Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[MrConservative]

I was in the beleif that the OPVs were there to take pressure off the frigates and release them for their primary duties and the IPVs were improved to in turn take pressure off the OPVs and free them up for their constabulary duties. I think we should get what we have up to a decent standard first (all classes incl air support) along with manning and systems before we consider adding anything above and beyond

Hopefully future OPV will be a much improved version again to take on even more lower to mid 'frigate' work as per BAMs which has successfully conducted anti piracy ops whereas we have to send one of the ANZACs due to current OPVs limited capability in this area, the Otagos probably could do it at a stretch however no fudge factor allowance so more liability than worth.

Once the realisation that F421 was not going to be replaced the Navy started thinking about OPV's and a future MRV, which they rightly believed could cover some aspects of the remaining frigates taskings. At that stage the Navy did not want IPVs and was pushing for OPV designs. However Cabinet and MFish and to a lesser extent wanted the IPVs. They won and the Navy lost that battle. It did not put up much of a fight because they and the RNZAF had been painted as stuck in the Cold War and wouldnt be listened to anyway. Defence became a service provider and that was how it was treated by the 9th floor of the Beehive.

 

[MrConservative]

Since I'm cluttering up the net today, I'll also point people at this media release on the NZDF website, with some good news about retention/recruitment.

NZDF - 20141022mfgb5

Of course, it doesn't mention that the spike in exits was caused in part by a poorly-handled civilianisation programme... Good news, nonetheless.

Good news. Has this been picked up by the NZ media? Of course it has not - it would not fit their narrative.

Isnt it amazing some new kit comes along and folk want to hang around.Jono Coleman came up trumps (Didnt I tell you he would do OK). He has made Big Jerry's job a little easier.

 

[MrConservative]

I have no idea whether this change is sufficiently institutionalised that it will survive a change of government. For this reason, I hope the current gov't pushes through as many of the pending purchases as possible in the current parliamentary term. For me, these are:
- Endeavour replacment (definite)
- littoral warfare vessel (probable)
- third OPV (unlikely)
- Strategic Bearer satellite comms project (definite)
- LAV upgrade (possible)
- misc. small arms replacements (probable)
- twin-engine training aircraft (possible)
- C130 replacement (possible/unlikely?) - not that an aircraft will be purchased or delivered by 2017, but that NZ will have gone sufficiently far down the track of choosing a replacement capability that any future government will simply stick with the decision.

Any other candidates?

Possibly to add to that list the AW109's "refresh." Other than MAOT and training roles the AW109s are going to provide more tasking support for CT and SOF. They are also going to be integrated with the CY. A refresh of systems is due later this decade. Now what is to be done with that has not been signed off. Yet signals in the past for 3 basic civilian Power versions for rotary training to offet the five LUH have been under discussion. It is in the scheme of things a small project that would sustain the LUH better overthe long term.

The other issue of the B200 replacement for MEPT post 2018. Another smaller project that should be integrated with the maritime ISR that goes back to the last government. With the move towards a directed approach to OPV taskings this needs to happen. Both these projects have not been as front and centre as they should be over the last 12 months. I think a please explain should soon be in order frankly.

 

[40 deg south]

Possibly to add to that list the AW109's "refresh." Other than MAOT and training roles the AW109s are going to provide more tasking support for CT and SOF. They are also going to be integrated with the CY. A refresh of systems is due later this decade. Now what is to be done with that has not been signed off. Yet signals in the past for 3 basic civilian Power versions for rotary training to offet the five LUH have been under discussion. It is in the scheme of things a small project that would sustain the LUH better overthe long term.

The other issue of the B200 replacement for MEPT post 2018. Another smaller project that should be integrated with the maritime ISR that goes back to the last government. With the move towards a directed approach to OPV taskings this needs to happen. Both these projects have not been as front and centre as they should be over the last 12 months. I think a please explain should soon be in order frankly.

Good points. I had forgotten about the suggested purchase of more AW109s for training purposes. In the 2014 Defence Capability Plan there is an item in one of the graphics 'A109 Refresh' around 2018, but no mention of extra airframes.

I hope the lack of visible activity around MEPT is because it is part of a cunning plan to replace the whole fixed-wing fleet in a coordinated manner that will extract maximum benefit from a minimal number of aircraft types. Alternatively, there is no money to progress it at this point.

