Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[kiwi in exile]

Personally I would like to see us get 2-3 naval nh90 frames (transport version) for now. Now that we can operate from the Canterbury and eventually from the Endevour replacement, shipboard operations/training will be a lot more common. However, I realise that for 90% of the time the new seasprites capabilitys will fulfill our shipboard helo needs in terms of vertrep and personell transport.

Longterm, post seasprites, NFH90 are a logical next step (an my preference).

Also does anyone else recall reading recently a comment in MSM that the seaspries weren't being deployed on the OPVs for whatever reason.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By96qH_dUguANk82NmVFOHhfMHc/edit?pli=1
http://www.nzdf.mil.nz/news/media-releases/2012/20120528-nstncoopv.htm

Does anyone know how often they do deploy from the OPVs and if there are any issues with this?

 

[chis73]

Also does anyone else recall reading recently a comment in MSM that the seaspri[t]es weren't being deployed on the OPVs for whatever reason.

Does anyone know how often they do deploy from the OPVs and if there are any issues with this?

Unfortunately I have to use Ron Mark again as a source, but according to him the Seasprites have never been deployed on Southern Ocean OPV patrols.

Remember HMNZS Wellington And Those Illegal Fishing Vessels? | Scoop News

I can't recall the Seasprite going up into the Pacific on an OPV either. I think that there have just been too few Sprites available (and the OPVs have had periods tied up as well).

The Seasprite has been as far as Campbell Island & the other sub-antarctic islands on Te Kaha, in 2009.
Subantarctic trip of a lifetime - travel | Stuff.co.nz

Photos here

Have the new Sprites actually flown in NZ yet?
Answer: Yes they have (photo here)

 

[ngatimozart]

Does anyone know how often they do deploy from the OPVs and if there are any issues with this?

I don't think that they have deployed because of a shortage of available airframes. Now with eight airframes OPV deployment by Sprites could be a possibility.

 

[RegR]

I don't think that they have deployed because of a shortage of available airframes. Now with eight airframes OPV deployment by Sprites could be a possibility.

Could the weight issue also be a factor? Especially on southern patrols. I remember the cock up with the ice belt from early in the sea trials and unsure how they remedied it if at all. This will also affect future growth and upgrades and limit 'add ons'.

They did trial the sprites to prove the capability and it did look somewhat cosy in terms of deck space but yes hopefully was just a lack of numbers which will soon be sorted.

That is where I see our best chance to increase 90 numbers is when we replace the sprites as it seems logical to consolidate into 2 types from 3 given the chance. This would need to coincide with ANZAC and OPV replacement considerations (End II and future MRV would/should be improved for even easier embarkation) to gain full benefit as at the moment CY is tight, ANZAC is tighter and current OPV is a no go therefore sprites are our best and only (in OPVs case) option.

A mix of NFH and marinised NHs, and possibly a couple of marinised 109s for intergrated continuation training/light duties kept with the SMEs, 6 sqn, would better suit our at sea duties rather then trying to operate our current 90s from RNZN ships vs purely transporting them. A NFH/NH(M)/A109(M) mix would more readily cover our naval combat, support and maritime training needs giving a true 'JATF' response whilst maintaining commonality, and still some crossover with their land based bretheren.

Would still be awhile away yet but at least a target to aim towards for now.

 

[ngatimozart]

Could the weight issue also be a factor? Especially on southern patrols. I remember the cock up with the ice belt from early in the sea trials and unsure how they remedied it if at all. This will also affect future growth and upgrades and limit 'add ons'.

They did trial the sprites to prove the capability and it did look somewhat cosy in terms of deck space but yes hopefully was just a lack of numbers which will soon be sorted.

That is where I see our best chance to increase 90 numbers is when we replace the sprites as it seems logical to consolidate into 2 types from 3 given the chance. This would need to coincide with ANZAC and OPV replacement considerations (End II and future MRV would/should be improved for even easier embarkation) to gain full benefit as at the moment CY is tight, ANZAC is tighter and current OPV is a no go therefore sprites are our best and only (in OPVs case) option.

