Like 40 S I didn't realise that there was a HD image available - duh on my part. Regarding those forward TEU, it looks to me that there may be 8 there. I could be wrong.
Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Padman
- Start date
The image (link) I was using was posted on the Fifth Column forum (thanks to Mercator).
It's interesting that the two images in the HHI press release (which seem to be a later evolution - with more ice protection) don't quite match up - at least to my eyes. Look outboard of the amidships containers. Different from the model at Euronaval as well.
Agree CD, I've travelled in CY in some of the roughest weather they will take her in, ie had to wait in port a day for it to settle, it did'nt, then eventually had to go due to timings and penalties in the next port ($$$$$ literally) if missed the berthing. Whilst I'm no sea horse it was'nt as bad as I expected, sure there were alot of green faces but even some of the naval pers looked worse for wear so at least that was something.
Not overly enjoyable but also not extremely uncomfortable either, I actually think it a well decked out and functional ship suited to our size of general deployments and requirements.
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
If in time a decision is made to move on to a full fledged landing platform dock (LPD) like the size of the Enforcer series from Holland or the Gallacia from Spain would it be prudent to design in capabilities similar to a frigate like what the Algerians have done with their new LPD?
Given their size at 13000 tons the inclusion of VLS for SeaCeptor as well as an armoury for naval helicopter deployed ordinance could prove advantageous given the likelihood of a one for one replacement of the frigates.
Does Canterbury have the ability to deploy its embarked Seasprite with weapons from a hangar armoury? Or do they just function in a VERTREP and SAR role?
Since the new Endeavour is going to be 20000 tons there should be no problem dealing with an LPD at 13000 tons. After viewing the photos of the cavernous hangar on the Gallacia class its likely more than sufficient for the NZDF and the limited number of helicopters in service now and in the future.
I don't think the South Korean LST is sufficient in size for the RNZN from the articles presented and the noted tonnage.
Has anyone heard of any movement on the LOSC process? I keep getting updates from GETS to bidders so I know its not closed yet.
Given their size at 13000 tons the inclusion of VLS for SeaCeptor as well as an armoury for naval helicopter deployed ordinance could prove advantageous given the likelihood of a one for one replacement of the frigates.
Does Canterbury have the ability to deploy its embarked Seasprite with weapons from a hangar armoury? Or do they just function in a VERTREP and SAR role?
Since the new Endeavour is going to be 20000 tons there should be no problem dealing with an LPD at 13000 tons. After viewing the photos of the cavernous hangar on the Gallacia class its likely more than sufficient for the NZDF and the limited number of helicopters in service now and in the future.
I don't think the South Korean LST is sufficient in size for the RNZN from the articles presented and the noted tonnage.
Has anyone heard of any movement on the LOSC process? I keep getting updates from GETS to bidders so I know its not closed yet.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
I don't have your technical knowledge, but have also picked up that there is a bit of variation between the different images that have been released.
Did I read that work on finalising the design/production drawings would continue through 2017, with steel cut in 2018? If so, we can expect a bit more fiddling with the details for a while yet.
Ngati - i thought there was one later of four TEUs up front, but haven't been able to figure out if there is a second layer of four underneath.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
Ngati's post a few weeks back read as follows
I'm glad the Ministry is listening to suppliers, but nervous about any delays that could push the order date past the next election (probably Oct/Nov 2017).
http://www.globalresearch.ca/milita...aval-arms-race-and-regional-conflicts/5498459
The Multirole Naval Platform is where the market is heading. The alphabet soup distinctions of LPD's, LHD's, LHA's, LST's et al are being broken down depending on the emphasis of what each country maritime needs actually are. Flexibility is the key driver and for a smaller Pacific Navy like the RNZN it is vital as the vessel should be able to enable a number of roles, both current and emerging. Navantia's evolution of the Galacia, the Athlas is the better CY replacement as it adds greater flexibility. But there are other MRNP designs as well.
