3 New Navy Vessels for Irish Naval Service

sparky42

roadmaster wrote: »

So say our vessels engaged the pirates and the pirates fired rpgs or maybe something heavier back would are vessels we able to take the hit with existing damage control and stay a float?

What is portable enough to fit on the skiffs that the pirates use but heavier than an RPG? The only thing that would come to mind would be a suicide attack ala the USS Cole, but that would mean letting them get that close.

I'd say you'd need plenty of RPG's to threaten the floatation of any ship along with a complete failure of Damage Control.

Really the Irish ships are no better or worse protected than other navies ships.

Tabnabs

An RPG, at close range, against a ship

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pu1lsoxxuMI

Now change that to a naval ship and out in open seas...

Cork boy 55

^^^^

That RPG hit a container full of illegal cigarettes on there way to Ireland
and led to an investigation and arrests IIRC.

Local-womanizer

Cork boy 55 wrote: »

^^^^

That RPG hit a container full of illegal cigarettes on there way to Ireland
and led to an investigation and arrests IIRC.

Customs are really stepping up their game!

nowecant

In case anyone has not seen this

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/waiting-for-beckett-navy-to-get-new-ship-in-weeks-29884493.html

Waiting for Beckett: Navy to get new ship in weeks


THE Naval Service's new €50m 'Star Wars' patrol vessel will be delivered in six weeks after undergoing sea trials in the UK.

The LE Samuel Beckett will replace the 35-year-old LE Emer which was sold at auction last October to an African consortium.

The new ship will bring Ireland's fleet back to full capacity with a second new vessel, LE James Joyce, due for delivery in 2015.

The new ships, built by Babcock Marine in the UK, are developments of the design chosen for the LE Roisin/LE Niamh in 1997. However, the LE Samuel Beckett boasts so-called 'Star Wars' technology and is capable of operating remotely controlled drones or aerial vehicles.

Naval Service officials confirmed that the new ship will dramatically increase the technological capacity of the navy both in terms of surveillance and incident response times.

The ability to operate drones, which are already used by the Defence Forces, will also dramatically increase the navy's patrol and surveillance capabilities.

The ship can similarly operate remotely controlled mini-submarines. With a top speed of 23 knots, the new ships are faster than the vessels they replace.

Ireland has an option for a third vessel from the UK yard but the order can be stalled until 2015.

The Government has insisted the deal represents value for money and warned that Ireland cannot afford to revert to the "bad old days" of the 40s and 50s, when the Naval Service was totally reliant on a fleet of ageing and obsolete former Royal Navy corvettes.

The new ships are the first commissioned for the Naval Service in a decade.

Irish Independent

MRnotlob606

we do have a an efficient navy but I think we need more vessels, le eithne is approaching 30 years old and its our flagship,I know Iceland doesn't have an a navy but its flagship of its costguard service is a 93 meter long OPV,I think it would be nice if we had something similar http://www.lhg.is/media/skip/thor/large/THOR8.jpg

sparky42

MRnotlob606 wrote: »

we do have a an efficient navy but I think we need more vessels, le eithne is approaching 30 years old and its our flagship,I know Iceland doesn't have an a navy but its flagship of its costguard service is a 93 meter long OPV,I think it would be nice if we had something similar http://www.lhg.is/media/skip/thor/large/THOR8.jpg

The two new ships will be pretty much the same size, faster and better armed, the Thor only has refueling capability for their helicopters not a hanger so that's still limited. The bollard pull I could see as being beneficial to the navy for emergencies like that bulk carrier off Kinsale.

I wonder how much she cost?

Maoltuile

nowecant wrote: »

In case anyone has not seen this

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/waiting-for-beckett-navy-to-get-new-ship-in-weeks-29884493.html

The tossers have a photograph of the Eithne, not the Emer.

nowecant

Oh its woeful journalism all right. But at least its some confirmation of a time scale.

I'm just hoping they announce that they are taking up the option of a third such OPV in the coming months.

sparky42

Maoltuile wrote: »

The tossers have a photograph of the Eithne, not the Emer.

I guess the Indo can't even look up Wiki to get the right ship:rolleyes:

sparky42

nowecant wrote: »

I'm just hoping they announce that they are taking up the option of a third such OPV in the coming months.

I'd guess that they'll push it to next years budget time at best in order to push out the costs as far as possible but if we have the option till 2015 that's not too bad.

