I am hoping for a situation to arise in which an OPV won't be enough, that a frigate will have to be sent before any New Zealand government strikes their remaining frigates. Its a tall order, since I can not easily dream up a scenario. Keeping a frigate force may be more difficult than we think.
Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Padman
- Start date
Its forecast that the opv's will be able to do up to 80% of the frigates tasking.
It would be of NZ and the NZDF's interests to keep frigates in the navy to forfill our commitments overseas ie arabian and persian gulf opereations.
And as always the navys top brass will always say that we arent a navy without combat capable ships, otherwise we are just a coast gaurd.
It would be of NZ and the NZDF's interests to keep frigates in the navy to forfill our commitments overseas ie arabian and persian gulf opereations.
And as always the navys top brass will always say that we arent a navy without combat capable ships, otherwise we are just a coast gaurd.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
My point about the Anzacs being a relatively "low end" frigate was not about the physical plant/machinery at all. What I was referring to was the capabilities of the sensors, comms and armament when compared with the same systems of similar classes of frigates. For example, a Greek Hydra-class frigate, also based off the MEKO 200 like the Anzac, has 8 Harpoon AShM, 16 Sea Sparrow SAM, and 2 Phalanx CIWS, plus 2 triple 324 mm lightweight torpedo mounts and a 5 in/127 mm main gun. That is a heavier weapons loadout than current RNZN Anzacs or that of the earlier builds of the RAN Anzacs. Some of which have now been fitted for the Harpoon AShM and ESSM quadpack.
If a RNZN Anzac ended up in a hostile situation and needed to carry out an attack upon another ship, at present that would involve either closing to within the ~20km range of the main gun, or if a Seasprite and Maverick AGMs are available, deployable range for that helicopter. If the first option, closing to within cannon range is chosen, then it is almost certain that the RNZN vessel would be within range of any AShM if any that would be carried by the hostile vessel. Given that their Anzacs only carry 8 Sea Sparrows with a single fire channel, inbound missiles would be a definate and difficult to deal with threat. Given the relatively short legs of the Maverick AGM, as well as the ranges at which a Seasprite would likely be detected at, the two Mavericks which could be launched at a time would likely be subject to interception by a hostile ships' air defences. Possibly including an attack upon the launching helicopter as well given the ranges available to some SAM systems.
I am all for the work needed to continue operations of the Anzac, as well as what can be done to operate it in a less crew intensive manner. I just remain concerned that, like much of the rest of the NZDF, some of the "pointy bits" are being ignored or neglected which could be to NZs cost in a potential future incident.
-Cheers
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Is that figure of 80% a NZDF figure touted by the top brass or a civilian/govt agency/consultant figure etc? Some things come into my mind, firstly its a "forecast" and presumably it is based on the current "peacetime" environment that we are in.
Secondly let's look at those so called 20% of the times where the OPV's won't be up to Frigate tasking.
1. Almost all exercises with the RAN and FPDA powers.
2. Gulf task force operations (UN/coalition mandated).
3. Another East Timor intervention a la 1999 when RNZN Frigates adopted a war footing (UN mandated).
4. Occassions like the Falklands War when the RNZN contributed a Frigate to RN operations elsewhere (to make up the RN shortfall).
The above are simply occasions where Frigates have been used. And this isn't even taking into account a scenario of increasing tensions in the wider SE Asian-Pacific region, let alone a conflict.
The OPV's lack any ASW sensors or armament, anti-sub ops have been NZ's (and the RAN"s) primary tasking post WW2, I don't see why things are alot different nowdays.
(And who wants to be the fool in Govt, immortalised forever in history, for doing away with the Frigates when we see an escalation in Asian arms build-ups, China developing a greater blue water navy, a possible resurgent Russia etc)?
