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 DeV View Post
    Neither did yours

    I'm talking about a tactical exercise where troops were I think picked up in Galway and landed in Donegal I think it was
    Correct it was in the mid 1990s and was part of a battalion level exercise. Footage of it and other exercises invokvibg eithne and the army on YouTube .

    Comment


    • Originally posted by paul g View Post
      Correct it was in the mid 1990s and was part of a battalion level exercise. Footage of it and other exercises invokvibg eithne and the army on YouTube .
      A later ex involving Eithne:

      Comment


      • Originally posted by DeV View Post
        I think it was part of Bn level ex in Donegal
        It was posted on line a couple of years back, might have even featured in An Cosantoir. While I'm sure some lessons have been learned , the training has benefit .


        And I'm going to throw a huge spanner in the works....had the dauphin been deployed at the time on the ship landing troops would have been far less hazardous.......

        With the bigger Rhibs now in service everyone gets dropped by crane, back in the bad old days.. they went over the side on a jumping ladder and only the boat crew went down on the crane...all shits and giggles ..until someone giggles and shits!!!..and it happened..not to a soldier but to a garda who mistimed his descent and ended up to his neck in water..while still attached to the ladder!
        Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

        Comment


        • Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
          It was posted on line a couple of years back, might have even featured in An Cosantoir. While I'm sure some lessons have been learned , the training has benefit .


          And I'm going to throw a huge spanner in the works....had the dauphin been deployed at the time on the ship landing troops would have been far less hazardous.......

          With the bigger Rhibs now in service everyone gets dropped by crane, back in the bad old days.. they went over the side on a jumping ladder and only the boat crew went down on the crane...all shits and giggles ..until someone giggles and shits!!!..and it happened..not to a soldier but to a garda who mistimed his descent and ended up to his neck in water..while still attached to the ladder!
          That's the one

          From what I remember they sent divers in to check the quay and came along side rather than land everyone by RHIBs.

          Dauphin onboard when most of the troops were on the helideck and in the hanger?

          Comment


          • As an aside, anyone think that whatever Babcock might end up with as their "Arrowhead" 120m Light Frigate might be in the running for the EPV? I mean have we ever sent hardware to DSEI before, or is it just given our relationship with the company we provided when they asked?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
              As an aside, anyone think that whatever Babcock might end up with as their "Arrowhead" 120m Light Frigate might be in the running for the EPV? I mean have we ever sent hardware to DSEI before, or is it just given our relationship with the company we provided when they asked?
              looking at this and previous thread comments on troop landings by Rhibs or helicopters. Other than preliminary covert landings forget about RHIBs. Unless you are using a spacious MRV, capable of an air insertion of platoon sized units, per aircraft, using a number of large helos, then you lose out on overwhelming force. Our best bet is a ship with at least two LCP's, rig lowered,and backed up by a large helo for early disruptive landings with support fire from own ship and attending escorts, say two, giving 3x 76mm plus a large number of 20mm and HMG's.Putting the ship alongside is a write off prospect in opposed landings, as in addition to being hit, it is over layered with tidal considerations eg in on highwater and stranded at low water in a minus six hour window.
              Last edited by ancientmariner; 2 September 2017, 11:12.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                looking at this and previous thread comments on troop landings by Rhibs or helicopters. Other than preliminary covert landings forget about RHIBs. Unless you are using a spacious MRV, capable of an air insertion of platoon sized units, per aircraft, using a number of large helos, then you lose out on overwhelming force. Our best bet is a ship with at least two LCP's, rig lowered,and backed up by a large helo for early disruptive landings with support fire from own ship and attending escorts, say two, giving 3x 76mm plus a large number of 20mm and HMG's.Putting the ship alongside is a write off prospect in opposed landings, as in addition to being hit, it is over layered with tidal considerations eg in on highwater and stranded at low water in a minus six hour window.
                Pln sized helo is also a Pln sized target

                If we are talking ability to troops ashore they need heavy equipment (e.g. MOWAGs), that means LCUs, that means a well dock, that means a much bigger ship, and it is unaffordable and a very big target

                Comment


                • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                  Pln sized helo is also a Pln sized target

                  If we are talking ability to troops ashore they need heavy equipment (e.g. MOWAGs), that means LCUs, that means a well dock, that means a much bigger ship, and it is unaffordable and a very big target
                  The scenario dictates , as does the size of ships in your Navy. The more recent vessels have opted for lowered LCP's and also have a couple of Helicopters. One of my offspring was BSM with 16th ASB in Afghanistan and had no operational restriction in insertions/ reliefs by Helicopter. We are not talking invasion but landing troops on tasks dictated by security requirements here or overseas. If vehicles are required they would have to be landed, in our case in port, or to a beach by larger navies. If costs are to be a continuous reason to prevent the Defence Forces from becoming a modern maneuverable body then it will slowly wither away to ACP and GOH.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                    Pln sized helo is also a Pln sized target

                    If we are talking ability to troops ashore they need heavy equipment (e.g. MOWAGs), that means LCUs, that means a well dock, that means a much bigger ship, and it is unaffordable and a very big target
                    It also surely means having escorts for such high value ship that have full capability to defend themselves I would think? I mean I don't know what the RNZN plans are in such a situation for Canterbury, but I would assume one of their Frigates would be assigned with her for such potentially hostile operations?

