Thanks Thanks:  774
Likes Likes:  1,635
Dislikes Dislikes:  42
Page 95 of 101 FirstFirst ... 45859394959697 ... LastLast
Results 2,351 to 2,375 of 2523
  1. #2351
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    The point was made but so was mine based on past history. The last couple of decades of the operational life of P31 was to see her Helicopter designation deleted and the remaining Dauphins gracing the Chilean Navy. Shortly after completion of live helicopter trials, when CO was on leave ,a truck arrived from the Don to remove ships starting trolley and certain other tools. Fortunately the CO had popped in and after discussion the truck departed empty handed. Ships need to be run by sailors and all other interfaces and visits are either by invite or for operational tasks. A ship is not a tank or a truck and is also home to it's crew for a year or so.
    Probably the best post you've made on the site, Can't disagree with a single word.

    I would go back to the point made around operations in the EEZ and would suggest that the size of the vessel would lead to greater self sufficiency and should be able to provide a sustained presence off shore for greater periods of time, the only weak link being the crewing arrangements, so you do need a bigger pool of people to operate a larger vessel, you especially need a greater number of specialized roles and this it would seem where we always run into trouble.
    Time for another break I think......

  2. Likes DeV liked this post
  3. #2352
    Lieutenant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,487
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Probably the best post you've made on the site, Can't disagree with a single word.

    I would go back to the point made around operations in the EEZ and would suggest that the size of the vessel would lead to greater self sufficiency and should be able to provide a sustained presence off shore for greater periods of time, the only weak link being the crewing arrangements, so you do need a bigger pool of people to operate a larger vessel, you especially need a greater number of specialized roles and this it would seem where we always run into trouble.
    Indeed endurance hangs on sustainability and the ability of crew to keep things running, especially in bad weather. With the higher levels of education, and knowledge of technical media being endemic in the young age groups, it is possible to train operators of specific equipment to maintain them and at least change parts that are broken. It is necessary to have higher quotas for electrical/electronic/engineering/armourer type ratings/officers. Ideally a singleton RRM on board should have a juniour understudy to provide maximum cover. An MRV with 3 deployable craft will need to be able to crew all three at the same time, with reliefs- possibly nine crew away with a relief contingent at the 4 hour mark. I would pitch her crew around the 70 + mark.

  4. #2353
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,706
    Post Thanks / Like
    It is necessary to have higher quotas for electrical/electronic/engineering/armourer type ratings/officers.
    I think we need to move away from our traditional style of deploying people around divisions and look at something along the UK RN style were branches are more holistic in their approach, where WEMS are function around of weapons systems and their supports and where boarding parties and boats crew are not drawn from a single division
    Time for another break I think......

  5. #2354
    The Auld Fella A/TEL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    466
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    I think we need to move away from our traditional style of deploying people around divisions and look at something along the UK RN style were branches are more holistic in their approach, where WEMS are function around of weapons systems and their supports and where boarding parties and boats crew are not drawn from a single division

    Boarding parties are drawn from all divisions onboard.

    Every NCO is trained in both Fishery and Naval Boarding.

    Eithne with her slightly larger crew has a bigger selection of Boarding Officers/NCOs.

    As it stands, all ships company are multi-role, beside their own job/division onboard they are trained in DCFF, boat launching, line handling, and all core ship or seamanship skills.

    There is scope in the engineering dept alright for what you suggest above.

  6. Thanks Turkey, hptmurphy thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  7. #2355
    Lieutenant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,487
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by A/TEL View Post
    Boarding parties are drawn from all divisions onboard.

    Every NCO is trained in both Fishery and Naval Boarding.

    Eithne with her slightly larger crew has a bigger selection of Boarding Officers/NCOs.

    As it stands, all ships company are multi-role, beside their own job/division onboard they are trained in DCFF, boat launching, line handling, and all core ship or seamanship skills.

