Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[spoz]

ANY ship at some point is likely to be uncomfortable and may experience issues in the Southern Ocean; for ships of their size the ANZACs (and the Kiwi OPVs) do reasonably well. We've had our ANZACs to Heard Island and across to South Africa in the high latitudes, they did OK although if you had a specialist vessel of the same size available that would probably do better..

 

[alexsa]

When I think of the Southern Ocean we need a vessel that has length, a wide beam, deep draft and high freeboard. I was once told that the first ANZAC we deployed to the Southern Ocean experienced a lot of difficulty as did one of our OPV's recently.

OK ... this is a massive oversimplification ..... it is not just freeboard, beam and draft as these are meaningless without context. Inherent stability and structural strength are vital (the NZ OPV design was based on a design for Northern Hemisphere operations and needed modification to withstand the wave height and period expected in the Southern Ocean storm season). A wide, short and deep vessel will role like a pig if the hull form is poor and stability is crap (noting stability can be impacted by ice formation)

Add to that if you vessel is going to play in ice long term the ballast, heating and cooling systems, and the accomodation all need to be built for that enviroment. This is in addition to the hull strength.

An ANZAC may operate in the Southern Ocean but it does not play in ice and no vessel should head down there in the extremes unless specifically designed for it. It should be noted the weather down there can be some of the worst in the world ..... any vesel not designed for it will struggle if caught in the so you really cannot suggest the ANZAC or OPV deficient.

 

[beegee]

And every single cent goes into the Korean Economy, meanwhile tens of Billions goes into the Australian Economy employing Australian Tax payers being employed by Tax Paying Companies who pay GST.
I doubt it would be anywhere near as cheap as you think, don't forget BAE own the Type 26 design so they will be collecting their cut as well.
Australia's upfront cost for building the Type 26 and future Surface Combatants is very high yes but the amount that will come back to the Government in Taxes and the decades of steady employment that will keep people out of the Dole Office will effectively cut that cost substantily.
64% of the Hunter Class will be manufactured in Australia thats over 50,000 tons.
Should NZ buy them from Australia? probably not, South Korea would be a better bet for NZ with only 2 Ships(3 very unlikely) for Australia with a big enough Navy to maintain a Continous build if properley managed we are better off building our own.

Yeah, I know mate. I was just being facetious. The premium being paid by Aus and the UK is to maintain their national shipbuilding capability.

Even if we got them built in Korea I think the T26 is still a bit too expensive for NZ. I think the best option at the moment would be for the Arrowhead 140 to be selected for the T31e (if it starts up again) and NZ could throw in an order on the back of that build.

 

[kiwipatriot69]

Yeah, I know mate. I was just being facetious. The premium being paid by Aus and the UK is to maintain their national shipbuilding capability.

Even if we got them built in Korea I think the T26 is still a bit too expensive for NZ. I think the best option at the moment would be for the Arrowhead 140 to be selected for the T31e (if it starts up again) and NZ could throw in an order on the back of that build.

Well, its not like moneys really an issue for Nz govt, given Deputy Prime Minister and foreign affairs minister Winston Peters earmarked a Billion dollars for foreign aid in the pacific, frankly i think this could easily end up being wasted, id rather see it being spent on a frigate, extra P8 and a military spec litoral support vessel. Seeing we often would be doing patrols on their behalf, im sure they ,and our other regional allies would appreciate that input more.

 

[Xthenaki]

OK ... this is a massive oversimplification ..... it is not just freeboard, beam and draft as these are meaningless without context. Inherent stability and structural strength are vital (the NZ OPV design was based on a design for Northern Hemisphere operations and needed modification to withstand the wave height and period expected in the Southern Ocean storm season). A wide, short and deep vessel will role like a pig if the hull form is poor and stability is crap (noting stability can be impacted by ice formation)

Add to that if you vessel is going to play in ice long term the ballast, heating and cooling systems, and the accomodation all need to be built for that enviroment. This is in addition to the hull strength.

An ANZAC may operate in the Southern Ocean but it does not play in ice and no vessel should head down there in the extremes unless specifically designed for it. It should be noted the weather down there can be some of the worst in the world ..... any vesel not designed for it will struggle if caught in the so you really cannot suggest the ANZAC or OPV deficient.

Yes I do agree with the above. In your first paragraph you referred to "a wide, short and deep vessel" I intended to portray a vessel of at least 120m. I consider both the ANZAC and OPV's as valuable assets to our navy. What I was really trying to invoke was discussion on a patrol vessel to enter the ice zone and then look at an ice breaker for this context. (adds support to "Aotearoa") The OPVs I feel would have benefited from a longer hull but have accomplished what has been asked from them. The ANZACs probably patrol to a certain parallel that being the southern most shipping routes.

