Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[recce.k1]

An interesting option indeed but is it plausible? Like other programs announced there is little public information on the status of the Littoral replacement other than the May 2017 report of delays to the program and possible redesign of the requirements.

Does anyone have any update? What can we anticipate? Were the original requirements pie in the sky or as I feel appropriate for a multi purpose platform?

Nova - NZ has an election in exactly two weeks time, then there could anywhere between 1-2 to 3-4 weeks of post-election coalition deal talks, so it'll be unlikely that there will be any official announcements and updates until some time afterwards (perhaps later in the year).

With polls being somewhat volatile it's not clear what the outcome will be but naturally if the current Govt is returned that vessel acquisition would proceed as planned. If the Govt changes then chances are we will see reviews (and potentially cheaper options explored as the new Govt, as Mr C points out, will need to prioritise what little capital expenditure they have allocated against the other increased (non-defence) operational spending they have promised to attract voters). So we'll just have to see what pans out ...

Could this be an option for a replacement of the ANZAC's when the time comes?

https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/-/medi...-launch-folder-line-diagram-v4-1.pdf?la=en-gb

Babcock is putting forward a 120 x 19 metre, 4000 ton frigate design, the Arrowhead. There's a PDF on their website somewhere. Looks interesting.

These look like good options for general purpose Frigates.

Personally I would hope that the Govt of the day (when the decisions needs to be made) prioritises ASW due to the growing submarine threat in NZ's wider region of interest and looks towards the likes of the ASW optimised T26 (with its quieter design etc), fit-out options and its flexible mission bay (which also provides additional military and HADR flexibility, which would be an asset in the local South West Pacific region here).

At the end of the day I guess the answers will depend on who the Govt is at the time these planning and acquisition decisions need to be made and what the Govt priorities are.

Timing wise, regardless of T26, T31, Arrowhead or RAN Sea 5000 Future Frigate designs and project outcomes for other nations, NZ may be in a good position in a few years by then as those projects are underway and costs for the successful designs will be a known quantity and if unit production is up, cost may be lower!

An ideal fleet? 2 or 3 ASW optimised Frigates for coalition support with Australia in South East Asia, with 2-3 GP Frigates for South West Pacific to East Timor regional patrolling and escort duties. Hey dreams are free

 

[ngatimozart]

Babcock is putting forward a 120 x 19 metre, 4000 ton frigate design, the Arrowhead. There's a PDF on their website somewhere. Looks interesting.

TBH we'd get far more bang for buck if we went to South Korea. GB₤250 million is around NZ$450 - 480 million. That's about what the Danes paid for one of their Iver Huitfeld class FFGs. For that amount the South Koreans could build a ship with greater capability than any proposed Type 31e built in the UK.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

Ngati I couldn't agree more about building in SK. Go where you get the most for your $$$$$.

Recce.k1 I would love to see your fleet mix number wise but realistically I will be surprised if three hulls could be bought to replace the existing two. As has been talked about depending upon those elected this year and in forthcoming elections the RNZN could be reduced to a constabulary force only. This would be disasterous. Using Ngati's "Sea Blindness" term it's a horrendous thought to scuttle ones own ability to project NZ power in support of coalition operations and in the protection of the home islands and its global trade.

At approximately NZ$500 million a piece surely three of these style of ship could be acquired.

 

[swerve]

TBH we'd get far more bang for buck if we went to South Korea. GB₤250 million is around NZ$450 - 480 million. That's about what the Danes paid for one of their Iver Huitfeld class FFGs. For that amount the South Koreans could build a ship with greater capability than any proposed Type 31e built in the UK.

The yards which built the Iver Huitfeldts have closed, Maerk's excellence at cost control has gone with them, & the full cost of a new ship for someone else would have been rather higher than the headline price, because of the frugality of the Danes (they're very good at refurbishing & re-using equipment from scrapped ships), & the Stanflex bits & pieces the cost of which is pooled, not allocated to specific ships.

Still very good value for money, just not quite as cheap as first appears.

The S. Koreans would be happy to build something designed elsewhere, as they've done with the UK's latest supply ships.