There should be a Briefing to Incoming Minister (BIM) posted on the MinDef site soon - they usually give a good succinct overview of the activities planned for the next few years. At present they still have the one for Coleman up, which isn't a great look.

 

[mattyem]

It should have been pretty easy to rebuild the helideck for the Sprite, I've never understood why they didn't. Would the hanger have been large enough to fit one?

As an engineer on END, believe me it would not have been an easy task! there is far more to welding reinforcing as it would seem. you get into affecting load lines, ships class issues with Lloyds Register, structural integrity of the ship is affected with shear forces and bending moments etc the list goes on,

an then there is also the massive process that goes on with capability branch, engineering change group and so on, Its hard enough getting a new air compressor onboard Let alone a flightdeck upgrade on an Auxiliary vessel of such age

and is there an actual requirement for END to have a helo landing capability?.... we can store and HIFR with out having to land a helo.

In my years onboard her we haven't had the need.

hassle far far bigger than the worth

 

[40 deg south]

Glancing at the 'What's New' page of the MinDef site (Nice work, by the way), I noticed the Endeavour replacement page was shown as being updated. As far as I can see, the only change is this:

Contracts were signed with Lloyds Register in August 2014 and Fraser-Nash in September 2014 for the provision of support services to aid in the development of the tender documentation suite for the supply of a Maritime Sustainment Capability for the NZDF.

Looks like solid background work on preparing for the tender. According to Mr Google, Frazer-Nash is a British engineering consultancy with strong defence links. Interestingly, they are playing a role in supporting the RN's procurement of the MARS tankers from Daewoo in South Korea.

Frazer-Nash Consultancy - Frazer-Nash leads technical support for mars tanker project

I've always thought a variant of the same class was a strong contender for NZ, and this is unlikely to hurt Daewoo's chances!

 

[40 deg south]

Sleek, modern and built on a budget – Denmark’s latest frigate | Intercepts | Defense News

A few members here are fans of Denmark's Iver Huitfeldt-class frigates. I found a nice pictorial tour of the final ship of the class on Defence News.

Lots of interesting points, but the degree to which they have built the base platform and will progressively arm it up as funds become available was striking.

 

[cdxbow]

Sleek, modern and built on a budget – Denmark’s latest frigate | Intercepts | Defense News

A few members here are fans of Denmark's Iver Huitfeldt-class frigates. I found a nice pictorial tour of the final ship of the class on Defence News.

Lots of interesting points, but the degree to which they have built the base platform and will progressively arm it up as funds become available was striking.

That's a great link, it gives a really good visual of the boats. At that price the NZDF could afford a few. I've been looking for a picture of the missile deck. The image I have attached is one of them which I have labelled. In the accompanying text it says "Flanking the Mark 41 are two Raytheon Mark 56 missile launchers to handle Evolved Sea Sparrow (ESSM) anti-air missiles. Just visible in the foreground are the support structures for Boeing Harpoon surface-to-surface missiles. Both the Mark 56 and Harpoon launchers come from decommissioned ships". It doesn't explicitly call them stanflex modules, but I am guessing they all are and the blank plate to the right is an empty module. Can anyone confirm this?

I was hoping for a picture showing the other 2 stanflex slots, these are somewhere near the waterline, probably aft.

In the article they say "The base ring for the forward mount is sized to take a US-built Mark 45 five-inch gun, but funding for the mount — at about $50 million each — has yet to be approved." Is that the price just for the mount or the mount and the gun?

 

[RegR]

Sleek, modern and built on a budget – Denmark’s latest frigate | Intercepts | Defense News

A few members here are fans of Denmark's Iver Huitfeldt-class frigates. I found a nice pictorial tour of the final ship of the class on Defence News.

Lots of interesting points, but the degree to which they have built the base platform and will progressively arm it up as funds become available was striking.

Very interesting link showing some interesting and relevant design concepts (modular, high automation, future growth etc). 2 Ivers and an absalon would give us far more options than we currently have and take us nicely into the future covering a wider range of ops/tasks that we would actually do. Good idea getting the ships online first then adding the options as and when funds become available, less of a hit initially and easier to sell to the budget conscious pulling the strings.

