Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[40 deg south]

Just an FYI about the wooden deck. Force fit between steel channel. No sealant. Regular removal to replace and clean up the paint job underneath. Better known as a sacrificial deck. Still slippery. Especially any painted surfaces.

Lots of interesting information in the last few posts for a landlubber like me.

Can someone explain the crane arrangement? There is a very large crane mounted about 2/3 of the way back from the bow, on one side of the ship. Why not centre-mount it so the vessel maintained better balance when the crane has a load?

Is the upright post near the rear of the vessel simply a support for the crane when in 'rest' position, or is it part of another smaller crane?

Apologies in advance if these are incredibly stupid questions!

 

[40 deg south]

If you bought a license from OMT you wouldn’t be buying the quite a bit different now Arrowhead 140. OMT haven’t managed to sell any Ivers to anyone despite many years trying. If we bought Arrowhead it would make sense to buy it from the production line which will have built 5 of them, so should be able to knock out 2/3 for NZ efficiently and quickly.

KiwiRob
Can you give any indication of how the Iver design has been modified to form the Arrowhead 140?

Given the possibility that Indonesia will buy a couple of Ivers direct from OMT (see the Indonesia thread), it would be interesting to get an idea of how different they would be to the Arrowhead if it is selected for Type 31.

 

[alexsa]

Lots of interesting information in the last few posts for a landlubber like me.

Can someone explain the crane arrangement? There is a very large crane mounted about 2/3 of the way back from the bow, on one side of the ship. Why not centre-mount it so the vessel maintained better balance when the crane has a load?

Is the upright post near the rear of the vessel simply a support for the crane when in 'rest' position, or is it part of another smaller crane?

Apologies in advance if these are incredibly stupid questions!

Lots of smaller vessels have offset cranes. For small feeder cargo vessels these generally operate across the deck, that is the cargo is landed or recovered on the opposite side of the crane base. This means you have access to the whole cargo deck without having to have a slew radius of more than 180 degrees. It also means all the forces are applied across the centroid and the shift of the centre of gravity is less than if you had a centre line crane and you picked up a heavy load on the port side and discharged it on the Wharf on the starboard side the shit of forces is much greater (you still have to be careful to calculate change of CoG for very heavy lifts. It does mean you are restricted to operating with one particular side to the wharf when they operate cargo.

The crane should be heave compensated if it is intended to operate offshore

 

[Novascotiaboy]

40 degsouth that post is just a support. The ship also has multiple Palfinger folding cranes in addition to the main large crane.

The size of the working deck will be a very welcome addition to the Navy Divers. A very spacious vessel. Will be interested to see interior photos once it arrives in NZ.

Looks great so far.

 

[ngatimozart]

KiwiRob
Can you give any indication of how the Iver design has been modified to form the Arrowhead 140?

Given the possibility that Indonesia will buy a couple of Ivers direct from OMT (see the Indonesia thread), it would be interesting to get an idea of how different they would be to the Arrowhead if it is selected for Type 31.

From what I read of the Babcock Type 31e literature it is generally the same except that STANFLEX is not offered, although eight deck mounted box launched SSM are and customer specific systems offered. It is still a CODAD propulsion system. In the NZ context, we could add Sea Ceptor in the ExLS VLS leaving the 32 Mk-41 VLS for other missiles such as SM-2 / 6, ASROC, LRASM, etc. There has been suggestion on various fora of adding a GT to the propulsion system, but I don't know if advantages would outweigh the costs total costs. It wouldn't necessarily increase speed through the water, because the hulls' vmax could already be achieved with its current CODAD propulsion system.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

Is the new twin arm lift intended for one of the REA boats Takapu or Tarapunga? These boats are only six or so years old so they would have lots of life in them.

 

[RegR]

Is the new twin arm lift intended for one of the REA boats Takapu or Tarapunga? These boats are only six or so years old so they would have lots of life in them.

SMB Adventure was the usual accompanying vessel for Reso so most likely be for that. The new Man comparitively has deck space for days though so could literally take all options if need be.

 

[40 deg south]

Thanks all - very informative.

Second New Zealand Navy frigate arrives in Canada for combat system upgrades

NZ now officially has a no-frigate navy until Te Kaha comes out of refit (towards the end of this year, I assume?). Hard to believe she has already been in Canada for a year.

