Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[Volkodav]

The problem is not to many hulls just not enough trained personnel to cover critical roles. This dates back to the Key government decision to change the terms and conditions of service from a service based system to a system based on civilian industry practices. This has lead to fully trained personnel leaving for better paying jobs outside the services. These changes have been a disaster in terms of retention of skilled personnel and due to the pollies not wanting to admit they made a mistake, this problem is likely to continue in the foreseeable future.
The OPV's and IPV's are currently not in sea service so scapping will achieve nothing, also the navy has about 2200 personnel, but it is the lack of the experienced personnel in the right qualification brackets that is the problem. A Mogami takes around 90 crew so the numbers are not the problem.

A fleet of five Mogamis would suit NZ well.

Not all would need to be in service, i.e. one in reserve or a minor availability, one in a major availability and three rotating through deployments.

They could be acquired over and extended period providing plenty of time to train crews, say one every three to five years.

Their multi role nature would also permit NZ to get into mine warfare and other areas.

 

[old faithful]

A fleet of five Mogamis would suit NZ well.

Not all would need to be in service, i.e. one in reserve or a minor availability, one in a major availability and three rotating through deployments.

They could be acquired over and extended period providing plenty of time to train crews, say one every three to five years.

Their multi role nature would also permit NZ to get into mine warfare and other areas.

5!!!????

They just ordered 5 Seahawks, let alone frigates!
I reckon 3 would be optimistic.

 

[Stampede]

5!!!????

They just ordered 5 Seahawks, let alone frigates!
I reckon 3 would be optimistic.

NZ’s navy realistically needs a clean slate approach going forward.
But for its supply ship, all of its current fleet needs replacing.
Not a great position to be in, but it is an opportunity to finally get it right.
So
What range of capabilities does NZ need?
What is it realistically prepared to fund?

If they want an actual warship the Mogami should be a good fit.
As to numbers refer to the above two questions.

Cheers S

 

[Rob c]

5!!!????

They just ordered 5 Seahawks, let alone frigates!
I reckon 3 would be optimistic.

When you have one training, another servicing and one as backup in case of unserviceability I think 2 deployed on ships is all you can expect.
With this in mind I think that 2 frigates is all the government has in it's current planning.

 

[kiwipatriot69]

When you have one training, another servicing and one as backup in case of unserviceability I think 2 deployed on ships is all you can expect.
With this in mind I think that 2 frigates is all the government has in it's current planning.

Which seems to go against what the Defence minister herself stated, 'funding allocated for a increased presence in the pacific' stating how much the threat level changed in recent years, so how does get achieved with 2 frigates? 'Increased lethality?

3 Mogami requires 270 crew. Two Anzacs require 360.

They want HMNZS Canterbury replaced with 2 ships for under a billion and crew them both?

Well how about 2 Damen LST 120 then. Equals the total crew of Canterbury and only $600 million. Can be used as a OPV role too.

Long range drones are being funded for what 300 to 600 million? . 3 Seaguardian is my pick. We can buy them easily and man them by contracting the peraonell from General atomic themselves. If they cost any more the savings of the Sealift purchase adds 400 million to that.

The current OPV , Otago is it? Being brought back into service, to do Southern Ocean patrol? Well that crew could be utilized in a new SOPV when that ships replaced.Something like Canada's arctic patrol vessel for instance.Maybe we can get the Danes to build one.

Someone here mentioned palletisation for increased lethality. Surely that could be added to the OPV and Sealift too?

 

[Nighthawk.NZ]

They want HMNZS Canterbury replaced with 2 ships for under a billion and crew them both?

The 2 ships in DCP2019 were1B+ each... just saying

 

[Rob c]

The current OPV , Otago is it? Being brought back into service, to do Southern Ocean patrol?

No, it is being reactivated and modified to replace Manawanui after it's loss. so it's main roles will be dive support and survey etc.

 

[Rob c]

Well how about 2 Damen LST 120 then. Equals the total crew of Canterbury and only $600 million. Can be used as a OPV role too.

What the navy want is basically a Canterbury with a dock, A LST is a little to specialised and does not cover all of Canterbury's capabilities which include the ability to carry up to 5 helicopters and she is fitted with a hospital as well as cargo and landing facilities. Oh and ice protected.

 

[Rob c]

3 Mogami requires 270 crew. Two Anzacs require 360.

It is the skill set which neads to be addressed, I would imagine that the skill set for the 90 man crew of a Mogami could be significantly different to the 180 of an ANZAC. Going down memory lane, when I was at Def HQ in the late 1970's the RNZN sailed 4 figates into Wellington harbour with a combined crew of over 1000 out of a navy with 1900 personnel. Now they have ships tied up when they have 2200 personnel and are struggling to man ships with a combined crew of less than 500. The required skill sets have changed along with what is required to retain them and the pollies are way behind the required 8 ball.

