Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[harryriedl]

As mentioned elsewhere, the HMNZS Endeavour is due for replacement some time in the 2011-2013 timeframe. While mention has been made in some quarters for some form of JSS that can do sealift to a degree, in addition to replenishment, there has not seemed to be an RFP or RFT. With that having not occurred, and given the time it can take to chose a design, have construction commence and then do a workup for commissioning, I have my doubts as to whether or not Endeavour could be replaced with the desired sort of ship.

It occurred to me that it might be sensible for the RNZN to do something similar to what the RAN did when replacing HMAS Westralia. The RAN had purchased a Korean-built commercial tanker and then leased it for a few years until it was time to begin decommissioning the Westralia. The lease was then ended and the MV Delos underwent refit and was recommissioned as the HMAS Sirius (with a really ugly addition to her stern BTW). IIRC The HMAS Sirius is also intended to be replaced in the roughly 2020 timeframe with a purpose built naval oiler/replenishment vessel, after HMAS Success is replaced between 2015-2017. It might be sensible for the RNZN to join with the RAN in ordering whatever sort of vessel will be replacing either HMAS Success or HMAS Sirius. This seems particularly sensible if some form of joint unit is created which would be supported by both the ADF and NZDF.

Given that the RNZN appears to have too small a window to order a dedicated vessel before Endeavour needs replacing and she might not be able to continue in service long enough for the replacement of HMAS Success and HMAS Sirius other options would seem appropriate. What the RNZN might be able to do is purchase a new (or used) double-hulled tanker and have it fitted out to temporarily provide the needed fleet oiler. Then once the desired replenishment vessel is entering service, offer the temporary oiler for sale or lease.

Conducting the Endeavour replacement in this fashion might not be the least expensive option, but IMO would give the RNZN the best chance of getting the type of vessel it wants and needs without suffering a capability shortfall while the replacement is acquired.

-Cheers

lots of allies of NZ are renewing their tanker capablity as well as Aus replacement both Can Navy and the RFA have tanker replacement needs and programs (both quite slow moving at present). Both would make quite good alternate partners to Aus.

Would their be a possiblity to lease a tanker from lets say the USA and build a cheap perpous built ship like the smallest Agier class(not sure of the spelling)

 

[Todjaeger]

lots of allies of NZ are renewing their tanker capablity as well as Aus replacement both Can Navy and the RFA have tanker replacement needs and programs (both quite slow moving at present). Both would make quite good alternate partners to Aus.

Would their be a possiblity to lease a tanker from lets say the USA and build a cheap perpous built ship like the smallest Agier class(not sure of the spelling)

Given the status of the Canadian Joint Support Ship project (JSS) I do not think NZ participation is either an option or good idea. From the linked article, the Canadian programme currently seems to be in limbo.

As for the RFA tanker replacement programme... Not sure if that would really be appropriate for the RNZN either. The RFA programme from what I can tell is looking to replace a variety of dedicated tankers of the Rover and Leaf classes, but I have seen no mention that stores replenishment was also desired. The RFA has another class of AOR the Fort Victoria class, which is not currently up for replacement, which does refueling and stores replenishment. Given the situation of the RNZN it would seem more appropriate to get a more versatlie AOR vs. just an oiler.

There were also two primary reasons why I suggested going along with a RAN replacement. The first was that depending on where the vessel was built and had final fitout done, NZ might be able to include some local content as an offset. This could help ease the budgetary burden.

The other reason was operational in nature. By having a common vessel, the RAN and RNZN could switch coverage for a particular mission or task force back and forth without having a change in capabilty. Additionally, if any joint force (as discussed on another thread) is created, it will be possible to form composite crews of RAN and RNZN personnel as needed with less effort as crew from different support vessels would already be familiar with the ship class itself.

-Cheers

 

[harryriedl]

Given the status of the Canadian Joint Support Ship project (JSS) I do not think NZ participation is either an option or good idea. From the linked article, the Canadian programme currently seems to be in limbo.

