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

3 New Navy Vessels for Irish Naval Service

Options
1…3132343637…162

Comments

  • Options
    #992
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,869 ✭✭✭sparky42


    nowecant wrote: »
    So it is bigger and the INS do own it.

    Free floating? As in it was meant to be attached and is currently tied up against the quay wall?

    Or was it originally designed to be a free floating gate and needs to be changed to a "static" one?

    I am looking on google earth now and am not sure which object it is. Also what about the marina that currently seems to reside in the dry dock?

    Behind that marina is the gate. For the rest of the question I'm afraid I can't answer you.


  • Options
    #993
    IrishTrajan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,703 ✭✭✭IrishTrajan


    sparky42 wrote: »
    That's one of the question and why I don't know if we could get an off the shelf version. The Absalon for example would barely fit (as in 1m to spare) and I don't think there'd be enough space in the dock to work on the hull even after it got in.

    The one in the Basin would have to be rebuilt, the gate (for lack of the correct term) is free floating (have a look on Google Maps and you can see it floating in the dock), and the pump room got flooded with Concrete at some point as far as I know.

    Didn't Coveney pledge €50mn in 2013/14 to make infrastructural changes to accommodate larger ships and allow UAVs to be deployed?


  • Options
    #994
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,869 ✭✭✭sparky42


    IrishTrajan wrote: »
    Didn't Coveney pledge €50mn in 2013/14 to make infrastructural changes to accommodate larger ships and allow UAVs to be deployed?

    That money is for UAV facilities and such. Don't think they've said anything about upgrades for larger ships. Any work on the Basin is going to be a LOT more than 50 million. Think about it, there's the entrance to the Basin that would need to be enlarged, then maybe draft issues in the basin and the work on the Graving Dock.

    It would be highly expensive, which is our problem.


  • Options
    #995
    Garzard
    Registered Users Posts: 1,282 ✭✭✭Garzard


    sparky42 wrote: »
    That money is for UAV facilities and such. Don't think they've said anything about upgrades for larger ships. Any work on the Basin is going to be a LOT more than 50 million. Think about it, there's the entrance to the Basin that would need to be enlarged, then maybe draft issues in the basin and the work on the Graving Dock.

    It would be highly expensive, which is our problem.

    I've seen the ScanEagle mentioned a few times here but has any decision on the UAV (and number to be purchased) been set in stone, so to speak?


  • Options
    #996
    BoJack Horseman
    Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    Garzard wrote: »
    I've seen the ScanEagle mentioned a few times here but has any decision on the UAV (and number to be purchased) been set in stone, so to speak?

    They have/had 6 of these from Israel
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbiter_UAV
    (Clare Daly must have had an aneurism that day).

    I'm not sure if they are good for the NS though?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #997
    Ren2k7
    Registered Users Posts: 1,161 ✭✭✭Ren2k7


    BoJack Horseman wrote: »
    They have/had 6 of these from Israel
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbiter_UAV
    (Clare Daly must have had an aneurism that day).

    I'm not sure if they are good for the NS though?

    Is that the only type of UAV the DF owns?


  • Options
    #998
    BoJack Horseman
    Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    Ren2k7 wrote: »
    Is that the only type of UAV the DF owns?

    I think so.


  • Options
    #999
    Boreas
    Registered Users Posts: 92 ✭✭Boreas


    I suppose cost would be an issue but wouldn't something like the Schiebel Camcopter make sense for naval use.


  • Options
    #1000
    BoJack Horseman
    Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    Boreas wrote: »
    I suppose cost would be an issue but wouldn't something like the Schiebel Camcopter make sense for naval use.

    They look pretty nifty.

    Expensive though.... Googled & the price per unit looks to be around €400k.

    I also wonder if they are too big to land safely on a Beckett?


  • Options
    #1001
    Boreas
    Registered Users Posts: 92 ✭✭Boreas


    BoJack Horseman wrote: »
    I also wonder if they are too big to land safely on a Beckett?

    You may well be right about them being too big for the Beckett's, the Germans use them on the Braunschweig corvettes which are almost exactly the same size as the P60's but have a dedicated helicopter pad.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1002
    Heraldoffreeent
    Registered Users Posts: 1,467 ✭✭✭Heraldoffreeent


    BoJack Horseman wrote: »
    They look pretty nifty.

    Expensive though.... Googled & the price per unit looks to be around €400k.

    I also wonder if they are too big to land safely on a Beckett?
    Boreas wrote: »
    You may well be right about them being too big for the Beckett's, the Germans use them on the Braunschweig corvettes which are almost exactly the same size as the P60's but have a dedicated helicopter pad.

    They're 10ft by 4ft approx, and weigh 400lb, I'd imagine the free deck would be more than adequate. Even if the three TEU's were in place I'd imagine it would be easy enough to rig a landing pad on top which would take that weight pretty easily.


  • Options
    #1003
    Peregrine
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭Peregrine


    I believe the original spec said it could accomodate 3 TEUs and a flight deck for a UAV (presumably a launcher and catching system for fixed wing). So, if the TEUs weren't there then it should be possible to accomodate rotary UAVs of that size.


  • Options
    #1004
    cameramonkey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,220 ✭✭✭cameramonkey


    Boreas wrote: »
    I suppose cost would be an issue but wouldn't something like the Schiebel Camcopter make sense for naval use.