I don't think NZ will ever do away with Frigates, assuming the RAN replace the ANZAC's with another Frigate type of course, seeing there are alot of benefits being tied into the RAN Frigate programme, (sure they might have them "fitted for but not with" to save money) and especially in these unstable times. Not unless the economy collapses or the Greens get into power
The weight/space issue that Mattyem is raising pretty much rules out OPV's (or Corvettes) being NZ's future fleet.
I agree we will always need frigates, and many serving members share this view. We also feel another frigate would have been a wiser choice as opposed to 2 opv's
the ipv's are a needed class of ship for coastel partol and interdepartmental roles ie customs, fisheries, SaR.
the ipv's are a needed class of ship for coastel partol and interdepartmental roles ie customs, fisheries, SaR.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Cheers Mattyem. Hey please don't think I addressed my last post to you personally, knocking you any way whatsoever. Far from it, its meant more to knock the pollies and their distorted world view! However whatever they decide to do, we all have to bear and grin it and professionals like yourself just knuckle down and get on with it. I think it would be fair to say most, if not all, of the others here respect the fact that the NZDF gets on with it and don't complain.
Sea Toby is right in that the offset packages with the ANZAC's will hopefully ensure any future NZ Govt gets on board with the Australian ANZAC replacement programme.
Depends on other external factors I suppose. I would have thought any bright cookie advocating replacing the ANZAC's with OPV's would be wanting NZ to have an isolationist "defence" posture (Greens and Peace groups come to mind). The irony of that is, what more exchanges with the USN and USCG in a border and customs role (how ironic!)? As Stuart M. reminds us periodically NZ's wealth and wellbeing are dependent on exports to other nations and their stability. OPV's won't be of any use for NZ playing its part keeping the region stable! Anyway don't get me wrong, OPV's are also another important asset to the RNZN for the roles envisaged of them. Um, hopefully when all the problems are ironed out!
Sea Toby is right in that the offset packages with the ANZAC's will hopefully ensure any future NZ Govt gets on board with the Australian ANZAC replacement programme.
Depends on other external factors I suppose. I would have thought any bright cookie advocating replacing the ANZAC's with OPV's would be wanting NZ to have an isolationist "defence" posture (Greens and Peace groups come to mind). The irony of that is, what more exchanges with the USN and USCG in a border and customs role (how ironic!)? As Stuart M. reminds us periodically NZ's wealth and wellbeing are dependent on exports to other nations and their stability. OPV's won't be of any use for NZ playing its part keeping the region stable! Anyway don't get me wrong, OPV's are also another important asset to the RNZN for the roles envisaged of them. Um, hopefully when all the problems are ironed out!
I didnt take anything as a dig at me, I totally agree with you lol.
I think the government as a whole got to involved with the deal as opposed to just the ministry of defence and the NZDF. Because the plans called for co-operation with customs and other such government agencies everyone body jumped on the band wagon.
That may be why project protector wound up with opv's ships that seem suited more for other governmnet departments rather than the Navy.
I guess we will wont know of the full capabilities untill be take delivery and get the initail problems with a new ship ironed out.
God knows how long that will be considering the problems that are occuring now with them, already 2 years late
I think the government as a whole got to involved with the deal as opposed to just the ministry of defence and the NZDF. Because the plans called for co-operation with customs and other such government agencies everyone body jumped on the band wagon.
That may be why project protector wound up with opv's ships that seem suited more for other governmnet departments rather than the Navy.
I guess we will wont know of the full capabilities untill be take delivery and get the initail problems with a new ship ironed out.
God knows how long that will be considering the problems that are occuring now with them, already 2 years late
I think the question NZ might have to face is that the surface combatant of the future will be a much larger ship in terms of displacement and capabilities, if international trends are anything to go by.I don't think NZ will ever do away with Frigates, assuming the RAN replace the ANZAC's with another Frigate type of course, seeing there are alot of benefits being tied into the RAN Frigate programme, (sure they might have them "fitted for but not with" to save money) and especially in these unstable times. Not unless the economy collapses or the Greens get into power
The weight/space issue that Mattyem is raising pretty much rules out OPV's (or Corvettes) being NZ's future fleet.
