The SAAF Forum

Discussion on the SAAF and other southern African air forces.
It is currently 24 Apr 2026, 11:47

All times are UTC + 2 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 18:08 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 29 Jun 2004, 17:19
Posts: 8553
26 February 2018: Damen press release

Quote:
Damen Shipyards Cape Town (DSCT) receives Project Biro order from Armscor

DSCT will deliver three Inshore Patrol Vessels for the South African Navy

Damen Shipyards Cape Town (DSCT) has received an order from Armscor – the acquisition agency for the South African Department of Defence – for three Inshore Patrol Vessels (IPV), 62 x 11 metres. The vessels form part of the South African Navy’s Project Biro. The project aims to develop South Africa’s maritime security, ensuring that the country has the capability to respond effectively, rapidly and cost-efficiently to maritime threats such as illegal trafficking and fishing.

DSCT received the order exactly four years to the day that it received the order to deliver vessels for a previous project for the South African Navy – Project Canter. The yard is delighted to be able to continue to provide support to the navy, says Chairman Mr. Sam Montsi.

“We are very happy to receive this order and are looking forward to this continuation of our long-standing relationship with the South African Navy.”

Participating in Project Biro underlines Damen’s commitment to the South African Government’s Operation Phakisa initiative, which aims to unlock the potential of the country’s maritime industry.

Mr. Montsi continues: “At DSCT we are not only about shipbuilding and repair, but also about providing people with the opportunities needed to reach their potential – whether they work for us or for one of our many local suppliers – and supporting the country’s economy. DSCT is about the development of an entire shipbuilding and related industries.”

Naturally, with this philosophy in mind, DSCT will be sourcing as many components and services as possible for the project from South Africa-based suppliers. In this regard, DSCT plans to provide active support for the Government’s Enterprise Supplier Development programme, supporting small and micro-businesses in the country.

The project will also actively contribute to the Department of Trade & Industry’s National Industrial Participation (NIP) programme and the complimentary, defence-focused Defence Industrial Participation (DIP). In turn this contributes to the Government’s Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE) initiative. DSCT is a Level-3 BBBEE rated company.

The IPVs will be the first vessels of a Damen Sea Axe design to operate in South Africa. The Sea Axe is a revolutionary, Damen patented hull design, which offers exceptional seakeeping behavior. The straight-edged, axe-shaped bow cuts through the water, minimising slamming for improved safety and comfort on board and significantly reduced fuel consumption and emissions.


Based on the FCS 5009 design?

_________________
How come every time my ship comes in, I'm at the airport?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 18:39 

Joined: 07 Apr 2008, 11:50
Posts: 4256
Dean wrote:
Based on the FCS 5009 design?


A very decent looking boat...
http://products.damen.com/-/media/Produ ... 1_2017.pdf


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 19:53 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 29 Jun 2004, 17:19
Posts: 8553
I remember attending a Damen presentation at AAD where a professor from the Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands presented on the benefits of the Axe unique design features.

_________________
How come every time my ship comes in, I'm at the airport?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 20:12 

Joined: 07 Apr 2008, 11:50
Posts: 4256
Dean wrote:
I remember attending a Damen presentation at AAD where a professor from the Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands presented on the benefits of the Axe unique design features.

Has it been tested in South Atlantic storm conditions?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: 26 Feb 2018, 21:20 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 29 Jun 2004, 17:19
Posts: 8553
Not sure about South Atlantic storm conditions, but it is in service where very rough seas are experienced. It is one of the reasons the design came about.

_________________
How come every time my ship comes in, I'm at the airport?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2018, 07:20 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 29 Jun 2004, 17:19
Posts: 8553
Image

_________________
How come every time my ship comes in, I'm at the airport?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2018, 08:34 

Joined: 07 Apr 2008, 11:50
Posts: 4256
Dean wrote:
Not sure about South Atlantic storm conditions, but it is in service where very rough seas are experienced. It is one of the reasons the design came about.


I'm asking because someone (Helmoed Heitman?) once posted a fairly detailed explanation for why 50m is the worst length for a ship in the South Atlantic; something about the "wavelength" of our Southeaster storms.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2018, 08:42 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 29 Jun 2004, 17:19
Posts: 8553
The IPV ordered is 62m in length.

_________________
How come every time my ship comes in, I'm at the airport?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2018, 08:59 

Joined: 07 Apr 2008, 11:50
Posts: 4256
Dean wrote:
The IPV ordered is 62m in length.

