Naval EU Mission to mediterranean - The great migrant disaster

Larbre34

Welcome home to LÉ Samuel Beckett, docked at home base yesterday after another exemplary mission which included a logistics rendezvous with the Army in Beirut as well as her own exhaustive patrolling and rescue work in the southern Med.

It has been the highest profile and most demanding year of the Naval Service ever and the commanding officers and crews of all three vessels, Eithne, Niamh and Sam B deserve the admiration and thanks of the nation for representing their people and their service, as also so do the vessels who remained at home to cover the duties and the naval operations staff for managing the task.

Happy Christmas and a safe new year to all the NS personnel and their families

Markcheese

Anyone know has another misson been sanctioned ? And if so which vessel going next- from a capacity point of view eithne's probably best but probably the most expensive fuel wise ...

roundymac

No decision made by Gov yet but the navy are preparing just the same.

mikeym

Markcheese wrote: »

Anyone know has another misson been sanctioned ? And if so which vessel going next- from a capacity point of view eithne's probably best but probably the most expensive fuel wise ...

Eithne wont be the next ship to go.

Heraldoffreeent

I'd imagine Roisin or JJ will be the next rotation, probably Roisin because JJ is still being put through her paces as a new build.

Larbre34

Yeah I heard somewhere Róisín was next up, but perhaps if the mission recommences during the Winter, JJ might be a better choice as the route down and the seas in the area of operation would prefer the extra stability and capacity. I would've thought 6 months of operations should make her ready for any potential task.

sparky42

Larbre34 wrote: »

Yeah I heard somewhere Róisín was next up, but perhaps if the mission recommences during the Winter, JJ might be a better choice as the route down and the seas in the area of operation would prefer the extra stability and capacity. I would've thought 6 months of operations should make her ready for any potential task.

Unless there's another major loss of life I doubt we'll see another deployment before March, or basically after the election, Coveney seems supportive of the idea but who knows what happens. Has there been any internal review/lessons learned within the Navy for this years deployments or is that too early?

sparky42

Well there's been an announcement of the new mission for the summer, 3 ships operating about 12 weeks each with Roísín being the first one to be deployed.

Larbre34

Just in time for delivery of the W.B. Yeats to enhance capacity.

I'm a little surprised that an acting defence minister would take such a significant decision, i.e. a big naval commitment. Convention holds that ex officio ministers only mind the shop and extinguish any fires, pending a new Government.

Nevertheless, a worthy mission, fair winds to them all.

sparky42

Larbre34 wrote: »

Just in time for delivery of the W.B. Yeats to enhance capacity.

I'm a little surprised that an acting defence minister would take such a significant decision, i.e. a big naval commitment. Convention holds that ex officio ministers only mind the shop and extinguish any fires, pending a new Government.

Nevertheless, a worthy mission, fair winds to them all.

WB isn't really going to be adding anything to the fleet until the end of the year I'd bet given the work up time of SB and JJ.

From memory there was cross party support for it, so I'm not really surprised that it got confirmed. I guess since it was well flagged, with work done by the NS and with the Med flow looking like it's increasing again I can see why they didn't wait.

roundymac

The minister has also stated that he wants to increase to a nine ship fleet. What are peoples thoughts on what we should get, another P60 class or something more expansive ie; with a greater disaster capability able to take helecopters etc.

Morpheus

Extended Patrol Vessel or multi role vessel with capability to
carry vehicles (needs vehicle lane meters)
or multiple containers
and to support heli's not necessarily an organic heli but to at least support a landing and refueling or in flight refueling
something much bigger than any of the existing ships

sparky42

roundymac wrote: »

The minister has also stated that he wants to increase to a nine ship fleet. What are peoples thoughts on what we should get, another P60 class or something more expansive ie; with a greater disaster capability able to take helecopters etc.

I'd say there are two chances of that actually happening now, but something like Morpheus said. The P60's are great OPV's but if we want to do more of these type of taskings we need a different type of ship.

Heraldoffreeent

roundymac wrote: »

The minister has also stated that he wants to increase to a nine ship fleet. What are peoples thoughts on what we should get, another P60 class or something more expansive ie; with a greater disaster capability able to take helecopters etc.

Rather than have the replacement for Eithne be yet another once off, it would make sense to order a second to a similar spec.

sparky42

Heraldoffreeent wrote: »

Rather than have the replacement for Eithne be yet another once off, it would make sense to order a second to a similar spec.

Sure it would make sense, to all of us that don't make the budget, the EPV is meant to be what 150 million, I'd bet closer to 200 million before it's done, so even at best case and it stays within 150m, we aren't going to see 300 million for 2 ships:(.

The operational experience of the Med and trading out the ships should be a demonstration but it won't be.

Larbre34

So long as the spectre of HMNZS Canterbury is to the fore in the minds of those making the decisions, I wish them luck with the project..

sparky42

Larbre34 wrote: »

So long as the spectre of HMNZS Canterbury is to the fore in the minds of those making the decisions, I wish them luck with the project..

