3 New Navy Vessels for Irish Naval Service

ancientmariner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118979008#Comment_118979008

For crapping in mid piece substitute SCRAPPING. Sorry.

saabsaab

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clacton_Spear

jonnybigwallet

I hope the people speccing this mooted MRV don't get too carried away on the humanitarian relief side of things and we end up with some toothless white elephant. Remember this is a military organisation not the bleedin Vincent de Paul! I'd like to see a ship capable of carrying out a tactical sea borne invasion (opposed), with pretty hefty firepower, and capable of putting 2 companies of soldiers ashore along with associated vehicles and weaponry. That's what let down the NZ ship in my opinion. Only really suitable for limited roles and not a true MRV. A couple of light attack helicopters to complement the above and 4 of them stealth attack craft made in Ireland by that firm down in Cork / Waterford as well as some landing craft. Let's see what the civil service comes up with. God knows we could do with a few ships with war fighting ability, and frankly we could well benefit from a couple of the "top of the range" Meko 100 series corvettes and an upgrade of the weapons systems carried on the 4 OPV's as they approach their quarter life heavy maintenance. They are just sitting ducks as they stand and have almost nil deterrence and self defence capability. We live in hope.

roadmaster

Jonny we need that 100% agree with you. We need to be able to carry out Seaborne invasion, it will come in very useful when we take back tory island and liberate it from the King of Tory

jonnybigwallet

I was thinking more in terms of support to overseas troops, with the necessary clout on hand in case they get into a dangerous situation. We don't want a scenario like what happened in the Congo all those years ago where we were waitin for Jonny Swede to reinforce us and they never rocked up at the party.

donvito99

We should not be procuring a vessel with the primary purpose of supporting peacekeeping. Let the Dept of Foreign Affairs do that.

We need ships and aircraft to fulfil proper defence roles that ensures continuity of supply to this island by sea.

In my view, we need to replace Eithne with a ship that can:

1. Offshore patrol - a Canterbury derivative cannot do that.

2. General sea going training to rebuild the NS - big enough to accommodate trainees, teaching facilities.

3. Provision for bow/towed array sonar to re-train in art of ASW, and also MCM.

4. Provision for helicopter and hanger.

5. Mission space for NSDS equipment and other TEUs for MCM.

6. The legs/endurance to go around the world to train/exercise.

Basically a bigger version of the HMNZS Otago/Wellington class, like the new USGC OPC by Card.

If we want to move a battalion minus to wherever, the State should buy a car ferry as part of some sort of strategic reserve.

sparky42

The reasoning, design and pricing range of the MRV was set over a decade ago at this stage (hell nearly 20 years), we know the basic idea of what it will be, and that is nothing like what the last few posts have suggested.

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118997239#Comment_118997239

That's a different ship completely you are looking for. The Eithne replacement is already well advanced in planning & proposed design stage.

We are not looking at a Canterbury derivative. NZ has its own needs, which are not ours. We don't have to look after Cape Verde Islands for example. On the other side of the Globe, NZ is expected to do similar, and also encounter frequent earthquakes, volcanoes and Tsunami. That's not something we expect in the lifetime of this vessel (though We may see them from time to time in The Canaries & Iceland, they are not in our AO.)

We have plenty of ships for sea going training. No dedicated training vessel is required. The only others who have one are the Russian Navy, and that's hardly a worthwhile comparator. Point 4, 5 and 6 are included in the proposed ship already.

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118997298#Comment_118997298

Some people only know ships from watching TV or reading a book in the library once titled "my big book of ships".

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118997833#Comment_118997833

How busy are ship yards at the moment? Will we have to wait in line or will builders be knocking the door down to tender?

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118998541#Comment_118998541

Depends on the yard, Some countries closed down completely during covid, and have a backlog of work, others stayed running as an essential service. The tender could also state "for delivery no later than", which would whittle down the options.

Either way It'll be 4 years at best before we see a hull in the water, assuming tenders & contracts are sorted quickly.

