Thanks Thanks:  991
Likes Likes:  2,003
Dislikes Dislikes:  49
Page 120 of 122 FirstFirst ... 2070110118119120121122 LastLast
Results 2,976 to 3,000 of 3026
  1. #2976
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,181
    Post Thanks / Like
    With regard to helicopter the view must be forward to what the replacement of the current S-70/NH-90 classes will look like. Already there is the US program to replace the Blackhawks with the V-280 Valour and SB-1 Defiant in testing. Looking at these aircraft it is easy to see that the size will again increase with the next generation. The SB-1 Defiant is more that size of an AW-101 than that of a MH-60. Just this week the European helicopter manufacturers start their long slow path to the replacement of the current offerings.

  2. Likes ropebag liked this post
  3. #2977
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,237
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    With regard to helicopter the view must be forward to what the replacement of the current S-70/NH-90 classes will look like. Already there is the US program to replace the Blackhawks with the V-280 Valour and SB-1 Defiant in testing. Looking at these aircraft it is easy to see that the size will again increase with the next generation. The SB-1 Defiant is more that size of an AW-101 than that of a MH-60. Just this week the European helicopter manufacturers start their long slow path to the replacement of the current offerings.
    Additional considerations for Logs/Transport is that a variety of Combat and work vehicles are also carried ,and these also should not be weight limited other than by cranage or on / off loading ramps. Mowag Piranha V can be 15tonne combat weight.

  4. Thanks The Usual Suspect thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  5. #2978
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,715
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Additional considerations for Logs/Transport is that a variety of Combat and work vehicles are also carried ,and these also should not be weight limited other than by cranage or on / off loading ramps. Mowag Piranha V can be 15tonne combat weight.
    I note the design from Vard boasts a 70 tonne side and stern ramp. This would be strong enough for the majority of our heavy combat and engineering equipment. Multiple TEU expected to be carried on deck should be no more than 18 Tonnes each(normally focused on the 4 twistlock spots). If we assume the heavier equipment won't sit on the helideck, it would still have an expectation that a helideck should be able to easily manage a 20 tonne heli landing on it.
    Other vessel options offer a removable "lid" on the helideck to permit TEU or vehicle storage below. This would of course cause weight limitations.
    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 DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  7. #2979
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,237
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    I note the design from Vard boasts a 70 tonne side and stern ramp. This would be strong enough for the majority of our heavy combat and engineering equipment. Multiple TEU expected to be carried on deck should be no more than 18 Tonnes each(normally focused on the 4 twistlock spots). If we assume the heavier equipment won't sit on the helideck, it would still have an expectation that a helideck should be able to easily manage a 20 tonne heli landing on it.
    Other vessel options offer a removable "lid" on the helideck to permit TEU or vehicle storage below. This would of course cause weight limitations.
    I would avoid removable lids or even opening lids as they are operationally messy. Strength needn't necessarily be compromised as cropped transverse beams are compensated for by deep girders in the opening and usually strong pillaring from each corner. However to move cargo in or out would require everything to be dismantlable, again very messy. Especially with lifts and Cranes.

  8. Likes na grohmiti, DeV liked this post
  9. #2980
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    24,024
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    I would avoid removable lids or even opening lids as they are operationally messy. Strength needn't necessarily be compromised as cropped transverse beams are compensated for by deep girders in the opening and usually strong pillaring from each corner. However to move cargo in or out would require everything to be dismantlable, again very messy. Especially with lifts and Cranes.
    If they can break they will, especially when exposed to the elements and not used very often

  10. #2981
    Lt Colonel EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,181
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Anzac View Post
    The CANT though can only handle a single NH-90 or Chinook at a time for deck safety reasons. This operational limitation is one of the things, like necessity of a well deck that the acquisition of the enhanced multi-role sealift vessel to complement HMNZS Canterbury will address to future proof the vessel.
    Cheers for the info about the need for something more than the current design of the CANT.

    I found this article which gives some background and details;
    http://nighthawk.nz/index.php?option...=11&Itemid=111

  11. Thanks na grohmiti, The Usual Suspect thanked for this post
    Likes Tempest liked this post
  12. #2982
    CQMS The Usual Suspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    173
    Post Thanks / Like
    Relevant to contingency roles envisioned for a similar vessel; studied by the Swedish Navy about a decade ago.



    Quote Originally Posted by The Usual Suspect 24/05/19 View Post
    There was quite a detailed debate over the desirability of a dual-role vessel; one which could deliver naval infantry and/or support two corvettes on an extended overseas mission, or a more capable multi-role vessel that could provide expeditionary headquarters, medical support, repair & maintenance, fire support etc.



