Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

EPV for naval service

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
    You got wires crossed. Ben my Chree is what HMNZS Canterbury is based on. The NS have visited Canturbury to confirm that a ship of this type is not the answer.
    That's what I said in that conversation when the info was given to me.

    Comment




    • Has this been posted here before? I know the VARD-7 510 LST has been, but this seems to get closer to the requirements than most. Being of the VARD 7 family their would be some synergies with the VARD 7-90 OPV's in service.

      The VARD 7 313 is a multi-purpose logistics vessel designed as a flexible platform to aid in force projection, maritime special operations, EEZ patrol, and humanitarian assistance. The vessel has significant capabilities for offloading heavy equipment, carrying cargo, transporting troops, launching boats, and supporting aviation.
      An internal ro-ro deck accommodates a variety of equipment including tanks, trucks, and ISO containers which can be efficiently loaded from a pier via ramps on the stern and vessel’s side. Two full-breadth cargo holds located beneath the ro-ro deck provide extra storage capacity, while protected areas forward house expansive troop accommodations providing safe and comfortable passage for embarked personnel. Large open deck areas on each side of the vessel provide secure stowage for two 15 m landing craft and two 11 m RHIBs. Aviation facilities include a flight deck capable of landing two medium lift helicopters and a hangar accommodating four. Expansive medical facilities are readily accessible from the flight and boat decks. Substantial internal area is dedicated to configurable offices and operations areas to support missions.

      Comment


      • From the middle of page 95 in this thread, onwards. It appears to tick all the boxes, with some tweaking here and there.
        Importantly though is for the tender process to commence now, as the ship it will replace will soon be due to retire from active service, if this has not already happened.
        For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
          From the middle of page 95 in this thread, onwards. It appears to tick all the boxes, with some tweaking here and there.
          Importantly though is for the tender process to commence now, as the ship it will replace will soon be due to retire from active service, if this has not already happened.
          A ship designed to tick all the boxes. I would like to know speed with 2 x 4500kw engines , also armament for insertion support is just token at 25mm plus HMG's. The Schottel 1215 Steerable rudder propellers SRP's at 1750kw and two bow thrusters at 500kw each are being fed how? I presume the SRP's from ME output and the Bow thrusters from generators. With 3x 2000kw generators what is the load with operating all systems on arrival and manoeuvring at same time.?

          Comment


          • I wouldn't see the point of having anything less than a 76mm main, and if deck penetration was an issue, then modern 57mm are bolt on, with similar bang for buck.
            To my comparably inexperienced eye, the only way you could propel a ship of that profile and not waste space below deck is using azipods, which would require a sizeable powerplant (or two) if we are not going to go down the gas turbine route.
            For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
              I wouldn't see the point of having anything less than a 76mm main, and if deck penetration was an issue, then modern 57mm are bolt on, with similar bang for buck.
              To my comparably inexperienced eye, the only way you could propel a ship of that profile and not waste space below deck is using azipods, which would require a sizeable powerplant (or two) if we are not going to go down the gas turbine route.
              I see Vard have update the picture of the 7-313 with what looks like a 76mm up front

              It was the year of fire...the year of destruction...the year we took back what was ours.
              It was the year of rebirth...the year of great sadness...the year of pain...and the year of joy.
              It was a new age...It was the end of history.
              It was the year everything changed.

              Comment


              • Indeed they have. Makes a lot more sense....
                For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                Comment


                • So... the original pdf had helicopters that looked "interestingly" close to the AC's 139's and now they have the image changed to the standard NS armament? Vard aren't really being subtle imo...
                  Looking at it they've replaced the cover gif, but the actual brochure is still the original with only the 25mm mount on the spec?
                  Last edited by Sparky42; 28 November 2019, 15:00.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
                    So... the original pdf had helicopters that looked "interestingly" close to the AC's 139's
                    They even have the AC roundrel !

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
                      I wouldn't see the point of having anything less than a 76mm main, and if deck penetration was an issue, then modern 57mm are bolt on, with similar bang for buck..
                      Well considering it's pretty much Eithne's replacement I'm sure the bean counters will be arguing for Eithne's 57mm to be transferred.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                        They even have the AC roundrel !
                        That they did/do, and now the 76mm... But that brings us back to drydocking it I suppose given it's Beam?

                        Comment


                        • Eithnes 57 mount is obsolete. The gun is fine, but naval armament mounts have come a long way since the early 80s.
                          For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Tempest View Post
                            Well considering it's pretty much Eithne's replacement I'm sure the bean counters will be arguing for Eithne's 57mm to be transferred.
                            As the Peacocks will also be going out of service during the probable build time the 76mm's will be available. This would then allow the NS to standardize on one large caliber.
                            The 25mm mount would only make sense if the Rhinos were also to be replace with the same mounts. Although something with a MK44 Bushmaster might be a better choice for the DF overall.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
                              So... the original pdf had helicopters that looked "interestingly" close to the AC's 139's and now they have the image changed to the standard NS armament? Vard aren't really being subtle imo...
                              Looking at it they've replaced the cover gif, but the actual brochure is still the original with only the 25mm mount on the spec?
                              Vard must read our threads!! For self defence the minimum is main armament 40/57/76mm with a radar and FCS auto. Two x 30mm bushmaster, and 4x 12.7mm. The 30mm mount should be augmented with the UK Martlet missile system , all controlled by auto FCS. Like all good FCS's we too , in planning , must be predictive in our efforts to deal with today's threats in a realistic manner.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                                Vard must read our threads!! For self defence the minimum is main armament 40/57/76mm with a radar and FCS auto. Two x 30mm bushmaster, and 4x 12.7mm. The 30mm mount should be augmented with the UK Martlet missile system , all controlled by auto FCS. Like all good FCS's we too , in planning , must be predictive in our efforts to deal with today's threats in a realistic manner.
                                If they are; please could we have the more common LCVP-1604 rather than a 15m non-standard landing craft and replace one of the Chess Dynamics Sea Eagle EOSS with the same company's Sea Eagle FCRO to give all weather FC capability.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X