Gary kk

Not sure what percentage material comes into cost but normal building steel is very expensive at moment.

donvito99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118997298#Comment_118997298

It does not matter when the price and scope of this project was determined. The NS is going to be supplied with a taxi for the army and that is a nonsense for an island nation on the extreme of Europe without a navy

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119000076#Comment_119000076

Mate, you're talking nonsense.

Manic Moran

Basically a bigger version of the HMNZS Otago/Wellington class, like the new USGC OPC by Card.

I've occasionally wondered why buying from the USCG supply chain isn't done, honestly. They have ocean-going vessels designed to handle pretty rough waters, with a primary law enforcement/rescue role and a secondary warfighting role. Sounds pretty much right what the NS would need for all practical purposes.

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119000193#Comment_119000193

Is it not to do with the US Arms industry being like the Sopranos once you deal with them there is no getting out

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119000193#Comment_119000193

As it happens, the folks who designed the P60, VARD (Not Card) a Canadian design house (with offices in Texas to get around the Jones act & protectionism) also provided a design for the USCG. The Heritage class is based on the VARD 7110. The P60 is the Vard 7090 and the P50 class are of the Vard 7080 design. The MRV could possibly be similar to the Vard 7313, a variant of which is currently being constructed for the Chilean Navy (or it may be a similar concept designed by other builders, that decision has yet to be made officially).

Vard also designed the Canadian AOPV.

Problem is though buying from US yards adds cost, as the US shipyards are tied in knots with outdated work practices and unnecessary delays caused by human factors, add to that the extra tarrifs that would be added to the cost by the EU. The Protectionism of the US maritime sector is counter productive. This is why so much building is either for the Department of Defense or for Jones Act merchant vessels.

For us to have a ship built in the US it would need mostly European made equipment, which would need to be shipped over (not sourced locally because you folk are still fond of your inches when it comes to tooling), adding greatly to cost. For example the Heritage class is armed with (among other things) the Mark 110 57m, which is a US made version of the Bofors 57mm L70 mk3. Could you guarantee they would share the same parts bin? It takes 72 hrs to ship a part overland & sea from Sweden. In a situation similar to the Icelandic volcano from some years ago, how long would it take to ship something by sea from Kentucky?

donvito99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119000095#Comment_119000095

An enormous ship designed for the purpose of aiding the Carribbean after a hurricane or swapping Mowags to the Leb every so often is a nonsense.

roadmaster

I wonder with the MRV will they look to use automated systems as much as possabile to reduce crew requirements

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119000826#Comment_119000826

again, you are 20 years late in deciding this isn’t what we are getting, if it wasn’t for the Crash she would likely be 10 years in service now. We are not buying what you have decided we should, nor can I see the logic in declaring that an island nation shouldn’t have some degree of organic lift. What’s next? If the AC might get a transport will you declare that it’s crazy to buy such a capability when we don’t have fighters?

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119000936#Comment_119000936

Definitely. On a related note, the IPVs will be the first ships with unmanned engineering spaces. No more mechs doing rounds, instead all the info they need will be on a screen, in the bridge. Obviously the crew will still consist of an engineering branch, but they'll have more time for other tasks.

HNLMS Karel Doorman has an operational crew of 159, but the ship can be operated safely with half that.

ancientmariner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119000936#Comment_119000936

Modern ship design brings with it automated systems with built-in digital controlled responses to maximise required outputs or responses. Crew is very much based on number of stations or equipment pieces to be manned 24/7 or during Stand To or action stations. The more weapons or operational responses needed, the more crew required. Skimped crew during a long full Stand To eventually drains the ability to maintain full capability during prolonged actions.

Ships built by EU nations must conform to EU Tender and purchase requirements. Obviously purchasing within the EU Basket of currencies will help conclude builds swiftly and reduce rancour and case making. Most of what we need is available in Europe for assessment, selecting, and building.

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119000826#Comment_119000826

Enormous? How big do you think its going to be?

Again mate, people who work in the sector, with far more knowledge than you are I about these things have decided on this ship. Indeed it is a matter of government policy.

