Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
Not a fan of Ellersie, Alexandra Park (harness racing for the non Kiwis) was more my fancy, but totally agree about the birdcage analogy.
Firstly what do you mean was more my fancy. Has that little pleasure been cut off by her in doors? I like both sorts and have had many happy Friday nights at the Alex too. But my favourites are the summer country meetings, which unfortunately are dying out. "Dally Day"at Te Aroha is always a hoot though. In the early-mid 70's as a youngster I spent most Saturdays in a car heading to a racetrack with my father all around the upper north island. My first hero's were Jockeys like Bob and Bill Skelton, Johnny Riordan who passed away last month, Grenville Hughes, I still remember my first collect with a $1 each way bet on Sailing Home on the 1972 Auckland Cup and followed it up with Apollo 11 the next year! Those days of the 70's and 80's were the Golden Days of racing. :D

Better give this a defence context; hows this .... former CDF Air Marshal Sir Richard Bolt owned Kotare Chief the 1987 Auckland Cup winner! ;)

The only problem that I have with automation would be damage control in wartime. That's manpower intensive especially when you're fighting the ship at the same time. If the DC parties have to go into action, it's dangerous, quite physical and can be quite tiring. If it goes on for a reasonable period of time you have to think about spelling and rotating DC crews.
Going lean can only get you so far.
 

Meriv90

Active Member
Just in case the PPA (Thaon di Ravel) has not only the 76mm but a 127mm, 16 A50vls and 8 ASuw launchers in the Full and Light+ configuration.

The Camm-Er I still haven't understood yet if it is quadpacked thus a potential 64Camms into the A50 Vls or 32(dual pack).

145 crew with space for 171

This is in the full configuration that cost estimately 530mln if i remember correctly.

But they arent built for ASW, they were built under the refugee crisis so they are oriented dual role with capacity to have up to 8 containers etc... etc... after all they were OPV. To deal with the lack of ASW we are going to use the EPC for it.

IMHO considering how the conversation started from the seasprite the solution of Jack of all trades would be the best, future USV e UAV will help a lot to specialize depending on the need. The problem as many said is that NZ cannot build a design alone.

What about finding coperation in southamerica to increase numbers? they have same size economy and similar oceanic needs. Because i have the feeling what you need is different from what we need (JAP/ITA/Kor/SPA/T26)
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Just in case the PPA (Thaon di Ravel) has not only the 76mm but a 127mm, 16 A50vls and 8 ASuw launchers in the Full and Light+ configuration.

The Camm-Er I still haven't understood yet if it is quadpacked thus a potential 64Camms into the A50 Vls or 32(dual pack).

145 crew with space for 171

This is in the full configuration that cost estimately 530mln if i remember correctly.

But they arent built for ASW, they were built under the refugee crisis so they are oriented dual role with capacity to have up to 8 containers etc... etc... after all they were OPV. To deal with the lack of ASW we are going to use the EPC for it.

IMHO considering how the conversation started from the seasprite the solution of Jack of all trades would be the best, future USV e UAV will help a lot to specialize depending on the need. The problem as many said is that NZ cannot build a design alone.

What about finding coperation in southamerica to increase numbers? they have same size economy and similar oceanic needs. Because i have the feeling what you need is different from what we need (JAP/ITA/Kor/SPA/T26)
The Sea Ceptor is quad packed when it's used in the Mk-41 VLS and triple packed in the ExLS VLS. We would only be using an American VLS because of commonality with weapons systems. A Euro VLS would create all sorts of problems for us.

There is only one South American country that we would have any naval dealings with and that is Chile. However AFAIK we don't really have any ongoing dealings with them except through RIMPAC.

We have regular defence dealings with South Korea, Japan and Singapore. There is no reason why we cannot form a good design and build relationship with one particular company in any of those three nations. We already have one with HHI and we could easily build on that.
 