An interesting bit about the RNZN that I was that they are thinking of flogging off their 4 IPV's and replacing them with 1 more OPV, seems that the usage rate is terrible with some not sailing for over a year.

http://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/govt-wants-rid-of-inshore-patrol-ships/ar-BBrIRek

The government wants to flog off the navy's four inshore patrol vessels because they aren't up to New Zealand seas.Defence Minister Gerry Brownlee has been scathing of the Rotoiti, Hawea, Pukaki and Taupo as he defended the navy against accusations of lack of time on the water.
In the last three months, six vessels in the navy's 11-strong fleet haven't registered any sea days, including three out of four inshore patrol vessels, and both frigates, Newshub reports.
The Hawea has made it out to open sea this year, but the Pukaki hadn't left port since the end of 2012 and the Taupo had been similarly moored since the end of 2013.
According to the NZ Defence Force website the Rotoiti hasn't done anything significant since July 2012.
Mr Brownlee said the four 55m inshore patrol vessels - which were delivered from 2009 - weren't up to the job.
"They've proved themselves to be completely inappropriate for the sort of seas that we have around New Zealand," he told the Paul Henry programme on Thursday.
"Once they get outside the EEZ (the 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone) they are pretty much a bit of danger."
The vessels would be sold, he said.
The minister was going through the planning process, which included talks with Treasury about what could be afforded.
"We would like to see another offshore patrol (vessel)... they are a much bigger vessel, very good utility, and we think one more of those ... would be a very good idea."
The inshore patrol vessels, part of the $500-million Project Protector ship building programme, have had a troubled short history.
They were all built in Whangarei by Australian firm Tenix but had to be repaired under warranty when cracks appeared in the superstructure.
In 2012, the navy was using just two of the ships because it did not have enough sailors to crew them.

To be honest given their location I never really saw the point in the IPV's for them.

Markcheese

Odd article, the inshore patrol vessels are suitable for work beyond 200 mile limit- duh... but they say their not in use because their short on sailors?
Would they be any good as peacock replacements if the kiwi's are getting rid..(or even revenue cutter replacements, brought into the naval service)

sparky42

Markcheese wrote: »

Odd article, the inshore patrol vessels are suitable for work beyond 200 mile limit- duh... but they say their not in use because their short on sailors?
Would they be any good as peacock replacements if the kiwi's are getting rid..(or even revenue cutter replacements, brought into the naval service)

Well as I said I think the article's comments show debate as to whether the true issue is a manning crisis in the RNZN that's being hidden by this excuse. Here's a rebuttal from the NZ Labour spokesman:

Staff shortages - not lack of need - is why the Navy’s inshore patrol vessels are not being put to sea, Labour’s Defence spokesperson Phil Goff says.

"Defence Minister Gerry Brownlee is deliberately misleading New Zealand in suggesting otherwise. Half of the new fleet has languished at port and have not gone to sea for years. ...

"Gerry Brownlee knows these facts and is therefore being dishonest in saying that the patrol vessels are not being used because they are not needed. ...

"Gerry Brownlee is arrogant and out-of-touch. It’s time the Government put in charge of Defence a minister who shows some interest in the portfolio and a commitment to our armed forces being able to carry out the roles the country needs it to," Phil Goff says.

I'd say revenue at the most for us but even then I couldn't really see the point in them, I'd say in most weather conditions they'd be stuck in port. I wonder might the Aussies buy them given the wear on their hulls and the loss of one to fire?

TripleC

Hey Gang

I basically agree with the comments above. Given the NZ experience they would be of doubtful value to us. They might be of interest to Mediterranean Nations like Malta or Cyprus who are struggling with the wave of migrants and don't necessarily have the resources to expand their Naval forces.

If, we were to go for them I agree with Sparky, they might make good Revenue cutters (actually they would be an improvement on what Rev have at the moment). In addition, since the 1950s(!!!!) the NSR has been looking for approx 4 vessels to be based in the four major ports for use as Seaward Defence/Training vessels......they might be ideal for that role. Certainly better then the Port Security Launchs being mooted a few years ago.

TripleC

On the substantive point, I think that whilst its great that the NS has finally gotten an overseas role, this particular mission "could" prove to be a double edged sword.

For a long time there was talk of the NS taking part in Anti-Piracy patrols, however, the humanitarian nature of the Migrant Patrol may well have been an easier sell politically. Thats all well and good, and the NS are doing a top notch job, which is hardly a surprise to those familiar with them. Having said that, the mood and public perception is very definitely shifting on this issue. Personally, and away from all the public acclamation, I have heard NS personnel raise doubts about the people they are supposedly rescuing.

Likewise, for the most part, the NS is landing these people in Italy. To characterize the Italian authorities control over migrants once in Italy as minimal is an understatement. Given recent events, we could literally be willingly making ourselves part of the paper trail in unsavory and dangerous elements entering Europe to commit god know what. And thats before we consider the optics of picking up migrants several dozen miles off the coast of Africa and transporting them several hundred miles to Europe.

