Grow up mate.
Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Padman
- Start date
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Hmm, I'm not sure what this has to do with discussing/understanding previous and future plans on acquiring ships for the RNZN (nor is it a good way to diss contributors from Australia/UK for example, whom have much insight on these matters, and thanks to them keep us abrest on new technologies that may be applicable to NZ needs, for there is a total lack of discussion and analysis on these issues in the general media etc. And I don't see any whinging from anyone here, eh).
Anyway your statement about NZ ANZACS being there to defend NZ and its interests, is indeed the case. However pause to think also that it is in NZ's interests (economic and wellbeing) that Australia is defended - an Australia under attack or threatened means NZ's economic properity will be directly affected. Indeed it is recognised by (NZ) Defence and Govt that if someone does attack Australia successfully, then NZ will be attacked to. That's why NZ trains and interoperates with our cuzzies across the ditch and so forth. The arguement to be had perhaps is to what extent NZ pulls its weight.
Right on the money Recce. While it isn't for NZ to defend Oz, Oz is a continent-sized shield for NZ. NZ's interest in contributing to Oz's security (for entirely selfish ends) isn't well understood anywhere in Australasia. Ozzies tend to see NZ's potential to contribute as marginal, which sort of lets NZ off the hook.
I have a feeling over the next 25 years the US navy will have to focus on what strategic capability it must have rather than, as we have been used to since Reagan, the US navy having any capability it deems desireable (just look at the NASA decision today) . In this situation, more will be required of other Pacific players (Australia, Japan, Korea) to shore up or lend a hand. This will have a knock on effect on the likes of NZ to step up, where before there was a nice free ride.
The economies of scale in short run ship building programs lead Oz/NZ into the off-the-shelf Meko 200 decision and I see the financial pressure to share programs between allies will only increase. If you add in the significance of data sharing systems to the effectiveness of naval fleets, the push for commonality in platform and systems will funnel NZ's procurement options toward Oz's and partners.
One could see this as a surrender of sovereignty; a kind of re-colonialisation. Or you can see it as conditions forcing our allies to take NZ seriously as a defence partner, where once it was seen as a colonial hangover irrelevance to be sold second hand half way to obsolesence frigates (I'm sure I will get flamed for impugning Leanders-mea culpa).
Oh and Tom Tom- bite me.
Latest on OPV
This was in the Otago Daily Times today. It also had one of the better photos I've seen of Otago at sea doing trials.
This was in the Otago Daily Times today. It also had one of the better photos I've seen of Otago at sea doing trials.
16 Feb - The ODT is now reporting that Otago will be in Dunedin before winter. An annoucement is due later this month. The ODT also states that the ships are lighter than first thought, but still heavier than planned, weight management will be an ongoing issue.
Last edited:
HMNZS Otago handover today 18 February 2010
Scoop: Navy Takes Delivery Of Offshore Patrol Vessel
Caught the news on the radio coming home tonight that at last HMNZS Otago has been handed over to the RNZN.So far Scoop NZ seems to be the first to post it on their web site.Due Devonport late March.
Scoop: Navy Takes Delivery Of Offshore Patrol Vessel
Finally the OPVs were accepted and delivered. Its about time, its been long overdue. I hope the weight issues will highlight the fact that these ships are patrol ships and will never be corvettes, now or in the future. Its also good to read that these ships as is will be effective patrolling the Southern Ocean. They were never icebreakers.
Too many fools have wanted them to be both icebreakers and corvettes. They aren't either.
Too many fools have wanted them to be both icebreakers and corvettes. They aren't either.
Yes this has snuck up on us unaware somewhat hasn't it!?! Great news!
I like many have suggested that they are under-armed as OPV, but yes on reflection they are specifically designed for constabulary tasks only & for that role they will be excellent.
As has been previously mentioned sea trails have shown them to be very stable & manouverable. I put money on them being popular with crews and ultimately considered highly successful. Weight management is certainly a unnecessary complication, but it is also very manageable with the right processes place.
