Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[ngatimozart]

An informative update on the Martac Mantas T12 has been provided by Tim Fish writing for ADM. Looks like an initial 3 month lease has been extended to 24 months and with an option to purchase for "experimental purposes" and not as an in-service capability at the moment, however:


Seems some the experiments were conducted for hydrographic and bathymetric (seabed topography) purposes and as the manufacturer (Martac) states it also offers a very useful MCM detection capability.

@NG: This is more your area of expertise, be great to hear your thoughts on such applications for the RNZN looking ahead?

RNZN testing USV operations - Australian Defence Magazine

The Royal New Zealand Navy’s littoral warfare unit, HMNZS Matataua, has completed trials with an uncrewed surface vehicle (USV).

www.australiandefence.com.au

Interesting and good to see. The Battle Lab concept that NZDF now use appears to be working quite well because that's how they gained the data for deciding the Steyr replacement and how they assessed the M3M 12.7mm MG. Never heard what happened with that either, but reckoned that they should be using them in NZDF helos instead of the MAG58. Means that you can touch the enemy further away.

Our Minister was in Ukraine yesterday meeting the Ukrainian DEFMIN so maybe we should ask them for a licence to build their USVs that they having been using against the Russian Black Sea Fleet.

The applications for the use of USV in the NZDF are many and varied from the likes of MCM as the one being assessed above is used for, to oceanographic research, kamikaze attack (like by the Ukrainians) port security, ISR etc. There could even be a SAR application as well when it's to dangerous for a crewed boat to put to sea.

The real thing that I think what NZDF and the NZG have forgotten, is that we have the industry and capabilities to design and build such vessels here. Or maybe they (govt - political & bureaucratic)) just deliberately ignore it. Think of the boat building industry in Auckland and Northland alone where some of the world's best boat builders in both traditional and composite materials are based. Then there are the electronics and power unit people in Auckland Wellington, Christchurch, Dunedin, and elsewhere within the country. We have the people, knowledge, facilities, hence the capability to design and produce our own.

 

[Nighthawk.NZ]

we at another low... again

One-third of New Zealand's navy ships inactive as 'workforce issues' hit defence force

Three of New Zealand's nine naval ships are sitting idle due to personnel leaving the defence force.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Teal]

we at another low... again

One-third of New Zealand's navy ships inactive as 'workforce issues' hit defence force

Three of New Zealand's nine naval ships are sitting idle due to personnel leaving the defence force.

www.abc.net.au

Yup .....what this doesnt say is the sale of two IPVs last year , had we still had them it would be close to half the fleet in CnC.

 

[RegR]

Yup .....what this doesnt say is the sale of two IPVs last year , had we still had them it would be close to half the fleet in CnC.

The real reason the IPVs were sold, again, manning, definitely not a new thing despite all the hype just a more convenient excuse to align with, again. Global crisis, covid security, financial crash, workforce shortage blah blah blah when in all honesty it has been an ongoing thing since the early-mid 2000s and has just never really recovered suuficiently to keep on top of. "not fit for purpose" to justify the sale is just to save face in light of the blindingly obvious in that you cannot put ships to sea without the manpower to do so safely and competently (more importantly specialist manpower) so literally no point having the ships in the first place however it is getting to the point that the problem is alittle hard hide now. These issues are exactly why I do not see an added sealift ship and most definitely not an added frigate joining the fleet anytime soon (and thats NZDF soon as well, 10-20 years) despite all the pipedreams, wish lists and upgraded/modified/ongoing/foolproof threat level theories and this applies to the NZDF as a whole not just navy. The SOPV project is a prime example as was almost assured and yet that project was sunk almost as quick as it began and yet nothing in our southern oceans/Antartic AO has changed in terms of need, requirement or justification.

We can have all the gear in the world in the largest numbers on the planet but it is all for nothing without the ongoing support network behind it to make it work, considerations such as manning, infrastructure, operation, funding, relevant upgrades etc etc the list is long.... something I feel a few always seem to forget.