A mix of NFH and marinised NHs, and possibly a couple of marinised 109s for intergrated continuation training/light duties kept with the SMEs, 6 sqn, would better suit our at sea duties rather then trying to operate our current 90s from RNZN ships vs purely transporting them. A NFH/NH(M)/A109(M) mix would more readily cover our naval combat, support and maritime training needs giving a true 'JATF' response whilst maintaining commonality, and still some crossover with their land based bretheren.

Would still be awhile away yet but at least a target to aim towards for now.

Don't think weight would be a factor in that the Sprite all up weight would have been taken into account when they designed the OPV. They did 161 landings and takeoffs on the OPV with the Sprite in 2012 during flight famil and deck trials etc. However given that the mistake the ice belt you have to wonder what else the builders and designers got wrong.

Whilst the NFH would be a logical replacement for the Sprites, I think that given the NZG and treasury aversion to cost it might be to expensive for their tastes. I did suggest it in my DWP submission though. I would think something along the lines of the AW159 Wildcat may appeal but who knows. Along with the NFH I suggested marinised NH90s and marinised armed AW109s for the OPVs. Put the glimmer of a possible idea into their heads.

 

[Lucasnz]

Could the weight issue also be a factor? Especially on southern patrols. I remember the cock up with the ice belt from early in the sea trials and unsure how they remedied it if at all. This will also affect future growth and upgrades and limit 'add ons'.

They did trial the sprites to prove the capability and it did look somewhat cosy in terms of deck space but yes hopefully was just a lack of numbers which will soon be sorted.

If the comments made here (previously posted link) are correct then a new class of OPV will be required once the mandatory polar code comes in in 2018.

I agree the OPV Flight Deck is far to cosy, especially with the crane down aft.

 

[chis73]

One reason for not embarking a Seasprite on Southern Ocean patrols could be that the sea conditions are perhaps too rough too frequently. The Otago class are fairly small ships, they will be tossed around a lot. I'm reminded of this video of a Lynx (arguably the world's best naval helo) landing on a Danish Knud Rasmussen* class OPV. There is a reason they invented adult diapers!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJIZTL2ZyEw

* I have the feeling the Rasmussen class lack fin stabilizers.

As for a new OPV, I suggested a Svalbard or DeWolf class (A/OPS) in my white paper submission. The bigger the better! The A/OPS has the advantage of having a warm production line. Only one Svalbard class was built, and that was 15 years ago.

 

[ngatimozart]

One reason for not embarking a Seasprite on Southern Ocean patrols could be that the sea conditions are perhaps too rough too frequently. The Otago class are fairly small ships, they will be tossed around a lot. I'm reminded of this video of a Lynx (arguably the world's best naval helo) landing on a Danish Knud Rasmussen* class OPV. There is a reason they invented adult diapers!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJIZTL2ZyEw

* I have the feeling the Rasmussen class lack fin stabilizers.

As for a new OPV, I suggested a Svalbard or DeWolf class (A/OPS) in my white paper submission. The bigger the better! The A/OPS has the advantage of having a warm production line. Only one Svalbard class was built, and that was 15 years ago.

Only a little bit of roughers.

 

[blackhawknz]

Government should look replace both OPVs and A09(The Littoral Warfare Support Vessel) with 2 bigger Multipurpose OPV s , i think two Damen Offshore Patrol Vessel 2400/2600 with these being between 90m-98 able to take two swap-able modules , with one setup with dive support/crane module and mcm module to cover the (The Littoral Warfare Support Vessel) Replacement but also being able to swap the module for say - Logistic support goods- Energy and water making facilities- Hospital facilities- (Refrigerated) provision stores, say for disaster support in NZ and be bigger vessel in pacific.Also able to purchase ASW ,UAV USV module to add new capability.
.With the other 2400/2600 OPV as a true OPV with RWS ice strengthen from the start which could be fitted with the above modules anytime to cover missions,. able to hanger NH90 and being of same design will help with training,maintenance,crew interchangeability .

 

[Zero Alpha]

. If defence had not coined the phrase JATF I somehow suspect NZ will stiil be operating as per, it just gave some officers in Wellington some flow diagrams to come up with and an overall focus for the 'future'.

I think you've seriously underestimated the significance of the decision. It's given a joint planning focus for NZDF that they haven't had since the withdrawal from Singapore. It's also given them a very tangible example to use to explain to decision makers on how various force elements contribute to the bigger picture.