 

[ngatimozart]

Aotearoa the former retired is Endeavour what stupidity to have yet retired !
HMNZS Aotearoa (A12) - Wikipédia
HMNZS Endeavour (A11) - Wikipedia

The reason the Endeavour was decommissioned last year was because it did not meet new international rules regarding tankers that came into effect earlier this year. The stupid centres around the fact that Aotearoa wasn't IOC by this year and that was a decision by the pollies.

 

[Redlands18]

Yeah, I know mate. I was just being facetious. The premium being paid by Aus and the UK is to maintain their national shipbuilding capability.

Even if we got them built in Korea I think the T26 is still a bit too expensive for NZ. I think the best option at the moment would be for the Arrowhead 140 to be selected for the T31e (if it starts up again) and NZ could throw in an order on the back of that build.

Yea sorry Cobber, thought you were serious. LOL
The future NZ Frigate(if it happens) will be a interesting call hard to know which way they will jump, could be anything from a large OPV, a OCV/Corvette, Light Frigate, right up to a T26 or maybe just a couple of Row Boats

 

[beegee]

And i would throw in the Southern Ocean patrol vessel and littoral support vessels built there too, notice things have been pretty quiet on those subjects.Are I heard a few months ago a commercial design proposed for manuwanui replacement , a far cry from what was intended, Surely South Korea could come up with something for both?

I've always thought a naval version of the S Korean RV Araon would be a perfect fit for NZ. It could perform the role of the LOSC vessel, fitted with all the dive and hydrographic equipment. It has a helicopter hanger, a crew of only 25 with accommodation for another 60, a range of 20k nm, endurance of 70 days, it can carry 46 TEU containers and it's an icebreaker, so it could re-supply the Antarctic. It'd be the ultimate multi-role southern ocean vessel.

And it cost less than US$100m to build in 2008.

RV Araon Icebreaker Operated by the Government of South Korea - Old Antarctic Explorers

 

[t68]

Yea sorry Cobber, thought you were serious. LOL
The future NZ Frigate(if it happens) will be a interesting call hard to know which way they will jump, could be anything from a large OPV, a OCV/Corvette, Light Frigate, right up to a T26 or maybe just a couple of Row Boats

I wonder if it’s feasable with warships of the line for say SK to build the hull and final fit out in NZ, or would this not be a beneficial arrangement ?

FFX-II?

 

[ngatimozart]

Korea Rocks! Fast, efficient, high quality and cheap. We should get all our ships built there.

When we come to replace the ANZACs we should get them to build us three T26s at a fraction of the cost the British and Aussies are paying for theirs. Then gloat about it.

Not T-26s but 3 x OMT Iver Huitfelds, built in South Korea, fitted with 1 x MT-30 GT, 2 x MTU diesels, 2 x Oerlikon Millennium 35 mm guns, 1 x Mk-45 Mod 2 Gun, 32 x Mk-41 tactical length VLS, Sea Ceptor, along with the same sensors, decoys, comms, ISR , data, computing, LM CMS etc., that are being installed on the ANZAC FFH in Canada. The first one after Aotearoa and then the second to be IOC by 2027 followed by the 3rd 3 years later.

 

[ngatimozart]

I thought the ANZACs only had self-defence length Mk 41, for Sea Sparrow initially.

Yep, an 8 cell one.

 

[beegee]

Not T-26s but 3 x OMT Iver Huitfelds, built in South Korea, fitted with 1 x MT-30 GT, 2 x MTU diesels, 2 x Oerlikon Millennium 35 mm guns, 1 x Mk-45 Mod 2 Gun, 32 x Mk-41 tactical length VLS, Sea Ceptor, along with the same sensors, decoys, comms, ISR , data, computing, LM CMS etc., that are being installed on the ANZAC FFH in Canada. The first one after Aotearoa and then the second to be IOC by 2027 followed by the 3rd 3 years later.

Personally I wouldn't change the propulsion system. Their propulsion system is incredible, being able to cruise at 18 knots on only one diesel. It's one of the design's best features. Check out this video:

Here's some more IH creamy goodness:

 

[Xthenaki]

Not T-26s but 3 x OMT Iver Huitfelds, built in South Korea, fitted with 1 x MT-30 GT, 2 x MTU diesels, 2 x Oerlikon Millennium 35 mm guns, 1 x Mk-45 Mod 2 Gun, 32 x Mk-41 tactical length VLS, Sea Ceptor, along with the same sensors, decoys, comms, ISR , data, computing, LM CMS etc., that are being installed on the ANZAC FFH in Canada. The first one after Aotearoa and then the second to be IOC by 2027 followed by the 3rd 3 years later.

