Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Anti Piracy mission

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,898 ✭✭✭sparky42


    cruasder777 wrote: »
    Its around a company size...120

    If there were Paris type incidents, even with the ERU, they would be stretched to the max.

    Why does an army Special Forces unit need to do anti piracy ?

    Its a marine deployment.

    I agree with you about how hard pressed the ERU/ARU/Wing would be in such an event certainly. To be honest I'm not sure why you couldn't just deploy some of the Army to do the task, seems all they really need to do is put rounds on the pirates to at least discourage them from attacking the ship.


  • Options
    #33
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,898 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Victor wrote: »
    Are we going to do amphibious assault soon?

    Train more people for the ARW and/or take back some of the ARW-trained people who are assigned to other units.

    There are ARW members who joined from the Naval Service.

    Given the size of the defence forces, there's not much chance of increasing the ARW much more, not without reducing their standards I'd bet. And I think taking back others would come down to why they are no longer in the ARW, their might be a good reason for that.


  • Options
    #34
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,898 ✭✭✭sparky42


    cruasder777 wrote: »
    Marines do a lot more then amphibious assaults.

    The Wing have trained with these guys.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71rIF5BJ-Ks

    I think the Wing should stick to land/air based Special Forces and anti terrorism missions. The Naval service create a platoon of Marines for these kind of Naval missions and maritime anti terrorism.

    The army a Pathfinder platoon for reconnaissance and long range patrolling. It would mean the Wing could concentrate more on anti terrorism, at present their role is way too broad and I don't see how a company can cover these roles and many others.

    If the EPV ever came to be I could see a chance of some of the Army being trained in more maritime capability, but I don't think the Army would be happy with the Navy developing their own force. Not too sure they should either, let the Navy concentrate on the ships and train the some army units for maritime boarding/security needs.


  • Options
    #35
    petergfiffin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 234 ✭✭petergfiffin


    sparky42 wrote: »
    let the Navy concentrate on the ships and train the some army units for maritime boarding/security needs.
    I don't know why you'd need to train the Army to do what the NS do every day i.e. board vessels, including armed boardings. If it were a case of building the capability to take back a hijaked ship then surely it wouldn't take very long to up-skill the existing (already highly trained) boarding parties which is good all round for the NS. I imagine when the RN are deployed on these type of operations they do so without the SBS or SAS deployed and instead rely on highly trained boarding parties, the fact these are drawn from marines is more of a historical throwback.


  • Options
    #36
    Markcheese
    Registered Users Posts: 8,436 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    Would the peacocks suit the role- they're the smallest and fastest Irish ships -and were designed for work in hot- climates -
    They' re getting on a bit though and might be a wee bit small ,especially getting them to the east coast of Africa and back -

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,898 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Markcheese wrote: »
    Would the peacocks suit the role- they're the smallest and fastest Irish ships -and were designed for work in hot- climates -
    They' re getting on a bit though and might be a wee bit small ,especially getting them to the east coast of Africa and back -

    They only have marginally more speed than the Roisin/Beckett class (25 to 23 knots), and aren't designed for long duration deployments, I'd say they would also have less range than the larger ships by a margin. If we are going to do it, the 50/60's would be the best option I still think.


  • Options
    #38
    Silvera
    Registered Users Posts: 4,033 ✭✭✭Silvera


    IMO, it would make more sense to increase the number of NS personnel available for maritime work. Otherwise, will it again be the same case as when the AC stopped heli ops? ....i.e. pilots in the AC didnt join up to spend extended periods at sea ..like wise re ARW personnel.

    Let the NS do all maritime work, be it boarding, heli ops, etc
    At the end of the day they are trained/have the 'sea legs' to do so better than any land-based/trained personnel.


  • Options
    #39
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,898 ✭✭✭sparky42


    From the Examiner article on the gift to Malta, it's suggested that it will be a navy ship being sent to Africa:http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/navy-gifts-ship-to-malta-313305.html
    Meanwhile, the Naval Service looks poised to send ships to the Horn of Africa as part of an EU anti-piracy mission.

    The Department of Defence confirmed that initial work on a contribution by Ireland to the EU maritime mission, Operation Atalanta, is being undertaken.

    It is likely that the Naval Service would send one of its newer ships out to the north-east coast of Africa, where Somali pirates in particular have reeked havoc with commercial shipping.

    The EU launched Operation Atalanta in December 2008 in response to the rising levels of piracy in the Western Indian Ocean.

    Incidents of piracy have fallen recently from a peak in 2011 when Somali pirates launched attacks on an almost daily basis, sometimes holding cargo and crew hostage for huge ransoms.

    A number of the ships were heading for Europe with important cargoes.

    The EU decided to act to protect economic interests and vessels operating the World Food Programme in Somalia.

    It is expected that Irish vessels sent to the Horn of Africa would typically work two-week patrols with three days off over a three-to-four-month period.

    The Naval Service will shortly be back up to full strength after losing two of its eight vessels for a number of months due to asbestos contamination.

    The new €50m LÉ James Joyce is due to be delivered to the Navy around St Patrick’s weekend.


  • Options
    #40
    Markcheese
    Registered Users Posts: 8,436 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    I suppose one of the Becketts could in theory stay off the coast of Africa for quite a while , (just rotating the crews ) they're brand new so maintenance should be minimal.
    Would they need adapting /kitting out for hot climate work ? More airconditioning or something -
    Any idea where they'd use as a home port when down there ? Or just turn up a t the nearest friendly port and fly the flag a bit . ?

