Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Irish Naval Mediterranean EU rescue patrols

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
    The 2019 rumour mill is starting on Social media and is suggesting that the mandarins in the CS are not in favour of continuing with Op. Sophia Mediterranean deployment for the current year. There needs to be an Irish presence in overseas naval tasks in support of Europe and the Union. We can hardly canvas for a seat on the UN Security Council and yet NOT contribute to security problems on the Union's own borders.
    If they are funking it because of hot incident potential , then upgrade by adding on decoy system and a CIWS unit or 30mm with FCS.
    It is not a popular mission with the great unwashed, who do not understand the purpose of this new mission. It is not a headline grabber in the same way the previous lifesaving mission was.
    It is ironic that the very same critics who thought rescuing migrants from the med was a waste of resources are the same ones criticising the current mission involvement for not rescuing enough migrants.
    For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

    Comment


    • I'm sure there would be the argument that the numbers had fallen since the peak, though they seem to be building across the straits of Gibraltar now, I'd also bet there would be PR about easing the strain on the NS as well. But given the likely support we are going to need from the 27 with Brexit going Car Crash it's a bad time in terms of optics to be seen withdrawing support for such a program I would have thought.

      Comment


      • Could be due to the inability to man the fleet

        Comment


        • Withdrawing from operations that raise the profile away from glorified fishery bailiffs will do nothing to encourage recruitment.
          For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
            Withdrawing from operations that raise the profile away from glorified fishery bailiffs will do nothing to encourage recruitment.
            But might ease retention issues by avoiding "long deployments" right now?

            Comment


            • People join the NS to go to sea. The only problem with long deployments from the crew point of view was the pay did not match the personal sarcrifices the crews were making. Had they been deployed on any other overseas mission, they would have been paid for the difficulties caused by long periods away from home and family.
              Doing away with the hope of long deployments, in my opinion would be even more detrimental to morale.
              It would also make the case for the EPV/MRV more difficult to justify.
              For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                People join the NS to go to sea. The only problem with long deployments from the crew point of view was the pay did not match the personal sarcrifices the crews were making. Had they been deployed on any other overseas mission, they would have been paid for the difficulties caused by long periods away from home and family.
                Doing away with the hope of long deployments, in my opinion would be even more detrimental to morale.
                It would also make the case for the EPV/MRV more difficult to justify.
                Resolve deployment Payments issues. Ensure family support with a full time office for issues that arise. Adjust pay to ensure that the state subsidises food and accommodation in shore billets, with NO charges while at sea. Navy recruitment to run continuously to reach viable Strength Numbers. Increase strengths for certain technical grades in engineering and electronics to allow normal Sea/Shore ratios. An MRV could give support for African deployments assuming it may be beefed up by special Irish Units, or if more than one ship was deployed to a mission. Running a 9 ship Navy with supports, with a 1000 personnel is short about 300 all ranks. We should not run spare ships policy or we will rot away.

                Comment


                • The pay and conditions/lifestyle isn’t attractive to recruit or perhaps more importantly retain personnel

                  It is a bit chicken & egg to be honest when you take pay & allowances out of the equation.... you can’t maintain the operational tempo because there isn’t sufficient strength, you aren’t able to retain the strength you do have due to the operational tempo, if you decrease the operational tempo you could find personnel having to live aboard ship along side (unless things have changed) affecting morale & retention, you can’t do the 2 years ashore due to the low strength & operational tempo

                  And in just over 2 months a no deal Brexit could result in a need to increase the operational tempo

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                    The pay and conditions/lifestyle isn’t attractive to recruit or perhaps more importantly retain personnel

                    It is a bit chicken & egg to be honest when you take pay & allowances out of the equation.... you can’t maintain the operational tempo because there isn’t sufficient strength, you aren’t able to retain the strength you do have due to the operational tempo, if you decrease the operational tempo you could find personnel having to live aboard ship along side (unless things have changed) affecting morale & retention, you can’t do the 2 years ashore due to the low strength & operational tempo

