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

  • 26-01-2011 5:13pm
    #1
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,633 ✭✭✭darkman2


    STX Canada Marine has been awarded a contract by Babcock UK subsidiary Devonport Naval Dockyard, to design the next-generation offshore patrol vessel (OPV) for the Irish Naval Service (INS).

    The new OPV will be a lengthened version of the current STXM PV80 design of which two vessels, L.E. Roisin and L.E. Niamh were delivered by Appledore Shipbuilding in 2000 and 2001.

    The tender process for the new vessels began in 2008 and it was late summer of 2010 that Babcock has reached an agreement with the Irish Defence Department to deliver two new vessels to enhance the INS fleet. The success of the existing vessels, and in particular the high-quality construction from Appledore Shipyard, were clearly an influencing factor in selecting Babcock and STXM for the contract.

    The new PV90 vessels will maintain the overall configuration of the PV80 but will be increased in length by more than 10m and have an additional 0.60m in depth to provide greater operational capability for the rough waters patrolled by the INS. The maximum speed of the vessels will be increased to 23kn and the addition of a power input on each gearbox will permit more efficient low-speed operation without having to run the main propulsion system at very low power levels. STXM will provide the classification design of the vessel and looks forward to continuing the excellent relationship with Appledore Shipbuilders from the previous contract in the late 1990s.

    Not sure if this is the actual ship but I think it is

    Irish-OPV-105-large.jpg


    And the other one.

    main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=4918&g2_serialNumber=1


«134567162

Comments

  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,684 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    Here's a flavour of the work
    http://www.stxmarine.net/ship_patrol.html


  • Registered Users Posts: 107 ✭✭BuckJamesRogers


    Look like sleek designs


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,266 ✭✭✭Steyr




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    Photo one is the ship.
    Photo two isn't. Read the full thread on IMO before you go stealing photos.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,633 ✭✭✭darkman2


    Is that photo copyright of IMO? I don't think so. I can use it if I like.

    I was under the impression that one of these ships is different and has a helipad on it. That was the story last year.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    darkman2 wrote: »
    Is that photo copyright of IMO? I don't think so. I can use it if I like.

    I was under the impression that one of these ships is different and has a helipad on it. That was the story last year.

    So you'll be able to show me where you found the photo online then?

    That was never the story.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,633 ✭✭✭darkman2


    So you'll be able to show me where you found the photo online then?

    That was never the story.


    Yes it was. One of the contracts as far as I remember was for a ship which could take some APC's aswell and has a helipad. Im pretty certain this is the case. I distinctly remember last year seeing renders of it and reading about it. This was to be the biggest of the two ships.


    Oh and don't even try to pretend that render was made up by a contributor to that forum. lol! Fact is it is not copyrighted to them so you have no right telling me that I can or cannot post it or infering that I have "stolen" anything.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    darkman2 wrote: »
    Yes it was. One of the contracts as far as I remember was for a ship which could take some APC's aswell and has a helipad. Im pretty certain this is the case. I distinctly remember last year seeing renders of it and reading about it. This was to be the biggest of the two ships.


    Oh and don't even try to pretend that render was made up by a contributor to that forum. lol! Fact is it is not copyrighted to them so you have no right telling me that I can or cannot post it or infering that I have "stolen" anything.

    The URL of the second photo gives away where you got it from.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 234 ✭✭petergfiffin


    Does anybody know if there's a particular reason why - yet again - we appear to be missing the opportunity for a multi-purpose Emergency Towing Vessel, something that was identified years ago as being a vital piece of kit.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    Does anybody know if there's a particular reason why - yet again - we appear to be missing the opportunity for a multi-purpose Emergency Towing Vessel, something that was identified years ago as being a vital piece of kit.

