Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[Norm]

Thanks for the link Norm. I think this project is now looking very good and added to the Anzacs it will, IMO, put the RNZN in the best state it has been in for some time. The more I look at the OPVs the more I wish the RAN had some vessels of this type. I am feeling just a little envious!

Cheers

Thanks,all the Protector Vessels are built with a level of crew comfort not normally found in Navy vessels.Seems to be a focus of the current Govt ,don't like things that make a loud bang but like everyone to arrrive on the scene fresh.EG Lav111 Aircon and has a zip for hot drinks! .Canterbury has wide hallways so the infantry can easily move when fully kitted out. The plans for the OPV show heaps of Toilets a Gym etc. If the OPV proves itself ( which it should)I'd expect a few will be built for Australia.


Some interesting Parliamentary questions for answer currently for us bottom feeders.(Kiwi slang Fishing term for being a the bottom of the foodchain/information chain), here is one example not yet replied to:

4070 (2007). Dr Wayne Mapp to the Minister of Defence (26 Mar 2007): Is a midlife upgrade planned for the two ANZAC class frigates; if so, what will be upgraded on the ships?
Hon Phil Goff (Minister of Defence) replied: Reply due: 03 Apr 2007

replies always run late but next few weeks should give more insite into RNZN upgrade plans (where is the Urgency!). Happy Easter, Cheers.

 

[Norm]

New Zealand ANZAC Frigate upgrade timeline.

4070 (2007). Dr Wayne Mapp to the Minister of Defence (26 Mar 2007): Is a midlife upgrade planned for the two ANZAC class frigates; if so, what will be upgraded on the ships?
Hon Phil Goff (Minister of Defence) replied: Reply due: 03 Apr 2007

replies always run late but next few weeks should give more insite into RNZN upgrade plans (where is the Urgency!).

4069 (2007). Dr Wayne Mapp to the Minister of Defence (26 Mar 2007): Is a midlife upgrade planned for the two ANZAC class frigates; if so, when are the upgrades planned for and how much is it expected they will cost?
Hon Phil Goff (Minister of Defence) replied: The Defence Long-Term Development Plan (LTDP) 2006 Update contains three projects, which together will constitute the midlife upgrade of the New Zealand ANZAC frigates. The Close-in Weapon Support System Upgrade will upgrade the Phalanx system which provides a last line of defence and protection from anti-ship missiles, strike aircraft, and potentially fast inshore attack craft. The estimated cost in the LTDP is $20-$25 million and the project is scheduled to commence this year. The ANZAC Class Platform Systems Upgrade will upgrade the systems that provide the frigates’ capability to move, generate power, recover from damage, and accommodate people. The estimated cost in the LTDP is $50-$60 million and the project is scheduled to commence in 2008/2009. The ANZAC Self Defence Upgrade will upgrade the frigates’ self defence systems to protect them and ships under their immediate protection from sophisticated anti-ship systems. The estimated cost in the LTDP of this project is $450-$500 million and the project is scheduled to commence around 2010.

So there we have it.!

 

[Tasman]

4070 (2007). Dr Wayne Mapp to the Minister of Defence (26 Mar 2007): Is a midlife upgrade planned for the two ANZAC class frigates; if so, what will be upgraded on the ships?
Hon Phil Goff (Minister of Defence) replied: Reply due: 03 Apr 2007

replies always run late but next few weeks should give more insite into RNZN upgrade plans (where is the Urgency!).