    The Camcopter has a range of 180km and six hours endurance so I think that would be a bit short of what the NS would want. The Scan Eagle has a range of 1500KM and an endurance of more than 28 hours, it a slower aircraft but with the vast distances out into the Atlantic I think the scan eagle would be a better fit.


    I know we are talking about naval operation but is there a need to have a ship based UAV? Why not just have them land based in Cork with conventional runway landings? I dont know if this would make them cheaper but all the problems associated with launching and retrieving a UAV in the Atlantic would be mitigated. It would also mean that a larger UAV could be used.

    This looks good.

    http://www.auvsi.org/HamptonRoads/blogs/auvsi-news/2014/12/18/liferay


  • Options
    #1005
    roundymac
    Registered Users Posts: 2,712 ✭✭✭roundymac


    Any update as to when she will be delivered.


  • Options
    #1006
    a/tel
    Registered Users Posts: 112 ✭✭a/tel


    roundymac wrote: »
    Any update as to when she will be delivered.


    17th May


    http://www.torridge.gov.uk/article/15320/Tuesday-5th-May-2015


  • Options
    #1007
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,869 ✭✭✭sparky42


    expectationlost wrote: »
    It is no time for heel-dragging - lives are waiting to be saved http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/it-is-no-time-for-heeldragging-lives-are-waiting-to-be-saved-31209776.html Eoghan O Neachtain



    who is dragging heels?

    descision by cabinet on tuesday

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0509/700001-le-eithne-migrant/

    thought he said that last week

    What's the EU mission got to do with the replacement thread?


  • Options
    #1008
    Tabnabs
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,693 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    I've heard a whisper of the JJ being commissioned in a harbour well known to Eithne, over a weekend in mid June.


  • Options
    #1009
    Larbre34
    Registered Users Posts: 23,814 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Coming from you Tabnabs it could only be Dun Laoghaire?

    I always thought that would be the obvious choice with the Joyce connection.


  • Options
    #1010
    mikeym
    Registered Users Posts: 3,984 ✭✭✭mikeym


    a/tel wrote: »
    17th May


    http://www.torridge.gov.uk/article/15320/Tuesday-5th-May-2015

    Not happening. Was talking to a crew member today.


  • Options
    #1011
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,869 ✭✭✭sparky42


    mikeym wrote: »
    Not happening. Was talking to a crew member today.

    Is she getting work done on her or is there another issue impacting things? It's what nearly 2 months slippage now?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1012
    mikeym
    Registered Users Posts: 3,984 ✭✭✭mikeym


    sparky42 wrote: »
    Is she getting work done on her or is there another issue impacting things? It's what nearly 2 months slippage now?

    The person didnt go into that much detail about the technical issues.

    If I find out anymore il let ye know.


  • Options
    #1013
    BowWow
    Registered Users Posts: 1,760 ✭✭✭BowWow


    Any update on P62? Rumours on another forum that all is not well with P61...


  • Options
    #1014
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,869 ✭✭✭sparky42


    BowWow wrote: »
    Any update on P62? Rumours on another forum that all is not well with P61...

    If you are talking about the post on IMO, mariner has been pretty negative about the entire P60 purchase in the posts I've seen. Didn't the admiral speak fairly highly of Beckett at a recent conference?


  • Options
    #1015
    mikeym
    Registered Users Posts: 3,984 ✭✭✭mikeym


    http://www.torridge.gov.uk/article/15437/Friday-5th-June-2015

    Crew will be heading across the pond very soon.


  • Options
    #1016
    nowecant
    Registered Users Posts: 332 ✭✭nowecant


    Any update on this?

    What was her original due date? 3 months ago?


  • Options
    #1017
    Tabnabs
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,693 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    She's still in Wales

    http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:2857921/mmsi:250003146/vessel:LE%20JAMES%20JOYCE

    But has recently undertaken sea trials.

    http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/oldshipid:2857921/oldmmsi:250003146/olddate:2015-06-16%2015%3A43%3A00/zoom:9


  • Options
    #1018
    Heraldoffreeent
    Registered Users Posts: 1,467 ✭✭✭Heraldoffreeent


    Tabnabs wrote: »
    She's still in Wales

    http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:2857921/mmsi:250003146/vessel:LE%20JAMES%20JOYCE

    But has recently undertaken sea trials.

    http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/oldshipid:2857921/oldmmsi:250003146/olddate:2015-06-16%2015%3A43%3A00/zoom:9

    Shes back at torridge, theres a problem with the port engine cooling system which, when its sorted, will allow her to sail on the next tide,morning July the 2nd. It seems the Propeller problems have been sorted and the trials were acceptable in that regard.


  • Options
    #1019
    a/tel
    Registered Users Posts: 112 ✭✭a/tel


    Tabnabs wrote: »
    She's still in Wales

    http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:2857921/mmsi:250003146/vessel:LE%20JAMES%20JOYCE

    But has recently undertaken sea trials.

    http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/oldshipid:2857921/oldmmsi:250003146/olddate:2015-06-16%2015%3A43%3A00/zoom:9


    Appledore is in Devon, in England not Wales! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:


  • Options
    #1020
    Tabnabs
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,693 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    a/tel wrote: »
    Appledore is in Devon, in England not Wales! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

    Good God, you're grammar is appalling.

    But thanks for your worthy contribution to the thread...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1021
    cameramonkey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,220 ✭✭✭cameramonkey


    Tabnabs wrote: »
    Good God, you're grammar is appalling.

    But thanks for your worthy contribution to the thread...


    I think that should be "your" not "you're". You're is short for you are.


Advertisement