Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[MrConservative]

You talk about rocket launchers as some sort of SDI initiative hugely expensive and ground breaking, it is fairly standard proven stuff. I am well aware of the need for a heavy maritime emphasis on defence, I just feel for a country that is only prepared to allocate a modest amount to defence (I make no call on whether this is right or wrong). Traditional ASW focused Frigates do not represent good value. A well armed OPV even something like a KD Lekiu (maybe, just 16 ESSM instead of Sea Wolf, torpedo tubes and the 57mm gun and a helicopter, slightly slower with a longer range) would be much better value for money. The RNZN could then afford to operate say 6 rather then the current 2 + 2.

My point about HIMARS and M777 were examples of things that should have greater priority than a 3rd frigate, earlier I did point out other such needy cases: the Orion and Hercules which like the artillery are very old and should be priorities for replacement.

Yes the sort of maritime work RNZN needs requires greater numbers, but not hi-end frigates to deal with submarines.

I did not mention anything about the cost of rockets persay or specifically mention SDI so dont attempt to re-evaluate what I have written to make up for the flawed logic in your principle argument.

A heavily armed OPV? A Corvette? Again take out the world map and see the distances that need to be covered. A general purpose frigate / long range surface combatant (120m+) call it what you will is the minmum required vessel. OPV's are fine for NZ EEZ work but not for a maritime nation stuck in the middle of the largest Ocean in the world with the longest SLOC of any country.

Also I did not say anything about a high end frigate - a general purpose frigate along the lines of the future C2 rather than C1 or planned AnzacII is most appropriate as it has the required automonous mission range, task flexibility capacity to deal with the various conigencies that a kiwi frigate might find itself just like the previous Leanders and current Anzacs have done over the last few decades.

 

[anzac3]

The other great thing about a 3rd frigate is that it can be off on joint exercises with friendly nations. Wheras now, if one frigate goes away that only leaves one remaining.
Joint exercises and friendship with other nations is new zealands best chance at beating off an attacker. Allies that see new zealand as a good contributor to global issues are are more likely to come to our aid.

You gotta have mates!
glad to see this forum is strong

 

[StevoJH]

It takes about 12 months to train an Army Battalion in an emergency, if you can use existing units and personnel to act as a skeleton right?

It probably takes about 4 or 5 years to construct a frigate from the time of placing an order.

Now tell me which is more vital to have on hand.

If you can't deploy a full brigade, you can contribute a battalion to an ANZAC brigade.

You can't exactly deploy an OPV with an ANZAC Amphibious task group as much more then canon fodder.

 

[1805]

I did not mention anything about the cost of rockets persay or specifically mention SDI so dont attempt to re-evaluate what I have written to make up for the flawed logic in your principle argument.

A heavily armed OPV? A Corvette? Again take out the world map and see the distances that need to be covered. A general purpose frigate / long range surface combatant (120m+) call it what you will is the minmum required vessel. OPV's are fine for NZ EEZ work but not for a maritime nation stuck in the middle of the largest Ocean in the world with the longest SLOC of any country.

Also I did not say anything about a high end frigate - a general purpose frigate along the lines of the future C2 rather than C1 or planned AnzacII is most appropriate as it has the required automonous mission range, task flexibility capacity to deal with the various conigencies that a kiwi frigate might find itself just like the previous Leanders and current Anzacs have done over the last few decades.

OK I will stop putting words into your mouth if you stop telling me to get a the map out. However range wise something along the lines of the Floréal class frigate at 93m and 10,000m range, maybe a bit fast at 22-24knots and a different armament. 4 OPVs along those lines and 2 Absalon types, able to operare the entire NH90 fleet. All updated on replacement of the existing fleet, as obviously the protector force is new.

 

[1805]

Possibly, but I'm unsure of how OPVs would be better for Gulf operations and similar to a frigate, even if they were procured in great numbers.

It's also worth remembering that you're not talking about spending the money saved from a third frigate on OPVs - you're talking about spending the money on artillery and attack helicopters.

Yes I was, I recon for the cost of a frigate you could build 2 OPVs and upgrade the artillery, and probably money for a handful of attack helicopters.

If an OPV can defend itself (57mm/16 ESSM) and has a fully armed helicopter it should be able to do as much as say HMS Cornwall was doing in the Gulf?

