Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[Novascotiaboy]

In the cases of fishery disputes I mentioned earlier they all occurred in near coastal areas where surveillance was readily available on station via vessel and aircraft. The shear distance to anywhere or any help in the southern ocean means that not withstanding illegal fishing activities what about SAR and vessel assistance?

Having a vessel on station with a helicopter and RPAS capability will go a long way to providing a level of safety for those legally operating in the area be they research or tourist.

Whatever vessel design is chosen for the SOPV it will have to be of significant size to allow an immense fuel reserve. Not like you can pop into a local port for a quick tank top up. Hence the Endeavour replacement. Two helicopters would seem realistic as redundancy in those extremes will be vital.

Looking at the various designs currently in the water or on the drawing board the Svalbard and the Dewolf are just slightly longer than 100 m with a displacement above 6000 tons. The Chilean vessel is bigger but more designed with a significant transport capability. The Aussie vessel is a monster at 156 m and over 23000 tons and a AUS$1 billion price.

Going on the cheap will be a huge mistake IMHO. There are those here who have sea time in these waters and I have the greatest of respect for your service. There are a few long retired fishermen in my community who went south in the sixties aboard Canadian research vessels and have told me amazing stories of extremes.

It will be interesting times in the coming months and years as we get to discuss three new vessels at a minimum for the RNZN. The SOPV I think will be a complicated build given its AO and the needs of redundancy of systems to insure its survival in the most remote corner of this earth.

 

[John Fedup]

Looking at the various designs currently in the water or on the drawing board the Svalbard and the Dewolf are just slightly longer than 100 m with a displacement above 6000 tons. The Chilean vessel is bigger but more designed with a significant transport capability. The Aussie vessel is a monster at 156 m and over 23000 tons and a AUS$1 billion price.

Going on the cheap will be a huge mistake IMHO. There are those here who have sea time in these waters and I have the greatest of respect for your service. There are a few long retired fishermen in my community who went south in the sixties aboard Canadian research vessels and have told me amazing stories of extremes.

The Southern Ocean is a brutal environment due to the lack of land breaks, hence the the fear of the furious fifties and screaming sixties. The De Wolf will be fine for the Arctic but bigger is better for the Southern Ocean IMO. A joint ice breaker fleet for Canada, the US, Australia, and NZ that could be transitioned between the two hemispheres would be nice as well.

 

[MrConservative]

I always remember listening to the late Capt Ian Bradley RNZN on Newstalk ZB years ago criticise the Protectors as being too small, too short ranged, not enough ice protection for Southern Ocean patrolling amongst other things.

A MOTS Svalbard or similar with ability to rendezvous and RPAS from the new Endeavour would be sufficient and safe to do the job. I am against the need for a second specialist SOPV that will cost the thick edge of +$250m in this role that will kill other required capabilities in other areas of the NZDF. It is simply not justifiable fiscally or operationally. Just specify 1C double-skinned ice-reinforced hulls for the replacement of the Protectors as a work around for the very brief times that the specialist SOPV is not available. A single 24 hour MQ-4C mission will hover up anything and everything intel wise in the Ross Sea Sanctuary Protectorate anyway - a P-3K2 a significant chunk also, let alone what a the P-8A will bring to the table. On those rare occasions when a vessel is not available to conduct an in-situ boarding inspection one can prosecute retrospectively through gathered evidenced and intercepted & enforced later.

Just to clarify the Aussie icebreaker that Nova spoke of is under a contracted build price of A$529m. The all-up program is $1.9B over 30 years.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

If the pollies won't stump for three extra AW109 light utility helicopters I find it extremely unlikely that they will pony up the US$120 plus for a Triton let alone multiples.

 

[ASSAIL]

I've considered all your contributions re the Southern Ocean over the last days or so and believe that many are missing an obvious truth. The Southern Ocean is not and won't, for many years, be a militarily contested space. Subsequently it should remain the arena for Antarctic support vessels and large very lightly armed resource protection ships, a capability carried out by agencies other than naval forces.
I appreciate the need for the multi role capability of the new tanker but surely the RNZN should be concentrating her limited resources on the SLOC and the security of her Pacific neighbours?
It seems the thrust of the discussion has skewed to making every RNZN ship capable of operating in the Southern Ocean and that is simply not feasible.

The Canadian situation is completely different strategically and the two should not be considered in parallel.

 

[MrConservative]

I've considered all your contributions re the Southern Ocean over the last days or so and believe that many are missing an obvious truth. The Southern Ocean is not and won't, for many years, be a militarily contested space. Subsequently it should remain the arena for Antarctic support vessels and large very lightly armed resource protection ships, a capability carried out by agencies other than naval forces.
I appreciate the need for the multi role capability of the new tanker but surely the RNZN should be concentrating her limited resources on the SLOC and the security of her Pacific neighbours?
It seems the thrust of the discussion has skewed to making every RNZN ship capable of operating in the Southern Ocean and that is simply not feasible.

The Canadian situation is completely different strategically and the two should not be considered in parallel.