JohnJT

Active Member
The Sea Ceptor is quad packed when it's used in the Mk-41 VLS and triple packed in the ExLS VLS. We would only be using an American VLS because of commonality with weapons systems. A Euro VLS would create all sorts of problems for us.
Just FYI, CAMM is quad packed in the ExLS VLS:
CAMM integration into ExLS uses MBDA-UK’s CAMM canister and Launch Management System (LMS). The MBDA-UK LMS interfaces with 12 CAMM missiles. The LMS can prepare three of those 12 missiles for launch simultaneously. As a result, the basic building block to deploy is three cells, each cell quad-packed with four CAMM munitions.
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Damage control is always going to be an issue, however, for a Navy like the RNZN, its just not an option in the current environment. Its not like NZ is choosing between 6 x destroyers or 12 x frigates and trying to find a balance there.

Also looking at modern weapons, the type of ships etc, how realistic is it to fight to save the ship or the ship continue the fight while damaged? Or is it more realistic to abandon the ship early and quickly, ensuring safe recovery of the crew. For NZ, that is probably again, just something that they would live with, the more limited damage control and the statistics that ships will generally be lost if hit with action. You can't armor and damage control your way out of every fight. Not to be dismissive, but I think there is just a different set of ideology going on here.

The US has a different policy, losing a CVN, or a whole task group has global repercussions, NZ loosing a frigate, probably doesn't. US ships have massive manpower capability, 300 on a destroyer, thousands on a carrier, they are on a different level of size and scale. The arguments that the US uses so destroyers aren't paired down probably aren't as relevant for NZ, you just don't have the crew. The RAN faces the same issue, we could never bloody crew the American ships, except in cases of full mobilisation.

But I would say crew, more than money is the most limited and valuable thing in the RNZN. People in rich modern nations, are expensive. Capable, but expensive. They are your key resource.

Certainly I think NZ could make a very capable fleet out of 4000-6000t ships.
Just in case the PPA (Thaon di Ravel) has not only the 76mm but a 127mm, 16 A50vls and 8 ASuw launchers in the Full and Light+ configuration.
It would be an interesting proposal, perhaps 2 Full and 2 light ships could be procured. If there was an interest in expanding the navy, a light ship could be converted to a heavy fit later on. Or if NZ wanted a particular mix of weapons and systems across 3-4 ships.

The Sea Ceptor is quad packed when it's used in the Mk-41 VLS and triple packed in the ExLS VLS. We would only be using an American VLS because of commonality with weapons systems. A Euro VLS would create all sorts of problems for us.
Didn't HMNZS Te Kaha loose the mk41 and sprout mushrooms? Either way, I don't think its a deal breaker, with ExLS various similar configurations can be had that would do the same job. I think getting any of these to fit a Mk41 would be relatively straight forward as many of the western launchers are fairly similar in installed dimensions. There would be bigger integration issues than that.
What about finding coperation in southamerica to increase numbers? they have same size economy and similar oceanic needs. Because i have the feeling what you need is different from what we need (JAP/ITA/Kor/SPA/T26)
The South Americans are very, very different. Not many are interested in new ships, and very different needs and capabilities. For them, crewing tends to be much easier. People are cheaper, but less money for expensive complex weapon systems. Not a whole lot of coalition work or integration.

Ideally NZ would find someone building a ship to specs that it is interested in, in sufficient numbers, and would be able to enter a supportive arrangement.

The Japanese and Koreans would be pretty hungry to grab NZ business. While the build volume isn't huge for them, it would be prestige, influential with another capable western partner in the region. These type of ships would also be interesting to others in the region.
 

Pusser01

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
There is only one South American country that we would have any naval dealings with and that is Chile. However AFAIK we don't really have any ongoing dealings with them except through RIMPAC.
Just in addition to Chile, Peru has sent a combatant on & off to RIMPAC since 2002 with the last time being 2018. Mexico & Columbia have also sent warships in the past. Quite correct though, outside of RIMPAC, there would rarely ever be any dealings with South American navies.
 
Last edited:

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
The Japanese and Koreans would be pretty hungry to grab NZ business. While the build volume isn't huge for them, it would be prestige, influential with another capable western partner in the region. These type of ships would also be interesting to others in the region.
There are a number of things favourable for all parties including the Kudos.

NZ and Korea have an FTA, Japan and NZ are members of the CPTTP and Korea is moving towards inclusion. These agreements are very helpful to both parties with working with NZ on a such a project such as a ship build. The US-South Korea FTA in 2008 opened up a strong commercial relationship with respect to the defence industry sector on the supplier - contractor side. Canada is also moving closer to South Korea in this area.


The UK has a continuing agreement in place post Brexit from the prior EU Korea arrangement and with Japan there is the Japan-UK Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement. Australia is a co-member of the CPTTP and has an FTA with Korea. Both Australia and the UK have memorandums for Defence and Security Cooperation, including defence industry, tech and classified military information with Japan and Korea.

These trade related structural arrangements within these nations are significant, because it allows for greater streamlining for contracted 3rd party suppliers or bidding opportunities, from US, Canada, UK and Australia defence sector players, to provide additional GFE options for a potential RNZN build programme for example with HHI or MHI.
 

CJohn

Active Member
An interesting piece by Dr Peter Greener, he discusses options in the need to replace half the RNZN's fleet by the mid 2030's, and how this presents an opportunity to move away from simply like for like replacements and to consider newer and fewer classes.
He highlights Andrew Watts article in the RNZN's Professional Journal of 2020 in regard to combat patrol vessels with modular ship systems etc.

 

OldTex

Well-Known Member
An interesting piece by Dr Peter Greener, he discusses options in the need to replace half the RNZN's fleet by the mid 2030's, and how this presents an opportunity to move away from simply like for like replacements and to consider newer and fewer classes.
He highlights Andrew Watts article in the RNZN's Professional Journal of 2020 in regard to combat patrol vessels with modular ship systems etc.

While the referenced articles offer hope for a larger number of vessels in the fleet there is still the likelihood that the use of modular ship systems will become the new version of FFBNW. The treasury bureaucrats and beean counters plus various politicians will be able to point to the increased number of hulls in the water as proof that they have expanded the capability of the fleet. But unless enough modules are procured and routinely fitted and the crews exercised IOT develop and retain certain skills (e.g. ASW or MCM etc) then the fleet will be at best only fit for constabulary duties. The mere fitting of a specific module does not suddenly imbue the vessel with greater capability, rather it will only be about 60% effective ( a very rough approximation on my part) in its new role.
Perhaps a better way of using the modular ship systems would be to have a number of them fitted to specific hulls IOT provide a core capability in the specific role. Additional modules can then be fitted to swing role hulls as required and some experienced personnel from the 'permanently' fitted vessels are attached as required. The additional modules would also allow for the 'permanently fitted' modules to be rotated for deep maintenance and upgrade.
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro

Stampede

Well-Known Member
An interesting piece by Dr Peter Greener, he discusses options in the need to replace half the RNZN's fleet by the mid 2030's, and how this presents an opportunity to move away from simply like for like replacements and to consider newer and fewer classes.
He highlights Andrew Watts article in the RNZN's Professional Journal of 2020 in regard to combat patrol vessels with modular ship systems etc.

No golden answer and it could all go many ways, but it is good to ask the question.
How do we replace the existing NZ fleet and what will be it's composition.



Regards S
 

40 deg south

Well-Known Member

One of the key requirements for the Southern Ocean Patrol Vessel is supposedly being much bigger than the current OPVs, to handle the weather 'down south'. While they haven't received a lot of publicity, Norway's new ice-strengthened patrol vessels certainly don't lack size (136m).


Despite being build by VARD (via their Romanian yard for the basic hull fabrication), the design appears to be from specialist Norwegian naval architects LMG Marin.

 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
No golden answer and it could all go many ways, but it is good to ask the question.
How do we replace the existing NZ fleet and what will be it's composition.

Regards S
Some of us have different answers to that question depending upon where we stand on the defence spectrum. My own views are well known by now and are towards the more muscular side than some others. How we would do it would mean more funding and greater commitment from the pollies who unfortunately are a more of an extensial threat to NZDF than any foreign enemy.
 

alexsa

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro

One of the key requirements for the Southern Ocean Patrol Vessel is supposedly being much bigger than the current OPVs, to handle the weather 'down south'. While they haven't received a lot of publicity, Norway's new ice-strengthened patrol vessels certainly don't lack size (136m).