 

[Kiwigov]

. As has been talked about depending upon those elected this year and in forthcoming elections the RNZN could be reduced to a constabulary force only.
.

With respect, all the primary parties in NZ barely mention Defence in their respective manifestos for the Sept 23 election. The "NZDF Defence Projects update" states that contracts have already been let for the upgrade of the two Frigate combat systems, the tanker replacement, and the ASW upgrade to the six P-3K2 Orions. So there is not much a new leftish Government can do to change the current budgeted capital expenditure, other than (perhaps?) the contract for the needed inshore warfare vessel - which could hopefully be relatively affordable for a COTS design.

 

[MrConservative]

The "NZDF Defence Projects update" states that contracts have already been let for the upgrade of the two Frigate combat systems, the tanker replacement, and the ASW upgrade to the six P-3K2 Orions. So there is not much a new leftish Government can do to change the current budgeted capital expenditure, other than (perhaps?) the contract for the needed inshore warfare vessel - which could hopefully be relatively affordable for a COTS design.

The oppositions Fiscal Forecast includes the following capital expenditure funding as it has mostly been contractually spent anyway.

Defence Command Control System
Strategic Bearer Network - Satellite Communications
Underwater Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance
Networked Enabled Army - Company Group
Individual Weapons
Assault Rifles
Maritime Sustainment Capability
Anzac Upgrade

They still have time to cancel the MSC.

However, their Fiscal Forecast provides no capital expenditure funding for the following projects where as the Government has forecast funded these project allocations.

Ice-Strengthened Offshore Patrol Vessel
HMNZS Canterbury Landing Craft Replacement
Littoral Operations Support Capability
Close-in Weapons System
Network Enabled Army Light Task Group
Network Enabled Army Combined Arms Task Group
Additional Night Vision Equipment
Combat Engineer Rolling Capability Refresh
Land Transport Capability - Distribution, Garrison and Training Vehicles
Soldier Modernisation and Combat Protective Equipment
Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Protective Equipment
Domestic Explosive Ordnance Disposal Rolling Capability
Special Operations Equipment Rolling Capability
Inflatable Boat Replacement
Urban Operations Equipment Rolling Capability
FASC
FAMC
A109 Refresh
Strategic Bearer Network High Frequency Radio Network
Strategic Bearer Network - Satellite Communications
Mobile Radio System
Various Classified Information Environments Upgrades
Defence Command Control System

The Littoral Operations Support Capability is in the $100m-$300m cost band and there is no money for this under the oppositions defence planning.

The following amounts for future CapEx are missing from the oppositions Defence funding: FY17/18 - $708,219,000, FY18/19 - $521,313,000, FY19/20 - $484,411,000 and FY20/21 412,325,000 and the capital charge goes on top of this.

The Governments $3.261 Billion FY Budget 2017/18 total allocation for Vote Defence versus the oppositions figure of just $2.286 Billion. That $2.286 Billion is similar to what the current government spends on OpEx each year.

 

[40 deg south]

Sea Ceptor User Group launched, as Sea Ceptor makes DSEI debut - MBDA

https://twitter.com/RAdmCGardner

MDBA have announced the inaugural meeting of the Sea Ceptor users group, including the RN, RNZN and Chilean Navy. Hope the numbers grow for future meetings - a bit of a surprise that Brazil is absent.

Nice touch to host it aboard HMS Argyll, which carried out the recent live firings off Scotland.

 

[40 deg south]

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/mil-log/marss-mobtronic-system-rnzn-fleet-tanker/

Contract signed to put electronic 'man overboard' monitoring system on the new tanker.

MOBtronic creates a virtual shield around a vessel which automatically detects and classifies a man-overboard event and supports rescue and recovery efforts of the crew.

The system consists of small marinised pods that are positioned around an entire vessel or platform. With a patented configuration of sensors, the MOBtronic pods notify crew when a man-overboard event occurs, minimising false alarms and operating even in harsh environments.

Using a combination of multi-sensor data and proprietary software, MOBtronic discerns an event from false positive detections caused by birds, breaking waves and other objects. The system does not require wearable tags, which could be removed, either intentionally or unintentionally. Alerts, live tracking and video playback are displayed on the intuitive MOBtronic user interface to aid crew in managing search and rescue operations and to analyse a man overboard incident.

