Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

swerve

Super Moderator
...
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 think this is what Maersk (the owners of the Odense Staalskibsvaerft until they closed it down) does now. It used to be, AFAIK, unique - a shipping line that owned its own yard, where it built its own ships. Now it has them built elsewhere, mostly Korea I think, but I believe it still has a design office & its ships are built to its specifications.
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
I think this is what Maersk (the owners of the Odense Staalskibsvaerft until they closed it down) does now. It used to be, AFAIK, unique - a shipping line that owned its own yard, where it built its own ships. Now it has them built elsewhere, mostly Korea I think, but I believe it still has a design office & its ships are built to its specifications.
The Tripple E's are built at DSME.

Going back a ways there were a number of Shipping Lines which build there own vessels, Mitsuibishi was one, they went the other way and build ships now, not operate them.
 

RegR

Well-Known Member
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.
It's only natural progression to modify, tweak and improve over the years as and when new and better options come online but fundamentally the base concept remains largely the same. I'm not argueing refinement and modernisation just disagreeing with you on discounting the Ivers and Absalon from NZ consideration completely, in fact I would go so far as to say that they are a lot more versatile than what we currently have. Obviously we would tailor it (or any vessel) for NZs situation in some ways to better suit our wants and needs.

Definitely options out there, possibly following Aus with the F-100 concept, UK with T26 or maybe even RCN with a Danish inspired soloution. Let the RandD commence.
 

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
It's only natural progression to modify, tweak and improve over the years as and when new and better options come online but fundamentally the base concept remains largely the same. I'm not argueing refinement and modernisation just disagreeing with you on discounting the Ivers and Absalon from NZ consideration completely, in fact I would go so far as to say that they are a lot more versatile than what we currently have. Obviously we would tailor it (or any vessel) for NZs situation in some ways to better suit our wants and needs.

Definitely options out there, possibly following Aus with the F-100 concept, UK with T26 or maybe even RCN with a Danish inspired soloution. Let the RandD commence.
With the ROK-NZ FTA just been signed you could throw into the mix a derived KDX IIA hull. We would tail on nicely with the end of that build program in the later half of next decade.
 

RegR

Well-Known Member
With the ROK-NZ FTA just been signed you could throw into the mix a derived KDX IIA hull. We would tail on nicely with the end of that build program in the later half of next decade.
Especially if we end up building a tanker there. When the time comes we could well end up spoilt for choice, hopefully we make the best choice logically and not just financially (unless it just happens to work out that way of course) and do not skimp to save, just costs more long term and not just in $$$ either.

We are already limited in numbers so at least put them on a decent footing from the get go.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
There is a new article by Steve Daly at casr.ca which may be of interest to some here. It discusses the Iver Huitfeldt class frigate as a starting platform for Canada's CSC ship program which will replace our Tribal and Halifax class ships.
 

Robbie

New Member
Interesting what`s this about look at flag

Interesting what`s this about ?Littoral Operations Support Ship look at flag Fassmer naval vessels 60 mtr coastal vessel .Hopefully they are not considering something so small, at least 80-90 mtr vessels would be minimum for NZ waters . I have to remove link to post item. visit Fassmer naval vessels to view and maybe someone else could post link Robbie
 

Robbie

New Member
Maybe South America has something to offer New Zealand other than used helicopter sales they are neighbours in real terms and if New Zealand could breakdown the language barrier it could find some new friends there.
The company Fassmer (German) designed some OPVs for South American countries Peru, Columbia, Chile and Asmar ship building have the International licensing and Lloyd certification to build these types of vessels. Point of interest visit Fassmer ship builders web page and look at the 60 metre patrol vessel with NZ flag and Kiwi on funnel interesting but too small for my liking. I wouldn’t by any vessels smaller the 80 mtrs for sailing NZ waters, I`ve been smashed in the old Lake class boats and hammered in frigates mid Tasman.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
So remind me please..just what was he point in arming the OPV's with a 25mm Typhoon!?! ;)

Navy unable to board illegal fishers' boats | Stuff.co.nz
That is so, but in order for the CO Wellington to fire warning shots across the bow and then if they still refuse to heave too, then fire into the bridge and / or engine room, he has to have the permission from very much on high. That is a political decision. I would imagine that this is being discussed at the very highest levels at the moment. Personally, I do hope that he / she is given the ok and that the RNZN do a hot (armed) boarding.
 

recce.k1

Well-Known Member
That is so, but in order for the CO Wellington to fire warning shots across the bow and then if they still refuse to heave too, then fire into the bridge and / or engine room, he has to have the permission from very much on high. That is a political decision. I would imagine that this is being discussed at the very highest levels at the moment. Personally, I do hope that he / she is given the ok and that the RNZN do a hot (armed) boarding.
Legally, what are the options?

At the lower end of the scale, could the OPV crew at the very least disable/destroy the winching equipment/nets to prevent further illegal fish catches (and thus force the vessels to return to home port)?

Could they destroy some of the windows on the bridge (making life uncomfortable for those sailing them and thus force a return to the home port)? Or would that ensue a "heath and safety" hazard?

