New Zealand awards contract for $500 Million Dollar Project "Protector".

Jason_kiwi

New Member
THE NZ NAVY CONSISTS OF

2 FRIGATES
1 TANKER
1 MRV
2 OPV'S
4 IPV'S
1 SURVEY
1 DIVING
2 LCM'S
1 SMB

I think that is great for our size...we have to remember aussie is over 5 times as big as us...
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Jason_kiwi said:
I said that they have helis which are armed with torpedos and missiles.

how many frigates will the aussies have when they finish decomishining the older ones???
about 8???
The major surface combatants will still be from 12-15 depending on launch times.

The Adelaides are being upgraded, so 4 will still be active. One of the six us sleighted for decom in November, the 2nd within 6 months of that (so far). The remaining 4 will be upgraded as their hulls are on average a min 3-4 years younger. Plus they've done less Indian Ocean work.
 

Jason_kiwi

New Member
The RNZN navy consists of 15 ships

2 frigates
2 opvs
1 tanker
1 survey
1 diving/mine
4 ipv
1 mrv
2 lcm's
1 smb


simple...perfect to defend NZ
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #47
As I said mate, I wasn't interested in a p*ssing contest, but was merely trying to point out a few realities. Trying to justify not arming your warships because you're not currently at war is the province of politicians and those with a political agenda.

The fact is, that when you become involved in operations you have to fight with what you've got. It's impossible to significantly upgrade your forces in the short time frames that are normally available pre-deployment because there's more to it than simply shelling out the money for the kit.

It has to be available for starters. All the money in the world won't get you a new missile system quickly if said system has to be built from scratch. The equipment needs time to be integrated onto the platform, tested and the troops trained in the use of said equipment. For complex systems like warships, major systems simply can't be installed overnight, no matter how much money is thrown at them.

As for your helo capabilities? Well NZ only has 5 SH-2G Super Seasprite helo's to rotate betweeen 5 ships... It's a pretty threadbare capability if you ask me. NZ would not be able to deploy 5 helo's at sea and sustain them for very long... Plus this miniscule fleet provides for no attrition capability at all if, all platforms were to be deployed simultaneously...

Despite the 15 ship fleet you've described, it's one that possesses only extremely limited capabilities (even for the small size of your Country) and is being deliberately hamstrung by it's own Government...

Australia currently has a planned fleet of 12 frigates, plus 3 soon to be acquired Air Warfare Destroyers (only ship Hull type and weapons fit is to be decided and Defence recommendations are currently before the Australian Government's National Security Committee for these remaining decisions).

The 12 frigates will comprise the 8 completed ANZAC frigates and the remaining 4 upgraded Adelaide Class FFG Frigates. Both ANZAC's and FFG's are programed for replacement from 2020 with a new Frigate design.

Cheers.
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #49
It would make sense for Australia and NZ to collaborate on a new Frigate design. Both Countries will require new Frigates at around the same time...
 

nz enthusiast

New Member
There has actually just been a leaked a defence force document leaked to the public which is stateing the boat is having stability problems and may not even be water tight. The problem we have faced is that another company that made a proposal for the deal sued the government because a review of the tenders said there offer was better and more relible, yet we went with tenix.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
nz enthusiast said:
There has actually just been a leaked a defence force document leaked to the public which is stateing the boat is having stability problems and may not even be water tight. The problem we have faced is that another company that made a proposal for the deal sued the government because a review of the tenders said there offer was better and more relible, yet we went with tenix.
matey have you go an NZ link for that? I wouldn't mind reading it. I'd hate to see NZ make the same mistakes as Oz, ie buy within the ANZ block just to keep local business in place - esp when there are some better bargains to be had off shore.

I understand the issues of local economy, incentives, strat interests etc... but its not always relevant in procurement IMO.
 

nz enthusiast

New Member
http://www.tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411749/593857/

The contents of the article:

Criticism over new Navy ship's safety
http://javascript:printPage()Jun 24, 2005
New Zealand Navy's new $250 million troop and transport ship may be sinking into crisis because of concerns about its stability and even how watertight it is.

Work has now resumed but critics aren't convinced the problems are over.

The vessle is the biggest of seven new ships being built by Australian company Tenix with a total cost half a billion dollars.

