Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[ngatimozart]

The money that would be spent on a HMS Ocean acquisition would be far better spent on a new vessel. In Treasury speak, far better value for money in the long term. Just with crewing alone, Ocean requires the crews of 2 frigates or 8 OPVs which the RNZN simply doesn't have. Yes we could probably tempt a few poms down under but 285 qualified to operate the ship across all branches? I also agree with spoz that she will be a stuffed unit and it will cost us more money in the long term. I think back to the two ex RN Leander class frigates we got in 1982 & 83 (F104 Dido - Southland & F69 Bacchante - Wellington). Southland had a reputation of being beloved by concrete companies around NZ because they were always supplying concrete for emergency repairs of the rust in the hull. Dido was commissioned in 1963 and Bacchante 1971, so Dido was basically 20 years old when we acquired her; a very similar age to Ocean. The NZG have an aversion to risk and this would be a risky acquisition.

 

[hauritz]

I am not sure a ship like the Ocean would really suit New Zealand.

Having said that I think that they may have missed an opportunity when France was trying to dispose of the Mistrals it built for Russia,

Fairly low crew requirements for a ship of that size and at the time the French were pretty motived to sell.

 

[MrConservative]

A modern small-medium landing helicopter dock (10000-15000 tonne) would be far more pragmatic and long term more cost effective replacement for the CY when the times comes than an aging 20000 tonne LPH. Find a solution that ticks the boxes rather than the false economy of a bargain.

 

[40 deg south]

A modern small-medium landing helicopter dock (10000-15000 tonne) would be far more pragmatic and long term more cost effective replacement for the CY when the times comes than an aging 20000 tonne LPH. Find a solution that ticks the boxes rather than the false economy of a bargain.

Mr C
Any examples you can point to of a vessel of this nature? Just curious.

Everyone else
While I love a session of 'What if...?' as much as the next bloke, RNZN's acquisition plans have been very clearly set out.
1) New tanker due 2020, contracted to Hyundai
2) LOSC vessel due 2020ish - tenders closing about now
3) Southern OPV - I'm expecting RFI soon
4) Replace 2 x ANZACs in (probably) late 2020s, although scoping work has begun on options
5) Replace Canterbury after 2030.

Any change to these plans will probably be for the worse, if a government with a strong anti-military wing gets in. Which one day it will.

Of course, this could change if the South China Sea gets all shooty.

 

[t68]

Mr C
Any examples you can point to of a vessel of this nature? Just curious.

Everyone else
While I love a session of 'What if...?' as much as the next bloke, RNZN's acquisition plans have been very clearly set out.
1) New tanker due 2020, contracted to Hyundai
2) LOSC vessel due 2020ish - tenders closing about now
3) Southern OPV - I'm expecting RFI soon
4) Replace 2 x ANZACs in (probably) late 2020s, although scoping work has begun on options
5) Replace Canterbury after 2030.

Any change to these plans will probably be for the worse, if a government with a strong anti-military wing gets in. Which one day it will.

Of course, this could change if the South China Sea gets all shooty.

Well it's certantly a little early to put out a RFI for canty's replacement but they would have to start soonish I imagine. I can really find anything concrete on how much hard power the NZG want's to project when, are they looking for minimum of Platoon or Company lift capabilty or combined Company Troop of NZLAV or Squadron capabilty. But the nearest I've come is that they want the capabilty to be able to lead an intervention in the regional area, but does not actually saw to what level, seems like the old saying "how long is a piece of string"

NZ had now gone through a couple of examples for sealift with Charles Upham and Canterbury, it should have an understanding on what type of vessel and capabilty it needs.

 

[ngatimozart]

The Endurance class LHD 160 from Singapore, a 15,000 tonne variant of the Dokdo class LPD with it being automated a lot to reduce the crew numbers, or a 10 - 15K tonne variant of the Makassar LPD would be something I'd think that we could go with.

 

[Cadredave]

NZ had now gone through a couple of examples for sealift with Charles Upham and Canterbury, it should have an understanding on what type of vessel and capabilty it needs.

Upham was a complete disaster from start to finish the only lesson RNZN got out of it was HMNZS Canterbury which is far from ideal but at least is a starting point, how to use and operate CAN is taking time for the obvious reason she is new & the capability provided NZDF has never been had before. 2030 is a realistic timeframe to replace her with something built to our new CONOPS thats why Future 2035 is a living document with the ability to change as the capability expertise is built up.