Would you prefer we weren't available for HADR when our neighbours need it most? Dou you want us relying on civvy ships or other nations warships to support our overseas operations?

Do you think our maritime responsibilities should end inside the EEZ? What makes you think this ship cannot tick all the boxes on your list? Please explain for example why the ship of who's design we cannot be sure of as yet cannot do offshore patrol?

donvito99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119001125#Comment_119001125

Until a contract is signed, the design of the MRV is fair game. The fact that it has been vapourware for 20 years demands a rethink, especially so in the context of the Commission Report and the invasion of Ukraine.

If we need "organic lift", get a proper lo-lo for that and stick it in strategic reserve a la the RNs Point Class. We're planning to buy a jack of all trades, master of none

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119001191#Comment_119001191

The "people who work in the sector" are dancing to the tune of a "government policy" centred around peacekeeping, a secondary tasking. They're doing as they're told.

Which one of our "neighbours" will require a ship of this sort for HADR? If there's a crisis in Belgium, are you planning an over a beach landing of JCBs? If we're New Zealand, on the edge of the planet with thousands of remote outlying islands, fair enough.

Our "maritime responsibility" as a neutral country in Europe is in Europe. If we're in NATO and if we had colonies, a ship to go gallivanting around the world can be justified.

A big, stupid ship cannot efficiently do patrol duties as the Kiwis have found out. The experts in the NS are aware of this and are no doubt thinking of how to explain to the public that the biggest investment in defence in the history of the state needs to go half way around the world to be of any use to anyone. Meanwhile the Russians will have invaded Moldova.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119001646#Comment_119001646

The Commission was fully briefed by the NS on the MRV and what they intend for it, what makes you think they didn’t take it into account when making their recommendations? Why do you think the LoA2 suggestion is just to accelerate the purchase of new hulls and increase manning rather than ripping up and starting over? It’s been vapourware because of budgets since the Crash, not because the NS didn’t want it, nor do I see why she would be limited to just HADR, no reason why she couldn’t operate with other navies in an Operation Atalanta style mission for example, or why she shouldn’t be bought while the NS plans/hopes for more combat capable ships as we are talking about a service life of multiple decades.

The other point is of course that for her budget allowance, at best you might get one NATO standard Corvette class hull, which isn’t really a useful investment either.

ancientmariner

If we think Defence at sea and stay within maritime combat features. A possible relevant fleet to add to the remaining 6 OPV's would be 2 Mine clearance vessels with necessary remote units, 2 missile European Corvettes, 3 AIP Submarines, an MRV as intended, and two further naval bases . In addition about 10 small craft, up to 30metres, for training and miscellaneous patrol duties. The MRV should also be fitted as a command vessel in addition to support/logistics. What we have spent on past Fiscal mistakes would cover it nicely. The complete Maritime Defence also needs relevant support from MAP flights and land based Radar coverage. Establishment about 1450 plus a usable Naval Reserve with job protection and callable for 3 month Duties. The alternative is to join an alliance and let them fit us into an Order of Battle relevant to EU needs.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119002648#Comment_119002648

Establishment of sub 1500 and a Reserve is arguable the bare bones number for sustaining the fleet as is to provide adequate supports and crews. There is simply no way you are sustaining a fleet of that size for under 1500 people even with a functioning reserve, not with all the specialists you’d need, nor is there any public appetite for joining an alliance looking at the most recent polling.

Just for example the RNZN running 2 frigates, 4 OPVs, an MRV, an AOR and a survey ship has 2000+ full time, and 500 Reserve and Civilian personnel.

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119001646#Comment_119001646

1. Wrong
2. no
3. Wrong again. So wrong.
4. So you are saying "let em drown" good to know where you stand. Any nation outside the EU border is our neighbour.
5. Our foreign aid budget says otherwise.
6. Wrong again.

Markcheese

What's the crew and finance to run a mine clearer or Corvette for a year

Versus an f16 or grippen .. ? Which would fill more rolls and probably have more capability anyway ..

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119003732#Comment_119003732

Dont think a Gripen or F16 would be a good asset for raiding a drugs boat in the middle of winter of the west coast