While I clearly support the need for frigates (after having rolled and chundered my way around the Auckland Islands / West Coast in winter) I think the ecomonic reality is that NZ may have to look at return to a force structure similar to that of the late 50's: 2 Large surface combatants (the crusiers) and 4-6 smaller ships of around the ANZAC's displacement, but outfitted to corvette / LCS standards in terms of sensors etc.
Frankly the more I think about the more I like the recent RN proposal of 3 classes of combat ships:
Type 1 - A full on surface combatant
Type 2 - An escort type ship
Type 3 - OPV / Survey / MCM type vessel
It would offer the RNZN significant advantages in terms of training, logistics etc and cut the number of classes currently operated by about 1-2 , if we were to purchase another OPV to replace the current diving tender and fit modular diving / MCM capabilities, and use one of the IPV's as a replacement for Kahu.
Mattyem I'd be curious to hear exactly what the reasons for the delays are. I've heard things through the grapevine and papers, but I'd (All of us) would like an insiders view.
Im not too sure what im allowed to say and not allowed to say, so until I clear that up this is what I can.
The issue is that tenix won the contract and recieved the specs for the ships we needed (OPV's). The end product that they produced isnt to the specs that was asked for. The big issue is the weight.
Because of the increase in weight, the life span of the OPV has been greatly reduced! And then there are several warranty issues which need addressing also.
The RNZN is keeping Kahu in service because it also is a diving tender, unlike the other IPC's that the RNZN operated it was fitted and used as a dive tender up until the procurment of Manawanui.
A new dive tender would be great, but im not sure that the navy would look for anything too much larger than manawanui, may up to and around the size of resolution.
The issue is that tenix won the contract and recieved the specs for the ships we needed (OPV's). The end product that they produced isnt to the specs that was asked for. The big issue is the weight.
Because of the increase in weight, the life span of the OPV has been greatly reduced! And then there are several warranty issues which need addressing also.
The RNZN is keeping Kahu in service because it also is a diving tender, unlike the other IPC's that the RNZN operated it was fitted and used as a dive tender up until the procurment of Manawanui.
A new dive tender would be great, but im not sure that the navy would look for anything too much larger than manawanui, may up to and around the size of resolution.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
If OPV's are too large to be (modular) diving tenders (& MCM), taking that concept of rationalising the fleet, what about a modified/modular IPV? Although noted that IPV displacement is almost one-third of the Manawanui, IPV may need stern mods to better support diving duties, diving bell etc. Wonder what the pros and cons are?
Also wonder what it is on the new OPV's that's adding significantly to the weight?
Shheesh, it's a good thing Tenix and the Govt don't listen to us, going by what we were posting here a couple of years ago, if we ran the project we'd be significantly adding more weight in terms of a higher calibre gun and fire control systems
Also wonder what it is on the new OPV's that's adding significantly to the weight?
Shheesh, it's a good thing Tenix and the Govt don't listen to us, going by what we were posting here a couple of years ago, if we ran the project we'd be significantly adding more weight in terms of a higher calibre gun and fire control systems
Yes the upgrades many of us were suggesting would have sunk the navy (the OPV's) at least. All the more reason for a new suface combatant, given the OPV can't be upgraded.If OPV's are too large to be (modular) diving tenders (& MCM), taking that concept of rationalising the fleet, what about a modified/modular IPV? Although noted that IPV displacement is almost one-third of the Manawanui, IPV may need stern mods to better support diving duties, diving bell etc. Wonder what the pros and cons are?
Also wonder what it is on the new OPV's that's adding significantly to the weight?
Shheesh, it's a good thing Tenix and the Govt don't listen to us, going by what we were posting here a couple of years ago, if we ran the project we'd be significantly adding more weight in terms of a higher calibre gun and fire control systems
You would wonder how a relatively simple design (OPV) could come in with such significant weight growth issues , it is not as though you are throwing heaps of complicated weapons systems into the mix, its not like you are building an F35
Any idea when we can expect an inservice date ?
