kiwipatriot69
Active Member
good jump in capability then, thanks.
Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Padman
- Start date
I agree that the ice strengthening of the tanker would be looked on by the government as a lot cheaper than a strategic airlift aircraft. In regards to the icebreaker requirement to use the tanker, it must be remembered that once cut a channel can remain open for long periods of time depending on the weather so more than one ship or sailing can use it
Actually a Svalbard class OPV might kill two birds with one stone. They are rated as an icebreaker capable of breaking up to 1m of ice. Generally in late February - early March the sea ice in McMurdo Sound breaks up for a short period which should enable a Svalbard to escort a RNZN MSC into McMurdo for off loading and reloading. Regarding cost, the ship cost the Norwegians slightly less than CAN$100 million and Canadian govt bought the design for CAN$5 million. Hence we possibly could buy the design for a similar sum and have the ship built in a Korean yard. My 2&1/2 cents worth.The NV Svalbard / Harry DeWolf Class is an ideal SOPV platform for the RNZN.
Have to say she looks quite portly though at 6000 tonnes.
The US$80m build price in 2001 was quite cheap though it did not include the radar. Which does raise a question. What are the RNZN doing with the legacy systems on the current Anzacs that are being replaced by the FSU?
We have the LOSV and the SOPV coming online in the next few years and I wonder what would be generally possible / appropriate to refurbish and cross-deck over to these vessels.
A Svalbard variant built at a Korean yard under license would be very plausible. Korea has built is own ice vessel the RV Araon in recent years and have 2 Antarctic bases as well as a Arctic research program which ironically is on Svalbard Island in Norway.
I haven't had time to go through all the documents in detail yet due to family and work commitments lately exceeding 24hours
but these are my brief observations. My apologises if I've overlooked something.I'm not two hung up on any design right now, though given the Svaldard in a proven in service design it would be high on the must have list given the construction contract lead times and in service time of 2019-2021. The one issue that might be of concern is the maximum top speed of 17 knots, if the vessel is to be used in the NZ EEZ, which I consider would be limited given that the winter months will be the only time for maintenance. However I think, unlike the Air Surveillance capability (which seems to have identified potential aircraft and associated capability), no specifics have been finalised for the OPV. The other issue is the main calibre gun, which on the Svalbard is 57mm and how that links to the littoral warfare vessel. This vessel interests me more given the reference to low to mid-intensity scenarios etc.
I think the navy would be unlikely to transfer the old systems to the new vessels. In terms of Radar the navy would more likely go with Sharp Eye given the compatibility with the ANZAC upgrade and helicopter control capability. However the Svalbard class utilise the TRS-3D (A tactical radar) versus the more limited Sharp Eye (if I've read everything correctly). I note the Canadian version seems to be leaning towards a similar capability to the Svalbard.
One thing I haven't heard is how Canterbury and the OPV have had the shortcomings in the Helicopter Control resolved.
One comment on the ANZAC price blow out. Going down the ASMD route may not have been possible. The NZ ANZAC's have been heavily modified in terms of the engineering plant (new diesels, air-conditioning etc) that would have made a straight acceptance of ASMD more problematic that it first seems given the changes in weight, cog etc.
Anyway my two cents worth.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Canada has taken this design and stuffed it up so each ship will cost over $600+ million. Building in SK sounds like a great idea.
John.
Is that the procurement and WoL cost?
I would not be surprised if a Korean build from a licensed or OTS design happens for the LOSV and the SOPV as well as the Endeavour.
I believe more of our defence spend will be spent in the Pacific Rim for trade / defence relationship reasons.
The costings for the Canadian build seem to be blown out of all proportion Mr C. From the article I Iinked, the design was acquired for $5 million and a contract worth $288 million was given to Irving Shipbuilding for just redesign work when Norway designed and built the Svalbard for $100 million.John.
Is that the procurement and WoL cost?
I would not be surprised if a Korean build from a licensed or OTS design happens for the LOSV and the SOPV as well as the Endeavour.
I believe more of our defence spend will be spent in the Pacific Rim for trade / defence relationship reasons.
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
The pig trough runnith over. If we get six I will be very surprised. The first hull is coming together but for the price it's almost criminal what we have done. Korean yards can build good ships if there is strong oversight and adherence to stringent quality standards. I would look strongly at this option.
I'm not sure whether that cost includes sustainment? One would hope so. By way of comparison, Australia signed a contract with Navantia for 2 X AORs earlier this year for AUD 640 m plus a periodic (5 years IIRC) sustainment contract for $250m
Bringing this back to the RNZN, I would hope that the Endeavour replacement contract doesn't exceed Navantias price by the time it's signed. It would be nice to have NZ piggyback off the Oz order to provide a substantial and valuable contribution to an ANZAC TF.
NZDF has shortlisted Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI) as 'preferred supplier' so no Navantia piggyback option available, although HHI are building 3 AOR for India IIRC and perhaps that offers a piggyback option (of sorts).
Still haven't seen any images of what HHI are offering.
The opening of a RNZN Project Management office in Ulsan would be the solution.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Unfortunately this inflated price does not include sustainment. The build costs for the AOPS highlight the concerns many here have for the CSC ships. Depending on what design is selected, each will come in at 1.5 to 2 billion Canadian if Irving has its way.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The plan was for 8 AOPS with a budget of roughly 3.5 billion Canadian. After Canadian mods, only 6 ships could be built and now that number will likely only be 5. This is the procurement cost only. As I mentioned in an earlier reply, this doesn't bode well for the CSC program.John.
Is that the procurement and WoL cost?
Do you have any more information? I've not heard anything about Hyundai building AORs for India.
Yes it is the local firm HSL in the frame and not HHI.
‘HSL to get orders for fleet support vessels this fiscal’ - ANDHRA PRADESH - The Hindu
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
'Make in India': Korean major Hyundai to build warships in India | india | Hindustan Times
Hyundai Heavy Industries Nears Shipbuilding Deal
Looks like a split build - first vessel will be built in Korea with a fair number of Indian shipyard staff learning on the job, and the following vessels being built by HCL in India with supervision from Hyundai.
If it goes ahead - this is India after all!
The Indian's are also going to use the tech transfer approach with their MCMV's working with Kangnam's to build them Kangnam style.
Kangnam Selected by India To Build Minesweepers
I still find it odd HHI won out over DSME without even an actual vessel put forward, no doubt they have the expertise in the field but in saying that so does airbus with aircraft but we've all seen how that is playing out.
I actually thought the DSME proposal looked the buisness but I suppose costings and options won out on the day (even though no actual ship to cost) and their financial position could have forced concessions just to gain a sale. We did have a good run with their last tanker so I guess we could be in line for another essentially civ tanker painted naval grey, just the ice strengthening factor could throw a cat in the bag as per our OPVs. I sure hope not but without an 'actual' ship who knows?
I actually thought the DSME proposal looked the buisness but I suppose costings and options won out on the day (even though no actual ship to cost) and their financial position could have forced concessions just to gain a sale. We did have a good run with their last tanker so I guess we could be in line for another essentially civ tanker painted naval grey, just the ice strengthening factor could throw a cat in the bag as per our OPVs. I sure hope not but without an 'actual' ship who knows?
Aaah, missed that. I remembered something about ships being built in India, not the HHI tie-up.
I think this is the way the Indians are going with ships for their navy now. Local yards linking up with foreign firms which have the experience & designs, & building in India as far as they can. I read that they're planning to build up to four LHDs to replace their current ex-USN antique LPD & other old amphibs, & foreign bidders will have to have an Indian partner.