Thanks Thanks:  50
Likes Likes:  92
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 160

Thread: navy

  1. #126
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,912
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    I'm not sure where you are getting the Oyster bank and Curlane bank plans from, but these were alternative options given to Ringaskiddy redevelopment. They were ruled out on a number of engineering and environmental grounds. The East of the harbour suffers from a glut of underwater cables and outflows, as well as a very poor road infastructure. The R630 is already in bits from the volume of traffic just to the refinery (60 trucks an hour, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year on average). The decommissioning of the older Aghada generating station will see the site used for Battery storage to support the grid coming from the newer Aghada station, the BGE power station next door to the Refinery, and the Wind turbines in Crocane.
    No matter what infastructure you provide for Container ships, you'll not see anything near 10000 TEU in Cork. We don't have the demand for ships of that size, while we continue to serve large feeder container ships to other Irish Ports.
    Oyster Bank area is NOT ruled out as the east-west leg of a container dog-legged berth will reside on part of it, and it is shown abutting NMCI grounds. I don't want to get into power stations as Electric Ireland have committed to importing all the replacement power caused by current and future closures. Shannon and wind will be it and the rest comes through connectors old and new to come on line. Any trouble in UK and Europe we will be goosed.

  2. Likes Shaqra liked this post
  3. #127
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,912
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Read a paper submitted to USNI about small Navies and a Need for a balanced force. The submission sees a need for forces at sea to act as a deterrent and to have an ability to keep sea lanes open. The agreed tasks are in the areas of Surface, Air, Submarine, and MCM with a range of platforms to undertake defensive tasks. We are the ultimate example of need in that we are totally surrounded by sea and heavily focused in location and capability. To be successful smaller navies need to pool training and tasks with another to maintain efforts . In our case, because knowledge was embedded in few personnel with access to a few platforms, when people and ships retired the Navy was literally destructured . Our political efforts since then was to put ships on the water with no particular capability, except for one, later de-classified.
    It can and should be achieved by insisting on following the Mission come what may and that is the Duty of Command.
    As a former user, I would suggest we use the P31 for training Naval Reserves. Our neighbour is using two ships for alongside training. Find a secure Berth around Fords Wharf or the Harbour Commissioners wharf and man the ship with a cadre with sufficient knowledge to run her systems, maintain the Cork Company's administration, and train the enlisted volunteers in all shipboard equipments and protocols appropriate to their Branches. They should maintain the ship and learn over time to be experienced enough to be assigned to seagoing ships as useful ships crew. They could shift the Cork Unit HQ from Collins Barracks to the ship. In ordinary circumstances she would need to be on shore power and have access to services such as FW, waste disposal, and fuel . She is a self made academy covering all Branches.

  4. Likes Flamingo liked this post
  5. #128
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,399
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    As a former user, I would suggest we use the P31 for training Naval Reserves. Our neighbour is using two ships for alongside training. Find a secure Berth around Fords Wharf or the Harbour Commissioners wharf and man the ship with a cadre with sufficient knowledge to run her systems, maintain the Cork Company's administration, and train the enlisted volunteers in all shipboard equipments and protocols appropriate to their Branches. They should maintain the ship and learn over time to be experienced enough to be assigned to seagoing ships as useful ships crew. They could shift the Cork Unit HQ from Collins Barracks to the ship. In ordinary circumstances she would need to be on shore power and have access to services such as FW, waste disposal, and fuel . She is a self made academy covering all Branches.
    Her current location is a pretty secure berth. The Cork NSR unit is based in Haulbowline.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  6. Thanks Auldsod thanked for this post
  7. #129
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,912
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Her current location is a pretty secure berth. The Cork NSR unit is based in Haulbowline.
    In that case the ship would need to be at the base as she needs to be secure enough to leave her short manned or even unmanned overnight, unless NSR watches are running. An Open berth in Cork would be too vulnerable and raise potential security problems.

