Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[JohnJT]

South Korean shipyard confirmed to build two new InterIslander ferries

KiwiRail has signed an agreement with Hyundai Mipo Dockyard to deliver two ships, for a price $150 million above funds set aside in the Budget.

www.rnz.co.nz

Not Navy but the government owned Interislander Ferry company has recently ordered two new 230m Vehicle / Train rolling stock Ferries for $550m from HHI. That is quite a lot of ship for the money.

I'm always impressed by how inexpensive ships built at the Korean yards are compared to western yards.

Take for example their KDDX program. The design and build of the six vessels is expected to cost around US $6.2 billion. That's a lot of ship for the price; 154 meters long, 64 VLS cells, integrated electric propulsion system, integrated mast sensor suite, small crew of 160 - 180 and designed to have low lifetime operating costs.

Anyway, I think SK should be NZ's go to ship builder for high quality vessels at an affordable price.

 

[MrConservative]

I'm always impressed by how inexpensive ships built at the Korean yards are compared to western yards.

Anyway, I think SK should be NZ's go to ship builder for high quality vessels at an affordable price.

You get to a certain size and with outfits like Hyundai their is significant vertical integration in their business model thus the economies of scale and market power becomes a thing in itself. Hyundai get the pick of the local work force also, the best STEM and business graduates in the land, the best apprentices, they become Hyundai or Samsung people ect. Hyundai are another company which also has looked to Toyota as their benchmark - so you can get products that are better built, more reliable, highly functional and on cost in a VfM sense. Hyundai steel goes into HHI ships that is a big cost advantage right their that other shipbuilders in Europe or the US might not enjoy.

The Koreans are definitely are solid option for the two future amphibious sealift vessels. I am interested to find out the final build cost of ROKS Marado which was completed this year. Its initial 2014 build budget was 417.5 billion won or USD $380m with the contract going to Hanjin Heavy Industries who later entered bankruptcy and her assets late last year which were controlled by a state financial institution were on the block. Hanjin was still listed as the builder so it is still a going concern of sorts. Hyundai was one of the three consortiums after Hanjin, but have not caught up with anything further. Hyundai did have a small LHD design the HDL-16000 but has not been offered lately. Not sure of the history but I predict that with Hanjin getting the Marado and Dokdo builds for the RoKN they have stuck the design it in the top draw for it to be dusted off when some foreigners might want a new amphibious vessel.

 

[Nighthawk.NZ]

I have a question ... I see above the flight deck on HMNZS Aotearoa there is some equipment under cover... are these fire fighting equipment in case of a crash on deck??? or something else as looking you can see some (what lool like) foam dispensers beside them...

Just curious...???

 

[KiwiRob]

I'm always impressed by how inexpensive ships built at the Korean yards are compared to western yards.

Take for example their KDDX program. The design and build of the six vessels is expected to cost around US $6.2 billion. That's a lot of ship for the price; 154 meters long, 64 VLS cells, integrated electric propulsion system, integrated mast sensor suite, small crew of 160 - 180 and designed to have low lifetime operating costs.

Anyway, I think SK should be NZ's go to ship builder for high quality vessels at an affordable price.

These ships wouldn't have been much, if any more expensive if built in Finland, Germany or France. Ferry's are relatively cheap, the other factor is Hyundai aren't a big player in the ferry market, they have a lot of excess capacity which the European ferry builders don't have, selling these for less profit keeps steel production going and shipworkers employed.

 

[Rudeboy]

These ships wouldn't have been much, if any more expensive if built in Finland, Germany or France. Ferry's are relatively cheap, the other factor is Hyundai aren't a big player in the ferry market, they have a lot of excess capacity which the European ferry builders don't have, selling these for less profit keeps steel production going and shipworkers employed.

Worth noting that both the UK and Norway had issues with their Tide Class and RNoMS Maud in pre-delivery and post delivery from DSME, both sets of ships required a fair bit of re-work...

 

[ngatimozart]

These ships wouldn't have been much, if any more expensive if built in Finland, Germany or France. Ferry's are relatively cheap, the other factor is Hyundai aren't a big player in the ferry market, they have a lot of excess capacity which the European ferry builders don't have, selling these for less profit keeps steel production going and shipworkers employed.