 

[John Fedup]

Te Kaha’s upgrade should be just about complete according to the link (10 months duration started in March 2018?)

 

[Gibbo]

SMB Adventure was the usual accompanying vessel for Reso so most likely be for that. The new Man comparitively has deck space for days though so could literally take all options if need be.

The logical thing is the REA boats or Adventure but not much is heard about them, particularly the REA boats. However the earlier images (artist impressions, not photos) showed a completely new RHIB with cabin like boat which I assumed was for use when deploying detached divers or REMUS AUV.

Dunno...final answer!

 

[seaspear]

I have read of the views of the type 31e being a candidate for the R.N.Z. N ,I can understand that New Zealand has to get value for money and any ship has to meet standards as well ,my concern is that the type 31 is being designed to a very cheap budget and corners may be cut , by which I meanbuilt to commercial standards , and if this type of ship will have a lifespan similar to the Anzac class

 

[John Fedup]

I don’t see the T31 as value for money when the RN is only planning to build 5 of them compared to the RN/RAN/RCN build of 30 plus T26s. Surely tagging on to one of these T26 builds and perhaps kit it out with less expensive electronics will be a better investment for a requirement that needs to be viable for 35+ years? The other option that might make sense is the USN’s FF(X) frigate program which will see about 20 ships being built.

 

[ngatimozart]

I have read of the views of the type 31e being a candidate for the R.N.Z. N ,I can understand that New Zealand has to get value for money and any ship has to meet standards as well ,my concern is that the type 31 is being designed to a very cheap budget and corners may be cut , by which I meanbuilt to commercial standards , and if this type of ship will have a lifespan similar to the Anzac class

NZ would be better avoiding any UK link at all, dealing direct with OMT and acquiring a licence to the Iver Huitfeldt design and having the ships built in a South Korean yard, fitted out to NZ specs. Would work out cheaper in the long run. The original ships were built to military specs but built using commercial practices in the OMT yard (now defunct) The design also includes commercial practices which makes the Iver Huitfeldt FFG class easier and cheaper to operate, maintain and upgrade.

I don’t see the T31 as value for money when the RN is only planning to build 5 of them compared to the RN/RAN/RCN build of 30 plus T26s. Surely tagging on to one of these T26 builds and perhaps kit it out with less expensive electronics will be a better investment for a requirement that needs to be viable for 35+ years? The other option that might make sense is the USN’s FF(X) frigate program which will see about 20 ships being built.

Politically the RAN build would be the one to watch because some will see NZ acquisition of Australian built ships as being part of the AU-NZ defence relationship and wider relationship between the countries. Canberra would see such acquisition as NZ taking defence AND the AU - NZ relationship seriously IF NZ acquired three or more frigates without any reduction of the ships capabilities. However NZ would have to basically sign cast iron guarantees that it would stick to its agreements and if I were Canberra I would ensure that there was a very hefty financial penalty for any Kiwi pollie back tracking - AU$1 billion as a start point comes to mind.

NZ would also be able to take advantage of the RAN continual build program meaning that both countries would be in lockstep. The advantage of this is that a minimum of 12 ships would be built and build costs really come down from ship nine onwards. The ANZAC build was 10 and they were built on time, under budget, with ships 9 and 10 very cheaply. The funding that would normally be spent on a MLU could be put towards the replacement so that is the advantage of a continual build.

The USN FFX is another option as well. If the USN go with the T26 then that adds to the RN / RAN / RCN group and I think that the NZG would have to serious give a T26 variant very serious consideration because basically it will be a FEYES frigate. It's two thirds of the way there now and the P-8 is is now basically the FEYES MPA / MMA. In NZG terms the FFG have the same same status as the P-3K2 / P-8 - strategic national assets, so if three or four FEYES partner navies have a T26 variant, that would carry serious weight with Wellington.

 

[seaspear]

The R.A.N build program for the Hunter class concludes around 2040 before the replacement program of the Hobart class this may mean changes to the shipyard itself to increase production for export purposes
If N.Z were to look at the City class built in the U.K it might be possible to be included in that production run as the City class is also cheaper than the Hunter class I say that because commentators there claim the Hunter class is better equipped
But of course it may come back to what sort of expenditure is available , the timeline , this may come out in some white paper which becomes filed in the round filing cabinet of course

 

[Redlands18]

NZ would be better avoiding any UK link at all, dealing direct with OMT and acquiring a licence to the Iver Huitfeldt design and having the ships built in a South Korean yard, fitted out to NZ specs. Would work out cheaper in the long run. The original ships were built to military specs but built using commercial practices in the OMT yard (now defunct) The design also includes commercial practices which makes the Iver Huitfeldt FFG class easier and cheaper to operate, maintain and upgrade.

