My own view is that NZDF funding should be back at 2%GDP like it was until the 1991 budget and it was affordable then and it is affordable now.
Feel free to slap me down if I have the wrong end of the stick but to me the issues for the RNZN (apart from political incompetence and lack of funding) is a shortage of skilled personnel, retention of the skilled personnel they do have and the operating costs of the current fleet. The upfront cost of platforms and capabilities is actually a much smaller (apart from the political angle) part of the problem than these other factors.
IMV the personnel shortage has been created by the political shenanigans of civilianisation, the politicisation of defence by Labour and the starvation of funding since 1991 by both National and Labour. In particular it has hit the RNZN hard because the young technicians become qualified in a trade and then get lured out by better pay and conditions in the civilian sector. The RNZAF has a similar problem too but it doesn't have the same impact upon the RNZAF as a whole. Then to top things off they take away the advantage of service housing in Auckland by charging service personnel market rates for service married quarters and it's like living in Sydney, bloody expensive.
Now, as I see it, an OPV is a much more capable platform than an IPV while not being much more expensive to own and operate. Its crew is about the same size (IPV 36, OPV 35 + 10 aviation), its fuel usage would not be much more for the distances covered and its maintenance costs would not be much higher. Accordingly for slightly greater operating costs the OPVs are far more capable and therefore better value for money, as they are larger, more comfortable and more interesting to serve on they likely would also lead to better morale in their crews and better retention. There greater size also facilitates embarking more trainees, which would improve the skilling issue and also provide extra hands for taskings, reducing the workload and monotony for the trained technical sailors also improving morale and retention. Also when tasked on missions that do not require an aviation element the OPV actually has a smaller crew that the IPV, actually making it cheaper still.
The OPV core crew is 35 and the IPV is 20
RNZN - Meet The Fleet. The RNZN hierarchy need to build a bridge about their attitude towards the RNZNVR and get over it. Such snobbery is unbecoming in a service which has to utilise every resource and is actually detrimental to the Navy. CN Jack Steer needs to lead by example and jump on it. My position here is biased because I was a Reservist and proud of it. We wore that uniform with the same pride as the Regulars and we worked bloody hard for it too. I'd like to see the IPVs go the Reserve Divisions as training ships. They take a crew of 20 which is only 2 more than the old Moa Class IPCs and I know that the Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin Divisions could crew their ships reasonably well and often. The RNZNVR having those ships would get the Reserves back into more regular and frequent sea time and keep them current so that they can be greater assets to the sea going side of the RNZN.
The only down side is greater upfront acquisition costs but they should not be that different in the situation of comparing an OPV to and IPV as steel is cheap and air is free, but also an OPV would be expected to be more durable and have a longer life than an IPV so therefore again better value for money. Also a larger class of OPVs, with no IPVs would enable maintenance to be better optimised while still meeting all scheduled taskings. Logistics and training would be simplified and an order for 4, 5 or 6 pretty much identical OPVs (plus the potentially similar littoral vessel) would also decrease unit cost and may even make local construction a possibility (if combined with a frigate build).
IMHO simple, 6 OPVs around the 2,500 tonne mark with an Ice Class 1C strengthening, flight deck and hangar plus a couple of 25mm guns and the usual .50 cal, air and surface surveillance radars, basic sonar for ASW, something like StanFlex where can fit a couple of torpedo tubes, Sea Ceptor, 40mm or 76mm main gun, mission fitouts, CIWS etc., as required.
The next issue is the frigates, NZ has only two but really needs three or more simply for sustainment reasons. An increased OPV fleet would take some of the load off through being able to conduct some tasks that would otherwise require a frigate how ever an OPV is not a frigate and there are tasks that an OPV should not be used for unless its systems are beefed up to the point it costs almost as much as a frigate but is still less capable and survivable.
That is true and I've only added something like Sea Ceptor more for Helos that might cause problems or a sub that decides to fling off a SLSM. Definitely wouldn't send OPVs into hi tech frigate fight.
Lets assume NZ decides to baseline the next generation frigate on the capabilities of the upgraded ANZAC. Such a ship, using the latest technologies, would have a crew less than half the size of the ANZACs, even a third or quarter, if modern corvette designs are considered. Also, as many auxiliary systems as possible could be shared with the OPVs, in fact even elements of the combat system could be shared. These factors will dramatically reduce the cost of ownership verses an ANZAC. Again, steel is cheap and air is free so a larger hull could be specified, with plenty of growth reserve but also with the reduction in crew size and operating costs verses an ANZAC more hulls could be afforded and if these ships are ordered in a batch from an established yard costs could be reduced enough to justify additional units.
No, corvettes are not an option. If you going down that road might as well jut put some armour plating on an some extra OPVs mentioned above. No NZ is in the position where it, like it or not, has to have three or more GP frigates capable of doing ASW, ASuW and AAW even if it's only
effective LAAD. However the ASW and ASuW have to be top notch and AAW preferably top notch.
Now here comes the stretch, some would say the pure fantasy, depending how many frigates, OPVs and Littoral Operations Support Ships are required, within a ceiling of total available crew and overall fleet operating costs, a local build of these ships could be justified, affordable and sustainable. Starting with the currently projected third OPV and a potentially common hulled littoral support ship as new design could be selected for local build.
By local build do you mean built in NZ?
Completed at two year intervals, from 2020, five new OPVs, with modular systems, are built with one outfitted for the littoral support role to replace the IPVs, Resolution and Manawanui. for a total of six OPVs and one support vessel. In 2030 the first of five new frigates is delivered from the same yard as the OPVs, commissioning at two year intervals through to 2038 and then the first two of seven new OPVs to replace the by then ancient Protector Class OPVs from 2040, then the newer OPVs and littoral ship following, again at two year intervals. Thus a continuous build of seven OPVs and five frigates is established with a new ship commissioning every two years and an old ship being replaced after twenty four years service.
Fantasy land I know but with the right amount of political will it could be done.
Maybe not quite fantasy land V. Actually it is quite a logical program and with the right amount of automation would be doable for a small navy. If you add to that build program an LPD and maybe a DDH
then it would be a very busy yard. I am quite fond of your DDH concept for the RAN and think maybe in the future one could find a home on this side of the ditch especially if a govt found the will to purchase say a dozen Tiger ARHs to support it's expeditionary JATF.
However all this is theoretical but like I said it is a good plan and program V. I know just where I would put such a yard and that would go towards solving a high unemployment problem in a region away from a main centre but still be close enough to barge steel from the Glenbrook steel mill just south of Auckland. On the sensor side I'd like to see Ceafar etc., as the radars but CEC at moment don't know. I am aware of the tactical advantage of it but think the possibility exists that there may be a simpler and cheaper way achieving the same outcome and linking with current CEC. Something maybe us ANZACs could work on as a project.
You've most definitely given us a lot to think about and cogitate over V.