 

[chis73]

Yup .....what this doesnt say is the sale of two IPVs last year , had we still had them it would be close to half the fleet in CnC.

Seems Lucy Craymer missed the frigate Te Kaha from her list too, which has been under refit (link) in Calliope graving dock since February this year (and presumably still is). So that's actually 4 of 9 out of action then.

 

[old faithful]

Quick question regarding the numbers of NZDF personnel, is the NZ government running a recruitment campaign, or are they ok with just letting the NZDF quietly become irrelevant?

 

[ngatimozart]

Quick question regarding the numbers of NZDF personnel, is the NZ government running a recruitment campaign, or are they ok with just letting the NZDF quietly become irrelevant?

There have been mutterings of recruiting warm bodies. CDF told the pollies in plain language that more warm bodies were required.

Seems Lucy Craymer missed the frigate Te Kaha from her list too, which has been under refit (link) in Calliope graving dock since February this year (and presumably still is). So that's actually 4 of 9 out of action then.

So that's where Lucy has gone. Hadn't seen her on Stuff for quite a while.

 

[RegR]

Quick question regarding the numbers of NZDF personnel, is the NZ government running a recruitment campaign, or are they ok with just letting the NZDF quietly become irrelevant?

They're always recruiting, it's retaining them after they've been trained up that is the problem with higher paying options, generally overseas, being the issue. Also the attention span is not as long as it once was and navy, military in general actually, is not the long term option it once was with a lot treating it as a stop gap.

For me personally once the incentives began waning and the BS began to catch upto and then outweigh the good stuff then people who may have been on the fence take the leap and pull pin. The current market only compounds things and makes the decision making process all that more easier, literally.

Its a great lifestyle but it's not for everyone, some people can hack it a lot cannot, I dare say something needs to change and most likely within defence itself, for better or worse, as I highly doubt the current recruiting pool will.

 

[recce.k1]

Quick question regarding the numbers of NZDF personnel, is the NZ government running a recruitment campaign, or are they ok with just letting the NZDF quietly become irrelevant?

NZDF is now offering retention bonuses to RNZN personnel to help stem the tide of them leaving to higher paid civilian jobs.

Navy offering bonuses to 300 sailors to stop them jumping ship

This comes as mid-rank to senior service members are leaving the branch for more money in warmer waters.

www.1news.co.nz

Seems to me the Govt needs to significantly increase pay across the board (IMO 10-20% to remain competitive).

Govt seems to have got the message it also needs to increase housing and accommodation for defence personnel (it's in one of their action plans, posted on the NZDF thread a while back), as the cost of housing has skyrocketed in recent years.

 

[Xthenaki]

Getting the above issues of renumeration, benefits Housing allowances etc brought up to an acceptable level and also recruitment programs given top priority we hopefully can stop the outflow of skilled personnal,
When the above problem is brought under control we can look forward to Frigate/OPV replacement. If the thinking was to procure the Arrowhead 140 or similar vessels T31/T32 buying or planning for say six vessels (Maybe in tranches of three) would give a common hull, propulsion, machinery etc leaving flexability to cover both types of vessels. The UK are building the T26 in two groups with funding. If you extend the period between the two groups you can also upgrade the last three to a new standard extending the life of the overall project and eventually making their replacement staggered. Using the Arrowhead 140 as an OPV/Corvette would be using the desigh in its original form (Absolon class). By refitting and upgrading the OPV type (Electronics and weaponary) leaves an option if war broke out. Using the flexi system could help with costs and changing roles or tasks.

 

[recce.k1]

Getting the above issues of renumeration, benefits Housing allowances etc brought up to an acceptable level and also recruitment programs given top priority we hopefully can stop the outflow of skilled personnal,
When the above problem is brought under control we can look forward to Frigate/OPV replacement. If the thinking was to procure the Arrowhead 140 or similar vessels T31/T32 buying or planning for say six vessels (Maybe in tranches of three) would give a common hull, propulsion, machinery etc leaving flexability to cover both types of vessels. The UK are building the T26 in two groups with funding. If you extend the period between the two groups you can also upgrade the last three to a new standard extending the life of the overall project and eventually making their replacement staggered. Using the Arrowhead 140 as an OPV/Corvette would be using the desigh in its original form (Absolon class). By refitting and upgrading the OPV type (Electronics and weaponary) leaves an option if war broke out. Using the flexi system could help with costs and changing roles or tasks.

