Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[MrConservative]

The only problem with the Absalons which are destroyer sized frigates is that they cost more than a frigate. So one might as well use a cheaper frigate, an Anzac, to patrol the Southern Ocean.

The whole world is building amphibious ships to move at least a battalion of troops, only New Zealand aimed low at a company group, and now you want to build a ship which moves far less?

What is needed is a slightly larger OPV, one of maybe 95 meters in length instead of 85 meters, not a destroyer sized vessel to patrol the Southern Ocean EEZ.

One that is priced around NZ$200 million at most, preferrably less; not NZ$600 million.

Do Kiwis understand foreign conversion of money? Pounds are worth more than Euros which are worth more than American dollars which are worth more than Kiwi dollars.

The OPVs are 100 tons overweight, not 1,000 tons. One doesn't need a 6,000 ton ship to replace a OPV which may have been too small at 1600 tons.

1. The entire two ship Absalon project cost CND$565 million. If you can build and sell us two good quality Frigates in the 21st century for less then phone the RNZN.

2. The original MRV concept in the 2000 Land Forces Review was to move a Battalion Group. Vessel was to cost an estimated NZ$400 million.

3. 95 meters is still far from ideal for heli-ops, especially in the Southern Ocean. Remember the new Canterbury was also to patrol the Southern Ocean which is a bit larger than a Absalon (Which are designed to patrol Greenland and the Northern Atlantic). Our OPV's are a pony with few tricks. One of the the complaints about relying on OPV route was that the broader New Zealand maritime environment is more complex and requires a vessel with a greater range of skill sets than the limits of operating an OPV. Modelling the RNZN as a fisheries protection force such as the on the Irish Navy was simply stupid.

4. Kiwi's understanding Forex? Most of us do (Maybe the fools running defence over the last 9 years could take lessons from our new PM on Forex arbitrage) - we understand it enough that its not going to hang around the US55c mark for long and will head higher again though not touch 80c+ during the next 18 months.

5. Who said we needed two small 1600 ton OPV's in the first place. Frankly the OPV design never offered enough breath in their capability. There are a number of other significant tasks that the Navy should also be focusing on and should be able to provide. The Absalon platform is what we need, it can do an OPV's role and a lot more.

 

[regstrup]

Absalon (Which are designed to patrol Greenland and the Northern Atlantic)

This is not totally correct. They could patrol the Northern Atlantic and around Greenland in the summer, but they are not constructed to do that in the winter.

So don't ecspect to se the Absalon class patrol the sea around Greenland, as the danish navy has better ships for that task, like the Thetis and Knud Rasmussen class, both of which are icestrengthed, which the Absalon is not.

So don't make the same mistake as the New Zealand goverment, who thought they could get ships, who could do the most things. The Absalon is not the perfect solution to all the NZ demands. No ship is !

Sometimes you need diffírent classes of ships to solve different kinds of tasks.

 

[Sea Toby]

1. The entire two ship Absalon project cost CND$565 million. If you can build and sell us two good quality Frigates in the 21st century for less then phone the RNZN.

2. The original MRV concept in the 2000 Land Forces Review was to move a Battalion Group. Vessel was to cost an estimated NZ$400 million.

3. 95 meters is still far from ideal for heli-ops, especially in the Southern Ocean. Remember the new Canterbury was also to patrol the Southern Ocean which is a bit larger than a Absalon (Which are designed to patrol Greenland and the Northern Atlantic). Our OPV's are a pony with few tricks. One of the the complaints about relying on OPV route was that the broader New Zealand maritime environment is more complex and requires a vessel with a greater range of skill sets than the limits of operating an OPV. Modelling the RNZN as a fisheries protection force such as the on the Irish Navy was simply stupid.

4. Kiwi's understanding Forex? Most of us do (Maybe the fools running defence over the last 9 years could take lessons from our new PM on Forex arbitrage) - we understand it enough that its not going to hang around the US55c mark for long and will head higher again though not touch 80c+ during the next 18 months.