 

[spoz]

Yes, crudely you probably need more POs and leading hands and less ABs. And the question, which I imagine Australia will also have to face up to, then becomes how do you grow those people if the majority of your force is structured that way. That is already something of a problem in the RAN with the current manning approach in the Anzacs and Hobarts, and will become more so. And, it probably takes you down the user/first line maintainer route which both Navies have been resistant to in the past.

 

[recce.k1]

There were reports from late last year quoting the CN that OPV Otago is being regenerated to resume "patrol and maritime domain awareness duties". RNZ reported that includes "fishery patrols, border protection work, and research and supply, and provide a "presence" in the Pacific".

Kiwipatriot raises Southern Ocean patrol but my guess is not much further than the sub-Antarctic islands for patrol/resupply (could be wrong but I don't think an OPV has been to the Antarctic continent since pre-covid (then being put into custody and care), also not since the larger AOR Aotearoa can better handle the extreme Southern Ocean conditions when undertaking resupply/patrol to and from McMurdo Sound)?

The other bonus of regenerating Otago is that (the sunken) Manawanui's crew maintain time at sea and it also provides opportunities for new cohorts to build up valuable experience. As the formal plan (and funding allocated) is to regenerate personnel it will be interesting to see when the reactivation of sister OPV Wellington is approved, considering it appears to be at least a 12 month process, and the need to provide "presence" is becoming vital.

 

[Volkodav]

5!!!????

They just ordered 5 Seahawks, let alone frigates!
I reckon 3 would be optimistic.

Five ships ordered over fifteen to twenty-five years.

To maintain one ship deployed at all times, you need a minimum of four hulls, five is better and can usually provide two available for deployment.

This is what Norway had: five frigates, four rotating through operations and maintenance availabilities and one in reserve.

The Mogamis have a crew of 90 and are truly multi-role, capable in ASW, anti surface and local air defence, mine countermeasures and can also easily be adapted for other roles, including hydrographics etc. they are in effect a modern-day sloop.

I know it likely won't happen, but that doesn't mean it isn't viable and good value for money.

Crewing is interesting, but one way around it is to change the pay scales and org structure of the crew. Aim to have more POs and CPOs than junior sailors, who will basically become trainees. Pay the senior sailors much more than the junior sailors and continue to increase their pay as their skills increase. With small crews, people need to have higher levels of skill and be capable of greater responsibility and autonomy, promote them accordingly, not to lead junior sailors, but to manage systems and deliver capability.

 

[Nighthawk.NZ]

The idea of a frigate is escort, as well to go out on it's own and do it's own thing... it is suppose to be able to take a hit and keep fighting. All very well saying lower crew numbers due to automation but when push comes to shove and shit has hit the fan... You need the crew numbers for for damage control as well as keeping the ship fighting simultaneously for as long possible.

The other is staying on station for long periods on time and crew rotations etc...

Those are my only concerns...

 

[Rob c]

Crewing is interesting, but one way around it is to change the pay scales and org structure of the crew.

This was a point put forward years ago in the 2011 white paper on defence in that it recognised that retention of experienced staff between the 6 and 16 year mark was becoming a problem and the terms of employment for this group needed to improve.
The government of the day (in their infinite wisdom, not) to significantly reduce the terms and conditions of employment, which has led us to the staffing problem we have today. So to simplify it, the goverment was given advise on what was needed to be done, went and did the exact opposite and wonders why we have a problem. I remember reading from a well known economist of the 1950's or 60's a statement saying, "Let the bean counters gain control and progress stop's" and that is what has happened. '

 

[Stampede]

Five ships ordered over fifteen to twenty-five years.

To maintain one ship deployed at all times, you need a minimum of four hulls, five is better and can usually provide two available for deployment.

This is what Norway had: five frigates, four rotating through operations and maintenance availabilities and one in reserve.

The Mogamis have a crew of 90 and are truly multi-role, capable in ASW, anti surface and local air defence, mine countermeasures and can also easily be adapted for other roles, including hydrographics etc. they are in effect a modern-day sloop.

I know it likely won't happen, but that doesn't mean it isn't viable and good value for money.

Crewing is interesting, but one way around it is to change the pay scales and org structure of the crew. Aim to have more POs and CPOs than junior sailors, who will basically become trainees. Pay the senior sailors much more than the junior sailors and continue to increase their pay as their skills increase. With small crews, people need to have higher levels of skill and be capable of greater responsibility and autonomy, promote them accordingly, not to lead junior sailors, but to manage systems and deliver capability.

Volk you mentioned the broad range of missions that the Mogami can fulfil.
Certainly a very flexible ship and highlights somewhat the trend in this area of ships having flexibility.
Like for like replace of vessel classes will probably not be the future which begs the question, how many classes of ship does a small navy like NZ need?

I’ll make a suggestion. Three vessel Classes

Supply x 2
Amphibious x 2
Combatant x 3 plus
( numbers are the flexible bit )

Seven plus vessels should be a realistic proposition.

