Thanks Thanks:  30
Likes Likes:  122
Dislikes Dislikes:  4

View Poll Results: What is the future for Naval Aircraft In Ireland?

Voters
123. You may not vote on this poll
  • Continue Naval Air Ops with a new Air Corps heli

    19 15.45%
  • Continue Naval Air Ops with New Naval services operated Helis

    66 53.66%
  • Continue with Helideck only on certain ships

    17 13.82%
  • Give up on the whole idea..the CASA does the job fine!

    21 17.07%
Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 306
  1. #126
    Tim Horgan Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    You need to upgrade the landing gear. Possibly include some sort of harpoon system to anchor to the deck, unless you just want to operate the aircraft while the ship is at anchor in calm water.

    Murph would know more, he's been there and done that.


    I didnt know the Malaysians were users of the AB139. Source on this?


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

  2. #127
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,068
    Post Thanks / Like
    I don't think there would be any problem tying them to a deck and when the ship reached its destination, dropping anchor and allowing them to fly off to a more permanent land base.

    Basically, the AW-139 wouldn't be operating off the ship if it was just on a coastal patrol. The ship would be used as a means of transport to a deployment area.

    I think it would be prudent for the new vessel to be able to take Merlin sized helicopters, because even if the Air Corps never operate them the ship may be deployed to zones where UN partners would.

  3. #128
    Tim Horgan Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    Absolutely! Retaining the capacity to operate, even if the ability is not exercised, is a vital factor in all operations, both at home and overseas. Even Eithne had the capability to VERTREP larger helis, without them being required to land.


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

  4. #129
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,706
    Post Thanks / Like
    the harpoon was used in all situations while on the move or even at anchor outside harbours as even at anchor or in costal waters the ship can pitch or roll....its these limits that dictated the landing of helos.I know there is a picture of 248 landing but this was done in the shannon estuary I thing in flat calm conditions and at anchor.

    We did do HIFR with a RAF seaking many years ago to test the ability to be able to fuel oversize helos but the fact that fuel contamination was such an issue with the ship it would take a lot of testing to ensure that such an ability still remained...any vessel can do a vert rep especially if it has a clear after deck or focsle but there doesen't seem to be the imoutus any more to do so.In reality while on day to day operations most replenishment has been by traditional transfeer means( jackstay) . The current AC fleet of helos are commited to Army support thingys so I don't think the naval aspect is being considered too much until we buy a navalised version of the 139..and thats not on the books anytime soon.

    In fairness I think you have to see a helo landing on a ship to witnsee the possible complications and know both the limitations of the ship and the helo to really appreciate whats in volved ..especially with some thing of Eithnes size in often not so flat calm conditions. Some here have what ever division they were in and know its not just a simple as putting peg'A' into slot 'B'
    Time for another break I think......

  5. #130
    Banned User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,058
    Post Thanks / Like

    bargain?

    Kickstart the Naval Service Air Wing with a deal like this: the Uruguayan Navy is buying 6 MBB Bo-105s secondhand from Germany, at a cost of €1.8 million. (The Bo-105 is the predecessor to the EC-135.)

  6. #131
    Tim Horgan Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    Secondhand=obsolete and well used. The BO 105 was old when the Dauphin was introduced.

    UAVs are the future, unless you need to transfer crew or cargo. Then a Land based heli is more than adequate.


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

  7. #132
    Banned User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,058
    Post Thanks / Like

    helicopters and UAVs

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie fish View Post
    Secondhand=obsolete and well used. The BO 105 was old when the Dauphin was introduced.

    UAVs are the future, unless you need to transfer crew or cargo. Then a Land based heli is more than adequate.
    I agree that UAVs will become widely used on ships, but I think they are more likely to supplement rather than replace helicopters, at least for the foreseeable future. Most major naval ship programmes still include helicopters in the plans.

    The roles of shipborne helicopters have changed since the end of the Cold War, with less emphasis on ASW work, which used to be their main task. But a helicopter is a still very useful and flexible element of a ship's equipment.
    Last edited by thebig C; 30th April 2007 at 08:15.

  8. #133
    Recruit Piranha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    22
    Post Thanks / Like
    How about something like the AS555 SN its twin engined it can be equipped with 360° digital colour radar for search and surveillance, a search and rescue winch and a variety of weapons system if needed. No idea on cost can anyone help? the only draw back i reckon are the skids. Its in service with Brazil, Columbia and Argentina. What do you think. http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/as555_fennec/

  9. #134
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Belfast
    Posts
    46
    Post Thanks / Like

    Smile Future naval air corp role?

    Given that the territorial waters have been increased do you think there will be more of a possibility of future naval vessels being equiped with AB139's to give the navy greater coverage?

