NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
I tend to agree that the vessel is something more than a 25mm equipped ship. LSS could mean anything but I would suggest that some of the roles that the proposed RAN OCV have are very similar.
Both the MEKO CSL and US LCS are clearly out on cost grounds. The only option short of building an OCV is to design an orphan (hence the OPV Option :shudder . I would suggest an endurance (Speed & Range) similar to the MRV, Medium calibre gun, 25mm (with maybe Mistral fitted). Core crew would have to be limited to the current size of Resolution. My two cents worth.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
The ex-RAN Seasprite were IIRC re-manufactured SH-2F airframes. As part of the re-manufacture process, they should have been 'zero-timed' and fitted with a second turboshaft. In terms of avionics fitout, the RAN Seasprites were to have a much more advanced, comprehensive sensor and electronics fitout than the RNZN. To my understanding, the cockpit/WSO electronics of the Oz Seasprites would have been in some ways comparable to the electronics aboard the MH-60R 'Romeo' Seahawks, or anticipated for the NFH-90. As mentioned earlier, where the Oz Seasprites ran into troubl, was that as part of the fitout, there were only to be two crewmembers aboard. Since there was only going to be a pilot and no co-pilot, and due to changes within the ADF flight certification requirements, the digital flight control system needed to have a backup digital flight control system. One of which could have been developed, but it would have further increased and delayed a project that was already A$1 bil. over budget, and ~a decade behind. While the backup would likely have only cost a further A$50 - 60 mil. to develop, it was expected that the development time would delay IOC a further 18 months up to 3 years. In short, the Oz Seasprites would likely have been entering FOC around the time that the ADF was expecting to begin replacing the S-70B-2 Seahawks with the Future Naval Helicopter as part of the ADF helicopter rationalization programme.
The SH-2G Seasprites that should be on offer for sale at present should have an avionics fitout that is more inline with the Kiwi Seasprites, and operating with the conventional pilot, co-pilot and crew chief/WSO that most naval helicopters operate with. If that is the case, then there should not be much risk in terms of entry into service for the helicopters.
From a NZDF POV, I do have some concerns as to whether or not they would be a wise purchase. As covered within NZ defence posts previously, Kaman might not be particularly interested in selling the ex-RAN Seasprites in any way apart from the entire lot. While I do think the NZDF would be well served having 11 extra naval helicopters, give their multi-role capabilities and the already existing gaps within NZ sensor/patrol coverage... 11 extra naval helicopters would triple the size of the naval helicopter fleet, and likely come close to doubling the total helicopter fleet size within the NZDF. I am not certain that the NZDF could absorb such an increase in terms of pilots, aircrew and ground support. Nevermind actually affording the operating costs given how parsimonous the NZDF budget has been.
Further, while the initial acquisition cost would likely be fairly low, at least when compared to new examples of the NFH-90 or MH-60R 'Romeo' naval helicopters, it is an older helicopter, which has largely been withdrawn from service and has a rather small support base. This means that over the operational life of the aircraft, it could get both more difficult and more expensive to keep them viable operationally.
As for what is appropriate for the littoral warfare support vessel... It very much depends on just what that is supposed to mean exactly. If the intention is to have a vessel which can operate with reasonable safety in contested/hostile greenwater environments, that would require certain capabilities in terms of situational awareness and self-defence. OTOH if the vessel was only planned for use in and around NZ home waters and EEZ, then that is an entirely different set of environmental parameters, all of which impact vessel fitout.
-Cheers
Commamality can be in the various specified OTS equipment that the vessel has installed during its design and construction. It does not mean that we should go out and carte blanche buy this particular design concept - because that is what it is - because it may have a degree of commonality with that thing they call the Canterbury. So if we want commonality we can by all means specify as many similiar onboard workable OTS systems to the Canterbury - but the Canterbury and Merwedes JSS design will have a number of different systems anyway due to breath of roles that the new JSS design can achieve.
I am more interested following this TKMS design concept than the proposed Merwede vessel in a future RNZN. In my view we can get commonality when we retire the Canterbury.
http://www.coecsw.org/011._Modularity_in_the_Field_of_Support_Ships_Dr_Kaeding_TKMS.pdf
Get something along these lines for the Endeavour replacement, the MRD-150 / MESHD for instance in the first half of the decade and then after the Canterbury has been in service for 10-12 years post 2017 sell it of to some 3rd world Navy and build the similar MHD-150 version. Then we will have proper synergies and commonality rather than another ad-hoc hamfisted lowest common demoninator attempt.
As for the LWSV, if it is going to go into harms way even in a zone slightly above LIC, then the OPV with a bigger gun is not going to cut the mustard. It is militarily fragile. It is a low cost large fisheries protection vessel. You cannot dress mutton up as lamb as they say. The only connection the vessel may have with surveying will be of a military nature and all that will require is the LWSV to act as a mothership for a containerised RSSM. It therefore does not need any of the design characteristics of a traditional survey ship. That can be sorted out and paid for by NIWA who are in all likelihood going to take over the civilian requirements of Hydrogrphic Survey. The LWSV to have any utiliity will need to be multi-role and closer to the Corvette spectrum in combat capability than a Protector OPV.
