Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[OPSSG]

@swerve and Todjaeger, thanks for your earlier comments, which add to the discussion.

$37.5mn is the value of the contract with Daewoo ($150mn) divided by four. But I'm not sure that's the real price. It's unclear what costs were included in the contract.

I understand that the US$ 150 million contract for the Makassar and Banjarsamin classes was for two Korean built vessels, plus license fee (or tech transfer) to build another two locally modified 125-metre Banjarsamin class vessels, which were effectively PT PAL's own design. PT PAL is state owned and they can push these out cheap. The first two Korean built vessels were not delivered armed; and weapons were later back-fitted at PT PAL (the cost of which is not factored in the contract). The two locally built vessels were budgeted and paid for separately by the Indonesian department of defence.

In other words, a simple division by four of the above contract price is completely off the mark. Further, PT PAL had to pay an external consultant, MASTEK, to provide supervision on the construction of the two built in Indonesia vessels.

That is not quite right either.

Thanks for the additional information, which provides a better comparison. Your post reinforces the point that the price difference between the two classes of ships (built in Singapore and NZ) is not as great as Sea Toby claimed.

 

[Todjaeger]

Thanks for the additional information, which provides a better comparison. Your post reinforces the point that the price difference between the two classes of ships is not as great as Sea Toby claimed.

Indeed the price between the two is quite small. OTOH there are some differences in capability, some quite significant.

Areas where IMO the Endurance-class LPD/LST (that is what the RSN calls them...) are superior are as follows.

1. Can lift/support a large company group up to a small battalion of troops, albeit I do not know for how long
2. Can lift/land tanks, as well as other vehicles and bulk cargo
3. The LPD also has a well dock with 2x25m FCU and 4x13m FCEU on davits
4. Comprehensive sensor and electronics suit
5. Basic self-defence, anti-FIAC and NGS armament

IMO the MRV is superior in the following areas

1. Aviation facilities sufficient for 4 NH-90 helicopters
2. ~8,000 n mile range at 16 kts
3. Ice-strengthened hull allows some Antarctic support operations

Now, while Canterbury is the best sealift ship the RNZN has every had, there are IMO a number of fairly serious flaws.

As a prior member suggested, there might only be limited utility for a NZ sealift ship, and perhaps a commercial and/or STUFT ro-ro could be used instead... For most practical purposes, the Canterbury IS a commercial ro-ro sealift vessel. Yes, there are a pair of ramps, and a pair of LCM's carried, but those can only safely operate in very mild sea states. Also depending on the situation and for planning purposes, I would expect that any NZ amphibious operations cannot count on using a port facility. This could be anything from operations in a conflict zone (whether peacekeeping, UN ops, evacuation of Kiwi and/or allied & friendly nationals) to HADR following an infrastructure wrecking incident. In short, NZ cannot and should not plan on having sealift which can steam into port, dock, and then disgorge NZDF kit for immediate use. Hence why hangar facilities for helicopters are required, as well as a good ship-to-shore vehicle and cargo landing capability. Unfortunately that IMO is where Canterbury falls most short. Hopefully any future sealift vessels will take that into account.

Now several have mentioned that any future sealift vessel is going to be in the 2030+ timeframe. Perhaps this is true, in which case the NZDF should really have worked out its maritime and sealift doctrine, however I can see the potential for Canterbury being either re-roled or replaced sooner than that. After all, HMNZS Charles Upham was initially purchased in 1994 for the sealift role, and sold by 2001, only having actually served in the RNZN from 1995-1998. With the ice-strengthening Canterbury has received, perhaps she could be used as an Antarctic support vessel? I do not think it sensible to spend too much money, and of course allocate so much weight, to ice-strengthening for vessels that really do not need to transit the southern ice. Like an AOR for instance.

With respect to any future RNZN amphib re-using the Mk-41 VLS from the ANZAC-class frigates, this could work, but only for carrying Sea Sparrow/ESSM/whatever the follow-on to ESSM turns out to be. The Mk-41 VLS cells fitted aboard the FFH's are IIRC not the strike length cells, which means they are too short for ASROC and Harpoon. Incidentally, while the Harpoon AShM has been test-launched from a shipbourne VLS, no actual production modules or cannisters have been made or deployed.

What I would be interested in hearing, is what sort of numbers and force composition do people thing that a RNZN amphib should be able to lift and support, and for how long?

-Cheers

 

[1805]

The Danish Thetis class of 4 ice strengthen patrol frigates are now over 20 years old, they are just being refitted, so the timescales for replacement of these ships would seem to align quite well with the ANZAC & later OPV. If NZ was in the market for a direct replacement with 4 hulls and the Danes also replace all 4, there would seem to be a pretty good change of a win/win partnership. The original specification of these ships looks a good match for NZ now (although maybe not the aspirations at the time of the ANZACs).

 

[Lucasnz]

The Danish Thetis class of 4 ice strengthen patrol frigates are now over 20 years old, they are just being refitted, so the timescales for replacement of these ships would seem to align quite well with the ANZAC & later OPV. If NZ was in the market for a direct replacement with 4 hulls and the Danes also replace all 4, there would seem to be a pretty good change of a win/win partnership. The original specification of these ships looks a good match for NZ now (although maybe not the aspirations at the time of the ANZACs).

I have increasingly come to see the Thetis and Floreal Class as an excellent examples of ships suited to operations in the South Pacific (and Thetis in the Southern Ocean). Both can provide 76mm Naval Gunfire Support for South Pacific operations where there are limited heavy targets that require a 127mm capability, esp when combined with limited land space resulting in the need for a lower calibre weapon to reduce collateral damage. There is a limited need for Air Defence (Sea Ram would be sufficient) and a limited ASW Capability to ensure sufficient surveillance. The way I see it 4 Patrol Frigates would replace the OPV (Shift to Littoral warfare ships) while replacing two frigates with three. Overall and thinking long term a force structure of 15 ships would make a very capable navy for NZ. Accepted the cost will be higher, but the price is a far more capable navy.

• 
  3 x ANZAC Replacements
  4 x Patrol Frigates
  2 x Littoral Warfare Vessels
  3 x IPV (More Multi role i.e. EEZ, Environmental pollution, MCM)
  1 x AOR
  2 x LPHD

I'm for replacing Endeavour with a like for like at this stage. I rather spend the money on Patrol Frigates in order to address the imbalance in combat capability.

 

[old faithful]

With no ACF, Future frigates need to be well equiped with SAM, and radar,s to support them. A awd frigate would partly fill that gap. 3 would be the minimum requirements, to ensure one is always operational, sm3 would be desirable to intercept aircraft in NZ airspace. (I'm thinking 911 attack, not soviet TU22,s).
SM,s would give good range coverage given lack of platforms. Also would fit in well with Co elition operations.

 

[ngatimozart]

With no ACF, Future frigates need to be well equiped with SAM, and radar,s to support them. A awd frigate would partly fill that gap. 3 would be the minimum requirements, to ensure one is always operational, sm3 would be desirable to intercept aircraft in NZ airspace. (I'm thinking 911 attack, not soviet TU22,s).
SM,s would give good range coverage given lack of platforms. Also would fit in well with Co elition operations.

Not necessarily how the NZG would see it and funding such would be difficult. Whilst some kiwi pollies may grasp the idea of an ACF they are not willing to stump up the funds to pay for it. Same with AWD frigates; high tech and expensive. Since no need for ACF because of no extent threat to NZ they would use exactly the same argument against AWD frigates. Funding is the largest issue and the largest pressure therefore 3 GP frigates would be easier to accept. Two even more acceptable because they [pollies] will argue that RNZN has survived since 2005 with only 2 FFHs and the sky hasn't fallen in and we still speak the Queens English. Fortunately 911 style attacks are a rarity and in a NZ context they would be a remote threat; possible but not probable.

 

[old faithful]

While I agree that there is little to no threat to NZ, having next to no defence against a remote threat would make NZ a very easy target, kind of having no defence to a threat, creates a threat.

No worries, Mr C

Actually NZ maintains 2 CT units. The NZ Police has very good operators with its Special Tactics Group as well as 1 Cdo who are attached to NZSASR.

