Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[Padman]

Protector Update
The Navy’s new Multi-Role Vessel (pictured right), to be named CANTERBURY, has a vehicle capacity for up to 40 NZLAVs (the Army’s new armoured fighting vehicle) along with an embarked force of up to 250 personnel.

The MRV’s commercial design heritage provides a comfortable and flexible level of accommodation for the embarked force, utilising a series of 12 berth cabins (four sets of bunks three deep) which are located in the superstructure on the same level as the flight deck. The ease of movement for fully equipped troops to or from the flight deck has been emphasised within the design criteria. Movement between decks is provided via two wide stair wells or a large centrally located service elevator.

Separate embarked force messing facilities and recreational areas are provided, including:

a gymnasium,
embarked force administration office,
stores areas,
workshops, and
offices for government agency officials.
The embarked force will also have its own armoury and magazine, located forward on the cargo vehicle deck.

As well as the vehicle lanes (total length 403m), CANTERBURY will be able to embark up to thirty three 20 ft ISO containers, of which eight may contain ammunition. Some of the container points are provided with power sockets to allow connection for Reefer Refrigerated containers. There is also space for up to twenty NATO-standard pallets.

In addition, a separate Hazardous Goods Facility is provided, allowing for 2 x 20ft ISO containers, and dedicated paint and petrol stowages. The Army’s LAVs LOVs and Unimogs run on diesel. Petrol is required for only a limited range of Army equipment (motorcycles, Quads and some generators) and so would be embarked for specific purposes only.

Due to the wide range of cargo that may be present in the Vehicle Deck at any one time extensive firefighting systems are being installed, with smoke and flame monitoring as well a Drencher and Sprinkler systems. Four NH90 Utility Helicopters can be carried in addition to the MRV’s own SH-2G helicopter. All of these aviation spaces are afforded AFFF sprinkler fire protection.


Ship - Shore Transfer System
The new CANTERBURY will have a range of methods for moving cargo and personnel from the ship to shore. ‘Cargo’ will generally be either:

vehicles (i.e. LAVs, LOVs, trucks, earthmoving machinery, or trailers with or without ISO 20 ft containers),
separate ISO containers, or
smaller items.
The various methods for ship/shore movement will be:

load/unload Landing Craft Medium (LCM) via stern ramp,
load/unload LCM via the ship’s 60 tonne capacity cranes, with access through hatches in the flight deck,
load/unload MRV via side and or stern ramp on to a wharf,
load/unload MRV via crane through flightdeck hatches direct to a wharf, or
helicopter under-slung loads.
The ship’s two RHIBs can also be used, for small numbers of personnel.

If the ship can’t get alongside, a key aspect for the MRV operations will be the ability to move vehicles and freight across the hydraulic-controlled stern ramp to the Landing Craft.


CANTERBURY’s LCMs
The Landing Craft Medium (LCMs) are significant vessels in their own right, being 23m long and displacing approximately 55 tonnes when empty. When loaded with 2 NZLAVs an LCM will displace 100 tonnes. Weight limit on the empty weight of the LCM is to enable them to be embarked using the MRVs 60 Tonne crane. (To appreciate the size of the LCM it is worth comparing them to the IPCs, which are only a little longer at 27m and displace 91 tonnes).



The LCMs will have a crew of 3; the LCMs are designed for beach landings and are fitted with a ballasting system to allow for safe operation when loading and unloading cargo. They also carry a kedge anchor, used to assist hauling the LCM back off the beach.

The Stern Ramp of the MRV has “marriage blocks” that allow the LCM to position itself forward or aft on the ramp and “Flippers” that ensure athwartships alignment. The stern of the LCM will be held in position with steadying lines running to the MRV port and starboard quarters. As can be seen in the photo the LCMs have a near-flat bottom that leads aft to a central fairing with no rudder, but with both azimuth thrusters on either quarter.

Propulsion is by two Azimuth Thrusters, powered by Scania D19 diesels of 235Kw (315hp) driving through z-drives. The LCMs are very maneuverable as the thrust can be directed in 360 degrees from the z-drive thrusters.

 

[contedicavour]

Great extra capability for NZ' Navy. Still, what a shame a 3rd Anzac couldn't be funded... Any NZ deployment will most probably need some escort from the Australians.

cheers

 

[Whiskyjack]

Great extra capability for NZ' Navy. Still, what a shame a 3rd Anzac couldn't be funded... Any NZ deployment will most probably need some escort from the Australians.

cheers

Depends where the deployment is, within the South Pacific it will not need a Frigate, out side the SP and it will be a multinational deployment anyway.

Still a third, and dear I say a fourth! would be nice.

