Originally posted by DeV
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
CPV Replacement
Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
-
The RAN currently has a 2 of its MCMV laid up as they cannot crew them. They have said that even if they could find crew tomorrow it would be several years (5 to have both back) before they could be operational again. This is due to the specialist nature of the skills involved in MCM ops. This is also why just dropping a module onto a carrier does not always provide the capability, the trained crew needs to be there. Having a multi-role vessel only works if all roles are regularly trained and maintained. But this goes for all specialties not just MCM but also things like ASW etc: use it or lose it!
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Where will the mines/underwater IEDs come from?
a) Left overs from the world wars?
Well any that were missed have since sunk to the bottom of the sea where they meet the 1,000,000 tons of munitions dumped there at the end of the wars. To tackle that will take more than one of two vessels from us. In fact that would be a major technical challenge to locate and remove what is in and around our waters.
b) State Actors
If a state is mining our waters then there is a major conflict and we would have a lot more to worry about than just mines. In this case our partners in the EU would most likely be already in combat actions of their own and would not be in a situation where they could send their few MCM assets to help us.
c) Non-state Actors
Could happen but so far despite much more lucrative targets areas nothing like this has happened. The approaches to the Suez or Panama canals and any other number of international choke points could have been targeted but never have. Even if such weapons are simple to make they need to be deployed where they can be effective and there needs to be a large number to ensure a single hit. Unlike a road a waterway lacks a lot of the features and characteristic that has made roadside IEDs effective. So a very low risk.
Should we develop a MCM capability ? Yes, but only as part of a balanced overall defence posture.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by ropebag View PostRead it more carefully.
Signitures to the treaty are required to help, but the nature, quantity, timing and extent of that help are matters purely for the assisting state to decide, with no role for any other state or organ, or court, to adjudicate on the appropriateness of that 'help'.
So, if Ireland calls for aid in minesweeping under A42 then every single signatury will fulfill entirely their treaty obligations by sending the Government a Mars Bar, or a WH Smith voucher. There is absolutely no treaty requirement whatsoever for the aid to be given in the way that you want it.
Originally posted by ropebag View PostHave they offered to pay for the MRV, or to donate some boots - or are you just talking shit having not actually read the treaty?
In the past, they paid 1/2 the cost of the P20/P21 class (4 ships), they paid 1/2 the cost of LE Roisin, they paid 1/2 the cost of the CASAs. Not sure about the other newer vessels but I don’t think so.
Don’t forget also if (big if) if DoD was creative there are a number of EU funds they could seek funding from.... and due to membership of the Euro loans from the EU are also interest free at the minute.
And we could find that come Brexit enhanced enforcement operations are required with regard to fisheries protection (and refugees seeking to escape Brexit )Last edited by DeV; 17 October 2019, 11:17.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Didn’t someone suggest replacing the CPVs with larger vessels with daughter craft for in shore patrols a while back?
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by na grohmiti View PostI think I may have....
There are longer endurance daughter craft in use in the offshore industry, ideal for over the horizon work, and easily adapted for the Caley system, if desired.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostDaughter craft are launched from a mother ship and can be sized between 9m and 20m therefore the bigger the DC the bigger the mother ship using the DC. They have been used in rescue in up to 7m sea/swell. Recommended crew duration is about 4 hours and recommended distance from Mother ship is 10nm and in exceptional circumstances 15nm. The larger DC's would be a useful craft for reserve NS training bases.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostHave a look at U-tube HMS NIMROD crossing Torbay in a breeze. The class was from an offshore design to be launched from large ERRV's
I think the correct designation is HMC (Her Majesty's Cutter).
These cutters are 20m, range 280nm @32kts.
Good article here -
Last edited by spider; 1 November 2019, 20:48.'History is a vast early warning system'. Norman Cousins
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostHave a look at U-tube HMS NIMROD crossing Torbay in a breeze. The class was from an offshore design to be launched from large ERRV's
Last edited by na grohmiti; 1 November 2019, 21:43.For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
- Likes 3
Comment
-
The structure down aft was the senior rates mess and rec space , collect your grub from the galley midships and make your way down aft . The galley stove was an oil burning stove and used the same fuel as the main boilers ( heavy sludge oil ) you needed to be a stoker to get the stove started .Don't spit in my Bouillabaisse .
Comment
-
Originally posted by na grohmiti View PostThe more things change, the more they stay the same.
https://www.rte.ie/archives/2016/100...training-ship/
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment