Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Padman
- Start date
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
From memory, they have a significantly longer range, and being larger might handle high sea states better. IIRC they can also operate a pair of aircraft like helicopters and/or UAV's.
The other area which I suspect is significantly better is the sensor suite, including air/sea search radars, which I am uncertain if the OPV's have, or have to that degree. The cutter's armament is also better than that of the OPV's, having a 57 mm gun as well as a CIWS...
All the same though, the warfighting capabilities of the cutter does not appear as significant as that of the Anzac-class frigates. No surprise there, since the role of a USCG cutter is different from a USN warship.
-Cheers
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Personally, I seriously doubt that the RNZN would ever opt for going with a USCG cutter design, I certainly hope that the RNZN does not.
USCG cutters are high-end patrol/constabulary vessels. Unfortunately they also have high-end prices, especially if built within the US. The price that the RNZN could purchase a new USCG cutter at would likely be comparable to the price that the RNZN would spend purchasing a new multi-role frigate.
The differences in capability between the two is that the frigate would likely have a shorter range (4,500 - 6,000 n miles being typical) vs. a USCG cutter which often have a listed range of 10,000 n miles. Keep in mind though that some of that difference in range could be dictated by preferred cruising speeds as well as onboard power generation requirements. Also, a multi-role frigate would have more warfighting capability, usually mounting a larger calibre main gun, ASW torpedoes, SAM, and possibly even AShM/SSM.
What people often overlook is the different roles which the USCG and USN perform, and how other, smaller nations and defence forces cannot afford to specialize to the degree that the US is able to.
The USCG performs patrol/constabulary missions, SAR and a range of other missions. In wartime, the USCG can (and has) operated as part of the USN performing some escort duties, as well as providing boarding parties and small boat ops. Unfortunately, other nations also need the potential for some of the warfighting capabilities like ASW that the USCG no longer is currently equipped or trained for, as well as NGS, anti-shipping, etc.
If the Gov't wished to re-role the RNZN into more of a USCG-type role, it could. However, if Gov't opted to do so, the RNZN would be even less able to protect NZ's SLOC than it currently is.
-Cheers
I would have thought that the Royal New Zealand Navy would have some type of dual Navy-USCG type role. Maybe they could have a High end Multi-role frigate and Corvette & LPD type for their naval role. Their middle would have been something similar to the US Coast Guard's National security cutter and their low end a Fast response cutter type.
RNZN does have a dual role,
Naval combat force:
The naval combat force currently consists of two Anzac Class frigates: HMNZS Te Kaha and HMNZS Te Mana. Both ships are based at the Devonport Naval Base on Auckland's North Shore. Te Kaha was commissioned on 26 July 1997 and Te Mana on 10 December 1999.
Naval Patrol Force
The Naval Patrol Force (NPF) is responsible for policing New Zealand's Exclusive Economic Zone, one of the largest in the world. In addition the NPF provides assistance to a range of civilian government agencies, including the Department of Conservation, New Zealand Customs and Police, Ministry of Fisheries and others. The NPF currently consists of:
2 Protector-class offshore patrol vessels (HMNZS Otago and HMNZS Wellington)
and 4 Protector-class inshore patrol boat (HMNZS Pukaki, Hawea, Rotoiti, Taupo)
Logistics support force
HMNZS Endeavour is the fleet tanker. She provides fuel and other supplies for the frigates when they are on international operations, and for allied ships should this be required. Endeavour takes her name from the Royal Navy ship that carried James Cook to New Zealand on his first voyage, in 1769. Her home port is the city of New Plymouth.
HMNZS Canterbury, the RNZN's new Multi-Role Vessel entered service in June 2007
There is no need for RNZN to have a fast security cutter type ship endurance and range is what our Naval Patrol Force require as Tod has said RNZN is to small to have dedicated ships like the USN/USCG.
I don't believe the NSC would be a good fit for another nation outside Russia. Not only does the NSC's have much more range, they were also designed for endurance. Endurance to stay at sea for a few months without replenishment. Fortunately, cutters do visit and replenish at foreign ports of call.
Overall, the NSCs were designed for three months Bering Sea EEZ patrols home based from Alameda, California, San Francisco-Oakland. The new OPCs upcoming for the next two decades, all to be built by 2030 as planned, will be our future medium endurance cutters with about half the endurance, although with more than half the range. The OPCs will be home ported on the Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and Pacific coasts for missions in those seas.
With the recent budget cut of two NSCs from the eight planned, I doubt if any will be home based in Miami. Since the OPCs will have the same sensors as the NSCs, fighting drug crime in the Caribbean won't be hurt. I hope two more OPCs will be ordered to replace the two cut NSCs, but that isn't certain.