Also I would rather us focus on the RNZN as I can see this discussion going into topics that I do not want discussion about on a public forum. Which, I think you may appreciate. Note this is a gentler blue reminder as it is courtesy to you as a DefPro Old Faithful.

 

[1805]

I have increasingly come to see the Thetis and Floreal Class as an excellent examples of ships suited to operations in the South Pacific (and Thetis in the Southern Ocean). Both can provide 76mm Naval Gunfire Support for South Pacific operations where there are limited heavy targets that require a 127mm capability, esp when combined with limited land space resulting in the need for a lower calibre weapon to reduce collateral damage. There is a limited need for Air Defence (Sea Ram would be sufficient) and a limited ASW Capability to ensure sufficient surveillance. The way I see it 4 Patrol Frigates would replace the OPV (Shift to Littoral warfare ships) while replacing two frigates with three. Overall and thinking long term a force structure of 15 ships would make a very capable navy for NZ. Accepted the cost will be higher, but the price is a far more capable navy.

• 
  3 x ANZAC Replacements
  4 x Patrol Frigates
  2 x Littoral Warfare Vessels
  3 x IPV (More Multi role i.e. EEZ, Environmental pollution, MCM)
  1 x AOR
  2 x LPHD

I'm for replacing Endeavour with a like for like at this stage. I rather spend the money on Patrol Frigates in order to address the imbalance in combat capability.

I was not suggesting the Thetis class, but to engage with the Danes to see if NZ could have an influence on the design of their replacement. They are fairly old designs now and the Danes have introduced 3 excellent class since them. All these have had the ESSM Stanflex modules available, even the smaller Knud Rasmussen class. I have not seen any papers or discussions about the replacement of the Thetis class, or even that they will be replace. But hoping this is the intention, as the Danish ships are a good 5 years older than the NZ ANACs and near 10 for the OPV the timescales look good.

A Thetis ship perhaps 10-20% larger (3,800-4,200t), modest speed increase to c24 knot, (but still diesel), even greater range c10,000m and endurance, a larger hanger (up to 20t), stealthy superstructure, and ESSM or replacement. Similar crew c40 plus mission crew c60. I would think these would be pretty logical and along the lines the Danes would go, so a modest ask for NZ.

I think such a ship would provide significant operating savings over the current ANZACs (reduced crew/diesels etc.).

If the existing 127mm guns could be ported across to a future Absalon/Endurance type development, the patrol frigates could be fitted with 76mm, the 25mm from the OPV or mix of the above. NZ could probably fund more hulls if some where war-fighting fit (ESSM, 76/57mm & CIWS) and other patrol (no ESSM, just 25mm), but I would see a single class.

I would then focus more capability on helicopters/mission modules to provide an upgraded capability the RNZN currently is a bit restricted.

NZ could take a very holistic view on defence procurement, i.e. if better maritime helicopter platforms maybe they could replace the P3, Seasprite and shipborne Harpoon, with say 8-10 heavy multi role helcopters which could switch between: serious ASW, heavy/light anti ship/FAC capability, medium logistics and surveillance....(what about 3-4 Crowsnest modules?)

 

[Todjaeger]

NZ could take a very holistic view on defence procurement, i.e. if better maritime helicopter platforms maybe they could replace the P3, Seasprite and shipborne Harpoon, with say 8-10 heavy multi role helcopters which could switch between: serious ASW, heavy/light anti ship/FAC capability, medium logistics and surveillance....(what about 3-4 Crowsnest modules?)

A few things.

The P-3K2 Orions are for long-range, high loiter time, broad area maritime patrol. No helicopter that I am aware of exists or is even on the drawing boards, which can replicate either the volume or time of coverage that a P-3 can. The role and capabilities of a naval helicopter are really more complimentery to that of a large MPA like an Orion, or even smaller fixed-wing MPA like a CN-235MPA/HC-144A Ocean Sentry.