  8. #130
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,399
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    In that case the ship would need to be at the base as she needs to be secure enough to leave her short manned or even unmanned overnight, unless NSR watches are running. An Open berth in Cork would be too vulnerable and raise potential security problems.
    Then you are dealing with a ISPS Code situation. While the rules may not apply to Naval vessels, they do apply to the quayside. If you are going to a permanent berth, then it is easy to secure access. Every marina in the country can manage it, all you need is a Gate at the end of the gangway. Custom House Quay (north) is ideal in this regard, but the imminent redevelopment may change this. When Tivoli is downgraded from a working container port, it's quays are also easily secured, as the gates are already there. The Old Terminal is ideal for shore accommodation.
    Ideally, you need a dedicated naval berth which, when required, can also accommodate visiting naval vessels, and give them the security they desire and deserve. While the Cruiseliner berth can handle the larger ships safely, it would be nice to see the smaller European and Non European ships back up the quays again. Not seen anything interesting since HMAS ANZAC about 12 years ago.
    Tivoli Could do all this.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  9. #131
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,912
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Then you are dealing with a ISPS Code situation. While the rules may not apply to Naval vessels, they do apply to the quayside. If you are going to a permanent berth, then it is easy to secure access. Every marina in the country can manage it, all you need is a Gate at the end of the gangway. Custom House Quay (north) is ideal in this regard, but the imminent redevelopment may change this. When Tivoli is downgraded from a working container port, it's quays are also easily secured, as the gates are already there. The Old Terminal is ideal for shore accommodation.
    Ideally, you need a dedicated naval berth which, when required, can also accommodate visiting naval vessels, and give them the security they desire and deserve. While the Cruiseliner berth can handle the larger ships safely, it would be nice to see the smaller European and Non European ships back up the quays again. Not seen anything interesting since HMAS ANZAC about 12 years ago.
    Tivoli Could do all this.
    The ISPS Code was born from the Twin Towers incident in New York and transferred, due impending risk of a similar nature, up to nuclear, to shipping entering port. Security is paramount for ships in open ports. What we would need is a secure Naval only berth that is lockable and/or guardable. The Cork HA are talking about using Tivoli for small coasters when the container cranes are removed. However if the NSR are Haulbowline based then that unit can use an adapted berth there and use any alongside ship assigned to training. It leaves Waterford, Dublin, and Limerick to be sited under similar security for their training craft only.

  10. #132
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,912
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Oyster Bank area is NOT ruled out as the east-west leg of a container dog-legged berth will reside on part of it, and it is shown abutting NMCI grounds. I don't want to get into power stations as Electric Ireland have committed to importing all the replacement power caused by current and future closures. Shannon and wind will be it and the rest comes through connectors old and new to come on line. Any trouble in UK and Europe we will be goosed.
    In today's Irish Examiner there is released information from the Minister of Housing,Planning Ports, and Local Government about a Master Plan for the Marine Area. The document sets out sectoral objectives and planning policies covering 16 sectors/activities. Among fish, sport, and energy is Defence and SECURITY, and also Ports, Harbours and Shipping. Where are Dept. of Defence and Dept. of Marine? With such conflicts of responsibility I can safely say we will be planned into a corner.

  11. #133
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,912
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    In today's Irish Examiner there is released information from the Minister of Housing,Planning Ports, and Local Government about a Master Plan for the Marine Area. The document sets out sectoral objectives and planning policies covering 16 sectors/activities. Among fish, sport, and energy is Defence and SECURITY, and also Ports, Harbours and Shipping. Where are Dept. of Defence and Dept. of Marine? With such conflicts of responsibility I can safely say we will be planned into a corner.
    Sorry a word reverse jump in the first line--after word Planning delete " Ports".

  12. #134
    Captain EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,602
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    In today's Irish Examiner there is released information from the Minister of Housing,Planning Ports, and Local Government about a Master Plan for the Marine Area. The document sets out sectoral objectives and planning policies covering 16 sectors/activities. Among fish, sport, and energy is Defence and SECURITY, and also Ports, Harbours and Shipping. Where are Dept. of Defence and Dept. of Marine? With such conflicts of responsibility I can safely say we will be planned into a corner.
    Do you mean this article;

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/sponso...-40021070.html

    It is a small step in the right direction, I do not really care in which department is is as long as it gets done properly. And we have to be happy that "defence and security" have been included.

  13. #135
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    589
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    Do you mean this article;

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/sponso...-40021070.html

    It is a small step in the right direction, I do not really care in which department is is as long as it gets done properly. And we have to be happy that "defence and security" have been included.
    What I am finding interesting is this from the draft paper

    "6.12 Haulbowline Naval Base is of strategic importance to the Naval Service and Ireland given its geographic location. In line with the ongoing investment programme in new ships, there will be a need for future expansion of the Naval Base with the requirement for additional berthage and the development of a dry-dock. Future development in Cork Harbour will need to take cognisance of the unique requirements of the Naval Service."

    edit, here is the draft paper: https://www.housing.gov.ie/sites/def...work_final.pdf
    Last edited by Graylion; 1st August 2020 at 19:40.