Again the future LWSV vessel can have some OTS systems commonality with the OPV's but it does not mean that we must box ourselves into corner due to the fact we need to attempt to perpetuate a sort of tarted up clone of the current OPV's. Let the LWSV lead us in a new direction and new maritime capability with new functionality and standards than trying to give a sense of purpose and continuity to in my view flawed vessels. Again build the LWSV in the first part of this decade and replace the OPV's after 10 years in service with a patrol derivative of the LWSV design. After ten years or so in service the Canterbury and the OPV's are likely going to have money spent on them. Cut our losses, factor in the depreciation, flog them off to a 3rd World Navy and start getting things right and appropriate.
I am more interested following this TKMS design concept than the proposed Merwede vessel in a future RNZN. In my view we can get commonality when we retire the Canterbury.
http://www.coecsw.org/011._Modularity_in_the_Field_of_Support_Ships_Dr_Kaeding_TKMS.pdf
Get something along these lines for the Endeavour replacement, the MRD-150 / MESHD for instance in the first half of the decade and then after the Canterbury has been in service for 10-12 years post 2017 sell it of to some 3rd world Navy and build the similar MHD-150 version. Then we will have proper synergies and commonality rather than another ad-hoc hamfisted lowest common demoninator attempt.
As for the LWSV, if it is going to go into harms way even in a zone slightly above LIC, then the OPV with a bigger gun is not going to cut the mustard. It is militarily fragile. It is a low cost large fisheries protection vessel. You cannot dress mutton up as lamb as they say. The only connection the vessel may have with surveying will be of a military nature and all that will require is the LWSV to act as a mothership for a containerised RSSM. It therefore does not need any of the design characteristics of a traditional survey ship. That can be sorted out and paid for by NIWA who are in all likelihood going to take over the civilian requirements of Hydrogrphic Survey. The LWSV to have any utiliity will need to be multi-role and closer to the Corvette spectrum in combat capability than a Protector OPV.
Again the future LWSV vessel can have some OTS systems commonality with the OPV's but it does not mean that we must box ourselves into corner due to the fact we need to attempt to perpetuate a sort of tarted up clone of the current OPV's. Let the LWSV lead us in a new direction and new maritime capability with new functionality and standards than trying to give a sense of purpose and continuity to in my view flawed vessels. Again build the LWSV in the first part of this decade and replace the OPV's after 10 years in service with a patrol derivative of the LWSV design. After ten years or so in service the Canterbury and the OPV's are likely going to have money spent on them. Cut our losses, factor in the depreciation, flog them off to a 3rd World Navy and start getting things right and appropriate.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
I'd agree in that the replacement is a Support vessel and primarily for the diving team (and maybe some secret squirel underwater operation/reconnaisance/sabotage/mine clearance stuff etc), and unlikely to be operated in direct-harms way (unless accompanied by a Frigate)?
One or two remote controlled 25 or 40mm's etc, as the main armament should be sufficient to ward off any nosey vessels nearby except I'd agree also with Lucas that it ought to have better self-defence systems eg Mistral or similar, and at least something similar to a CIWS (maybe drop the 25mm RWS in lieu) seeing that operating in the littorals could see a missile fired at it. Whilst primarily for work in the Pacific, the diving team are top notch and surely could easily find themselves operating in SE Asia as a Govt contribution to 5PDA etc? Agreed that a helo deck would be of huge benefit especially for resupply and maybe as a means to extract/deliver divers or ROV's to a location (or multiple locations) out of harms way, away from the vessel and unfriendly forces etc.
HMNZS MANAWANUI Particulars
MANAWANUI is part of the Navy’s Littoral Warfare Support Group and supports diving and mine counter-measure operations.
The Navy’s Operational Dive team is often based on MANAWANUI who are trained for deep diving using mixed gas breathing apparatus, and is skilled in underwater demolition and unexploded ordnance disposal. Onboard MANAWANUI you will find modern system including a compression chamber, a diving bell, a 15 ton crane and workshop facilities including electric and gas welding equipment and a lathe.
With a range of 5000 nautical miles MANAWANUI can undertake peacekeeping and maritime security missions around the New Zealand coast, South Pacific and South East Asia regions. MANAWANUI is a frequent visitor to New Caledonia to take part in multi national exercises in mine clearing.
Displacement: 911 tonnes
Length: 43.6 metres
Beam: 9.5 metres
Draught: 3.2 metres
Range: 5000 nautical miles
Crew: 20 personnel
ENDS Our Littoral Support ships RESOLUTION and MANAWANUI undertake diving, mine clearance and surveying work around New Zealand and the Pacific.
Im starting to think that because the replacement is dubbed a 'littoral warfare support ship' everyone thinks its going to be some warfighting vessel with self protection and the ability to take care of itself in a stoush, somewhere between an upgunned OPV and dummed down frigate. From this article you can see that it just a title not a design concept, littoral warfare support group has a ship, therefore littoral warfare support ship. The ships this is replaceing are not combat in nature now so why would they in the future. In fact they barely even leave NZ territorial waters. They probably will have some sort of weapon system(s) but no where near the extent some here are proposeing.
The way I see it all this ship is doing is combineing our current Hydrographic survey and Diving support along with MCM, limited EEZ patrol etc into one platform ie naval support, not to provide another combatent. If we needed these support roles under a weapon umbrella then we could just upgun the OPVs and put the modular containers on the back.
We do not have alot of funding now and I do not see that changing in the immediate future so all these visions of weapons systems, sensor suites, mini aircraft carriers/super tankers are wishful at best. Project protector is a prime example, nothing flashy, on a budget, has its problems, not entirely suited however does the job, covers its required roles and is still a vast improvement on what we had. The recent ex Hamel showed this with Canterbury, deployed the Army to Australia and brought them back within our own means, job done role justified, and the 'puny' 25mm cannon did not alter the endstate. LWSS will work just as well in its intended role.
sorry recce you got in just ahead of me
MANAWANUI is part of the Navy’s Littoral Warfare Support Group and supports diving and mine counter-measure operations.
The Navy’s Operational Dive team is often based on MANAWANUI who are trained for deep diving using mixed gas breathing apparatus, and is skilled in underwater demolition and unexploded ordnance disposal. Onboard MANAWANUI you will find modern system including a compression chamber, a diving bell, a 15 ton crane and workshop facilities including electric and gas welding equipment and a lathe.
With a range of 5000 nautical miles MANAWANUI can undertake peacekeeping and maritime security missions around the New Zealand coast, South Pacific and South East Asia regions. MANAWANUI is a frequent visitor to New Caledonia to take part in multi national exercises in mine clearing.
Displacement: 911 tonnes
Length: 43.6 metres
Beam: 9.5 metres
Draught: 3.2 metres
Range: 5000 nautical miles
Crew: 20 personnel
ENDS Our Littoral Support ships RESOLUTION and MANAWANUI undertake diving, mine clearance and surveying work around New Zealand and the Pacific.
Im starting to think that because the replacement is dubbed a 'littoral warfare support ship' everyone thinks its going to be some warfighting vessel with self protection and the ability to take care of itself in a stoush, somewhere between an upgunned OPV and dummed down frigate. From this article you can see that it just a title not a design concept, littoral warfare support group has a ship, therefore littoral warfare support ship. The ships this is replaceing are not combat in nature now so why would they in the future. In fact they barely even leave NZ territorial waters. They probably will have some sort of weapon system(s) but no where near the extent some here are proposeing.
The way I see it all this ship is doing is combineing our current Hydrographic survey and Diving support along with MCM, limited EEZ patrol etc into one platform ie naval support, not to provide another combatent. If we needed these support roles under a weapon umbrella then we could just upgun the OPVs and put the modular containers on the back.
We do not have alot of funding now and I do not see that changing in the immediate future so all these visions of weapons systems, sensor suites, mini aircraft carriers/super tankers are wishful at best. Project protector is a prime example, nothing flashy, on a budget, has its problems, not entirely suited however does the job, covers its required roles and is still a vast improvement on what we had. The recent ex Hamel showed this with Canterbury, deployed the Army to Australia and brought them back within our own means, job done role justified, and the 'puny' 25mm cannon did not alter the endstate. LWSS will work just as well in its intended role.
sorry recce you got in just ahead of me
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
I agree with your sentiments Reg, but also suspect that because the replacement vessel will likely be "more-capable" eg likely to be bigger (to accomodate the roles of two seperate vessels), likely to have a faster transit speed (there's no excuse not to, nowadays), in this day and age likely to have a helo deck and hanger (good for storage when not carrying helo or UAV), and likely to accommodate more gadgets for the diving team not envisaged when Manawanui was bought (eg ROV's and other new generation underwater vehicles) and now that the world situation is becoming more uncertain as other nations are turning into players (and NZ has left the 80's and 90's era of marking time whilst the pollies tried to figure out what to do with defence in light of non-involvment with the US) and NZ is increasingly contributing to international efforts to maintain stability etc, I'd suggest Govt and Defence would want more out of this proposed vessel (and manpower expertise) and get closer to harm's way. A popgun or sorts should be added (after all they are on the patrol boats which won't go anywhere near any harm) but I still reckon it needs a better self-defence system than the OPV's. Unless the Govt skimps and buys something "commerical" like Project Protector, a more capable replacement would be both a handy utility for Govt foreign policy objectives and slotting into an international coalition force, so it would need extra capabilities that the two current vessels lack to make them worthy of selection for more demanding task force needs, if NZ is to be taken seriously etc. I do agree it doesn't need to be a warship-lite though (buy some OCV's or Corvettes instead)!
yes totally agree with you reece that the new ship will be more capable speed, endurance, sea keeping, habitability even size wise etc, it now has the added tasks of 2 ships, all useful traits for its intended role however just not sold on giving it bigger and better weapon systems than the OPVs no real need, if it was intended to go into a theatre that required that level of protection then it would have an escort otherwise for the majority of its life it would be an unnesscessary waste of capital when probably the OPVs could get the upgrades and be used more productively. The OPVs are just as likely to deploy where the new survey/diving ship will ie Aus and south pacific if not more and even then not as a combatent more just a presence/good will visit, otherwise pottering around Hauraki gulf, East coast, Fiordland sounds and our EEZ just does'nt warrant a floating arsenal.