The so called multi role vessel will carry troops and equipment and accounts for half the cost of the contract.

Now a leaked Ministry of Defence report shows the government asked Tenix to suspend construction of the vessel because of safety and design concerns.

National MP Richard Worth says the document indicates that the vessel at the moment is not fit for its purpose in critical areas.

The report reveals serious concerns with the ship's stability during loading and also questions whether it's actually watertight in some conditions.

Builders Tenix told One News the concerns related to how the ship would manourvere when getting troops or equipment from ship to shore, which is Its main role.

It says work was stopped for two months but began again after designs were altered. It says no time or costs will be added to the project.

Defence Minster Mark Burton says construction was stopped to ensure the ship was being built to the right standard.

"A design modification phase was always going to be required to ensure that this vessel is fully compliant with New Zealand's requirements and the operational requirements of the New Zealand defence force and the other agencies that will use it," says Burton.

It's not the first set back for the project after the government signed with Tenix last year and an unsuccessful bidder took legal action.

The minister is confident the design concerns will be struck out and the ship will be ready by christmas next
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #54
I thought the MRV was being built in the Netherlands, with Tenix Defence providing the project management side of this project?
 

EnigmaNZ

New Member
Correct, because of the tight timeframes the MRV was contracted out by Tenix to Merwede Shipbuilders in the Netherlands, the OPV are to be mostly built in Australia with some input from NZ companies, and the IPV will be built in NZ.

"During February, RNZN officers attended the design review at Merwede Shipbuilders in the Netherlands, where the ship that is to be New Zealand’s Multi-Role Vessel is to be built. The MRV design is being adapted from a proven ‘Ro-Pax’ ferry design, the BEN MY CHREE of the Isle Of Man Steam Packet Company.
Ben My Chree is a combination passenger and freight ferry, providing the daily link between the Isle of Man and the north of England. [The Isle of Man, in the Irish Sea, is a major holiday destination, as well the venue for the Tourist Trophy Grand Prix motorcycle endurance races and other sporting events.] Although well served by airlines, the island requires regular, reliable sea transport. The Isle of Man Steam Packet Company has an agreement with the Manx government that allows it to have sole use of the linkspan in the port of Douglas in return for a guaranteed service to the island. The 12,500gt Ben My Chree makes two crossings a day during week days from the Isle of Man’s main port of Douglas to Heysham, near Morecambe, on the north-west coast of England. At the weekends she switches to a Douglas to Liverpool service (also served by a high-speed catamaran out of Liverpool).
Commodore Clipper sails the route between the UK and the Channel Islands of Guernsey and Jersey. The Jersey-based Commodore Group operates a number of ferries and high-speed craft between the UK, the Channel Islands and the northern coast of France. At US$48 million, Commodore Clipper - designed to carry freight, as well as passengers – is the largest single ship for maintaining the crucial link between the islands and the mainland. She can take six to eight hours to complete the crossing. The Channel Islands government granted an operating licence for the Commodore Clipper in 1998 on the understanding that full passenger accommodation would be available during the winter months (because weather conditions often do not allow the two fast ferries to serve the route).
DESIGN
The Commodore Clipper, a passenger and ro-ro cargo vessel (or Ro-Pax) was built at the Rotterdam-based van der Giessen de Noord shipyard in the Netherlands during 1998–1999. Commodore Clipper is constructed to meet the classification standards of Det Norske Veritas; the overall design is a continuation of the yard’s blueprint for ferries which it has built for three other companies: Norse Irish Ferries, Stena Line (UK) and Finaval.
Ben My Chree was built to Lloyd’s Register classification standards. She first entered service in summer 1998 but, following a series of customer complaints about on-board standards and facilities - passengers had also been disappointed that the initial design of the ship barred them from outside decks - the ferry company was forced to send her for a refit during her first winter to improve passenger accommodation. The ship has also undergone a £1.5 million refit in the January / February 2004 in which a new accommodation module was added, which greatly enhanced the ship’s passenger accommodation. In addition to the new accommodation section, the stern door was modified and the new livery including traditional steam packet stripes on the funnel were added.
FACILITIES
Commodore Clipper’s cargo capacity is up to 92 truck/trailer combinations and 279 cars. Space is provided for 500 passengers, 160 accommodated in 40 four-berth cabins. However, in summer operations when the wave piercers are also running, the vessel is restricted to 300 passengers. Crew accommodation is available for 37. There is a self-service restaurant, lounge, panoramic bar, VIP lounge and duty-free shop.
PROPULSION
Both ferries are powered by two MaK9M32 medium-speed diesel engines each developing 5,873bhp - a total of 11,746bhp – driving two controllable pitch propellers for an 18-19 knot service speed. For manoeuvrability in the small harbours that they use, the ships have bow thrusters.
Gross Registered Tonnage
BMC: 12,503 Commodore Clipper:13,456t
Passenger Capacity: 500
BMC: 420 in ordinary seating &80 in 20 four-berth cabins.
Commodore Clipper: 340 in seating & 160 in 40 4-berth cabins
Vehicle Capacity (Cars)
BMC: 275 Commodore Clipper:279
Service Speed 19 knots
Length Overall
BMC 125.2m Commodore Clipper:129.14m
Beam (both) 23.4 metres
Draught (both) 5.8 metres
Freight Capacity:
1235 lane-metres; 92 truck/trailers
Engine Type MAK 2 X 9m32
Year Completed:
BMC 1998 Commodore Clipper: 1999
Builders:
Van der Giessen de Noord(now part of Merwede Shipyards)Holland
Cost
BMC: US$39.5m Commodore Clipper: US$48M "