Also, naval helicopters cannot (yet) replace heavy, shipbourne AShM generally, and certainly cannot for NZ. Firstly because NZ does not have an AShM capability. Secondly, one of the largest AShM ranged for carriage and launch from a helicopter is the Pengiun AShM (which is NZ supposed to be getting along with more Seasprite naval helicopters). IIRC the max range of a Penguin AShM is ~37km, which would put the launching helicopter outside the range of CIWS, point defence and short-ranged naval SAM systems. However, that is within the range of medium and long-ranged naval SAM systems. This basically means that a helicopter could only launch a strike against targets not under the umbrella of an area air defence.

This could change if either of the successor designs to the Penguin, the Naval Strike Missile or its variant the Joint Strike Missile, get adapted for helicopter launch.

-Cheers

 

[Lucasnz]

I was not suggesting the Thetis class, but to engage with the Danes to see if NZ could have an influence on the design of their replacement. They are fairly old designs now and the Danes have introduced 3 excellent class since them. All these have had the ESSM Stanflex modules available, even the smaller Knud Rasmussen class. I have not seen any papers or discussions about the replacement of the Thetis class, or even that they will be replace. But hoping this is the intention, as the Danish ships are a good 5 years older than the NZ ANACs and near 10 for the OPV the timescales look good.

A Thetis ship perhaps 10-20% larger (3,800-4,200t), modest speed increase to c24 knot, (but still diesel), even greater range c10,000m and endurance, a larger hanger (up to 20t), stealthy superstructure, and ESSM or replacement. Similar crew c40 plus mission crew c60. I would think these would be pretty logical and along the lines the Danes would go, so a modest ask for NZ.

I think such a ship would provide significant operating savings over the current ANZACs (reduced crew/diesels etc.).

If the existing 127mm guns could be ported across to a future Absalon/Endurance type development, the patrol frigates could be fitted with 76mm, the 25mm from the OPV or mix of the above. NZ could probably fund more hulls if some where war-fighting fit (ESSM, 76/57mm & CIWS) and other patrol (no ESSM, just 25mm), but I would see a single class.

I would then focus more capability on helicopters/mission modules to provide an upgraded capability the RNZN currently is a bit restricted.

NZ could take a very holistic view on defence procurement, i.e. if better maritime helicopter platforms maybe they could replace the P3, Seasprite and shipborne Harpoon, with say 8-10 heavy multi role helcopters which could switch between: serious ASW, heavy/light anti ship/FAC capability, medium logistics and surveillance....(what about 3-4 Crowsnest modules?)

The way I was looking at things is that NZ will always have a need for high end surface combatants, but within the context of the South Pacific a mid tier ship would go a long way to make up the shortfall in combat capability. I see a ANZAC / Thetis Replacement complementing each other rather than replacing the ANZAC with a Thetis replacement.

I'm not keen about your crew size, 70-80 would be a min given the 127mm, flight deck ops and the need to cover damage control. The USN is struggling with the original crew size on the LCS and still appear to be with a minor crew increase. There is also a danger with the modular approach as I believe the Danes found with there now withdrawn SF300 Patrol Craft, in that if you have too many modules you can't maintain crew competency. If I understand some of the stuff I read that why they single rolled them.

The single hull concept might be an idea for the future, there would a lot of savings in logistics and training. The key issue is overcoming the various stability and weight issues in taking a wide range of equipment, or leaving things out. Either way talking to the Danes about an upgraded Thetis wouldn't be a bad idea

 

[1805]

The way I was looking at things is that NZ will always have a need for high end surface combatants, but within the context of the South Pacific a mid tier ship would go a long way to make up the shortfall in combat capability. I see a ANZAC / Thetis Replacement complementing each other rather than replacing the ANZAC with a Thetis replacement.

I'm not keen about your crew size, 70-80 would be a min given the 127mm, flight deck ops and the need to cover damage control. The USN is struggling with the original crew size on the LCS and still appear to be with a minor crew increase. There is also a danger with the modular approach as I believe the Danes found with there now withdrawn SF300 Patrol Craft, in that if you have too many modules you can't maintain crew competency. If I understand some of the stuff I read that why they single rolled them.

