Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[kiwipatriot69]

Because they were all built as part of "Project Protector"

You're lucky that HMNZS Canterbury isn't also called Protector Class, because it was similarly built as part of the project. Three different types, one class..

Very economical people, the Kiwis. It explains the use of one all purpose vowel too.

oldsig

Which is kind of ironic ,considering the lack of 'protection' those Opv and Ipv can offer, outside of scarering would be poachers from nicking fish ,especially since only in recent years the ipv have been deployed much.Ive mates that work the boats for sealord, they reckon they rarely see a RNZN ship around, its like spotting a mermaid.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

Ngati is there a need to replace the IPVs given their limited use to date? They appear to be good ships but not for the RNZN. Maybe they would be better utilized by a nation like Fiji. Maybe a lease could be arranged whereby Fiji pays for the operations of a couple of vessels and co mans them.

The next OPVs for the RNZN IMHO should have better Sea keeping, range and flexibility. In their constabulary role today the 25 mm Typhoon is OK but I think it would be short sighted to build and equip the second generation design without some better weapons and sensors. In this respect I can see an OPV being tasked to patrol waters where a frigate is overkill but there is still a need for effective firepower to dissuade an aggressor with less ability.

FFBNW should be a consideration. If Vard 7 100 is chosen, as proposed for the USCG, would the RNZN stay with the 57 mm? This caliber would be unique in the region. As would the 76 mm OTO Super Rapide which I think should be the minimum. The vessel could easily accommodate Seaceptor.

 

[MrConservative]

Very different indeed. Looks like a 40 mm on the bow similar to the RAN Arafura OPV.

Nice find Ngati as I didnt see that image on the website.

It seems the variant with the Kiwi markings is the updated ice capable 7-110 design that according to Chuck Hill's blog has a revised enclosed superstructure to patrol the “increasingly accessible Arctic” for the USCG. The older 7-110 design dates from the 2013 collaboration study by Eastern and Vard then proposed for the USCG.

My take is that the revised 7-110 version is in the mix for the SOPV as well as the 7-100 ICE. One has greater emphasis on ice (up to 1 metre) and the other is substantially faster (22.5kts versus 17kts). It comes down to what trade off they require.

 

[Calculus]

The RCN AOPS is the Vard 7-100-ICE, which I think is the better option for SOPV, because by the time we order one and start building it should be derisked. Also they have the VARD 7 100 - Vard Marine which would be an ideal replacement for the current Protector class OPVs. For the IPV replacement maybe the VARD 7 055 - Vard Marine or the VARD 7 065 - Vard Marine. Yes we await the DCP. They who wait also serve. The old service carry on - hurry up and wait.

True. However, the RCN AOPS (AOPV) is an enhanced version of the basic Vard design (Halifax Shipyard launches Canada’s lead Arctic and Offshore Patrol Vessel). The RCN vessels are 103.6 metres long (vice 98 for the Vard 7-100-ICE), and 6615 tons vice 6350 tons. The RCN vessels are also enhanced in that the bow is designed to Arctic PC4 standard, with the rest of the hull at PC5+ (vice PC5 for the entire hull on the Vard 7-100-ICE), thus allowing the RCN vessels to break through slightly thicker ice (120 cm vice 100 cm). The RCN ships also have fin stabilizers for rough open sea navigation as they have been designed to be used as OPVs in all climates. Those are the most obvious differences, but there are internal changes as well resulting from unique RCN operational and habitability requirements. Both vessels are designed for pretty extreme ice conditions, and either one would seem like good candidates for the RNZN.

This class has been somewhat controversial in Canada, mostly for its cost, but is nonetheless purpose-built for operation in arctic ice conditions, and will be a significant enhancement to Canada's ability to have a presence in the North.

Good overview here: Patrolling the High North: Canada’s Procurement of AOPS

Also, of interest, is there are 6 ships currently under contract (4 in various stages of construction) to the RCN, but Irving is reputedly looking to build 2 more in order to keep the shipyard "hot" until the start of the surface combatant project. The government is considering building these for the Coast Guard (Federal bureaucrats considering proposal to award Irving contracts for more Arctic coast guard ships), but the CCG is not that enthused as these vessels are not purpose built for ice breaking but rather for patrolling in extreme ice conditions. This is described here: Ice-capable Canadian Coast Guard ships could be both ‘a blessing and a curse’: expert

So, there may be opportunity for the RNZN to jump on those two ships still.

