River class Patrol vessels..

[FMP]

You'll find that helis that land on ships moving decks that are not fitted with such a system also are not fitted with wheeled undercarriage.

Otherwise its like keeping snow chains in the boot of your car all year round.....while you live in the south of france.

Ahhhhhh now I get it. So that's why all (bar but not limited to USMC Cobra's and Huey's) helis operating off of ships have,,,,,,,,,,wheels. No don't get I'm afraid.

Like the snow chain reference though .

[expat01]

FMP, thanks for your reasoning. You are however knocking up against an attitude which has been hard-wired into the entire DF since the 1930s. If you can't go the whole hog, don't try at all, along with... If we can't have it, then by God we don't need it and we'll prove the reason why!
We have a tiny air corps and I imagine little appetite within it for acquiring and maintaining the skill of landing on a ship should the need arise. Is the capacity to land a helicopter on a deck to pick up a casualty or drop off a ranger team useful? Hell yes and Ireland should be able to do this in its huge area of responsibility.
We can't. The government don't see it as a priority and the DF will say it's unnecessary until the day they're told they should. Then they'll do it and make it work.

[Jetjock]

The lack of even a landing facility for a helicopter on Irish OPVs is inexplicable really. It massively limits any potential uproling of the vessels during their 30 year lifespan and limits them to what is in actuality home water EEZ police work. Potential overseas roles beyond anti piracy convoy escort is a non runner. You certainly won't hear an Captain Phillips types threatening Somali boarding parties that the Irish Navy is on the way..at a breakneck 20 knots.

A bad experience 25 years ago will now have implications over 50 years after the experiment failed. Mostly for lack of trying by a spoiled IAC. There were other reasons granted, none however were insurmountable. It's time to move on.

One must ask the question has the Irish taxpayer been given value for money and the answer must surely be in the negative simply by the failure of the specification writers to future proof the vessel by simply adding a flat area to land a helicopter. Not even a hangar, just a landing position.

Regarding non equipped helicopters landing on Naval ships(not even flat tops), British International were recently contracted to ferry personnel between ships during Ex Joint Warrior. In the North Sea. With a bog standard S61. No bells, no whistles. They also regularly do the same in the Falklands. On the River class. That's the ones of similar proportions to the P60 class. Check out what HMS Clyde has been up to of late: http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and...de-gets-flying
The RN don't seem to be shy about listing the ships ability to refuel and thereby extend the range of SAR helicopters as an "important" role.

There is simply no Navy ship worldwide of similar proportions being built ANYWHERE without an aviation facility. The mind boggles. The Irish Navy simply does not know better than every other navy on the planet! Any argument to the contrary just doesn't hold water(pun absolutely intended).

It's a bit like the recent Irish penchant for building three quarters of a sports stadium. Most of it is brilliant, it's just a little bit shit at one end.

[expat01]

If we didn't already have artillery, trying justify the purchase and setting up a whole corps to use it would be a lot harder than this (not now, infantrymen!). I mean, what for, the off chance of needing a few illum rounds from a 120?
And yet...

[DeV]

The AC generally don't do SAR anymore (if they do it is very limited and inland only)
The EC135 and AW139 (or S92) aren't probably equipped for deck landings in bad weather, which is the time they could be needed)
Is the deck rated for a S92 sized helo (on a 2000 tonne vessel not those in the pics)?
Does the EC135/AW139/S92 have HIFR capability?
How far offshore are they rated for?

What sea state can the helo operate in from these (ie land/take off)

Home water EEZ is the raison d'ete of the NS. Overseas would be a major policy change (the only other type of overseas op would be embargo enforcement).

[morpheus]

The NS should have its own dedicated maritime air wing anyway. Taking airmen and trying to turn them into part time sailors was never going to work. esp with the operation of the IAC at the time.

[expat01]

The AC generally don't do SAR anymore (if they do it is very limited and inland only)
The EC135 and AW139 (or S92) aren't probably equipped for deck landings in bad weather, which is the time they could be needed)
Is the deck rated for a S92 sized helo (on a 2000 tonne vessel not those in the pics)?
Does the EC135/AW139/S92 have HIFR capability?
How far offshore are they rated for?