  14. Thanks EUFighter, na grohmiti thanked for this post
  15. #136
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,912
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    What I am finding interesting is this from the draft paper

    "6.12 Haulbowline Naval Base is of strategic importance to the Naval Service and Ireland given its geographic location. In line with the ongoing investment programme in new ships, there will be a need for future expansion of the Naval Base with the requirement for additional berthage and the development of a dry-dock. Future development in Cork Harbour will need to take cognisance of the unique requirements of the Naval Service."
    This is an eureka moment. Delighted with that statement but am always sceptical when aspirations and budgets do not coincide, unless increased berthage and drydock is going to be funded from Dept of Building , Planning and Environment. In another piece in today's Irish Examiner Captain Mc Carthy, Chairman of Cruise Europe, is negative about proposed river Crossing in Cork that will isolate upper Quays and shut out all traffic including visiting Naval vessels.

  16. #137
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,399
    Post Thanks / Like
    (a) No crossing is needed there, the residents want to walk there, they want less vehicles.
    (b) There was supposed to be a swing bridge. You must keep the city quays open to all vessels. Otherwise just fill in the river with concrete and be done with it.

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/m...-40025285.html
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  17. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  18. #138
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,040
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    This is an eureka moment. Delighted with that statement but am always sceptical when aspirations and budgets do not coincide, unless increased berthage and drydock is going to be funded from Dept of Building , Planning and Environment. In another piece in today's Irish Examiner Captain Mc Carthy, Chairman of Cruise Europe, is negative about proposed river Crossing in Cork that will isolate upper Quays and shut out all traffic including visiting Naval vessels.
    Work on additional berthage has already started. Drydock is new

  19. #139
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,399
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Work on additional berthage has already started. Drydock is new
    Where is the work on berthage happening? Are they restoring the Graving dock(a tight squeeze without cranes or engineering workshops nearby). I always believed purchase of a floating dock, locating at (and leasing to/from) the Cork Dockyard would be a wise move in the long term. Cork Dockyard continues to be used to assemble Dockside cranes, ironically having none itself. Proposed plans for floating offshore wind farms will require lots of space ashore for assembly, support and repair. If the NS purchased a Floating dock, and leased it to DSG, it would be paid for within 10 years.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  20. #140
    Captain EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,602
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Where is the work on berthage happening? Are they restoring the Graving dock(a tight squeeze without cranes or engineering workshops nearby). I always believed purchase of a floating dock, locating at (and leasing to/from) the Cork Dockyard would be a wise move in the long term. Cork Dockyard continues to be used to assemble Dockside cranes, ironically having none itself. Proposed plans for floating offshore wind farms will require lots of space ashore for assembly, support and repair. If the NS purchased a Floating dock, and leased it to DSG, it would be paid for within 10 years.
    We can't afford a "floating dock", only large countries with a long naval tradition like Cameroon can do that!!!!

    https://www.defenceweb.co.za/sea/sea...ock-in-action/

  21. Likes na grohmiti, Graylion, hptmurphy liked this post
  22. #141
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,040
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Where is the work on berthage happening? Are they restoring the Graving dock(a tight squeeze without cranes or engineering workshops nearby). I always believed purchase of a floating dock, locating at (and leasing to/from) the Cork Dockyard would be a wise move in the long term. Cork Dockyard continues to be used to assemble Dockside cranes, ironically having none itself. Proposed plans for floating offshore wind farms will require lots of space ashore for assembly, support and repair. If the NS purchased a Floating dock, and leased it to DSG, it would be paid for within 10 years.
    https://irl.eu-supply.com/app/docmgm...8&DVID=1219071

    Doesn’t DSG not already have a floating dock? There was pics of one on their previous website.

    Would require a multi annual tender for all the vessels. Not impossible but generally not done by DoD

  23. #142
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,399
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    https://irl.eu-supply.com/app/docmgm...8&DVID=1219071

    Doesn’t DSG not already have a floating dock? There was pics of one on their previous website.

    Would require a multi annual tender for all the vessels. Not impossible but generally not done by DoD
    It started sinking sometime round 2010, was scrapped soon after. Was in frequent use for maintenance of the CPVs but couldn't manage anything much bigger. There was a much larger one along side it for years.


