3 New Navy Vessels for Irish Naval Service

sparky42

Heraldoffreeent wrote: »

After all these years though, I still like the look of Eithne, much more Naval looking than the P20's, who look more like converted trawlers than warships.
Its a pity the project for the P30's didn't proceed with the planned three ships rather than one, the second and third ships would have been improvements on her.

Agreed, a natural development of the design would have been good to see, the 20's for what they were did what they said on the tin. If we had the 3 ships, we might have seen the Air Corps much more active. But sadly it never came to pass and we got the Peacocks instead.

Heraldoffreeent

sparky42 wrote: »

Agreed, a natural development of the design would have been good to see, the 20's for what they were did what they said on the tin. If we had the 3 ships, we might have seen the Air Corps much more active. But sadly it never came to pass and we got the Peacocks instead.

Its possible the whole heli thing would have developed, but unless they did something with the size of the 2nd and 3rd ships I'd say we'd still end up where we are today.

If I rem correctly, P31 still ended up costing the same as the three ships were budgeted to.

The P20's were OK for the 3mile/12mile limit but nothing more really.

In fairness, the Peacocks were an opportune buy at the time, and at least the OTO Malera was introduced.

I'm in 2 minds as to whether the DOD should have bought the three Amazonas/Trinidadian ships. I think the Brazilians paid €133m for the Job lot, I'm sure some Capital financing company would haave done a hire purchase deal on them. Being based on the River class, they should have been fairly well suited to our conditions with a few modifications.....like extending the superstructure further toward the stern.

mikeym

Heraldoffreeent wrote: »

The P20's were OK for the 3mile/12mile limit but nothing more really.

The P20 Deirdre class are well capable of patroling harsh waters 100-200 miles away from land.

They have been doing it for more than 30 years.

Maybe you got mixed up with the coastal patrol vessels.

nowecant

So has anyone any information about how Sam is working out?

Is he all that they hoped for?

sparky42

nowecant wrote: »

So has anyone any information about how Sam is working out?

Is he all that they hoped for?

Wouldn't it be a bit early to tell (short of anything majorly wrong), she's still working up at the moment, I would have thought you'd need a couple of months of routine operations to be able to decide.

Markcheese

And maybe a couple of nasty storms !!

BowWow

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/third-new-ship-to-be-announced-for-navy-270645.html

nowecant

BowWow wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/third-new-ship-to-be-announced-for-navy-270645.html

Thats great news. I have long thought that this was the best approach, so long as the Beckett class was up to scratch that is.

Hopefully now they can start looking towards replacing the P31 with an EPV while having the luxury of having enough time to make a well founded decision.

sparky42

nowecant wrote: »

Thats great news. I have long thought that this was the best approach, so long as the Beckett class was up to scratch that is.

Hopefully now they can start looking towards replacing the P31 with an EPV while having the luxury of having enough time to make a well founded decision.

It's great to hear that this might actually happen, I'm guessing it will be close to the end of the option, though Babcock might be eager to get a sign off.

In terms of replacements, given the age profile there's not exactly a lot more time to think/plan/budget.

nowecant

sparky42 wrote: »

In terms of replacements, given the age profile there's not exactly a lot more time to think/plan/budget.

Its still more than if they were trying to replace the last of the P20s with an EPV in the next 2 years (I'm not sure which will be decommissioned next but presumably P23 will be last)

I believe that most of these should have been replaced several years ago but the P31 is still four years younger than P23. That will give them some additional time If they keep replacement at the current levels/time/age

Considering the additional cost benefits of commissioning multiples of the same design what is the likelihood that rather than designing one large EPV that will fulfil our needs that they design 2 or more smaller ships which could be used in tandem. It would also mean that we would be less exposed to scheduling around refits etc.

Five Lamps

From the examiner article:

"David Stanton TD says it’s imperative that the Navy be given the best equipment possible because of its role in defending increased territorial waters which may harbour huge reserves in oil and gas."

