TBH I am dubious that NZGov would be willing to go for this. I could easily see certain elements among Kiwi policy makers objecting to such a deal on the ground that they do not wish to spend the coin, even buying at cost.
Which elements among Kiwi policy makers are you referring to in this day and age of hightened security concerns across the threat spectrum?
In terms of "coin" all three parties of the incoming coalition govt are talking about increasing defence expenditure (back to cold war levels).
It might be possible that NZ could get a different vessel and fitout built elsewhere for a lower cost (though the functional value of such a hypothetical vessel might be akin to the combat value of the RNZN OPV's right now...).
Sorry, are you suggesting the RNZN will obtain replacement vessels without air/search/fire control radars, missile systems, ASW sonars, decoy & EW systems and so on and instead only be fitted with 25mm EO guns, which is the same combat value of the RNZN OPV's?
Others among those who might be in or advise NZGov might also object to such a purchase on the grounds that it would be acquiring too warlike a platform and capability set.
Who might these people be? Peace groups or serious defence analysts? This thinking is a couple of decades out of date. NZG security assessments are focusing on global instability and security threats, which has bi-partisan political support. Like the AusGov NZGov has instigated a fleet review and it has been reported that the RNZN is talking to its RAN counterparts about future fleet options and commonality. The Aussie Minister for Defence Industry has stated
"We’re very focused on where we can operate together, so interoperability is a critical feature. If there’s opportunities to build platforms together, if they eventuate, then we're happy to look at it."
One of the other potential objections is that by the RNZN acquiring a new platform that is also in RAN service and built in Australia, it could be construed as making the RNZN take on/repeat certain things that the RAN is doing. It is possible that NZGov might not want the RNZN locked into such a situation, or might be unwilling to provide the resources and coin for the RNZN to do what would be needed.
Who is objecting to this and why would that be when the focus is interoperability and closer defence working relationships? In recent times the RNZAF and NZ Army have acquired the exact same capabilities as the RAAF and Australian Army. No-one in NZG, defence or media circles are objecting to this. Excepting the usual suspects of peace-niks and the green party but life goes on without their antics.
As an example (and this is getting quite hypothetical, given all the exacting details released on Tier 2 vessels for the RAN...) if the RAN's Tier 2 vessel is kitted out with Mk 41 VLS in a 16-cell arrangement, with a planned loadout of 8 SM-2/SM-6 missiles and 32 quad-packed ESSM/ESSM Block 2, the RNZN might not be interested in that.
Why wouldn't the RNZN be interested in that? Babcock are promoting the AH140 for NZ, which is kitted out with Mk41 VLS with a minimum of 32 cells. Previously BAE were promoting the T26. There are also bound to be other suppliers.
This is particularly true since the Kiwi ANZAC-class frigates are now armed with SeaCeptor missiles with the Kiwi vessels now having a completely different radar and CMS system from the RAN ANZAC-class frigates.
The main reason why the Kiwi ANZAC class have the different fit-out was to reduce top-weight/instability issues (TBH I really like the new RAN ANZAC class fit out and personally I would have supported the same upgrade), but the Aussie ANZACs also had to make compromises too because of the top-weight/instability issues (which have been discussed here so won't repeat them). This is less a NZ/Aus thing but more a limitation of the ANZAC class Frigate in terms of its weight/growth margins etc.
Also project risk was a factor - the thinking was that by joining on to the RCN Halifax Frigate upgrade programme the RNZN would acquire capabilities that could be scaled to fit the smaller ANZAC Frigate (de-risked by the Canadians being the first to do so etc). Whether ultimately this was the right decision could be open to debate, but as the saying goes it is what it is.
At the end of the day, as some DefPros here would say, the ANZAC was perhaps ironically a little too good in that Aus/NZ Gov's would rather invest in upgrades when really a larger new vessel should have been acquired (perhaps 10 years earlier).
Would NZ be interested in going back to the sensors, CMS and weapons fitout used by Australia?
Well NZ didn't mind changing (from Saab to LM) so presumably the same logic could apply in the future and possibly do so. After all we are only talking about 2 NZ vessels currently to be concerned about (i.e. not a much greater fleet). But at the end of the day vessels like the T31/AH140 or T26/CSC/Hunter or whatever can be fitted with tailored weapon or CMS systems. Hypothetically the RNZN could have the same vessel as the RAN but with a different CMS (putting some risk back on NZ though but it shouldn't be insurmountable).
TBH I think there might be a greater likelihood of success and advantage to be had by having bi-lateral talks between AusGov and NZGov and both defence forces to see what opportunities there are for commonality in systems and munitions used. It would also be nice, particularly if modular systems really start to enter service, if shared national pools of modular systems could be established.
Full agree. Perhaps we could continue the discussion on the RNZN thread (so save our cousins across the ditch on this chit chat? They have bigger fish to fry so to speak with the shennigans of the PLA-N to contend with)!
navalinstitute.com.au
