Thanks Thanks:  814
Likes Likes:  1,661
Dislikes Dislikes:  43
Page 102 of 104 FirstFirst ... 25292100101102103104 LastLast
Results 2,526 to 2,550 of 2581
  1. #2526
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,056
    Post Thanks / Like
    A downsized member of the Elida family could fit a multitude of future roles.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  2. Likes Graylion liked this post
  3. #2527
    Captain
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,557
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    A downsized member of the Elida family could fit a multitude of future roles.
    Given what the baseline is set up to do, how much capability would have to be reduced for downsizing?

  4. #2528
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    466
    Post Thanks / Like
    Well, Vard have a smaller ship with similar capability

    Attachment 8697

    https://vardmarine.com/gallery/vard-7-510/

    It's an LST - but just do not order the bow ramp

  5. Dislikes na grohmiti disliked this post
  6. #2529
    The Auld Fella A/TEL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    477
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    Well, Vard have a smaller ship with similar capability

    Attachment 8697

    https://vardmarine.com/gallery/vard-7-510/

    It's an LST - but just do not order the bow ramp

    100m is not what the RFT specified. 120-130m is what the NS has set out as its required length.

    To get true capability the longer the vessel the better.

  7. Thanks na grohmiti, DeV thanked for this post
  8. #2530
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,056
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    Well, Vard have a smaller ship with similar capability

    Attachment 8697

    https://vardmarine.com/gallery/vard-7-510/

    It's an LST - but just do not order the bow ramp
    If you were buying a bungalow, would you order a 2 story house and just tell them to not bother with the ground floor? If you buy a motorbike, do you buy a car and tell then not to bother with the 2 of the wheels.
    The bow ramp is a major feature of the design. To "not order" one, would involve a total redesign of the hull, tank test, stiffeners, keel etc.
    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. Likes Sparky42, Turkey liked this post
  10. #2531
    Captain
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,533
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    If you were buying a bungalow, would you order a 2 story house and just tell them to not bother with the ground floor? If you buy a motorbike, do you buy a car and tell then not to bother with the 2 of the wheels.
    The bow ramp is a major feature of the design. To "not order" one, would involve a total redesign of the hull, tank test, stiffeners, keel etc.
    There is also a stern ramp, however this ship would need a calm AOP , it has a designed draft of 3.8m, what would it be fully discharged ?

  11. Likes na grohmiti liked this post
  12. #2532
    Sergeant Major EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    863
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    Well, Vard have a smaller ship with similar capability

    Attachment 8697

    https://vardmarine.com/gallery/vard-7-510/

    It's an LST - but just do not order the bow ramp
    The design is more targeted towards the Polish need for a new LST rather than our MRV. But even as an LST there are a few points missing for beaching such as protection for the propellers and an aft anchor for de-beaching.

  13. #2533
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    466
    Post Thanks / Like
    I was thinking of the late use of the RN Sir class. They served as LSLs even though they originally were LSTs.

  14. #2534
    Captain
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,533
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    I was thinking of the late use of the RN Sir class. They served as LSLs even though they originally were LSTs.
    Sir Lancelot and Sir Tristram, plus three others, were of the Round Table Class and could carry 12 Challenger tanks but as you say were logistics capable and could carry many trucks, recce vehicles, and containers, and transport 420 troops. Dimensionally they would suit our available facilities on their 18.6 meter beam. Their successor The Bay Class are beyond our White paper proposals. I don't believe we should go into beach operations but stay within a multi role capability on a budget of Euro 130m +/-.

  15. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV, Graylion, Turkey liked this post
  16. #2535
    Hostage Flamingo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Over the water
    Posts
    3,819
    Post Thanks / Like
    I remember being on both of those in 92 (one out, the other back), and they carried out entire Field Ambulance (very vehicle-heavy, 60+ from memory) with lots of room to spare. The way back they also had lots of 432's being repatriated from Germany.
    Last edited by Flamingo; 23rd October 2019 at 21:15.
    'He died who loved to live,' they'll say,
    'Unselfishly so we might have today!'
    Like hell! He fought because he had to fight;
    He died that's all. It was his unlucky night.
    http://www.salamanderoasis.org/poems...nnis/luck.html

  17. Thanks sofa thanked for this post
  18. #2536
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,056
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    I was thinking of the late use of the RN Sir class. They served as LSLs even though they originally were LSTs.
    That isn't what we are looking for.
    Patrol first. Ass and Trash second.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  19. Thanks Graylion thanked for this post
    Likes Sparky42 liked this post
  20. #2537
    Captain
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,533
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Flamingo View Post
    I remember being on both of those in 92 (one out, the other back), and they carried out entire Field Ambulance (very vehicle-heavy, 60+ from memory) with lots of room to spare. The way back they also had lots of 432's being repatriated from Germany.
    These LSL's had quite a reputation for bad seakeeping qualities. They were constructed for beaching and had, a shallow draft of about 3.5 meters, and were flat bottomed to lift their planned deadweight. Beaching ships generally are designed to go from embarcation Point to Landing point and do their business. If they are generally tasked for Fleet use then continuous rolling is an additional hazard to their operations as a logistics and manpower transporter.