Don't get me wrong I advocate some form of defence bare minimum .50 cals but max 25mm for that rare 'incident' possibility however anything larger is just overkill. If you compare it to our other vessels and tally up the likeliness of where their main tasks will occur and in what context then it just seems like putting a big gun on it for the sake of having a big gun, not for its actual usefulness and in these fiscal times it will be at the expense of something else probably more beneficial.
I can only dream of what people will want added to Endeavour replacement, will probably be a destroyer by the end.
Don't get me wrong I advocate some form of defence bare minimum .50 cals but max 25mm for that rare 'incident' possibility however anything larger is just overkill. If you compare it to our other vessels and tally up the likeliness of where their main tasks will occur and in what context then it just seems like putting a big gun on it for the sake of having a big gun, not for its actual usefulness and in these fiscal times it will be at the expense of something else probably more beneficial.
I can only dream of what people will want added to Endeavour replacement, will probably be a destroyer by the end.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I think you sort of missed the point I and some of the other posters were making.
If the vessel is just intended to operate in and around NZ, the significant armament is indeed not required. OTOH the expected aim for the Littoral Warfare support vessel has not been mentioned, whilst that of the OPV's has. For in and around NZ, a 25mm cannon, and/or 12.7mm HMG would really be sufficient. IMO though a mounting for a Mk 15 Phalanx CIWS would likely be a better option.
If the LWSV ended up getting dispatched due to Kiwi interests or obligations to needed areas (Malacca Straits, Horn of Africa, etc) then additional equipment would likely be needed. Not so much for ASuW or even air defence, but more self-defence vs. FAC. At the least, space and weight should be allocated to allow for additional armament to be mounted if/when needed, that and the helicopter hangar would also include a magazine.
As for the Endeavour replacement, that is really intended as a lift/replenishment vessel. IMO it should have at a minimum, a helipad and munitions/dry goods storage in addition to the fuel and fluids replenishment. And of course the required double-hull to meet MARPOL reqs.
If there was a hangar which could allow transport and/or operations of a heli, it could be an advantage. As would lane metres available for transport of small boats, vehicles or shipping containers. However, the emphasis needs to be on ensuring the vessel(s) meet the primary requirements, and any secondary capabilities/taskings are complementary to the primary role(s). In many respects, the opposite of the Canterbury which was supposed to be a multi-role lift and ice-capable patrol ship. Given the rather large differences in fitout required for the divergent roles, it is little wonder why the Canterbury can realistically only really act as a lift ship.
-Cheers
Absolutely not - Submarines would be a much better option. That way when they reach 30 years of age the holes will already be there.
Seriously though I see the LSS this way. We all agreed there will be improvements in speed, range, endurance from what I can see. We also seem to recognise the importance of a flight deck. Ok.
If you're just going to operate the LSS in the same manner as the current ships then a 25mm would be appropriate. To that end a ship built to commerical standards would surfice. I would then suggest that the existing OPV design meets the requirements and despite some design flaws the OPV's are funamentally sound. Some minor modifications would be needed but the existence of a crane, storage for containers or portable decompression chambers etc already contribute to replication of some of the existing capabilities. When combined with reduced logistics and training costs a third OPV for the navy offer a number of advantages that when combined with a price tag thats fiscally acceptable to the government. Well I quess you get the picture.
However the critical issue that seems to tip the scales in favour of a more capable vessel is that since the 1980's and 1990's the South Pacific has become more unstable. When combined with a reduction in the combat force I think there is a clear gap in Defence planning and capability. For example in Bougainville the frigate Canterbury deployed to provide an inital entry support roll (i.e I've got a gun - so behave). Manawanui deployed to the Solomons armed only with a pair of .50cal's. And we shouldn't forget the Pacific's problem child Fiji. While an upgrade in weapons capability to a medium calibre gun may seem excessive it would not be by international standards (i.e Visby, LCS etc)
exactly, this is what I am saying the 'aim' of ship may have not been published but you just have to look at what it is replacing to get an idea, a survey ship and a dive support ship, not a corvette and a OPV, therefore why an overly increased level of defence. Even 25mm is ample firepower for what it is going to do, just because it is a new ship does not mean we are going to do anything wildly different with it or send it anywhere vastly dangerous. OPV is slated as deployable around NZ, deep south,Australian, pacific and Indian oceans and I can't personally see LWSS going outside these areas so why would it have a better weapons system.
In 20+ years Manawanui has ventured to Bougainville and Sollies and all with just a .50 cal mount. Fiji would not warrant more than a bushmaster(for LVSS) and even then it would have a ANZAC or even a OPV as cover as they are more suited. ODT can self deploy as they did in Tonga and work off other vessels if need be.
