Originally posted by DeV
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
CPV Replacement
Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
-
-
Originally posted by DeV View Post
Comment
-
Being closed in its current form due to operation now of the Equipment Development Plan which will be the way to take this (and similar projects) forward, it moves to the EDP programme level process using PM methodology. The Equipment Development Plan has an explicit commitment to fleet replacement.
For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
Comment
-
The number of serving personnel is due to drop below 900, amid further resignations, including its second in command Captain Brian Fitzgerald
Last December, the Irish Examiner exclusively revealed that Minister for Defence, Simon Coveney, and military chiefs were planning to acquire two smaller vessels for fishery patrols in the Irish Sea; a move necessitated by Brexit.
Two ships belonging to a foreign navy have been identified as being suitable for the task.
They are much smaller than some of the newer Naval Service ships, which are 90m long, and can thus be crewed with fewer personnel.
There isn't the requirement for bigger ships to patrol the Irish Sea as the weather there is not as turbulent as the Atlantic.
The 90m ships need a crew of 45, whereas these vessels can be crewed by anything between 20 and 25 personnel.For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
Comment
-
Vittoria Shipyard launched the Maltese Armed Forces' biggest patrol vessel, OPV P71, on February 27, during a ceremony that took place in the facilities of the Venetian company.
LÉ Aoifes replacement has left the slipway. It seems like a nice upgrade for the Maltese navy. In the article it states it is 75% funded by the EU. I believe in the past the EU has part funded ships for us aswell. Go easy on me, but would it be possible to receive similar funding for future vessels?
Comment
-
Originally posted by pilatus View Posthttps://navalpost.com/malta-armed-fo...unch-vittoria/
LÉ Aoifes replacement has left the slipway. It seems like a nice upgrade for the Maltese navy. In the article it states it is 75% funded by the EU. I believe in the past the EU has part funded ships for us aswell. Go easy on me, but would it be possible to receive similar funding for future vessels?
Comment
-
Originally posted by pilatus View Posthttps://navalpost.com/malta-armed-fo...unch-vittoria/
LÉ Aoifes replacement has left the slipway. It seems like a nice upgrade for the Maltese navy. In the article it states it is 75% funded by the EU. I believe in the past the EU has part funded ships for us aswell. Go easy on me, but would it be possible to receive similar funding for future vessels?
We are now a net contributor and we the recent CFP enforcement issue that ship may have sailed
Comment
-
Originally posted by DeV View PostThe EU funded Deirdre, Aoife, Aisling, Emer, Roisin and Niamh (not sure about Eithne, the Peacocks or P60s) to the tune of 50% (ex armament).
We are now a net contributor and we the recent CFP enforcement issue that ship may have sailed
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparky42 View PostThe 60's were paid by us I think.Last edited by ancientmariner; 1 March 2021, 08:54.
- Likes 5
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostYes, AFAIK, P60 onwards were ours. I was directly involved in the building of P20's next sister and was constantly reminded by DOD reps that the EU would countenance NO procurement of armaments so we wound up with token local operated WW11 Bofors, a couple of 20mms. They even mentioned that funding would be withdrawn if we kept highlighting the need for military equipment. Luckily the Peacocks came in, just in time, to make 76mm acceptable for P31 onwards, even if from the Hector Gray stable.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
I remember that the main armament on P20 (L60) had a date of manufacture of 1948.
Our DoD had a history of messing up military equipment purchases. Wasn't there a case in the 70s of some armoured vehicles being detained at a port somewhere because local law enforcement couldn't be sure whether the vehicles were destined for the Defence forces or the PIRA?For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by na grohmiti View PostI remember that the main armament on P20 (L60) had a date of manufacture of 1948.
Our DoD had a history of messing up military equipment purchases. Wasn't there a case in the 70s of some armoured vehicles being detained at a port somewhere because local law enforcement couldn't be sure whether the vehicles were destined for the Defence forces or the PIRA?
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jetjock View PostDo you believe that there was a genuine threat to funding if the vessels were appropriately armed or was it a convenient excuse to avoid spending the money required to do so?
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by ancientmariner View PostIt was a running mantra from the CS on the Defence construction board, obviously they were building a ship for FP only.For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
Comment
Comment