 

[MrConservative]

OK I will stop putting words into your mouth if you stop telling me to get a the map out. However range wise something along the lines of the Floréal class frigate at 93m and 10,000m range, maybe a bit fast at 22-24knots and a different armament. 4 OPVs along those lines and 2 Absalon types, able to operare the entire NH90 fleet. All updated on replacement of the existing fleet, as obviously the protector force is new.

No you were not putting words in my mouth you were attempting to spin doctor my comments to dig yourself out of flawed argument viz security priorities. So the Floreal class - a short hull frigate is what you want as your "OPV" for the RNZN? So you really have shifted positions. Must have been the cartographical assistance you heeded. There is a hell of a lot of difference between a floreal class frigate and an OPV even with a 76mm like the Roisin from which the Protectors were sired from. Whacking ESSM on to the thing starts to mock the monicker OPV with a Corvette.

Now the question is why then a short hulled frigate of 93m is your preference to a othodox 120m hull frigate for the RNZN? Which is typicallly the more stable helicopter platform? Which would have greater space for tech creep over the 30+ year life of the vessel? Which would be more suitable for the NZ maritime environment which involves the Pacific and Southern Oceans?

Now as for your suggestion of an Absalon "Type" you are now closer to the mark - the new patrol frigate derived version currently under construction is in the same potential mix as a C2 and worth considering for the RNZN.

 

[MrConservative]

Yes I was, I recon for the cost of a frigate you could build 2 OPVs and upgrade the artillery, and probably money for a handful of attack helicopters.

If an OPV can defend itself (57mm/16 ESSM) and has a fully armed helicopter it should be able to do as much as say HMS Cornwall was doing in the Gulf?

Well you reckon wrong. You will not in a month of sundays be able to construct the two corvette you have outlined with ESSM ect, to do"all that the elderly Cornwall can do (and I'm not even going to go there) plus replace the artillery for 161 and 163 Batteries with triple 7's as well as buy let alone deploy a "handful" of attack helicopters for the same price of modest general purpose frigate.

It would be nice if you could put some reality checking into your posts and not be so obstinate about defending a position that that has been politely exposed by a numbrer of posters as flawed.

 

[Sea Toby]

Yes I was, I recon for the cost of a frigate you could build 2 OPVs and upgrade the artillery, and probably money for a handful of attack helicopters.

If an OPV can defend itself (57mm/16 ESSM) and has a fully armed helicopter it should be able to do as much as say HMS Cornwall was doing in the Gulf?

An OPV doesn't have a sonar, towed sonar array, SAMs or a SAM launcher, a SSMs or SSM launcher, CIWS, ASW torpedo tubes, the combat targeting missile radars/illuminators, much less the accommodations for the increased number of sailors aboard. By the time you add all of these items to turn an OPV into a small corvette or small frigate, you will have a frigate... Why not buy a frigate to begin with? There is a reason why frigates run over US $300 miliion, not US $50 million...

The OPVs were designed for constable missions in and around New Zealand. They were not designed to be warships, or converted into warships at a later date. They also were not designed to spend months in one deployment at sea either. While they have good range as patrol vessels, they do not have the endurance of US Coast Guard high endurance cutters. The US Coast Guard would classify NZ's OPVs as medium endurance cutters, not corvettes or frigates...

Frankly, I doubt whether any ally would want an OPV in their task force without at least a CIWS mount... They are best doing with what they were designed for, for constable duties. They are not warships and will never be warships going in harm's way... :

Why do we listen to those who know absolutely nothing about naval warfare discuss naval warfare? I know they have a right to their opinions, but their opinions have no substance whatsoever...None! Fly by wire admirals don't cut the mustard...

 

[1805]

Well you reckon wrong. You will not in a month of sundays be able to construct the two corvette you have outlined with ESSM ect, to do"all that the elderly Cornwall can do (and I'm not even going to go there) plus replace the artillery for 161 and 163 Batteries with triple 7's as well as buy let alone deploy a "handful" of attack helicopters for the same price of modest general purpose frigate.

It would be nice if you could put some reality checking into your posts and not be so obstinate about defending a position that that has been politely exposed by a numbrer of posters as flawed.

OK maybe not a handful of attack helicopters, but Wiki quotes a AH-64A at US$20 million (2007) so 4 $80m. HIMARS & M777 are cUS$3m each, so if you replace 12 L119 you're talking US$40m a couple of Floreal Class type ships $100m each? All guess work, and a bit over but surely more useful than a 3rd frigate.