Good points, and perhaps there are historical precedents in doing this, for example two Type 12 frigates (Otago and Taranaki) were ordered in 1957, but it wasn't until 1963 and 1968 that the next two Frigates were ordered, which were of the Improved Type 12 class and gave better capabiilities. Although IIRC the reasons were primarily "economic" related (eg balancing NZ's balance of payments at the time plus allowing for other service priorities), rather than a deliberate strategy? Kind of sounds familiar to this day!

I think one of the biggest hurdles defence in general and the Navy in particular has to contend with in recent times is this so called "credible minimum force" absurdity which has seen capabilities scaled back to their absolute bare minimum, so much so that the illusion that "all is well" in peacetime then becomes highly problematic when tensions flare up.

So I think one of the biggest changes we need to see as a result of the defence policy review (to demonstrate the review has had any credibility) is to see this "credible minimum force" concept either dropped or raised to a realistic and quantifiable level (across the 3 services).

To relate that back to your examples, perhaps that means the ANZAC's are replaced with more than two vessels. If so, would that be in batches (which may be needed anyway due to the need to raise and train additional crews and their competencies for vessel #3 and possibly vessel #4)?

Or something else?

 

[ngatimozart]

Getting the above issues of renumeration, benefits Housing allowances etc brought up to an acceptable level and also recruitment programs given top priority we hopefully can stop the outflow of skilled personnal,
When the above problem is brought under control we can look forward to Frigate/OPV replacement. If the thinking was to procure the Arrowhead 140 or similar vessels T31/T32 buying or planning for say six vessels (Maybe in tranches of three) would give a common hull, propulsion, machinery etc leaving flexability to cover both types of vessels. The UK are building the T26 in two groups with funding. If you extend the period between the two groups you can also upgrade the last three to a new standard extending the life of the overall project and eventually making their replacement staggered. Using the Arrowhead 140 as an OPV/Corvette would be using the desigh in its original form (Absolon class). By refitting and upgrading the OPV type (Electronics and weaponary) leaves an option if war broke out. Using the flexi system could help with costs and changing roles or tasks.

The T31 is a variant of the Arrowhead 140 which itself is based on the OMT F370 design; the Iver Huitfeld Class FFG, and the Iver Huitfeld is a variant of the Absalon Class.

We would do well to stay well away from the RN Type 31 and Type 32 ships. The five Type 31 are political sops to the RN for the axing of 11 Type 23 frigate replacements. The Type 32 is an unknown beastie at the moment and odds are that it might never get built. The Poms have to fund a replacement DDG design for the Type 45 destroyers and they are struggling to pay for their defence requirements now. The Covid pandemic and Brexit have played havoc with their economy and a very short term PM didn't help matters any after initiating a run on the pound. It also costs a fortune to have anything built in their shipyards - as well as western European, North American, and Australian shipyards. The pandemic on its own is enough to cause major disruptions for any economy, but their self inflicted Brexit damage was avoidable and it will cause them problems for decades. They had unlimited tariff free access to their major market and they threw it all away. They may very well not be able to pay for their future defence commitments especially if Scotland gains its independence and Northern Ireland joins the Republic. All that will be left will be the English and the Welsh. If the Welsh decide that they want their independence back, well London has an even bigger problem doesn't it.