    Because up to recently there was an arrangement with HM Coastguard that they would provide either of their 2 ETVs to us. However these too are being withdrawn.
    The ETV should be something the Coastguard are after, not the Naval service. I can see in the future though, perhaps when the CPV are being withdrawn from service, that they would be replaced with an ETV, which would spend the rest of it's time, when not rescuing sinking tankers, engaging in coastal patrolling. The HM Customs arrangement is unsatisfactory, if for no other reason than when not engaged in work with the coastguard, the vessel does commercial towing work.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,684 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    The ETV should be something the Coastguard are after, not the Naval service.

    I respectfully disagree with this assertion. The Irish Coastguard have how many sea going personnel exactly? That's right ZERO! On the other hand the INS not only have numerous ships and qualified seafarers, but also have the infrastructure ashore to cater for ship management. Why create what effectively would amount to a whole new quango?
    I can see in the future though, perhaps when the CPV are being withdrawn from service, that they would be replaced with an ETV, which would spend the rest of it's time, when not rescuing sinking tankers, engaging in coastal patrolling.

    Have you seen the size of an ETV? These ships are designed to work "offshore" and are as capable as anything in the INS. They should be utilised to their fullest capacity and not be sold short.
    The HM Customs arrangement is unsatisfactory, if for no other reason than when not engaged in work with the coastguard, the vessel does commercial towing work.

    Unless things have radically changed, this is news to me :confused: I sailed with someone who worked on the English Channel ETV and his trip to sea consisted of patrolling and anchoring near "hotspots". Have you a source for your claim?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,633 ✭✭✭darkman2


    The URL of the second photo gives away where you got it from.

    It's not copyright of that forum so who gives a damn?


  • Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭savagecabbages


    Nothing should be put up on the internet if you dont want it to be stolen/used by someone else;)


    Back on topic, are the two vessels to be PV90s? two similar vessels or two different ones like in the photos? I notice in the highly contested second photo that there is a helicopter deck, does this hint at possible helicopter support down the line?

    As for the use of helicopters on INS vessels, what are the pros and cons of them? I know we used have Helicopters on the Eithne but this practice stopped years ago. Why?

    Other than it being a pretty cool thing to have, why would we need/want helicopters on our vessels?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,827 ✭✭✭ex_infantry man


    heli ops were stopped because of funding. They were usefull in seeking out trawlers in fisheries protection role and of course s.a.r.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    Tabnabs wrote: »
    I respectfully disagree with this assertion. The Irish Coastguard have how many sea going personnel exactly? That's right ZERO! On the other hand the INS not only have numerous ships and qualified seafarers, but also have the infrastructure ashore to cater for ship management. Why create what effectively would amount to a whole new quango?
    The head of the Coastguard, and most of its management are ex Naval officers and this is the avenue they wish to persue. I don't agree with it myself. We are not a nation so large that we can afford more than one Navy.

    Tabnabs wrote: »
    Have you seen the size of an ETV? These ships are designed to work "offshore" and are as capable as anything in the INS. They should be utilised to their fullest capacity and not be sold short.
    Have seen them and had to steer to avoid 3 of them(they weren't working in the ETV role, but were the same type of vessel) pulling a Jackup Oil Rig through the channel. I never said they were incapable, but there would not be enough towing work for them in irish waters, so they would slot in to do the duties that the CPV used to do. Their seakeeping would make them ideal for the currents and oddities of irish waters inside the 12 mile limit. The OPV have been designed from the outset to remain in(and beyond) the 200mile EEZ. The ETV could do both, but it would be more comfortable in an OPV, or better again an EPV, if it ever comes on stream.


    Tabnabs wrote: »
    Unless things have radically changed, this is news to me :confused: I sailed with someone who worked on the English Channel ETV and his trip to sea consisted of patrolling and anchoring near "hotspots". Have you a source for your claim?

    My source is the "Sea Patrol UK" series on Nat Geo.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    Nothing should be put up on the internet if you dont want it to be stolen/used by someone else;)


    Back on topic, are the two vessels to be PV90s? two similar vessels or two different ones like in the photos? I notice in the highly contested second photo that there is a helicopter deck, does this hint at possible helicopter support down the line?