As for the RFA tanker replacement programme... Not sure if that would really be appropriate for the RNZN either. The RFA programme from what I can tell is looking to replace a variety of dedicated tankers of the Rover and Leaf classes, but I have seen no mention that stores replenishment was also desired. The RFA has another class of AOR the Fort Victoria class, which is not currently up for replacement, which does refueling and stores replenishment. Given the situation of the RNZN it would seem more appropriate to get a more versatlie AOR vs. just an oiler.

There were also two primary reasons why I suggested going along with a RAN replacement. The first was that depending on where the vessel was built and had final fitout done, NZ might be able to include some local content as an offset. This could help ease the budgetary burden.

The other reason was operational in nature. By having a common vessel, the RAN and RNZN could switch coverage for a particular mission or task force back and forth without having a change in capabilty. Additionally, if any joint force (as discussed on another thread) is created, it will be possible to form composite crews of RAN and RNZN personnel as needed with less effort as crew from different support vessels would already be familiar with the ship class itself.

-Cheers

The reson for the mentioning Canada program was they are in desprate need for replacement 40 year old vessels ect. I belive they were going milt-spec a tanker which was rather close to your intial proposal.

Soild stores transfere wasn't mentioned intialy as it was a mil spec tanker. Im not sure its in NZ interest to wait for the Aus replacment tanker program and would be better to get a replacement sooner. The RFA was mentioned as they will be buying quite a few vessels so their could be econmy of scale. Not sure about local content all could be buillt in NZ if it has facilities.
How much NZ content has been in joint contrats with AUS (curious). Commonality is overated for support vessels as they are significantly simpler than combat vessels and are primarly fitted with COTS equipment and are simple powerplant wise. The RFA managed without difficulty to added many diffrent merchi Tankers (and others) within days during the Falklands from the STUFT vessels. RAN crews should be able to adapt quickly to a diffrent class or AOR without significant challange.

 

[Todjaeger]

The reson for the mentioning Canada program was they are in desprate need for replacement 40 year old vessels ect. I belive they were going milt-spec a tanker which was rather close to your intial proposal.

Soild stores transfere wasn't mentioned intialy as it was a mil spec tanker. Im not sure its in NZ interest to wait for the Aus replacment tanker program and would be better to get a replacement sooner. The RFA was mentioned as they will be buying quite a few vessels so their could be econmy of scale. Not sure about local content all could be buillt in NZ if it has facilities.
How much NZ content has been in joint contrats with AUS (curious). Commonality is overated for support vessels as they are significantly simpler than combat vessels and are primarly fitted with COTS equipment and are simple powerplant wise. The RFA managed without difficulty to added many diffrent merchi Tankers (and others) within days during the Falklands from the STUFT vessels. RAN crews should be able to adapt quickly to a diffrent class or AOR without significant challange.

I agree that Canada does need to replace their tankers. Unfortunately from what I read on the programme status from DID earlier this year, the programme is essentially stuck. The two firms short-listed for designs seem unable to achieve the sort of design Canada wants, in the qty desired for the budget offered. Canada wants 3 of the same JSS for ~C$2.9 bil. Of the competing firms, one seems to think only 2 can be developed and built within that budget. The seems to thinik it can deliver 3 vesselsl, they just cannot all be JSS... Given a variety of factors, I do not see the situation resolving itself in a the timeframe needed if NZ would to join with Canada in ordering a replenishment ship.

As for what NZ is looking for in a replacement for HMNZS Endeavour, I located the description here. I have quoted the important bits below.

Although thinking on the matter is ‘still embryonic’ Keating says the intention, in terms of capability, ‘is not to simply go for a one-for-one replacement of ENDEAVOUR. Indeed, for reasons including fit-out, training and logistic support it is preferable to replace ENDEAVOUR with a ‘joint support’ capability, he said.

Such a ship, where possible, would have a high degree of commonality with the new Multi-Role Vessel CANTERBURY, but it would carry more fuel and have a replenishment capability, a combination that would make her more versatile all round.

From the comments on a 'joint support capability' and what other navies and shipbuilders are working on towards 'joint support' I would interpret it as the NZDF desiring some sealift capability in the Endeavour replacement to augment the Canterbury. The second paragraph clearly indicates that the replacement needs to have more than just a refueling capability. This IMO is not surprising since larger organizations like the RFA or USN Sealift Command are large enough to be able to operate a number of ships in specialty roles. For New Zealand and even Australia, that is really not an option.