http://www.navy.mil.nz/rnzn/article.cfm?article_id=1661&article_type=discuss

 

EnigmaNZ

New Member
Just having a look around and found this article that might be of interest. This compnay, which lost out to Tenix, made claims that aspects of the MRV design may be flawed, as it turns out, the problems the MRV project is having is just what was predicted by the competing shipbuilder, in sumary they questioned the suitability of the design, and the cost which they felt was grossly inflated for what is being provided. Note especially the paragraph between the ***....***

"2/8/04
Dutch shipbuilder Scheld Marinebouw BV says it has filed a legal claim seeking to overturn the Government's decision to award Australian firm Tenix a contract to build seven new ships for the navy.
Government ministers on Friday signed the contract with Tenix.A spokeswoman for Defence Minister Mark Burton said that had to be done by the end of July or the Government would have had to pay a penalty.
Schelde said Monday it had lodged a claim in the High Court in Wellington on Friday against the Ministry of Defence (as first defendant) and Tenix (as second defendant) for $55 million.
In April, Tenix was named as the preferred tenderer for the new navy ships under the $500 million Project Protector programme following what the Government described as "an exhaustive" tendering process.The project includes building a new 8000 tonne multi-role ship capable of undertaking tactical sealift and disaster relief operations in the Pacific.Tenix has contracted the Dutch shipyard Merwede to build that ship.The other new ships are two 1500 tonne offshore patrol craft and four 350 tonne inshore patrol ships.On Monday, Schelde said it was surprised the Ministry of Defence had concluded the contract for Project Protector despite being advised beforehand that a legal claim for $55 million was being prepared.
Schelde, as MoD's second preferred option for the multi-role vessel (MRV) has filed a claim in the High Court seeking to overturn the award of the Project Protector contract to Tenix Defence Pty Ltd, a spokesman for Schelde Shipbuilding said in a statement.Burton's spokeswoman and a spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said no legal papers had yet been received.he Schelde spokesman said it was the actions of Ministry of Defence officials that were being questioned.
Schelde has no beef with fellow shipbuilder Tenix. But in our opinion Tenix has wrongly been awarded the contract through a fatally flawed tender process," the spokesman said.Tenix has only been nominated as a defendant because of New Zealand's legal requirements.