Despite being build by VARD (via their Romanian yard for the basic hull fabrication), the design appears to be from specialist Norwegian naval architects LMG Marin.

Impressive ship ............... and expensive. I suspect this would give most cost minded politicians apoplexy. At over 200 million USD per hull (I think that excludes lifetime costs) for a large OPV with limited weapons fit.

Certainly it appears to be within the announced budget for the SOPV but I think that budget may cover the life of the vessel. I could be wrong and happy to admit it.

New Zealand releases Southern Ocean patrol ship RFI (janes.com)
 

Rob c

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Impressive ship ............... and expensive. I suspect this would give most cost minded politicians apoplexy. At over 200 million USD per hull (I think that excludes lifetime costs) for a large OPV with limited weapons fit.

Certainly it appears to be within the announced budget for the SOPV but I think that budget may cover the life of the vessel. I could be wrong and happy to admit it.

New Zealand releases Southern Ocean patrol ship RFI (janes.com)
I did read somewhere that they have a magazine for helicopter and other weapons. I would suspect they may be fitted for but not with weapons in a similar way to there predecessors the Nordkapp class. I would prefer something like these ships as aposed to a Harry DeWolf. Making them somewhat useful if things get a little pear shaped conflict wise.
 

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
Last year Beca Applied Technologies Ltd, with the support of specialist naval architecture company Vard Marine Inc, were appointed by the New Zealand Ministry of Defence as the Technical Support Partner to the Southern Ocean Patrol Vessel (SOPV) project, providing systems engineering, concept design and technical logistics input for the early stages of the project as the capability is defined and specified.

The RFI released in May was looking for a Polar Class 5 multirole vessel of up to 115m that can achieve a 12000nm / 60 day endurance with 100 embarked (nominally 60 crew with up to 30 x embarked science / other mission staff as well as 10 helicopter flight crew). Accommodation arranged is to provide 50 x single berth cabins and 25 x double berth cabins. The RFI called for deck space for at least 6 unstacked 20 ft containers, be capable of deploying a 12m 7 tonne landing craft, two 11m RHIB's with provision for two more if required. Also the provision of Norsafe JYN-100 Mk1 lifeboats, plus hangar and flight deck for an embarked NH90/MH-60R sized helicopter as well as an RPAS (Boeing Integrator RQ-21 was indicated in the footnotes) and the ability to deploy AUV / ROV’s. The SOPV must have the performance ability to tow and recover vessels of up 26000 tonnes (The ice capable Aotearoa AOR and the future USCG Polar Security Cutter are around that size) as well "summer icebreaking" ability. "The vessel should also have both a hydrographic and sea floor mapping multibeam echosounder, as well as a deck mounted articulated crane and other LARS systems. The budget band is NZD$300-$600m. The vessel can only have a 25mm main gun as that is the allowable limit in the Ross Sea in which it is designed to operate.


BTW VARD have the AIP through on their new 115m Next generation OPV.



 

danonz

Member
I didn't realize there were more upgrades for the frigates in the pipeline.
I can understand prolonging the life to save capital expense but at what point do you stop throwing money at them, must be over 500 million upgrades for both of them now.
 

40 deg south

Well-Known Member
Last year Beca Applied Technologies Ltd, with the support of specialist naval architecture company Vard Marine Inc, were appointed by the New Zealand Ministry of Defence as the Technical Support Partner to the Southern Ocean Patrol Vessel (SOPV) project, providing systems engineering, concept design and technical logistics input for the early stages of the project as the capability is defined and specified.


>>
I'm unclear of the significance of Vard partnering with local engineering consultancy Beca to provider technical support to MinDef for the SOPV project. Does this give their designs the inside running, or will they be excluded from consideration on conflict-of-interest grounds?

The Vard 7-115 you highlight certainly ticks many of the boxes, but does it come in ice-hardened form? I understand Canada's new AOPS class are based on an ixe-strengthened version of the smaller Vard 7-100, so I assume it is feasible (but perhaps costly?).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top