Exactly. All that is needed is a single SOPV supported by the next Endeavour. I have no issue with future protector replacements having a some form of icebelt but
anything else is overkill - certainly not quarter billion dollar specialist ships.

 

[Rob c]

Exactly. All that is needed is a single SOPV supported by the next Endeavour. I have no issue with future protector replacements having a some form of icebelt but
anything else is overkill - certainly not quarter billion dollar specialist ships.

Agree, the combination of a SOPV ,reasonable aerial surveillance and some satellite recon should be enough, What I am not sure of is where we stand over this in regared to International maritime law and what have the signature nations agreed to in regared to policing of the sanctuary and what help may be available from the other signatories to assist in this task.

 

[MrConservative]

If the pollies won't stump for three extra AW109 light utility helicopters I find it extremely unlikely that they will pony up the US$120 plus for a Triton let alone multiples.

Completely different context. Buying 3 extra 109's is not anywhere near the priority of maritime surveillance - which is one of the vital areas for the NZ Govt in both recent DWP's. Furthermore, no one has discounted getting more 109's in the training role - all they did was push the timeline out to 2019 for a refresh - which may or may not include extra frames for training. The extra tranche of 109's was never going to be immediate as they were only just introducing the type and building capacity, rebuilding the engineering, pilot and QFI pool. And money and time was going into the SeaSprite replacement project which was bought forward 3-4 years according to the previous minister.

It has been well signposted by the last 3 DefMIns that a HALE UAV is in the eventual picture with respect to the NZDF to triangulate our WGS involvement and the very high interest in getting the P-8. Six years ago Wayne Mapp was publicly mentioning the Global Hawk as the kind of future capability we may seek - even discounting a manned replacement. If the UK, another 5i's partner also moves on it we will to. Brownlee has spoken to conferences speaking of a "wide area maritime surveillance capability that is manned and unmanned." Coleman has spoken about New Zealand maintaining a tier maritime ISR capability when welcoming the RAF down to NZ to work with 5Sqd. If they go with the P-8 and indications are that we will get 4 airframes then us getting Triton or Triton derivative as a follow up and an enabler to the ADF/Allies is entirely possible. When around 25% of the capital allocation out to 2030 is for ISR then yeah Triton is possibly in the mix - and that is way better odds than 'extremely unlikely'.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

Not sure where the quarter billion price quote came from but at no time has this been a military conversation. The Ross Sea Marine Santuary is a conservation policing and presence scenario.

The fact that NZ lacks another agency to deal with non military maritime issues I think is more of an issue. As has been said by others here that the limited military funding needs to be directed to core military functions. I do not advocate for a reduction of capabilities of the RNZN to a constabulary coast guard but I believe that the time has come for that discussion to be had. There is no military component to anything associated with Antarctica yet the government has set out that it is a priority of the NZDF.

If it were possible to separate the navy from the civilian oriented tasks via a separate coast guard what would each fleet look like?

 

[Rob c]

agree with Mr C that the AW109 would be a far lower priority than the total replacement of the P3K2. and if they go for only 4 high end airframes that the need for additional supporting unmanned or manned airframes becomes more pressing so I would think that the likely hood of additional airframes of some sort,to be fairly high.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

The attached article provides a little information on the Triton and the reality of its poor performance and high cost. Both of these will have a detrimental impact on any acquisition by NZ and other allies.

The Drone That Wouldn't Die: How a Defense Contractor Bested the Pentagon - The Atlantic

Limited funds can be better spent elsewhere.

 

[John Fedup]

The attached article provides a little information on the Triton and the reality of its poor performance and high cost. Both of these will have a detrimental impact on any acquisition by NZ and other allies.

The Drone That Wouldn't Die: How a Defense Contractor Bested the Pentagon - The Atlantic

Limited funds can be better spent elsewhere.

This is a rather dated article and is a discussion of the USAF's Global Hawk. The USN Triton is a separate program albeit with the same airframe. IIRC, the USN is very pleased with Triton including its integration with the P-8. The same will eventually apply to the F-35C.

 

[40 deg south]

Exactly. All that is needed is a single SOPV supported by the next Endeavour. I have no issue with future protector replacements having a some form of icebelt but
anything else is overkill - certainly not quarter billion dollar specialist ships.

The addition of a new 'Southern' OPV will mean three vessels are capable of carrying out at least some patrolling n the Ross Sea, given the two existing OPVs have ice belts. Plus the new tanker, which at 23,000 tonnes may be overkill for chasing rogue fishermen.

I fully agree with Assail that the vessel only needs to be lightly armed for resource protection duties.

Does anyone have a feel for how big she needs to be to carry out (I assume) long-duration patrols at southern latitudes? The existing Protector-class OPVs are 85m, and there seems to be a feeling that is too small.

The Svalbard is 103m, so Canada's AOPS will be similar. The Icelandic Coast Guard's Thor is 93m, and based on RR offshore support vessel design. Is NZ likely to be looking in this range, or wanting something even larger to cope with the extremes of the southern ocean?