The single hull concept might be an idea for the future, there would a lot of savings in logistics and training. The key issue is overcoming the various stability and weight issues in taking a wide range of equipment, or leaving things out. Either way talking to the Danes about an upgraded Thetis wouldn't be a bad idea

I am not sure the current ANZAC/Seasprite compo can be called a high end combatant, as I understand from others more in the know than me, in this thread, they have minimal ASW capability. I many ways they are as expensive as a frigate, but offering little more than an OPV.

I would see the 127mm being transferred over to some Abaslon/Endurance class type command/logistics vessel. The crew I have just taken from Wiki on the current Thetis at about which can rise to 100 including mission crews.

 

[Todjaeger]

With much of the recent discussion here about talking with the Danes on some of their naval building programmes, particularly for ice-strengthened vessels, as well as suggestions for a Canterbury and Endeavour replacements I find myself with questions.

Namely, just what sort of requirements does the RNZN and NZDF really have for certain roles and missions? The RNZN, like the RAN, USCG and USN has an area of operations which covers warm tropical waters, and cold and iceberg strewn waters. How many vessels though are likely ever to be needed in terms of operations in a given environment though?

Take the AOR for instance. It seems to have been suggested that ice-strengthening the AOR would allow it to bring fuel to McMurdo station in Antarctica. By some rough calculations, it appears that ~400 tonnes of fuel are shipped to McMurdo annually. Given that HMNZS Endeavour can move and replenish 5,500 tonnes of fuel, such a small shipment would comprise less than 10% of the AOR's capacity, assuming it was at least as capable as the current AOR. Would the added cost and operational impact so much extra displacement would cause an AOR when not in an ice enviroment be worth spending so much on such a limited mission?

The same goes for other vessels. While some patrol assets likely should be able to operate in the Southern Ocean, does it make sense to have a single class of patrol asset for covering the NZ EEZ, as well as S. Pacific areas, and also the ice zones?

-Cheers

 

[1805]

A few things.

The P-3K2 Orions are for long-range, high loiter time, broad area maritime patrol. No helicopter that I am aware of exists or is even on the drawing boards, which can replicate either the volume or time of coverage that a P-3 can. The role and capabilities of a naval helicopter are really more complimentery to that of a large MPA like an Orion, or even smaller fixed-wing MPA like a CN-235MPA/HC-144A Ocean Sentry.

Also, naval helicopters cannot (yet) replace heavy, shipbourne AShM generally, and certainly cannot for NZ. Firstly because NZ does not have an AShM capability. Secondly, one of the largest AShM ranged for carriage and launch from a helicopter is the Pengiun AShM (which is NZ supposed to be getting along with more Seasprite naval helicopters). IIRC the max range of a Penguin AShM is ~37km, which would put the launching helicopter outside the range of CIWS, point defence and short-ranged naval SAM systems. However, that is within the range of medium and long-ranged naval SAM systems. This basically means that a helicopter could only launch a strike against targets not under the umbrella of an area air defence.

This could change if either of the successor designs to the Penguin, the Naval Strike Missile or its variant the Joint Strike Missile, get adapted for helicopter launch.

-Cheers

All of these decisions would be difficult compromises, particularly when there is no appetite for increased spending. I don't think its fair to make a direct comparison with a well equipped ASW helicopter, like say a Merlin. But that said if you were comparing with a P8, you might get 2-3 Merlin, and for somewhere like NZ where its pretty much 1200 miles before you run into anything, a Merlin/frigate combo probably provides greater range/loitering, and more flexibility around logistics/SAR etc. Merlin doesn't have an anti ship missile mind, but that could be sorted. I do like the NSM/JSM quite modest numbers, would be a huge increase in capability.

 

[Todjaeger]

All of these decisions would be difficult compromises, particularly when there is no appetite for increased spending. I don't think its fair to make a direct comparison with a well equipped ASW helicopter, like say a Merlin. But that said if you were comparing with a P8, you might get 2-3 Merlin, and for somewhere like NZ where its pretty much 1200 miles before you run into anything, a Merlin/frigate combo probably provides greater range/loitering, and more flexibility around logistics/SAR etc. Merlin doesn't have an anti ship missile mind, but that could be sorted. I do like the NSM/JSM quite modest numbers, would be a huge increase in capability.