Something multifunctional like the Danish design or a scaled back LCS, from 2012-2015.

Dreams are free.

 

[Sea Toby]

The Irish navy wants their government to purchase a MEKO 200 MRV, a 3,600 ton OPV with a vehicle deck instead of a hangar and helicopter deck. Its about half the size of the Danish MRV.

Other small navies are doing their homework on MRVs too. Norway, Belgium, and Portugal. Frankly, I like the New Zealand MRV the best, it has the best tactical sealift with the most vehicle deck space of any MRV. If the New Zealand MRV had a well dock, it might be considered a small LPD.

Here's a link to the Irish MRV:
http://www.irishmilitaryonline.com/board/showthread.php?t=6905

While the New Zealand MRV can carry 40 LAVIIIs, a typical load would be 16 LAVs, 14 LOVs, 7 Unimogs, 2 ambulances, 2 flat bed trucks, 7 LOV trailers, 2 rough terrain fork lifts, and 4 four wheel drive vehicles, plus 33 containers, and 4 NH-90 helicopters stored below and 1 Seasprite helicopter in its hangar, along with 250 troops. The helicopter deck has two landing zones.

 

[Padman]

The new OPVs have also got room for extra personnel aboard, mainly from civilian agencies. Could this not enable them to provide some support for spec force ops in the Islands, esp if had a 57mm installed to provide a bit more fire power.

 

[Padman]

New Vessels named

Navy names seven new ships
The names and affiliated home ports of the Navy’s seven new Protector ships were announced by Defence Minister Phil Goff on Friday 31 March.

The Chief of Navy, Rear Admiral David Ledson said that the announcement of the ships’ names was another significant milestone in the delivery of 7 new ships under Project Protector. “The names that have been chosen for the new vessels illustrates not only the Navy heritage but the enduring links between the Navy and New Zealand. These are names that the Navy is very happy with and I’m sure the many ex-sailors who served on the original ships will feel exactly the same” he said.

The Navy’s Protector fleet will comprise of seven ships of three different classes; one Multi Role Vessel (MRV), two Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPV) and four Inshore Patrol Vessels (IPV).

All seven ships will be commissioned into operational service for the Royal New Zealand Navy at staged intervals during 2007 with the Multi Role Vessel scheduled for January and the last Inshore Patrol Vessel in December 2007.

MRV - CANTERBURY, Jan 07 (Christchurch/Canterbury)
OPV(1) - OTAGO, Apr 07 (Dunedin/Otago/Southland)
OPV(2) - WELLINGTON, Oct 07 (Wellington)
IPV(1) - ROTOITI, Jan 07 (Napier/Hawkes Bay)
IPV(2) - HAWEA, May 07 (Greymouth/Wesport/West Coast)
IPV(3) - PUKAKI, Sep 07 (Nelson/Marborough)
IPV(4) - TAUPO, Dec 07 (Whangerei/Northland)



Background on the Names
The Multi Role Vessel and two Offshore Patrol Vessels are named after Leander/ Otago Class frigates in commission in the Royal New Zealand Navy from 1966 until 2005. HMNZS CANTERBURY was the last to be decommissioned, on 31 March 2005, after 33 years operational service.

“The Navy has historically enjoyed a strong relationship with the Canterbury District, and we are pleased to be continuing this into the future with our Multi Role Vessel.” said the Chief of Navy. “We look forward to re-establishing connections with our capital city and further south in Dunedin, where regional visibility of the Navy has at times been limited.”

The Multi Role Vessel brings entirely new capabilities of military sealift and amphibious operations to the Royal New Zealand Navy. It will operate as an element of the Naval Support Force, around New Zealand and in the South East Asian region.

The two Offshore Patrol Vessels are designed as versatile vessels capable of multi-agency operations in support of national security tasks, with a secondary capability to operate in support of miscellaneous maritime operations.

The names chosen for the Inshore Patrol Vessels (IPVs) reflect two classes of earlier RNZN ships of the same names. They represent four of the six LOCH Class Frigates that fought in the Korean War between 1951 and 1953. The names were also used for the LAKE Class Patrol Craft that carried out 'resource protection' patrols around New Zealand in the 1970s and 1980s.
Image of Inshore Patrol Vessel at sea
The current IPVs are to fulfil a similar protection role, conducting EEZ patrols of New Zealand’s maritime borders, and working in a multi-agency environment to achieve government outputs.

The four names maintain a geographical balance – Taupo and Rotoiti being North Island lakes, Hawea and Pukaki being South Island lakes.

(Navy records state that while each Island has a Lake Rotoiti the original ROTOITI was named after the North Island lake.)