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Options
    #41
    Larbre34
    Registered Users Posts: 23,921 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    The mission has its own oilers, replenishment vessels and landing platform docks, mostly from France, Germany and the Netherlands. When berthing is needed they would use coalition states in the Gulf.

    The Beckett is really the only ship for the mission, NATO standard gear, maximum capacity for boarding ops and interdiction, a years drill behind the crew.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,898 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Larbre34 wrote: »
    The mission has its own oilers, replenishment vessels and landing platform docks, mostly from France, Germany and the Netherlands. When berthing is needed they would use coalition states in the Gulf.

    The Beckett is really the only ship for the mission, NATO standard gear, maximum capacity for boarding ops and interdiction, a years drill behind the crew.

    If they wanted to they could also carry extra stores/whatever on the space for the containers as well. I suppose it would be too much to see if we could convince the Brits to loan us a Scaneagle and crew;):D:P


  • Options
    #43
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,342 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Markcheese wrote: »
    I suppose one of the Becketts could in theory stay off the coast of Africa for quite a while , (just rotating the crews ) they're brand new so maintenance should be minimal.
    Brand new ships are the last ones you send on long trips, because if something new breaks, you are kinda stuck.

    With ships that you've had a few years, at least you know what the niggly bits are.


  • Options
    #44
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,898 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Victor wrote: »
    Brand new ships are the last ones you send on long trips, because if something new breaks, you are kinda stuck.

    With ships that you've had a few years, at least you know what the niggly bits are.

    She's had a year of operations without any significant issues. It's either her or Roisin/Niamh.


  • Options
    #45
    voter1983
    Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭voter1983


    What about Eithne?


  • Options
    #46
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,898 ✭✭✭sparky42


    voter1983 wrote: »
    What about Eithne?

    I would think the Navy would prefer not to send a 30 year old ship on such a deployment. If it's going to be a continuous deployment (ie some other ship replacing the proposed deployed ship) then it might make sense to use ships that have common spares (ie Roisin and Niamh swapping off, or Beckett with Joyce following).

    Given the comments that have come from the Navy in regards to the fuel efficiency of the Beckett's propulsion, they might be the best for this kind of deployment.


  • Options
    #47
    petergfiffin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 234 ✭✭petergfiffin


    sparky42 wrote: »
    If it's going to be a continuous deployment (ie some other ship replacing the proposed deployed ship) then it might make sense to use ships that have common spares (ie Roisin and Niamh swapping off, or Beckett with Joyce following).
    Would it not be a lot cheaper to make more sense to just base a ship in an African country e.g. Kenya or DJibouti and just fly the crews in?


  • Options
    #48
    Tabnabs
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,699 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    voter1983 wrote: »
    What about Eithne?

    It's the name I've heard more than once...


  • Options
    #49
    Markcheese
    Registered Users Posts: 8,436 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    Tabnabs wrote: »
    It's the name I've heard more than once...

    It's 30 years old , we don't have a helicopter to suit ,( which would have seriously upped her suitability ) , she's the only one of her class so lowering number of crews available if it's a long mission - and she'd burn some amount of diesel -

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Options
    #50
    Cork boy 55
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,324 ✭✭✭Cork boy 55


    Missed the boat
    Somalia piracy collapsed(-90%) in 2013 for a variety reasons
    only nine vessels attacked in 2013 and ZERO successful
    Main reasons being the adoption of best tactics by vessels , armed private security onboard ships and improvements in Somalia

    http://www.thejournal.ie/piracy-somalia-down-on-last-year-1219326-Dec2013/

    theres no DATA for 2014 I can find?
    Of course it could be argued that if the international mission was wound down there would be another rise in it, I don't know enough.

    Would not supporting Italy/Malta/Greece/Spain in Med with current invasion
    be more appropriate to the NS kit. If NS is going out of EEZ.
    Seems more urgent,important,benefaction and appropriate.


  • Options
    #51
    a/tel
    Registered Users Posts: 112 ✭✭a/tel


    Markcheese wrote: »
    It's 30 years old , we don't have a helicopter to suit ,( which would have seriously upped her suitability ) , she's the only one of her class so lowering number of crews available if it's a long mission - and she'd burn some amount of diesel -



    Eithne is good on fuel compared with the rest of the ships in the fleet. Smaller engines burn less fuel!. As for the heli, the equipment has been removed and the deck back to normal painted metal deck. None of the rest of the ships have that capability either.

    If i was a betting man id still say Beckett though. Power Take In system = considerable fuel cost savings


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    expectationlost
    Registered Users Posts: 11,778 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost


    Deployment of a Naval Vessel to Assist in the Humanitarian Crisis in the Mediterranean http://www.defence.ie/WebSite.nsf/5DA6B7566A3866B38025777000566065/EBF2905C273EB68080257E31004948B8 its a maybe, willing if they want us and if we can. Are their new ships any use for this kinda thing, thought they had to have a low side to take people on board easily or would it just be use for search and surveillance?


  • Options
    #53
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,898 ✭✭✭sparky42


    expectationlost wrote: »
    Deployment of a Naval Vessel to Assist in the Humanitarian Crisis in the Mediterranean http://www.defence.ie/WebSite.nsf/5DA6B7566A3866B38025777000566065/EBF2905C273EB68080257E31004948B8 its a maybe, willing if they want us. Is their new ships any use for this kinda thing, thought they had to have a low side to take people on board easily or would it just be use for search and surveillance?

    Don't see why the sides make a difference, have you see the Frigates the Italians have been using?


Advertisement