The fake mount maintaining dynamics is intrigueing although I fear our cheap govt may take it literally and may have found an easy way to save millions, all look and no actual use haha.

Another set of options for 2030? Or better yet aqquire the absalon now as a lead in to the class giving us our much needed 3rd frigate and extra limited sealift until ANZAC replacement rolls around with the 2 Ivers. Solves some availability/capability issues and spreads the costs somewhat.

 

[ngatimozart]

Very interesting link showing some interesting and relevant design concepts (modular, high automation, future growth etc). 2 Ivers and an absalon would give us far more options than we currently have and take us nicely into the future covering a wider range of ops/tasks that we would actually do. Good idea getting the ships online first then adding the options as and when funds become available, less of a hit initially and easier to sell to the budget conscious pulling the strings.

The fake mount maintaining dynamics is intrigueing although I fear our cheap govt may take it literally and may have found an easy way to save millions, all look and no actual use haha.

Another set of options for 2030? Or better yet aqquire the absalon now as a lead in to the class giving us our much needed 3rd frigate and extra limited sealift until ANZAC replacement rolls around with the 2 Ivers. Solves some availability/capability issues and spreads the costs somewhat.

Talking costs, for UK£800 million (US$1,255 billion a guesstimate at moment) approximately we could get two T26s. For the same amount of money we could buy three Iver Huitfelds and an Absalon fully weaponised and with full sensor suites if the same process as the Danish Navy used was followed. I also think they are ice strengthened as well. However I am unsure that the NZG would fund such a package although it would be to its long term advantage to do so.

 

[RegR]

Talking costs, for UK£800 million (US$1,255 billion a guesstimate at moment) approximately we could get two T26s. For the same amount of money we could buy three Iver Huitfelds and an Absalon fully weaponised and with full sensor suites if the same process as the Danish Navy used was followed. I also think they are ice strengthened as well. However I am unsure that the NZG would fund such a package although it would be to its long term advantage to do so.

So cheaper, more versatile and in service proven? Oh no that means we will not get them as it is too easy and straight forward.

In saying that I still do like the T26 'commonwealth' class as well but you can't beat good old fashioned value for money when it comes to such a major long term commitment especially if it comes down to an entire hull.

 

[40 deg south]

So cheaper, more versatile and in service proven? Oh no that means we will not get them as it is too easy and straight forward.

Realistically, by the time our ANZACs are replaced, the Iver Huitfeldts will be pretty dated, and the yard that built them closed for nearly 20 years. Although according to the linked piece, Denmark will still have an active naval design team...

I think NZ could learn a lot from the Danes about innovative planning and choosing flexible options, but buying actual vessels of this class isn't a serious option.

 

[40 deg south]

Brazil selects MBDA Sea Ceptor for new corvettes - IHS Jane's 360

Missile systems, defence systems - MBDA missiles


Brazil has just become the second export customer (after NZ) for the CAMM missile, to be fitted to their four new corvettes.

This is good for NZ, as a bigger the customer base generally translates into better availability of spares and more frequent upgrades. Given the small footprint required for launchers and the supposed 'plug and play' radar requirements, CAMM may well carve a out a decent niche on smaller-sized warships.

MBDA is also trying to interest Brazil in a truck-mounted version for their army, but I understand a Russian alternative is likely to be chosen..

 

[ngatimozart]

Realistically, by the time our ANZACs are replaced, the Iver Huitfeldts will be pretty dated, and the yard that built them closed for nearly 20 years. Although according to the linked piece, Denmark will still have an active naval design team...

I think NZ could learn a lot from the Danes about innovative planning and choosing flexible options, but buying actual vessels of this class isn't a serious option.

No I'd disagree in that it's more the design and construction process, systems and philosophy that's important and transferable. Secondly, the ships designs, specs etc., can be updated prior to any construction so they wouldn't be out dated. Thirdly, Odense now operate as a design team so they are still available and retain all the IP required.

 

[RegR]

Realistically, by the time our ANZACs are replaced, the Iver Huitfeldts will be pretty dated, and the yard that built them closed for nearly 20 years. Although according to the linked piece, Denmark will still have an active naval design team...

I think NZ could learn a lot from the Danes about innovative planning and choosing flexible options, but buying actual vessels of this class isn't a serious option.