  10. #135
    Banned User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,058
    Post Thanks / Like

    Fennecs for Naval Service

    Quote Originally Posted by Piranha View Post
    How about something like the AS555 SN its twin engined it can be equipped with 360° digital colour radar for search and surveillance, a search and rescue winch and a variety of weapons system if needed. No idea on cost can anyone help? the only draw back i reckon are the skids. Its in service with Brazil, Columbia and Argentina. What do you think. http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/as555_fennec/

    I agree, this would be the way to go. It's the smallest, lightest shipboard helicopter on the market. The army Fennec costs over €2 million, but expect the naval version to cost more, especially if you add the search radar. Probably still work out at less than half the price of an Air Corps EC-135, or you could buy four naval Fennecs for the price of one AW139. (The unarmed MN version more suitable for the Naval Service than the SN?)

  11. #136
    Tim Horgan Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    And how much would it cost to replace the skids with wheels? You have never seen a heli landing on a small warship in heavy seas I assume. Its too small to be of any use. What would we use it for? Argentina use it for training and over the Horizon targeting. It would cost the same as an EC135 with its radar.


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

  12. #137
    Banned User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,058
    Post Thanks / Like

    no problem with skids

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie fish View Post
    And how much would it cost to replace the skids with wheels? You have never seen a heli landing on a small warship in heavy seas I assume. Its too small to be of any use. What would we use it for? Argentina use it for training and over the Horizon targeting. It would cost the same as an EC135 with its radar.

    It doesn't appear to be necessary to replace the skids.






    This is how they're moved from the helideck into the hangar.



    The Argentinian Navy use AS555SNs on their MEKO 360 H2 destroyers and MEKO 140 A16 corvettes. They have participated in numerous national and international exercises, including with the U.S. Navy, and have been away from their home bases for periods of up to 6 months. Apart from training and OTH targeting, the Argentinians use them for maritime surveillance and SAR.

  13. #138
    Tim Horgan Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    Its not a very useful sar asset, given its size. Most you could carry is two survivors...

    Its fine when working as part of a Naval Flotilla, perhaps as gaurd aircraft for an aircraft carrier, but in real world SAR, not much use. We have Fixed wing to do Surveillance, it does the job better. Otherwise a UAV could do the exact same job, for cheaper.

    Is there an echo here, or am I repeating myself?


    is there an echo here, or am I repeating myself?


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

  14. #139
    "Nice ass, Samson..." mutter nutter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Banner
    Posts
    1,716
    Post Thanks / Like
    The Argentines use them because they are cheap, the same way the still use A-4 skyhawks, they can't really afford to operate Seahawks, NH-90's or any other proper modern naval helicopter, it would frankly be a step in the wrong direction to go for AS555's as NAS, you either do it right or not at all, GF's right UAV's would give you the same surrveillence capabilities as these heli's, you want something more then that, you would want to get much more capable one's
    Dr. Venture: Why is it every time I need to get somewhere, we get waylaid by jackassery?

    Dr. Venture: Dean, you smell like a whore

  15. #140
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,068
    Post Thanks / Like
    Carrington, I don't know why you insist on comparing the price of Fennecs to the AW139. They are different aircraft for different roles.

    Again, here you are proposing an aircraft for the Defense Forces. But the most pertinent question in all this is: do the Navy want, or require OTHT, Observation & SAR helicopters?

    Do you have any information in this regard?

  16. #141
    CQMS
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    davy jones
    Posts
    255
    Post Thanks / Like
    Again, here you are proposing an aircraft for the Defense Forces. But the most pertinent question in all this is: do the Navy want, or require OTHT, Observation & SAR helicopters?
    Of course the Navy want & require the capability but can the State & Defence Forces get its act together to provide and pay for it? Ireland is the only State in Western Europe WITHOUT an organice NavaL Air Capability and yet it has the largest Exclusive Economic Zone area per capita.
    Last edited by Goldie fish; 7th May 2007 at 06:13.
    Fail to prepare....prepare to FAIL!

  17. #142
    Banned User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,058
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mutter nutter View Post
    The Argentines use them because they are cheap, the same way the still use A-4 skyhawks, they can't really afford to operate Seahawks, NH-90's or any other proper modern naval helicopter, it would frankly be a step in the wrong direction to go for AS555's as NAS, you either do it right or not at all, GF's right UAV's would give you the same surrveillence capabilities as these heli's, you want something more then that, you would want to get much more capable one's
    What's 'right'? At the moment we do not have any naval helicopters. One of the reasons for that seems to be the failure of the Eithne/Dauphin experience, and the other is cost. What's wrong with cheap, if it does the job? In fact public servants - including those in the Defence Forces - are obliged to buy the cheapest option, provided it meets the requirements. Given that it's your money and mine and everyone else's that they're spending, isn't that the way it should be?

