FOUR PATROL VESSELS FOR ROYAL NETHERLANDS NAVY

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

Author	Comment
esp49129		#21	[-]
Posts: 64 (31-Dec-2007 11:16:06) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Mark F wrote: OK, if it's too big what capability do you want to give up to make it smaller? The helicopter? The multi-function radars? Some of the guns? The communications datalinks? A few thousand miles worth of endurance? A few weeks worth of stores and endurance? Answer: The multi-function radars. As I explained before, I strongly believe the radars are overkill for the OPV role. They drive the cost upwards in more ways than one - the direct purchase cost, the additional manpower required, the ship's size. They might be justified if the OPV had a secondary warfighting capability, but it doesn't. In fact it's an unbalanced design that lags behind the Floreal and BAM in several respects (no active stabilization, lack of IFF & defensive aids, less modular than BAM and less armed than Floreal) The Floreal and BAM are proof that you can perform the exact same missions just as efficiently with a smaller, cheaper Toyota rather than a Cadillac. Isn't that the point of buying an OPV? Edit #1: As I previously posted, I would like to see the BAM gain a couple hundred tons to increase its endurance, but it would still be the Spanish Toyota to the Dutch Cadillac Edit #2: Now if the Dutch paid for active stabilizers, IFF & defensive aids, a basic SAM system (e.g. Stinger/Mistral) and anti-ship missiles to match the ship's combat system, then I wouldn't be so critical. Except that at that point it would be a 2nd rate frigate, not an OPV. (7 edits - oops!) Last Edited By: esp49129 31-Dec-2007 11:32:56. Edited 7 times.
Ken the Coastie		#22	[-]
Posts: 36 ( 2-Jan-2008 02:31:13) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Wow! Very complete, overview E2R! The notion that an OPV was too big because it is bigger than its contemporaries is not a new one. In the late 1970's the US Coast Guard decided to replace the remaining ships of the Hammilton class 378' cutters with an austere version. The initial design cut back on the sensors and replaced the gas turbines with diesels accepting a lower speed. This afforded a large up front and maintenance cost savings. Somebody in the Carter administration pointed out that this much cheaper vessel was virtually the same size as the Hamilton. Surely cutting a hundred feet off the design would maker it cheaper still. The result was the BEAR class which are...um...pigs. They have achieved much in spite of their design and because of their crews, but they are poor seaboats and exceedingly cramped they have suffered damage a larger more seaworthy vessel would not have. Roominess and seakeeping are very important in an offshore search and rescue vessel It is telling that the current notational OPC design is broadly very similar to the original design for the Bear, that is, ~350 feet long 4 diesels. http://www.icgsdeepwater.com/img/concepts/MAR05/ICGS_OPC.pdf The Coast Guard seems determined not to make the same mistake ( there are other mistakes that need making ) The Dutch have to cover the area between the Antilles, Rotterdam and the North Sea. This ignores any any peacekeeping/ antipiracy roles these vessels might be called on to perform. I'm disinclined to mock the sensor array as it is optimized for the role....on a dark and stormy night a desperate soul clinging to a piece of wreckage needs all the sensor overkill available. I don't think its too big, I think its a "Goldilocks boat"
esp49129		#23	[-]
Posts: 65 ( 2-Jan-2008 08:34:57) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	There's a significant tradeoff between the BAM and the Dutch OPV: the number of platforms a user can afford. Roughly, you can operate 3 BAMs with the same financial and manpower ressources you need to operate 2 OPVs. For the patrol mission, the BAM will deliver 95% of an OPV's capability (my educated guess). Having more ships allows you to deploy more of your most crucial sensor - the Mark 1 eyeball, backed-up by a response team on an interceptor or a helicopter. So for the patrol role, I'll take 3 BAMs over 2 OPVs any day (or 2 AEGIS cruisers, or 2 Kirov battlecruisers for that matter) The BAM is also almost 50% larger than the Bear class so the comparison doesn't fly. It's in roughly the same displacement class as the Coast Guard's Offshore Patrol Cutter concept and the Floreal, so there's absolutely no reason to believe that you need an OPV the size of a light frigate for the mission.