 

[KiwiRob]

If the comments made here (previously posted link) are correct then a new class of OPV will be required once the mandatory polar code comes in in 2018.

I agree the OPV Flight Deck is far to cosy, especially with the crane down aft.

Aren't naval vessels usually exempt from these kinds of agreements?

 

[ngatimozart]

Aren't naval vessels usually exempt from these kinds of agreements?

If it is the same as the one that covers oil tankers, fuel ships etc., then there could be some possible exemptions. However under that one IIRC the host country could refuse to accept the port visit by an unconforming tanker and in fact refuse it permission to enter its territorial waters. That's the reason why End was double hulled at last refit and is now being replaced. Based on that it is possible that a similar scenario would apply for the polar rules. Whilst Antarctica wouldn't be so much of an issue regarding foreign port visits, it would possibly create diplomatic issues with some states and if by chance any ice capable RNZN vessel ever visited Arctic waters then the rules would definitely apply. Finally if you are going to build vessels to an ice standard it is probably practical and sensible to build hen to an accepted IMO standard.

 

[RegR]

I think you've seriously underestimated the significance of the decision. It's given a joint planning focus for NZDF that they haven't had since the withdrawal from Singapore. It's also given them a very tangible example to use to explain to decision makers on how various force elements contribute to the bigger picture.

And I think you are overestimating it or what exactly do you think JFNZ HQNZDF have been doing all these years? Again we have already been doing these things it is just alittle more cohesive and has a banner to fly but that is just normal progression to make the most of service specific outputs and improvements. Alot of hype more than direct action IMO, it was going to happen (or already was) regardless of some fancy title.

Any new capability we have is either amalgation, modernisation or natural progression, it's not as if we now have marines, LHDs or actually anything 'amphibiously' new. We already had a sealift ship, obviously their main use will be transporting army (funnily enough by sea) and the landing craft have always had a purpose, P3K has an overland capability and the info gathered is not much use for navy, NH90 is new and improved and in some cases is just easier to move by sea in numbers and we knew the air transport fleet would need upgrading for us to move NZLAV operationally when we got them.

If you really believe our defence force has never combined and worked together before this JATF then what exactly do you think we have been doing all these years?

 

[ngatimozart]

And I think you are overestimating it or what exactly do you think JFNZ HQNZDF have been doing all these years? Again we have already been doing these things it is just alittle more cohesive and has a banner to fly but that is just normal progression to make the most of service specific outputs and improvements. Alot of hype more than direct action IMO, it was going to happen (or already was) regardless of some fancy title.

Any new capability we have is either amalgation, modernisation or natural progression, it's not as if we now have marines, LHDs or actually anything 'amphibiously' new. We already had a sealift ship, obviously their main use will be transporting army (funnily enough by sea) and the landing craft have always had a purpose, P3K has an overland capability and the info gathered is not much use for navy, NH90 is new and improved and in some cases is just easier to move by sea in numbers and we knew the air transport fleet would need upgrading for us to move NZLAV operationally when we got them.

If you really believe our defence force has never combined and worked together before this JATF then what exactly do you think we have been doing all these years?

Reg up until now the 3 services have on occasion acted together in "joint" operations but there has never been a true joint force in NZDF. This JATF is a proper joint force with a defined structure and doctrine. It's a true purple force. Yes it is mostly comprised of existing forces and assets, but so is the ADF force. The NZDF and the ADF are not large enough to justify separate marine style forces, although the Dutch do and IIRC the Danes to a lessor extent. The JATF actually makes the NZDF a true expeditionary force now and just because part of its title is amphibious don't get to hung up in that. Look at what amphibious forces do and how they can tie an opposition down, then look at airlift capabilities of the ADF and NZDF. The JATF is only being stood up recently and its first major test is occurring now at Talisman Sabre. There will still be pieces that need to be put in place but it is the way of the future. We have to look to the future not to the past.

The P3K2 have ISR capabilities now and that makes them a purple asset, however it does not remove them from their basic role of MPA, it just adds to its capabilities. Overland ISR does have some benefit for naval forces because it can provide intelligence etc., for their planning if needed.