Who are we defending against? Assuming that we are to engage in battleship diplomacy against our nearest neigbours (assuming the Russians don't get bored of the Ukraine and China of their neighbours) are we making the right decisions in ship purchase and how they are armed?

Even if we're not going to war just yet, it seems a rather old fashioned approach to what is needed these days.

Why did they put 2 x 20mm Rheinmetall cannons on this boat?

thomil

Five Lamps wrote: »

Who are we defending against? Assuming that we are to engage in battleship diplomacy against our nearest neigbours (assuming the Russians don't get bored of the Ukraine and China of their neighbours) are we making the right decisions in ship purchase and how they are armed?

Even if we're not going to war just yet, it seems a rather old fashioned approach to what is needed these days.

Why did they put 2 x 20mm Rheinmetall cannons on this boat?

The Irish Navy is most definitely not equipped to handle a full scale naval conflict, but that is not what it's there for. It is mostly tasked with maritime policing roles, support for search and rescue operations, fisheries protection, or drug interdiction, jobs that are often left to the Coast Guards or fishery protection services in countries that are better off financially.
Given that role, the acquisition of the Beckett Class vessels is certainly the right decision. However, the fact that Irelands EEZ, and the area that the Naval Service is tasked with patrolling has extended dramatically over the last decades, the acquisition of at least one EPV, preferably several, is something that should seriously be considered.
As far as the armament, Ireland currently simply doesn't need heavily armed surface platforms. Don't forget that it is not only the weapons systems themselves that need to be purchased, but also targeting systems, maintenance capabilities on shore, training, spare parts, extra missiles, etc. None of this currently exists in Ireland, and would have to be built up, which just adds to the costs, and doesn't help the Naval Service in its day to day operations. Planning for a new class of ships with on-board helicopters, and actually carrying out such a construction program would make more sense in my opinion.

beauf

battleship diplomacy ?

Capt'n Midnight

beauf wrote: »

battleship diplomacy ?

Yeah , we've a window of opportunity before the neighbours get operational carriers again.

jimeryan22

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Yeah , we've a window of opportunity before the neighbours get operational carriers again.

Neighbours..?

Tabnabs

jimeryan22 wrote: »

Neighbours..?

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/the-equipment/ships/future-ships/aircraft-carrier

jimeryan22

Tabnabs wrote: »

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/the-equipment/ships/future-ships/aircraft-carrier

Yeah I got it was the British alright... Just am surprised to know we're in competition with them... You realise if you go back to after the ice age, when our islands became islands. England Ireland Scotland and Wales were all Celtic.. Not Gauls like on mainland Europe like we've always been taught.. In fact it's even been confirmed through DNA that we're the same and also different at the same time to mainland Europe... The Brits have just forgotten that's all..

Five Lamps

thomil wrote: »

The Irish Navy is most definitely not equipped to handle a full scale naval conflict, but that is not what it's there for. It is mostly tasked with maritime policing roles, support for search and rescue operations, fisheries protection, or drug interdiction, jobs that are often left to the Coast Guards or fishery protection services in countries that are better off financially.
Given that role, the acquisition of the Beckett Class vessels is certainly the right decision. However, the fact that Irelands EEZ, and the area that the Naval Service is tasked with patrolling has extended dramatically over the last decades, the acquisition of at least one EPV, preferably several, is something that should seriously be considered.
As far as the armament, Ireland currently simply doesn't need heavily armed surface platforms. Don't forget that it is not only the weapons systems themselves that need to be purchased, but also targeting systems, maintenance capabilities on shore, training, spare parts, extra missiles, etc. None of this currently exists in Ireland, and would have to be built up, which just adds to the costs, and doesn't help the Naval Service in its day to day operations. Planning for a new class of ships with on-board helicopters, and actually carrying out such a construction program would make more sense in my opinion.

