P63- Third OPV

[na grohmiti]

Keel laying of P63 yesterday in Appledore Shipyard

Posted by Irish Naval Service on Thursday, 16 April 2015

Keel was laid in Appledore earlier this week. Now that the last bits of the, as the locals call it, "Aircraftless carrier" have left the shipyard, final assembly of the many modules of our third OPV can begin. Things will start happening fast now.
Hopefully they will have ironed out all the issues that have delayed James Joyce and snagged Beckett by then.

[Stinger]

Now that the yard is finished with the aircraft carrier whats it building next? Aside from P63 that is. Would this be a good time to enter negotiations for another new ship? The yard might appreciate the work?

[Sparky42]

Given contract laws, bidding rules etc, not too mention that it wouldn't be the same price as the other 3 I can't see it happening as a direct follow on to 63. I'd bet it would take years to get sign off from Government for the next hull.

[na grohmiti]

Now that the yard is finished with the aircraft carrier whats it building next? Aside from P63 that is. Would this be a good time to enter negotiations for another new ship? The yard might appreciate the work?

No.
Another OPV is not what we need. We need something larger as a direct replacement for Eithne (Perhaps 2). This shipyard is not equipped to build anything larger than the OPV90. Indeed it has struggled with some elements of this. It also built in the past HMS Echo and Enterprise, also 90m ships.
It has no more orders on the book because it lacks a drydock, and is at the mercy of local tides, particularly for large builds.

We need larger ships, to be built in a yard capable of completing them on time and on budget.

[DeV]

The navy would like 1 or 2 more capable vessels in the form of EPV (otherwise they wouldn't have tendered them out).

But they could still fulfil their current taskings if the remainder of the fleet were replaced with P60 class vessels as they fall due.

[na grohmiti]

The navy would like 1 or 2 more capable vessels in the form of EPV (otherwise they wouldn't have tendered them out).

But they could still fulfil their current taskings if the remainder of the fleet were replaced with P60 class vessels as they fall due.

Remainder of the fleet?
P63 is Replacement for P23..
P31 needs to be replaced with an EPV (or 2)
P41 and P42 could be replaced with whatever the White paper decides. Inshore work still needs to be done, the ETV absence is still an issue that , in the same way the Air Corps ended up providing an air ambo service carried out elsewhere by private enterprise, the NS could end up with a dual role vessel, akin to the Rolls Royce type as seen in Iceland in the vessel "Thor".
P51 would be due for replacement by 2029, at which point I would like to hope we were no longer stuck with an 8 ship fleet.

[DeV]

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, just saying there are options.

There isn't much of a difference is displacement or size between Eithne and the P60 class, in fact the later are longer, wider and have a swallower draught. The P60s are also faster. But Eithne displaces 10 tonnes more and has longer legs.

Eithne is due to be replaced in 2019, I'm just saying if we can't find the money for an EPV, another P60 could do the job.

Orla and Ciara are due to be replaced in 2023. Yes there is inshore work (requiring a shallow draught), but potentially you could replace them with either 1 or 2 P60s. This would mean nothing to do the inshore work but it would mean the whole NS could put to sea in most weather.

All I'm saying is that if Government are willing to provide the resources. Then the NS could be worse off than with:
2 x P50 class and 5 / 6 x P60 class

[na grohmiti]

True, just not as flexible. There are many places around our coast where the P50/P60 just cannot operate. Most of them are also large fishing/yachting ports.

[ropebag]

if you had a fleet of just one or two types, what impact would that have on the training/maintainence/logistics tail?

also, if all of your fleet was mid-Atlantic-in-March capable, whart impact would that have on overall effectiveness/coverage/sea-time etc... even if it meant that there was a reduction in your ability to do do inshore work?

[na grohmiti]

The type does not matter. Ships are all just different combinations of welded steel boxes. From a logs point of view, the only differences come with engines.
Eithne Has 2 Rustons
Aisling has 2 SEMT- Pielstick
The Peacocks have a combination of 2 Crossley SEMT- Pielstick and a different secondary drive that has its own issues
The P50s have 2 X Twin 16 cly V26 Wartsila each
The P60s have 2 x Wärtsilä diesel engines and Power Take in.