5. Who said we needed two small 1600 ton OPV's in the first place. Frankly the OPV design never offered enough breath in their capability. There are a number of other significant tasks that the Navy should also be focusing on and should be able to provide. The Absalon platform is what we need, it can do an OPV's role and a lot more.

The only probelem with the Absalon is they don't have enough lane meters to keep the Chief of the New Zealand defence staff happy. When he says at least 390 meters, trust me nothing will be bought with less. Building Absalons with only 240 lane meters would be a larger mistake than building OPVs a few meters too short.

One would have to be dreaming in never never land to think the NZ government would spend more money buying Absalons which are larger and more expensive than Anzac class frigates to do the EEZ patrols of the Southern Ocean. Period.

The government is not going to strike the Project Protector ships anytime soon. They are built, and we are stuck with them for the next 20-30 years in the for seeable future.

Either New Zealand spends a bit more to fix the Canterbury, and lose as much weight as possible with the OPVs, or nothing will be done. This is the political realities, not day dreaming in never never land.

 

[greenie]

Im only a sparky and not a TIF , but at the begining of a ships life there cant be to much off loaded in the name of saving weight ( alot of weight too)without compromising the operational capability , maybe there is .

 

[Sea Toby]

You are right, there isn't much weight to unload. If we were going to build more ships of the class, we could make some changes for the next batch of ships. Unfortunately, we are stuck with these. New Zealand doesn't have any more planned for the near future. That is why we should stick to tried and tested ships, without much of any changes whatsoever.

Its much easier to add some weight, ballast, than it is to remove extra weight. The question is how did we end up in this situation? The answer is we built two new ships with significant changes to what we thought were tried and tested ships. The Irish have two Roisins, there are four similar civilian ferries of the Canterbury. But we Kiwi-ized them, adding a helicopter hangar and deck among other changes. We built ships with significant changes that appears to not have the weight reserved for those changes.

We should have built the ships exactly as the Irish, without a helicopter hangar or deck, or built larger ships which could handle the extra weight. The answer is not to choose a ship more expensive than an Anzac frigate for Southern Ocean EEZ patrols.

We decided to replace two Leander class frigates with Anzacs during 1988, Absalons did not exist at that time. We decided to build a sea lift ship and patrol ships during 2003-04, we already had two new frigates. As I said before, New Zealand went cheap, wanting all seven ships of Project Protector for the price of one Anzac frigate.

 

[regstrup]

We should have built the ships exactly as the Irish, without a helicopter hangar or deck, or built larger ships which could handle the extra weight.

Could the problem be solve, if the OPV didn't carry a helicopter permanently ?

Not a perfect solution, because the helicopter is a great force multiplier, but a solution.

 

[Sea Toby]

A 10 ton helicopter won't solve a 100 ton overweight problem. One would probably be better off reducing fuel load. Even that won't be enough. The ship will have to carry on overweight, much like people do. But don't expect the best performance: top speed, ship handling, and sea keeping.

 

[Lucasnz]

The ANZAC's are having their engines replaced. The displacement growth per year is quoted at 2 tonnes. If you apply a margin of 2 tonne over the life of the OPV (25 years) then you're looking at a displacement increase of 50 tonnes (around 3% of the current displacement of 1700 tonnes), it brings the current weight problems into prespective.

 

[mug]

I've just seen that article - in fact there's been a flurry of NZDF articles on Stuff today.

Are the "four new engines" a GT and PDE for each ANZAC?

 

[ThePuss]

I've just seen that article - in fact there's been a flurry of NZDF articles on Stuff today.

Are the "four new engines" a GT and PDE for each ANZAC?

I cant see them replacing the LM2500 GT's and each ANZAC carries two PDE's so that would be the four donks

 

[MrConservative]

This is not totally correct. They could patrol the Northern Atlantic and around Greenland in the summer, but they are not constructed to do that in the winter.

So don't ecspect to se the Absalon class patrol the sea around Greenland, as the danish navy has better ships for that task, like the Thetis and Knud Rasmussen class, both of which are icestrengthed, which the Absalon is not.