I will wager a beer the first OPCs built will be home ported at Miami. The OPCs will have more than enough range and endurance for the Caribbean. Having said that, the NSCs wil spend most of their time, if not all, in the Pacific and Bering Sea. I expect showing the flag in the western Pacific with NSC cutters as well.
NSCs are running over USD 400 million, the first over USD 600 million. Later ships are coming in considerably cheaper. On the other hand the OPCs are planned to cost within USD 200-250 million. The USCG should be able to get two OPCs for the price of one NSC.
I dread the day when factory fishing trawlers and ships are designed as icebreakers. And I pray the UN outlaws not only owning such a ship, but for anyone to build one as well. Unfortunately, that day is coming, sooner than most of us think.
Overall, the NSCs were designed for three months Bering Sea EEZ patrols home based from Alameda, California, San Francisco-Oakland. The new OPCs upcoming for the next two decades, all to be built by 2030 as planned, will be our future medium endurance cutters with about half the endurance, although with more than half the range. The OPCs will be home ported on the Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and Pacific coasts for missions in those seas.
With the recent budget cut of two NSCs from the eight planned, I doubt if any will be home based in Miami. Since the OPCs will have the same sensors as the NSCs, fighting drug crime in the Caribbean won't be hurt. I hope two more OPCs will be ordered to replace the two cut NSCs, but that isn't certain.
I will wager a beer the first OPCs built will be home ported at Miami. The OPCs will have more than enough range and endurance for the Caribbean. Having said that, the NSCs wil spend most of their time, if not all, in the Pacific and Bering Sea. I expect showing the flag in the western Pacific with NSC cutters as well.
NSCs are running over USD 400 million, the first over USD 600 million. Later ships are coming in considerably cheaper. On the other hand the OPCs are planned to cost within USD 200-250 million. The USCG should be able to get two OPCs for the price of one NSC.
I dread the day when factory fishing trawlers and ships are designed as icebreakers. And I pray the UN outlaws not only owning such a ship, but for anyone to build one as well. Unfortunately, that day is coming, sooner than most of us think.
Last edited:
From wikipedia, the following
Protector IPV:
Type: Inshore patrol boat
Displacement: 340 tonnes (loaded)
Length: 55 m (180 ft)
Beam: 9 m (30 ft)
Draught: 2.9 m (9 ft 6 in)
Propulsion: Two MAN B&W 12VP185 engines, each rated at 2,500 kW at 1,907 rpm ZF 7640 NR gearboxes Two controllable pitch propellers
Speed: Top speed 25 knots (46 km/h; 29 mph)
Patrol speed 16 knots (30 km/h; 18 mph)
Range: 3,000 nautical miles (5,600 km; 3,500 mi)
Boats and landing
craft carried: 2 x RHIB with diesel-powered three-stage jet units
Complement: 36 (includes 4 government agency staff and up to 12 others)[1]
Armament: 3 x 12.75 mm machine guns
Sentinal Class:
Displacement: 353 long tons
Length: 46.8 m (154 ft)
Beam: 8.11 m (26.6 ft)
Depth: 2.9 m (9.5 ft)
Propulsion: 2 x 4,300 kilowatts (5,800 shp)
1 x 75 kilowatts (101 shp) bow thruster
Speed: 28 knots (52 km/h; 32 mph)
Endurance: 5 days, 2,500 nautical miles (4,600 km; 2,900 mi)
Designed to be on patrol 2,500 hours per year
Boats and landing
craft carried: 1 x Short Range Prosecutor RHIB
Complement: 2 officers, 20 crew
Sensors and
processing systems: L-3 C4ISR suite
Armament: 1 x Mk 38 Mod 2 25 mm automatic gun
4 x crew-served Browning M2 machine guns
So all in all they appear fairly evenly matched, the only major difference is in armament, I'm sure the IPV could be up gunned if necessary. IMO there would be no point in replacing our fairly new IPV's with a vessel which we could have bought from Damen a few years back but chose not to.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Heh, I was thinking of the Legend-class NSC and the RNZN OPV's, not the smaller IPV's and the Sentinel-class FRC. Nothing quite like one person talking about apples, and then another talking about oranges, eh.
Aside from the stabilized 25 mm gun on the FRC, the other area where I suspect the fitout is 'better' is in the shipboard electronics systems like sensors and comms/datalinks. But that is only a suspicion on my part.
-Cheers
Why would the National Security Cutter have better seakeeping? As for range I'm sure if a frigate was needed with 12,000 NM range it could be built, it's just a matter of having enough bunkerage.