-Cheers

 

[Sea Toby]

Google Karel Doorman JSS and images. You should see a extended Canterbury with a tanker hull and replenishment rigs. The Dutch Navy is planning on building one, and the Canadians are considering this JSS instead. Should be cheap enough to build three, the magic number for Canada, with maybe enough left over for a true gator, a Mistral LHD with the 2.1 billion Canadian dollars....

While this Karel Doorman JSS isn't as gold plated as the TKKS German design, it should mostly fill Canada's requirements. A smaller version would fit New Zealand's requirements easily.....

Who thought a ship similar to the Canterbury would arise again? Maybe Australia might be interested too....

I think the problems with cost with the Canadians is military spec.... not commercial specs. Tankers shouldn't run close to a billion dollars each.....

 

[Todjaeger]

Google Karel Doorman JSS and images. You should see a extended Canterbury with a tanker hull and replenishment rigs. The Dutch Navy is planning on building one, and the Canadians are considering this JSS instead. Should be cheap enough to build three, the magic number for Canada, with maybe enough left over for a true gator, a Mistral LHD with the 2.1 billion Canadian dollars....

While this Karel Doorman JSS isn't as gold plated as the TKKS German design, it should mostly fill Canada's requirements. A smaller version would fit New Zealand's requirements easily.....

Who thought a ship similar to the Canterbury would arise again? Maybe Australia might be interested too....

I think the problems with cost with the Canadians is military spec.... not commercial specs. Tankers shouldn't run close to a billion dollars each.....

It was my understanding that the bidder who felt a 3-ship replenishment order was still 'doable' basically indicated that all three ships would be different. Something other than the requirement had been. Again, do not have info for that aside from the DID article.

As for costs... C$2.1 billion works out to approximately C$700 mil/per ship. A bit high perhaps, particularly something like a tanker, but it is possible part of the dollar determination had been based upon a stronger USD. Normally US$1 is ~ C$1.40, which would work out to around US$500 mil/per. For some reason that number sounds familar for something like this kind of project with design and development, etc.

-Cheers

 

[Sea Toby]

It was my understanding that the bidder who felt a 3-ship replenishment order was still 'doable' basically indicated that all three ships would be different. Something other than the requirement had been. Again, do not have info for that aside from the DID article.

As for costs... C$2.1 billion works out to approximately C$700 mil/per ship. A bit high perhaps, particularly something like a tanker, but it is possible part of the dollar determination had been based upon a stronger USD. Normally US$1 is ~ C$1.40, which would work out to around US$500 mil/per. For some reason that number sounds familar for something like this kind of project with design and development, etc.

-Cheers

I understand dollar conversions are up and down from day to day and year to year. Currently the Canadian dollar is worth 93 US cents....which is almost the same.... Two years ago the Canadian dollar was worth more than a US dollar....

There is no telling what Canada will do. Canada is rethinking the program. There is a requirement for three replenishment ships, but Canada could end up buying only two. Other nations have had the same costs problem too.

The British are building aircraft carriers to commercial standards, one would think Canada may decide to build their replenishment ships/sea lift ships to commercial standards as well.... While this won't necessarily allow the current design ships to fit the budget, going commercial would significantly reduce the difference....

 

[harryriedl]

I understand dollar conversions are up and down from day to day and year to year. Currently the Canadian dollar is worth 93 US cents....which is almost the same.... Two years ago the Canadian dollar was worth more than a US dollar....

There is no telling what Canada will do. Canada is rethinking the program. There is a requirement for three replenishment ships, but Canada could end up buying only two. Other nations have had the same costs problem too.

The British are building aircraft carriers to commercial standards, one would think Canada may decide to build their replenishment ships/sea lift ships to commercial standards as well.... While this won't necessarily allow the current design ships to fit the budget, going commercial would significantly reduce the difference....