The key is what does the combatant look like and what does plus look like!!!!!
KPI
Truly multi-role, capable in ASW, anti surface,local air defence, mine countermeasures and can also easily be adapted for other roles to which I’ll add - constabulary duties.

So can NZ afford a combatant and if so how many?
If not then a flexible robust constabulary vessel in good numbers.


Thoughts

Cheers S

 

[OldTex]

The key is what does the combatant look like and what does plus look like!!!!!
KPI
Truly multi-role, capable in ASW, anti surface,local air defence, mine countermeasures and can also easily be adapted for other roles to which I’ll add - constabulary duties.

So can NZ afford a combatant and if so how many?
If not then a flexible robust constabulary vessel in good numbers.

A multi-role combatant can do constabulary duties, but that would be overly capable. The reverse is not true (i.e. using a vessel designed for constabulary duties cannot do combatant roles). It would suggest that a 4 classes fleet is needed:
Logistic
Sealift
Combatant
Auxiliary

The auxiliary vessels pick up the constabulary, mine warfare, training and other duties. The question of what the combatant vessel looks like is where political will (and budgets) comes into play. For NZ a capable frigate design should be the basis for the combatant. If more than 2 vessels are needed then there is the risk that the powers that be will limit the choice to a light/patrol frigate design or go with a corvette design.

 

[Rob c]

A multi-role combatant can do constabulary duties, but that would be overly capable. The reverse is not true (i.e. using a vessel designed for constabulary duties cannot do combatant roles). It would suggest that a 4 classes fleet is needed:
Logistic
Sealift
Combatant
Auxiliary

The auxiliary vessels pick up the constabulary, mine warfare, training and other duties. The question of what the combatant vessel looks like is where political will (and budgets) comes into play. For NZ a capable frigate design should be the basis for the combatant. If more than 2 vessels are needed then there is the risk that the powers that be will limit the choice to a light/patrol frigate design or go with a corvette design.

At this point in time politics and budgets will dictate the outcome as our pollies still have not woken up to the reality that we need to be able to defend our selves at least in the short term as any help could be some time away. The question our pollies have to ask and answer is how much is our freedom and sovereignty realy worth, which is something they avoid, seeing their own politics as being more inportant than the long term good of the country. This is the nature of pollitics today.

 

[Todjaeger]

At this point in time politics and budgets will dictate the outcome as our pollies still have not woken up to the reality that we need to be able to defend our selves at least in the short term as any help could be some time away. The question our pollies have to ask and answer is how much is our freedom and sovereignty realy worth, which is something they avoid, seeing their own politics as being more inportant than the long term good of the country. This is the nature of pollitics today.

I suspect a sizable portion of the problem is that so many in NZ, not just pollies, have gotten so used to thinking and viewing things a certain way, that they really cannot see threats to NZ's freedom or sovereignty. That whole 'sea blindness' ostrich head buried in the sand type thinking where people dismiss certain things as being impossible when the reality is that they are at best just unlikely and fall well short of being impossible.

 

[Rob c]

I suspect a sizable portion of the problem is that so many in NZ, not just pollies, have gotten so used to thinking and viewing things a certain way, that they really cannot see threats to NZ's freedom or sovereignty. That whole 'sea blindness' ostrich head buried in the sand type thinking where people dismiss certain things as being impossible when the reality is that they are at best just unlikely and fall well short of being impossible.

This is certainly true, however a lot of this is due to the pollies of all types controlling the narrative to suit their ends and a very left leaning jurno sector backing this up.

 

[Stampede]

A multi-role combatant can do constabulary duties, but that would be overly capable. The reverse is not true (i.e. using a vessel designed for constabulary duties cannot do combatant roles). It would suggest that a 4 classes fleet is needed:
Logistic
Sealift
Combatant
Auxiliary

The auxiliary vessels pick up the constabulary, mine warfare, training and other duties. The question of what the combatant vessel looks like is where political will (and budgets) comes into play. For NZ a capable frigate design should be the basis for the combatant. If more than 2 vessels are needed then there is the risk that the powers that be will limit the choice to a light/patrol frigate design or go with a corvette design.

I see part of the challenge being perception
To put it another way ……..it’s sales
More vessel classes will probably necessitate a greater number of ships.
Probably not politically palatable nor affordable.

Solo ship classes are annoying on many levels
HMNZS Aotearoa is an example.
Great ship but an orphan.

If you go frigates experience suggest the two of the past lacks depth so going forward three is the minimum.
What does the amphibious bit look like.
One ship , two ships.
Looking at a fleet of six so far
Now for the auxiliary to do all the other stuff.
How many of those? One,two,three?
I agree on many levels it’s looking like a well balanced force and probably needed ,but realistically NZ just does not have a great track record on spending the coin.

Supply ships , Amphibs and a constabulary/auxiliary will be an easy sell.
But three combatants are the challenge.

Technically I think NZ currently has eight ships.
Not all are active

So maybe the question is how many ships would government fund.

A fleet of 7 or 8 or 9.
What’s the best combination for a balanced fleet.


Cheers S