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
With the announcement today of the Ross Sea marine exclusion area today what willl this mean for the RNZN? With only a single planned ice capable OPV I think there is going to be a lack of presence that unscrupulous individuals will take advantage of to profit from the marine riches that exist there. Since New Zealand claims the Ross Dependancy it will have to step up to insure the next 35 years will have a continuos presence. Satellite and aircraft overflight don't dissuade those intent on raping the seas.
One would think that this was the driving rationale for the ice capability for the Endeavor replacement and the acquisition of the third OPV.
One would think that this was the driving rationale for the ice capability for the Endeavor replacement and the acquisition of the third OPV.
So true Reg that trip we did in UPHAM was the worse trip ever CAN is a Rolls Royce compared to UPHAM, im so glad that those days are over NZDF has done a remarkable job getting ships that they require through the system things are definitely looking good for the RNZN & NZDF as a whole.
kiwipatriot69
Active Member
Nova,agreed, and throw in the kermadecs too as John Key has done, we are simply going to have to build more patrol ships soon. I would say 4 extra OPV at minimum to replace our current IPV. Gift them IPV to the Fijians or other pacific island nations if we have too, would shore up good relations with them too.
It would require a large expansion in the number of required crews including plus the PI crews whom we would have to train and likely have to subsidise. What and where would be your annual tasking schedule for these six OPV's?
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
No presence equals violation of the restrictions placed on the two marine reserves. Therefore, in order to keep one vessel on station in the AO it will require another in transit, particularly travelling 4000 km to the Ross Sea, and one home in refit and / or being used for training. I agree fully with Kiwipatriot69's assumption that six OPV's will be required.
Given the failure of the toothfish boats from last year who failed to allow boarding by the RNZN there is a need to "man up" and be prepared to defend with force. Not the first time bullets have been fired to get vessels to heave to. Iceland cod wars with the UK had collisions, Argentina sunk a Chinese vessel recently, and here in Canada we had armed coast guard fisheries patrol vessels armed during the "Turbot War" with Spanish fishing vessels off Newfoundland.
Even with a single vessel on station the areas in question are huge.
Time to order Svalbard class vessels from HHI and get some steel cut and ships in the water.
Not a military mission but it's going to have serious implications as MrC has stated on crewing and funding.
Given the failure of the toothfish boats from last year who failed to allow boarding by the RNZN there is a need to "man up" and be prepared to defend with force. Not the first time bullets have been fired to get vessels to heave to. Iceland cod wars with the UK had collisions, Argentina sunk a Chinese vessel recently, and here in Canada we had armed coast guard fisheries patrol vessels armed during the "Turbot War" with Spanish fishing vessels off Newfoundland.
Even with a single vessel on station the areas in question are huge.
Time to order Svalbard class vessels from HHI and get some steel cut and ships in the water.
Not a military mission but it's going to have serious implications as MrC has stated on crewing and funding.
You can thank the Lord that they did not send the Admiral for photos (Charlie).So not even the Admiral of the Fleet in the Royal New Zealand Navy is coming.
And to think they want to be all palsy-walsy with the Colonialists after Brexit. Oh dear how sad never mind.
Will the band have their drum leopard skins inspected for fleas by NZ quarantine?
A prime example of what HM government really thinks about NZ'ers.
:eek
kiwipatriot69
Active Member
But as technology is ever moving forward, our crew requirements are dropping for larger vessels due to automation. Our current OPV only require a crew of what, 45? double that of existing ipv, some of which arent evidently going to sea,according to media reports.
The necessity has already been outlined by our Navy themselves for much larger vessels prior to Project protector,and we got short changed. Poaching is only going to increase, as climate change,depleted fish stocks, future economic instability is going to make a resource rich, largely unprotected country like Nz easy pickings for that.
Also another reason regards to eventual bigger Lpd replacement for Navy, climate change leading to more interventions by us to cyclone events,flooding. just look at the figures we are seeing now in the frequency and duration of that, Eventually some of those pacific islands are going to dissapear .
