Irish Military Online is in no way affiliated with the Irish Defence Forces. It is in no way sponsored or endorsed by the Irish Defence Forces or the Irish Government. Opinions expressed by the authors and contributors of this site are not necessarily those of the Defence Forces. If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
No, the radioactive waste went elsewhere. This is just where toxic by products of the steel industry were dumped. When confined they pose no hazard, however they can be harmful to human health if they become airborne in dust form, or make their way into the water supply.
Still no sign of said park opening to public.
For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
Because it is a contaminated waste site that includes radioactive waste
Making it a public/civic amenity was the only way to sell the cost of the clean up to Joe Public Tax Payers , no political gain for anyone if it was done for the sake of the Naval Service .
No, the radioactive waste went elsewhere. This is just where toxic by products of the steel industry were dumped. When confined they pose no hazard, however they can be harmful to human health if they become airborne in dust form, or make their way into the water supply.
Still no sign of said park opening to public.
Making it a public/civic amenity was the only way to sell the cost of the clean up to Joe Public Tax Payers , no political gain for anyone if it was done for the sake of the Naval Service .
Sorry misread it no long and radioactive waste on site but hazardous
This argument on the "Park" is a waste of time as we are where we are in it's environmental hazards. It's progression as a potential hazard should be monitored at appropriate intervals and issued in clear terms and not buried in factual history.
The drydock seems to upset some people but in general not sailors. The fact is we have a physical drydock , of suitable dimensions , in the Naval base. We need to re-instate it's use to significantly increase our ability to maintain our own ships. The drydock may need a couple of specialists but in general worked by existing Dockyard and Naval personnel. All naval vessels going into stand down for drydock or leave usually de-ammunitions, for security and safety reasons.
Our current fleet especially, the 4 P60 class, has the potential to weaken the Navy. Ships of the same build vintage need to be managed to maintain continuity-losing 4 ships to retirement within a few years of each other, in the future , will need examination and planning for that event now.
Very true, the P20s were all well past retirement age before a decision was made to replace them, even though it had been flagged in one of the many VFM reports ten years in advance of their expected end of life.
As a rule of thumb, the captain should be older than the ship...
For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
Making it a public/civic amenity was the only way to sell the cost of the clean up to Joe Public Tax Payers , no political gain for anyone if it was done for the sake of the Naval Service .
It's a pretty sad indication of joe public when you have to find a way to spin the clean up a toxic dump.....
Very true, the P20s were all well past retirement age before a decision was made to replace them, even though it had been flagged in one of the many VFM reports ten years in advance of their expected end of life.
As a rule of thumb, the captain should be older than the ship...
In any event it is one of those professions that experience pays off in tricky situations--especially manoeuvring. With naval repair schedules , and half-life refits, we should get up to 40 years from our vessels. The last Captain of P64 might be a new infant now.
As for the changes in the ports, you are right that times have changed and we see Dublin, Cork and Waterford building up their capacity to provide the needed facilities, though I suppose there is some degree of merit to the argument floated by the Architects about building a new Port between Dublin and Belfast and reusing the current footprint.
With Brexit traffic to the UK is going to be less, not more. I see no point in a new short sea port for the Irish Sea. Run the trains into Rosslare Europort again and if we need more cargo capacity, I'd extend Belview.
With Brexit traffic to the UK is going to be less, not more. I see no point in a new short sea port for the Irish Sea. Run the trains into Rosslare Europort again and if we need more cargo capacity, I'd extend Belview.
Even with Brexit there will be traffic between Ireland and GB, the point they were making was the chance to design a new build port while at the same time freeing up a massive footprint inside the Capital. And they aren't wrong, Dublin Port is going to face capacity issues going forward no matter what they do.
Even with Brexit there will be traffic between Ireland and GB, the point they were making was the chance to design a new build port while at the same time freeing up a massive footprint inside the Capital. And they aren't wrong, Dublin Port is going to face capacity issues going forward no matter what they do.
Currently Dublin port is gaining traffic to the continent. I see traffic to the continent gaining momentum and Irish Sea not so much. I'd much rather develop a port further south.
Currently Dublin port is gaining traffic to the continent. I see traffic to the continent gaining momentum and Irish Sea not so much. I'd much rather develop a port further south.
Down south has Rosslare and Cork already, the center of population/economy is on the East coast from Belfast to Dublin. Makes more sense to build up capacity there.
Currently Dublin port is gaining traffic to the continent. I see traffic to the continent gaining momentum and Irish Sea not so much. I'd much rather develop a port further south.
Dublin is gaining continental traffic because Irish Ferries shifted all their continental traffic to it , not because hauliers wanted it . On the Irish Sea routes Stena has introduced the first of it's new class of ferry the E Flexer on Dublin to Holyhead (Stena Estrid ) with two more to follow for their Belfast to Liverpool route , one of which is crossing the Indian Ocean at the moment from it's builders in China ( Stena Edda ) . Irish Ferries are also close to having a new ferry built by FSG in Germany similar to the new WB Yeats but bigger with more freight space and less passenger cabins than the Yeats which will be for Dublin to Holyhead and will be the largest ferry in the world based on lane metres . It would seem that business minded people of Stena and Irish Ferries seem to think that the Irish Sea traffic has some more to give .
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Comment