I know I am being simplistic, but as a guy who is proud of the NS and wants it enlarged and expanded, all I am saying is we should be wary of temporary positive publicity when the long term trend could be more damaging. In general I think Coveney has been a good Min Def, one of the few who has had a grasp of the Defensive situation and a vision for the future. However, on this issue his public utterances all suggest a man acting with his heart not his head, and, a politician who craves good publicity from a certain set in the media and society.

murf

TripleC wrote: »

For a long time there was talk of the NS taking part in Anti-Piracy patrols ...

Think the old 'triple-lock' excludes that. As it does any participation in EUNAVOF MED operations.

sparky42

murf wrote: »

Think the old 'triple-lock' excludes that. As it does any participation in EUNAVOF MED operations.

Not sure, from memory wasn't it being put forward for last year until the major loss of life and then it switched to the Med operation?

Boreas

I remember reading at the time that the reason the NS were able to deploy a ship fairly quickly was that it was already being worked up for an anti-piracy deployment.

sparky42

TripleC wrote: »

On the substantive point, I think that whilst its great that the NS has finally gotten an overseas role, this particular mission "could" prove to be a double edged sword.

For a long time there was talk of the NS taking part in Anti-Piracy patrols, however, the humanitarian nature of the Migrant Patrol may well have been an easier sell politically. Thats all well and good, and the NS are doing a top notch job, which is hardly a surprise to those familiar with them. Having said that, the mood and public perception is very definitely shifting on this issue. Personally, and away from all the public acclamation, I have heard NS personnel raise doubts about the people they are supposedly rescuing.

Likewise, for the most part, the NS is landing these people in Italy. To characterize the Italian authorities control over migrants once in Italy as minimal is an understatement. Given recent events, we could literally be willingly making ourselves part of the paper trail in unsavory and dangerous elements entering Europe to commit god know what. And thats before we consider the optics of picking up migrants several dozen miles off the coast of Africa and transporting them several hundred miles to Europe.

I know I am being simplistic, but as a guy who is proud of the NS and wants it enlarged and expanded, all I am saying is we should be wary of temporary positive publicity when the long term trend could be more damaging. In general I think Coveney has been a good Min Def, one of the few who has had a grasp of the Defensive situation and a vision for the future. However, on this issue his public utterances all suggest a man acting with his heart not his head, and, a politician who craves good publicity from a certain set in the media and society.

It's a fair point, though to be honest I don't there is any perfect answer to this feck up in the Med, one way or the other we do have migrant flows with of course potential/likely hostiles within it, but withdrawing the operation didn't work either when the Italian's did that a couple of years ago.

I think frankly it's going to be up to the larger EU nations to figure this out, either the ones that are drawing people from all over the world (Germany, UK), or the ones that have a habit of breaking countries and then walking away (UK, France) to try and figure out the policy that needs to be taken. As an aside, see the article about a people smuggler arrested in the UK whose meant to be extradited to Greece for trial, that's claiming asylum due to conditions in Greek jails:rolleyes::mad:

Meanwhile for us, without question it must be generating plenty of operational and institutional knowledge and hopefully will play a factor in the next few hull purchases at the very least.

sparky42

Boreas wrote: »

I remember reading at the time that the reason the NS were able to deploy a ship fairly quickly was that it was already being worked up for an anti-piracy deployment.

Yeah hadn't they gone out for tender for armoured shields for the machine gun positions for the operation for example?

Heraldoffreeent

Triple lock was never going to be a problem, the EUNAVFOR deployment, Operation Atalanta, operates under four UNSC resolutions.

The NS were gearing up for this in Q1 2015, until the med mission became more immediate.

thomil

Speaking of gearing up, LÉ Roisin will be departing Haulbowline for the Mediterranean on May 1st, that's just been announced by Simon Coveney. She'll probably remain on station in the Med until mid July. Follow-up deployments by other ships are not ruled out.

http://www.afloat.ie/port-news/navy/item/32042-l-e-roisin-to-assist-in-humanitarian-crisis-in-the-mediterranean

sparky42

thomil wrote: »

Speaking of gearing up, LÉ Roisin will be departing Haulbowline for the Mediterranean on May 1st, that's just been announced by Simon Coveney. She'll probably remain on station in the Med until mid July. Follow-up deployments by other ships are not ruled out.

http://www.afloat.ie/port-news/navy/item/32042-l-e-roisin-to-assist-in-humanitarian-crisis-in-the-mediterranean

Think actually they've already confirmed/committed to 3 ships doing 12 weeks each, I think the statement was on the Navy's facebook page a while back, wonder which ships will go afterwards? Guessing Eithne again given she proved to have the largest life capacity.

Larbre34

So to resurrect this topic, the NS have been working away in the summer months in the Med on a bi-lateral basis with Italy, rescuing stranded immigrants and bringing them to reception centres.

The media are reporting tonight that Govt want to upgrade involvement in the Med to make the NS a member of EU naval ops under Operation Sophia, which covers interdiction and engagement of traffickers, close to Libya if necessary and destruction of their craft and assets.

So, a new departure for the DF, potential shooting engagements with criminal or rebellious elements on foreign territory, if it passes the triple lock of course. NS vessels involved in humanitarian enforcement