Any idea when we can expect an inservice date ?
Its not just the weapon systems that have significant weight. Alot of people tend to forget about the propulsion plant and likes of ac units, refer units, generators etc etc. And also the addition of an ice breaking bow also increases the weight significantly.
As for a date of delevery, its anyones guess. We (saliors in the Navy) have been told numorus date. If everything starts now and warranty issues are addressed maybe we will take delivery by the years end.
But from what I can see, maybe feb/march next year. It all depends on how talks with tenix go, and what can and cant be accomplished to meet the specs the navy asked for to begin with.
What also has delayed things is BAE purchasing tenix.
As for a date of delevery, its anyones guess. We (saliors in the Navy) have been told numorus date. If everything starts now and warranty issues are addressed maybe we will take delivery by the years end.
But from what I can see, maybe feb/march next year. It all depends on how talks with tenix go, and what can and cant be accomplished to meet the specs the navy asked for to begin with.
What also has delayed things is BAE purchasing tenix.
All the aspects that you detailed should really have been factored in at the initial deign phase I would have thought (unless trials indicated additional capacity requirements), maybe the ice strengthening issue was abit of a surprise in terms of impact on the weight distribution (as an aside are the ANZACS similarly ice strengthened ?)
I presume that the IPV's are alot closer to an inservice date than the OPV's ?
The problem with both Australia and New Zealand is that even the basic patrol vessels have to be quite large due to the ocean conditions and range required.
To do basic patrol work some countries may use small 500 tonne patrol boats where as we have to use Frigate sized patrol boats for the southern ocean.
New Zealand and Australia sharing ships is definitely an attractive option.
If you consider things in a high/medium/low mix or blue/green/brown water cateogories then New Zealand can easily share the medium and low level ships.
For instance both countries have patrol vessels, frigates which are the low and medium ships. Heres an example of how it could work.
High/Blue water = AWD and LHD, excellent air defence, anti-ship and CIWS. These require sophisticated weapons systems and thus require high levels of manning. Only Australia can realistically afford these assets and in small numbers at that.
Medium/Green water = Light armed Frigate or Large Heavy armed Ocean Patrol Vessel. 2000-3000 ton class ANZAC replacement. Due to the lower performance requirement, basic, yet highly automated off the shelf weapon systems can be used. These will signifcantly reduce manning levels to corvette levels or below. This would be New Zealands best combat ship and should defeat anything they require. For Australia this ship would support the High/Blue water assets during wartime and perform all long range peacetime patrol missions.
Low/Brown water = Large Patrol boat/IPV or small OPV. 500+ ton class Armidale replacements. An off the shelf ship design with relatively good range and ocean keeping for its size. Basic gun and extremely low manning due to commercial design. Not really a brown water Littoral ship but instead more a cheap low end ship. Ideal for peace time patrol for both NZ and Aus. Though as these ships are off the shelf product there probably isn't a need for NZ and Aus to share development. The Armidale and Protector class are quite new it would be wise to replace both when the time comes with a common ship.
It seems the reason why New Zealand bought their OPV is that the ANZAC frigates are too expensive. Australia required the ANZACs to be their frontline combat ship which pushed up the price. As Australia will soon have dedicated AWD's the ANZAC replacements can be more budget orientated which will definitely suit New Zealand. This will allow New Zealand to buy the future Frigate in sufficient numbers that they wont have to buy a cheap OPV for long range patrol work.
To do basic patrol work some countries may use small 500 tonne patrol boats where as we have to use Frigate sized patrol boats for the southern ocean.
New Zealand and Australia sharing ships is definitely an attractive option.
If you consider things in a high/medium/low mix or blue/green/brown water cateogories then New Zealand can easily share the medium and low level ships.