    As for the use of helicopters on INS vessels, what are the pros and cons of them? I know we used have Helicopters on the Eithne but this practice stopped years ago. Why?

    Other than it being a pretty cool thing to have, why would we need/want helicopters on our vessels?

    The second photo, which mysteriously no longer exists.... was of an Omani OPV designed by Blohm and Voss.
    The PV 90 is the winning design, to be built in Appledore, by Babcock, designed by STX Canada, who also designed L.E. Roisin and Niamh, as well as the Kiwi OPVs.If you were to look at a better image of the PV90 design, you will see that just aft of the RIBs, there is storage space for 3 Containers. In the absence of these containers, or even on top of them if necessary, a helicopter "could" operate, or at least safely winch to and from. However the advantages of having a heli aboard ship in our normal sea and weather conditions was cancelled out by the introduction of the CASA maritime patrol aircraft. It can do what the dauphin was designed to do(extra eyes BVR), better and faster(Navalised dauphins were not equipped with FLIR. Rotary wing UAVs however are the future in shipboard aircraft, particularly(as in our case) if you don't intend carrying lots of troops or arming the heli.
    However there is potential for a Medium sized heli(not ours obviously) to operate from the proposed EPV. But thats just at drawing board stage still.
    The NS learnt that it was easier to operate a heli from a ship, and let it go home when not in use, than to operate it, and maintain it aboard. To do that successfully you need a much larger vessel than Eithne, and an air wing who don't mind missing home and away.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,684 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    The head of the Coastguard, and most of its management are ex Naval officers and this is the avenue they wish to persue. I don't agree with it myself. We are not a nation so large that we can afford more than one Navy.

    So again, they're shore staff, not sea staff, as the coastguard have no ships. INS personnel could transfer across when a ship was decommissioned etc.

    Realistically however, I would see it being chartered the same way as the UK system (and probably no Irish seafarers being involved :rolleyes:)
    My source is the "Sea Patrol UK" series on Nat Geo.

    That's at odds with what I've been told and from this source
    4. Availability
    4.1 Under the terms of the Contract, the tug and crew are to be retained at a continuous
    alert state of not more than 30 minutes readiness to proceed, 24 hours a day whether
    berthed alongside or at anchor.
    source


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    Tabnabs wrote: »
    So again, they're shore staff, not sea staff, as the coastguard have no ships. INS personnel could transfer across when a ship was decommissioned etc.

    Realistically however, I would see it being chartered the same way as the UK system (and probably no Irish seafarers being involved :rolleyes:)



    That's at odds with what I've been told and from this source


    source

    Fair enough, but the UK are getting rid of their ETVs. So the decision, either way needs to be made soon. And the Naval officers were seagoing before they left the NS for the Coastguard.
    The coastguard have no ships AT THE MOMENT.
    The Naval service have no ETV AT THE MOMENT.
    It's all up for grabs.
    The NS expressed an interest in it about 12 years ago, but their priorities will always be the military armed role, rather than the civilian salvage role.

    Never say never.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 2,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Morpheus


    I wonder why nobody in Ireland has attempted to develop some kind of homegrown UAV, surely its not THAT big a task.

    radio reciever and sattelite comms required, guidance computers, etc, a lot could be bought off the shelf to produce a small fleet of these craft, larger than the Orbiter used by the army but small enough that it would be financially achievable.

    we might be able to mass produce a lightweight cheap navalised heli UAV that could be sold to smaller navies around the globe!?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,266 ✭✭✭Steyr


    Morphéus wrote: »
    I wonder why nobody in Ireland has attempted to develop some kind of homegrown UAV, surely its not THAT big a task.

    radio reciever and sattelite comms required, guidance computers, etc, a lot could be bought off the shelf to produce a small fleet of these craft, larger than the Orbiter used by the army but small enough that it would be financially achievable.

    we might be able to mass produce a lightweight cheap navalised heli UAV that could be sold to smaller navies around the globe!?