Sensor fit across the fleet is similar. Comms fit are identical.
The type of maint carried out on ships is different to that of other vehicles. Everywhere you go, you bring with you almost a full set of engineering spares. Many parts are built specifically for your ship, and replacements likewise will be made to spec. Consider it more like maintaining and operating a building of some type.
When it comes down to it, even ships of the same type are different. Lead any crew member on to Roisin or Niamh, and they will be able to tell you which one they are on. Deirdre was very different to the later P20s. Emer was similar, but not identical in major ways to Aoife and Aisling. Aoife and Aisling were almost identical. Almost.
Joyce has already been built differently to Beckett.
Seamanship is seamanship. The differences between ships can be covered in a week or less of on the job familiarisation. Its like using a chainsaw. Learning to use a chainsaw safely is the hard part. The easy part is going from using a Husqvarna to using a Stihl.
Likewise your technicians will have trained on the system, not the make. A diesel is a diesel, a motor is a motor. A radar is a radar. The skill is being able to read the plate and know which bit connects to what and how to get it working when it stops.

There is not much point in the entire fleet being mid atlantic in march capable when all the vessels of interest are tied up in a port you have no way to get into because of weather and dimensions.

[ancientmariner]

where do we go from here post P63? We seemed to have settled on 85/ 90m classes to deal with Winter North Atlantic and other commom long range missions like circumnavigation of South America and Eastwards through the Panama Canal. The Peacocks were a surprise addition in the the 1980's from our generous neighbours and were ships looking for a security role.
Most of our harbors are mud-piles other than Dublin, Cork, most other harbors are either estuaries or exclusive to somebody else. Galway is a lock port and used minimally. Investigations at Fishery type ports is usually done by anchor off, and send a ship's boat in for inquiries, so in reality we can still function at 85/90m by 4.4 meter draft. Losing the Peacocks wont require similar replacements but the loss needs to be filled not least for it's effects on Establishments and Trades in the Navy.
I would look to acquiring a surplus package from our neighbor quickly, and then building a new fully equipped Fremm type vessel on long term lease.
The RN's three OPV's are being replaced with South Atlantic / Merlin capable ships and might be available for 39m GBP or much less for all three. Don't build in restricted yards where tide heights are a factor and don't build ships with promenade decks and open foredecks.

[na grohmiti]

I'm with you on the Open foredeck. The danes have had the foredeck enclosed (and heated) for many years. It seems an obvious step.
My concern for larger ships is their effectiveness during the salmon season. Is it good use of an asset to have a 90m ship with a crew of 50 at anchor in Kenmare Bay while one of it's ribs carries out boardings on Half deckers and lobster boats?
What do you think of the Icelandic Vessel "Thor" as a direct replacement for the peacocks? It gifts us a 120T bollard pull too.

[Jetjock]

My concern for larger ships is their effectiveness during the salmon season. Is it good use of an asset to have a 90m ship with a crew of 50 at anchor in Kenmare Bay while one of it's ribs carries out boardings on Half deckers and lobster boats?

Surely something like the two Customs cutters that seem to permanently decorate Castlepark Marina in Kinsale are much more suitable for that task than a 76mm toting armour plated gun boat/ship. Actually there really is a certain absurdity in their use for such a role.

[na grohmiti]

The Revenue Commissioners have no fisheries protection role or powers. That said, the particular vessels would be ideal for inshore patrolling, but limited for any other work. You want something at least as big as the average trawler.

[hptmurphy]

This would mean nothing to do the inshore work

Surely something like the two Customs cutters that seem to permanently decorate Castlepark Marina in Kinsale are much more suitable

Certainly, they should become NS assets

76mm toting armour plated gun boat/ship. Actually there really is a certain absurdity in their use for such a role.

Has to be remember why and how we ended up with the Peacocks, they were replacement for the sweepers, they were a bargain , we had nil naval spending at the time and they were the best thing available.

I would look to acquiring a surplus package from our neighbor quickly,

They have nothing suitable in the role, and buying second hand again is a major backward step.

The RN's three OPV's are being replaced with South Atlantic / Merlin capable ships and might be available for 39m GBP or much less for all three

Doesn't mean they won't hang onto them for more local work given their run down on Frigates, Buying anything second hand from the RN is not a good option.

Don't build in restricted yards where tide heights are a factor and don't build ships with promenade decks and open foredecks.

I don't see what difference the location they are built in makes, but if you build what you want as opposed to buying second hand you have the choices mentioned.