You are apparently unaware then of the size and range of area that the NZ P-3K2 Orions patrol. In addition to the EEZ around both North Island and South Island, NZ Orions also patrol the Chatham Islands which are 600+km from 'main land' NZ to the SE, the Kermadec Islands which are 800+km NE of North Island, Tokelau, Niue, and the Cook Islands. To get an idea of the potential patrol area, as well as how far some patrol areas are from NZ, look at this Wiki map. The areas in red comprise the Realm of NZ. Also NZ has agreements with some S. Pacific states to provide MPA assistance.

Another thing to keep in mind, a helicopter like the Merlin has a mission endurance of ~5 hours, while many fixed-wing MPA have mission endurances of considerably greater. IIRC the P-8 Poseidon is supposed to have a mission endurance of 15-18 hours and AFAIK the P-3 Orion has an endurance of 16 hours. Helicopters just do not have the endurance, the range, or the stores capacity of something like an Orion.

-Cheers

 

[1805]

You are apparently unaware then of the size and range of area that the NZ P-3K2 Orions patrol. In addition to the EEZ around both North Island and South Island, NZ Orions also patrol the Chatham Islands which are 600+km from 'main land' NZ to the SE, the Kermadec Islands which are 800+km NE of North Island, Tokelau, Niue, and the Cook Islands. To get an idea of the potential patrol area, as well as how far some patrol areas are from NZ, look at this Wiki map. The areas in red comprise the Realm of NZ. Also NZ has agreements with some S. Pacific states to provide MPA assistance.

Another thing to keep in mind, a helicopter like the Merlin has a mission endurance of ~5 hours, while many fixed-wing MPA have mission endurances of considerably greater. IIRC the P-8 Poseidon is supposed to have a mission endurance of 15-18 hours and AFAIK the P-3 Orion has an endurance of 16 hours. Helicopters just do not have the endurance, the range, or the stores capacity of something like an Orion.

-Cheers

I am aware of the performance of both two types, and don't disagreeing with you on the comparison between the two. In an ideal world NZ would have access to both. But without a decent ASW helicopter the frigates become very limited, given the choice between a P8 and say 3 Merlin (or similar ASW equipped helicopter). A good medium helicopter could potentially be more useful forward deployed for logistics and air to surface. I like the Merlin as it has heavy lift could move a light gun etc. But the MH60R (probably get 4 for a P8 and I think could still lift a light gun) is probably a better fit with allies, and with hellfire capability, would be very useful at sea and in support of the army. What NZ should avoid is operating limited helicopters and limited MPA just to maintain a perception of the capability, when neither do the job effectively.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I am aware of the performance of both two types, and don't disagreeing with you on the comparison between the two. In an ideal world NZ would have access to both. But without a decent ASW helicopter the frigates become very limited, given the choice between a P8 and say 3 Merlin (or similar ASW equipped helicopter). A good medium helicopter could potentially be more useful forward deployed for logistics and air to surface. I like the Merlin as it has heavy lift could move a light gun etc. But the MH60R (probably get 4 for a P8 and I think could still lift a light gun) is probably a better fit, aligns with allies, already having hellfire capability. What NZ should avoid is operating limited helicopters and MPA just to maintain a perception of the capability, when neither do the job effectively.

again. have you looked at the NZ area of operations????

they don't have the spread of skimmer forces and/or luxury in their Navy to be able to monitor that seascape.

countries like Aust, NZ with small populations have a BAMS requirement as their primary tier of surveillance - its the BAMS assets that vector in available shipping if a recovery is needed - and or naval vessels if a broader intimate engagement is deemed necessary

One of the reasons why countries like australia and NZ have sharing arranegments with the French is because we're all on limited resources to cover our maritime areas of interest - and we (aust for example) can task the french to act on our behalf. Its why they allow Aust crew to rotate on to their vessels

The kiwis have even less flexibility, A rotor focused force would detract and diminish their ability to conduct meaningful surveillance.

they need fixed wing to undertake BAMs - Merlins would kill their budget and provide zero benefit - and actually detract from their overall force posture.