While I think it is a useful capability, it adds yet another orphan platform to NZ's already fragmented fleet.

 

[ASSAIL]

The addition of a new 'Southern' OPV will mean three vessels are capable of carrying out at least some patrolling n the Ross Sea, given the two existing OPVs have ice belts. Plus the new tanker, which at 23,000 tonnes may be overkill for chasing rogue fishermen.

I fully agree with Assail that the vessel only needs to be lightly armed for resource protection duties.

Does anyone have a feel for how big she needs to be to carry out (I assume) long-duration patrols at southern latitudes? The existing Protector-class OPVs are 85m, and there seems to be a feeling that is too small.

The Svalbard is 103m, so Canada's AOPS will be similar. The Icelandic Coast Guard's Thor is 93m, and based on RR offshore support vessel design. Is NZ likely to be looking in this range, or wanting something even larger to cope with the extremes of the southern ocean?

While I think it is a useful capability, it adds yet another orphan platform to NZ's already fragmented fleet.

Border Force Cutter Ocean Shield is 111 mtrs x 22 mtrs at a displacement of 8300 tonnes and seems fit for purpose in sub Antarctic conditions. It could hardly be called "orphan" as there are many examples throughout the worldwide offshore industry using a well worn sustainment path.

http://newsroom.border.gov.au/photos/1118/7c7e/11187c7e-4fdf-47b6-8bc5-006cb6968a4c-450x310.jpg

 

[alexsa]

Looking at the various designs currently in the water or on the drawing board the Svalbard and the Dewolf are just slightly longer than 100 m with a displacement above 6000 tons. The Chilean vessel is bigger but more designed with a significant transport capability. The Aussie vessel is a monster at 156 m and over 23000 tons and a AUS$1 billion price.

.

Actually about half a billion for build. The one billion dollar figure covers operational costs and will be a bit higher as this has been funded for the life of the vessel.

The size is essential as it allows two bases to be resupplied in one voyages and is more able to force access in very marginal conditions. Chile is following a similar line but a tad smaller.

The Aurora is less than 100m and can only resupply a single base and has significantly less uplift capacity

 

[alexsa]

Border Force Cutter Ocean Shield is 111 mtrs x 22 mtrs at a displacement of 8300 tonnes and seems fit for purpose in sub Antarctic conditions. It could hardly be called "orphan" as there are many examples throughout the worldwide offshore industry using a well worn sustainment path.

http://newsroom.border.gov.au/photos/1118/7c7e/11187c7e-4fdf-47b6-8bc5-006cb6968a4c-450x310.jpg

And the vessel has a ICE notation consistent with the Polar Code which will come into effect from 01 January 2017.

 

[ASSAIL]

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.

There hasn't been a whole lot of discussion about the future replacements for the NZ Anzacs apart from a quick mention on MEKO however, just released in mid October by DCNS is the BELH@ARRA 4,000 tonne frigate which, from the glossy brochure appears to be a perfect fit with ideal timing to be one of the front runners, with relatively low risk by the late 2020's
DCNS released the very modern and well armed concept during Euro Navale 2016

http://en.dcnsgroup.com/news/dcns-devoile-belhrra-la-fregate-numerique-de-nouvelle-generation/

 

[ngatimozart]

There hasn't been a whole lot of discussion about the future replacements for the NZ Anzacs apart from a quick mention on MEKO however, just released in mid October by DCNS is the BELH@ARRA 4,000 tonne frigate which, from the glossy brochure appears to be a perfect fit with ideal timing to be one of the front runners, with relatively low risk by the late 2020's
DCNS released the very modern and well armed concept during Euro Navale 2016

DCNS unveils BELH@RRA®, the new-generation digital frigate | DCNS Group

We have been throwing a few ideas around.

The unit price for a the French variant of the FREMM is €670 million (US$734 million) and the guesstimated cost of the Belh@rra is €500 million (US$550 million). Interesting but we might be better off going to the ROK for the ANZAC replacements cost wise and they have experience with US systems.

 

[MrConservative]

We have been throwing a few ideas around.

The unit price for a the French variant of the FREMM is €670 million (US$734 million) and the guesstimated cost of the Belh@rra is €500 million (US$550 million). Interesting but we might be better off going to the ROK for the ANZAC replacements cost wise and they have experience with US systems.

Just to throw it out there the JMSDF has launched its new 151m 5100 tonne Asahi Class built by MHI for the princely sum of US$732m.

New, fuel-efficient MSDF destroyer Asahi launched in Nagasaki | The Japan Times

 

[ngatimozart]

Just to throw it out there the JMSDF has launched its new 151m 5100 tonne Asahi Class built by MHI for the princely sum of US$732m.

New, fuel-efficient MSDF destroyer Asahi launched in Nagasaki | The Japan Times

That puts it around a similar price to the DCNS FREMM, ROK KDXIIA, maybe more a bit more expensive than the Italian FREMM but I think it offers greater capability than either of the FREMMS.