Finally, I do think that this is a good move but it needs more equipment such as helos and a proper LHD / LPD plus a really good logistical tail. The logistical tail in the end will be the making or breaking of it. The problem with NZG resourcing of defence is that there is not enough of it.

 

[RegR]

Reg up until now the 3 services have on occasion acted together in "joint" operations but there has never been a true joint force in NZDF. This JATF is a proper joint force with a defined structure and doctrine. It's a true purple force. Yes it is mostly comprised of existing forces and assets, but so is the ADF force. The NZDF and the ADF are not large enough to justify separate marine style forces, although the Dutch do and IIRC the Danes to a lessor extent. The JATF actually makes the NZDF a true expeditionary force now and just because part of its title is amphibious don't get to hung up in that. Look at what amphibious forces do and how they can tie an opposition down, then look at airlift capabilities of the ADF and NZDF. The JATF is only being stood up recently and its first major test is occurring now at Talisman Sabre. There will still be pieces that need to be put in place but it is the way of the future. We have to look to the future not to the past.

The P3K2 have ISR capabilities now and that makes them a purple asset, however it does not remove them from their basic role of MPA, it just adds to its capabilities. Overland ISR does have some benefit for naval forces because it can provide intelligence etc., for their planning if needed.

Finally, I do think that this is a good move but it needs more equipment such as helos and a proper LHD / LPD plus a really good logistical tail. The logistical tail in the end will be the making or breaking of it. The problem with NZG resourcing of defence is that there is not enough of it.

Ok so how exactly is TS15 deployment differering to any other ex deployment (therefore notionally op deployment) such as Hamels, Southern Katipos etc as according to the boys it's same old same old just a different ex. I have served in 2 of our services and in 2 completely different trades in my time and only recently left and in all those years I worked with all three services under command of a mix from all 3 services (and not only NZ) on a variety of exs, tasks and ops. I honestly for the life of me cannot see any difference in overall operation. They occasionally worked together as not all tasks, missions and ops require all of the services particular skillsets at the same time and is dependant on nature, theatre and response of any given task but overal we still worked together, very closely in some instances, to acheive a common endstate. What exactly will change in this regard?

Maybe some tangible examples of how JATF is a new concept as so far I still see no great difference in what we were already doing? Same job new title.

 

[Ocean1Curse]

At the risk of sounding noob to defence matters, it is my understanding that defence policy was to shift priority spending from the back office to the front. I figured that to mean no more spare parts and more bullets. It's a little annoying to hear not much has changed.

It would be preferable to see vessels braking laws in NZ waters to face NZ courts. If this is not a priority as seen by the recent tooth fish vessel incident then how best can navy proceed under increasingly tight budgets. Is navy output to improve by conducting training excersises with our allies?

I don't want NZDF to be Billy no mates. But I would like to hear navy/NZDF is actually training for issues that threaten New Zealand.

Are there any opertunities to get school programmes in so school children can use some of navies technologies that children wouldn't ordinarily have access to like using radios. Or is that too un PC.

I want defence jobs to matter and be payed accordingly. New Zealand is the second hardest working country in the OECD. But we get payed the lest. I would like to see some navy jobs grow from our nich capabilities. Defence pay may be better served by investing in our uniqueness.

What ever it is unique about navy. I want to see more.

 

[Zero Alpha]

If you really believe our defence force has never combined and worked together before this JATF then what exactly do you think we have been doing all these years?

You've actually misrepresented what I've said. I've said the JATF has provided a strategic focus (on joint outputs) that hasn't been present since the withdrawal from Singapore. That isn't to say there hasn't been a history of joint exercises, but that is very different to a strategic planning imperative. It has created a new sense of focus for senior uniformed leaders, and an easily understood (and widely supported) planning context for parliamentary leaders.

It's probably difficult for most people operating in the weeds to understand the importance of this for securing long-term funding and achieving a much-needed political consensus on outputs, but it is absolutely crucial.

Arguably the previous white paper announcing the JATF endorsement was the last step in a process to achieve a broad political consensus that started with the 1999 Defence Beyond 2000 report. It's no coincidence that the minister who signed off on the report was also one of the authors of the 1999 report.

