John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Absolutely and it is likely (albeit based on very limited information), the answer may be a career termination.
Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Padman
- Start date
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Limited information and the pilot/helmsman/OOW issue will need to be sorted for sure.
I thought it sounded more like it turned in the wrong direction while under auto-pilot so then when they tried to regain control but did not actually dis-engage auto pilot so then assumed the problem was something completely different, which only made matters worse as they were then applying wrong corrections to an unknown issue. Panic under pressure and procedure goes out the window. By the time they have gotten control back the damage is done and the recovery only makes matters worse.
Doesn't this ship have (had) dynamic positioning so can literally hold on a dime? Made to take on north seas tendering oil rigs so not sure alittle weather would really affect it's handling or seakeeping in terms of operation in even adverse conditions.
I am unsure about RNZ's standard operating procedures and regulations but autopilots are typically limited to open water / transit.
Use of autopilot within restricted waters with high traffic density or known navigtion hazards are carefully regulated with the key requirement that the bridge team can immediately transition to hand steering.
It reeks of competency and training issue (inability to identify that autopilot was engaged, procedures to rapidly disengage and handsteer), as well as non comformance to regulations. The hammer's going to drop on a lot of folks.
A colleague once told me the only time in his career he bollocked a subordinate what when said subordinate gave him an incorrect navigation fix in confined waters.
Everyone has their job, if one person doesn't do theirs the whole thing can go to custard. If you are on the bridge you are expected to be competent.
Everyone has their job, if one person doesn't do theirs the whole thing can go to custard. If you are on the bridge you are expected to be competent.
yes I believe she had dynamic positioning - BUT- holding on to a dime in a swell could be fun especially if the ship gets "lifted". I would think that in adverse conditions you would keep clear of any structures.(Nth Sea rigs) Back to the MANAWANUI incident it will be interesting to see what happened when the findings of the C o I are made known.
Last edited:
Not sure it was initially in confined waters (it ended up there which is what they were trying to avoid/correct), sounds like it was in a box grid doing a survey pattern which would explain a semi plotted set of course waypoints to cover. Unsure as well but I highly doubt they just decided to suddenly use auto-pilot to undertake this seemingly regular (for this ship) task in this type of weather "near" this type of coast, point being I dont think they chose this particular survey mission to trial something new and out of order.
Edit: And if they did then someone definately is going to lose their pips as not following procedure on an operational mission vs informal training trials is not the done thing with this kind of asset in this type of organisation.
Last edited:
SeaplanePaul
New Member
Is it true that the Mawanui accelerated into the reef?
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Probably not, or at least not without the vessel going into a shipyard or drydock and getting modifications done to the hull and superstructure.
A SeaPhalanx is a non-deck penetrating CIWS mounting, but it still requires both appropriate connections for power, cooling and command/control. More importantly, the area where Phalanx or SeaPhalanx gets mounted needs to be sufficiently reinforced to both accommodate the weight of the gun (~6,200 kg) and handle the forces exerted when the gun fires.
Typhoon mountings like are currently fitted to the RNZN OPV's displace around ~700 kg, or a little over a tenth of a Phalanx. Also the deck plans for the reference design for the OPV's used to be available online, and IIRC when I looked through those plans, there were compartments on the deck immediately beneath where the Typhoon mounting was, not a magazine. This would suggest to me that there was never any intention or expectation that the OPV's armaments would get (or need) improvement. That or at the time, the then powers that be deliberately decided to make future upgrades in combat capability as difficult as possible.
I doubt the OPV would be capable of surviving much in the way of inbound fire so it is likely debatebale if they'd be put in a situation where a Phalanx CIWS would be required. AIUI HMNZS Aotearoa has been built 'fitted for but without' a Phalanx CIWS however thus far it would almost seem like the RNZN has zero interest in even trying it out for size! With some judicious maintenance scheduling it should be possible to fit one ANZAC & Aotaearoa with one at the same time whilst the 'other' ANZAC is most likey portside.
Aluminium Hail
New Member
Judith Collins says Manawanui will not be replaced and HMNZS Otago will fill the role.
I understand we have a platform agnostic capability with HMNZS Matataua but surely this is a significant loss for both NZ and the region? I assume Otago will not be being upgraded with the sorts of systems Manawanui had.
Also, how much equipment used by Matataua was on board and needing replacement?
www.1news.co.nz
.
I understand we have a platform agnostic capability with HMNZS Matataua but surely this is a significant loss for both NZ and the region? I assume Otago will not be being upgraded with the sorts of systems Manawanui had.
Also, how much equipment used by Matataua was on board and needing replacement?
HMNZS Manawanui will not be replaced, Government says
The decision comes as negotiations continue over whether the wreck should be removed or left as is.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Meh, the journo abruptly cut off the answer for all we know it could have been "I don't see us replacing the Manawanui ... until Defence makes their recommendations on the future RNZN fleet composition" or such-like.
I could be completely wrong of course but I really doubt the Minister would pre-empt the upcoming DCP outcomes (which would be news in itself if that were the case).
In terms of "how much equipment ..." that hasn't been answered or discussed (let alone leaked by now) so suggest as the vessel appeared to be primarily undertaking survey work (for CHOGM) then chances are much of Matataua's fancy kit may not have been on board.
I could be completely wrong of course but I really doubt the Minister would pre-empt the upcoming DCP outcomes (which would be news in itself if that were the case).
In terms of "how much equipment ..." that hasn't been answered or discussed (let alone leaked by now) so suggest as the vessel appeared to be primarily undertaking survey work (for CHOGM) then chances are much of Matataua's fancy kit may not have been on board.
Massive loss of capability... RNZN is now without a dedicated dive support vessel for the first time in decades... they've lost a very capable survey, dive/MCM support, salvage vessel... the OPV is not built for any of those roles. Manawanui had the moon-pool & dynamic positioning & azimuth propulsion and provided SSBA diving ...Otago won't be able to hold station dynamically and doesn't have 4-point anchoring so at best can provide 'mother ship' support for small-boat deployed divers... that's it! Does the RNZN even have a deployable decompression chamber to go on Otago when deployed? As far as survey work goes that is likely limited as well... AIUI Otago has previoulsy had an echo sounder (single-beam?) fitted but will rely heavily on REMUS UAV for the bulk of survey work. The ROV on Manawaui was a very capable built-in uint that has been lost as well, but not sure what deployable options RNZN have.Judith Collins says Manawanui will not be replaced and HMNZS Otago will fill the role.
I understand we have a platform agnostic capability with HMNZS Matataua but surely this is a significant loss for both NZ and the region? I assume Otago will not be being upgraded with the sorts of systems Manawanui had.
Also, how much equipment used by Matataua was on board and needing replacement?
.HMNZS Manawanui will not be replaced, Government says
The decision comes as negotiations continue over whether the wreck should be removed or left as is.
All this at a time we see underwater sabotage becoming a major concern and other navies investing significantly in platforms similar to Manawanui. It just occurrred to me the loss of Manawanui could possibly be partially responsible for the delay in the DCP.
I think that the non replacement of Manawanui just indicates the direction this government will take on the DCP which is to do as little as possible with as little money as possible. They simply don't care about our long term security or the freedom of our children and grandchildren in the future. It is all about the politics they adhere to today. they will talk the talk but it is highly unlikely that they will walk the talk.
Aluminium Hail
New Member
Yep that's pretty much how I see it. Nicolas Willis (Minister of Finance) has said there is no money, and probably said it's the navy's own fault they are in this position anyhow.
OTOH, it may be possible that the DCP is directing a significant increase in combat capability and that will use up all available monies for the near future so Manawanui's replacement is therefore delayed.