 

[MrConservative]

Mr C
Any examples you can point to of a vessel of this nature? Just curious.

The following would be worth investigating to eventually replace the CY:

BPC 140 (Smaller Mistral variant)

Endurance 160 (ST Marine LHD design)

Oosumi Class (Amphibious Transport Dock)

Kalaat Beni Abbes BDSL (Fincantieri’s variant of the San Giorgio Class)

Athlas 13000 (Navantia’s LHD variant of the Galicia Class)

MHD-150 (TKMS’ Meko design)

Dokto Class Variant

Everyone else
While I love a session of 'What if...?' as much as the next bloke, RNZN's acquisition plans have been very clearly set out.
1) New tanker due 2020, contracted to Hyundai
2) LOSC vessel due 2020ish - tenders closing about now
3) Southern OPV - I'm expecting RFI soon
4) Replace 2 x ANZACs in (probably) late 2020s, although scoping work has begun on options
5) Replace Canterbury after 2030.

There is also the replacement of the OPV / IPV's which are within the lifetime of the Future 2035 timeframe.

Gut feeling is that replacement program listed will not cut the mustard within 5 years. It is kind of flimsy, a minimalist scenario whereby the strategic projections are seen through rose tinted lenses that when put on the future is always seen as it was in 1994 irrespective of the year. I wonder if the forecasters wear pleated trousers, wide floral ties and listen to Wet Wet Wet on their Sony Discman.

Any change to these plans will probably be for the worse, if a government with a strong anti-military wing gets in. Which one day it will.

Of course, this could change if the South China Sea gets all shooty.

The Key Government will soon find out that a HRC White House will be far more direct about US concerns and expectations than the Obama years. HRC and the Clinton camp has always been more hawkish than the Obama faction.

If New Zealand continues to do well economically, yet continues to take its recent benign default position with respect to regional security investment over the next 5 year irrespective of the West / China / Russia / Cold Peace dynamic - it will come on the receiving end of increasing pressure. Key gets feted in Washington - but could soon end up with simply being politely ignored as what happened to Bolger (Clinton I) and Clark (Bush II).

 

[MrConservative]

Upham was a complete disaster from start to finish the only lesson RNZN got out of it was HMNZS Canterbury which is far from ideal but at least is a starting point, how to use and operate CAN is taking time for the obvious reason she is new & the capability provided NZDF has never been had before. 2030 is a realistic timeframe to replace her with something built to our new CONOPS thats why Future 2035 is a living document with the ability to change as the capability expertise is built up.

To be fair Dave. The Navy knew exactly what they were being forced on them. Internally they were more interested in a Sir Galahad II design as used by the RFA.
It was a $14m disaster than when they sold it at least they got $8m back.

 

[Rob c]

Gut feeling is that replacement program listed will not cut the mustard within 5 years. It is kind of flimsy, a minimalist scenario whereby the strategic projections are seen through rose tinted lenses that when put on the future is always seen as it was in 1994 irrespective of the year. I wonder if the forecasters wear pleated trousers, wide floral ties and listen to Wet Wet Wet on their Sony Discman.



The Key Government will soon find out that a HRC White House will be far more direct about US concerns and expectations than the Obama years. HRC and the Clinton camp has always been more hawkish than the Obama faction.

If New Zealand continues to do well economically, yet continues to take its recent benign default position with respect to regional security investment over the next 5 year irrespective of the West / China / Russia / Cold Peace dynamic - it will come on the receiving end of increasing pressure. Key gets feted in Washington - but could soon end up with simply being politely ignored as what happened to Bolger (Clinton I) and Clark (Bush II).[/QUOTE]

Totally agree with you. The problem with forecasting is that when we look into the future and see nothing, the forecasters then assume incorrectly that there is nothing there the reality is that we cannot see into the future and trying to achieve this by projections makes the mistake of assuming thing's will remain constant which never happens. The government does need a short shift in regard our contribution to regional security, if we are to remain relevant to other participants.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

Here is a very informative document that I have just come across. Helps to provide far more detail on LHD's from Navantia. A couple of yours old but still pertinent.

http://www.infodefensa.com/wp-content/uploads/JCI_en_v2.pdf

 

[Cadredave]

To be fair Dave. The Navy knew exactly what they were being forced on them. Internally they were more interested in a Sir Galahad II design as used by the RFA.
It was a $14m disaster than when they sold it at least they got $8m back.