 

[1805]

An OPV doesn't have a sonar, towed sonar array, SAMs or a SAM launcher, a SSMs or SSM launcher, CIWS, ASW torpedo tubes, the combat targeting missile radars/illuminators, much less the accommodations for the increased number of sailors aboard. By the time you add all of these items to turn an OPV into a small corvette or small frigate, you will have a frigate... Why not buy a frigate to begin with? There is a reason why frigates run over US $300 miliion, not US $50 million...

The OPVs were designed for constable missions in and around New Zealand. They were not designed to be warships, or converted into warships at a later date. They also were not designed to spend months in one deployment at sea either. While they have good range as patrol vessels, they do not have the endurance of US Coast Guard high endurance cutters. The US Coast Guard would classify NZ's OPVs as medium endurance cutters, not corvettes or frigates...

Frankly, I doubt whether any ally would want an OPV in their task force without at least a CIWS mount... They are best doing with what they were designed for, for constable duties. They are not warships and will never be warships going in harm's way... :

Why do we listen to those who know absolutely nothing about naval warfare discuss naval warfare? I know they have a right to their opinions, but their opinions have no substance whatsoever...None! Fly by wire admirals don't cut the mustard...

This is NZ not the USN, on the money available huge areas have to be given up. A powerful ASW force is not really sustainable. I was not talking about the current NZ OPVs, something more akin to the Floreal Class.

 

[MrConservative]

OK maybe not a handful of attack helicopters, but Wiki quotes a AH-64A at US$20 million (2007) so 4 $80m. HIMARS & M777 are cUS$3m each, so if you replace 12 L119 you're talking US$40m a couple of Floreal Class type ships $100m each? All guess work, and a bit over but surely more useful than a 3rd frigate.

Firstly, I would not quote from wiki to get reliable results. The ARH Tiger which is the rival to the Apache is around the USD$50m mark in the real world. Do you seriously think that 4 attack helicopters would be operationally feasible? Four airframes would still mean you have to set up a very long logistical supply line. Operationally it gets even more complex from that point.

Secondly I have been told by someone very much in the know that to replace the 24 L119's with the M-777 would be in the order of $180m - $200m by the time the full support costs are added to the acquisition package. That does not include ordance either.

Thirdly the Floreals have been essentially a non runner as a viable build for years - wouldn't you be more interested in their replacement? Gawd knows where you came up with the figure of $100m for a Floreal. Or are you basing it on some figure from the late 80's when they began to be built.

As you say - all guess work - pretty much encapsulates the cognitive grunt you have been putting into your recent posts.

 

[stryker NZ]

OK maybe not a handful of attack helicopters, but Wiki quotes a AH-64A at US$20 million (2007) so 4 $80m. HIMARS & M777 are cUS$3m each, so if you replace 12 L119 you're talking US$40m a couple of Floreal Class type ships $100m each? All guess work, and a bit over but surely more useful than a 3rd frigate.

technically speaking according to wiki our new NH90's cost around 30 million each which means it should have only cost us around the 270mil mark to buy 10 not 900 mil. Base cost is not always the only thing which has to be taken into consideration and although im no expert i would think attack helicopters would be alot more expensive than those built for transport.

oh just another note the cost on wiki are for the AH-64A model which came out in the early 1980's would they even build those any more?

 

[1805]

Ok ok...I hold my hands up those numbers don't stake up. Thats said the artillery still needs updating (not all 24), as eventually will the Orions/Hercules which should all have priority over a 3rd frigate.

 

[Sea Toby]

technically speaking according to wiki our new NH90's cost around 30 million each which means it should have only cost us around the 270mil mark to buy 10 not 900 mil. Base cost is not always the only thing which has to be taken into consideration and although im no expert i would think attack helicopters would be alot more expensive than those built for transport.

oh just another note the cost on wiki are for the AH-64A model which came out in the early 1980's would they even build those any more?

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN US DOLLARS AND NEW ZEALAND DOLLARS. At the moment the conversion rate is:

U.S. Dollar / New Zealand Dollar 0.7321 0.7321
New Zealand Dollar / U.S. Dollar 1.3660 1.3660

Monetary conversion rates change all of the time. Its misleading to use costs of NZ dollars with US dollars... They are not the same... And I am not even sure your 60 million quote is in US dollars.