Ocean counts but the QE's are built to mil standards in conjunction with Lloyd's shipping using mil standards. So its not strictly true to say that they have been built to commercial standards.

Its more than likely that it will be built to commercial standards (im not sure but it might have been initially but CAN Gov balked at the cost of all the extras which they wanted. they were talking about a full C&C suit fitted plus the sea-lift and replenishment tasks) It makes sense for AOR vessels and the like to be built to commercial standards

 

[Sea Toby]

Ocean counts but the QE's are built to mil standards in conjunction with Lloyd's shipping using mil standards. So its not strictly true to say that they have been built to commercial standards.

Its more than likely that it will be built to commercial standards (im not sure but it might have been initially but CAN Gov balked at the cost of all the extras which they wanted. they were talking about a full C&C suit fitted plus the sea-lift and replenishment tasks) It makes sense for AOR vessels and the like to be built to commercial standards

When the British are cutting the thickness of the ship's steel 20 percent to save costs, in my mind they are building the ship to commercial standards. Having said that, I am sure the British will build these ships ammo magazines to military standards....

 

[harryriedl]

When the British are cutting the thickness of the ship's steel 20 percent to save costs, in my mind they are building the ship to commercial standards. Having said that, I am sure the British will build these ships ammo magazines to military standards....

Ive only heard that as from the news of the world which i doubt.

 

[swerve]

When the British are cutting the thickness of the ship's steel 20 percent to save costs, in my mind they are building the ship to commercial standards.....

If you believe the Screws of the World . . . . .

That claim has attracted a great deal of mirth elsewhere. Apparently, it's nonsense.

They are, as said, building them to military standards. They're being classed under Lloyd's Register Warship Rules, & some people mistake classification by Lloyd's or an equivalent for building to commercial standards. But that is becoming standard practice. All the leading class societies have devised warship rules, & many navies are now using them.

Warship Technology January 2009

 

[mattyem]

As mentioned elsewhere, the HMNZS Endeavour is due for replacement some time in the 2011-2013 timeframe. While mention has been made in some quarters for some form of JSS that can do sealift to a degree, in addition to replenishment, there has not seemed to be an RFP or RFT. With that having not occurred, and given the time it can take to chose a design, have construction commence and then do a workup for commissioning, I have my doubts as to whether or not Endeavour could be replaced with the desired sort of ship.

It occurred to me that it might be sensible for the RNZN to do something similar to what the RAN did when replacing HMAS Westralia. The RAN had purchased a Korean-built commercial tanker and then leased it for a few years until it was time to begin decommissioning the Westralia. The lease was then ended and the MV Delos underwent refit and was recommissioned as the HMAS Sirius (with a really ugly addition to her stern BTW). IIRC The HMAS Sirius is also intended to be replaced in the roughly 2020 timeframe with a purpose built naval oiler/replenishment vessel, after HMAS Success is replaced between 2015-2017. It might be sensible for the RNZN to join with the RAN in ordering whatever sort of vessel will be replacing either HMAS Success or HMAS Sirius. This seems particularly sensible if some form of joint unit is created which would be supported by both the ADF and NZDF.

Given that the RNZN appears to have too small a window to order a dedicated vessel before Endeavour needs replacing and she might not be able to continue in service long enough for the replacement of HMAS Success and HMAS Sirius other options would seem appropriate. What the RNZN might be able to do is purchase a new (or used) double-hulled tanker and have it fitted out to temporarily provide the needed fleet oiler. Then once the desired replenishment vessel is entering service, offer the temporary oiler for sale or lease.

Conducting the Endeavour replacement in this fashion might not be the least expensive option, but IMO would give the RNZN the best chance of getting the type of vessel it wants and needs without suffering a capability shortfall while the replacement is acquired.

-Cheers

just to note, im currently serving on the big easy (A11, endeavour) the rumor in the mill atm is leavinfg the fwd setup as is, cutting off the back half (engine spaces and such like) with an up graded approach. this will still meet requirements and carry us for another 8/10 years, and we all know the RNZN likes the cheap approach

 

[Gibbo]

just to note, im currently serving on the big easy (A11, endeavour) the rumor in the mill atm is leavinfg the fwd setup as is, cutting off the back half (engine spaces and such like) with an up graded approach. this will still meet requirements and carry us for another 8/10 years, and we all know the RNZN likes the cheap approach

Not sure what you mean here - what's the plan? Mind you, until we see the outcome of the defence review I wouldn't speculate on any equipment changes / puchases etc.