What sea state can the helo operate in from these (ie land/take off)


Home water EEZ is the raison d'ete of the NS. Overseas would be a major policy change (the only other type of overseas op would be embargo enforcement).

What exactly is the purpose of the main armament on NS vessels in home waters? Remove that - which will never be needed against a yacht and would never even know what destroyed it if a warship were involved - and there's plenty of space. Actually, given what we actually do in home waters, what do we need beyond a fast, seaworthy vessel with room for RIBs?

It's a poor argument and taken logically, there is no justification for the Defence Forces at all.

[Brian McGrath]

What ever about the pros and cons of this I have to say that the Naval version of the S92 looks the business.

[expat01]

How can you un-dislike? It was a knee-jerk response and I never see it as constructive.

[pym]

What ever about the pros and cons of this I have to say that the Naval version of the S92 looks the business.

Well it has been an absolute nightmare for the Canadians.

As regards helicopters for the NS - I don't see the need right now, I don't see how it could be financed right now and I don't see the logic in carting around aviation fuel on the offchance someone might need to drop in for a top up.

My position as a know nothing landlubber is just - have loads of space on the aft deck. Make it big & strong by design. Use it for loads of TEU's or delivering some Mowags on a resupply, or whatever.

5-10 years hence if carting a helicopter to an AO like Liberia is seen as a requirement, you can do that. Or if a large VTOL UAV is seen as the next step for OPV's - well, it's doable.

In the meantime, it's just some nice space with a lot of possibilities.

[DeV]

Lads I'm not saying that having such capability is a bad thing but:
- how likely is it to be used?
- how usable is it (eg what sea state)?
- how much € in capital outlay?
- how much € annually to gain and retain competency?

[expat01]

And in reply, I still say that the same applies to everything we have over a 12.7 and a mowag. I tend to agree that these days helicopter capacity is a basic naval capability, not a nice to have.
It is a soldier's job to prepare to meet any eventuality or that that could conceivably arise. If he can't do so due to lack of resources, he highlights the issue and makes do with what he has. He doesn't pretend issue doesn't exist just because he doesn't have the kit.

[hptmurphy]

Define suitable

The DH244 and DH 245 variants were suitable as they were specifically built for ship board ops with items that were deemed suitable by both the clients and the users to use them aboard ship.The remainder were not fitted for naval ops.

Theres the suitability deal with. The Air Corps didn't request a naval spec for an machines since so they never had any intention of revisiting the project, given the projected life span of the 139s its never going to happen.

FMP, you have all the arguments why we should and I don't disagree

- if there was a role
- if there was money available
- if the helos were navy owned
- if all the other priorities such has having enough ships and people were met .

As for storage,,,,,crikey, jerrycans? No wounder our first attempt was such a disaster.

Don't know where you got that one from Bud! LE Eithne has quite a sizeable Jet A1 storage tank and we did HIFRs were RAF Sea kings back in 1987..as I did with Dauphins

Well it has been an absolute nightmare for the Canadians.

Just look at the photos supplied and note the size of the vessels plus the flat calm conditions. You can operate helos all day long on pond like conditions...I take it you've never been 200 miles off the west coast of Ireland on a 1900 tonne HPV in January.

I tend to agree that these days helicopter capacity is a basic naval capability, not a nice to have.

No..having ships is a basic capability, helos would be a nice to have !!!

[hptmurphy]

What ever about the pros and cons of this I have to say that the Naval version of the S92 looks the business.

Looks can be deceiving , and they have a problem in the hover that was not present in the S61N, the larger chord rotor blades give off a bigger down draft and can cause problems at certain heights for winch men.

[hptmurphy]

We have a tiny air corps and I imagine little appetite within it for acquiring and maintaining the skill of landing on a ship should the need arise. Is the capacity to land a helicopter on a deck to pick up a casualty or drop off a ranger team useful? Hell yes and Ireland should be able to do this in its huge area of responsibility.

You don't have to be able to land to put people aboard a ship!!! And anyway there's nothing there that the Naval Boarding teams can't do using RHIBs instead of Helos.