If the NH90s were purchased for 30 million Euros, which are worth more than the US dollar and with the NZ dollar worth even less... 30 million Euros can easily be 60 million or more NZ dollars...

When quoting price figures, please define which currency you are using.

 

[Sea Toby]

Ok ok...I hold my hands up those numbers don't stake up. Thats said the artillery still needs updating (not all 24), as eventually will the Orions/Hercules which should all have priority over a 3rd frigate.

Skimping the frigate requirement to save money up front, buying two instead of three, means in the long run you spend more. The two frigates have been and are being used much more wearing them out much faster. Instead of getting 30+ years out of the frigates, NZ will probably end up with 20+ years before a service life extension program. SLEPs are as expensive as buying the frigate 20 years ago.

Think in years

2 ships for 20 years is 10 years each
3 ships for 30 years is 10 years each

Then think either the SLEP or buying new ships at the 20 year point will cost more over the long run...

 

[Bonza]

Yes I was, I recon for the cost of a frigate you could build 2 OPVs and upgrade the artillery, and probably money for a handful of attack helicopters.

I disagree, for the reasons a number of other posters have already pointed out. I'd also point out that buying a handful of attack helicopters doesn't build a capability - you need more than a few if you want them to be useful. In addition you need to consider more than just procurement costs, as there's not only associated through-life costs, but also the costs of growing an entirely new capability (attack helicopters), with all the associated logistics, training and operational burdens.

If an OPV can defend itself (57mm/16 ESSM) and has a fully armed helicopter it should be able to do as much as say HMS Cornwall was doing in the Gulf?

My reservations have absolutely nothing to do with weapons fit - why would you think that? I was thinking of the utility offered by a large vessel in terms of seakeeping, endurance, room for equipment/personnel, etc... weapons fit is the furthest thing for my mind.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Thats said the artillery still needs updating (not all 24), as eventually will the Orions/Hercules which should all have priority over a 3rd frigate.

I don't know about that. I think a Frigate is of more national important than Oris/hercs/artillery.

I think a lot of this stuff is wait and see what Aus will buy, and see if it is appropriate to buy the same. Herc replacement is something that well Australia is concidering a simular project for Bou replacement that may be of interest to NZ. Same for frigates. Artillary has plenty of options avalible that aren't time critical and is for a capability that allies can cover.

 

[stryker NZ]

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN US DOLLARS AND NEW ZEALAND DOLLARS. At the moment the conversion rate is:

U.S. Dollar / New Zealand Dollar 0.7321 0.7321
New Zealand Dollar / U.S. Dollar 1.3660 1.3660

Monetary conversion rates change all of the time. Its misleading to use costs of NZ dollars with US dollars... They are not the same... And I am not even sure your 60 million quote is in US dollars.

If the NH90s were purchased for 30 million Euros, which are worth more than the US dollar and with the NZ dollar worth even less... 30 million Euros can easily be 60 million or more NZ dollars...

When quoting price figures, please define which currency you are using.

sorry should have been more clear i shouldnt do early morning posts

i should have said i had alreadi converted the 30mill number i put forward into NZ dollars from the wiki number which was quoted in euros. Im not exactly sure where the US dollars came into the equation guess that was my fault for not being clear again.

however that aside my whole point was that we should not trust wiki, not to argue aquisition costs in that case i would have been much more careful with my numbers

 

[anzac3]

I wonder if Australia will be in the position of having too many ships in the near future,
If australia offers new zealand a secondhand anzac frigate or two, would that be exceptable to the nz public?
I think a second hand frigate will help ease the pain, and im hoping that two could come our way.
They wouldnt be cheap, as the australian public and media would go to town on the pricing, but this could really work.
Would it be cheeky asking them?
I know during the 90s they tried to force nz into getting at least 3 frigates. so they must be keen to help us.
help us poor nzers

 

[Adzze]

I wonder if Australia will be in the position of having too many ships in the near future,
If australia offers new zealand a secondhand anzac frigate or two, would that be exceptable to the nz public?
I think a second hand frigate will help ease the pain, and im hoping that two could come our way.

I wondered that too. It might be prudent to buy closer to the time when Australia starts to replace their Anzacs, though I imagine they will want to get rid of the oldest ones first.
I think with the changing attitudes of the public, they would be amenable to a second hand upgraded Anzac as long as it's done after the recession is perceived to be over.