4069 (2007). Dr Wayne Mapp to the Minister of Defence (26 Mar 2007): Is a midlife upgrade planned for the two ANZAC class frigates; if so, when are the upgrades planned for and how much is it expected they will cost?
Hon Phil Goff (Minister of Defence) replied: The Defence Long-Term Development Plan (LTDP) 2006 Update contains three projects, which together will constitute the midlife upgrade of the New Zealand ANZAC frigates. The Close-in Weapon Support System Upgrade will upgrade the Phalanx system which provides a last line of defence and protection from anti-ship missiles, strike aircraft, and potentially fast inshore attack craft. The estimated cost in the LTDP is $20-$25 million and the project is scheduled to commence this year. The ANZAC Class Platform Systems Upgrade will upgrade the systems that provide the frigates’ capability to move, generate power, recover from damage, and accommodate people. The estimated cost in the LTDP is $50-$60 million and the project is scheduled to commence in 2008/2009. The ANZAC Self Defence Upgrade will upgrade the frigates’ self defence systems to protect them and ships under their immediate protection from sophisticated anti-ship systems. The estimated cost in the LTDP of this project is $450-$500 million and the project is scheduled to commence around 2010.

So there we have it.!

The LTDP is extremely vague re details of what the ANZAC Self Defence Upgrade will comprise. This statement doesn't add much to what is in the LTDP. Or have I missed something?

the full scope of the third and fourth phases cannot yet be fully determined.

http://www.defence.govt.nz/reports-publications/ltdp-2006/prj-essential.html#anzac

Presumably it includes ESSM and an updated decoy system (such as Nulka). It would be good to see them get all of the self defence systems upgrades being planned for the Australian ships. With the upgraded CIWS they would then have an even better self defence capability than the RAN vessels, unless the RAN adds a CIWS (such as the 35mm Millennium Gun) or VSRAD system to what is already approved.

Cheers

 

[contedicavour]

Still no news about Harpoon integration on NZ Anzacs ?
Are the NZ embarked helos equipped with air to surface missiles ?
Reinforcing AAW + CIWS is a good thing, but I'd think it is more likely to encounter in the Southern Pacific hostile (pirate/terrorist/etc) ships rather than fighterbombers

cheers

 

[Tasman]

Still no news about Harpoon integration on NZ Anzacs ?
Are the NZ embarked helos equipped with air to surface missiles ?
Reinforcing AAW + CIWS is a good thing, but I'd think it is more likely to encounter in the Southern Pacific hostile (pirate/terrorist/etc) ships rather than fighterbombers

cheers

The helos embarked on RNZN Anzacs carry the Raytheon Maverick AGM-65 .

Cheers

 

[Markus40]

Yeah, seems they are not a bad design for NZ use however i wouldnt go as far as being a bit envious just yet. I think for the size of the vessel its still underarmed, if the purpose of the OPV is on coast guard and have a role alongside the ANZACs. It really needs a CIWS at the back as well as a sea surface radar. Something in the range of a 350 mile radius. The pad for the helo is good for the seasprite armed with the mav.

Thanks for the link Norm. I think this project is now looking very good and added to the Anzacs it will, IMO, put the RNZN in the best state it has been in for some time. The more I look at the OPVs the more I wish the RAN had some vessels of this type. I am feeling just a little envious!

Cheers

 

[contedicavour]

The helos embarked on RNZN Anzacs carry the Raytheon Maverick AGM-65 .

Cheers

Ah-ha thanks this increases significantly the NZ Anzacs' anti-shipping capabilities. I'll stop complaining about the absence of Harpoons then

cheers

 

[recce.k1]

Yeah, seems they are not a bad design for NZ use however i wouldnt go as far as being a bit envious just yet. I think for the size of the vessel its still underarmed, if the purpose of the OPV is on coast guard and have a role alongside the ANZACs. It really needs a CIWS at the back as well as a sea surface radar. Something in the range of a 350 mile radius. The pad for the helo is good for the seasprite armed with the mav.

Talking about OPV's and radars. Didn't the former Leander frigates' Canterbury and Wellington get new "long range" air surveillence radars fitted in the 1990's? What happened to them once the ships were decommissioned? If they are sitting around, could it be worth fitting them to the OPV's? Granted the OPV's primary role is EEZ patrol of surface vessels and there is no real requirement to conduct air surveillence (nor are the OPV's armed or outfitted operationally for surface-to-air tasks). However despite the govt always highlighting the civillian uses of these vessels, the navy also talks about operational uses, whatever that means, presumably involvement in multi-nation exercises, peace-keeping support, coalition searching/boarding operations etc. So whilst not being at the sharp end of combat vessel operations, potentially the OPV's in times of emergencies, could be pressed into service where there could be potential air activity (I'm thinking of in SE Asia or the indian ocean etc, not the pacific). Granted again, there is no point turning an OPV into a mini-frigate (and there is a pressing need for an EEZ patrol vessel capable of patroling the southern and pacific oceans), but I recall discussions from last year about upgrading the main gun and having mistral SAM's fitted, then why not also the air search radars if there are some half decent ones simply sitting around (if feasible)?