 

[ngatimozart]

Ok so how exactly is TS15 deployment differering to any other ex deployment (therefore notionally op deployment) such as Hamels, Southern Katipos etc as according to the boys it's same old same old just a different ex. I have served in 2 of our services and in 2 completely different trades in my time and only recently left and in all those years I worked with all three services under command of a mix from all 3 services (and not only NZ) on a variety of exs, tasks and ops. I honestly for the life of me cannot see any difference in overall operation. They occasionally worked together as not all tasks, missions and ops require all of the services particular skillsets at the same time and is dependant on nature, theatre and response of any given task but overal we still worked together, very closely in some instances, to acheive a common endstate. What exactly will change in this regard?

Maybe some tangible examples of how JATF is a new concept as so far I still see no great difference in what we were already doing? Same job new title.

I think that whilst exercises like Southern Katipo have been really informative and instructive, TS15 gives an opportunity for the JATF to be tested in a large environment involving significant forces from the ADF and the USA. In the overall history of the NZDF and NZ military, the JATF is a relatively new concept and as I said in my previous post, a true purple force. Yes you may have served in two different services and different trades, but you aren't the only one. The point is to be able to have a holistic approach and be able to look at it at the micro, meso and macro scales simultaneously. That's where I'm coming from.

 

[kiwi in exile]

I tend to see it like Zero Alpha. To some extent JATF is just an extension of what we have allready been doing to a greater or lesser extent recently, but its importance lies in its role signposting a strategic direction for NZDFs future. This is important so that we dont slip into the bad old days of interservice rivalry (LAV purchase).

It will be interesting how this evolves when the next DWP comes out. Other issues may take priority (maritime domain awareness, Antarctic capability)

 

[40 deg south]

A couple of weeks ago I posted some info on the GETS tender for the new Littoral Operations Support Capability (LOSC) a.k.a. the Manawanui and Resolution replacement. I’ve been busy in the real world, but will now finish the job.

One of the unusual features of the tender docs is the provision of four scenarios that the LOSC could be used in. I’ve never seen this before, and will briefly summarise the scenarios below.

1) A major earthquake strikes Wellington cutting off all land access and damaging container port and airport. The LOSC surveys the shipping channel for geological uplift and sunken debris, finds a safe approach route to dockside for Canterbury, surveys condition of wharves and clears sunken shipping containers blocking access. Diverts to Taranaki to survey a capped oil well that has begun leaking oil post-earthquake, provides information on damage to civilian contractors, returns to Wellington to fully re-survey harbour and mark new shipping channel.

2) In company with multinational disposal teams, LOSC is locating and destroying unexploded WWII ordinance in Western Pacific. Diving and demolition specialists embarked, along with explosives and detonators. LOSC required to survey safe passages through reefs while maintaining high-tempo disposal activities. An exploding detonator seriously injures a diver, who is stabilised and returned to the LOSC. After further treatment and assessment, diver is evacuated to a US Navy ship by Seahawk helicopter.

3) Political turmoil in the Pacific state of Mainlandia leads to NZ and Australian dispatching a battalion-sized security and stabilisation force to restore order and support elected government. The LOSC goes in advance of the Canterbury to conduct reconnaisance by UAV, survey the port and identify suitable landing sites. LOSC deters a potentially hostile speedboat with warning shots, and stands by to refuel HN90 and Seasprite helicopters. LOSC crane and divers clear the port for use of Canterbury, and return to Townsville to collect more troops/equipment. In a further patrol of outer islands, a shore party is ambushed, and has to be evacuated with casualties by LOSC.

4) NZ contributes the LOSC to a UN-mandated de-mining mission in the Middle East, along with a wide variety of other nations. Installing a Phalanx CIWS is considered but rejected because of cover from other allied forces. After travelling in convoy with a US carrier strike group, refuelling at sea and other manoeuvres, the LOSC begins de-mining with assistance of an Underwater Autonomous Vehicle. LOSC is required to engage and neutralise two suspected hostile small craft due to unavailability of coalition air support, before completing mining task.

I’m not sure how much use these scenarios will be to prospective suppliers of the LOSC, but they give a good insight into RNZN thinking. The assumption that a UAV capability will be acquired sooner or later is unsurprising, but good to have confirmed.

Finally, if their defence career doesn’t work out, someone in Wellington could make a decent living in Hollywood churning out these scenarios!