Very true MrC Navy might of known about UPHAM no one informed us poor land lovers that our journey would be quite a tiring experience never seen so many green faced Army pers ever in my life, Im glad CAN is in service she might not be what we wanted but as a learning platform to better inform RNZN & NZDF of what future capability we need she does just fine.

 

[40 deg south]

The following would be worth investigating to eventually replace the CY:

BPC 140 (Smaller Mistral variant)

Endurance 160 (ST Marine LHD design)

Oosumi Class (Amphibious Transport Dock)

Kalaat Beni Abbes BDSL (Fincantieri’s variant of the San Giorgio Class)

Athlas 13000 (Navantia’s LHD variant of the Galicia Class)

MHD-150 (TKMS’ Meko design)

Dokto Class Variant

Thanks for the pointers.

There is also the replacement of the OPV / IPV's which are within the lifetime of the Future 2035 timeframe.

I'm pretty sure the IPVs will be flogged off as soon as NZ can find a willing buyer. Unless they want to keep one for training purposes, but I'm not sure the current Navy brass think it is worth the trouble.

Gut feeling is that replacement program listed will not cut the mustard within 5 years. It is kind of flimsy, a minimalist scenario whereby the strategic projections are seen through rose tinted lenses that when put on the future is always seen as it was in 1994 irrespective of the year. I wonder if the forecasters wear pleated trousers, wide floral ties and listen to Wet Wet Wet on their Sony Discman.



The Key Government will soon find out that a HRC White House will be far more direct about US concerns and expectations than the Obama years. HRC and the Clinton camp has always been more hawkish than the Obama faction.

If New Zealand continues to do well economically, yet continues to take its recent benign default position with respect to regional security investment over the next 5 year irrespective of the West / China / Russia / Cold Peace dynamic - it will come on the receiving end of increasing pressure. Key gets feted in Washington - but could soon end up with simply being politely ignored as what happened to Bolger (Clinton I) and Clark (Bush II).

I'm much more positive than you on the replacement programme. Of the three vessels due to be ordered in immediate future, two are enabling assets that are much more capable than their predecessors. The third (southern OPV) is either a capability we have never had before, or an enhancement on the current OPVs, depending on the degree of ice hardening specified.

My impression is that the gov't is more wary than you give them credit for over the potential for conflict in Asia. The question (to me) is 'What is the appropriate response?' I'm not sure that NZ up-arming our OPVs and ordering an extra frigate is going to make a great deal of difference either way. As I see it, the level of military capability that would make even the slightest difference in a major shooting war would never be approved by the NZ voting public. Modest improvements that fly under the radar (so to speak) are probably the best we can expect unless there is a major geopolitical crisis that shifts public opinion. And that is pretty much what we are getting now.

 

[40 deg south]

https://www.facebook.com/RoyalNewZealandNavy/?ref=page_internal

RNZN Facebook page is doing a series of brief descriptions of the vessels coming to Auckland in November.

Does anyone know if this will be the first visit to NZ by an Indian warship?

 

[htbrst]

https://www.facebook.com/RoyalNewZealandNavy/?ref=page_internal


Does anyone know if this will be the first visit to NZ by an Indian warship?

No - The INS Delhi (ex-HMNZS Achilles) visited in the 1960's, and the INS Tabar visited 10 years ago or so. Not sure if anything has been here before or since though

 

[swerve]

Just had a look at Hms Ocean, surprised she was decomissioned a yr after a 98 million refit!

Ah, I see you're unfamiliar with the workings of our Ministry of Dementia sorry Defence.

 

[Jezza]

Thanks for the pointers.




I'm pretty sure the IPVs will be flogged off as soon as NZ can find a willing buyer. Unless they want to keep one for training purposes, but I'm not sure the current Navy brass think it is worth the trouble.



I'm much more positive than you on the replacement programme. Of the three vessels due to be ordered in immediate future, two are enabling assets that are much more capable than their predecessors. The third (southern OPV) is either a capability we have never had before, or an enhancement on the current OPVs, depending on the degree of ice hardening specified.

