Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

River class Patrol vessels..

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

  • pym I do agree with you, honest I do, all of it and I am well aware of the issues. All of them financial, but a few more related to "it wont happen to us so why do we need it". The 61's got signed off and ended up costing more or less the same as the 3 x Batch 11's which were on offer for GBP 133 million. But without the aforementioned flat bit of deck. All I'm saying is, a bit of foresight (that we would spend the money a few years later) and a bit of determination to protect our island nation's assets and resources and those that work the sea for a living to the best of our ability. The lack of political will to do that, I can tell you it makes me angry and very frustrated that our forces (all of them) are tied to a millstone of false neutrality, a population that believes "it wont happen to us" and the belief that someone else will sort our problems for us.

    Not looking for Exocet, Seawolf, or HMS Ocean. Just the kit to give the lad's and ladettes the best possible chance of doing their job to the best of their ability as part of a DF that can work together. And if that means a bit of flat steel to fly a 139 off, I think and believe they should have it.

    The 51's and 61's are superb vessels and all who sail in them and every vessel in our inventory do, in my opinion an amazing job. Just wish their political masters would take a leaf from their book and do likewise.

    That's all it is pym, its frustration and anger that good people are having to fight tooth and nail for nuts bolts and rivets. Let alone a ship that can operate a 139 on an occasional basis. I know its pie in the sky. But I will fight my corner at the same time .
    Last edited by FMP; 4 December 2014, 21:22.
    We travel not for trafficking alone,
    By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
    For lust of knowing what should not be known,
    We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

    Comment


    • And instead the NS got the vessels it needed to the specs they wanted (not those of another country whose navies operate in completely different seas to the NS

      Comment


      • Originally posted by DeV View Post
        And instead the NS got the vessels it needed to the specs they wanted (not those of another country whose navies operate in completely different seas to the NS
        Not saying they didn't DeV. Far from it. Said it before the 51 and 61 class are pure class just cant help feeling that if the option were on the table in the first place the NS would say yes please. We will take a heli capable vessel or two.

        How much of that was influenced by the DoD and therefore the NS's political masters? Find the politicians usually have more sway than the men and girls on the ground. Look at the UK MoB.

        Maybe I'm totally wrong, but was it not the politicians that got in the way of Blackhawk for example?

        River class Batch 11 are also operated by the RN, based on the original River Class which is operated by the RN who operate in much the same waters as the NS. The North Atlantic and South Atlantic and a few other places in between (not that there's actually much in between, less you count the Med and the Caribbean etc) .
        Last edited by FMP; 4 December 2014, 21:23.
        We travel not for trafficking alone,
        By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
        For lust of knowing what should not be known,
        We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by FMP View Post
          pym I do agree with you, honest I do, all of it and I am well aware of the issues. All of them financial, but a few more related to "it wont happen to us so why do we need it". The 61's got signed off and ended up costing more or less the same as the 3 x Batch 11's which were on offer for GBP 133 million. But without the aforementioned flat bit of deck. All I'm saying is, a bit of foresight (that we would spend the money a few years later) and a bit of determination to protect our island nation's assets and resources and those that work the sea for a living to the best of our ability. The lack of political will to do that, I can tell you it makes me angry and very frustrated that our forces (all of them) are tied to a millstone of false neutrality, a population that believes "it wont happen to us" and the belief that someone else will sort our problems for us.

          Not looking for Exocet, Seawolf, or HMS Ocean. Just the kit to give the lad's and ladettes the best possible chance of doing their job to the best of their ability as part of a DF that can work together. And if that means a bit of flat steel to fly a 139 off, I think and believe they should have it.

          The 60's and 61's are superb vessels and all who sail in them and every vessel in our inventory do, in my opinion an amazing job. Just wish their political masters would take a leaf from their book and do likewise.

          That's all it is pym, its frustration and anger that good people are having to fight tooth and nail for nuts bolts and rivets. Let alone a ship that can operate a 139 on an occasional basis. I know its pie in the sky. But I will fight my corner at the same time .
          The Navy got what it wanted, they didn't want Helis. The helis we have aren't suited to Naval operations. The Navy didn't have a budget to buy helis as part of, or separate to, the OPV tender. A Heli deck could have been part of the final EPV tender, it may infact still be.The Navy wanted 3 OPV's to it's specification, It wants 2 EPV's, also to its specification. Buying the 3 P60's and the 3 amazonas would have killed the EPV for sure.

          Where is any of this difficult?

          Should we buy one of the French Mistral's? It can carry Heli's too, the only difference is the number of zero's after this €10000..........
          Last edited by Herald; 4 December 2014, 20:23.

