Page 2 of 10
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 29 Dec 2015, 21:31
by ArmChairCivvy
I believe it has been mainly "up North" where the wave modality suits her better
- our friends from Oz here on the forum can probably confirm?
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 29 Dec 2015, 22:57
by SKB
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 14 Feb 2016, 14:14
by marktigger
I do think there needs to be a more joined up approach to EEZ Surveillance by the UK with the agencies coming together to eliminate duplication. Now the Navy and RAF have handed SAR by air to the Coastguard and they coordinate with the RNLI to provide a SAR service. Maybe its time to look at the other functions.
I would suggest even if we stay in the EU there is a need to improve our border patrols as the UK has many places where illegal activity along the coast can happen be that illegal fishing or smuggling of various things (people, Arms ir drugs). The fragmented approach is inefficient and needs reviewing.
Common patrol vessels would also help keep the costs of this under control allowing for common training, common maintenance and economies of scale when procuring vessels especially if merged with other roles.
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 14 Feb 2016, 19:35
by S M H
Serious thought was given in the 1980s to the establishment of a coast guard service incorporating customs craft, the military S.A.R. (including Royal air force vessels). some R m a s seagoing vessels & elements of the fishery protection squadron. But the inter departmental bickering protecting each departments budget from cuts to fund the new service. Along with which department of government would be responsible for the service stopped it. Departments had to consider prevailing government thinking towards government owned contractor operated / support contracts being rolled out at the time (with view to contractor owned eventually).How this would effect future budgets. So now some 30 years later the suggestion is being raised. I wonder if the so called joined up government might give it serous thought. The border force and R. N. fishery protection squadron are the only bits not contactor provided. Making it impractical without massive default contract payments to some large government contractors.
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 14 Feb 2016, 19:48
by marktigger
there does need to be more joined up thinking and planning. Other nations have integration into the crews with representatives from other government departments on Naval vessels.
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 24 Feb 2016, 15:42
by donald_of_tokyo
Cross post from FLF thread. I think this is directly related to this thread.
So, if the border control is getting more and more important, why not add more Damen 4207 cutters? Looking at the following documents, I understand it is cheap to build and cheap to operate. For coastal operation, identifying the threat is the key. If anything suspicious is there, you can call for help. Lean manned, affordable, may have (so so) good sea keeping, Damen 4207 looks very good.
donald_of_tokyo wrote:shark bait wrote:An interesting slide from a Damen presentation comparing length vs costs, important to not this is for patrol vessels not necessarily frigates.
They suggest increasing the platform size by 50% only increases build costs by 6%, whilst yielding efficiency saving in other areas.
Thanks Shark-bait-san!! Great info!!
I think this
http://www.hiswasymposium.com/assets/fi ... m-2006.pdf
is better for read.
The numbers quoted is for fast boat, 26m long. The important assumption is as follows:
The Enlarged Ship Concept
In 1995, Delft University and Damen Shipyards carried out a desk study on the influence of hull lengthening on the “practical characteristics” of a ship. In this study, a 26 m Damen Patrol Boat was taken as the “parent ship”. In two steps the hull of this design was lengthened respectively by 25% and 50%, See Figure 1. Similar studies were carried out before, but in this case it was decided to keep the functionality of the two lengthened versions completely equal to the original design. In other words, only the hull length was varied, the accommodation, superstructure, speed and range were all untouched. For the three designs, the following “practical characteristics” were determined:
• Building cost
• Operational cost (i.e. mainly fuel)
• Transport efficiency
• Operability (i.e. sea-keeping characteristics)
The production result was the Damen 4207 patrol boats, the ones you have in your Border Force. When looking at it, I was surprised by its sleek hull, low height, and lightweight (~250t) compared to its length. (The RNZN Protector-class inshore patrol vessel has similar length, but weighs 340t). I liked it a lot. Simple, smart, efficient.