    There is scope in the engineering dept alright for what you suggest above.
    I agree , and the same with CRAA weapons. Key is to have the crew big enough to meet a 48 hour stand to, in emergency ,with all capabilities front loaded.

  8. #2356
    Sergeant Major EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    848
    Post Thanks / Like
    Just noticed that VARD (people behind the P50 & P60 design) have a new multi-role vessel.

    https://vardmarine.com/gallery/vard-7-313/
    https://vardmarine.com/wp-content/up...VARD-7-313.pdf

    Could this be a sign of things to come?
    Helicopter type, camo and roundel might be a clue for some!
    Last edited by EUFighter; 10th May 2019 at 22:31.

  9. Thanks Sarsfield, DeV, Anzac, The Usual Suspect thanked for this post
    Likes Herald, Rhodes, DeV, hptmurphy liked this post
  10. #2357
    The Auld Fella A/TEL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    466
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    Just noticed that VARD (people behind the P50 & P60 design) have a new multi-role vessel.

    https://vardmarine.com/gallery/vard-7-313/
    https://vardmarine.com/wp-content/up...VARD-7-313.pdf

    Could this be a sign of things to come?
    Helicopter type, camo and roundel might be a clue for some!

    Interesting!!. Ticks most boxes for the EPV requirement bar the 76mm which is the stnadard main armament now.

  11. Likes Sarsfield, DeV liked this post
  12. #2358
    Rittmeister Herald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    866
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    Just noticed that VARD (people behind the P50 & P60 design) have a new multi-role vessel.

    https://vardmarine.com/gallery/vard-7-313/
    https://vardmarine.com/wp-content/up...VARD-7-313.pdf

    Could this be a sign of things to come?
    Helicopter type, camo and roundel might be a clue for some!
    Great find! I see Breadth is 24m.

    I'd say Weapons fit is up to customer really.

    4 helis, with hanger-age for two, you could nearly take the whole Air corps and dump them in Lebannon ............or syria.
    Last edited by Herald; 11th May 2019 at 00:25.

  13. Likes EUFighter liked this post
  14. #2359
    Private 3*
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Derry
    Posts
    64
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hangar for 4 , flight deck for 2 , all our AW 139 Wolfhounds! Ah if only we had bought ones with auto folding blades. NB, remember Eithne's hangar was wide enough for Dauphins to not need to fold their rotors.
    Sarsfield

  15. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Dislikes hptmurphy disliked this post
  16. #2360
    Captain
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,512
    Post Thanks / Like
    It's certainly interesting but the breadth would be an issue unless she's going to be supported elsewhere, otherwise it would seem to tick all the boxes.

  17. #2361
    C/S
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    529
    Post Thanks / Like
    Funny if you look at the pdf file and expand the Heli on the landing pad it really looks like a tricolour on the door (Celtic boss).

  18. #2362
    Captain
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,512
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ias View Post
    Funny if you look at the pdf file and expand the Heli on the landing pad it really looks like a tricolour on the door (Celtic boss).
    Vard trying to get in early? Though they might be overdoing with what looks like an MBT on the stern ramp.
    Last edited by Sparky42; 11th May 2019 at 02:16.

  19. #2363
    Sergeant Major EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    848
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    Vard trying to get in early? Though they might be overdoing with what looks like an MBT on the stern ramp.
    I would say it is a Stridsvagn 122 that has come for a visit from Sweden!

  20. #2364
    Sergeant Major EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    848
    Post Thanks / Like
    Looking at the VARD specification they match pretty much those of HMS Canterbury with the biggest exception being an LCVP rather than a LCM. But this is just a info brochure and the final product usually has some changes.

  21. Thanks The Usual Suspect thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  22. #2365
    Chief Casey Ryback
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,128
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sarsfield View Post
    Hangar for 4 , flight deck for 2 , all our AW 139 Wolfhounds! Ah if only we had bought ones with auto folding blades. NB, remember Eithne's hangar was wide enough for Dauphins to not need to fold their rotors.
    You must be talking about the little model sized Dauphin .
    Don't spit in my Bouillabaisse .