Mostly agree but why put a pea shooter on the front? Would it not have been more appropriate to look at missile systems even with the additional costs outlined. Even talk of UAV's makes perfect sense over looking (longterm) at ships that can carry helicopters. Also wondering why 20mm canons are installed?

sparky42

Five Lamps wrote: »

Mostly agree but why put a pea shooter on the front? Would it not have been more appropriate to look at missile systems even with the additional costs outlined. Even talk of UAV's makes perfect sense over looking (longterm) at ships that can carry helicopters. Also wondering why 20mm canons are installed?

You do realise that the 76mm is an extremely common naval gun with service from the USN to many of the European navies to Asian navies? Hell some consider the 76mm larger than what we need, since the RN OPV's mount smaller guns, while the USN is going down to the 57mm on the LCS.

What exactly are you asking about in terms of a missile system? Anti air, anti ship, anti small craft? None of those are cheap, low maintenance or really useful for naval policing operations (ie they are good for destroying things, not so good for less than lethal actions). Why exactly given our position and the use of our navy are you suggesting we need them? And most naval ships carry secondary crew served weapons around the 20-30mm range (pretty much all NATO ships have some type of those weapons).

The Irish Navy is a patrol navy that is never going to be deployed into heavy combat, and short of both massive global change and systemic change in how we Irish view defence we are never going to pay for what you are suggesting.

roundymac

Oh it has to be an anti shipping missile of course, be able to blow any trawler that is fishing in our waters clean out of them, there would be no need to board them any more or arrest them and bring them to court.

Morpheus

Five Lamps wrote: »

Mostly agree but why put a pea shooter on the front? Would it not have been more appropriate to look at missile systems even with the additional costs outlined. Even talk of UAV's makes perfect sense over looking (longterm) at ships that can carry helicopters. Also wondering why 20mm canons are installed?

Very hard to fire a warning shot across a bow with a precision strike weapon :rolleyes:

Tabnabs

jimeryan22 wrote: »

Yeah I got it was the British alright... Just am surprised to know we're in competition with them... You realise if you go back to after the ice age, when our islands became islands. England Ireland Scotland and Wales were all Celtic.. Not Gauls like on mainland Europe like we've always been taught.. In fact it's even been confirmed through DNA that we're the same and also different at the same time to mainland Europe... The Brits have just forgotten that's all..

Ah, I think it was just a bit of a joke really...

sparky42

roundymac wrote: »

Oh it has to be an anti shipping missile of course, be able to blow any trawler that is fishing in our waters clean out of them, there would be no need to board them any more or arrest them and bring them to court.

Good in theory, but somehow I get the feeling that it might have some slight international repercussions if we start sinking every foreign trawler, nations tend to get a bit annoyed about such things.

Heraldoffreeent

I'd imagine that if a decision was made to send a ship to a more dangerous environment where hot pieces of metal were to be flying about close by, that a CIWS would be on the shopping list.These don't come cheap, 10-15 million ea. if I remember from some stats I saw for Phalanx or GK. Also they're very demanding on power IIRC, and I'd imagine each ship would require two.


Having said that, Its interesting that the new ships have a requirement for 3 TEU's on the aft deck. In light of this I'm wondering are there modular Anti Air/Anti-small craft missile systems that could use this functionality in the future and if so, would the FCS be compatible or would a new system be required?

mikeym

Le Sam is currently in Cork City tours Friday & Sunday 3-5pm.

No tours Saturday.

sparky42

Heraldoffreeent wrote: »

I'd imagine that if a decision was made to send a ship to a more dangerous environment where hot pieces of metal were to be flying about close by, that a CIWS would be on the shopping list.These don't come cheap, 10-15 million ea. if I remember from some stats I saw for Phalanx or GK. Also they're very demanding on power IIRC, and I'd imagine each ship would require two.


Having said that, Its interesting that the new ships have a requirement for 3 TEU's on the aft deck. In light of this I'm wondering are there modular Anti Air/Anti-small craft missile systems that could use this functionality in the future and if so, would the FCS be compatible or would a new system be required?

GK is out as that requires undermount/underdeck work as well from what I remember. Theoretically Phlananx could be mounted but I'd guess you'd need significant upperworks modifications for it.