Although the system is fully automated, 16 manual alarm activation stations will be installed around the vessel to further protect crew

Very impressive-looking technology.

 

[t68]

Rumor mill from another forum that the UK may lay up a couple of T45's and sell off the Albions.

The Albions with no hangers might not be suitable but if you can pick up a couple of bargin basement price of T45's might come in usefull.

http://www.defensenews.com/digital-...-have-to-trim-platforms-to-afford-tech-surge/

 

[RegR]

Rumor mill from another forum that the UK may lay up a couple of T45's and sell off the Albions.

The Albions with no hangers might not be suitable but if you can pick up a couple of bargin basement price of T45's might come in usefull.

The Royal Navy may have to trim platforms to pay for tech surge

Destroyers could be alittle hard to sell to the folks at the govt retirement village considering even replacement frigates are looking sketchy at this stage.

 

[KiwiRob]

Rumor mill from another forum that the UK may lay up a couple of T45's and sell off the Albions.

The Albions with no hangers might not be suitable but if you can pick up a couple of bargin basement price of T45's might come in usefull.

The Royal Navy may have to trim platforms to pay for tech surge

I doubt either of those classes will be under threat, what I see going are the Echos, Hunts and Sandowns, all replaced by a modular vessel which will do the job of all three classes, with a greatly reduced number of hulls in the water.

 

[John Fedup]

Agree, no way the RN will cut the T45 fleet despite the propulsion issue which will be resolved. These ships are state-of-the-art and will be around for another 20 years minimum.

 

[ngatimozart]

Kelvin Hughes will supply its integrated navigation bridge system (INBS) for the HMNZS Aotearoa. This includes the SharpEye radars.

New Zealand Navy’s largest ship to feature Kelvin Hughes navigation systems

 

[beegee]

TBH we'd get far more bang for buck if we went to South Korea. GB₤250 million is around NZ$450 - 480 million. That's about what the Danes paid for one of their Iver Huitfeld class FFGs. For that amount the South Koreans could build a ship with greater capability than any proposed Type 31e built in the UK.

I agree with this.

A version of the Hyundai Heavy Industries HDF-3500 multipurpose frigate would be perfect. Here are the specs for the S Korea navy FFX-II version:

Displacement (Full): Abt. 2800 (3,600)
Length/ Beam: 122m / 14m
Max. Speed: 30 kts
Complement: 120 sailors
Major weapons: 5” Main gun (K Mk.45 Mod 4) / 20mm CIWS (Phalanx Block 1B) / KVLS (16 cells)
Propulsion: CODLOG
Range: 8,500 nm @ 15 knots
Endurance: 40 days at sea
Hangar for one 10t helicopter

FFX-II batch II is the first South Korean warship to be fitted with DRS Hybrid Electric Drive system, coupled with Rolls-Royce MT-30 gas turbine engine for CODLAG integrated full-electric propulsion. This configuration is shared with the US Navy's LCS and Zumwalt destroyers, as well as with the Royal Navy's QE aircraft carriers and future Type 26 GCS. In terms of engine technology and acoustic reduction technology, this makes FFX-II one of the most advanced and 'reduced accoustic signature' ASW frigates among western navies.

Replace the KVLS with 2 Mk41s and you're in business.
And the space between the funnel and hanger (used for the SSM launchers) could be used as a mission bay for an extra RHIB or containers (or even SSMs).

South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) disclosed that the contract for two new FFX II frigates was worth 700 billion won (approx. $586 million) adding that the construction will be led by Hyundai Heavy Industries.

That's US$292m or NZ$400m each.

 

[40 deg south]

Kelvin Hughes will supply its integrated navigation bridge system (INBS) for the HMNZS Aotearoa. This includes the SharpEye radars.

New Zealand Navy’s largest ship to feature Kelvin Hughes navigation systems

New Zealand picks Saab communications system for future fleet tanker | Naval Today

The Royal New Zealand Navy has contracted Saab to deliver their TactiCall communications system for New Zealand’s future fleet tanker.