  23. Likes na grohmiti, hptmurphy liked this post
  24. #2366
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    22,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ias View Post
    Funny if you look at the pdf file and expand the Heli on the landing pad it really looks like a tricolour on the door (Celtic boss).
    Those are definitely AC roundels and the helis look like AW139s

  25. #2367
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    22,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    Just noticed that VARD (people behind the P50 & P60 design) have a new multi-role vessel.

    https://vardmarine.com/gallery/vard-7-313/
    https://vardmarine.com/wp-content/up...VARD-7-313.pdf

    Could this be a sign of things to come?
    Helicopter type, camo and roundel might be a clue for some!
    Brilliant find

    If you look at the specs compared to the EPV (2007)
    Beam is 4m wider
    Draft is 0.4m deeper
    Max speed is 2kts slower

    Not saying that the EPV tender will be used but it’s a guide

    Other than that, and no 76mm it would appear to be exactly what the NS wants

  26. #2368
    Lieutenant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,487
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Brilliant find

    If you look at the specs compared to the EPV (2007)
    Beam is 4m wider
    Draft is 0.4m deeper
    Max speed is 2kts slower

    Not saying that the EPV tender will be used but it’s a guide

    Other than that, and no 76mm it would appear to be exactly what the NS wants
    .

    It seems to be designed around our blogged descriptions of EPV operational tasks. I don't normally look at "Gift" horses in the mouth but unfortunately this vessel could never be drydocked in our backyard. The extra beam is probably related to deploying landing craft by ship side davit arrangements. If the Navy Drydock was operational it would be ideal. It would also need an adequate defence scheme and in this case additionally, as do all our ships , a beefed up cyber security system. There were more than 50 marine based hacks in the Norwegian sector in the past year .

  27. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  28. #2369
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,909
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Brilliant find

    If you look at the specs compared to the EPV (2007)
    Beam is 4m wider
    Draft is 0.4m deeper
    Max speed is 2kts slower

    Not saying that the EPV tender will be used but it’s a guide

    Other than that, and no 76mm it would appear to be exactly what the NS wants
    The EPV never went to tender, as far as I can remember, It went as far as RFP stage, with certain specifications, but never proceeded further.
    Luckily, since then, numerous states are seeking vessels with similar capability.

    A lot to like about the VARD design. 70 tonne ramps are industry standard for most ferries. 20T (at 20m) deck crane is excellent, and is well located. If the spec is correct, you could lift the majority of TEUs from quayside to deck. Do do the same with a Mobile crane ashore would require a 130 Tonne model, minimum. Not always easily available, and there are none in the DF inventory.
    The image also seems to suggest container stowage on top of the hangar. Better still.

    2 bow thrusters, and the mention of schottel drives seem to suggest the vessel would be DP2. 470 Lane metres is excellent. Thats 58 Mowag Piranhas, comfortably, before you put anything on the helideck. Relatively manageable crew size. Less than Eithne's compliment when she was new. Plenty of space for extra bods during the inevitable overseas resupply trips, that the NS used to enjoy.
    The Design of landing craft is interesting. Much more workboat like than most landing craft in use. Very large wheelhouse for the type. I like the use of 11m enclosed Rhibs also. Looks more like the daughter craft used in the offshore industry. Greatly expands your over the horizon capability.
    I'm not too bothered with the indication of a 25mm main gun. It seems to be trending that way, internationally. Don't forget the RN are using unarmed tankers and research ships to combat drug smugglers in the carribean and elsewhere. If some in the NS had their way, the P60s would all have been fitted with Bofors L70s.
    I also wouldn't be too concerned with the beam. True it may not fit within the basin, but the oil wharf would be fine for most times ashore. The NS has been availing of nearby civilian berthage a lot lately, and most of the quayside in the Former dockyard is no longer in regular use. I also understand there are other plans...
    By the time this hits the water, many things may have changed.