    Amongst others, two Ro-Ro derived concepts were considered..


    145 to 160 meters
    12,000 to 15,000 tonnes (full load)
    Ro-Ro deck of approximately 1,250 m2 (420 vehicle lane metres) or 10 CB-90s
    Cargo space (weather deck) 900 m2 cargo on the weather deck
    Two fast supply craft, on davits.
    Crew of 55-60
    Naval Infantry up to 400 troops



    Displacement 13,430 tonnes
    Total cargo deck area will be equal to 2,150 m2 (720 vehicle lane metres)
    No docking facilities, but facilities for up to 12 CB-90s, which can be set afloat by means of a slip or a crane.
    Two NH90 helicopters
    Naval Infantry up to 170 troops

    There's a good deal of overlap, and a good deal of divergence from what we're discussing here. Not least in the absolute size and endurance of the vessel. But transporting 12 CB-90s, and supporting them for a limited period of time, is something that the Vard design should be able to do standing on it's head.

  13. #2983
    C/S
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    East
    Posts
    331
    Post Thanks / Like
    That small boat would be great for the NSR.

  14. Likes ibenji, Graylion liked this post
  15. #2984
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    649
    Post Thanks / Like

  16. Thanks DeV, na grohmiti thanked for this post
  17. #2985
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,715
    Post Thanks / Like
    From last September. Much has happened since.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  18. #2986
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,237
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    From last September. Much has happened since.
    Indeed, including the October 2020 Fire on NIAMH and the prolonged rebirth of ROISIN. The only commitment to new build is the replacement of EITHNE with an MRV. The two Peacocks replacements are on the TO DO list but could be offset by the proposed Irish Sea 50m vessels. The next step is to leave recruiting to Military Staffs and select by availability and Medical classifications. Also Vaccinate all recruits in training.

  19. Likes na grohmiti, Graylion, Turkey liked this post
  20. #2987
    The Auld Fella A/TEL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    571
    Post Thanks / Like

  21. Thanks na grohmiti, DeV, The Usual Suspect thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  22. #2988
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,715
    Post Thanks / Like
    Interesting. The side ramps seem bigger than the original, and would love to see how the well deck would work out.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  23. #2989
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,237
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Interesting. The side ramps seem bigger than the original, and would love to see how the well deck would work out.
    Most interesting given the intended area of operations and overall concept of use including accent on multirole.

  24. Thanks na grohmiti thanked for this post
  25. #2990
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    2,009
    Post Thanks / Like
    Wonder what the price tag is for it, could give us an idea in terms of what we've "budgeted" for.

  26. Likes na grohmiti, DeV liked this post
  27. #2991
    The Auld Fella A/TEL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    571
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    Wonder what the price tag is for it, could give us an idea in terms of what we've "budgeted" for.
    Given that this one has the inclusion of a well deck its design and cost will prob be higher.

    Also the normal Irish save a few bob routine by building to civilian standards may lower it to meet our budget.

    If the RN can get a 140m Type 31 frigate for £250m then our €200m proposed budget should easily get us an 120-130m MRV.

    VARD designed both the P50s and P60 along with the RNZN OPVs and the USCG OPCs currently in build.

  28. Likes DeV liked this post
  29. #2992
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,237
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by A/TEL View Post
    Given that this one has the inclusion of a well deck its design and cost will prob be higher.

    Also the normal Irish save a few bob routine by building to civilian standards may lower it to meet our budget.

    If the RN can get a 140m Type 31 frigate for £250m then our €200m proposed budget should easily get us an 120-130m MRV.

    VARD designed both the P50s and P60 along with the RNZN OPVs and the USCG OPCs currently in build.
    Hulls built on Lloyd's Rules will be stronger than that built in an exclusive Naval Only yard. The cost arrives when you want the ship to take a hit and require military shock mounting standards for most equipment, plus high grade Government required equipment such as armament, missiles, CMS etc. In any case such hulls can last with care 40 plus years.

  30. #2993
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,715
    Post Thanks / Like
    Depending on how you read it, this sounds positive.
    The replacement of the flagship LÉ Eithne with a multi role vessel (MRV) is the next scheduled component of the White Paper fleet investment programme. Projects for other vessel replacement will be considered over the life-time of the White Paper in the context of overall capability development and funding and the Equipment Development Plan (EDP) process. The EDP outlines that the MRV project is in the planning ongoing stage with an indicative timeframe for progression from the current year through to 2024.
    https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates...28/141/#pq_141

    So does that mean the planning will be finished by 2024, or the ship will be delivered by 2024?
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  31. #2994
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Depending on how you read it, this sounds positive.

    https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates...28/141/#pq_141

    So does that mean the planning will be finished by 2024, or the ship will be delivered by 2024?
    The Equipment Development Plan runs until 2024. There is unlikely to be any advancement within that time due to four ships being tied up.