          Comment


          • Zero difficulty mate. None at all on my side but you seem a bit confused. We are having a discussion about the pros and cons of heli ops capable ships, sort of started when I asked about the Batch 11's. No one ever said "Navy buy helis" there was the mention of maybe a 139 doing a deck landing during a bit of SAR or the ARW deploying from one off shore out of heli range of the shore, some humanitarian mission stuff but that's about it. No navy heli's mentioned at all. Not once did I mention the NS buying helis. Deck capable crews, that's a different story and you don't have to be navy to do that or the heli your flying in. And the 139 is a very capable heli for deck landings, never said naval operations, I do understand the difference. Helis at sea can do a lot more than just kill sub's. Nor did I ever suggest the navy did not get what they wanted, full of admiration for the 51 and 61 class actually, was always dissapointed the option for a third 51 was never taken up. But I am interested as to why the flight deck option is so off the table in some circles.

            WTF is all this crap about aircraft carriers by the way? At least my arguments are somewhere in the realms or reason. River Class Batch 11 would have cost the same as the 61's did and we still have a bunch of ships that need replacing so the money has to come from somewhere at some stage.

            From what you say Herald does that mean the EPV is a no go now anyway? With the 51 class bought, the 61 class bought (sorry just realized my typo from earlier, was referring to 60 and 61 class instead of 51 and 61 class) where does that leave us with the remaining ships nearing the end of their service and up for replacement if that extra three would have killed EPV would not the replacement of a further 3 (Eithne and the peacocks,,,,,sounds like a dodgy 80's band) not do the same? Or are the EPV's part of that replacement? If not whats going to replace those that need replacing?
            Last edited by FMP; 4 December 2014, 22:08.
            We travel not for trafficking alone,
            By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
            For lust of knowing what should not be known,
            We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

            Comment


            • In my humble opinion to have a vessel equipped to carry out heli operations
              Thats a very negative perspective... think along the lines of the AC have no suitable helos...makes much more sense
              Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

              Comment


              • The Coast guard also have no suitable helos. Indeed I find it hard to think of a scenario where a Helicopter which is not an Irish military helicopter would NEED to land on an Irish Naval vessel which just happened to be in the vicinity.

                I genuinely ask that someone provide such a scenario in the current environment.
                For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                Comment


                • I am aware that the RN don't base helis on PV's and I did mention it, but they do operate helis from those decks and that's where you get your new skills from. Courtesy of them! Its a given, its a known, there is no guesswork involved. Decades of doing it off destroyers, frigates and patrol vessels, all that experience at your fingertips. No risk to yourselves. A cost, but no risk. In the same waters as the NS, same conditions and to a degree same tasks. Not just in heli operations but in the vessels operating them. Try before you buy! We don't make enough effort to make use of the efforts of others. Or didn't anyway. And certainly not "them".
                  We didn't pull the skill set out a box.....we went and saw how people with a similar helo did it, went sent our people to the RN.. christ knows we used to even buy fuel from them.

                  But what if! What if that elusive EPV is finally realised and there on the back of her is a big flat space and its titled "Heli Deck". What do we do then? Do crack on in our own fashion? Or do we ask those in the know?
                  Again a nisnomer to think that we ever did anything by ourselves, The US coastguard were almost twinned with us in developing a vessel of similar size with similar capabilites, they couldn't do certain things with theirs , that we managed.
                  It wasn't an abject failure, it just wasn't cost effective, the whole method of surveillance changed with computerisation and satellites thus making the helo redundant in role it was supplied for.

                  Again bear in mind only two of the five supplied were fitted for ship board ops, backfooted straight away.

                  Now why would the NS want to spend money on making a ship receptive to a non existent helo out of their own budget?
                  Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                  Comment


                  • Let alone a ship that can operate a 139 on an occasional basis
                    But the Air Corps would have to buy ENOUGH suitable kitted out ones.. to do what?????
                    Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                      The Coast guard also have no suitable helos. Indeed I find it hard to think of a scenario where a Helicopter which is not an Irish military helicopter would NEED to land on an Irish Naval vessel which just happened to be in the vicinity.

                      I genuinely ask that someone provide such a scenario in the current environment.
                      Don't the NS respond to SOS calls anymore, along with the CG and RNLI and any available vessel? That would kinda put an NS vessel and a CG heli in the same area at the same time where it could make use of that bit of deck for a refuel, if of course it had a deck. Are you also saying the CG helis cant land on a suitable sized peice of anything? Surely its that the crews that haven't been trained, and that's fixable.
                      Last edited by FMP; 4 December 2014, 22:55.
                      We travel not for trafficking alone,
                      By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
                      For lust of knowing what should not be known,
                      We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
                        But the Air Corps would have to buy ENOUGH suitable kitted out ones.. to do what?????
                        Define suitable? ASW, Sonar towing? Wheels and a deck qualified crew! AAC Apache, is that a suitable heli? RAF Chinook, is that a suitable heli? One would think not but there you have them bouncing on and off ships all over the RN. Not carrying out navy operations but operating off a navy vessel. There are enough Rigs and Rig support vessels flying heli's all day and night every day and night all over the place. Again not talking ship board navy type sub killing operations. But a ship that can accept a heli on occasion. How hard is that?