    The AW139 with tricolour roundel on deck though....
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  29. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  30. #2370
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    22,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    .

    It seems to be designed around our blogged descriptions of EPV operational tasks. I don't normally look at "Gift" horses in the mouth but unfortunately this vessel could never be drydocked in our backyard. The extra beam is probably related to deploying landing craft by ship side davit arrangements. If the Navy Drydock was operational it would be ideal. It would also need an adequate defence scheme and in this case additionally, as do all our ships , a beefed up cyber security system. There were more than 50 marine based hacks in the Norwegian sector in the past year .
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    The EPV never went to tender, as far as I can remember, It went as far as RFP stage, with certain specifications, but never proceeded further.
    Luckily, since then, numerous states are seeking vessels with similar capability.

    A lot to like about the VARD design. 70 tonne ramps are industry standard for most ferries. 20T (at 20m) deck crane is excellent, and is well located. If the spec is correct, you could lift the majority of TEUs from quayside to deck. Do do the same with a Mobile crane ashore would require a 130 Tonne model, minimum. Not always easily available, and there are none in the DF inventory.
    The image also seems to suggest container stowage on top of the hangar. Better still.

    2 bow thrusters, and the mention of schottel drives seem to suggest the vessel would be DP2. 470 Lane metres is excellent. Thats 58 Mowag Piranhas, comfortably, before you put anything on the helideck. Relatively manageable crew size. Less than Eithne's compliment when she was new. Plenty of space for extra bods during the inevitable overseas resupply trips, that the NS used to enjoy.
    The Design of landing craft is interesting. Much more workboat like than most landing craft in use. Very large wheelhouse for the type. I like the use of 11m enclosed Rhibs also. Looks more like the daughter craft used in the offshore industry. Greatly expands your over the horizon capability.
    I'm not too bothered with the indication of a 25mm main gun. It seems to be trending that way, internationally. Don't forget the RN are using unarmed tankers and research ships to combat drug smugglers in the carribean and elsewhere. If some in the NS had their way, the P60s would all have been fitted with Bofors L70s.
    I also wouldn't be too concerned with the beam. True it may not fit within the basin, but the oil wharf would be fine for most times ashore. The NS has been availing of nearby civilian berthage a lot lately, and most of the quayside in the Former dockyard is no longer in regular use. I also understand there are other plans...
    By the time this hits the water, many things may have changed.

    The AW139 with tricolour roundel on deck though....
    I wouldn’t be at all surprised if this was designed specifically for the NS, possibly at NS request

    Your right it was a RFP but they (NS and DoD) obviously picked those specs for a reason.
    Last edited by DeV; 11th May 2019 at 09:16.

  31. #2371
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    22,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Vard/STX were involved with both the P50 and P60 design

    https://vardmarine.com/wp-content/up...VARD-7-080.pdf
    Note helipad on P50 design

    https://vardmarine.com/wp-content/up...VARD-7-090.pdf

  32. #2372
    CQMS The Usual Suspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    129
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    Just noticed that VARD (people behind the P50 & P60 design) have a new multi-role vessel.

    https://vardmarine.com/gallery/vard-7-313/
    https://vardmarine.com/wp-content/up...VARD-7-313.pdf

    Could this be a sign of things to come?
    Helicopter type, camo and roundel might be a clue for some!


    Sweet!

    Implication that the wheels are turning. Sure Vard would like to maintain involvement in NS acquisition programmes, and vice versa, understand the relationship is considered on all sides to have been very mutually productive one.

    Folding rotor blade retro-fit for AW139s is concievable. Practical insight could be gained from the Swedes who have operated an army/navy light utility squadron of AW109s for several years. Unnavalised 'green' helicopters generally do quite badly in a naval environment, not least because of the pervasive effects of salt water/air.

    If I'm correct on the volumes, the stores and equipment for an EU ISTAR component could be loaded aboard, although the flight facilities would be overrun.