6,000 tonne is far to large for a corvette and definitely huge large for an OPV. We would never get 5 frigates, however we could be somewhat cunning and use the RDN (Royal Danish Navy) as a template for a frigate force. They have 3 Ivers and two Absalons so we could attempt justifying a similar force for the RNZN. The RDN also have OPVs that are well armed and they operate in and around Greenland as well. However the Southern Ocean is a tad more dynamic than the North Sea and the North Atlantic and the RNZN operates in equatorial waters as well. What we could justify is something with a hull size about that of an Anzac Frigate - 3,500 - 3,800 tonnes displacement that is a corvette / light frigate and has mission bays enabling it be easily and quickly re-rolled, using modular systems based on a 20ft ISO container footprint. This way it has some FFBNW capability and also able to multirole. It can do everything from minelaying and hunting to SAR and HADR with a multitude of roles in between. Plus it's capable of defending itself if it has to. These could be used to replace the Protector Class IPV & OPV fleet on a one for one basis, including the two IPV just sold. These would be far more versatile than any OPV and far better VfM / bang for buck than said OPV

 

[ngatimozart]

Good points, and perhaps there are historical precedents in doing this, for example two Type 12 frigates (Otago and Taranaki) were ordered in 1957, but it wasn't until 1963 and 1968 that the next two Frigates were ordered, which were of the Improved Type 12 class and gave better capabiilities. Although IIRC the reasons were primarily "economic" related (eg balancing NZ's balance of payments at the time plus allowing for other service priorities), rather than a deliberate strategy? Kind of sounds familiar to this day!

I think one of the biggest hurdles defence in general and the Navy in particular has to contend with in recent times is this so called "credible minimum force" absurdity which has seen capabilities scaled back to their absolute bare minimum, so much so that the illusion that "all is well" in peacetime then becomes highly problematic when tensions flare up.

So I think one of the biggest changes we need to see as a result of the defence policy review (to demonstrate the review has had any credibility) is to see this "credible minimum force" concept either dropped or raised to a realistic and quantifiable level (across the 3 services).

To relate that back to your examples, perhaps that means the ANZAC's are replaced with more than two vessels. If so, would that be in batches (which may be needed anyway due to the need to raise and train additional crews and their competencies for vessel #3 and possibly vessel #4)?

Or something else?

The so called credible minimum force policy is an absolute travesty and a bunch of political bull manure used to justify political inaction and deliberate reduction of defence capabilities across the board. It's the biggest lie since Noah told the Officer of the Day that he wasn't drunk when he was poured across the brow, smelling like a brewery, saying that he only had a slight balance problem because he tripped on a ring bolt.

The use of tranches would be the only way of enabling the replacements and it's because of more than costs; it enables time between the tranches so that when the new ships have to be replaced they don't all have to be replaced at the same time.

 

[swerve]

Getting the above issues of renumeration, benefits Housing allowances etc brought up to an acceptable level and also recruitment programs given top priority we hopefully can stop the outflow of skilled personnal,
When the above problem is brought under control we can look forward to Frigate/OPV replacement. If the thinking was to procure the Arrowhead 140 or similar vessels T31/T32 buying or planning for say six vessels (Maybe in tranches of three) would give a common hull, propulsion, machinery etc leaving flexability to cover both types of vessels. The UK are building the T26 in two groups with funding. If you extend the period between the two groups you can also upgrade the last three to a new standard extending the life of the overall project and eventually making their replacement staggered. Using the Arrowhead 140 as an OPV/Corvette would be using the desigh in its original form (Absolon class). By refitting and upgrading the OPV type (Electronics and weaponary) leaves an option if war broke out. Using the flexi system could help with costs and changing roles or tasks.

Absalon isn't an OPV/corvette. It's a multi-role ship, able to function, for example, as a mothership for a few OPVs deployed far from home, small (special forces level) amphibious operations, an armed transport, or a GP frigate. 36 ESSM, 8 Harpoon, a 5" gun, MU-90 torpedoes & a pair of EH-101 or SH-60 helicopters isn't OPV armament. And they'll soon get towed sonars.

 

[Xthenaki]

The T31 is a variant of the Arrowhead 140 which itself is based on the OMT F370 design; the Iver Huitfeld Class FFG, and the Iver Huitfeld is a variant of the Absalon Class.