They don't have enough helo friendly skimmers to do the job as it is.

partial map of NZ's maritime zone:
http://foreignminister.gov.au/releases/2004/images/a-nz-maritimebound.gif

http://www.linz.govt.nz/sites/default/files/docs/hydro/ntm/summary/annual/nz12.pdf

 

[RegR]

With regard to the number of ships all that would happen is that one extra ship (3rd Frigate) would be acquired. The 6 new OCVs would replace the current 2 OPVs plus the 4 IPVs. We are not looking at having everything tomorrow but between now and 2030. The fleet crewing numbers can be slowly built up over time and also automation reduces crewing numbers in ships. With regard to VLS, that is becoming standard and it's a matter of keep presenting the concept until the pollies get used to the idea. You fit VLS but you don't have to load it all the time. OCV tonnage could sit at around 2,500 - 3,000 tonnes per vessel and with stanflex each one could have different taskings such as LWS or ASW etc. One way to get the pollies onside would be to develop an oil spill module that could be utilised by the OCVs - saves the NZG having to buy two dedicated ships.

I think the most improvement numbers wise we can hope for is maybe a 3rd frigate as it is the more strategic option internationally and that is still a stretch as we have been seen to 'get by' this long with the two ANZACs albeit with the obvious numbers issue and subsequent inherent deficiencies caused.

I cannot think of any asset/capability we have replaced/upgraded in recent times that have led to us gaining or even maintaining our current numbers, in fact each time we replace/upgrade we seem to lose more actual assets due to being able to 'do more with less' thanks to the wonders of modern technology, and this looks likely to continue with C130, P3, littoral, TF, vehicles, bases etc etc.

Also I think replacing 4 50cal (if that) equipped patrol boats that primarily hunt illegal poachers and conduct fisheries patrols with 4 VLS equipped miniature frigates is again pushing ship uphill. It will be at least like for like covering fit for purpose of respective type and not automatically ticking off the highest possible end of the threat scale for every ship (it will take a major regional climate change to justify). Frigate, OPV, IPV groups individually could gain some improvements in their respective roles (frigates especially, OPVs probably) but to get solely OCVs to cover everything currently undertaken by the OPV and IPV fleets is asking alittle too much of our peacenik frugal govt.

Come replacement time hopefully we could gain an added frigate barring that an extra OPV/OCV(more likely dummed down 'oil spill' V) but probably have to settle for current numbers/types (we are at max minimum now IMO ) that we have but with improved weapons/sensors/options mix and added responsibilities(non-warlike of course).

Not being negative just being a realist and noting history.

 

[recce.k1]

@ Reg - I'd say that's a more realistic scenario within the next 10 or so years (unless the wider regional dynamics change within that time), although I also realise NM is looking further out and IMO what he is proposing could be possible if NZG changed defence focus from boots on the ground to maritime and up'ed spending back up to 2+% of gdp. However like you I don't see the need to ditch IPV sized vessels. They have proven their worth over the last 70 years or so for inshore and harbour patrolling and MCM work and provide opportunities for ratings and junior officers to gain value experience before progressing onto bigger and better etc. If anything we all should be pleased about the greater capabilities and sea-keeping abilities that the current IPV's provide over their various predecessors. If anything we need to double or treble the fleet and allow the Reserves to have their own vessels again.

Personally I feel future NZG's should be looking to building up (as new assets) and forward basing 2-3 OPV (H) types in the Pacific to enhance regional patrolling/intel gathering and W-O-G needs. Armament wouldn't have to be excessive (because if it were to "hot up" that's when Frigates are to be deployed) but basic ASW/detection would be handy in these times of greater numbers of submarines being built in the wider A-P region. As history (going back to WW1 and WW2) demonstrates for us ...

@ 1805 - in terms of NZ's area of operations, it's vast. Using Distance Between Cities Places On Map Distance Calculator as a rough guide the P-3 Orions:

*Patrol south (in summer) from Christchurch to McMurdo Sound which appears to be some 3800km's,which to cap it off there is no-where else to land in-between in case of an emergency. That's equivalent to London to Mali non-stop!

*Patrol north (north west) from Auckland to Solomon Islands in Micronesia (NE of Austailia), some 3360km (eg equiv. to London to western Greenland)!