 

[Lucasnz]

Talking about OPV's and radars. Didn't the former Leander frigates' Canterbury and Wellington get new "long range" air surveillence radars fitted in the 1990's? What happened to them once the ships were decommissioned? If they are sitting around, could it be worth fitting them to the OPV's?

I don't think that would work, due to weight issues. The Auditor General report in the early 1990's discussed the whole issue of fitting new Air Search radar. The navy wanted SPS-49 to retain similarity with the ANZAC's, but couldn't get the weight down.

If you wanted a Air/Surface search radar for the OPV I would suggest the Terma Scanter 4100 (Fitted to the Falklands Patrol vessel and approved for fitting the the Danish Thetis class).

Has anyone been able to identify the radar been fitted to the MRV and OPV. I've had no luck.

 

[Norm]

Canterbury handover June 2007

updateer news item on Stuff.co.nz Delivery of the 8800 tonne multi-role ship Canterbury was delayed several weeks after the Ministry of Defence ordered special ice-strengthening to the bow and changes to the ship's hospital. It was also delayed by the late delivery of some spare parts and publications from various equipment manufacturers.

The ship is expected to be commissioned into the navy at a ceremony in Melbourne next month where it is in the final stages of fitting out with military systems and testing. Prime Minister Helen Clark is expected to be at the commissioning ceremony.

No mention of Rudder/Stern door issues, good to see it's on it's way. Norm

 

[Gibbo]

updateer news item on Stuff.co.nz Delivery of the 8800 tonne multi-role ship Canterbury was delayed several weeks after the Ministry of Defence ordered special ice-strengthening to the bow and changes to the ship's hospital. It was also delayed by the late delivery of some spare parts and publications from various equipment manufacturers.

The ship is expected to be commissioned into the navy at a ceremony in Melbourne next month where it is in the final stages of fitting out with military systems and testing. Prime Minister Helen Clark is expected to be at the commissioning ceremony.

No mention of Rudder/Stern door issues, good to see it's on it's way. Norm

Yes finally... here's a link to the full NZHerald article:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10439683

 

[recce.k1]

Seasprite ASW capabilities

I understand the RNZN Seasprites are primarily designed for anti-surface warfare. However for ASW, I understand the Seasprites rely on data relayed from the ANZAC frigate in order to deploy torpedoes or depth charges. My question is, what would be required and how much would it cost to upgrade the ASW capabilities and would the Seasprite be a suitable platform for this enhanced role? Eg is the Seapsrite large enough to carry dipping sonar? Would a third crew member be required operating dedicated equipment in the back etc? Should we be looking into future more capable replacement of the Seasprite in a few years time (in line with the RAN) etc?

I also understand a few years back that the fitting points were removed from the RNZN ANZAC's for any towed array sonar. Can someone confirm? And do the RNZN ANZAC's have the same medium frequency hull mounted sonars like their RAN cousins? Do the RNZN ANZAC's require ASW sensor upgrades (or is this covered in the current LTDP ANZAC Self-Protection upgrade)?

 

[Todjaeger]

I understand the RNZN Seasprites are primarily designed for anti-surface warfare. However for ASW, I understand the Seasprites rely on data relayed from the ANZAC frigate in order to deploy torpedoes or depth charges. My question is, what would be required and how much would it cost to upgrade the ASW capabilities and would the Seasprite be a suitable platform for this enhanced role? Eg is the Seapsrite large enough to carry dipping sonar? Would a third crew member be required operating dedicated equipment in the back etc? Should we be looking into future more capable replacement of the Seasprite in a few years time (in line with the RAN) etc?