We would do well to stay well away from the RN Type 31 and Type 32 ships. The five Type 31 are political sops to the RN for the axing of 11 Type 23 frigate replacements. The Type 32 is an unknown beastie at the moment and odds are that it might never get built. The Poms have to fund a replacement DDG design for the Type 45 destroyers and they are struggling to pay for their defence requirements now. The Covid pandemic and Brexit have played havoc with their economy and a very short term PM didn't help matters any after initiating a run on the pound. It also costs a fortune to have anything built in their shipyards - as well as western European, North American, and Australian shipyards. The pandemic on its own is enough to cause major disruptions for any economy, but their self inflicted Brexit damage was avoidable and it will cause them problems for decades. They had unlimited tariff free access to their major market and they threw it all away. They may very well not be able to pay for their future defence commitments especially if Scotland gains its independence and Northern Ireland joins the Republic. All that will be left will be the English and the Welsh. If the Welsh decide that they want their independence back, well London has an even bigger problem doesn't it.

6,000 tonne is far to large for a corvette and definitely huge large for an OPV. We would never get 5 frigates, however we could be somewhat cunning and use the RDN (Royal Danish Navy) as a template for a frigate force. They have 3 Ivers and two Absalons so we could attempt justifying a similar force for the RNZN. The RDN also have OPVs that are well armed and they operate in and around Greenland as well. However the Southern Ocean is a tad more dynamic than the North Sea and the North Atlantic and the RNZN operates in equatorial waters as well. What we could justify is something with a hull size about that of an Anzac Frigate - 3,500 - 3,800 tonnes displacement that is a corvette / light frigate and has mission bays enabling it be easily and quickly re-rolled, using modular systems based on a 20ft ISO container footprint. This way it has some FFBNW capability and also able to multirole. It can do everything from minelaying and hunting to SAR and HADR with a multitude of roles in between. Plus it's capable of defending itself if it has to. These could be used to replace the Protector Class IPV & OPV fleet on a one for one basis, including the two IPV just sold. These would be far more versatile than any OPV and far better VfM / bang for buck than said OPV

Thanks Ngati. I had gone down the line of thinking that same size hull and machinery would fit both roles (Frigate or Corvette/OPV) and that the lessor role could be upgraded to frigate status if needed by a refit. I take note of what you have explained above and like both of your options given.

 

[Xthenaki]

Absalon isn't an OPV/corvette. It's a multi-role ship, able to function, for example, as a mothership for a few OPVs deployed far from home, small (special forces level) amphibious operations, an armed transport, or a GP frigate. 36 ESSM, 8 Harpoon, a 5" gun, MU-90 torpedoes & a pair of EH-101 or SH-60 helicopters isn't OPV armament. And they'll soon get towed sonars.

Thanks Swerve - point taken

 

[Stuart M]

The T31 is a variant of the Arrowhead 140 which itself is based on the OMT F370 design; the Iver Huitfeld Class FFG, and the Iver Huitfeld is a variant of the Absalon Class.

We would do well to stay well away from the RN Type 31 and Type 32 ships. The five Type 31 are political sops to the RN for the axing of 11 Type 23 frigate replacements. The Type 32 is an unknown beastie at the moment and odds are that it might never get built. The Poms have to fund a replacement DDG design for the Type 45 destroyers and they are struggling to pay for their defence requirements now. The Covid pandemic and Brexit have played havoc with their economy and a very short term PM didn't help matters any after initiating a run on the pound. It also costs a fortune to have anything built in their shipyards - as well as western European, North American, and Australian shipyards. The pandemic on its own is enough to cause major disruptions for any economy, but their self inflicted Brexit damage was avoidable and it will cause them problems for decades. They had unlimited tariff free access to their major market and they threw it all away. They may very well not be able to pay for their future defence commitments especially if Scotland gains its independence and Northern Ireland joins the Republic. All that will be left will be the English and the Welsh. If the Welsh decide that they want their independence back, well London has an even bigger problem doesn't it.

