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…5354565859…163

Comments

  • Options
    #1652
    Heraldoffreeent
    Registered Users Posts: 1,467 ✭✭✭Heraldoffreeent


    sparky42 wrote: »
    That's pretty much it, I mean frankly I'd like them to work up to the 9 ship force (if not more) but the core issue is she was never planned and therefore we haven't enlarged the manpower for her. I mean remember back when the order went in we were debating whether we'd get the 3, then a couple of days before Brexit we announced a 4th one (nothing to do with trying to get votes I'm sure), have they sorted the supply of the 76mm yet? I know she's sailing to Cobh without it.

    Well, they've tried recruiting, but the Examiner today shows how unsuccessful that was.

    The interesting comparison was between wages for DF and wages for Gardai,Nurses, coupled with the unfavorable conditions for families.

    Really they do need to look at pay, but Kehoe is such a useless minister, and Vradker seems pretty hands off in the Min Def role.

    Dunno about the Oto Malera, did I hear it was being shipped to the base?
    Where were the others sourced? Were they refurbed by Oto? Why is this one different? I wonder do they have another pair of 20's? There used be some rotated and used for training I think, but I can't rem how many pairs they sourced from the DeutscheKriegsMarine.


  • Options
    #1653
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Heraldoffreeent wrote: »
    Dunno about the Oto Malera, did I hear it was being shipped to the base?
    Where were the others sourced? Were they refurbed by Oto? Why is this one different? I wonder do they have another pair of 20's? There used be some rotated and used for training I think, but I can't rem how many pairs they sourced from the DeutscheKriegsMarine.


    They came from the refurbished stock the company has (with the USN decommissioning the Perry's I'd say there's a few spare) from memory, as to why it's different I'd say again it's the nature of the unplanned order, Babcock were desperate for the order cause the yard has nothing else so that was fine, I'd say Otto and ourselves were arguing over the cost of the mount.


    Like you I can't remember how many mounts we have, wonder if one of the Peacocks will be taken out of service for the crew?


  • Options
    #1654
    roadmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 3,747 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    Talking of peacocks i would not be surprised if babcock offered two more Becketts to replace them in order to keep the shipyard open ( with British state aid of course unofficially) It could work out well for us having the fleet near enough the same for training and parts supply


  • Options
    #1655
    Yawlboy
    Registered Users Posts: 748 ✭✭✭Yawlboy


    But isn’t the plan to replace the Peacocks with smaller ships with mine sweeping capabilities?


  • Options
    #1656
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Yawlboy wrote: »
    But isn’t the plan to replace the Peacocks with smaller ships with mine sweeping capabilities?


    That's what's in the WP, but what actually happens is another question, from memory there was nothing currently on the market that would provide the combination of speed/draft of the Peacocks for close in work along with the Mine Sweeping capabilities.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1657
    roadmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 3,747 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    Yawlboy wrote: »
    But isn’t the plan to replace the Peacocks with smaller ships with mine sweeping capabilities?

    its true that is what the WP says but with a ship yard with not much work on an offer could be put on the table to the government that they can not refuse.


  • Options
    #1658
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    roadmaster wrote: »
    its true that is what the WP says but with a ship yard with not much work on an offer could be put on the table to the government that they can not refuse.

    Given the yard is hoping to be part of the 31 bid they need something to keep going, and since 1 of the peacocks is the likely option for laying up for Shaws crew who knows.


  • Options
    #1659
    jonnybigwallet
    Registered Users Posts: 1,100 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    They must have some spare weapons from the 2 ships that were gotten rid of recently. They were sold minus the guns. What's all this talk about replacing the Peacocks? Surely the only capital spend left in the plan is for this multi role vessel to be used for humanitarian aid and to support overseas deployment by the army?


  • Options
    #1660
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    jonnybigwallet wrote: »
    They must have some spare weapons from the 2 ships that were gotten rid of recently. They were sold minus the guns. What's all this talk about replacing the Peacocks? Surely the only capital spend left in the plan is for this multi role vessel to be used for humanitarian aid and to support overseas deployment by the army?


    Oh for the love of god... What ships have we decommissioned recently? Those would be the P20's, now think hard did they have 76mm mounts? Their 20mm's were already moved to their replacements before they were decommissioned.


    And the talk about the Peacocks is because they are also end of lifing, and because 1 of them is most likely going to be laid up for the crew for Shaw, the capital budget isn't enough for the current spend, the Eithne replacement and the CASA's are happening roughly at the same time, that's at least 250m just for them.


  • Options
    #1661
    jonnybigwallet
    Registered Users Posts: 1,100 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    Cheers Sparky...I had me eye off the ball. If they are going for a replacement for the inshore patrol vessels...surely it would make sense to buy a couple of the mark 1 River class patrol vessels that the Royal Navy is floggin off (even though they are not that old at all) ? I'VE BEEN TRYIN TO KEEP A HANDLE ON THE SITUATION WRT SHIPS IN SERVICE AND DECOMMED, BUT THE NS WEBSITE HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED PROPERLY. ATB. JBW. BTW NO NEWS ON THE NEW MULTIROLE JOBBIE?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1662
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    jonnybigwallet wrote: »
    Cheers Sparky...I had me eye off the ball. If they are going for a replacement for the inshore patrol vessels...surely it would make sense to buy a couple of the mark 1 River class patrol vessels that the Royal Navy is floggin off (even though they are not that old at all) ? I'VE BEEN TRYIN TO KEEP A HANDLE ON THE SITUATION WRT SHIPS IN SERVICE AND DECOMMED, BUT THE NS WEBSITE HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED PROPERLY. ATB. JBW. BTW NO NEWS ON THE NEW MULTIROLE JOBBIE?


    The River's are OPV's not CPV's not too mention the UK is holding them due to a) BAE farcical if not criminal flaws in the Batch 2's that has had the first one returned and b) if needed for post Brexit patrols.


  • Options
    #1663
    roadmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 3,747 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    In a worse case scenario where everything bad about brexit comes to pass such as hard borders would the naval service need to consider boats like the custom cutters for patrolling carlingford lough and lough foyle


  • Options
    #1664
    Heraldoffreeent
    Registered Users Posts: 1,467 ✭✭✭Heraldoffreeent


    roadmaster wrote: »
    In a worse case scenario where everything bad about brexit comes to pass such as hard borders would the naval service need to consider boats like the custom cutters for patrolling carlingford lough and lough foyle

    Or if it goes really really bad,we could consider offering to take a few Aircraft carriers and destroyers off their hands in exchange for a years supply of Kerrygold and a few thousand sheeps?


  • Options
    #1665
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Heraldoffreeent wrote: »
    Or if it goes really really bad,we could consider offering to take a few Aircraft carriers and destroyers off their hands in exchange for a years supply of Kerrygold and a few thousand sheeps?


    Lets avoid the Destroyers with the bust engines anyway...


  • Options
    #1666
    roadmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 3,747 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    Is there any truth in this article where it says about basing naval ships in killybegs and Dun Laoghaire?

    https://afloat.ie/blogs/tom-macsweeney/item/39728-disgusted-by-government-s-maritime-ignorance-where-is-the-dept-of-marine


  • Options
    #1667
    Tabnabs
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,719 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    roadmaster wrote: »
    Is there any truth in this article where it says about basing naval ships in killybegs and Dun Laoghaire?

    https://afloat.ie/blogs/tom-macsweeney/item/39728-disgusted-by-government-s-maritime-ignorance-where-is-the-dept-of-marine

    Have heard the rumour about DL before, in the recent past. I believe it may well happen, but nothing has come of it yet.


  • Options
    #1668
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Tabnabs wrote: »
    Have heard the rumour about DL before, in the recent past. I believe it may well happen, but nothing has come of it yet.


    We can't fill our numbers right now, splitting the Navy up won't help that. As to the Incinerator, the Navy was forced to live for decades next to Steel and the Slag heap and nobody in the Government had an issue, I doubt very much they will care about the incinerator.


  • Options
    #1669
    Tabnabs
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,719 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    I heard it was in connection with Vice Admiral Mellett wanting to raise the profile of the NS and give them a more visible profile around the coast.


  • Options
    #1670
    jonnybigwallet
    Registered Users Posts: 1,100 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    The recent disastrous reorganisation of the DF has caused great hardship among members who have been forced to travel long distances to work and has contributed to the high numbers quitting. Since many of the guys in the navy are Cork lads I can't see them being enthusiastic about relocating to Dublin or Donegal (aside from the affordability issue). Hopefully the government has learned a lesson and will kick this daft idea into touch. Mind you I think it would be OKAY to establish some satellite facilities on the east and west coast, but Haulbowline is totally fit for purpose as the HQ and the navy is part of the social fabric of Cork life. Hopefully this stupid idea will get "blown out of the water" as we used to say in the officers mess after a few noggins of finest navy rum.


  • Options
    #1671
    roadmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 3,747 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    i know the actual docking facilitates are in place in both locations, but i would say the costs of setting up a new base would be massive when you add in new buildings, communications and ICT , weapons stores etc. When support services are added in i would say over 1500 jobs in the cork area are support by the navy. it would be suicide for any cork politician to support a move away. Besides as i have being told be fore by many a cork person its not the Irish navy its there navy.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1672
    jonnybigwallet
    Registered Users Posts: 1,100 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    Agree. And besides....Seems daft to have the auld ammo store bang in the middle of a residential area. ( no pun intended ). Tis safer on an island.


  • Options
    #1673
    mikeym
    Registered Users Posts: 3,985 ✭✭✭mikeym


    P64 currently on sea trials.


  • Options
    #1674
    roadmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 3,747 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    When the Shaw gets to cork will it take long for the main Gun to be fitted?


  • Options
    #1675
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    roadmaster wrote: »
    When the Shaw gets to cork will it take long for the main Gun to be fitted?


    Presuming it's already here then fitting shouldn't be too bad given it's a sole unit, I'm looking forward to trying to get photo's, the calibration works and such may be the time issue.


  • Options
    #1676
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    showphoto.aspx?photoid=3163963&size=800

    Here she is on Trials.


  • Options
    #1677
    roadmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 3,747 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    It’s time to forget about the cpvs now is the time to put the boot in to the british shipyard and get more Beckett’s at knockdown prices

    https://www.northdevongazette.co.uk/news/concerns-over-future-of-appledore-shipyard-1-5626483

    Just seen this below.in it the mp for the area mentions winning more overseas work. Could there be talks between the DOD already and the British?

    https://www.northdevongazette.co.uk/news/mp-geoffrey-cox-allays-fears-over-appledore-shipyard-1-5629802


  • Options
    #1678
    jonnybigwallet
    Registered Users Posts: 1,100 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    Bit boring only having one type of ship in the navy. Would be better to acquire something along the lines of a frigate with a helicopter on board. Maybe Appledore could come up with something decent?


  • Options
    #1679
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    jonnybigwallet wrote: »
    Bit boring only having one type of ship in the navy. Would be better to acquire something along the lines of a frigate with a helicopter on board. Maybe Appledore could come up with something decent?

    How is it boring? Logistically it's perfect. As for Appledore, if the DOD is stupid enough to gamble on the Arrowhead before the RN make a call they are insane.


  • Options
    #1680
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    roadmaster wrote: »
    It’s time to forget about the cpvs now is the time to put the boot in to the british shipyard and get more Beckett’s at knockdown prices

    https://www.northdevongazette.co.uk/news/concerns-over-future-of-appledore-shipyard-1-5626483

    Just seen this below.in it the mp for the area mentions winning more overseas work. Could there be talks between the DOD already and the British?

    https://www.northdevongazette.co.uk/news/mp-geoffrey-cox-allays-fears-over-appledore-shipyard-1-5629802


    I'd say that MP might have been banking on the 31e staying on schedule, but that's gone back for retendering so doubtful it will happen on the original timeframe.



    As to ditching the CPV's and moving to more P60's with Brexit there's just too much uncertainty that such a close in hull might be needed I'd say. On the otherhand technically the WP review is meant to be underway or soon will be. I think it would take a miracle for the review to be other than a box checking exercise, but at best maybe the 3 years of Med operations might change some views?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1681
    jonnybigwallet
    Registered Users Posts: 1,100 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    I thought the next addition to the fleet was meant to be a multirole vessel. Hopefully something with a bit of clout like the Absalon class. Also....I understand the smaller opvs need replacing, wirh a similar shallow draft vessel for operating in estuaries and closer to shore than the P60's are able to do. Not sure what Babcock have to offer. Maybe potential to do a 10 metre stretch on the P60 design and add a helideck and hanger plus extra space for a company of army personnel and hospital module etc. Would be a pretty good solution and make a decent flagship without breaking the bank. Probably a good idea to beef up the arnaments as well with a five inch gun and some missiles and torpedos. Kind of a poor mans destroyer!


Advertisement