The scoop article describes some of the military roles as MCM, Diving operations support, military hydrography. All roles currently performed by Resolution and Manawanui. Despite my yearning for a bigger gun it would appear that the weapons outfit is suitable for the roles being performed. It also raises the question as to whether Resolution and Manawanui will be replaced on a one for one basis.
I believe those two roles of a diving tender and mine hunting can be fulfilled using the OPVs work deck below the helicopter flight deck with modular equipment containers. I would prefer to buy at least one more OPV with one set of containers for those roles to get to a minimum flexibility. One OPV should be doing patrol work at all times, whereas the other roles can be filled with a second ship, with a third ship undergoing maintenance.
There have been discussions moving the hydrographic mission to a private enterprise outside of the navy. If so, than a fourth ship, not necessarily of this OPV class, could be purchased, outside of the navy. I doubt a proper echo sounder can be easily modularized... But if it can there wouldn't be a need to buy a fourth ship.
On the other hand mine hunting gear can be modularized, Other navies have a similar mindset with these roles too. New Zealand should be thinking in the same terms. Without doubt there would be savings with spare parts using a very similar ship design. Not to mention buying a total of three ships instead of four...
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Good news indeed and the Beehive release states that "Otago is due to arrive at the Devonport Naval Base on 26 March. The second OPV, Wellington, will be accepted in mid-April and arrive later that month".
A question for the ship designers out there etc, in regards to the OPV which will have some MCM, hydrography and diving operations support roles, the current vessels undertaking these roles (Manawanui and Resolution) both have bow thrusters. Not sure whether the OPV's have bow thrusters (I will assume not for discussion purposes), so the question is if the OPV's don't have them, how much of an issue will that be? Would the RNZN really be needing Manawanui and Resolution replacements with proper bow thrusters?
A question for the ship designers out there etc, in regards to the OPV which will have some MCM, hydrography and diving operations support roles, the current vessels undertaking these roles (Manawanui and Resolution) both have bow thrusters. Not sure whether the OPV's have bow thrusters (I will assume not for discussion purposes), so the question is if the OPV's don't have them, how much of an issue will that be? Would the RNZN really be needing Manawanui and Resolution replacements with proper bow thrusters?
Every website with characteristics listed say they do have one bow thruster, including Wiki. Its the IPVs that don't have bow thrusters.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Thanks Seatoby, I didn't think to check Wiki (just the RNZN site which didn't mention one) and yes you are correct - they have a bow thruster.
Wonder then if a third OPV will be acquired to replace Manawanui/Resolution...
Also this Wiki site Reference for Protector class OPV - Search.com if anyone is interested lists the crew rank structure for the OPV's. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protector_class_offshore_patrol_vessel
Wonder then if a third OPV will be acquired to replace Manawanui/Resolution...
Also this Wiki site Reference for Protector class OPV - Search.com if anyone is interested lists the crew rank structure for the OPV's. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protector_class_offshore_patrol_vessel
I agree with the need for one more OPV as a replacement for Resolution and Manawanui. Two ships (and this goes for the ANZAC's also) creates a risk in terms of operational capability and and policy failure. I've got no problem having these ships being used for the MCM / Survey role. Its simply a prudent use of resources.
As a side note I would have thought that the ROV's that the RNZN could carry out a survey role besides there core MCM role. The OPV and Canterbury are fitted with Obstacle sonar, I wonder how that would work in the survey role?
With respect guys I take a different approach. I do not actually want anymore Protector Class vessels built. I wish the OPV's to put in 10-15 years of hard service and then be paid off. I'm afraid we'll have to do some ad-hoc fleet planning for the next decade or so until we can get into the ANZAC II and OCV programme and get things finally done right. Building another OPV is just exacerbating the problems longer. Which means we need a tried and true MCM/Dive vessel over the short to medium replacement for the Manawanui and the Resolution.
For example the HMCS Summerside and Whitehorse are to be paid off this year as the Kingston Class is drawn down to 10 vessels. Both vessels have a good 15 years of service life ahead and are only as old as the current Anzacs. Not as quick as the IPV/OPV in a patrol pursuit but are good useful small naval ships and can do the survey role as they can be fitted with the high-frequency sidescan sonar towable survey unit. It would at least cover us until the time when the next generation of vessels are to be introduced.