MRnotlob606

maybe they could do with a MRV ?

nowecant

MRnotlob606 wrote: »

maybe they could do with a MRV ?

If you read back through the posts there has been some discussion about this possibility, though even optimists on the topic would put it several years off

Larbre34

nowecant wrote: »

If you read back through the posts there has been some discussion about this possibility, though even optimists on the topic would put it several years off

The DoD should be doing the research and specification for it now. The lead time on the P60's has been 7 years, they can be assessing off the shelf versus bespoke and getting the right option to fulfill the role for 30 years. Apart from the frigates our own Navy would be a similar order to the RNZN, and they have had serious problems with their MRV, Canterbury due to deficient design and fundamental flaws. That vessel cost €80m equivalent so if we are looking at spending 80-100m there are good lessons to be learned in a long design and build process.

goldie fish

Larbre34 wrote: »

The DoD should be doing the research and specification for it now. The lead time on the P60's has been 7 years, they can be assessing off the shelf versus bespoke and getting the right option to fulfill the role for 30 years. Apart from the frigates our own Navy would be a similar order to the RNZN, and they have had serious problems with their MRV, Canterbury due to deficient design and fundamental flaws. That vessel cost €80m equivalent so if we are looking at spending 80-100m there are good lessons to be learned in a long design and build process.

It's been done, an RFP was even issued, back in 2008. €180m (in 2008) was the expected cost for an EPV/MRV*. A decision on whether or not to tender for this type of ship would be taken after a decision is made whether or not to exercise the 3rd OPV option. A lot has been learnt from the Kiwi difficulties.

* (MRV is no longer used as an abbreviation for this type of ship, as it could be confused with the Cavalry Medium Recce Vehicle)

Tabnabs

Never mind the cost of building it, the cost of manning it would be phenomenal

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4a/US_Navy_110423-N-ZF681-011_Capt._Jesse_A._Wilson_commander_of_Pacific_Partnership_sits_in_the_captain%27s_chair_aboard_the_New_Zealand_navy_multirole.jpg/800px-US_Navy_110423-N-ZF681-011_Capt._Jesse_A._Wilson_commander_of_Pacific_Partnership_sits_in_the_captain%27s_chair_aboard_the_New_Zealand_navy_multirole.jpg

I've sailed on ships with smaller crews than that gathering.

goldie fish

Tabnabs wrote: »

Never mind the cost of building it, the cost of manning it would be phenomenal

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4a/US_Navy_110423-N-ZF681-011_Capt._Jesse_A._Wilson_commander_of_Pacific_Partnership_sits_in_the_captain%27s_chair_aboard_the_New_Zealand_navy_multirole.jpg/800px-US_Navy_110423-N-ZF681-011_Capt._Jesse_A._Wilson_commander_of_Pacific_Partnership_sits_in_the_captain%27s_chair_aboard_the_New_Zealand_navy_multirole.jpg

I've sailed on ships with smaller crews than that gathering.

That's just visitors. The crew on the HMNZS Canterbury is relatively small, at 109 in total, including 53 of the core ship's company, ten flight crew, four government agency officials, seven Army staff and 35 trainees.

Larbre34

goldie fish wrote: »

* (MRV is no longer used as an abbreviation for this type of ship, as it could be confused with the Cavalry Medium Recce Vehicle)

Pedantic Pete strikes again. MRV is a globally recognised term or MRSV if you prefer. Put the two side by side on the water of Cork harbour and the confusion would end quick enough.

goldie fish

Larbre34 wrote: »

Pedantic Pete strikes again. MRV is a globally recognised term or MRSV if you prefer. Put the two side by side on the water of Cork harbour and the confusion would end quick enough.

I'm not being pedantic.

Appendix B Con/195/2006
Statement of Requirement EPV
Naval Service Patrol vessels are required to undertake a range of duties including, fishery protection, search and rescue, maritime protection, drug interdiction, anti-pollution and maritime security duties, including vessel boarding. The EPV will be required to provide an extended patrol capability capable of undertaking these duties throughout Ireland’s EEZ and in the adverse weather conditions of the North Atlantic. The following is an outline of the characteristics required to fulfil that role. The vessels must be designed and constructed to the Rules and Regulations of the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS).

