Originally posted by na grohmití
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
CPV Replacement
Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
-
Originally posted by na grohmití View PostIf Like for Like was a consideration for the CPV replacement, maybe it is worth considering VARDs other designs?
http://vardmarine.com/wp-content/upl...VARD-7-055.pdf
Beat me to it
Comment
-
On mature reflection, of everything I've looked at there is still nothing that completely fits the bill without modification to the design.
The nearest would be either:
Rolls-Royce 70 Skadi / Freyja
Take off the SSMs and SAMs, replace the 57mm with a 76mm, add 2 X 20mm
Add 2 X RHIBs on davitts
Increase the endurance
A crane would be required
Would probably need to be lengthened by around 7+ metres (making it only 1m off Roisin) to accommodate TEUs and work area
Would possibly need to be widen aft to accommodate TEUs
Vard 7 065
Replace the 40mm with a 76mm, add 2 X 20mm
Not sure about endurance
A crane would be required
Would need to be lengthened by around 6+ metres to accomodate TEUs and work area (still less than 70 metres)
Would need to be widen aft by around 1.5m to accommodate TEUs
Not sure about the accommodation standards on either
This would probably be a fairly major redesign but a redesign of any of the others I mentioned would be even more significant.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
You cannot describe accurately the consequences of ship lengthening. When a ship is lengthened, you have to maintain her stability and point of trim or balance. It usually means adding the extra "Bit" in the middle and widening and deepening the ship as required to meet operational draft requirements. Better to have a stab at making a new overall design or, as some one says pick a ship that meets the specification. It is apt that the German ship builders are of the opinion that Corvette type vessels, properly equipped are the answer to today's threat environments. I say Keep SSM'S and SAM'S otherwise you must keep the ship out of harms way.
- Likes 5
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostYou cannot describe accurately the consequences of ship lengthening. When a ship is lengthened, you have to maintain her stability and point of trim or balance. It usually means adding the extra "Bit" in the middle and widening and deepening the ship as required to meet operational draft requirements. Better to have a stab at making a new overall design or, as some one says pick a ship that meets the specification. It is apt that the German ship builders are of the opinion that Corvette type vessels, properly equipped are the answer to today's threat environments. I say Keep SSM'S and SAM'S otherwise you must keep the ship out of harms way.
In the case above, the SAMs & SSMs would be replaced by RHIBs and TEUs (and it would still need lengthened.
Comment
-
Last edited by CTU; 23 January 2016, 20:51.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 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by CTU View PostWhat about two of these. Built by the same yard that built the revenue cutters.
If not they have other similar vessels.
http://www.tyovene.com/site/index.ph...rpose-vessels/
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostThese are adapted Baltic tugs that are fine for jobbing at oil spills, fires on other vessels, and coastguard chores. They are not naval vessels and I would not suggest that the Army should be looking at a squadron of John Deeres instead of fighting vehicles.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by hptmurphy View PostDefine conventional warfare?
Throw conventional and non-conventional out the window, the key is the threat level of the environment you want to operate in. Operating in a hostile environment, you may actually be doing HADR operations but have to ward off a high level threat.
- Likes 5
Comment
-
A good point. Two things I would ask is that in the event of the international security situation declining rapidly it is too late to start acquiring capabilities you never had; we got away with it in WW2 through no efforts of our own. More immediately, will the government be seeking to have the NS take part in future operations, for one example anti-piracy missions, in areas where the threat is greater than in home waters?
Comment
Comment