 

[Todjaeger]

Not sure what you mean here - what's the plan? Mind you, until we see the outcome of the defence review I wouldn't speculate on any equipment changes / puchases etc.

I second that about not being sure of the meaning. I was under the impression that one of the drivers to replace the Endeavor is that it is a single-hulled oiler/tanker and due to a design to conform to treaty requirements (Marpol?) that tankers are to be double-hulled. I do recall one proposal was to upgrade the Endeavor to make it into a double-hulled vessel. I am not sure if that is what you are speaking of, or something else entirely different. Any possibility of a clarification?

-Cheers

 

[Gibbo]

just to note, im currently serving on the big easy (A11, endeavour) the rumor in the mill atm is leavinfg the fwd setup as is, cutting off the back half (engine spaces and such like) with an up graded approach. this will still meet requirements and carry us for another 8/10 years, and we all know the RNZN likes the cheap approach

Actually perhaps you should have more faith in your senior officers - I guarantee you it's not that the RNZN likes the cheap approach, it's that the Govt likes it! I guarantee the RNZN wouldn't turn down a brand-spanking new top-spec tanker! Their expectations are naturally tempered by the tight-fisted politicians that pull senior officers strings!

 

[Norm]

HMNZS Kahu to be paid off.

Actually perhaps you should have more faith in your senior officers - I guarantee you it's not that the RNZN likes the cheap approach, it's that the Govt likes it! I guarantee the RNZN wouldn't turn down a brand-spanking new top-spec tanker! Their expectations are naturally tempered by the tight-fisted politicians that pull senior officers strings!

Navy to set sail with new ships - national | Stuff.co.nz

RNZN - KAHU

Apparently like all Government Departments , Defence spending savings are being sought, its well known that the Police have to find $23M . Defence has to find $50M I've been told ,(seems to be $40M savings factored in the budgets posted on the NZDF web site ) so I'm not sure what's what.Anyhow although Kahu is very useful as a training ship (finally got a second .50 cal mount) its a gonner , doing its little bit to meet the savings goal.Bit hard to argue for it when you have 4 nice new IPV's.

 

[Twickiwi]

Protector class

[Defence has to find $50M I've been told ,(seems to be $40M savings factored in the budgets posted on the NZDF web site ) so I'm not sure what's what.Anyhow although Kahu is very useful as a training ship (finally got a second .50 cal mount) its a gonner , doing its little bit to meet the savings goal.Bit hard to argue for it when you have 4 nice new IPV's.

Is there any word on the outcome of the review of the OPVs?

 

[Sea Toby]

Is there any word on the outcome of the review of the OPVs?

I was under the impression the OPVs would be delivered by the end of this year, 2009.

 

[Gibbo]

Navy to set sail with new ships - national | Stuff.co.nz

RNZN - KAHU

Apparently like all Government Departments , Defence spending savings are being sought, its well known that the Police have to find $23M . Defence has to find $50M I've been told ,(seems to be $40M savings factored in the budgets posted on the NZDF web site ) so I'm not sure what's what.Anyhow although Kahu is very useful as a training ship (finally got a second .50 cal mount) its a gonner , doing its little bit to meet the savings goal.Bit hard to argue for it when you have 4 nice new IPV's.

Pity the Kahu's going - short notice so obviously to meet Govt spending cuts.:sniper Expect no replacement! She's getting long in the tooth but she's valuable as the backup diving tender for when Manawanui is unavailable, so my only hope is they manage to get one of the other vessels to fill in as backup diving tender. I'm not sure but isn't her decompression chamber a smaller 'mobile' one?

 

[Gibbo]

Is there any word on the outcome of the review of the OPVs?

Still officially 'under mediation' AFAIK. Similarly no word on Canterbury's $20M 'do up' for same reason I believe.