The "Enlarged Ship Concept" answers everything. Great.
Note that, they "keep the functionality of the two lengthened versions completely equal to the original design. In other words, only the hull length was varied, the accommodation, superstructure, speed and range were all untouched." So this enlarging hull has NOTHING to do with adding any assets, not mission bay, not accommodation, no additional armaments.
They say,
Comparing the results of the three variants, some very interesting conclusions were drawn for the lengthened designs:
• Building costs are only influenced marginally by the hull length, due to the fact that the extra length is “empty”.
• Operational costs decrease, due to lower resistance
• Transport Efficiency increases significantly
• Operability increases significantly
...
Also note they say "
In the study, the hulls were lengthened by simply increasing frame spacing. "
So I think this is not for adding any assets. JUST making your ship LONGER.
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 25 Feb 2016, 18:50
by marktigger
the damen vessels look excellent in the Inshore role yes there needs to be more of them to increase their presence around our coasts
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 08 Mar 2016, 08:55
by GibMariner
Gibraltar offers logistical support in Nato migrant operation
A UK Border Force cutter will stop in Gibraltar today on its way to the Aegean Sea as part of a Nato deployment to tackle people smugglers.
HMC Protector will stop in the Naval Base to pick up fuel and stores before sailing east into the Mediterranean.
The vessel is part of a wider deployment announced by the British Government yesterday.
http://chronicle.gi/2016/03/gibraltar-o ... operation/
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 08 Mar 2016, 13:32
by PAUL MARSAY
how many border force cutters have we ? are they now mainly in the med ?
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 08 Mar 2016, 13:46
by shark bait
we have five
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 08 Mar 2016, 14:00
by GibMariner
PAUL MARSAY wrote:how many border force cutters have we ? are they now mainly in the med ?
The Border Force cutters are:
HMC Protector
HMC Seeker
HMC Searcher
HMC Vigilant
HMC Valiant
Plus the chartered MV Vos Grace.
Of these, MV Vos Grace is already in the Aegean and HMC Protector is currently in Gibraltar en route to the Aegean.
Last year HM Cutters Protector and Seeker were deployed to the central Mediterranean for ~6 months.
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 08 Mar 2016, 16:30
by marktigger
they should look at a 2nd batch of these cutters for the UKBA and also batches for the RN and RNR
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 08 Mar 2016, 20:34
by ArmChairCivvy
marktigger wrote:they should look at a 2nd batch of these cutters for the UKBA and also batches for the RN and RNR
I am sure that with a good offer more of these
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/home ... -coastline
could become available.
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 08 Mar 2016, 20:56
by shark bait
There we're three for sale when we got ours, I assume the others are now gone.
I would advocate more border force vessels, sell the batch one rivers and use the proceeds for more cutters. Use them for boder and fisheries protection. Damen have some nice sea axe patrol boats.
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 09 Mar 2016, 06:36
by marktigger
interesting the papers yesterday featured a story about a gang of smugglers being caught in kent with a cargo of Cezch AK's and Skorpion SMG's. I wonder how many more illicit cargoes of guns, drugs, people etc will slip through while the UKBA are in the Agean and 1/3 of the OPV fleet is in the West Indies?
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 27 Mar 2016, 13:28
by marktigger
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 28 Mar 2016, 17:58
by Repulse
MV Vos Grace is an interesting addition to the Border Force fleet. Lots of deck space for the embarked RMs and a potential model for the future MHC motherships.
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 14 Apr 2016, 19:32
by marktigger
so people smugglers are now starting to target other areas looks like Borders Agency and Royal Navy will need more resources to interdict them.
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 14 Apr 2016, 22:43
by shark bait
they could do with bringing back the light aircraft they used to use. The police are beginning to operate light aircraft, perhaps the home office should pool their resources.
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 15 Apr 2016, 00:04
by marktigger
kent police even operate a former lifeboat and police marine units are having to provide more and more security patrols.