So don't make the same mistake as the New Zealand goverment, who thought they could get ships, who could do the most things. The Absalon is not the perfect solution to all the NZ demands. No ship is !

Sometimes you need diffírent classes of ships to solve different kinds of tasks.

Thanks for that regstrup. It helps with another piece in the puzzle so to speak.

Q. Will the planned Danish Patrol Ships based on the Absaloms be ice strengthened?

 

[MrConservative]

The only probelem with the Absalon is they don't have enough lane meters to keep the Chief of the New Zealand defence staff happy. When he says at least 390 meters, trust me nothing will be bought with less. Building Absalons with only 240 lane meters would be a larger mistake than building OPVs a few meters too short.

One would have to be dreaming in never never land to think the NZ government would spend more money buying Absalons which are larger and more expensive than Anzac class frigates to do the EEZ patrols of the Southern Ocean. Period.

The government is not going to strike the Project Protector ships anytime soon. They are built, and we are stuck with them for the next 20-30 years in the for seeable future.

Either New Zealand spends a bit more to fix the Canterbury, and lose as much weight as possible with the OPVs, or nothing will be done. This is the political realities, not day dreaming in never never land.

I am well aware that the Army had its lane meters requirement. In fact the CDF in the early stage of the planning for Protector was pushing for a sea lane requirement greater then 390 metres (Battalion Group capability). In the end it is DefSec and Cabinet who decides these things.

I for one agree with your point that the former Government did the project on the cheap. We were all hoping with fingers crossed it wouldnt end in tears knowing that there was a fair chance of it being a dog. They totally ignored all the sage advice (Actually sacked people like Dave Dickens who disagreed with them), had a domestic political agenda and not a strategic regional agenda. Remember, the old Government very early on they had a pro Europe - Anti Aust/US sensibility. This had acquisition repercussions. The half billion cap (evidently set by Michael Cullen) was unrealisitic and the quality of advice was selective and at times mediocre. Thus was the result.

Sorry this point needs to be made again. An Absalon is cheaper to build in 2008 than to build replacement frigates suitable for the RNZN. Period. Greater in size does not mean greater in cost. This is 2008 and not the mid 90's. Of course if you loaded up the Absalon with every piece of choice kit going then obviously it would surpass it - that is not the point we are making. So please check your reading comprehension Toby. I have never said NZ should buy Absalons solely for EZZ fisheries patrol. In fact, I think the one trick pony capability of OPV's for New Zealand is not appropriate. I disagree over the Irish OPV as a model for NZ needs. It is too one dimensional in its capablity. Building naval capability is not about today, it is about at least a decade ahead. The naval requirements for a 2008 world we dont even posssess let alone the platforms needed for 2018.

When ex CNS guys of the calibre such as VADM Teague, RADM Wilson, RADM Welch, and ex DefSec Hensley have publicly stated that four Frigates and a Sealift ship was the optimal large ship package for the RNZN - who am I to argue with them.

To think we are stuck with the Protector ships for 30 years ... somehow I dont think you have cottoned on enough to the seriousness of the situation here in NZ, how seriously the new regime are taking it and how very anti Project Protector the new government has been. Also the Cowes report had very defined points of reference essentially over the Canterbury - it is still not the last word in the least to come out regarding the severe problems within Project Protector. I would not bank on all the project Protector ships especially the OPV's being around for long. Furthermore, I would be very careful in using the word dreaming ....

It is also yet not a 'given' that the vessels can be adequately rectified to a point that they are finally suitable. No one has made any guarantees and the reported twenty million was an estimate only on the Canterbury.

 

[swerve]

Q. Will the planned Danish Patrol Ships based on the Absaloms be ice strengthened?

I think not.

BTW, the label has changed from "Patruljeskib" to "Fregat".

http://www.navalhistory.dk/Danish/SoevaernsNyt/2008/1114_fregattagerform.htm

 

[regstrup]

Q. Will the planned Danish Patrol Ships based on the Absaloms be ice strengthened?

The Danish Defence Acquistion and Logistics Organization dosen't mention anything about that, like they positivly do with the OPVs for Greenland.