    With the eyes on a move to a certain landlocked overseas mission, its time to invest the money on whats badly needed, a tactical airlift aircraft. Any such aircraft would carry out more missions in a year than any supposed MRV ship in its lifetime.

  32. #2995
    The Auld Fella A/TEL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    571
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhodes View Post
    The Equipment Development Plan runs until 2024. There is unlikely to be any advancement within that time due to four ships being tied up.

    With the eyes on a move to a certain landlocked overseas mission, its time to invest the money on whats badly needed, a tactical airlift aircraft. Any such aircraft would carry out more missions in a year than any supposed MRV ship in its lifetime.

    The project is proceeding.

    The MRV is not being built to purely deliver equipment overseas hence the Multi Role part of the name.

    Why can't we have both MRV and tactical airlift?.

    Four ships are not tied up, P31 & P41 only are in operational reserve with P52 commencing half life refit.

    P51 due to start trials this quarter back to operations.

    We are an island nation which most people tend to forget.

  33. Thanks DeV, na grohmiti thanked for this post
    Likes DeV, Sluggie, Rocinante, CTU, Flamingo liked this post
  34. #2996
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,715
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhodes View Post
    The Equipment Development Plan runs until 2024. There is unlikely to be any advancement within that time due to four ships being tied up.

    With the eyes on a move to a certain landlocked overseas mission, its time to invest the money on whats badly needed, a tactical airlift aircraft. Any such aircraft would carry out more missions in a year than any supposed MRV ship in its lifetime.
    Because all the vehicles you need for the overseas mission to this land locked place will be driven from Ireland to the AO.
    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. #2997
    Private 2*
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    21
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by A/TEL View Post
    The project is proceeding.

    The MRV is not being built to purely deliver equipment overseas hence the Multi Role part of the name.

    Why can't we have both MRV and tactical airlift?.

    Four ships are not tied up, P31 & P41 only are in operational reserve with P52 commencing half life refit.

    P51 due to start trials this quarter back to operations.

    We are an island nation which most people tend to forget.
    P42 to join P31 & P41 very shortly. P52 to remain at sea until all the P51 post-refit gremlins are sorted out, then straight into her refit, returning somewhere in 2022.

  36. Thanks na grohmiti thanked for this post
  37. #2998
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by A/TEL View Post
    The project is proceeding.

    The MRV is not being built to purely deliver equipment overseas hence the Multi Role part of the name.

    Why can't we have both MRV and tactical airlift?.

    Four ships are not tied up, P31 & P41 only are in operational reserve with P52 commencing half life refit.

    P51 due to start trials this quarter back to operations.

    We are an island nation which most people tend to forget.
    The project is in planning this 20 years. It's proposed to be an XXL OPV with "freight carrying capacity" to support overseas missions. All OPV's are multi-role.
    In an ideal world, there should be both a tactical airlift aircraft and an amphibious ship, but in the real world, funding will only be made available for just about one.
    There are four ships tied up. A decision is going to be made on where to find the crew for P51 before the spring gand its likely to be from P42.
    Last edited by Rhodes; 5th February 2021 at 00:11.

  38. #2999
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Because all the vehicles you need for the overseas mission to this land locked place will be driven from Ireland to the AO.
    Which will be on a very large Ro-Ro ship.

  39. Likes DeV liked this post
  40. #3000
    The Auld Fella A/TEL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    571
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhodes View Post
    The project is in planning this 20 years. It's proposed to be an XXL OPV with "freight carrying capacity" to support overseas missions. All OPV's are multi-role.
    In an ideal world, there should be both a tactical airlift aircraft and an amphibious ship, but in the real world, funding will only be made available for just about enough for one.
    There are four ships tied up. A decision is going to be made on where to find the crew for P51 before the spring gand its likely to be from P42.
    There is a crew on P51 already.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Naval air ops no more?
    By Goldie fish in forum Navy & Naval Reserve
    Replies: 305
    Last Post: 1st May 2019, 23:01
  2. Naval Wishlist(realistic)
    By Goldie fish in forum Navy & Naval Reserve
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 10th April 2007, 23:54
  3. Naval Training Ship?
    By Goldie fish in forum Navy & Naval Reserve
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 4th February 2003, 01:19

Posting Permissions

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