For instance both countries have patrol vessels, frigates which are the low and medium ships. Heres an example of how it could work.
High/Blue water = AWD and LHD, excellent air defence, anti-ship and CIWS. These require sophisticated weapons systems and thus require high levels of manning. Only Australia can realistically afford these assets and in small numbers at that.
Medium/Green water = Light armed Frigate or Large Heavy armed Ocean Patrol Vessel. 2000-3000 ton class ANZAC replacement. Due to the lower performance requirement, basic, yet highly automated off the shelf weapon systems can be used. These will signifcantly reduce manning levels to corvette levels or below. This would be New Zealands best combat ship and should defeat anything they require. For Australia this ship would support the High/Blue water assets during wartime and perform all long range peacetime patrol missions.
Low/Brown water = Large Patrol boat/IPV or small OPV. 500+ ton class Armidale replacements. An off the shelf ship design with relatively good range and ocean keeping for its size. Basic gun and extremely low manning due to commercial design. Not really a brown water Littoral ship but instead more a cheap low end ship. Ideal for peace time patrol for both NZ and Aus. Though as these ships are off the shelf product there probably isn't a need for NZ and Aus to share development. The Armidale and Protector class are quite new it would be wise to replace both when the time comes with a common ship.
It seems the reason why New Zealand bought their OPV is that the ANZAC frigates are too expensive. Australia required the ANZACs to be their frontline combat ship which pushed up the price. As Australia will soon have dedicated AWD's the ANZAC replacements can be more budget orientated which will definitely suit New Zealand. This will allow New Zealand to buy the future Frigate in sufficient numbers that they wont have to buy a cheap OPV for long range patrol work.
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
Any ANZAC replacement is unlikely to be more budget orientated, back when the ANZAC's were first introduced, Australia had 9 assets with Area Air defense capabilities. The three Perth class destroyers which were the main Air defense ships, plus the six Adelaide class which had a basic area air defense system.
Once the 3 AWD's come into service Australia will have at maximum 5 area air defense ships assuming the two 1990's built Adelaides stay in service until the ANZACs are replaced.
Correct me if i'm wrong, but seeing as how the Australian ANZAC's are being upgraded, if anything the replacements will probably be a lot more capable.
Once the 3 AWD's come into service Australia will have at maximum 5 area air defense ships assuming the two 1990's built Adelaides stay in service until the ANZACs are replaced.
Correct me if i'm wrong, but seeing as how the Australian ANZAC's are being upgraded, if anything the replacements will probably be a lot more capable.
You are forgetting that the Anzacs Sea Sparrows and/or Evolved Sea Sparrows are much more effective than Sea Cats. The range of the Evolved Sea Sparrows are almost the same as the old SM-1s. Thus the RAN has seen a huge improvement with SAMs, both area and self defence.
I haven't a clue on what Australia and/or New Zealand will buy to replace the Anzacs. At the moment these ships are going through their mid-life upgrades. While its time to start thinking about their replacements, any decision is still several years in the future.
I would think US/NATO weapons will be necessary, but there isn't any glimmer of which ship. I would assume a ship will be decided upon the bid price.
I haven't a clue on what Australia and/or New Zealand will buy to replace the Anzacs. At the moment these ships are going through their mid-life upgrades. While its time to start thinking about their replacements, any decision is still several years in the future.
I would think US/NATO weapons will be necessary, but there isn't any glimmer of which ship. I would assume a ship will be decided upon the bid price.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
HMNZS Te Mana Leaves Arabian Gulf
May news report and photo from US Tin Can Sailors http://www.destroyers.org/News From Todays Navy/Photo of CTF 152.htm
Map of Te Mana's area of ops http://www.nzdf.mil.nz/downloads/pdf/mr/te.mana.gulf.ao.pdf
May news report and photo from US Tin Can Sailors http://www.destroyers.org/News From Todays Navy/Photo of CTF 152.htm