    Careful now you are talking sense. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,684 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    The Minister for Justice, Equality & Defence, Mr. Alan Shatter, T.D., announces that the
    Build of new Naval Service ship is well underway


    I am pleased to announce that a significant milestone has been reached this afternoon (Friday 18th May 2012) in the build process for the first of two new ships for the Irish Naval Service when a traditional Keel Laying ceremony took place in Babcock Marine’s Appledore Shipbuilding Yard in Devon, UK.

    The Keel Laying ceremony was attended by senior representatives of the Naval Service the Department of Defence, as well as Naval Service members involved in the build project.

    This is not the first time that the Department of Defence and the Irish Naval Service have had an association with Appledore. Two ships, LE Roisin and LE Niamh, were built in this very dockyard over ten years ago and remain key elements of the current Irish Naval Service fleet.

    The first ship is scheduled for delivery in early 2014. The second ship will follow in 2015. The new ships will replace two of the older Naval Service vessels, which will be withdrawn from operational service.


    Ends - 18TH May 2012

    Note for Editors:

    A contract for the provision of two new ships for the Naval Service was placed with Babcock Marine, UK, in October 2010. The contract price is €99m exclusive of VAT and subject to contract terms and final agreed costs. In addition, the cost of providing a weapons system for the ships, similar to the systems on LE Roisin and LE Niamh, will be €7.8m, exclusive of VAT.
    Payments on the contract are scheduled over a period of eight years, 2010 to 2017 and are being funded from within the annual Defence budget. The first ship is scheduled for delivery in early 2014. The second ship will follow in 2015. The new ships will replace two of the older Naval Service vessels, which will be withdrawn from operational service.
    Further Technical Information (If required):


    Babcock Marine 90 metre Offshore Patrol Vessel
    53.35BE?OpenElement&FieldElemFormat=gif
    · Commonality of Layout with LE Roisin and LE Niamh
    · Commonality of Equipment and Systems with LE Roisin and LE Niamh
    · Maintenance and Spares commitments reduced

    The following is an overview of the main characteristics and capabilities of the proposed new OPV’s. These vessels will provide strong operational capability for up to 40 years of service in their main area of operation which will be the North Atlantic ocean - out to the 200 mile Economic Exclusion Zone limit and beyond.

    Specification Outline Proposal
    Length 90 metres
    Beam 14 metres
    Draft 4 metres
    Max Speed 23 knots
    Cruise speed 16 knots
    Loiter speed 0-8 knots
    Range 6000 nm
    Endurance 21 days
    Propulsion Diesel Electric
    Communications Comprehensive Military Communications Package
    Stabilisation Fin Stabilisers
    Stabilisation Tank
    Flight Deck Aft deck provided for UAV Ops and Stowage for 3 TEU on Aft deck
    Accommodation 44 crew + 10 trainees


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,968 ✭✭✭aindriu80


    great to see 2 new vessels on order as some of the older ships really look like they have reached their expiry date.

    Have they any other plans for more advanced ships than patrol vessels ? We have no frigate or transport ships (to transport army equipment overseas) but realistically I could never see us being able to operate a frigate or afford it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,518 ✭✭✭OS119


    aindriu80 wrote: »
    ...Have they any other plans for more advanced ships than patrol vessels ? We have no frigate or transport ships (to transport army equipment overseas) but realistically I could never see us being able to operate a frigate or afford it.

