprised that Damen have not changed this to a modular mission bay combining their Cross-deck concept with the hanger and moving the stacks outboard. This would give much more mission flexibility.
    2. The lower troop deck is not something we need in that size, we are not in the business of doing invasions (amphib assault). Most of our troops would be flown out to an AoO and not sea-lifted. Some capacity is needed but more of the 150-200 range rather than the 400-600 range currently offered as we would most likely be deploying a company sized force and need to transport all its equipment and initial stores to cover the first weeks of operation. The space would be better utilized in our case for more TEU storage including reefers.
    I believe in the Multirole Logistics type ship for the Naval Service but within the parameters of being serviced and maintained within the island of Ireland. When the state took over Haulbowline all systems and staffs were in place to operate the Dockyard including the Drydock. Clever micro budgetting soon saw that being redacted and the gates sold off for scrap. Drydocks are operated by multirole staff within the engineering shipwrights departments who also operate the slips for smaller craft.
    I also think that at this time ships of over 150m and 24m beam will have a draft that may give berthage problems. We should stay within the concepts of the current preparations for tender and be as definite with our specifications as possible, particularly on the dimensional and sealift aspects.

  28. #244
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,339
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    I believe in the Multirole Logistics type ship for the Naval Service but within the parameters of being serviced and maintained within the island of Ireland. When the state took over Haulbowline all systems and staffs were in place to operate the Dockyard including the Drydock. Clever micro budgetting soon saw that being redacted and the gates sold off for scrap. Drydocks are operated by multirole staff within the engineering shipwrights departments who also operate the slips for smaller craft.
    I also think that at this time ships of over 150m and 24m beam will have a draft that may give berthage problems. We should stay within the concepts of the current preparations for tender and be as definite with our specifications as possible, particularly on the dimensional and sealift aspects.
    My understanding was that when Haulbowline was handed over to the state in 1923 (seems it was not part of the treaty ports) The dockyard went into private hands, with ship conversion work taking place. The Depression that followed soon put an end to this. Though shipbreaking continued for some time, with former warships being broken up for their valuable steel plate. A steel mill opened alongside the mostly unused Basin in 1938. The Irish Naval presence in the dockyard was minimal, at best during this time, with the predecessor of the Naval service only operating from 1936 onwards, the Naval service itself only coming into being 10 years later.
    However as for the drydock gates, last time I looked, the same caisson is still floating at the southern end of the graving dock as always has been. Getting it operable has been investigated and is not as costly as expected. The pumphouse also remains, though most of the machinery is now encased in concrete.
    Daire Brunicardi (Lt Cdr, retiired) has recently written in great detail on the history of the Island. I would recommend his book. It is an overdue update on the book written by his father Niall in the mid 70s. There has been others too, but not as easy to read as DB.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  29. Thanks Turkey, EUFighter, Flamingo thanked for this post
  30. #245
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,270
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmit� View Post
    .
    However as for the drydock gates, last time I looked, the same caisson is still floating at the southern end of the graving dock as always has been. Getting it operable has been investigated and is not as costly as expected. The pumphouse also remains, though most of the machinery is now encased in concrete..
    Except the plan for the Dock is allow it to be used to tie up OPVs
    Last edited by DeV; 24th August 2018 at 00:08.

  31. #246
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,339
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Except the plan for the Dock is allow it to be used to tie up OPVs
    One of the plans...
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  32. #247
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,270
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmit� View Post
    One of the plans...
    Current plan

  33. #248
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,217
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Current plan
    Current Plan-yes. Caisson, floating or otherwise-gone to the furnaces!!

  34. #249
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,339
    Post Thanks / Like
    Caisson was still floating in the dock last time I looked.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  35. #250
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,270
    Post Thanks / Like
    Plan is to dredge it, remove the “stone buttress type structures” from the west side, regularise the face of the wall, remove the floating marina, provide facilities on both walls in order to provide simultaneous berthing for 2 x P60 class on opposite walls offset fore and aft.

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
  •