    I can't speak to the weight/displacement implications of such a heavy loading.

    76mm would appear to be a minimum requirement.

    * Swedish AW109s have deployed expeditionally aboard HMDS Absalon on East Africa anti-piracy missions.
    Last edited by The Usual Suspect; 13th May 2019 at 21:03.
    Diplomacy is a continuation of war by other means - Zhou Enlai

  33. #2373
    Lieutenant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,487
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by The Usual Suspect View Post


    Sweet!

    Implication that the wheels are turning. Sure Vard would like to maintain involvement in NS acquisition programmes, and vice versa, understand the relationship is considered on all sides to have been very mutually productive one.

    Folding rotor blade retro-fit for AW139s is concievable. Practical insight could be gained from the Swedes who have operated an army/navy light utility squadron of AW109s for several years. Unnavalised 'green' helicopters generally do quite badly in a naval environment, not least because of the pervasive effects of salt water/air.

    If I'm correct on the volumes, an EU ISTAR component with all it's equipment could be loaded aboard, although the flight facilities would be overrun.

    I can't speak to the weight/displacement implications of such a heavy loading.

    76mm would appear to be a minimum requirement.

    * Swedish AW109s have deployed expeditionally aboard HMDS Absalon on East Africa anti-piracy missions.
    If we are happy to proceed with the Vard-7-313 then we must solve certain operational and lifetime requirements such as on-going dry Docking plans for the ship. We must also solve Ro-Ro ramp types and method of loading such as the five height variables in loading i.e ship light, ship loaded, tide low, tide high, lastly actual height of quay wall. All these matters would have to be discussed with specialists in the loading and watertight integrity of logistic ships such as the McGregor Company. They would need to know the nature and footprint of all vehicles to be carried and whether you want more than one vehicle at a time on the ramp. It is a naval necessity that the ship can also defend itself and offer some support to deploying units.

  34. Likes sofa, ias liked this post
  35. #2374
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    22,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by The Usual Suspect View Post


    Sweet!

    Implication that the wheels are turning. Sure Vard would like to maintain involvement in NS acquisition programmes, and vice versa, understand the relationship is considered on all sides to have been very mutually productive one.

    Folding rotor blade retro-fit for AW139s is concievable. Practical insight could be gained from the Swedes who have operated an army/navy light utility squadron of AW109s for several years. Unnavalised 'green' helicopters generally do quite badly in a naval environment, not least because of the pervasive effects of salt water/air.

    If I'm correct on the volumes, the stores and equipment for an EU ISTAR component could be loaded aboard, although the flight facilities would be overrun.

    I can't speak to the weight/displacement implications of such a heavy loading.

    76mm would appear to be a minimum requirement.

    * Swedish AW109s have deployed expeditionally aboard HMDS Absalon on East Africa anti-piracy missions.
    She could carry most (not all) of the Irish contingent of the NBG, which afaik the German BG contingent was bigger than.

  36. #2375
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    22,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    If we are happy to proceed with the Vard-7-313 then we must solve certain operational and lifetime requirements such as on-going dry Docking plans for the ship. We must also solve Ro-Ro ramp types and method of loading such as the five height variables in loading i.e ship light, ship loaded, tide low, tide high, lastly actual height of quay wall. All these matters would have to be discussed with specialists in the loading and watertight integrity of logistic ships such as the McGregor Company. They would need to know the nature and footprint of all vehicles to be carried and whether you want more than one vehicle at a time on the ramp. It is a naval necessity that the ship can also defend itself and offer some support to deploying units.
    Ringaskiddy an option?

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, 22:01
  2. Naval Wishlist(realistic)
    By Goldie fish in forum Navy & Naval Reserve
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 10th April 2007, 22:54
  3. Naval Training Ship?
    By Goldie fish in forum Navy & Naval Reserve
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 4th February 2003, 00:19

Posting Permissions

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