We are already having problems with the OPVs space/weight issue with 25mm and this is probably the size in both tonnage and crew LWSS will be in the vicinity of if not smaller let alone adding survey/dive/MCM modules to the mix. I doubt the new ship will be any larger than OPV, it starts becoming something else then. We have means to counter the increase in regional trouble in the OPVs failing that ANZACs, no need for something in between otherwise we would upgun the OPVs before LWSS.
Also I think the MRV fullfills its intended tasks sealift, training etc albeit with a few flaws but again it is not intended as some kind of assaulting angel that will need to fight its way out of trouble, there are other ships for that, deliver, move around and pick up thats its bag.
Sorry if I am coming across as dis-agreeing it is just I can't seem to justify a mini-warship Dive platform that does survey work in its spare time especially when it will probably see less 'conflict' then the OPVs.
In 20+ years Manawanui has ventured to Bougainville and Sollies and all with just a .50 cal mount. Fiji would not warrant more than a bushmaster(for LVSS) and even then it would have a ANZAC or even a OPV as cover as they are more suited. ODT can self deploy as they did in Tonga and work off other vessels if need be.
We are already having problems with the OPVs space/weight issue with 25mm and this is probably the size in both tonnage and crew LWSS will be in the vicinity of if not smaller let alone adding survey/dive/MCM modules to the mix. I doubt the new ship will be any larger than OPV, it starts becoming something else then. We have means to counter the increase in regional trouble in the OPVs failing that ANZACs, no need for something in between otherwise we would upgun the OPVs before LWSS.
Also I think the MRV fullfills its intended tasks sealift, training etc albeit with a few flaws but again it is not intended as some kind of assaulting angel that will need to fight its way out of trouble, there are other ships for that, deliver, move around and pick up thats its bag.
Sorry if I am coming across as dis-agreeing it is just I can't seem to justify a mini-warship Dive platform that does survey work in its spare time especially when it will probably see less 'conflict' then the OPVs.
Interesting that Fiji has been mentioned in all this. Currently Fiji is on the donor hunt to China. It is making serious efforts to get military hardware from the PRC. Politically, diplomatically, trade wise and military ties both making hay while the sun shines. There is an expectation that the replacement patrol vessels for Franks Navy will be donated / sweet deal - remanufactured ex PRC Shanghai II Class vessels and more hardware for essentially what has been a light infantry Army.
Thus in a few short years an OPV or LWSV with - and I repeat it for full effect - a puny 25mm could not live there. Fiji is not the only area of interest that the PRC has within our wider region. There are other locales with an emerging military-centric leadership that we may be drawn into. ET for instance, which incidently has acquired ex Shanghai's in recent months. Generally the region is not taking on any sembalence of being benign as maritime aggression is now becoming available at a lower cost. As for the utility of our OPV's, with the state of regional strategic flux hardening, we will see them both more and more unlikely to ever venture too far from the key EEZ duties supporting government agencies. It is debatable if they ever were leaving the EEZ other than Fisheries trips to the Cooks or Niue. Frankly, no MCC would ever agree to commit them to anti-piracy duties beyond the Pacific in the years ahead for example. As for the OPV's being deemed deployable - well there is deployable and there is DEPLOYABLE. It can mean showing the flag or it can mean as part of a taskforce. Guess which one the Protector OPV's are only realistically capable of. Would a coalition taskforce commander be that happy? A headache he could do without I'd say.Furthermore, as for up gunning the current OPV's there are few options and nothing more than 40mm and thats pushing it. As I have pointed out before what stops the OPV's doing anything more than Coastguard duties is because of its two engines one engine room layout. So why up gun it to 40mm if all it is capable of is fisheries patrol?
I think Kiwi's need to get a bit of a reality check concerning what is going to have be appropriate in the next couple of decades concerning the NZDF's requirements. And No RegR, a small MRD / MHD type vessel is not a mini aircraft carrier. Nor am I wishing for a gold plated full monty LHD even. I am talking about the utility, survivability, affordability and appropriateness for the unravelling geo-political change within our region and they type of vessel we actually need. Whether we do it or not is a moot point, but all I am saying is - we should. They are pretty much becoming a standard naval issue over the next couple of decades. They are a heck of a lot more pragmatic than a vessel derived from a RoRo ferry. For an island nation with a huge physical area of maritime interest, huge distances to deploy and sustain potentially up to Battalion group level, and without the current fiscal wherewithall, but an ever increasing workload and range of tasks in the next 25 years, the future RNZN auxillary fleet has to do more than simply replenish and lift. We also need to have a commensurate degree of seabasing capability and strategic projection from the sea rather than on the sea. The Canterbury, or a baby Berlin Class, or God forbid the Canterbury and that Merwede JSS thing will not do it anywhere as well as good as it should.
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub743.pdf
The above is a good read as it provides a relevant context. It may help us move beyond planning todays Navy on yesterdays ideas when we need to focus on tomorrows Navy. That said as Kiwi Rob pointed out they will probably get a tarted up OPV and a stretched Canterbury to spite me!