                    Comment


                    • So much talk about a proposed ship that hasn't being even tendered yet. It's confirmation when it comes is bound to disappoint.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
                        It also surely means having escorts for such high value ship that have full capability to defend themselves I would think? I mean I don't know what the RNZN plans are in such a situation for Canterbury, but I would assume one of their Frigates would be assigned with her for such potentially hostile operations?
                        Distinguishing the scenarios is correct.

                        Canterbury’s most common role is HADR/SASO and strategic sealift into already stabilised environments such as secured ports or landing points. From what I have read they are the primary roles in which the Irish Defence Force is seeking. Essentially these are benign independent operations that demonstrate a nations soft power and responsible international citizenship - and of course great PR for domestic virtue signalling.

                        Conops for opposed combat operations that involve insertion of troops and material are an entirely different matter. Again with respect to Canterbury or similar vessel like what Ireland is considering, a frigate with all its AD/ASW/EW/ASuW capabilities would be present plus all the other coalition taskforce assets.

                        As one is always operating in a multi-national taskforce environment in those situations the reality is for a small force like NZ or Ireland ones own national component is subordinate to a theatre commander from a larger force. East Timor and INTERFET provide an example – everyone including elements from PACCOM came under the ADF commander MajGen Cosgrove’s UNSC mandate. He effectively decided and had the responsibility for - who went in, what went in, when it went in, how it went in and why it went into the ET theatre. How much influence you have on that all depends on what you offer – symbolic political gestures or passengers need not apply. As MajGen Dunne the INTERFET Deputy Commander said in those situations “You are either with the swimmers or non swimmers.”

                        Without a Frigate the Canterbury would be a non swimmer. No theatre commander would allow it anywhere near the action in any case without one or two. Even with a Frigate it will not be a week one tasking - thats flat-top assault ship stuff. Besides in the Irish context a theatre commanders first cab off the rank choice would be your specials - who would mostly likely have already shown up before it all kicks off anyway - as that is the way the specials roll.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by ibenji View Post
                          So much talk about a proposed ship that hasn't being even tendered yet. It's confirmation when it comes is bound to disappoint.
                          Once dimensional , speed , and on board power aspects are decided then what it is to do in general support terms and in what kind of theaters, will dictate all matters including the descriptive name of the ship type e.g. MRV or EPV. Ships are adaptable to a degree when we look at the unplanned roles of all our Naval vessels such as Mediterranean , re-supply, and worldwide show the flag, supporting national interests. Correctly built they are environmentally compatible with a large range of capabilities. They are in fact what we make them to be but of course must be funded realistically to last over 30 years plus, which is much longer than our neighbours.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                            They are in fact what we make them to be but of course must be funded realistically to last over 30 years plus, which is much longer than our neighbours.
                            The RN 42's lasted over 30 years, the 23's are going to have to sail 30 plus years, some of the T class will hit 30 years the only reason why the River Batch 1's are going early is budgets and questionable procurement but they are still going to sail for that period with who ever ends up buying them. How many navies regularly retire ships below 25 years even the RN Castle class hit 26 years before replacement?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
                              The RN 42's lasted over 30 years, the 23's are going to have to sail 30 plus years, some of the T class will hit 30 years the only reason why the River Batch 1's are going early is budgets and questionable procurement but they are still going to sail for that period with who ever ends up buying them. How many navies regularly retire ships below 25 years even the RN Castle class hit 26 years before replacement?
                              P31 will go to 34 years, P21 lasted over 30 years and is still active with the Nigerian navy, as is p22 with our colleagues in the AFM. I agree that some existing tonnage may be retained by the RN to lessen gaps but count up the vessel types since Suez which reveals disposals, short lives, and unsuitability factors.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                                P31 will go to 34 years, P21 lasted over 30 years and is still active with the Nigerian navy, as is p22 with our colleagues in the AFM. I agree that some existing tonnage may be retained by the RN to lessen gaps but count up the vessel types since Suez which reveals disposals, short lives, and unsuitability factors.
                                And how many of them went on to serve in other navies (if you are going to use P21/P22 as indicators)? The County class served on average 30 plus years of combined RN/other nation service, the 21's still have 5 out of 8 in service, the Leanders saw long and varied service. You seem to be ignoring that UK budget issues/doctrine changes that drove many of those decisions, along with designs that were meant for areas that the RN no longer operated in, or hulls that were compromised by dated designs (the Light Carriers, or the Eagle class)

                                The French still have 30 year old ships in service, I think the USN plans for the Burkes to last 30 plus years as are the Ticonderoga class, the USCG and others have the Hamilton class still in service what 40+ years?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X