santi		#24	[-]
Posts: 69 ( 2-Jan-2008 20:26:10) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Edit #1: As I previously posted, I would like to see the BAM gain a couple hundred tons to increase its endurance, but it would still be the Spanish Toyota to the Dutch Cadillac "Autonomía combustible: 3500 millas a 15 nudos + 12 días a 6 nudos + 3500 a 12 nudos" Well, the range for BAM is quoted in the Spanish Armada site in an esoteric way but it means: 3.500 nm at 15 kn (transit to the patrol area) + 12 days at 6 kn (=1728 nm, patrolling, may be using the electric motors) + 3500 nm at 12 kn (comeback to the base). This makes a total of 8.728 nm at different speeds. Regards
esp49129		#25	[-]
Posts: 66 ( 3-Jan-2008 07:08:48) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	santi wrote: Well, the range for BAM is quoted in the Spanish Armada site in an esoteric way but it means: 3.500 nm at 15 kn (transit to the patrol area) + 12 days at 6 kn (=1728 nm, patrolling, may be using the electric motors) + 3500 nm at 12 kn (comeback to the base). This makes a total of 8.728 nm at different speeds. Okay, so that might give a range of about 7,000 miles at 15 knots, which is pretty respectable. Almost as much as a Type 23 frigate (7,800nm @15kts). Basically they can do a 12-day patrol in the Caribbean or off the Horn of Africa, including a roundtrip from Spain, without refuelling. Last Edited By: esp49129 3-Jan-2008 07:17:57. Edited 1 times.
s7seas	Radical Departure	#26	[-]
Posts: 521 ( 4-Jan-2008 20:25:03) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Joris Janssen Lok has a new article on the Ares blog around the content of the mast: Radical Departure It states that the mast has a non-rotating IFF (so no lack of IFF, esp49129!) plus a whole lot of communication capabilities. NR-IFF uses a cylindrical antenna unit mounted at the top of the mast structure. Together with its beam forming unit, this is to be supplied by PIT of Warsaw, Poland. The integrated communications antenna system ICAS will have four receiving flat panel arrays plus four sets of two transmitting flat panel arrays. Combined these provide 360-deg. coverage, and all of these are connected to an antenna distribution unit coupled to a transceiver combiner unit. That would mean that they even can do directional radio transmission, and as such introduce an intermediate EMCON level ! (Image courtesy: Ares & Thales) I think the emphasis on sensors and communication, plus helicopter and interceptors is a good choice. About speed: -give me more, give me more! You always lack a few knots with your ship to catch a gofast. If not, ... then they will redesign it in a gofastfast. It's better to give your helo some weapons. About the sensors: -what you don't see, you will never know! I think that the RNLN, has good experiences with active phased array (lately with the raid of Israel on Syria) and don't want to go back to rotators. Like the German navy selected non-rotators on their F125. Both navies decided already for their second generation active phased array, while most other navies still have to start. About communication: -you never walk alone! Illegal immigration, smuggling, maritime security and disaster relief are typical roles for this patrol ship who are executed together with other (often non-) military forces. A large emphasis on communication (even commercial ones like GSM/UMTS and WiMax) bridges the communication mix-up to non military authorities and organizations like Red Cross. About OPV export: -a non flyer! De Schelde has it's own family of ships according to their Sigma concept. Their hull-plug concept is much more suitable for adaptation to customer request on the export market. The first two Sigma ships are successfully delivered to Indonesia, while an other two are under construction. B.t.w: the RNLN is the design authority of this Patrol ship and I saw in a newspaper that the naval architect recently quited and became professor at the Delft University. (is that good or bad?) About Mast export: -a "could be later on" flyer! Based on history, the products that the RNLN uses (specifies), are no big export successes : PHS-36 sonar, Irscan, Sirius, 2.4m STIR, SMART-S Mk1, and GOS are only suitable for high end navies. Derivates, like the multi-beam family after SMART-S Mk2 are much more suitable for export. Thales just recently introduced the Smart-S Mk2, that radar fits much better for export. Introducing within 3 years a new product in the marked, makes the product life cycle unbelievable short for radar. So esp49129's statement: or