***Schelde said its claim questioned both the safety of the proposed ship-to-shore transfer system and whether the Ministry of Defence could lawfully have chosen it.It suggested the proposed MRV could easily turn out to be another HMNZS Charles Upham.That ship, which has been described previously as a lemon, was sold because it was considered too costly to upgrade. Schelde said that aside from carrying a landing craft, the MRV's roll-on roll-off design provided little additional capability notwithstanding its likely price tag of up to $250 million. Other shipbuilders were probably capable of meeting the full operational requirements within the US$100 million ($NZ158.75m) originally indicated as being available for this project.***

Schelde was part of the Damen Shipyards Group employing 11,000 people worldwide, with 30 yards delivering more than 160 vessels a year and an annual turnover in excess of one billion Euro ($NZ1.92 billion), its spokesman said.Burton's spokeswoman said the contract with Tenix had been signed after final ministry negotiations that were supported by legal and technical advice.A spokesman said Defence Secretary Graham Fortune could not comment because the ministry had not yet received any legal papers from Schelde"
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #57
Here's what the Merwede shipyard website has to say about the MRV:

Merwede Shipyard, a full subsidiary of the stock listed IHC CALAND is proud to announce the contract award for the design, engineering and building of one Multi-Role Vessel, for Tenix Defence PTY,Ltd. Of Australia.
Functionality: The Multi Role Vessel meets or exceeds all operational requirements of the New Zealand Ministry of Defence, including those for cargo and troop carriage, speed, endurance, helicopter operations and the secondary role of Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) patrol and response.

The vessel has the following main particulars:

Main dimensions and Charactaristics:

Length over all 131,2 metres
Length between perpendiculars 115,1 metres
Breadth moulded 23,4 metres
Design Draught moulded 5,6 metres
Deadweight 2925 tonnes
Maximum speed 19,6 knots

This Multi-Role Vessel is part of a total of seven vessels that will be supplied by Tenix Defence to the Ministry of Defence of New Zealand. The building period for the Multi-Role Vessel is 22 months.

A computer generated image of the MRV can be found here:

http://www.merwede.com/images/uploaded/582004155151.jpg

All above info can be found at www.merwede .com

As people can probably see, all thoughts that the MRV will be an 'actual" combat vessel, are gone. It will only be lightly armed, and not likely to ever carry more significant armament than the 25mm cannon and 0.50cal machine guns it will be fitted with from the outset.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jason_kiwi

New Member
What you dont see is that when the mrv and opvs have to be deployed into dangerous circumstances they will have there seaspit helis which are armed with mgs torps depth charges homing torps and minstril missiles...that is fire power.

When it sees an enermy frigate the heli takes off launches homing torps and minstril missiles while the mrv or opv are lobbing 25mm bullets at them.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Jason_kiwi said:
What you dont see is that when the mrv and opvs have to be deployed into dangerous circumstances they will have there seaspit helis which are armed with mgs torps depth charges homing torps and minstril missiles...that is fire power.

When it sees an enermy frigate the heli takes off launches homing torps and minstril missiles while the mrv or opv are lobbing 25mm bullets at them.
That may well be the case in a benign environment. But the vessels either provide meaningful air defence via organic ewarfare or they act in concert with a skimmer that has a meaningful air warfare role.

without that the sprog is at risk.

the very reason why the Oz ANZACs are getting new warfare suites and toys is because they were about as useful as a big USCG Ocean cutter.

A lone frigate is a target of opportunity - it's not a substantial threat delivery platform.

against NZ's likely threat matrix, they are more than sufficient for current roles. However, the day that they are required to work as a complimentary asset in an expeditionary role, they will need to be paired up with an AWD platform. RNZN knows that as well.
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #60
Jason,

The 25mm Bushmaster cannon, has a range of about 2.5k's. That's it. It would be the closest naval engagement in modern history if it could actually engage another warship... Any warship that is likely to be considered a threat is probably going to be equipped with a more capable gun than the MRV, meaning that the RNZN is going to have to rely an awful lot on it's Seasprite helo's.


Let's hope this enemy ship is not also equipped with Surface to air missiles, the Seasprite is going to find this very environment very difficult otherwise...

I'd also be very surprised if the RNZAF has acquired air to air versions of the Mistral missile for the Seasprites too. It would be a world first and would probably have attracted quite a bit of attention. The New Zealand Army operates a troop of Mistral surface to air missiles in it's 16 Field Regiment but that's the only Mistral purchase by NZ as far as I'm aware. I'd be happy to be proved wrong on this point though.

Did you mean Maverick air to ground missiles possibly? Either way, the Seasprite cannot realistically operate each of these weapon types on a single mission, and the Seasprite has a relatively limited range even by helo standards and you are also banking solely on the reliability of the helo. All this means that the combat options for the RNZN are very limited with this ship...
 
Top