As for the IPV if the govt had stumped up more cash they could have been better armed, with better sensors. I think the IPV must have a more streamlined hull, it's nearly as fast but with significantly less installed power.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I could be mistaken, but the seakeeping should be comparable between frigates/destroyers the size/displacement of the NSC, and the NSC itself.
As for the range, so what? If a warship needed to have a longer range, then it could be optimized to cruise at a more economical speed, and/or have more fuel bunkerage. As it is, the ~6,000 n mile range of the Anzac-class FFH's in RNZN is already rather long-ranged for a frigate.
A NSC still does not have the armament that the RNZN Anzac's have, since it's main gun is a 57 mm instead of a 127mm/5", and the NSC also lacks ASW, ASW sonar, SAM's, etc.
The NSC is a good vessel for the USCG, but that does not mean the class is appropriate for other nations. The same holds true for other USCG vessels, they might be just what the USCG needs for different roles, but that does not make them appropriate for other services.
-Cheers
I'll say this, Can Any frigate, OPV or cutter survive a trip to the Bearing Sea and come back to port without smelling of puke. The NSC has done a trip in the bearing sea and has survived it. Go watch an episode of Deadliest catch and see what a trip into the bearing sea is like.
The Southern Ocean ain't that nice either, the ANZAC's appear to do a fairly good job. This is getting silly, vessels are built for the conditions they are liable to encounter during their operating life, that said I can't imagine the Berhof class is any better or worse than most frigates operating today. If you really want a tough ship an offshore supply or standby vessel will be tougher than most vessels afloat. A friend of mine is captain of a North Sea standby ship, they stay out no matter what the weather.
Absolutely agree, not to mention the specific needs of the service involved.
But it's about requirements and whats needed for particular taskings. The Protector IPVs are not required to go into combat type environments. They are required to patrol NZs EEZ which IIRC is the worlds 4th largest. Our EEZ doesn't abutt onto any other nations and the only 'hostile' vessels they would be dealing with would be illegal FFVs (Foreign Fishing Vessel) in EEZ or the occasional druggy. The FFV issue is changing because the NZG has decreed that from 2016 all FFV working in the NZ EEZ and all FFV being chartered by NZ companies must be NZ flagged and registered. In my time in the pussers doing patrols of the EEZ in IPCs never met a FFV that could outrun a .50cal.
You don't appear to understand the NZ context and I strongly suggest you look at some charts and maps. You also need to read back though this thread and that will give you an understanding of the RNZN, its mission and the issues it faces. NZs area of interest extends from beyond the equator on the Indian and Pacific Oceans to Antarctica. Our SLOC are in the Indian and Pacific Oceans, and to a lesser extent the Great Southern Ocean. USCG ships do not meet the mission requirement of the RNZN as set down by the NZG. The RNZN is a combat Navy, not a Coastguard.
As CD has pointed out we already have these in way of the 2 ANZACs, 2 OPVs and the MRV and are all relatively new so why would we replace them now just for the sake of some high end sensors and a bigger gun.
The vessels we have are fit(ish) for purpose and are a whole lot better then what we had and also for the cost of 1-2 american gucci vessels we got 7 practical and useable vessels, so VFM. All we have to do now is crew them.
So your basing RNZN needs of a episode of deadlest catch, I can watch this video of an OPV in the southern ocean does not mean im going to base any conculsions on what type of capability the RCN needs for the barents sea.
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMv3SZIEJ6Q&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL14D57352EF461BF8"]HMNZS Wellington weathers a storm during sea trials in the Southern Ocean - YouTube[/nomedia]
Your steadfast refusal to fully comprehend what the RNZN needs or requires is not helping your argument and using a episode of a TV programme has done you no favours with anyone on this thread.
CD
Just quoting this for emphasis, Zhaow, do some more reading on the topic and the thread, I mean you just quoted "Deadliest Catch" as a reference for god's sake... if you think that sort of thing will fly around here, you've bloody well got another thing coming...
Try the Southern Ocean on any given day where seas of 6m + are the norm and the winds whip all the way around the southern latitudes with no land to disturb them. Some learning for you. An ocean wave is generally wind generated and the height of the wave in the open ocean is determined by the energy of the wave which it gets from the wind. So the area need for the wind to generate an ocean wave is called the fetch. The greater the fetch the more energetic the wave and the larger the wave. In the higher latitudes of the Souhern Hemisphere there is no land to inhibit the wind so like I said it whips around the whole planet with it's fetch being planetary in scale.
Yes the Bering Sea can be rough but the Great Southern Ocean is a real test of a seamanship and a ship. Oh yes and it can be a long way to go for help too.