It's a NZ government contract and it will have a political context as well. Germany or France wouldn't be able to compete with HHI on labour and materials cost because they have higher wage costs as well as EU regulation compliance costs over and above national compliance costs. Per tonne displacement South Korea is cheaper to build than Western Europe. Whether or not HHI specialises in ferries is really moot because they have the experience, capability, and capacity to turn their hands to building just about any ship design.

Worth noting that both the UK and Norway had issues with their Tide Class and RNoMS Maud in pre-delivery and post delivery from DSME, both sets of ships required a fair bit of re-work...

Yet Aotearoa was built by HHI and we had no problems. We had a full-time NZ project team in the yard working with HHI though, so that may have been the difference.

 

[Xthenaki]

It's a NZ government contract and it will have a political context as well. Germany or France wouldn't be able to compete with HHI on labour and materials cost because they have higher wage costs as well as EU regulation compliance costs over and above national compliance costs. Per tonne displacement South Korea is cheaper to build than Western Europe. Whether or not HHI specialises in ferries is really moot because they have the experience, capability, and capacity to turn their hands to building just about any ship design.

Yet Aotearoa was built by HHI and we had no problems. We had a full-time NZ project team in the yard working with HHI though, so that may have been the difference.

The project team on site during the build is the key. Any problems arising are shared between the NZ Navy team and the shipbuilders. So many solutions are available including extra cost, design changes, etc and then acceptance by both parties. Otherwise it is very common that the new acquisition arrives at its home port on its maiden voyage complete with a load of baggage for the dockside maintenance crews.

 

[Nighthawk.NZ]

Whether or not HHI specialises in ferries is really moot because they have the experience, capability, and capacity to turn their hands to building just about any ship design.

Agree HHI said in an article I read during the build of HMNZS Aotearoa that it was a more complex build than they normally have with all the ice strengthening, and winterization features that were added etc. I don't see a problem them building any other kind of ship.

Yet Aotearoa was built by HHI and we had no problems. We had a full-time NZ project team in the yard working with HHI though, so that may have been the difference.

Having a team there on site would most definitely have helped iron out any minor issues that were found during the build.

 

[KiwiRob]

It's a NZ government contract and it will have a political context as well. Germany or France wouldn't be able to compete with HHI on labour and materials cost because they have higher wage costs as well as EU regulation compliance costs over and above national compliance costs. Per tonne displacement South Korea is cheaper to build than Western Europe. Whether or not HHI specialises in ferries is really moot because they have the experience, capability, and capacity to turn their hands to building just about any ship design.

Yet Aotearoa was built by HHI and we had no problems. We had a full-time NZ project team in the yard working with HHI though, so that may have been the difference.

I disagree, it wouldn't have been cheaper building them in Korea over Germany, Finland or France, the difference is time, the main Euro ferry yards are all loaded. Korean yards aren't as cheap as you think they are, steel costs near enough the same world wide, engines cost the same, Korean shipyard workers are well paid, they aren't paid much less then a German, Finn or French yard worker. If you want to save money on labour China, India, Turkey, Vietnam is where you get your ship built.

The reason why the Koreans can knock out commercial designs as quickly as they do is scale, they build standardised products, if you want a Suez max tanker this is the design you get, if you want a handy max bulker this is what you get, once you move outside of standardised products (unless you're ordering 20 vessels at a time like Mærsk) they charge for all the changes, changes mess with there production schedule. RoPax vessels are not standardised, they are highly complex vessels, its not often a class will have more than 3 vessels, it's usually 1 or 2 vessels, the vessels for Interislander are 100% bespoke, there are no other rail ferries in existence like these 2, they are not cheap ships.

I quoted for these vessels, I have been in contact with one of the European yards which bid on the project, have you, are involved in the shipbuilding industry, do you do this everyday, do you have access to reports from Clarkson.

Aotearoa might have had many issues that have never been made public, the Tide class had multiple gremlins, those weren't made public but if you're ever at Cammell Lairds who maintain them for the RFA they'll happily tell you all about them.