Regional Affiliation
Each ship is affiliated with a city and region of New Zealand in continuation of current naval practise. Ships traditionally develop a unique and close relationship with their ‘home port’. The locations of affiliated regions were chosen to ensure geographical balance of the Navy’s fleet throughout New Zealand.

Associations are developed between a ship and charities or organisations within their region. The ship may be issued a ‘Freedom of the City’ Charter which allows the officers and sailors onboard the “right and privilege, without further permission being obtained, of marching at all times with "drums beating, bands playing, colours flying, bayonets fixed and swords drawn.”

 

[Big-E]

Padman-

Please post links to your articles, they must be copyrighted, plus I want to see the pictures.

 

[Sea Toby]

Yes, the two OPVs have the capability to support 30 Special Forces each, carry their boats, and supply them with a sea container. Very handy indeed.

The OPVs can also be used to resupply offshore bases and island dependencies too. Currently New Zealand uses a frigate for such duties. Without any doubt these OPVs will be able to carry out duties locally which will free up the frigates for more important duties abroad.

 

[Padman]

Links for NZ Navy

Here is the link for the two articles posted www.navy.mil.nz

 

[Sea Toby]

While New Zealand has the capability to move one company of its army's forces, 250 men is enough to handle disaster relief operations, but overtaking an island country such as Fiji or Tonga or Samoa, this isn't enough men. Its simply not enough men. New Zealand would be looking for Australia to join any military operations in the South Pacific.

So why ask the question? New Zealand isn't powerful enough without the Australians, and neither will mount a military operation without the support of the rest of the Pacific forum nations.

 

[Whiskyjack]

While New Zealand has the capability to move one company of its army's forces, 250 men is enough to handle disaster relief operations, but overtaking an island country such as Fiji or Tonga or Samoa, this isn't enough men. Its simply not enough men. New Zealand would be looking for Australia to join any military operations in the South Pacific.

So why ask the question? New Zealand isn't powerful enough without the Australians, and neither will mount a military operation without the support of the rest of the Pacific forum nations.

Interesting that NZ does not have enough lift to accomplish any mission in the South Pacific that may fall within the national interest.

As a country 5 x larger in population and many times more wealth than Fiji it is a sad state of affairs.

However I am not convinced that NZ could not seize and hold a port or airport if it made use of the mobility and fire power of the LAV, also the tactical lift for a light infantry company e.g. C-130s.

I have been a bit concerned for a number of years now that NZ does not take into account the South Pacific is an ocean into its defence planning.

two 12000-14000 ton LPDs would be much more applicable to NZ defence/emergency interests in the South Pacific than a air strike force. it is also an important niche contribution to UN/Coalition operations. Cost wise, spread over 5-7 years we are not talking a lot of money in terms of the defence budget.

The MRV is a useful ship, but alone it is not what NZ needs to conduct operations that fall within the national interest in the South Pacific region and wider world.

Fiji, Solomon’s and East Timor (where all of Australia’s sea lift assets are now concentrating). Not to mention Papua New Guinea.

Got to love a benign strategic environment like that!

 

[Big-E]

Does one fully loaded Wasp LHD have more force projection than the entire NZDF?

 

[Whiskyjack]

Does one fully loaded Wasp LHD have more force projection than the entire NZDF?

By a factor of 10 would be my best guess.

NZ can project 1 x reinforced infantry company and 4-5 helos.

 

[Big-E]

By a factor of 10 would be my best guess.

NZ can project 1 x reinforced infantry company and 4-5 helos.

If they acquired the two LPDs as you suggest we would be talking about mutiple times the current capability. Is NZ ready to support such vessels?

 

[Whiskyjack]

If they acquired the two LPDs as you suggest we would be talking about mutiple times the current capability. Is NZ ready to support such vessels?

Yes they could.

My above answer is based on the constraint of the lift not the force behind it.

It would mean building the army into a mix n match force. Eg a LPD could carry, 1 x Motorised/mech coy 1 x light coy 1 x recon and support forces.

IMHO, the NZDF and Govt need to think about using modern tech and fire power as a force multiplier in the South Pacific and wider world in conjunction with allies.

I am not talking about them arriving to morrow, but building a force and force structure in a 5 - 10 year plan.

What we have done is build a force structure that is primarily suited to UN peace deployments, instead of a force that is structured to regional needs with a secondary UN role.

 

[Rocco_NZ]

Yes they could.

What we have done is build a force structure that is primarily suited to UN peace deployments, instead of a force that is structured to regional needs with a secondary UN role.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. The only force elements we lack is a serious indirect fire support capability. The line companies are pretty well equipped - certainly better than an opposition they are likley to face in a regional scenario.