*Patrol east (NE) from Auckland to the Cook Islands in Polynesia some 3000km (eg equiv. to London to Kirov, Russia)!

These exclude deployments to exercises in Singapore, Malaysia, Japan, South Korea etc and coalition support in the Arabian Gulf.

I also wouldn't say they "maintain a perception of capability", their sea and overland surface sensors have/are being upgraded, the underwater sensor upgrades are being scoped for the next project and RNZAF have made mention of weapon upgrades after that. Along with the RAAF, RCAF & USN Orions - RAF personnel are also embedded with the RNZAF's Orion squadron to maintain UK MPA/ISR skillsets (so they can't be too bad)!

http://airforce.mil.nz/downloads/pdf/airforce-news/afn146.pdf Pg9 for area of operations etc.
http://airforce.mil.nz/downloads/pdf/airforce-news/afn147.pdf Pg 11 for RAF "Seedcorn" initiative.

 

[Todjaeger]

I am aware of the performance of both two types, and don't disagreeing with you on the comparison between the two. In an ideal world NZ would have access to both. But without a decent ASW helicopter the frigates become very limited, given the choice between a P8 and say 3 Merlin (or similar ASW equipped helicopter). A good medium helicopter could potentially be more useful forward deployed for logistics and air to surface. I like the Merlin as it has heavy lift could move a light gun etc. But the MH60R (probably get 4 for a P8 and I think could still lift a light gun) is probably a better fit with allies, and with hellfire capability, would be very useful at sea and in support of the army. What NZ should avoid is operating limited helicopters and limited MPA just to maintain a perception of the capability, when neither do the job effectively.

You do appear unaware. As I have been saying, and GF and Recce have supported, the NZ patrol area is vast. No naval helicopter has the range, loiter time, or mission endurance to cover that area. Also at present (and likely to continue for some time) the RNZN only has five helicopter capable vessels. Of these, only one could potentially be able to support a medium or heavy weight helicopter.

In order for Merlins to provide anything even close to what the NZDF can currently do with the P-3 and SH-2G, it would likely require a purchase of 24+ (and I suspect quite a few more actually) Merlins. Further, a number of bases and facilities would need to be opened and sustained throughout the Realm of NZ. Several Merlins would need to be based out of the Cook Islands, at least one on Niue, the Chatham Islands, etc.

At present, NZDF MPA assets are a half-dozen P-3 Orions and five SH-2G(NZ) Seasprite naval helicopters. IIRC talks are underway for an NZ buy of 10 SH-2G(I) Seasprites to replace their current ones. The reason behind the increase in numbers is that with only five helicopters currently, that is insufficient to provide shipbourne helicopter support as much as desired.

As for the notion of purchasing more helicopters and vessels to operate them from... That is a quite difficult and expensive path to attempt. Given that a fairly basic OPV(H) costs ~$100 mil. if one adds the cost of a Merlin helicopter onto that, the price for an OPV(H) + naval helicopter gets into the range of ~$180 mil. Given a projected cost for the P-8A Poseidon of ~$200 mil. and the fact that an OPV requires additional crew and support facilities... Just getting such a vessel to provide a base of operations for a helicopter patrol is certainly not more cost effective than use of a fixed wing MPA for broad area maritime surveillance (BAMS). Particularly if one also looks at how many OPV(H) + helicopter combos would be required to provide not only the same search volume capability, but a comparable search rate.

-Cheers

 

[MrConservative]

...... given the choice between a P8 and say 3 Merlin (or similar ASW equipped helicopter). A good medium helicopter could potentially be more useful forward deployed for logistics and air to surface. I like the Merlin as it has heavy lift could move a light gun etc. But the MH60R (probably get 4 for a P8 and I think could still lift a light gun) is probably a better fit with allies, and with hellfire capability, would be very useful at sea and in support of the army. What NZ should avoid is operating limited helicopters and limited MPA just to maintain a perception of the capability, when neither do the job effectively.

Back in the real world who the heck is going to tell the vessel with its kitted up Merlin where to look and shoot?

Epic fail.