 

[swerve]

The fact that the first Tide class needed a lot of work after supposed completion to get it fit for use, & as a result was delivered a year late, was widely reported at the time.

 

[Gibbo]

I disagree, it wouldn't have been cheaper building them in Korea over Germany, Finland or France, the difference is time, the main Euro ferry yards are all loaded. Korean yards aren't as cheap as you think they are, steel costs near enough the same world wide, engines cost the same, Korean shipyard workers are well paid, they aren't paid much less then a German, Finn or French yard worker. If you want to save money on labour China, India, Turkey, Vietnam is where you get your ship built.

The reason why the Koreans can knock out commercial designs as quickly as they do is scale, they build standardised products, if you want a Suez max tanker this is the design you get, if you want a handy max bulker this is what you get, once you move outside of standardised products (unless you're ordering 20 vessels at a time like Mærsk) they charge for all the changes, changes mess with there production schedule. RoPax vessels are not standardised, they are highly complex vessels, its not often a class will have more than 3 vessels, it's usually 1 or 2 vessels, the vessels for Interislander are 100% bespoke, there are no other rail ferries in existence like these 2, they are not cheap ships.

I quoted for these vessels, I have been in contact with one of the European yards which bid on the project, have you, are involved in the shipbuilding industry, do you do this everyday, do you have access to reports from Clarkson.

Aotearoa might have had many issues that have never been made public, the Tide class had multiple gremlins, those weren't made public but if you're ever at Cammell Lairds who maintain them for the RFA they'll happily tell you all about them.

I'm not sure of actual final figures but IIRC the RAN's two new tankers combined cost little more in real dollar terms that what Aotearoa cost NZ....well certainly a lot less per unit. Whilst Aotearoa had winterization features etc the RAN ones have CIWS & 2 x typhoon which would've added a few more $$$ (unless from a separate sub-project budget)... and they are of fairly similar size & capacity. If so then your points about Korean yards not being cheaper probably does hold water KiwiRob.

 

[MrConservative]

I'm not sure of actual final figures but IIRC the RAN's two new tankers combined cost little more in real dollar terms that what Aotearoa cost NZ....well certainly a lot less per unit. Whilst Aotearoa had winterization features etc the RAN ones have CIWS & 2 x typhoon which would've added a few more $$$ (unless from a separate sub-project budget)... and they are of fairly similar size & capacity. If so then your points about Korean yards not being cheaper probably does hold water KiwiRob.

The Aotearoa design by RR and built by HHI had a lot more than weatherisation. To turn it into a vessel which could handle Polar Class 6 Ice required an additional NZ$90m, which added 1600 tonnes to the basic design. The vessel had to have a higher grade of steel plating than other similar vessels to withstand cold temperatures plus extra thickness calculated to allow for corrosion/abrasion against ice. The ship also had increased number of hull scantlings take the high ice impact loads and exposed propellers and rudders were strengthened. Basically you cannot compare the Stalwart with the Aotearoa. The environmental side of the build was also at a different level.

Rob it is a statuary requirement for all government projects in NZ, such as naval ships to be audited by the Auditors Generals office and be publicly reported.

Will be fascinated to find more peer reviewed articles that report on the South Korean shipbuilding productivity and the comparisons to other countries.

 

[Pusser01]

The Aotearoa design by RR and built by HHI had a lot more than weatherisation. To turn it into a vessel which could handle Polar Class 6 Ice required an additional NZ$90m, which added 1600 tonnes to the basic design. The vessel had to have a higher grade of steel plating than other similar vessels to withstand cold temperatures plus extra thickness calculated to allow for corrosion/abrasion against ice. The ship also had increased number of hull scantlings take the high ice impact loads and exposed propellers and rudders were strengthened. Basically you cannot compare the Stalwart with the Aotearoa. The environmental side of the build was also at a different level.