One thing I have noted on this (and other) board(s) is that people assume things don't exist becase they haven't seen the ministry tendering for them. The threshold for the ministry handling a purchase is $7M. That's actually a hell of a lot of equipment. A companies worth of STANO/NVG kit runs at around $1.5M for example.

 

[Whiskyjack]

I wouldn't be so sure about that. The only force elements we lack is a serious indirect fire support capability. The line companies are pretty well equipped - certainly better than an opposition they are likley to face in a regional scenario.

One thing I have noted on this (and other) board(s) is that people assume things don't exist becase they haven't seen the ministry tendering for them. The threshold for the ministry handling a purchase is $7M. That's actually a hell of a lot of equipment. A companies worth of STANO/NVG kit runs at around $1.5M for example.

So how do you see what is essentially a mechanised (I have difficulty as seeing the LAV force as Motorised) force operating in the island environment of the South Pacific and South East Asia?

NZ will have the ability to lift one reinforced company on one ship that may or may not be available due to its commitments patrolling. NZ will have 5 upgraded C-130s that do not have the ability to deploy the ground forces main item of equipment.

My point is not that the NZ army is not well equipped (although I contend it is not equipped or organised for the environment and region that NZ interests are anchored in), but given the security situation in the SP and SEA how does NZ propose to employ the army?

Australia has many commitments overseas at the moment, roughly comparable to ours when size is taken into account. It has 800 soldiers on standby for East Timor, NZ has 30.

Originally in the late 90s NZ was to buy 60 APCs and 24 fire support vehicles to support the two infantry battalions. That turned into 105 25mm armed LAVs that are intergrated into 1 battalion (it was supposed to be both but not enough were bought). When was the last time NZ deployed to an operational environment that required a Mech force? Bosnia in the mid 90s and before that WW2!!! Light infantry on the other hand, Malaysia, Borneo, Vietnam, East Timor, Bouganville, Solomon Islands.

Where is NZ most likely to deploy in the National interest?

 

[Rocco_NZ]

So how do you see what is essentially a mechanised (I have difficulty as seeing the LAV force as Motorised) force operating in the island environment of the South Pacific and South East Asia?

Who said motorised infantry was the only option? 2/1 RNZIR is operating in the same light role it always has. If anything there are more options for deploying forces now than there have been. Don't get hung about capacity to transport individual kit. If you want to look at a likley scenario think about achieving a lodgement somewhere like Honiara or a service protected evacuation in the same place. Nothing in that country requires anything like five dozen armoured vehicles to be brough ashore.

 

[Whiskyjack]

Who said motorised infantry was the only option? 2/1 RNZIR is operating in the same light role it always has. If anything there are more options for deploying forces now than there have been. Don't get hung about capacity to transport individual kit. If you want to look at a likley scenario think about achieving a lodgement somewhere like Honiara or a service protected evacuation in the same place. Nothing in that country requires anything like five dozen armoured vehicles to be brough ashore.

But that is my point with 2 Battalions one is light and one is mech, so how will NZ ever deploy more than a reinforced company? Also the NZ army will have two doctrines for two different types of force. Or pay to train a force that is not suited to its environment?

As an example why not have two battalions based around the Royal Marines, with the QA providing the armoured lift as needed? That means that NZ can deploy one complete battalion and maintain it for a year, without having to re-role a battalion.

With the disbandment of airstrike where is the extra airlift that is needed? Plan on two 12,000 ton enforcer type LPDs and configure the army around them. Members of the NZ army should expect to be spending time on them as a force projection platform, not as an A to B ferry.

NZ has an opportunity with a 10-15 year plan to organise and equip a force that will be well suited to operations in NZs environment and useful in UN/Multinational forces.

Also most importantly, it is affordable!

As another option the NZ Army could keep the structure it has now and base a 'taskforce' around 1 x Mech, 1 x Light with support and recon elements. But it still needs the lift to go with it.

 

[Rocco_NZ]

But that is my point with 2 Battalions one is light and one is mech, so how will NZ ever deploy more than a reinforced company? Also the NZ army will have two doctrines for two different types of force. Or pay to train a force that is not suited to its environment?

Deploying a battalion for a short duration isn't a problem. Concievably two could be deployed in an emergency. Don't presume that a battalion sized deploymen has to be made up or forces from the same battalion either.

Doctrine isn't really effected. Tactics may change, but they always do according to various vactors. Nothing I have seen or heard suggest that motorised forces couldn't be employed in the pacific. The main islands in Tonga, for example, are easily trafficable by LAV.