    A Seahawk or an NH90 would cost in the region of €30 million. An AS555 costs about €5 million. Would a Seahawk or an NH90 provide 6 times the capability of an AS555? Furthermore, these are bigger, heavier helicopters, requiring bigger, stronger helidecks and hangar space. The new Naval Service OPVs will probably be similar in size to Niamh and Róisín, about 80 metres, so a smaller helicopter would be more suitable.

    There are few if any alternatives to the AS555 in the light naval helicopter market. A109 maybe? Otherwise you have to take a step up in terms of weight and cost to a Lynx or a Panther.
    Last edited by thebig C; 10th May 2007 at 10:13.

  18. #143
    Tim Horgan Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    USCG are using the A109.

    What do you want the helis to do? Apart from look nice parked on the helideck in anything more than a force 2.

    There are many options in Naval heli before you reach the Seahawk or NH90.

    Pay peanuts, get monkeys. The MNH90 would provide 20 times the capability of the fennec(Remember a similar type is soon to retire from GASU service. Having flown in same, I have to say they are Tiny. Only a slight improvment from the Gazelle.)


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

  19. #144
    Banned User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,058
    Post Thanks / Like

    what can a shipborne helicopter do?

    Shipborne naval helicopters can contribute to the following naval roles:

    • Search and rescue
    • Maritime Surveillance
    • Fishery Protection
    • Pollution Monitoring and Control
    • Anti-smuggling
    • Anti-submarine and anti-ship warfare
    • Humanitarian assistance/disaster relief
    • Border protection
    • Amphibious operations
    • Utility tasks, including transport of supplies internally or underslung, and transport of personnel, including insertion of Special Forces or other specialist teams


    Seems pretty useful to me. Probably more useful than a 76mm gun.

  20. #145
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    moving rapidly away.......
    Posts
    2,584
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by carrington View Post
    Shipborne naval helicopters can contribute to the following naval roles:

    • Search and rescue
    • Maritime Surveillance
    • Fishery Protection
    • Pollution Monitoring and Control
    • Anti-smuggling
    • Anti-submarine and anti-ship warfare
    • Humanitarian assistance/disaster relief
    • Border protection
    • Amphibious operations
    • Utility tasks, including transport of supplies internally or underslung, and transport of personnel, including insertion of Special Forces or other specialist teams


    Seems pretty useful to me. Probably more useful than a 76mm gun.

    Only if a real helicopter were used not a micky mouse Fennec.
    The NS should operate it's own fleet of Lynx at a minimum
    and probably the NH90 if P31's flight deck suited it[it does'ent]
    Last edited by Turkey; 7th May 2007 at 21:50.
    "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

  21. #146
    Tim Horgan Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    It should have been Lynx from day one.


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

  22. #147
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,706
    Post Thanks / Like
    I think if you read 'Fifty years a Ship builder' by Patrick Martin you will see that the concept of the lynx was declared obselete at the time.Also if you take the time to read what the authour says ..he establishes the concerns other people including the AC views on putting medium helos on small ships giving the constraints of limited capability single engine helos on small ships..pilots just don't want to do it...and more to the point ....designers want no part in it.

    The Indians tried to build a P31 copy and wanted more power engine wise....hull form didn't help..the wanted to put Allouettes on this surface...pilots wouldn't do it..just wasn't plausible.

    Quote all the examples you like...nice to put any helo on any deck in flat calm conditions..but then again ..do we ever need them in those conditions or mores to the point do we ever have ideal conditions.

    For the rare occasions when a 90 to 100 metre vessel could operate effectively a medium to small helo ion the type of seas witnessed by our fleet..whats the point..I think you have to see for real what the realities are..not just accept the sales pitch..after all the two governement agencies and a government department experienced this type of failure in the not too distant past.
    Time for another break I think......

  23. #148
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,709
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hi Goldie
    Couldnt agree with you more.The Lynx is such a capable aircraft, even though it's old as designs go....don't sneer small helis.Look what the Westland Scout/Wasp achieved, even though it was/is heavier than it's nearest equivalent. Even the old Bo-105 is still a good aircraft;it's fast, twin-engined, reliable, small, has an aft-cargo bay with clamshell doors and is built tough....the Dauphin was ill-starred for so many reasons and infighting between the Ac and NS didn't help.
    regards
    GttC

  24. #149
    Tim Horgan Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    I thought you said you were agreeing with me GttC


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

  25. #150
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,706
    Post Thanks / Like
    the original drawings on the ship showed lynx..but the DoD and the Ac changed their minds..nothing to do with the NS..
    Time for another break I think......

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. The Falklands War diary, 25 years later.
    By Goldie fish in forum Military Heritage / History
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 30th September 2011, 16:09
  2. Dail Debates [Naval Vessels]
    By Kieran Marum in forum Navy & Naval Reserve
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 30th May 2008, 09:25

Posting Permissions

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