I also understand a few years back that the fitting points were removed from the RNZN ANZAC's for any towed array sonar. Can someone confirm? And do the RNZN ANZAC's have the same medium frequency hull mounted sonars like their RAN cousins? Do the RNZN ANZAC's require ASW sensor upgrades (or is this covered in the current LTDP ANZAC Self-Protection upgrade)?

With regards to the NZ Seasprites, as I understood it, the NZ Seasprites have a crew of 3, pilot, co-pilot and then a crewman in back. As for the Seasprite being used in an ASW role, they certainly could if properly equipped. I would presume though that there would be some impact/reduction on ASuW capability to do so since it's a rather small bird.

As for the Anzacs, not really sure on this one. The RAN Anzacs have had (or are undergoing) additions to their sonar with the addition of a mine-avoidance sonar, but I'm uncertain if such an addition would offer any synergy with ASW kit. As for the RNZN removing the fitting points for towed sonar, I don't know about that. If true, I'd say that is a shame since the Anzac's hull-mounted sonar, and sonobuoys from the P-3K Orion are NZ's only ASW sensors. To my knowledge, a passive towed sonar would offer better detection than either. OTOH the RNZN seems willing at present to let their stock of torpedoes soon so perhaps they feel no need for an ASW capability.

-Cheers

 

[Lucasnz]

With regards to the NZ Seasprites, as I understood it, the NZ Seasprites have a crew of 3, pilot, co-pilot and then a crewman in back. As for the Seasprite being used in an ASW role, they certainly could if properly equipped. I would presume though that there would be some impact/reduction on ASuW capability to do so since it's a rather small bird.

As for the Anzacs, not really sure on this one. The RAN Anzacs have had (or are undergoing) additions to their sonar with the addition of a mine-avoidance sonar, but I'm uncertain if such an addition would offer any synergy with ASW kit. As for the RNZN removing the fitting points for towed sonar, I don't know about that. If true, I'd say that is a shame since the Anzac's hull-mounted sonar, and sonobuoys from the P-3K Orion are NZ's only ASW sensors. To my knowledge, a passive towed sonar would offer better detection than either. OTOH the RNZN seems willing at present to let their stock of torpedoes soon so perhaps they feel no need for an ASW capability.

-Cheers

The towed sonar capability on the ANZAC's has been removed - just after Labour got into power. The navy has a towed array sonar in storage which it used for trials in the 1990's on Tui and Resolution to determine what was best suited to NZ. Can't remember what the outcome was, but I don't think it was passive (could be wrong)

 

[Markus40]

Yes the OPV is drastically lacking in survellience radar as i have been mentioning frequently in past threads. However they are certainly not going to get the the old Canterbury survellience radar as its currently in dock at Opua being stripped down with its radar still attached. So no luck there im afraid. Its a pity actually because many of the Canterburys systems like the radar was semi recently upgraded. The radar on it has a survellience range of 350Km and would be ideal for the OPV. The Canterbury still has its Navigation radar still attached too and this has a range of 30Km.

The OPVs major archilles heel is its defensive ability. It drastically needs survellience radar and a CIWS and have at least the Seasprite armed with the Mav. when on patrol.

As to the Mistrals well, maybe, could be fitted for but not used status, but in this region at least there isnt any need for it. There are no aircraft to shoot down.

