Originally posted by na grohmiti
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
EPV for naval service
Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
-
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.
- Likes 2
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.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by na grohmiti View PostFrom 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.
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.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by na grohmiti View PostI 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.
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.
- Likes 2
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, 14:00.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by na grohmiti View PostI 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..
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tempest View PostWell considering it's pretty much Eithne's replacement I'm sure the bean counters will be arguing for Eithne's 57mm to be transferred.
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.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparky42 View PostSo... 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?
- Likes 5
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostVard 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.
- Likes 4
Comment
Comment