I would agree about a Maritime Law enforcement organisation would be a better option. Sweeping up inshore security, law enforcement, customs and fisheries protection taking over from a variety of bodies. And them having a limited role in SAR. equipped with Ships, boats, helicopters and fixed wing aircraft. But also shore side as well. how far out would its jurisdiction would run is the issue if it covers the UK EEZ then the navy loses the OPV's to it. That then generates the issue of deploying the OPVs in lieu of a frigate.
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 15 Apr 2016, 01:41
by Caribbean
marktigger wrote:That then generates the issue of deploying the OPVs in lieu of a frigate.
Well - there will be three or four B1/1b surplus to requirements shortly - give them to the reformed Coastguard/Border/Police force and free up the B2/B3s for FIGS/WIGS/Gib etc
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 15 Apr 2016, 07:52
by shark bait
Rivers a too big for the border force. The better option would be to sell them and invest the proceeds into some new Damen patrol boats.
There should be a civilian organisation, most probably the border force, that is responsible for the maritime policing of UK waters. We farmed SAR out the the civilian world, theres no reason we cant do the same with fisheries and smuggling. Let the navy focus on its core tasks and "free up the B2/B3s for FIGS/WIGS/Gib etc"
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 15 Apr 2016, 13:55
by marktigger
shark bait wrote:Rivers a too big for the border force. The better option would be to sell them and invest the proceeds into some new Damen patrol boats.
"
would you want to be in a Damen coastal patrol vessel in some of those waters?
this why if you transfare the responsibility for patroling it they would need rivers. The Irish navy felt that they need 60m vessels to patrol its area. the Damens are useful for inshore waters but for offshore you "need a bigger boat". But I would agree with similar arrangements being in Falklands and Gibraltar but in a similar role operated by same agency working with FIG and Gib government.
If you want to go down the civilian agency approach then the navy don't need the rivers and the money could be invested in type 31 general purpose frigates to support the civilian agency and provide FIGS & WIGS.
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 15 Apr 2016, 14:13
by shark bait
Protecting rockall shouldn't be a priority so that cuts out a big chunk.
Scotland has their own arrangements, and the big threat is not from smugglers but submarines, to which a river would be useless.
Really it is the Irish sea, the north sea and channel that would require the intensive patrols, where the Damen vessels will do just fine.
Or we could copy the Australians;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACV_Ocean_Protector#
I see little reason to keep those rivers. The choice would be something like 3 rivers, or 6 cutters. I would vote for the 6 cutter choice.
Re: Border Force Cutters.
Posted: 15 Apr 2016, 14:59
by marktigger
shark bait wrote:Protecting rockall shouldn't be a priority so that cuts out a big chunk.
Scotland has their own arrangements, and the big threat is not from smugglers but submarines, to which a river would be useless.
Really it is the Irish sea, the north sea and channel that would require the intensive patrols, where the Damen vessels will do just fine.
Or we could copy the Australians;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACV_Ocean_Protector#
I see little reason to keep those rivers. The choice would be something like 3 rivers, or 6 cutters. I would vote for the 6 cutter choice.
Scotland has their own arrangements? for Fisheries protection yes but who patrols the oil fields to deter terrorists? who is trying to intercept illegal migrants or drugs being smuggled into scotland? Our oilfield interestis extend up to the edge of the Norwegian EEZ (so close that in some oilfields the evacuation plan is airlift to Norway) And at present Rockall is disputed with ireland what if there are oil/gas reserves there and they can be exploited?
so rissian submarines are trying to land illegal immigrants, drugs, weapons/explosives? we aren't at war with russia at the minute. Yes having the capability to look for them is more advantageous than having River class patrol vessels however having more real frigates with some ASW capability is more advantageous than having BaE job creation projects playing "plastic" frigate across the world. Keep the rivers in the UK EEZ and have more frigates to be guard ships.
http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/hom ... :lastknown