                    And in just over 2 months a no deal Brexit could result in a need to increase the operational tempo
                    Agree that negative inputs from financial measures are causing problems, especially recruitment control which often causes, I believe, deliberate strength drain down. Once assigned to an operational ship, every officer, NCO, and Rating lives on board, and in the case of Single personnel, it's their home for the period of posting. There is a psychological boost when posted ashore and Department of Defence must ensure that strengths meet that posting cycle.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                      Agree that negative inputs from financial measures are causing problems, especially recruitment control which often causes, I believe, deliberate strength drain down. Once assigned to an operational ship, every officer, NCO, and Rating lives on board, and in the case of Single personnel, it's their home for the period of posting. There is a psychological boost when posted ashore and Department of Defence must ensure that strengths meet that posting cycle.
                      Absolutely agree because the DF is unable to recruit or retain sufficient personnel... not all that being for financial reasons

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                        Absolutely agree because the DF is unable to recruit or retain sufficient personnel... not all that being for financial reasons
                        Naval trips abroad were always a plus factor among most crew. Occasionally domestic strains made it difficult for some crew members when separation became a problem. Recruits and recruiting is a Defence responsibility, however the numbers involved are not part of trained strength , so that in theory if you are at CS4 strength you should have recruits in training to cover statistical personnel losses. The damage is done by continually straining the use of trained personnel by lack of replacements. Training cadres also need to be as permanent as possible with all the skills necessary to guide recruits and approve the successful ones.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                          People join the NS to go to sea. The only problem with long deployments from the crew point of view was the pay did not match the personal sarcrifices the crews were making. Had they been deployed on any other overseas mission, they would have been paid for the difficulties caused by long periods away from home and family.
                          Doing away with the hope of long deployments, in my opinion would be even more detrimental to morale.
                          It would also make the case for the EPV/MRV more difficult to justify.
                          If the Overseas Mission which attracts overseas rate allowances is scrapped it will speed up the exodus of personnel from the service. Fisheries/Routine Irish Water patrolling ss a similar issue to the EU Battlegroups. No Mission, No Medal, No Money.

                          If personnel are going to be worked long hours away from home, they accept it IF they get paid the worth while allowance. If you don't pay the allowance for the same long hours, then people will just quit. End of.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by TangoSierra View Post
                            If the Overseas Mission which attracts overseas rate allowances is scrapped it will speed up the exodus of personnel from the service. Fisheries/Routine Irish Water patrolling ss a similar issue to the EU Battlegroups. No Mission, No Medal, No Money.

                            If personnel are going to be worked long hours away from home, they accept it IF they get paid the worth while allowance. If you don't pay the allowance for the same long hours, then people will just quit. End of.
                            Certain Overseas Missions are essential . The present humanitarian crises in the Mediterranean / North Africa-principally Libya/Tunisia is an indictment of EU policies towards migration. Paying Libya and training their personnel to contain migration must NOT include bombing their detention facilities or have them wandering around the oceans on charity rescue vessels. Now another 80 have drowned off Tunisa overnight. The only way to stop economic migration is to , over time, improve the domestic and commercial circumstances in their own countries and stop those in power plundering national assets and resources.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                              Certain Overseas Missions are essential . The present humanitarian crises in the Mediterranean / North Africa-principally Libya/Tunisia is an indictment of EU policies towards migration. Paying Libya and training their personnel to contain migration must NOT include bombing their detention facilities or have them wandering around the oceans on charity rescue vessels. Now another 80 have drowned off Tunisa overnight. The only way to stop economic migration is to , over time, improve the domestic and commercial circumstances in their own countries and stop those in power plundering national assets and resources.
                              And improve regional security

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                                And improve regional security
                                There is a request by the Humanitarian Agency that Naval ships should return to the Mediterranean to assist with returning rescued migrants, as they occur , to North Africa. They have also ask Libyans to release from detention more than 5000 migrants. response will be interesting!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X