Politically the RAN build would be the one to watch because some will see NZ acquisition of Australian built ships as being part of the AU-NZ defence relationship and wider relationship between the countries. Canberra would see such acquisition as NZ taking defence AND the AU - NZ relationship seriously IF NZ acquired three or more frigates without any reduction of the ships capabilities. However NZ would have to basically sign cast iron guarantees that it would stick to its agreements and if I were Canberra I would ensure that there was a very hefty financial penalty for any Kiwi pollie back tracking - AU$1 billion as a start point comes to mind.

NZ would also be able to take advantage of the RAN continual build program meaning that both countries would be in lockstep. The advantage of this is that a minimum of 12 ships would be built and build costs really come down from ship nine onwards. The ANZAC build was 10 and they were built on time, under budget, with ships 9 and 10 very cheaply. The funding that would normally be spent on a MLU could be put towards the replacement so that is the advantage of a continual build.

The USN FFX is another option as well. If the USN go with the T26 then that adds to the RN / RAN / RCN group and I think that the NZG would have to serious give a T26 variant very serious consideration because basically it will be a FEYES frigate. It's two thirds of the way there now and the P-8 is is now basically the FEYES MPA / MMA. In NZG terms the FFG have the same same status as the P-3K2 / P-8 - strategic national assets, so if three or four FEYES partner navies have a T26 variant, that would carry serious weight with Wellington.

I think the biggest issue for NZ is that the 3 T26 classes are not really 1 for 1 replacements for the 2 NZ Anzacs, they are in a very different League, offering far more capability and come with a price to match and could be a difficult sell for future NZ Navy Chiefs.
There will be plenty of people in NZ who will be saying why do we need a 8000t+ Frigate when there are plenty of good 5000t+ Frigates on the Market.

 

[alexsa]

The R.A.N build program for the Hunter class concludes around 2040 before the replacement program of the Hobart class this may mean changes to the shipyard itself to increase production for export purposes
If N.Z were to look at the City class built in the U.K it might be possible to be included in that production run as the City class is also cheaper than the Hunter class I say that because commentators there claim the Hunter class is better equipped
But of course it may come back to what sort of expenditure is available , the timeline , this may come out in some white paper which becomes filed in the round filing cabinet of course

What changes would be required to the shipyard? The design is for a module production line. I may be practical to increase the drum beat of the process to add additional hulls as the modules can be constructed in parallel. Ordering long lead items would be necessary. Until we see the yard in operation it would be inappropriate to try and determine what its output potential is.

 

[seaspear]

Coming back to cost ,the latest estimate for the U.S.N replacement frigate program is 800 million U.S per ship
The Navy's Future Frigates Are Shaping Up To Be More Lethal And Capable, As Well As Cheaper

 

[beegee]

Coming back to cost ,the latest estimate for the U.S.N replacement frigate program is 800 million U.S per ship
The Navy's Future Frigates Are Shaping Up To Be More Lethal And Capable, As Well As Cheaper

There's no way in hell any NZ government is going to spend NZ$2.3 billion on two frigates.

 

[MrConservative]

There's no way in hell any NZ government is going to spend NZ$2.3 billion on two frigates.

Just like there is no way in hell any NZ government is going to spend NZ$2.3 Billion on four P-8A Poseidon's and NZ$1.15 billion on Anzac upgrades and a new tanker to support them ..... hang on a minute.

 

[beegee]

Just like there is no way in hell any NZ government is going to spend NZ$2.3 Billion on four P-8A Poseidon's and NZ$1.15 billion on Anzac upgrades and a new tanker to support them ..... hang on a minute.

This is such a specious argument. Surely you understand why the government will spend money on certain capabilities and be reluctant to spend on other capabilities?

The funny thing is you're the one who posted the helicopter options the military wanted only to have the government fund only 8 NH90s, the cheapest, bare minimum capability.