                        Are there not 3 (If memory serves) or thereabouts 139's fitted with winch and flotation kits? Kitted out with FLIR, NVG compatible, weather radar and all that glass cockpit stuff. Can someone serving in AC please give a definitive answer?

                        Last edited by FMP; 5 December 2014, 09:02.
                        We travel not for trafficking alone,
                        By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
                        For lust of knowing what should not be known,
                        We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by FMP View Post
                          Don't the NS respond to SOS calls anymore, along with the CG and RNLI and any available vessel? That would kinda put an NS vessel and a CG heli in the same area at the same time where it could make use of that bit of deck for a refuel, if of course it had a deck. Are you also saying the CG helis cant land on a suitable sized peice of anything? Surely its that the crews that haven't been trained, and that's fixable.
                          Does the CG train to land on moving decks that are just big enough to hold them, Doing so would put the aircraft and crew in unnecessary danger. I don't see it equipped with deck harpoon and I have not seen any other S92 on a ships deck. Have sikorsky approved it for landing on a ships deck? It doesn't appear in any of their promotional literature, The S92 is a huge heli. It may land on helidecks aboard almost stationary oil rigs, or suitably strengthened decks of large cargo ships. The S92 also has very long range, much greater than the S61. But at that super long range, would it be better to task an asset that can refuel in midair, and trains for this regularly? USAF for example?
                          As for refuelling a heli on the deck of a ship. You want to store aviation fuel on the ship just in case the Coast Guard heli needs to fuel on it? And you need to keep it contamination free too. Ever try using petrol in the lawnmower in spring that has been sitting in a jerrican since you last used the mower the previous autumn?
                          For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                          Comment


                          • Well that would the part of my statement where I said "Surely its that the crews haven't been trained, and that's fixable". A Heli does not need a deck harpoon to land on a deck!! That's too much reading Jane's talk that is, super lynx and all the rest of it. The vast majority of vessels with decks do not come heli handling systems. It new and shiny and all the rage but in use with only the big bad boys with frigates and destroyers. Not fitted to OPV's and the like because most OPV's and especally ones like Batch 11 don't have a hanger so harpoons and handling kit are redundant.

                            Foerder – und Hebesysteme (FHS) provides helicopter handling systems, helicopter landing grids, naval doors, hatches, hangars, hangar doors as well…


                            Rig's may be stable ish Rig support vessels are still ships, ships at sea, ships at sea with a deck for helis to land on and S92 does that. Its roughly same size as Merlin if you want to talk size and Batch 11 will take Merlin. Brits do mid air refueling (do you mean HIFR?) too and are a lot closer than the good old US of A. As for storage,,,,,crikey, jerrycans? No wounder our first attempt was such a disaster.

                            My god is the principle really that hard to grasp. Just about every nation with a shoreline have somehow managed to make it work. Rich civilians with yachts make it work. Oil and gas contractors make it work.

                            I give up, I really do. A simple question and a discussion about a simple concept that works the world over has degenerated into an argument of outlandish proportions. Hows this for you then. Your right! You now just need to convince everyone.
                            Last edited by FMP; 5 December 2014, 09:01.
                            We travel not for trafficking alone,
                            By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
                            For lust of knowing what should not be known,
                            We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

                            Comment


                            • The harpoon is redundant... until the heli rolls off the deck. You'll find that helis that land on ships moving decks that are not fitted with such a system also are not fitted with wheeled undercarriage. You'll find any helideck equipped OPV that does not have a harpoon grid on deck has a beartrap instead.


                              Show me one photo of a S92 landing on the deck of a ship.

                              Just one.

                              We'll discuss the merits of that then. Otherwise its like keeping snow chains in the boot of your car all year round.....while you live in the south of france.
                              For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                              Comment
















                              • What now?

                                Too big?

                                Too small?

                                Wrong shape?

                                Wrong colour?

                                Wrong kind of ships?

                                The pilots are female?

                                Sea too green?

                                Sky too blue?

                                Their using cargo net and not harpoons and all sorts of trickery from the archives of defense international and Jane's monthly?

                                But then they are using harpoons and all sorts of trickery from the archives of defense international and Jane's monthly?

                                Their civilian and not applicable?

                                Their navy and not applicability?

                                Like I said in my last post mate, your right!! Honest to god you are! Hands up, I surrender!!
                                We travel not for trafficking alone,
                                By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
                                For lust of knowing what should not be known,
                                We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X