The fregats are build after the same concept as the Absalon and has the same hull (almost). The Absalon is not icestrengthen and neither will the fregats be.

 

[t68]

If it weren't for the costs of adding a plug, lengthening the OPVs another 5 to 10 meters, I would suggest doing this to make do with the OPVs. I would think these ships could use a longer bow up front. Two longer OPVs would be an asset. But it looks as if we will have to make do with the ships as they are, minus whatever weight the ships can be reduced, which won't be much.

But what got us to this point of having no ships to patrol the Southern Ocean is thinking in terms of being too cheap, and too small with Project Protector. They were on the right track, but it appears to me a bit more funding and a bit more boat size would have done the trick, been better.

I don’t know anything about ship design, would putting the plug in fix the top weight issue with HMNZS Otago?
Apart from having more internal spaces and possible fixing the weight issue, would the extra $ put into it make it worth while to do?

 

[Sea Toby]

I am not an expert either. But I do know of a few cruise ships which have been extended with a plug, which increased their displacement. For example, the Norwegian Dream, Wind, and Majesty were given plugs by Lloydwerf in Hamburg. Were not the last batch of Type 42s built longer, towards the bow of the ships? And were not their displacement larger?

Instead of dreaming up new ships, I would think it would be cheaper to plug the ships, increasing their length? And wouldn't the best location be towards the bow similar to the Type 42s?

 

[t68]

I am not an expert either. But I do know of a few cruise ships which have been extended with a plug, which increased their displacement. For example, the Norwegian Dream, Wind, and Majesty were given plugs by Lloydwerf in Hamburg. Were not the last batch of Type 42s built longer, towards the bow of the ships? And were not their displacement larger?

Instead of dreaming up new ships, I would think it would be cheaper to plug the ships, increasing their length? And wouldn't the best location be towards the bow similar to the Type 42s?

Agreed, they just spent a bucket load of money on the seven ships for a small economy like the kiwis have, I just think that they needed to look at the end result a bit more carefully when choosing a design and as you say kiwi-zing it.

As to were to put a plug in it, put it in the middle so that they could increase usable stowage ,as I said before I am no ship builder so have no idea of the implications of whacking 10 or so metres in the middle.

 

[greenie]

From the rumors I here the OPVs may not be the only ships needing a plug, it is also an option on the table to fix the MRVs pitching problems, about 20m I here. Maybe we wont ever see the "all grand" protector fleet.

 

[Tasman]

Te Kaha visits Hobart

The Anzac class frigate HMNZS Te Kaha visited Hobart in December. She is now fitted with what appear to be 2 Mini Typhoon RWS in the wings above the bridge. Her Phalanx CIWS was not shipped (presumably because it is undergoing modification at present).

images can be seen at http://tasmansblog.blogspot.com/


Tas

 

[recce.k1]

The Anzac class frigate HMNZS Te Kaha visited Hobart in December. She is now fitted with what appear to be 2 Mini Typhoon RWS in the wings above the bridge. Her Phalanx CIWS was not shipped (presumably because it is undergoing modification at present).

images can be seen at http://tasmansblog.blogspot.com/


Tas

More nice shots there thanks Tasman! Te Kaha arrives back in NZ tomorrow after 3 months of exercises and training in the South China Sea and in the Indian Ocean with the RAN. Next month she is on the annual sub-Antarctic islands re-supply for Govt agencies (talk about extremes in climates!) and I believe mid year she will undergo a major refit and will be out of action for a while (hopefully some of the Navy subscribers here can confirm). Details at http://www.nzdf.mil.nz/news/media-releases/20081215-nfahfcr.htm

Also the 5 RNZN Seasprites flew together in formation yesterday. NZDF haven't released the press release or pics yet but here are some nice pics unofficially at http://rnzaf.proboards43.com/index.cgi?board=Postwar&action=display&thread=8121