  21. Thanks Shaqra, na grohmiti, Flamingo thanked for this post
    Likes DeV, Flamingo liked this post
  22. #2538
    Hostage Flamingo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Over the water
    Posts
    3,819
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    These LSL's had quite a reputation for bad seakeeping qualities. They were constructed for beaching and had, a shallow draft of about 3.5 meters, and were flat bottomed to lift their planned deadweight. Beaching ships generally are designed to go from embarcation Point to Landing point and do their business. If they are generally tasked for Fleet use then continuous rolling is an additional hazard to their operations as a logistics and manpower transporter.
    I can vouch for them being bloody rough! On our return journey, we set off from Emnden into a rough sea (memory is force 6). After a very uncomfortable night, we awoke to find we were still hove to about six miles off Emnden!
    'He died who loved to live,' they'll say,
    'Unselfishly so we might have today!'
    Like hell! He fought because he had to fight;
    He died that's all. It was his unlucky night.
    http://www.salamanderoasis.org/poems...nnis/luck.html

  23. Thanks Graylion, Rocinante thanked for this post
  24. #2539
    Captain
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,533
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Flamingo View Post
    I can vouch for them being bloody rough! On our return journey, we set off from Emnden into a rough sea (memory is force 6). After a very uncomfortable night, we awoke to find we were still hove to about six miles off Emnden!
    I can well understand a bad night with no respite next day. We have been preoccupied for years to have ships that can function normally for boarding up to force 5/6, and other duties up Force 8/9, and going into a survivable mode in force 9 and above by heaving to , or running down wind in a decreasing 9 for shelter harbour. The CMS's were a particular problem and needed to be minded to maintain hull sacrificial planking. We must make sure that our future MRV can operate in WNA weather with some ease.

  25. Thanks na grohmiti, Turkey, Shaqra thanked for this post
    Likes na grohmiti, Flamingo liked this post
  26. #2540
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    466
    Post Thanks / Like

  27. Thanks EUFighter thanked for this post
  28. #2541
    Captain
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,533
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    It impresses as a vessel with a robust seakeeping configuration but would have to be a more all rounder, with some emphasis on HADR as well as fleet support and logistics, to meet our MRV aspirations.

  29. Likes Graylion liked this post
  30. #2542
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,056
    Post Thanks / Like
    Until the rest of the fleet is capable of taking stores via NATO RAS cranes, much of its functionality is redundant.
    A fine solid looking ship though. I am a big fan of enclosed fore deck spaces.
    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. #2543
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    22,141
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Until the rest of the fleet is capable of taking stores via NATO RAS cranes, much of its functionality is redundant.
    Cost and VFM wise I tend to agree but it doesn’t necessarily have to resupplying (Irish) NS vessels

    But we know what would happen in Newbridge plus the Dail (and now MEP) lefties

  32. Thanks Graylion thanked for this post
  33. #2544
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,056
    Post Thanks / Like
    Exactly, we could theoretically operate with a multi national force as a support ship, but outside of those operations, you need to practice this very complicated RAS operation regularly and for real, with suitably equipped receiver vessels. Hoping for a transit through Irish waters with a suitably equipped foreign naval vessel would not be a good use of asset.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  34. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  35. #2545
    Captain
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,533
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Exactly, we could theoretically operate with a multi national force as a support ship, but outside of those operations, you need to practice this very complicated RAS operation regularly and for real, with suitably equipped receiver vessels. Hoping for a transit through Irish waters with a suitably equipped foreign naval vessel would not be a good use of asset.
    There is no technical reason why all of our ships could not be adapted to RAS to a standard that could keep them on scene in a prolonged operation. We need to be able to transfer and receive stores , equipment, and liquids. The means can be complicated, but the operation is an everyday task for all Blue water Naval Forces.

  36. Thanks na grohmiti, Graylion thanked for this post
  37. #2546
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,056
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    There is no technical reason why all of our ships could not be adapted to RAS to a standard that could keep them on scene in a prolonged operation. We need to be able to transfer and receive stores , equipment, and liquids. The means can be complicated, but the operation is an everyday task for all Blue water Naval Forces.
    The location of the refueling area on the P60 class is actually ideal, just under the Port Sea Rider with only minor modifications to the funnel ducting area to permit RAS. Is a sliding padeye possible I wonder?
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  38. Thanks Graylion, DeV thanked for this post
  39. #2547
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    466
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    It impresses as a vessel with a robust seakeeping configuration but would have to be a more all rounder, with some emphasis on HADR as well as fleet support and logistics, to meet our MRV aspirations.
    I think this ship would be ideal for HADR. Containers with emergency supplies. Electric drive that one can reconfigure as on shore power supply. Accommodation for aid vehicles, helpers, evacuees. Build in a small hospital that can be extendied via containers on the vehicle deck. Had we had such a ship we could have sent it to Haiti after the hurricane for instance.

  40. Likes DeV liked this post
  41. #2548
    Captain
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,533
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    I think this ship would be ideal for HADR. Containers with emergency supplies. Electric drive that one can reconfigure as on shore power supply. Accommodation for aid vehicles, helpers, evacuees. Build in a small hospital that can be extendied via containers on the vehicle deck. Had we had such a ship we could have sent it to Haiti after the hurricane for instance.
    I would concur with your view, except we would be trying to squeeze our requirements into 125m X 21.3 m at around 10,000 tons DWT. The Cork Dockyard is limited to a width of 21.3 m.

  42. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  43. #2549
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,056
    Post Thanks / Like
    I don't think we should limit ships size based on the dimensions of a graving dock who's owners have no interest in maintaining it or the associated facilities.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  44. Likes sofa, EUFighter, Graylion liked this post
  45. #2550
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    466
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    I would concur with your view, except we would be trying to squeeze our requirements into 125m X 21.3 m at around 10,000 tons DWT. The Cork Dockyard is limited to a width of 21.3 m.
    Yes, the vessel would have limitations based on size. I still think that of everything we have kicked around here over the last several years it offers the best option. Or we bite the bullet and accept that drydocking happens abroad.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 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
  •