Out interest what vessel does NZ normally use to resupply Scott Base with equipment/personnel etc? Could the NZ base be supplied with fuel from a civilian vessel like Australia has done with the Aurora Australis, Everest & the new Nuyina instead of using the Aotearoa? Cheers,

 

[Nighthawk.NZ]

Out interest what vessel does NZ normally use to resupply Scott Base with equipment/personnel etc? Could the NZ base be supplied with fuel from a civilian vessel like Australia has done with the Aurora Australis, Everest & the new Nuyina instead of using the Aotearoa? Cheers,

HMNZS Aotearoa is the first we have had in long time... previously it was HMNZS Endeavor II, ...

HMNZS Aotearoa hull is up to 100mm or 4 inches (for our non-metric friends) thick with much higher grade steel, plus all her other deck winterization features... and a few differences here and there to handle ice under water line... she also has a few clean green filters on her exhaust and few other gizmos that all increased the cost compared to say the Tide Spring.

 

[Gibbo]

The Aotearoa design by RR and built by HHI had a lot more than weatherisation. To turn it into a vessel which could handle Polar Class 6 Ice required an additional NZ$90m, which added 1600 tonnes to the basic design. The vessel had to have a higher grade of steel plating than other similar vessels to withstand cold temperatures plus extra thickness calculated to allow for corrosion/abrasion against ice. The ship also had increased number of hull scantlings take the high ice impact loads and exposed propellers and rudders were strengthened. Basically you cannot compare the Stalwart with the Aotearoa. The environmental side of the build was also at a different level.

Rob it is a statuary requirement for all government projects in NZ, such as naval ships to be audited by the Auditors Generals office and be publicly reported.

Will be fascinated to find more peer reviewed articles that report on the South Korean shipbuilding productivity and the comparisons to other countries.

Ah fair call, thanks MrC for clarifying that... yes should've realised it wasn't just a reinforced ice-belt. She's a mighty fine looking vessel.

 

[DDG38]

Speaking of HMNZS Aotearoa : "HMAS Anzac breaks away after receiving fuel during a replenishment at sea with HMNZS Aotearoa during Exercise Bersama Gold 21." Image source : ADF Image Library

 

[alexsa]

HMNZS Aotearoa is the first we have had in long time... previously it was HMNZS Endeavor II, ...

HMNZS Aotearoa hull is up to 100mm or 4 inches (for our non-metric friends) thick with much higher grade steel, plus all her other deck winterization features... and a few differences here and there to handle ice under water line... she also has a few clean green filters on her exhaust and few other gizmos that all increased the cost compared to say the Tide Spring.

Yep, Ice class costs as it includes more than just hull strength with important issues such as engine cooling (water a freezing temps in a cooling system is a bugger), life saving equipment, fire fighting, pumps etc are all now covered in the POLAR code. There is a lot in complying with the code as indicated by the LR took kit.

Interactive toolkit | Polar code (lr.org)

One important issue...... Ice Class 6 is not an ice breaker. Class 6 allows a vessel to operate in medium first year ice (over 70cm up to 120cm) but this will often be broken ahead of the ship when the thickness is getting up to 30cm. In my merchant navy days we operated two ice class ships designed for northern Europe (same rating as Aotearoa) and these were escorted by a breaker when headed to Russia.

Polar_Code_How_to_Use_POLARIS_Guidance_Version_1.0_September_2016.pdf

This means that HMNZS Aotearoa would only operate south of 70 during the Summer/autumn season where the destination is largely large ice free or has thin new ice about.

 

[Nighthawk.NZ]

I see according to the NZDF website (NAVY) that HMNZS can max out at 20 knots which I thought her speed was 16...?

HMNZS Aotearoa

 

[Nighthawk.NZ]

So Seaspan's Victoria Shipyards is blaming Lockheed Martin's designs... Lockheed Martin is counterclaiming negligence, understaffing and mismanagement at the shipyard.

My head hurts...
Canadian defence contractors upgrading NZDF warships locked in legal battle

On a brighter note...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1450247624733429760

 

[MrConservative]

LM Canada are also doing the CMS 330 and Sea Ceptor upgrade for the Chilean Type 23's at ASMAR Shipyards. Any word from anyone how that contract is going?

That would be indicative of where things might be in a general sense.