 

[Rob c]

When coming up with what is a suitable Opv for the RNZN to use in the Southern Ocean we will need to know what is the minimum hull length that is required in the Southern Ocean for the speed required. In WW2 the RN calculated that in the north Atlantic they required 20 knots and 12 knots cruise with a 300ft (90 mtr)hull length. I would suspect that the southern Ocean max wavelength would exceed the North Atlantic by a significant margin as it has a far greater west -east length for this to build up thus requiring a greater hull length. As to armament, there are cases on Utube of patrol ships sinking fishing vessels with a 25mm but the don't F--K with me effect of a bigger gun certainly helps.
We must keep in mind that the hole protector program was an extremely economically constrained , Helen Clark flight of fancy and her defence abilities or lack there of are well know, so total success was never going to happen.

 

[MrConservative]

When coming up with what is a suitable Opv for the RNZN to use in the Southern Ocean we will need to know what is the minimum hull length that is required in the Southern Ocean for the speed required. In WW2 the RN calculated that in the north Atlantic they required 20 knots and 12 knots cruise with a 300ft (90 mtr)hull length. I would suspect that the southern Ocean max wavelength would exceed the North Atlantic by a significant margin as it has a far greater west -east length for this to build up thus requiring a greater hull length. As to armament, there are cases on Utube of patrol ships sinking fishing vessels with a 25mm but the don't F--K with me effect of a bigger gun certainly helps.
We must keep in mind that the hole protector program was an extremely economically constrained , Helen Clark flight of fancy and her defence abilities or lack there of are well know, so total success was never going to happen.

Indeed. Two 85m vessels + four 55m vessels + the CY = NZ$500m budget = an extremely economically constrained and compromised project that was NOT "a sustainable defence force to meet New Zealand's needs."

I always remember the interview made by the late and always outspoken Capt Ian Bradley who knew a thing or two about naval ships on Larry Williams Drive on Newstalk ZB years ago after the OPV's were announced where he commented that anything less than 100m was folly in the Southern Ocean.

 

[CJohn]

It is interesting to note where the Norwegian Coast Guard is heading with Arctic patrol vessels in regard to RNZN requirements in the Southern Ocean.
From the Vard designed Svalbard which has led to the Canadian Harry Dewolf class.

Their project to build three new OPVs has led to what I believe is a Vard designed Vessel under program P6615 http://www.sms1835.no/arkiv/2014-08-27 New Coastal Guard Vessels - Status an Plans by Commander Odd Magne Nilsen.pdf

This is a big vessel design at 136 m x 13 m x 6.2 m with a light displacement of 7300 t and full displacement of 9800 t. Which would bring plenty of scope for future upgrade or multi roll operations.

I'm interested what others think of this specific design in a NZ context.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

That is a big vessel by any stretch. Thanks for that.

 

[ASSAIL]

Ngati is there a need to replace the IPVs given their limited use to date? They appear to be good ships but not for the RNZN. Maybe they would be better utilized by a nation like Fiji. Maybe a lease could be arranged whereby Fiji pays for the operations of a couple of vessels and co mans them.

The next OPVs for the RNZN IMHO should have better Sea keeping, range and flexibility. In their constabulary role today the 25 mm Typhoon is OK but I think it would be short sighted to build and equip the second generation design without some better weapons and sensors. In this respect I can see an OPV being tasked to patrol waters where a frigate is overkill but there is still a need for effective firepower to dissuade an aggressor with less ability.

FFBNW should be a consideration. If Vard 7 100 is chosen, as proposed for the USCG, would the RNZN stay with the 57 mm? This caliber would be unique in the region. As would the 76 mm OTO Super Rapide which I think should be the minimum. The vessel could easily accommodate Seaceptor.

I disagree with the assumption that the IPVs are “not for the RNZN”.
NZ sovereignty extends far greater into the Pacific islands than into the Southern Ocean and while recognising the need for a specialised ice capable OPV to protect resources, there is a greater soft power advantage by having a continuous NZ presence in her protectorates and nearby neighbours.
I’ve posted this view before but the IPVs provide a tangible expression of NZs interest in these islands.
I fear the only reason why this has not occurred regularly in the past, despite some recent patrols, is purely financial however, surely these deployments could be co funded by the Departments of Trade and Foreign Affairs if the Defence budget is diminished by their execution.

 

[Kiwigov]

I disagree with the assumption that the IPVs are “not for the RNZN”.
NZ sovereignty extends far greater into the Pacific islands than into the Southern Ocean and while recognising the need for a specialised ice capable OPV to protect resources, there is a greater soft power advantage by having a continuous NZ presence in her protectorates and nearby neighbours.
.

Yes, the recent deployment of an IPV to Fiji was a very tangible expression of assistance, as it reportedly included extensive sea training for Fijian personnel and lead to a lot more inspections of fishing vessels. It may also have helped cool tensions between Island States (viz, the reported stand-off between Tonga and Fiji over the Minerva Reef), given the RNZN's reputation.
The MFAT Pacific Reset should be expected to lead to more of these assistance and exchange operations, especially if NZ and Aust support an air surveillance capacity for the Island States (e.g. leasing a suitable turboprop, flown by RNZAF/RAAF aircrew).

 

[ASSAIL]

Yes, the recent deployment of an IPV to Fiji was a very tangible expression of assistance, as it reportedly included extensive sea training for Fijian personnel and lead to a lot more inspections of fishing vessels. It may also have helped cool tensions between Island States (viz, the reported stand-off between Tonga and Fiji over the Minerva Reef), given the RNZN's reputation.
The MFAT Pacific Reset should be expected to lead to more of these assistance and exchange operations, especially if NZ and Aust support an air surveillance capacity for the Island States (e.g. leasing a suitable turboprop, flown by RNZAF/RAAF aircrew).

Australia has already committed to a 30 year aerial surveillance capability for the Pacific.
The service is to be provided by contractors.



Press Release: Pacific leaders welcome state of the art aerial surveillance | Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA)

 

[Traveller]

Australia has already committed to a 30 year aerial surveillance capability for the Pacific.
The service is to be provided by contractors.



Press Release: Pacific leaders welcome state of the art aerial surveillance | Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA)

It will be interesting to see whether this is a new aircraft fit for purpose King Air 350ER Special Mission Aircraft - Naval Technology or a retired Equal to the task: 38 Squadron calls time - Australian Aviation .

 

[ASSAIL]

It will be interesting to see whether this is a new aircraft fit for purpose King Air 350ER Special Mission Aircraft - Naval Technology or a retired Equal to the task: 38 Squadron calls time - Australian Aviation .

They are two King Air 200 units fitted with high tech surveillance systems as reference in my link above (post #6851)

 

[Traveller]

They are two King Air 200 units fitted with high tech surveillance systems as reference in my link above (post #6851)

Well done that man, you spotted my deliberate mistake! How on earth did I miss that...thanks for the loop back.

 

[ngatimozart]

It is interesting to note where the Norwegian Coast Guard is heading with Arctic patrol vessels in regard to RNZN requirements in the Southern Ocean.
From the Vard designed Svalbard which has led to the Canadian Harry Dewolf class.

Their project to build three new OPVs has led to what I believe is a Vard designed Vessel under program P6615 http://www.sms1835.no/arkiv/2014-08-27 New Coastal Guard Vessels - Status an Plans by Commander Odd Magne Nilsen.pdf

This is a big vessel design at 136 m x 13 m x 6.2 m with a light displacement of 7300 t and full displacement of 9800 t. Which would bring plenty of scope for future upgrade or multi roll operations.

I'm interested what others think of this specific design in a NZ context.

Certainly an interesting looking ship and it's of similar size to Canterbury (Length: 131 m, Beam: 23.4 m, Draught: 5.4 m, displacement: 9,000 tonnes [full load]) except for having a significantly narrower beam of 13 m. It's ice classification is PC 6 the same as the Aotearoa, so would meet the requirement for operating in an around Antarctica. A good sized hangar and with room for two NH90 sized helos means that it could carry a Sprite and a UAV if need be, plus it appears to have an armoury in the hangar. The oil spill capability would be a good capability to have and the towing ability stated must be over and above a normal warship / coastguard ship towing capabilities, so that would be a good capability to have as well. Having eight weeks endurance, it theoretically could spend the summer in the region checking FFVs etc., with RAS from Aotearoa and / or refuelling and revictualling at Bluff then returning to the ice. When the ship is not down south it could be used for HADR missions, training and DOC work on Raoul Island and in the Sub Antarctic Islands etc. Definitely something that we should keep an eye on. Nice find.

 

[MrConservative]

Certainly an interesting looking ship and it's of similar size to Canterbury (Length: 131 m, Beam: 23.4 m, Draught: 5.4 m, displacement: 9,000 tonnes [full load]) except for having a significantly narrower beam of 13 m.

The beam of the Jan Mayen Class or P6615 is now 22m according to the link below after all it does have a twin hangar for NH90's. They are going to build three vessels with the project cost estimated at Eur550m or NZD$315m a vessel.

DefPost

It's ice classification is PC 6 the same as the Aotearoa, so would meet the requirement for operating in an around Antarctica. A good sized hangar and with room for two NH90 sized helos means that it could carry a Sprite and a UAV if need be, plus it appears to have an armoury in the hangar. The oil spill capability would be a good capability to have and the towing ability stated must be over and above a normal warship / coastguard ship towing capabilities, so that would be a good capability to have as well. Having eight weeks endurance, it theoretically could spend the summer in the region checking FFVs etc., with RAS from Aotearoa and / or refuelling and revictualling at Bluff then returning to the ice. When the ship is not down south it could be used for HADR missions, training and DOC work on Raoul Island and in the Sub Antarctic Islands etc. Definitely something that we should keep an eye on. Nice find.

The environmental protection and cleanup capability should have no problems politically in the virtue signalling sense. Will come with Saab's 9LV Fire Control System, Mk57 and also be pretty handy as an open waters patrol vessel.

 

[ngatimozart]

The beam of the Jan Mayen Class or P6615 is now 22m according to the link below after all it does have a twin hangar for NH90's. They are going to build three vessels with the project cost estimated at Eur550m or NZD$315m a vessel.

If we were smart we could try tacking one or two vessels on the end of their build.

The environmental protection and cleanup capability should have no problems politically in the virtue signalling sense.

Yep, and TBH it is a capability sorely lacking here.

Will come with Saab's 9LV Fire Control System, Mk57 and also be pretty handy as an open waters patrol vessel.

Agree regarding it as an open waters PV. TBH I'd rather we stuck to a single CMS because it saves a lot in the long run, so forget the SAAB 9LV and go with either the Lockheed CMS 330 or a cut down version of it if one exists. It just keeps things simpler and when push comes to shove that can make a big difference. Mount a 35 mm Millennium Gun up forward and a Typhoon mount with a 25 mm aft on top of the hangar, plus the usual manual 50 cal HB HMGs. Make sure it has Link 16 so if it has a Sprite etc., it can receive all the necessary data, video etc.

 

[Calculus]

TBH I'd rather we stuck to a single CMS because it saves a lot in the long run, so forget the SAAB 9LV and go with either the Lockheed CMS 330 or a cut down version of it if one exists.

It certainly does. The CMS on the RCN AOPV is a "light" version of CMS330, but light only in that as delivered it supports a subset of capabilities. The interface is identical to the full bore version.

 

[Catalina]

there is a greater soft power advantage by having a continuous NZ presence in her protectorates and nearby neighbours.
I’ve posted this view before but the IPVs provide a tangible expression of NZs interest in these islands.

I agree with ASSAIL. There is a mighty battle for influence going on in our front yard and the more forward presence we deploy the better please.

 

[40 deg south]

I agree with ASSAIL. There is a mighty battle for influence going on in our front yard and the more forward presence we deploy the better please.

Fortunately, at this stage it's a battle for diplomatic influence. There are plenty of non-military tools to consider; increased aid, educational scholarships targeting future leaders, guest worker programmes etc.

As this is a military forum, we tend to look first at military solutions. Ideally, NZ would use a multi-pronged approach, but if funds are tight (and they always are), other avenues might be considered to give better bang for buck.