Well if we look at it like that everything available now will be 'dated', we could get something totally new at the time, seems to have worked well for us so far. AK-47s are pretty dated however still seem to have a pretty decent following, if it ain't broke.....

Interested in why ships of this class would not be a serious contender for ANZAC replacement as I did not realise we are such a powerhouse in frigate circles internationally or indeed have a specific type? The way I see it the more options we can decently roll into a singular hull the better for our small Navy remembering what we are more probably going to realistically do and not possibly do in a traditional naval sense. We have under-armed OPVs and a civilian based sealift vessel so not sure why we would now be picky.

 

[Volkodav]

Reading the articles it seems that the cost mentioned doesn't include SM-2, SM-6, or even ESSM. The combat system and weapons outfit is far from complete, as are likely many other systems; add these costs together and the cost advantage of the Iver Huitfelds is nowhere near as good as it first appears.

It would be interesting to see an apples for apples comparison between an optioned up Iver Huitfeld and say a Horizon, F-100, F-124, Tromp etc. or alternatively see how much could be saved through adopting a similar for but not with on these other designs.

 

[swerve]

Realistically, by the time our ANZACs are replaced, the Iver Huitfeldts will be pretty dated, and the yard that built them closed for nearly 20 years. Although according to the linked piece, Denmark will still have an active naval design team...

I think NZ could learn a lot from the Danes about innovative planning and choosing flexible options, but buying actual vessels of this class isn't a serious option.

You mean, dated like DDG-51?

The yard that put their blocks together has closed (though part of it, including the building docks, has re-opened as a ship repair & conversion yard), but the way they were built, I think they could be built almost anywhere. Each ship was made up of 14 blocks, built in yards in Estonia & Lithuania & assembled & fitted out by Staalskibsvaerft in Denmark.

The navy design office that oversaw the building of five ships by that method should be able to handle overseeing the building of ships in other yards. Note that it's also overseen the building of the Knud Rassmussen patrol ships - two hulls built in Poland, finished by Karstensens Skibsvaerft, & a third now being built.

 

[John Fedup]

No I'd disagree in that it's more the design and construction process, systems and philosophy that's important and transferable. Secondly, the ships designs, specs etc., can be updated prior to any construction so they wouldn't be out dated. Thirdly, Odense now operate as a design team so they are still available and retain all the IP required.

I believe the Odense design team has done some work for Canada's Irving shipyard which will be (supposedly) be building Canadian surface combatant ships. This could mean a modified Danish frigate but little has been made public about the CSC ships of late. I mentioned an interesting article on the CASR website on another thread. It discussed the modification of the Absalon class ship as a possible destroyer replacement for Canada's tribal destroyers. Both of these Danish designs would work for us.....then again, almost anything would be welcome at this point given the state of the RCN!

 

[40 deg south]

No I'd disagree in that it's more the design and construction process, systems and philosophy that's important and transferable. Secondly, the ships designs, specs etc., can be updated prior to any construction so they wouldn't be out dated. Thirdly, Odense now operate as a design team so they are still available and retain all the IP required.

Ngati
I said "innovative planning and choosing flexible options", while you said "it's more the design and construction process, systems and philosophy that's important and transferable."

I think we are pretty much in complete agreement, although your wording was better. Given the time lapse, any possible RNZAF order wouldn't be of the IH class as such, but could well be a"Son of Iver" class.

RegR
As I understand it, the original AK47 design has been refined and upgraded over time, manufacturing methods have been changed etc etc.
The same happens with ships - a fundamentally sound design will still be tweaked and improved over the years.

If some variant on the Danish multi-purpose design is around a decade from now, it would certainly be an interesting contender as the ANZAC replacement. Quite possibly constructed somewhere like Korea or Vietnam, but to Danish specifications.

 

[John Fedup]

Ngati

If some variant on the Danish multi-purpose design is around a decade from now, it would certainly be an interesting contender as the ANZAC replacement. Quite possibly constructed somewhere like Korea or Vietnam, but to Danish specifications.

I guess if Canada settles on a modified Danish design, having Irving build a couple for NZ might be an option depending on when they are required. The Halifax class frigates built by Irving will need to be replaced starting in 2025-30. Assuming the RCN actually gets 12-15 frigates, adding 2 more might be cost competitive.