Thus in a few short years an OPV or LWSV with - and I repeat it for full effect - a puny 25mm could not live there. Fiji is not the only area of interest that the PRC has within our wider region. There are other locales with an emerging military-centric leadership that we may be drawn into. ET for instance, which incidently has acquired ex Shanghai's in recent months. Generally the region is not taking on any sembalence of being benign as maritime aggression is now becoming available at a lower cost. As for the utility of our OPV's, with the state of regional strategic flux hardening, we will see them both more and more unlikely to ever venture too far from the key EEZ duties supporting government agencies. It is debatable if they ever were leaving the EEZ other than Fisheries trips to the Cooks or Niue. Frankly, no MCC would ever agree to commit them to anti-piracy duties beyond the Pacific in the years ahead for example. As for the OPV's being deemed deployable - well there is deployable and there is DEPLOYABLE. It can mean showing the flag or it can mean as part of a taskforce. Guess which one the Protector OPV's are only realistically capable of. Would a coalition taskforce commander be that happy? A headache he could do without I'd say.Furthermore, as for up gunning the current OPV's there are few options and nothing more than 40mm and thats pushing it. As I have pointed out before what stops the OPV's doing anything more than Coastguard duties is because of its two engines one engine room layout. So why up gun it to 40mm if all it is capable of is fisheries patrol?
I think Kiwi's need to get a bit of a reality check concerning what is going to have be appropriate in the next couple of decades concerning the NZDF's requirements. And No RegR, a small MRD / MHD type vessel is not a mini aircraft carrier. Nor am I wishing for a gold plated full monty LHD even. I am talking about the utility, survivability, affordability and appropriateness for the unravelling geo-political change within our region and they type of vessel we actually need. Whether we do it or not is a moot point, but all I am saying is - we should. They are pretty much becoming a standard naval issue over the next couple of decades. They are a heck of a lot more pragmatic than a vessel derived from a RoRo ferry. For an island nation with a huge physical area of maritime interest, huge distances to deploy and sustain potentially up to Battalion group level, and without the current fiscal wherewithall, but an ever increasing workload and range of tasks in the next 25 years, the future RNZN auxillary fleet has to do more than simply replenish and lift. We also need to have a commensurate degree of seabasing capability and strategic projection from the sea rather than on the sea. The Canterbury, or a baby Berlin Class, or God forbid the Canterbury and that Merwede JSS thing will not do it anywhere as well as good as it should.
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub743.pdf
The above is a good read as it provides a relevant context. It may help us move beyond planning todays Navy on yesterdays ideas when we need to focus on tomorrows Navy. That said as Kiwi Rob pointed out they will probably get a tarted up OPV and a stretched Canterbury to spite me!
I kind of think we blow this whole Fiji thing up bigger than it really is, lets be honest it will be hard to justify us taking military action against them, despite their current leadership regime we are still actually freinds both civil via our large fijian populace and national links and defence through courses, exs and ops. They could be given a aircraft carrier by the chinese, and then what, they will have a aircraft carrier, we are still more likely to be invaded by inner Mongolia. What I am saying is that if we factored for every 'what if' we would be a fortress nation but in reality there is no need therefore practicality shines over slim possibility. Also even if it went to mud do you think our response would be in the form of a diving/survey ship?
And on 'DEPLOYABLE' no one is saying the OPVs are going to the Persian Gulf, China sea or downtown Kabul, their AOs have been stated, however they have more chance then a support ship, we have the ANZACs to cover that role so focus on them rather then a ship which chances are would not go and even then would be after the fact and with escort.
Why would the OPVs not leave our EEZ they are capable vessels in their own right and also a bonus to what we originally had therefore nothing is lost sending them further afeild.
Funding for possibilities rather than probabilities inevitability costs more for no real actual gains therefore costs us more in other areas where their uses would be more useful.
And on 'DEPLOYABLE' no one is saying the OPVs are going to the Persian Gulf, China sea or downtown Kabul, their AOs have been stated, however they have more chance then a support ship, we have the ANZACs to cover that role so focus on them rather then a ship which chances are would not go and even then would be after the fact and with escort.
Why would the OPVs not leave our EEZ they are capable vessels in their own right and also a bonus to what we originally had therefore nothing is lost sending them further afeild.
Funding for possibilities rather than probabilities inevitability costs more for no real actual gains therefore costs us more in other areas where their uses would be more useful.
Reg I dont want come across as hounding you but I dont think you have squared away your arguments as well as you could.
MCM / LWS vessels are very much wanted around the global supporting a range of maritime operations. A lot of sterling work has gone on in places as the Gulf for example, so I would argue that a MCM capability on a LWSV - to assist in littoral warfare support duties is more useful than many people think. Plus being a valued asset as part of a taskforce and the kudos and thanks that it would bring. The Government is well aware of this, but has been not been able to utilise its littoral support role due to the limitations of the Manawanui. A vessel which was procured during a completely different geo-political era for role on the domestic front, which has over the last decade or so swung towards a expeditionary littoral warfre support capability. You will find that the future LWSV will be configured to be suitable for Chp VII Peace Enforcement missions. That means the vessel will then be able to match the capability and skill sets of the crews who will man it. It also dovetails into the likely operations scenario modellers expect in the region over the coming decades, as well as a role the NZDF operationally requires but as yet has not been able do do whilst the Res/Mana have been around.