Length 130 – 140M
Beam 16-20 m
Draft 4.0- 5.0 m

Max Speed 22-26 Kts Cruise Speed 15 Kts Loiter Speed 0 – 8 Kts

Range 8,500 nm Endurance 24 days

Propulsion Diesel, Diesel Electric, DE Hybrid,
Power Generation Diesel Generators, Shaft Alternator, PTO/PTI

Communications HF, VHF, UHF, GMDSS, SAT
Radars Navigation and Air Defence
Stabilisation Active and Passive

Flight Deck 1 Spot for a 10 metric tonne helicopter

Medical LEVEL 11, for 2 pers.

Accommodation Crew + 12 trainees.

Options
Proposals should be provided for the following additional options
1.Helicopter in-flight Refuelling Facility
2.Provision of Dynamic Positioning class 2 or 3
3.Because of the required size of the vessel, there may be potential to increase the utility of the vessel in other roles which would be desirable but not essential.* In this regard, the potential to provide a level of carrying capability for personnel, military vehicles and containers within the size and configuration of the vessel to which the mandatory requirements give rise, should be set out in the proposals.
In this regard, the proposal should indicate the possible arrangements/ combinations of personnel, vehicles and containers that could be accommodated and should indicate the lane metres that can be designed into the vessel.* Annex A indicates the type of items which might be carried on the vessel although not necessarily at the same time.* Proposals should include separately the option of a facility for cargo discharge where no port infrastructure exists.* The implications of including such carrying capacity and cargo discharge arrangements on the nature of the proposed vessel should be fully outlined in the proposal. As already stated above, these optional additional capabilities are desirable but are not essential requirements of the proposed patrol vessel.

nowecant

I've said it before but when I see that description I always think of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMS_Absalon_%28L16%29 but with significantly less fire power.

aindriu80

nowecant wrote: »

I've said it before but when I see that description I always think of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMS_Absalon_%28L16%29 but with significantly less fire power.

I think its a poor man frigate.

zone 1

aindriu80 wrote: »

I think its a poor man frigate.

its a lot better than anything the irish navy have at the moment. not there own fault i must say. im sure if they were told they could have too they would bite your hand off.

goldie fish

aindriu80 wrote: »

I think its a poor man frigate.

If by frigate you mean random word to describe grey ship then yes.

However it's taskings are closer to that of a mixture of offshore Patrol vessel, and amphibious transport/support ship.

nowecant

goldie fish wrote: »

However it's taskings are closer to that of a mixture of offshore Patrol vessel, and amphibious transport/support ship.

Which by the description given seems to be what we are looking for

goldie fish

It all goes back to an interview given by the current DCOS when he was in charge of fleet operations.

The FACT is, seas are getting larger, and you need a longer ship to maintain station 12 months of the year. This is why the new OPVs are 90m long, and longer than their predecessors. We also share responsibility with Canada for some atlantic fishery protection. To do so all year round you need something even larger, at 130-140m. The larger the platform, the safer the crew.
You could make an OPV longer, but you'll have a lot of empty space. Why not put the extra space to other uses. To quote the DCOS "Steel is cheap and air is free". So the Extended Patrol vessel was born. The idea that the spare space could be used for storage of vehicles or Modular TEUs as already used by the defence forces for numerous tasks. Naturally you'll now have room for a helideck, may as well max it out to something most frequently seen overseas, 10 Tonne. That lets you land something like a Sikorsky S92. More importantly you are giving them and larger machines a safe deck to winch on and off.
The space used as a helideck can also be used to store TEUs or Vehicles. This could potentially save costs in shipping stores and equipment overseas, where normally commercial shipping is used (with it's associated risks).
People are getting bogged down on the amphib operations concept but in truth this is just a minor element in a platform that will be far more useful than just that. The TEUs in use already by the defence forces can let the ship become anything from a floating hospital, to salvage vessel, to ocean survey, to island relief, to humanitarian aid transport etc, etc.

Larbre34

Any sniff from the NS heads of a delivery date / show off for the Beckett? It comes to mind today as the CG in Dublin get their shiny new S-92

BowWow

About 5 weeks - see Post 336

Markcheese

aindriu80 wrote: »

I think its a poor man frigate.

The Danes already have frigates, the absalon does different things/has different roles to a frigate.... Doubt we'll get either

goldie fish

Larbre34 wrote: »

Any sniff from the NS heads of a delivery date / show off for the Beckett? It comes to mind today as the CG in Dublin get their shiny new S-92

Commissioning calendared for April in any event. Remaining work in Appledore has been limited due to the recent weather conditions. Not ideal for painting or aerial work.

zone 1

any new pictures Goldie of her