Talking about OPV's and radars. Didn't the former Leander frigates' Canterbury and Wellington get new "long range" air surveillence radars fitted in the 1990's? What happened to them once the ships were decommissioned? If they are sitting around, could it be worth fitting them to the OPV's? Granted the OPV's primary role is EEZ patrol of surface vessels and there is no real requirement to conduct air surveillence (nor are the OPV's armed or outfitted operationally for surface-to-air tasks). However despite the govt always highlighting the civillian uses of these vessels, the navy also talks about operational uses, whatever that means, presumably involvement in multi-nation exercises, peace-keeping support, coalition searching/boarding operations etc. So whilst not being at the sharp end of combat vessel operations, potentially the OPV's in times of emergencies, could be pressed into service where there could be potential air activity (I'm thinking of in SE Asia or the indian ocean etc, not the pacific). Granted again, there is no point turning an OPV into a mini-frigate (and there is a pressing need for an EEZ patrol vessel capable of patroling the southern and pacific oceans), but I recall discussions from last year about upgrading the main gun and having mistral SAM's fitted, then why not also the air search radars if there are some half decent ones simply sitting around (if feasible)?

 

[Tasman]

Yes the OPV is drastically lacking in survellience radar as i have been mentioning frequently in past threads. However they are certainly not going to get the the old Canterbury survellience radar as its currently in dock at Opua being stripped down with its radar still attached. So no luck there im afraid. Its a pity actually because many of the Canterburys systems like the radar was semi recently upgraded. The radar on it has a survellience range of 350Km and would be ideal for the OPV. The Canterbury still has its Navigation radar still attached too and this has a range of 30Km.

I agree that the OPVs ought to have a decent surveillance radar.

It does seem a pity (and also a waste) that the surveillance radar from Canterbury and Wellington has not been used on the OPVs, especially if it has been upgraded reasonably recently. I presume the navy would have thought about the re-use of older equipment and there are a number of reasons why it may have been rejected. These could include stability issues, age of components (the upgrades may only have replaced components necessary to see the radar through to the decommissioning dates of the frigates) and difficulties with integrating old radar into the new systems aboard the OPVs.

Cheers

 

[KH-12]

If the primary role for the OPV's is domestic EEZ patrol then I don't see that they have an immediate requirement for a high powered Air search radar, more important to have good surface detection systems which I beleive they have, not alot of point in being able to detect an airborne threat hundreds of km out if you don't have any means to defeat such a threat. Loading such a vessel up with such systems starts to turn them into "mini-frigates" which they were never intended to be.

 

[Todjaeger]

If the primary role for the OPV's is domestic EEZ patrol then I don't see that they have an immediate requirement for a high powered Air search radar, more important to have good surface detection systems which I beleive they have, not alot of point in being able to detect an airborne threat hundreds of km out if you don't have any means to defeat such a threat. Loading such a vessel up with such systems starts to turn them into "mini-frigates" which they were never intended to be.

Indeed, the three main characteristics that differentiate an OPV from a FS (corvette) are the weapons loadout, sensor/electronic systems and price. The first two the corvette is superior, for pricing though, an OPV is typically a fraction of the cost for a similarly sized corvette. And given the difference in kit the vessels are used differently, or more properly, since there different tasks, the ships are equipped appropriate to their respective tasks.

-Cheers

 

[Lucasnz]

If the primary role for the OPV's is domestic EEZ patrol then I don't see that they have an immediate requirement for a high powered Air search radar, more important to have good surface detection systems which I beleive they have, not alot of point in being able to detect an airborne threat hundreds of km out if you don't have any means to defeat such a threat. Loading such a vessel up with such systems starts to turn them into "mini-frigates" which they were never intended to be.

I'd agree that fitting a high powered Air Radar is not suitable for an OPV. I would consider something like the Air / Surface search radar fitted to the new Falklands Patrol vessel suitable given that these vessels are likley to operate in the South Pacific.

As a side note the MRV, OPV and IPV all have a life expectancy of 25 years according a written parliamentary response earlier this year.

 

[Tasman]

If the primary role for the OPV's is domestic EEZ patrol then I don't see that they have an immediate requirement for a high powered Air search radar, more important to have good surface detection systems which I beleive they have, not alot of point in being able to detect an airborne threat hundreds of km out if you don't have any means to defeat such a threat. Loading such a vessel up with such systems starts to turn them into "mini-frigates" which they were never intended to be.

Good point. We have to keep reminding ourselves what the primary role of these vessels is and also of the need to keep costs down by installing equipment that is appropriate for the task.

Cheers