In post 1771 you stated: "OPV is slated as deployable around NZ, deep south,Australian, pacific and Indian oceans and I can't personally see LWSS going outside these areas so why would it have a better weapons system. In 20+ years Manawanui has ventured to Bougainville and Sollies and all with just a .50 cal mount. Fiji would not warrant more than a bushmaster(for LVSS) and even then it would have a ANZAC or even a OPV as cover as they are more suited. ODT can self deploy as they did in Tonga and work off other vessels if need be."
However in the next post (1773), you stated that: "And on 'DEPLOYABLE' no one is saying the OPVs are going to the Persian Gulf, China sea or downtown Kabul, their AOs have been stated, however they have more chance then a support ship, we have the ANZACs to cover that role so focus on them rather then a ship which chances are would not go and even then would be after the fact and with escort. Why would the OPVs not leave our EEZ they are capable vessels in their own right and also a bonus to what we originally had therefore nothing is lost sending them further afeild.
Funding for possibilities rather than probabilities inevitability costs more for no real actual gains therefore costs us more in other areas where their uses would be more useful."
Firstly you indicated that it was deployable. Then you said no one was saying it was deployable and then later on you said that it could be deployable. All I am trying to do is indicate to you that OPV deployment is not in the real world. Ive given you the reasons which you have yet to take on board. Dust off the plans of the ship and look for yourself. Attributing a cost-benefit analysis like you attempted to do works both ways - however the real cost is loss of life. For anything such as a LIC under UNSC Chapter VII cannot be done without huge and unacceptable risks. All I am pointing out is that the OPV's are only capable for Fisheries / Assistance to Civil Authorities tasks. Furthermore, a vessel such as a LWSV that can be used to support a maritime operation under Chp VII mandate offers greater utility for both ourselves as a defence force and the taskforce that we may be with. So to answer you question from post 1773 where you posed "Also even if it went to mud do you think our response would be in the form of a diving/survey ship?" Yes. However, the LWSV wont be a survey ship as such but only likely to be a platform for a modulised military survey capability when required.
As for the comments per Fiji - all I was indicating was in reply to your comments in post 1771 where you said that: "Fiji would not warrant more than a bushmaster(for LVSS) and even then it would have a ANZAC or even a OPV as cover as they are more suited. ODT can self deploy as they did in Tonga and work off other vessels if need be."
I was pointing out that there is a likelihood that may not be the case for much longer in regards to Fiji. Fiji may not explode into strife. Lets pray it doesn't, however they do have a military which is in need of re-equiping - per the Shanghai II comment, plus they do have a close mate in a nation which enjoying its new found power and status, and that Fiji is now a country suddenly (and belatedly) on the map of interest to the US. I was simply stating my view that a Protector OPV or a LWSV that is derived from an OPV, that is minimally armed would not go there if there was a risk of attack. And hypothetically speaking as you were, our single available ANZAC would probably have its hands full baby sitting the Canterbury if there was the unlikely event of military adventure within the countries EEZ whereby we sent an Anzac, the grey ferry and a LWSV (And no the Aussies would not want to babysit with an Anzac either). As for the Tonga self-deployment the role undertaken was of civil assistance in nature in support of the Ferry disaster and does not directly co-relate to a situation of military emergency.
Other than that Cheers and lets hope the AB's stuff the WELSH tonight!
Sorry Reg all Military aid of all kinds have been cut, the only NZDF component that has anything to do with Fiji troops is the MFO in Sinai, thats why you see a lot of Fijian soldiers joining the UK units. But reference what you are saying about our OPV I do see your point.
CD
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Chief of Army: Defence Whitepaper 2010
From Army News 415
And good to see more will be done to ensure the safety of the NZDF servicemen and women when on deployment.
CD - et al - I've browsed around to understand the terms Combined Arms Task Group etc. Perhaps I'm not quite clear eg this previous Army news article talks abouts the force and support elements needed within the Army itself to function effectively on deployment, but does it also relate to slotting in with another nation's task groups (eg could an ANZAC deployment be more possible now)?
And able to comment on suggestions on other boards that the M777 may eventually replace the L119 howitzers?
From Army News 415
Good to see one of the service chief's publically spelling out where their service is heading.
And good to see more will be done to ensure the safety of the NZDF servicemen and women when on deployment.
CD - et al - I've browsed around to understand the terms Combined Arms Task Group etc. Perhaps I'm not quite clear eg this previous Army news article talks abouts the force and support elements needed within the Army itself to function effectively on deployment, but does it also relate to slotting in with another nation's task groups (eg could an ANZAC deployment be more possible now)?
And able to comment on suggestions on other boards that the M777 may eventually replace the L119 howitzers?
RubiconNZ
The Wanderer
Thanks for the post Recce.