My impression is that the gov't is more wary than you give them credit for over the potential for conflict in Asia. The question (to me) is 'What is the appropriate response?' I'm not sure that NZ up-arming our OPVs and ordering an extra frigate is going to make a great deal of difference either way. As I see it, the level of military capability that would make even the slightest difference in a major shooting war would never be approved by the NZ voting public. Modest improvements that fly under the radar (so to speak) are probably the best we can expect unless there is a major geopolitical crisis that shifts public opinion. And that is pretty much what we are getting now.

Maybe Hyundai Heavy Industries LST-II tank landing ship.

South Korean shipbuilder Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI) launched on 25 October the third of four planned LST-II tank landing ships for the Republic of Korea Navy (RoKN) at its Ulsan dockyard, the company said in a press release.

The vessel, which has been named Ilchulbong , will join the fleet in February 2018 after undergoing sea trials in the coming month, the Yonhap news agency quoted a RoKN spokesman as saying.

According to specifications provided by HHI, the 127 m-long vessel has a standard displacement of 4,900 tonnes and accommodation for 120 crew.

The vessel can also carry up to 300 fully equipped soldiers and two landing craft, tanks, Korea amphibious assault vehicles and features a flight deck that can take up to two helicopters, including the UH-60A.


HHI launches second LST-II for South Korea | IHS Jane's 360

 

[40 deg south]

No - The INS Delhi (ex-HMNZS Achilles) visited in the 1960's, and the INS Tabar visited 10 years ago or so. Not sure if anything has been here before or since though

htbrst
Thanks. I knew someone in this forum would know!

As India moves beyond it's post-independence inward focus and resumes its historical role as a major trading nation, we can expect more frequent visits in the future.

 

[t68]

Maybe Hyundai Heavy Industries LST-II tank landing ship.

South Korean shipbuilder Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI) launched on 25 October the third of four planned LST-II tank landing ships for the Republic of Korea Navy (RoKN) at its Ulsan dockyard, the company said in a press release.

The vessel, which has been named Ilchulbong , will join the fleet in February 2018 after undergoing sea trials in the coming month, the Yonhap news agency quoted a RoKN spokesman as saying.

According to specifications provided by HHI, the 127 m-long vessel has a standard displacement of 4,900 tonnes and accommodation for 120 crew.

The vessel can also carry up to 300 fully equipped soldiers and two landing craft, tanks, Korea amphibious assault vehicles and features a flight deck that can take up to two helicopters, including the UH-60A.


HHI launches second LST-II for South Korea | IHS Jane's 360

Certantly looks the goods from the few pictures I have seen it appears to be influenced by the Kanimbla/Newport class ship. But with the little infomation I can find it appears not to have a hanger for the helo's ( can only find bow or side views no stern views that I came across)

If it could be further modified with a hanger for four NH-90's might be the way to go.And apparently built for 116M USD

Cheonjabong was built by HHI under a KRW136.4 billion (USD116 million) contract announced in December 2013 by South Korea's Defense Administration Program Agency (DAPA). The company has also been selected to construct the third vessel.

http://www.janes.com/article/56812/hhi-launches-second-lst-ii-for-south-korea

 

[40 deg south]

...

The boxes 40degS is referring to are the ones outboard & slightly forward of the crane, and at the forward end of the amidships TEU block. In the original graphics, they are open-topped & covered by tarpaulins (not as obvious on the model). I don't think they are 'bi-cons'. I assumed they were stowage areas for the equipment associated with the crane (ie a frame to help with lifting containers, plus strops, lines, slings, cargo nets, maybe spare pallets, perhaps hoses if they intend to use the crane as a refuelling rig). The boxes are all within easy reach of the crane. Perhaps they hold bulky items like fenders - but like 40degS, I'm just guessing. I doubt they contain boats or life-rafts.
...

Chis73
I didn't know where you had found CGI pics with enough resolution to be able to spot tarpaulins etc. Have just belatedly stumbled across the original HHI media release, and see there are two high-resolution graphics attached. Posting link here in case anyone else missed them too.

| Press Release | Disclosure and News | HYUNDAI Heavy Industry Investor Relations