It would be great if the OPV's could remove (and detain) the "pirate" fishing crews and sink their rust-buckets to prevent them returning, but environmentally wise that probably wouldn't be a good idea ... and it's not like NZ has a few heavy ocean going tugs to tow the vessels back to a NZ port.

Whatever happens I hope the pollies grow some balls and approve some form of action otherwise they will be back (ref link to the Michael Field article via the Stuff article on the history of some of these vessels).
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Legally, what are the options?

At the lower end of the scale, could the OPV crew at the very least disable/destroy the winching equipment/nets to prevent further illegal fish catches (and thus force the vessels to return to home port)?

Could they destroy some of the windows on the bridge (making life uncomfortable for those sailing them and thus force a return to the home port)? Or would that ensue a "heath and safety" hazard?

It would be great if the OPV's could remove the fishing crews and sink the rust-buckets to prevent them returning, but environmentally wise that probably wouldn't be a good idea ... and it's not like NZ has a few heavy ocean going tugs to tow the vessels back to a NZ port.

Whatever happens I hope the pollies grow some balls and approve some form of action otherwise they will be back (ref link to the Michael Field article via the Stuff article on the history of some of these vessels).
The crew cannot force a boarding without authority from higher authority, in this case will more than like be Cabinet. If they get the go ahead then they can board said vessels and if vessels are found by the CO HMNZS Wellington and / or MaFISH inspectors aboard to be in contravention of law, in this case International Law, then the ships can be arrested and escorted to a port with jurisdiction, probably Bluff or Dunedin. If the crews resist then the CO Wellington is entitled to use the minimal amount of force required to carry out the orders issued by the NZG in Wellington (city) and compel the crews compliance. That was how it was when I was in (1990 -94) and we did boardings at sea.
 

recce.k1

Well-Known Member
Cheers NM. Media reports suggest the OPV boarding parties cannot board because the vessels are manoeuvring "aggressively" and sailing into fog. I wonder if a Seasprite is on board, but even if so, would it simply provide top cover, rather than be used to drop naval personnel onto the vessels to affect an arrest?

(Does RNZN personnel undertake helicopter type "assaults" or is that the domain of the Army, who presumably aren't on board the OPV's? If so, perhaps the NZG think that one through, future funding/output wise, when sending these OPV's out on patrol)!
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Cheers NM. Media reports suggest the OPV boarding parties cannot board because the vessels are manoeuvring "aggressively" and sailing into fog. I wonder if a Seasprite is on board, but even if so, would it simply provide top cover, rather than be used to drop naval personnel onto the vessels to affect an arrest?

(Does RNZN personnel undertake helicopter type "assaults" or is that the domain of the Army, who presumably aren't on board the OPV's? If so, perhaps the NZG think that one through when sending these OPV's out on patrol)!
I cannot comment on that because I don't know although I think that it would be doubtful that RNZN personnel would train for a helo assault. Yes sea conditions are a concern and fog would prevent the boarding party being observed at all time from the Wellington and the RHIB(s). Just because it can't be done today doesn't mean that it can't be done tomorrow or the day after etc.
 

kiwi in exile

Active Member
I cannot comment on that because I don't know although I think that it would be doubtful that RNZN personnel would train for a helo assault. Yes sea conditions are a concern and fog would prevent the boarding party being observed at all time from the Wellington and the RHIB(s). Just because it can't be done today doesn't mean that it can't be done tomorrow or the day after etc.
In addition to the lack of traing for this, I'm not sure that our current sprites are equipped for rapelling/fast roping. Small doors. Alternative is a slow winch one at a time. This aussie fairfax article from 2003 states that their then new seasprites (the oneswe are now gettin are fast rope capable. But again it's just a newspaper article and AFAIK this was never done. Finally, the Seasprite has landed - National - www.theage.com.au

IMHO this a capability we should look into. I'd be interested to learn just how skilled our boarding parties are. Ops range from checking fishing vessels as in the linked story to potentiall taking on armed pirates.
 

40 deg south

Well-Known Member
UK orders next-generation air defence system from MBDA - IHS Jane's 360

According to Janes, the UK is pushing ahead with replacing its aging Rapier air defence missiles. Of tangential interest to RNZN, as the chosen missile is none other than the land-based version of CAMM, coming soon to an ANZAC frigate near you!

Following the Brazilian Navy's selection of CAMM for their corvette programme, I understand MBDA are trying to sell Brazil the land-based version as well.

Generally, the bigger the pool of users, the better the supply of parts and system upgrades. So any export success for CAMM is a good sign for NZ's frigates.
 

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
Following the Brazilian Navy's selection of CAMM for their corvette programme, I understand MBDA are trying to sell Brazil the land-based version as well.
Interesting, last I heard Brazil were very close to signing a deal for 18 Pantsir S-1 systems from Russia.

As an aside WRT more orders, Brazil may buy more.

They don't have a common naval SAM (it's mostly Aspide with 3 T22s packing Sea Wolf), they're on the market for SAMs (reportedly strong interest in the T26 with Brazilian engineers working as part of the design team) for new frigates as the significant majority are getting close to 40 years old, their order for their corvettes represents their first SAM fitted to a corvette in their fleet.
 
Top