Switching to Iver Huitfelds built in Sth Korea means proven, versatile vessels especially with the first to follow "Aotearoa" . the 2nd and third possibly spread out a bit further to allow the ANZACs to fulfil their life (I believe Australia could extend their ANZACs life giving time to ramp up the T26s)

 

[kiwipatriot69]

Not T-26s but 3 x OMT Iver Huitfelds, built in South Korea, fitted with 1 x MT-30 GT, 2 x MTU diesels, 2 x Oerlikon Millennium 35 mm guns, 1 x Mk-45 Mod 2 Gun, 32 x Mk-41 tactical length VLS, Sea Ceptor, along with the same sensors, decoys, comms, ISR , data, computing, LM CMS etc., that are being installed on the ANZAC FFH in Canada. The first one after Aotearoa and then the second to be IOC by 2027 followed by the 3rd 3 years later.

Would the Iver Huitfelds be able to handle our

Personally I wouldn't change the propulsion system. Their propulsion system is incredible, being able to cruise at 18 knots on only one diesel. It's one of the design's best features. Check out this video:

Here's some more IH creamy goodness:

 

[kiwipatriot69]

Curious though about crew requirements ,recruitment for these, you would need what, 140, 180 crew members, plus one spare for change over of crews, and the end of their deployment? So for three frigates of this type, how many extra personnel would the navy have to recruit, compared to now?

 

[ngatimozart]

Curious though about crew requirements ,recruitment for these, you would need what, 140, 180 crew members, plus one spare for change over of crews, and the end of their deployment? So for three frigates of this type, how many extra personnel would the navy have to recruit, compared to now?

Nope, basic crew is 100 - 120. Three of these would utilise the same number of crew that the current 2 ANZAC FFHs do. The extras are RNZN aircrew, RNZAF aircraft techies and sea riders.

 

[KiwiRob]

Yeah, I know mate. I was just being facetious. The premium being paid by Aus and the UK is to maintain their national shipbuilding capability.

Even if we got them built in Korea I think the T26 is still a bit too expensive for NZ. I think the best option at the moment would be for the Arrowhead 140 to be selected for the T31e (if it starts up again) and NZ could throw in an order on the back of that build.

Why do people think Type 31E has stopped, it's slightly delayed but the two bidders are still forging ahead with potential suppliers.

 

[KiwiRob]

Not T-26s but 3 x OMT Iver Huitfelds, built in South Korea, fitted with 1 x MT-30 GT, 2 x MTU diesels, 2 x Oerlikon Millennium 35 mm guns, 1 x Mk-45 Mod 2 Gun, 32 x Mk-41 tactical length VLS, Sea Ceptor, along with the same sensors, decoys, comms, ISR , data, computing, LM CMS etc., that are being installed on the ANZAC FFH in Canada. The first one after Aotearoa and then the second to be IOC by 2027 followed by the 3rd 3 years later.

As OMT are now part of the Babcocks consortium any future Ivers will be built in the UK, you will not see them being built in Korea or anywhere else. This question was asked at the open day I went to, so if NZ decided to buy them they would come from the UK.

 

[beegee]

As OMT are now part of the Babcocks consortium any future Ivers will be built in the UK, you will not see them being built in Korea or anywhere else. This question was asked at the open day I went to, so if NZ decided to buy them they would come from the UK.

That wouldn't be a problem if they can keep the sticker price close to the T31e stipulated 250m quid (depending on weapon and sensor fit). The NZ MOD has said they will be sticking with Sea Ceptor for the ANZAC replacements, so reusing the weapons/sensors/CMS from the upgraded ANZACs should make for a cheap build, with plenty of margin for future upgrades.

 

[swerve]

Not T-26s but 3 x OMT Iver Huitfelds, built in South Korea, fitted with 1 x MT-30 GT, 2 x MTU diesels, 2 x Oerlikon Millennium 35 mm guns, 1 x Mk-45 Mod 2 Gun, 32 x Mk-41 tactical length VLS, Sea Ceptor, along with the same sensors, decoys, comms, ISR , data, computing, LM CMS etc., that are being installed on the ANZAC FFH in Canada. The first one after Aotearoa and then the second to be IOC by 2027 followed by the 3rd 3 years later.

When the 1st new frigate's in service strip the 1st Anzac to retire of everything worth keeping for the 2nd new frigate, & repeat for the 2nd Anzac & 3rd new one. Can be updated later.

Why change the propulsion?