I think the no new money is quite telling, in terms of new things, the planned 2015 Defense Review will be the one to watch, hopefully a stronger economic position, and most likely a more unstable pacific environment may require some big ticket purchases.
By the look of things a couple of hundred MRAPs, and a upgrade to the L119's seems to be the main buys in terms of equipment updates, plus of course LAV upgrades.
The only mention of new forces are the increased infantry and special forces numbers. I
MO something like taking each from 3-4 plus perhaps a special forces "Ranger Company".
Last edited:
Hey Recce,
We have two TG, CATG(Cav) & CATG(Lt) both based around a rifle Coy from the 2 RF Bn, what the CA said in his article is where the Army is trying to go in the future & yes the TG will be able to slot into another nations TG which is good news for us. Only talk in the gunners circle at the moment is the upgrade of there current equipment as they have ben told not to expect any new guns in the near term as they are quite low on the priority list for equipment needing replcement..
CD
New CDF for NZDF
MAJGEN Rhys Jones has been selected by Cabinet to be the new CDF. So congratulations are in order.
New Defence Force chief announced - National - NZ Herald News
There was some speculation I heard months ago when back in NZ that AVM Lintott was in with a good chance also since he is very popular with the rank and file in the RNZAF. Also a few of the old salts I know felt that RADM JacK Steer had a chance of the top slot due to him being current VCDF and a previous JFCOMNZ and felt it was the Navy's turn (its been 15 years now since we had a VADM on the books). However these days command positions are dealt differently than in the old days when it was turn about.
Nevertheless, MAJGEN Jones should be a safe pair of hands. I think he has been Commander 3LFG, then Assistant Chief Development, then Land Component Commander, then JFCOMNZ, then CA for the last 2 years and now the top post. So he certainly has covered all the bases - no pun intended.
In my view I think that Lt General Jerry Mateparae has been an outstanding and popular CDF over the last 5 years and CA for a couple of years before that. Though that said, I would have preferred him to be my pick for the next Governor General job coming up in May rather than heading the Security Intelligence Service from next year. General Jerry is still young so hopefully the GG job 5 years down the track may happen.
MAJGEN Rhys Jones has been selected by Cabinet to be the new CDF. So congratulations are in order.
New Defence Force chief announced - National - NZ Herald News
There was some speculation I heard months ago when back in NZ that AVM Lintott was in with a good chance also since he is very popular with the rank and file in the RNZAF. Also a few of the old salts I know felt that RADM JacK Steer had a chance of the top slot due to him being current VCDF and a previous JFCOMNZ and felt it was the Navy's turn (its been 15 years now since we had a VADM on the books). However these days command positions are dealt differently than in the old days when it was turn about.
Nevertheless, MAJGEN Jones should be a safe pair of hands. I think he has been Commander 3LFG, then Assistant Chief Development, then Land Component Commander, then JFCOMNZ, then CA for the last 2 years and now the top post. So he certainly has covered all the bases - no pun intended.
In my view I think that Lt General Jerry Mateparae has been an outstanding and popular CDF over the last 5 years and CA for a couple of years before that. Though that said, I would have preferred him to be my pick for the next Governor General job coming up in May rather than heading the Security Intelligence Service from next year. General Jerry is still young so hopefully the GG job 5 years down the track may happen.
Well saw the 6 oclock news tonight, the new CDF will be pushing for the LAV to be sent into Bamiyan by the middle of next year, however he was down to earth about more possible casualties, he has always been a straight talker cant wait until the new year to come there will be massive but long over due changes for the whole NZDF.
Following from TVNZ:
After seven years of sitting on the sideline in New Zealand, the Army's light-armoured vehicles (LAVs) may finally be put to work in the Afghan province of Bamiyan.
The significant U-turn on the vehicles, which have long been considered too big for the region's roads, has come from the newly-appointed Chief of Defence Force Major-General Ryhs Jones.
"It's not so much that they can't go but to travel in those areas they'd be quite slow to negotiate the roads. or if the roads are narrow, if traffic is coming the other way, it will be awkward for them to operate. But if protection becomes the ultimate requirement, then light armoured vehicles or something very similar is probably going to be the answer," said Jones.
In October, ONE News revealed the New Zealand Defence Force had unsuccessfully made a request to the US military for new bomb resistant vehicles, two months before Lieutenant Tim O'Donnell was killed when his Humvee was hit by an IED.
However, the soon-to-be Lieutenant-General admits that even LAVs don't guarantee the troops' safety.
"We are prepared within the army that this will happen again and if there's one message that we constantly give to the government is that 'yeah this will probably happen again, it may happen in more numbers.'"
The Prime Minister said a decision on the future of New Zealand's Provincial Reconstruction team in Bamiyan, and the SAS in Kabul, which has been making use of three LAVs in the capital, will be made by cabinet early in the new year. This will be around the same time that Jones will take on his new role.
One of Jones' incoming jobs will be to slash $400 million a year from military spending in a plan that was outlined in last month's white paper, which will see soldiers from both Waiouru and Linton move in with the Air Force at Ohakea.
A number of uniformed military jobs could also be handed over to civilians as part of cost-cutting measures.
Last edited: