Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Padman
- Start date
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Hard to say exactly, but hard enough I would expect, particularly if they are to be kept in service until the mid-2030's, after having been laid down about 40 years earlier. In terms of construction history, the RNZN frigates were the second and fourth out of the ten ANZAC-class frigates laid down, launched and commissioned. One real danger is that even with the upgrades completed in Canada a few years ago, the Kiwi frigates' capabilities might no longer be sufficient for some areas of operation and I would anticipate this would only increase over the next decade or so.
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
They are very expensive, probably because they are full Frigates with a lot of FFBNW.
If you just want OPV's, these are not the ships for New Zealand.
Not that it matters, but they are also extremely ugly in my opinion.
NZ doesn't need OPV current versions are poorly equipped could hardly handle conditions in Southern ocean undersized tonnage. What I trying to say need modular ships that can scale up and down to suit the conditions that have operate in Danish navy being doing for years small navy like us probably for not much longer thanks to Trump ambitions.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I do not really see this as being particularly viable. If NZ were to go for OPV's, or at least more/new OPV's to replace the existing OPV's at some point, there are likely much better options in terms of affordability. If memory serves, the current Protector-class OPV's cost about NZD$110 mil. around 2004, but going by the terms of a recent Indonesian contract to purchase a pair of Thaon di Revel-class OPV's for €1.18 bil. which works out to NZD$2.25 bil. for two vessels which is certainly in the realm of frigate pricing. Now even if these vessels for Indonesia are more of a frigate vs. OPV fitout, I cannot see a vessel based off this class being able to get a non-frigate fitout to be priced competitively vs. a normal OPV build and fitout.
If NZ were to get OPV's they should order proper OPV's designed for the conditions needed. By the same token, if buying frigates, order proper frigates whilst also keeping in mind the idea that having a fitout which works well with likely allies and is relatively easy to support in the Pacific. With that in mind, a reliance upon Sylver VLS and Aster missiles for air defence would likely be less wise than fitting Mk 41 VLS and then adopting and integrating something like ESSM Block II, something from the Standard missile family or candidates from comparable S. Korean or Japanese missiles.
Also in terms of numbers, yes the RNZN has been running two and two, but it has also shown that these numbers are not really sufficient to meet potential capability needs. There were periods of time when the RNZN had no warships either on deployment or available for deployment. Fortunately nothing happened during that time where NZ or any ally needed the RNZN to send a frigate, but in a more uncertain and insecure future this would most likely not be true.
My personal preference would be for the RNZN to opt for four frigates, to provide boosted numbers and potentially increased availability. Depending on what the RAN selects for SEA 3000, there could be options here and I would not dismiss a joint programme, but I would also be okay with NZ opting for a different but comparable design. Perhaps of greater importance is that I do not think NZ can wait a decade before the new frigates can start entering service, so there is a bit of a time crunch to get selections made and contracts signed.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Personally I think it would be good (or at least there is the potential for it to be good, never, ever, ever underestimate the abilities of politicians and bureaucrats to stuff things up) if NZ were to adopt some measure of modular ship systems much like the Danes have been using for years now. Possibly even to the point of licensing some of the system designs and joint development of new modules. This could enable RNZN warships to be built with a base fitout, but also then be able to be 'up-armed' by fitting certain modules depending on what role is called for and/or what area of ops a vessel will deploy to or have to transit through.
I would keep this separate and distinct from any OPV effort though as some of what makes OPV's viable does not really lend itself to modularity so much. Typically an OPV is going to be built more towards commercial standards and not some of the naval standards used for warships. This difference enables a ship to built at less cost, but also not have some of the redundancy and survivability features included, or even noise reduction and isolation to make sonar more effective. All of this costs money. Another area with a large different is with not only the weapons fitout, but also the sensors and shipboard electronics. IIRC something like a third to half the acquisition cost of a new, modern warship will typically come from the sensors, CMS and shipboard electronics, whilst an OPV will typically have a minimal sensor and electronics fitout since much of the intended role does not require such capabilities. After all, why spend the coin so a ship can perform volume air/surface searches and obtain 3D targeting data when the vessel has no ability to directly do anything with such information? Now for a ship fitted to take various mission modules, the base ship design would need to include space for the modules, sensors to make using the modules possible (i.e. sonar system for an ASW module, etc.) as well as space in the CIC or bridge for a station to control/use the module, as well as all the necessary computers, electronics, power, cooling and networking needed for everything to connect and work together.
Combo of Type 31(GPF) + Type 32(Multirole GPF/OPV) if based on the same/similar hull makes too much sense for nz.
Range 9,000nm, significantly more than the current Anzac and other future options.
Crew 110, significantly less than the current Anzac and roughly the same as future options.
Armament 32 cells(GPF) and 16 cells(MNP), 4x and 2x the current Anzac.
Proven performance in high sea state.
Mission Flexibility, more than any other future option.
Size of the platform allows for future upgrades.
MNP variant = OPV also + commonality with GPF variant and redundancy for when in maintenance or upgrades.
Easy purchase off the Type 31 production line following the u.k order (2032-2035) 3 or 4.
Range 9,000nm, significantly more than the current Anzac and other future options.
Crew 110, significantly less than the current Anzac and roughly the same as future options.
Armament 32 cells(GPF) and 16 cells(MNP), 4x and 2x the current Anzac.
Proven performance in high sea state.
Mission Flexibility, more than any other future option.
Size of the platform allows for future upgrades.
MNP variant = OPV also + commonality with GPF variant and redundancy for when in maintenance or upgrades.
Easy purchase off the Type 31 production line following the u.k order (2032-2035) 3 or 4.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
The Type 31 might work as a replacement for the Kiwi ANZAC-class frigates, though the timeframe when they might be available is IMO rather questionable unless either UK yards could accelerate production, or the design could be built overseas in S. Korean or Japanese yards or some similar sort of arrangement. The Type 32 frigate is at this point more vapourware than anything else. As of 9 January of this year, the Type 32 frigate programme is still in the concept phase pending review as reported here.
With the Type 32 still being in the concept phase, there is no information on when the design will be completed or what it's capabilities are going to be, never mind when construction will start or the first units would get delivered to the RN. This means that we have no idea on whether the design would be suitable for the RNZN, or when NZ could get it into service. Also if the Type 32 is designed and built as a frigate, even if only armed like an OPV, that is still going to be a significantly more expensive vessel than an OPV typically is.
To provide some other context beyond the price NZ paid for OPV's under Project Protector, the UK sold Brazil three OPV's that were a variant of the River-class OPV back in 2012 for a sum of £133 mil which works out to ~NZD$112 mil. The reason I bring this up is that if there is any question about NZ being ready, willing and able to order and pay for proper replacements to the current frigates, then it makes very little sense for people to think NZ would be willing to pay frigate prices for OPV capabilities.
If the type 32 goes ahead, the options put forward early were the MNP variant of the Arrowhead 140 or BAEs Adaptable strike Frigate.
BAEs chances are less now because of the potential Norway order of Type 26 and the future type 83. Babcock is easily the favourite, an existing design and an easy transition from the type 31.
Not a chance in hell they transfer the build over to a Japanese or Korean yard.
The cost of the Type 31 and Type 32 will be alot less if they build more hulls.
The timeline for delivery is perfect for nz -2032 to 2035 for the Type 31(when Anzacs need replacing). opv replacement later on.
The core crew requirements, aimed at just 50-60.
Last edited:
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
However, with the Type 32 currently existing only as a concept, whatever options raised early might not resemble the final product if and when it gets completed. This means that we lack any sort of clarity on what the capabilities will actually be, what the costs involved are, or when they would become available.If the type 32 goes ahead, the options put forward early were the MNP variant of the Arrowhead 140 or BAEs Adaptable strike Frigate.
BAEs chances are less now because of the potential Norway order of Type 26 and the future type 83. Babcock is easily the favourite, an existing design and an easy transition from the type 31.
Not a chance in hell they transfer the build over to a Japanese or Korean yard.
The cost of the Type 31 and Type 32 will be alot less if they build more hulls.
The timeline for delivery is perfect for nz -2032 to 2035 for the Type 31(when Anzacs need replacing). opv replacement later on.
The core crew requirements, aimed at just 50-60.
As for the Type 31... In 2021 it was expected they would all be in service by February 2030. Right now three have been reported as being in varying stages of construction with two having been laid down and it appears the expectation is that it will be about a four to five year process from cutting first steel through to commissioning. If all the Type 31's are in service in 2030. Where a likely wrinkle comes up in terms of availability of yards involves the potential for the yards building the Type 31 to transition over to building the Type 32 once the Type 31 build is complete. Should that happen (and it appears the gov't expects Type 32's will be also be built in Scotland) then it is quite possible that the Babcock yard in Rosyth would become occupied with the Type 32 order for the RN. Pretty much the only way I see NZ being able to get Type 31's in the timeframe needed to meet a mid-2030's replacement would be if BAE facilities in Glasgow, currently occupied with the Type 26, end up getting the nod for the Type 32, or that NZ places an order for Type 31 frigates either now or in the very near future.
Those OPVs were built to a contract from Trinidad & Tobago, for its coast guard, & two were complete & the third launched when after the 2010 general election the new government cancelled the order, IIRC claiming that the ships were not suitable for the coast guard's needs. That wasn't an unreasonable claim, I think, & the order had been controversial from the start. T&T bought some smaller vessels in their place. But that left BAE with three ships & no customer, & I think it was willing to sell them for a bargain price, to get a quick sale.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
IIRC the contracted order from Trinidad & Tobago had an original price of £150 mil. for the three, or £50 mil. each, which is the actual cost that I used when with when estimating the cost per OPV at NZD$112.55 mil. each, which again is approximately the same a what NZ paid under Project Protector for the OPV's, which were ~NZD$110 mil. each. Either way, the cost of an OPV should be significantly less than that of a proper warship, even for a corvette of comparable size like a Braunschweig-class/K130 corvette which cost €400 mil. in 2017.
If one bothers to adjust for inflation, that same €400 mil. corvette would now be over €510 mil. and at current conversion rates would work out to ~NZD$973 mil.
The basic point I have been trying to make, possibly without success, is that there are significant cost and capability differences between OPV's and properly fitted warships and that these differences exist for a reason. Eventually, NZ will need to decide what they want and are willing to pay for.
I believe so, when the MRH90 conducted trials, it was at its max embarked operating weight of 10,600kgs. HMAS Anzac Completes MRH90 Multi-Role Helicopter Trials
kiwi in exile
Well-Known Member
I used to think if we were to go to a four frigate navy you could do something like this: A mix of 2 higher spec arrowheads as frigates and then 2 lower spec arrowheads (MNP or just a FFBNW standard 140) initially as OPVs then upgrade them to full frigae fit out, once you have acquired some actual OPVs. Part of the reason for this was the versatility of the arrowhead 140 design (GP and MNP). and small crew size. This would allow our 'OPVs" to do MCM, hydrographic survey, and support NZG agencies wider activities within the Realm. But I think TJ is probably correct about the price difference between OPVs and light frigate hulls. whatever we get as ultimately OPVs, they should have the ability to patrol from the Pacific to the Southern Ocean and fulfill a these other kinds of roles.
Yes it’s about what expectations government wants from its defences.
The Ocean going OPV concept would free up funds for the Airforce and Army
More P8s and other platforms
Land based Sam and SSM capabilities.
It’s a compromise solution working with the reality of future underfunding
Not my first choice
But a reluctant proposition
Cheers S
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I will agree that going with an all OPV naval patrol force would be a compromise, but I would disagree that it would be a solution of any sort.
After all, if the RNZN were to find itself without any naval combat forces, NZ would be incapable of escorting vessels and would be forced to rely upon friends/allies.
The entirety of the NZDF's ASuW and ASW capabilities would rest upon the P-8 Poseidons and possibly any armed naval helicopters, if there were to get acquired. Also, if the RNZN is left without surface combatants, the utility and value of naval helicopters like the MH-60R 'Romeo' Seahawk or NFH90 is significantly if not entirely diminished, which in turn would mean it would make little sense spending so much coin on a platform where 80% of the capabilities cannot be utilized.
From my POV, GBAD and land-based AShM would be an expensive way to waste significant coin, coin that the NZDF has never had enough of over the last 30+ years. Such capabilities would really only possibly become useful if NZ were to get directly threatened or attacked following an outbreak of hostilities. Even if NZ were to suddenly become a target though, these land-based systems would also need to be positioned somewhere within NZ where both the sensors could detect and track potential targets, and the launched missiles could then hit those targets. A unit based in Auckland would be of little use in defending Wellington, never mind anywhere on South Island. By the same token, if there was a unit based in/near Christchurch, then Auckland would not be covered, never mind ports and harbours further north like Whangaroa or Whangarei.
Also, any land-based units would be worth SFA in keeping the SLOC to NZ open and/or protecting essential merchant marine shipping traffic like tankers. All a hostile force would need to do would be to intercept or interdict NZ-bound tankers say 300 n miles away from NZ ports and NZ would be effectively unable to do anything about it. All the while Kiwi petroleum supplies would begin to dwindle. If enough such tankers get lost along the SLOC leading to NZ, then NZ could effectively run out of power and have little ability to do anything.
While I agree with a deployable land based SAM system is required, Todjaejer is correct that a land based AShM is a waste of coin. We would be better off with fast jets (yes I know). In terms of surface units 3 frigates provides for 1 operational, 1 working up / training and one in refit / extended maintenance - in other words nothing for the South Pacific / NZ response should the need require. 4 is the minimum for FFG, especially if you need to try and keep SLOC opens. A common OPV / FFG doesn't work in my view, from a crewing / maintenance / operational profile perspective, especially when you look at the USCG OPC crew size.
In terms of OPV I like new Cube concept in order to provide modular capabilities esp. in the case of Hydro, MCM, pollution. Think Vards proposed Vigilance, as a replacing for OPV / IPV. A couple of SOPV, tanker and improved LPHD - think flush deck (4 landing spots) to top it off. If you run through the personnel numbers you're limited to around 700-800 seagoing personnel, to maintain current planned personnel at around 2,200, though the sea / shore ratio could be lower based some rough calculations I did
In terms of OPV I like new Cube concept in order to provide modular capabilities esp. in the case of Hydro, MCM, pollution. Think Vards proposed Vigilance, as a replacing for OPV / IPV. A couple of SOPV, tanker and improved LPHD - think flush deck (4 landing spots) to top it off. If you run through the personnel numbers you're limited to around 700-800 seagoing personnel, to maintain current planned personnel at around 2,200, though the sea / shore ratio could be lower based some rough calculations I did