In terms of the TEU's they don't have an air search radar system currently, so maybe something shortranged like a MANPADS system or something in airdefence. Aren't pretty much the rest of the anti-air missiles "Hot launches". Maybe something like the light anti-small craft missile systems that are meant to be used in the LCS though I don't know if anyone has put it into something like a 20 ft container.

thomil

Five Lamps wrote: »

Mostly agree but why put a pea shooter on the front? Would it not have been more appropriate to look at missile systems even with the additional costs outlined. Even talk of UAV's makes perfect sense over looking (longterm) at ships that can carry helicopters. Also wondering why 20mm canons are installed?

As far as I know, VTOL UAVs that come close to the performance of modern ship-borne helicopters are not yet in production. Furthermore, UAVs are by their very principle not suited for assisting boardings or SAR operations. The flexibility offered by helicopters over UAVs is well worth the extra cost in my opinion.
As for the 20mm Rheinmetalls, they are designed to take on targets that are too small, too fast, or too close for the Oto Melara guns to lock on to. If there is one thing a navy ship can't do without, it is short range rapid-fire guns. The attack on USS Cole (DDG67) pressed that point home. One could argue though that it would be prudent to replace them with more modern remote controlled platforms, but the principle of these guns is more valid now than ever before.
Concerning your point about missiles, while it certainly would be nice, I see three major problems with that:

Space: None of the Irish Naval Service's ships has enough space on deck or below deck to hold missile launchers. They simply weren't designed for it. It isn't just the launcher itself, it is the accompanying magazine space, firefighting and damage control procedures, all this is not designed for it. This would require a massive refit of every ship in the fleet that is expected to serve for more than a few more years. Remember, even the new Samuel Beckett class ships aren't particularly large, and they are the largest ships in the fleet.

Fire Control/Command & Control: There is no provision for the needed military grade Sea Search of Fire Control radars to be installed on Naval Service Vessels. Like with the missile launchers, this would require a refit and reconfiguration of the ships. While it is technically possible, the cost would be astronomical.
As far as Command & Control is concerned, I am not sure if Irish Naval Vessels have central C&C facilities similar to the CIC on a US warship or the Control Room of Royal Navy vessels. If they do, are they laid out in a way that they can accommodate the extra control stations, etc, or does this need to be completely reconfigured as well?

Operational profile: What missiles are we talking about? Anti Air, Anti Surface, or Anti-Submarine Systems such as ASROC? If we go for SAMs, what range are we looking at? Should they be able to have an area defense capability, or just short range point defense systems like Sea Sparrow? When it comes to Surface to Surface Missiles, do we go fort shorter range platforms, or for something along the lines of a Tomahawk (okay, going to the extremes with that one)? Do we go for radar guided missiles, or infrared guided systems? And, most importantly, what kind of targets will we use them against, and how likely is it that we are going to use them?

As I said, in principle, I agree with you that missiles are a nice to have accessory to the capabilities of the fleet, but they are not essential. Helicopters on the other hand are, especially when it comes to covering large areas of ocean faster than a surface ship.

beauf

Simply they don't any of that stuff.

Helicopters would be useful. Or at least a functioning landing pad and refuelling.

mikeym

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/le-samuel-beckett-opens-to-the-public-271119.html#.U5HAmEbWI6I.facebook

The Irish Naval Service’s new state-of-the-art vessel, the LÉ Samuel Beckett, will open to the public for the first time today ahead of its official twinning with Cork city this weekend.

The €50m 90m long off-shore patrol vessel (OPV) will sail from naval headquarters in Haulbowline to Kennedy Quay today and will open for public tours from 3pm to 5pm.

Its skipper, Captain Kenneth Minihane, will sign the formal twinning document with the new Lord Mayor at a formal ceremony in City Hall at 4pm tomorrow.

The ship will also open for public tours from 3 to 5pm on Sunday.

mikeym

The MV Emer has left Verolme Cork Dockyard yesterday and is heading south.

It will probably never come back to Irish waters again.