A little bit longer than the old strike-craft (58m), hopefully long enough to avoid the wavelength problem, which reputedly affected the strike-craft quite badly.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: 28 Feb 2018, 16:07 
User avatar

Joined: 23 Jul 2004, 15:11
Posts: 961
Location: Centurion, RSA
Very strange ships to buy as IPV's. In my opinion these are too big to be IPV's and too small to be OPV's.
Very strange decision for sure #-o

_________________
Da-di-da-da-da


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: 01 Mar 2018, 18:25 

Joined: 29 Oct 2014, 17:12
Posts: 162
Location: Durban South Africa
I think they went for the largest Stan Patrol model because of the OPV part of the project being shelved. Remember when Damen was originally announced as the preferred bidder everyone thought we were getting the 1800 Sea Axe model for the OPV. The Stan Patrol 4207 (same as DAFF vessels) would've been fine for the IPV role. But because we're not getting any OPV's, at least not for the foreseeable future, they went for a bigger "IPV" as a compromise.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: 01 Mar 2018, 19:28 

Joined: 07 Apr 2008, 11:50
Posts: 4256
The Damen Stan 6211 Sea Axe is too big for the IPV role and too small for the OPV job.
An armed version of the 4207 (Lillian Ngoyi-class of the DAFF) is used by the US Coast Guard; it's a real IPV.
The OPV role really needs a ship that can carry one medium helicopter (and a UAV) and have a fairly capable set of weapons (something bigger than a 20-30mm canon). It should also be able to carry a full squad of MRS/marines for boarding target ships etc. In addition it should have the capacity to accommodate a reasonable number of extra people (rescued people, Special Forces, etc.) The Damen Stan 1800 Sea Axe fits this requirement.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: 01 Mar 2018, 20:30 
User avatar

Joined: 03 May 2005, 08:40
Posts: 3478
Location: New Zealand
It does seem to be a peculiar size. For comparison I am looking at the Royal New Zealand navy's selected OPV platform which seems to offer significantly more capabilities:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protector ... rol_vessel

_________________
A plan is simply a basis for change.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: 03 Mar 2018, 10:16 

Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 11:43
Posts: 168
Hey guys, look on the bright side. Defence gets less and less money with every budget. That we're even getting this order is good news.

As to the size issue, well, of course we know that the OPV part of project Biro went south and that they're only ordering the 'IPV'. But these are quite a bit bigger than what we expected. 62m not 47m. The Lillian Ngoyi class IPV's are 350 tons, so my guess is these bigger IPV's will replace a good 500/600 tons. The Lillian Ngoyi's have an endurance of 14 days, these will probably be able to stay out another week. I'm just speculating, because actually we don't yet know:

1. What the full specs of the Stan Patrol 6211 are... as far as I can see the 6211 is a design and is not yet in service anywhere in the world... maybe I'm wrong!
2. But the other thing is that we don't really know for sure that the SAN are getting the Stan Patrol 6211! The press release features a Stan Patrol 6211 photoshopped in front of Table Mountain... but it could be that the vessel that is built at the end of the day is different and that the 6211 picture is just for marketing purposes.

I'd love to see these two questions answered.

But if we do get a Stan Patrol 6211, I think it's good news. It'll replace our three strike craft patrol vessels with something a bit bigger. It'll be more comfortable, economical and will probably have longer endurance. It'll be more lightly armed, OK. And I'd like to see what sensors it carries - will it have a big search radar like the strike craft and any EW sensors? Probably not. But I think it'll do a better job as a patrol vessel than the recycled strike craft that are now 30 - 40 years old.

As to the 'wave length' issue, give me a break. Just because Helmoed Heitman said something once about waves off the coast of South Africa doesn't mean we have to worry. The SAN have been operating strike craft, mine hunters and mine sweepers off our coast for donkey's years. Not always easy. But these little IPV's (if they are indeed the 6211) are going to be bigger than any one of those, so while we all know the limitations of the strike craft as a blue ocean vessel, these are definitely an improvement.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: 06 Mar 2018, 13:51 

Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 11:43
Posts: 168
The mystery deepens, because, on Defenceweb, another poster says that the total value of the deal is 5 billion. Surely that can't be right!

The DAFF ship Sarah Baartman cost 150 million. I know this was thirteen years ago, but all the same.

I think these 6211's look quite good as an IPV... as long as the price is a whole lot less than 5 billion! Maybe the comma was in the wrong place and it's really 500 million? That would make a degree of sense but, still, for 500 million, you could have bought 3 x Sarah Baartman's in 2005. And the Sarah Baartman at least has a flight deck (no hangar).


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC + 2 hours


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group