Last edited:
With respect guys I take a different approach. I do not actually want anymore Protector Class vessels built. I wish the OPV's to put in 10-15 years of hard service and then be paid off. I'm afraid we'll have to do some ad-hoc fleet planning for the next decade or so until we can get into the ANZAC II and OCV programme and get things finally done right. Building another OPV is just exacerbating the problems longer. Which means we need a tried and true MCM/Dive vessel over the short to medium replacement for the Manawanui and the Resolution.
For example the HMCS Summerside and Whitehorse are to be paid off this year as the Kingston Class is drawn down to 10 vessels. Both vessels have a good 15 years of service life ahead and are only as old as the current Anzacs. Not as quick as the IPV/OPV in a patrol pursuit but are good useful small naval ships and can do the survey role as they are fitted with the high-frequency sidescan sonar towable survey unit. It would at least cover us until the time when the next generation of vessels are to be introduced.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
The Kingston-class MCDV could certainly provide some MCM support to the RNZN, as well as augment both the OPVs and IPVs in a patrol capacity as well. The primary issue as I understand it is that the vessels are somewhat hard on the crew, being fairly small vessels for the areas in which they patrol. To my knowledge, the ocean areas around South Island are similar to areas around Canada so they certainly could serve.
Another possibly candidate (at least for MCM) would be a USN Osprey-class MHC. I am uncertain if there are any currently available for sale, but the USN has been retiring these vessels early (after 10-15 years of service) and several have been sold to allied nations.
While I do not know exactly how well a MCM fitout would work in a survey role, I would imagine it would be significantly better than trying to kitout an OPV or IPV for that role.
It would also be nice for there to be a somewhat more thought out approach to RNZN purchases/replacements (and the NZDF as a whole as well...) Yes, the Project Protector fleet will certainly help the RNZN regain some lost patrol capability, and maintain some other capabilities, as well as adding a lift component. All together though, between the numbers purchases and their inherent capabilities, the RNZN could have gotten better IMO.
Hopefully the current and future governments will look at what is needed and make appropriate purchases to fill the needs.
-Cheers
Not acquiring another OPV would introduce another class of vessel increasing logistics and training costs for the RNZN. I think another OPV is the best option even if the design could do with some improvement. The only exception to this should be the surface combatants - can we really afford 2-3 at one time. I think a return to the 60-70's where we purchased one frigate at a time is a better (so long as its part of a batch production) approach. Consequently joint projects with the RN / RAN make sense. NZ might take the first, 10 and last ship out of a 20 ship project in order to spread the cost and allow for progressive upgrades to the design.
I agree with your comments, the NZ habit of buying ships on a adhoc basis as the old ships need replaced as caused problems and contributed to a reduction in the size of the Naval Combat Force, especially when the other services reequippment programs have to be considered by the government. Ideally New Zealand should be buying one ship every two years on a 30 year rolling program to spread the cost and burden to the taxpayers. Shifting to such a model, besides spreading the fiscal cost, would require an intermin solution that would see some vessels replaced early and other later than currently planned.
The other option for future replacement is 4 large OPV type hulls with identical engines and superstructures, but different weapon options, gun, air defence missles, CIWS, torpedo tubes etc and frigate type electronics, to replace the ANZACS and the other pair replacing the OPVs with just the gun and CIWS for example.
I just can't see a future NZ buying a ship as capable and expensive as a possible ANZAC II
I just can't see a future NZ buying a ship as capable and expensive as a possible ANZAC II
Steel is fairly cheap. There is not going to be a huge lot of difference in cost between a 140m vessel and a 100m vessel with the equipment level you have described. I would say the 140m vessel would more likely suit the Ocean conditions that a RNZN vessel is likely to face and the range required.
Basically the next Anzacs sound as though they are going to be "lower cost" (and I am being mildly ironic about this) of the more capable and sophisticated Hobarts. I actually cant see NZ not getting this class or similar because not to do so would be highly risky in the strategic sense.