    Last edited by na grohmiti; 2nd August 2020 at 19:04.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  24. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  25. #143
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,912
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    https://irl.eu-supply.com/app/docmgm...8&DVID=1219071

    Doesn’t DSG not already have a floating dock? There was pics of one on their previous website.

    Would require a multi annual tender for all the vessels. Not impossible but generally not done by DoD
    The floating docks are gone many years. Reading the request for Tender to increase berthage at the naval base seems to have so many unquantifiable hindrances to commencement of work that not many Irish firms will be interested!! I would have thought the major thing would be to remove all of the unwanted silt by a dredging contractor at first and then follow with the engineering works. The dredging will be mostly suction and waterjet coupled with a magnetic means to remove steel jetsam. Using the graving dock for staggered berthage is a bad mistake as it is virtually destroying it as a potential drydock and when in use the outer ship will block the inner ship freedom of movement. Better make it a covered dock to work on ships afloat, one at a time.

  26. Thanks na grohmiti thanked for this post
  27. #144
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,399
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    The floating docks are gone many years. Reading the request for Tender to increase berthage at the naval base seems to have so many unquantifiable hindrances to commencement of work that not many Irish firms will be interested!! I would have thought the major thing would be to remove all of the unwanted silt by a dredging contractor at first and then follow with the engineering works. The dredging will be mostly suction and waterjet coupled with a magnetic means to remove steel jetsam. Using the graving dock for staggered berthage is a bad mistake as it is virtually destroying it as a potential drydock and when in use the outer ship will block the inner ship freedom of movement. Better make it a covered dock to work on ships afloat, one at a time.
    Costings were done on this some years ago and it was not at all costly. Biggest problem is the Visual intrusion such a structure would bring, and the outrage from NIMBYs in Cob H.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  28. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  29. #145
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,815
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Costings were done on this some years ago and it was not at all costly. Biggest problem is the Visual intrusion such a structure would bring, and the outrage from NIMBYs in Cob H.
    I thought the Basin had already had a full dredging only a couple of years ago to remove the slit and debris from Steel? As to the visual impact, feck me, we had steel itself for decades how could covering the the graving dock be any more than that?

  30. Likes EUFighter, DeV liked this post
  31. #146
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,399
    Post Thanks / Like
    Not sure how much of the graving dock was dredged. It would have had a large quantity of steel here as this was where finished product was loaded to go outbound.
    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. #147
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,040
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    The floating docks are gone many years. Reading the request for Tender to increase berthage at the naval base seems to have so many unquantifiable hindrances to commencement of work that not many Irish firms will be interested!! I would have thought the major thing would be to remove all of the unwanted silt by a dredging contractor at first and then follow with the engineering works. The dredging will be mostly suction and waterjet coupled with a magnetic means to remove steel jetsam. Using the graving dock for staggered berthage is a bad mistake as it is virtually destroying it as a potential drydock and when in use the outer ship will block the inner ship freedom of movement. Better make it a covered dock to work on ships afloat, one at a time.
    Could well be gone

    Which is probably why it’s says it should be removed

    In fairness in the basin there is only so many places to go

  33. #148
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,912
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Could well be gone

    Which is probably why it’s says it should be removed

    In fairness in the basin there is only so many places to go
    Just answering a question. Engineering wise not many companies are into specialised dredging. It would be better to have that done first and then figure solving an engineering problem of making provision for a 125/130 metre ship which may need to be 180'ed to get out of the basin. Rolling all the exigencies of updating the basin facilities into one contract may frighten most ,unless they receive letters of comfort and an open chequebook. Any Mariner would know what to do with the basin. Make it bigger and re-instate the drydock. While all this is going on, including loading dredged contaminants for processing means we may have to vacate the basin for some time, for after all, as you say there is only so many places to go in that basin.

  34. #149
    Captain EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,602
    Post Thanks / Like
    Why is the assumption that any new berthage is within the basis?
    If the NS does ever get an EPV/MRV it could be much large than any current vessel.

  35. #150
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,399
    Post Thanks / Like
    Any plans I saw had new berthage outside the basin to the north where water is deep. The quay at the basin entrance was also in the plan as a short term berth.
    At present at least one ship is using the Deepwater berth in Cobh on a regular basis.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  36. Thanks DeV thanked for this post

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
  •