because the Dutch government is indirectly subsidizing Schelde and Thales Netherlands to help them compete in the very lucrative corvette/small frigate export market... does not ring a bell for me. The major corvette exporter is i.m.h.o. VT, they have a repeating export customer: Oman. About the Floréal: -fits it's purpose: As esp49129 showed us in it's post, mainly to show the French flag around the world. An appropriate ship for its task at the time as it was build. Nowadays one would not fit a 100mm and Exocet on a ship with tasks as law enforcement, exclusive zone protection and humanitarian aid About BAM: -who is launching customer? I have seen news from 2005 that the detailed design for Spain would be started in that year and delivery to the navy was scheduled for 2008. Is the first already launched? I can imagine that they fit in Spain's operational concept. Are these type of ships also for Venezuela? If not, why not? Have a nice trip 7seas Your Text Signature ...
santi		#27	[-]
Posts: 70 ( 4-Jan-2008 22:56:35) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	About BAM: -who is launching customer? I have seen news from 2005 that the detailed design for Spain would be started in that year and delivery to the navy was scheduled for 2008. Is the first already launched? I can imagine that they fit in Spain's operational concept. Are these type of ships also for Venezuela? If not, why not? The launching customer is, of course, Spain. At the moment 4 vessels are contracted for 340 million € (85 a piece). The schedule is some delayed, with the first one entering service in 2009 and the other 3 along 2010. Plans are to built another 4-6 in order to replace up to 23 old patrol boats from 100 to 1.500 tons. Another 4 specialized vessels based in the same design would be built for MCM Command, Oceanographic (2) and AGI, totalling 12-14 hulls. The electronic suite will be less capable than in the NL ships but, at least, of Spanish origin a lot of them (SCOMBA combat system, Aries surface and navigation radars, Dorna FCS, INDRA ECM/ESM, Tecnobit EO…) For Spain BAM, in its patrol role, is a massive improvement over ancient ships, but of course will be OPVs and not combat vessels. IMHO, NL-OPV will be magnificent vessels in its role and is understandable that they were equipped with a first class electronics. Thales-NL is, may be, the best naval system builder in Europe and would be a pity that they lost some of their pulse because, at the moment, NL Navy had no new frigate/destroyer program. Mostly, are the national navies who pays for the vanguard projects of theirs defence builders. NL-OPVs electronics will be in the line of that on modern frigates in other navies, but this isn't a demerit but the opposite! Regards
MConrads		#28	[-]
Posts: 439 ( 7-Jan-2008 10:20:15) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Just for the sake of illustrating the comparison between the NL OPV, BAM and Floreal, take a look: Regards. Make sure to visit the Shipbucket Collection @ http://s90.photobucket.com/albums/k279/shipbucket and our new Shipbucket Forum @ http://z11.invisionfree.com/shipbucket/index.php?act=idx Last Edited By: MConrads 8-Jan-2008 19:56:47. Edited 1 times.
esp49129		#29	[-]
Posts: 67 ( 7-Jan-2008 14:31:58) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	MConrads, Thanks - great drawings. For a second I thought the scale was wrong, because the Dutch OPV sure looks BIG. But I checked the Dutch drawings (which you probably used) and you've got it exactly right. What a beast. Any chance you could add the below-the-waterline section for the Floreal? It looks really small compared to the others, but that's partly an optical illusion. Here's an image of the Floreal you could use: http://www.netmarine.net/bat/fregates/floreal/caracter.htm If you compare the 2 Floreal drawings, your rendering looks about the right length but 5% too small height wise. The Dauphin helicopter should also be significantly bigger if the other drawing's scale is right.
MConrads		#30	[-]
Posts: 440 ( 8-Jan-2008 19:58:57) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Your wish is my command. I checked the hight issue and I think it checks out correctly. Same is true for the Helicopter. But thanks for the detailed look :-)))) Regards. Make sure to visit the Shipbucket Collection @ http://s90.photobucket.com/albums/k279/shipbucket and our new Shipbucket Forum @ http://z11.invisionfree.com/shipbucket/index.php?act=idx

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

FOUR PATROL VESSELS FOR ROYAL NETHERLANDS NAVY

Quick Reply