6,000 tonne is far to large for a corvette and definitely huge large for an OPV. We would never get 5 frigates, however we could be somewhat cunning and use the RDN (Royal Danish Navy) as a template for a frigate force. They have 3 Ivers and two Absalons so we could attempt justifying a similar force for the RNZN. The RDN also have OPVs that are well armed and they operate in and around Greenland as well. However the Southern Ocean is a tad more dynamic than the North Sea and the North Atlantic and the RNZN operates in equatorial waters as well. What we could justify is something with a hull size about that of an Anzac Frigate - 3,500 - 3,800 tonnes displacement that is a corvette / light frigate and has mission bays enabling it be easily and quickly re-rolled, using modular systems based on a 20ft ISO container footprint. This way it has some FFBNW capability and also able to multirole. It can do everything from minelaying and hunting to SAR and HADR with a multitude of roles in between. Plus it's capable of defending itself if it has to. These could be used to replace the Protector Class IPV & OPV fleet on a one for one basis, including the two IPV just sold. These would be far more versatile than any OPV and far better VfM / bang for buck than said OPV

At the risk of delving into politics, I do think it's important to note that Brexit was not and is not an economic decision , it was a matter of national self determination that has economic effects and its an important distinction. However disatrously handled, and it is, I cannot fault the Brits for the choice they made because such a choice is the very essence of the democratic principle.

Its long term impact on UK defence decisions will be pronounced however because of the nature of the EU; as it begins to solidify a common defence and defence procurement policy alongside its other competencies that perforce excludes its constituant members, it will eventually, in theory, gain distinct economies of scale across the economic board that the UK won't be part of.

So to follow on from that , whilst one can point to questionable NZ spending that force budgetary opportunity costs that are not on balance favourable to vote defence, the same issue exists in the UK that hinders their export opportunities. It's a double whammy on any NZ interest in UK products if we can't buy it and that cannot sell it.

There is also another issue that I am in no way qualified to answer, how do waships from non five eyes nations stack up qualitatively if NZ is forced down that path? Yes we would get the systems, radars, vls etc from our brethren but can we get a product that is as good at ASW from a Korean yard as a UK one, or better yet would the UK allow something like T26 to be built in Korea on NZs behalf, as per the A140 Polish variant?

 

[John Fedup]

At the risk of delving into politics, I do think it's important to note that Brexit was not and is not an economic decision , it was a matter of national self determination that has economic effects and its an important distinction. However disatrously handled, and it is, I cannot fault the Brits for the choice they made because such a choice is the very essence of the democratic principle.

Its long term impact on UK defence decisions will be pronounced however because of the nature of the EU; as it begins to solidify a common defence and defence procurement policy alongside its other competencies that perforce excludes its constituant members, it will eventually, in theory, gain distinct economies of scale across the economic board that the UK won't be part of.

So to follow on from that , whilst one can point to questionable NZ spending that force budgetary opportunity costs that are not on balance favourable to vote defence, the same issue exists in the UK that hinders their export opportunities. It's a double whammy on any NZ interest in UK products if we can't buy it and that cannot sell it.

There is also another issue that I am in no way qualified to answer, how do waships from non five eyes nations stack up qualitatively if NZ is forced down that path? Yes we would get the systems, radars, vls etc from our brethren but can we get a product that is as good at ASW from a Korean yard as a UK one, or better yet would the UK allow something like T26 to be built in Korea on NZs behalf, as per the A140 Polish variant?

Agree, the national self determination issue and huge regulatory requirements motivated Brexit. The AUKUS agreement will offset being excluded from EU defence somewhat and perhaps AUKUS will expand to include the other 5EYE members and possibly Japan.

 

[Tbone]

@Tbone

Can you please be careful in how you post. On both the RAN and RNZN sites you have posted this link and then added another post to comment. In the RAN thread you had three duplicate posts. As you are a new member this is just a warning and no points have been assigned. Do it again and points will be assisgned.

alexsa

 

[Tbone]

NZ need to join up with the RAN and purchase 4 of the Damen crosser over xo vessels to supply an all round multi mission small frigate with low personnel requirements. They can be built in Australia for a total of 12 vessels and be low cost but provide everything the rnzn needs amphibious and all