The necessity has already been outlined by our Navy themselves for much larger vessels prior to Project protector,and we got short changed. Poaching is only going to increase, as climate change,depleted fish stocks, future economic instability is going to make a resource rich, largely unprotected country like Nz easy pickings for that.
Also another reason regards to eventual bigger Lpd replacement for Navy, climate change leading to more interventions by us to cyclone events,flooding. just look at the figures we are seeing now in the frequency and duration of that, Eventually some of those pacific islands are going to dissapear .
Do we really need to intercept the illegal poachers down there with a ship? Surely they have to come north at some point and rather fruitless without their valuable cargo. Orions (or P8) could identify and navy could intercept ship of interest aywhere south, just not convinced it needs to be all the way south as long as enough evidence is gained prior to prosecute.
I would say increased air patrols would have as much if not more of a deterrant factor than say a single ship in the area and surely work out cheaper and cover a wider area quicker.
kiwipatriot69
Active Member
Gerry Brownlee himself only pointed out a possible 4 P8 or similar as a mooted replacement for our six P3, which considering they are often involved in ops far from our shores, and less airframes, the additional capability is compromised by the lack of numbers. So we need an increase in both vessels and MPA in my opinion.
I agree. There is no need for a constant station of an OPV in the Southern Ocean. The seasonal patrol activity by the SOPV and RAN vessels in the Southern Ocean working with other assets should amply suffice. Since the 2014/15 Season, 7 of the 9 identified illegals have been put out of action leaving only two vessels of interest. The legal powers relating to the classification of the Ross Sea being a Sanctuary will give the RNZN et al clear powers to detect, intercept, board and prosecute - previously a legally/politically grey area on the high seas with respect to the previous status recognition of the Ross Dependency. The new sanctuary status has raised the penalty stakes so high for the few who may have gone there to really not really bother.
Do the RAN operate in the Southern Ocean? From whats been said on the RAN thread they don't go below 48 degrees South. The icebreaker the Aussies have (had) is not RAN. They don't have the same focus on the South that NZ does - they look North. The real point though is what level of resourcing will the NZG be willing to devote to surveillance and policing of the Southern Ocean? Will this new sanctuary mean increased number of OPVs, crews and surveillance resources or will it just result in hot air emanating from the Beehive?
Last edited by a moderator:
Well NG you will be very pleased to know that I changed my short and quick reply to RegR's post from RAN to "Australian Maritime Enforcement Assets" who like NZ do keep a close eye on the Southern Ocean and have significant interests their irrespective of where their focus also lies.
As for the two questions postulated. 1. The emphasis does lie in the fact that they are finally building specialist SOPV to patrol down there and whether that will be successful one can only speculate on what type of capabilities the future SOPV will have. 2. We will have to wait until the mid-point rebalancing in 2018, but what we will likely find down the procurement track is that the last two IPV's will likely get replaced by an OPV.
As for surveillance resources - the key all along is BAMS and goes back to what I have banged on for years about. We could have all the OPV's we have down there and it would only scratch the surface - a single regular Triton sortie though would place things much differently. Pin-pointedly for the SOPV and or P-8A as the case or situation would be.
The surveillance is crucial and it would have to be ongoing, not just once every now and again. But you still need ships down there to effect boardings and to show the flag. One SOPV is a starting point and I think another one would be better because it means that you can always have one on station down there over the summer period, say from November to March, with one ship relieving the other on a rotational basis. I totally agree the P8 Pegasus / MQ4C Triton would be the idea combination. A good logical case could be made for say a 5 - 6 x P8 / 3 x MQ4C combo along with 2 - 3 ice / Southern Ocean capable patrol vessels with onboard helo / uav assets etc., but like all things it comes down to funding and political will, both of which are sadly lacking.
Of the known illegals 2 maybe remaining but how many unknown illegals are operating there and my thought is that as the fishing catch decreases in the other oceans there is going to be greater illegal fishing in the Southern Ocean.