The new Maritime Sustainment Capability vessel, HMNZS Aotearoa, will be fitted with the integrated communications system which interconnects communication technologies regardless of radio band, frequency or hardware.

Saab to provide the internal comms system for Aotearoa. Detailed design work and subcontracting appear to be trucking along steadily. Given the political limbo NZ is in until a new government forms, I guess we aren't going to get any capability announcements made at the Pacific 2017 exhibition in Sydney.

 

[40 deg south]

Navy considers €200m multi-role ship | Irish Examiner

An interesting snippet, courtesy of Sparky42 at the Warships1 forum. Hopefully they are taking a 'lessons learned' approach to the challenges of converting a civilian vessel for naval purposes, rather than proposing to replicate NZ's many missteps in selecting this vessel and bringing it into service.

A delegation is set to visit New Zealand shortly to look at a warship which could become a blueprint for the new ship — and could cost up to €200m to construct.

A small group consisting of Department of Defence officials and experts from the Defence Forces have been invited by the New Zealand government to inspect HMNZS Canterbury, which was designed by the New Zealand navy.

 

[ngatimozart]

Navy considers €200m multi-role ship | Irish Examiner

An interesting snippet, courtesy of Sparky42 at the Warships1 forum. Hopefully they are taking a 'lessons learned' approach to the challenges of converting a civilian vessel for naval purposes, rather than proposing to replicate NZ's many missteps in selecting this vessel and bringing it into service.

Yep I saw this the yesterday on a RNZN related Facebook page. Some of the old salts aren't that impressed with the RNZN MRV Canterbury.

 

[Rob c]

Yep I saw this the yesterday on a RNZN related Facebook page. Some of the old salts aren't that impressed with the RNZN MRV Canterbury.

The concept for Canterbury was not that bad, as with the hole protector program. the problem was that it was done on too tight a budget so that all the compromises that where forced on the program left us with almost every part of the program being badly operationally compromised. In other words cheap and nasty. We got what we paid for. I heard that the original concept for Canterbury included a small dock, but that this was to expensive so was not included and to keep costs down. that the basic design was from a roll on/off ferry which of course was not designed to stay at sea in hostile weather. Due to excessive cost constraints there are major shortcomings in both Canterbury and the OPV's and we don't even want the IPV's.

 

[hauritz]

The concept for Canterbury was not that bad, as with the hole protector program. the problem was that it was done on too tight a budget so that all the compromises that where forced on the program left us with almost every part of the program being badly operationally compromised. In other words cheap and nasty. We got what we paid for. I heard that the original concept for Canterbury included a small dock, but that this was to expensive so was not included and to keep costs down. that the basic design was from a roll on/off ferry which of course was not designed to stay at sea in hostile weather. Due to excessive cost constraints there are major shortcomings in both Canterbury and the OPV's and we don't even want the IPV's.

Cost constraints are the big issue of course. If NZ want better ships than it needs to spend more money. The Canterbury is what it is ... a converted Commercial RORO design built on the cheap.

On a more optimistic note the new tanker being built for the RNZN looks like it will be a very capable ship so hopefully, those lessons will be learned.

One advantage NZ does have is that it doesn't have to appease a local shipbuilding industry so it should get far better value for its dollar than a country like Australia does.

 

[John Newman]

One advantage NZ does have is that it doesn't have to appease a local shipbuilding industry so it should get far better value for its dollar than a country like Australia does.

I don't think that is a completely accurate statement to make.

With the very small numbers of naval ships that NZ operates and the large time gaps in ordering/requiring replacements, then of course there is no local shipbuilding industry that could survive those gaps between replacement orders.

On the question if they get value for money or not, yes certainly overseas yards would appear to compete for orders, but if the prices were high, then NZ wouldn't have a choice but to order whatever they could at the lowest cost possible, which may or may not be a bargain, and of course all those NZ dollars going offshore don't circulate in the local economy.

Yes we have been paying a premium here, but hopefully the plan in place with the significant number of ships and submarines to be ordered over the next 30 years reduces those premiums. And of course those dollars spent here go around and around in the local economy many times over too.

I don't really think it's a proper comparison to compare shipbuilding in NZ vs Australia.