    Goldie is your man for this subject, but my understanding - limited - is that the NS/DoD would like at least one of the 'down-the-line' replacement vessels to be either an 'Enhanced PV': a bigger PV, with significantly more room for embarked troops and TEU containers, and ideally a fight deck, or even better, a 'Multi-Role-Vessel': a ship much larger than an EPV, with a large flight deck, a well-dock, storage room for the vehicles of a Coy+, accommodation for 120-odd troops, a dozen TEU containers and cranes to put them on a dock.

    very roughly, an EPV is a Patrol Vessel that can do other stuff, and an MRV is an Assault Ship that can do patrolling - think the Bay Class LPD(A)'s of the RFA, just a bit smaller, and some cunning re-naming to get them passed the crusties/idiots...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    Thanks OS119, things are more or less as you say. When tenders were being invited for the ships mentioned above, the plan was 2 OPVs with an option for a third. The option will only be exercised when OPV1 is complete.
    The EPV was a separate RFP.It was for one 4000t Extended Patrol vessel. Basically the same duties as an OPV, only larger, about twice the size. The reason for the extra size being the better seakeeping this would provide. Then, as you have a frigate sized vessel, make the extra space useful, providing space for vehicles, troops and a Helideck to accomodate a 10 T helicopter.
    The decision on the EPV however is very much dependant on what the Defence Forces White paper has to say about the future make up of the Naval Service.
    All this of course depends on finance.

    The 2 OPVs are being funded by a very complex staged payment system, meaning that the €99m they cost will be paid over a 5 year period.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,968 ✭✭✭aindriu80


    I think they will have to come up with some kind of a new design for any frigate sized vessel in the future if they intend to get them. A lot of ship design has not changed a whole pile and could be a bit leaner.

    If you check out other nations navies and look at the frigates and destroyers they have, they could be designed better and cheaper. the vessels are no doubt capable but they aren't used 100% and either cash isn't a problem or their navies have never done any cash savings and put on the full thing into every ship.

    Still a frigate is a frigate and a destroyer is a destroyer. Another extended patrol vessel will get rid of a few old ships but that's about it. Any expansion in role really will take a new ship type.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    aindriu80 wrote: »
    I think they will have to come up with some kind of a new design for any frigate sized vessel in the future if they intend to get them. A lot of ship design has not changed a whole pile and could be a bit leaner.

    If you check out other nations navies and look at the frigates and destroyers they have, they could be designed better and cheaper. the vessels are no doubt capable but they aren't used 100% and either cash isn't a problem or their navies have never done any cash savings and put on the full thing into every ship.

    Still a frigate is a frigate and a destroyer is a destroyer. Another extended patrol vessel will get rid of a few old ships but that's about it. Any expansion in role really will take a new ship type.

    Aindriu, with all respect, you are in walter mitty land. We have no need for, nor can we afford a frigate or destroyer. The most modern destroyer near to us, the RN Type 45, cost €1bn each, compared to our OPV, which will do the same duties that the Frigates will spend most of their lives doing, for About €50m. Our EPV concept, which would be similar in size to most frigates, would still only cost about €90m.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,968 ✭✭✭aindriu80


    I guess you get what you pay for and we don't have any isles in the south Atlantic to worry about. They could get them a lot better and cheaper that's all I can say.

    I could stretch my imagination for a frigate though regardless of what state the country is in. The dutch have some extremely capable frigates about half that price. De Zeven Provinciën class frigate €600 million each (wiki). Something more capable than a PV or extended PV should be got.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    aindriu80 wrote: »
    I guess you get what you pay for and we don't have any isles in the south Atlantic to worry about. They could get them a lot better and cheaper that's all I can say.

    I could stretch my imagination for a frigate though regardless of what state the country is in. The dutch have some extremely capable frigates about half that price. De Zeven Provinciën class frigate €600 million each (wiki). Something more capable than a PV or extended PV should be got.

    How do you know capable the EPV will be when it has not been designed, never mind built yet.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,968 ✭✭✭aindriu80


    How do you know capable the EPV will be when it has not been designed, never mind built yet.

    depends on what they come up with. It just sounds like a stretched PV to me.

    At the moment the new ships (10 year old design) will no doubt do a better job than the ships we have but nothing new.


Advertisement