Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[Novascotiaboy]

Thanks Mr C.

From your comments and those of the Janes article there appears to be a thought that the initial design needs a revision.

Could a larger hull be at the root of the issue? I have wondered about the tonnage recommended initially and thought it a little light. Considering the ABPF vessels are in the 6500 to 8500 ton range with similar capabilities I would think this may be a case of reality setting in and the associated cost increases. Just my thoughts.

 

[MrConservative]

Thanks Mr C.

Could a larger hull be at the root of the issue? I have wondered about the tonnage recommended initially and thought it a little light. Considering the ABPF vessels are in the 6500 to 8500 ton range with similar capabilities I would think this may be a case of reality setting in and the associated cost increases. Just my thoughts.

The Manawanui / Resolution design envelope that was/still being considered was three times the tonnage evidently. Which seemed sufficient. The funding band from the DCP16 had it in the $100-$300m range which again seems sufficient. I should note that the DCP16 funding range for the SOPV is in the $300-600m range. Money is not entirely the most pressing dynamic - the issue is I would guess nailing down what is really required going forward.

One of the issues that also maybe colouring this from moving through the next business case gateway - is that with a Navy of relatively small numbers in personnel and a diversity of platforms just in ones and two's - is that training cycles and sustainment are a real headache.

We will be heading to a point where not too far away where we will have 2 IPV, 2 OPV, a SOPV, a LOSV, a tanker, a sealift ship and two Frigates - possibly seven different vessels in a ten vessel fleet. Hopefully the RNZN 'brains trust' are working on that issue and finding that if platform synergies between the SOPV and LWSV and flow on to the replacements of OTG and WLG then it would make life a heck of a lot easier for the RNZN long term.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

I agree completely. Any possibility of a standard hull and systems would truly reduce costs overall. With the $$$'s you quoted I would agree that there should be no issues.

At a max of $600 million you could almost consider tagging on to to our build of a Harry Dewolfe from Irving, LOL. Lead ship is due to hit the water is 2018. According to the local news the three mega blocks are to be assembled outside starting very soon.

For that amount of money a fleet of Damen Holland class could be acquired at $150 million per hull. Full military build. Impressive ISR capabilities and full size helicopter operations. Nice replacements for the Wellington and Otago.

 

[John Fedup]

If Irving's Dewolfe comes in at less than $700m I would be shocked. If NZ wanted a ship like the DeWolfe, buy it from the country that designed the original, Norway. Oh, and you will probably save 50%.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

Pure sarcasm on my part John. I too would go elsewhere.

 

[John Fedup]

Too bad the RCN can't.

 

[htbrst]

An update that appears to have been missed at least by me; HMNZS Hawea is currently deployed in Fiji having arrived in April on a 6 month deployment. Probably not worth too much discussion, but it does spell the first deployment of an IPV outside NZ, and signals a bit more of a thaw in NZ/Fiji relations.

HMNZS Hawea arrived in Suva harbour this week to help patrol Fiji's Exclusive Economic Zone and territorial waters, and help train its navy.

It's the first time one of the New Zealand Navy's inshore patrol vessels had been deployed to the South Pacific.

NZ vessel leaves for 6-month patrol mission in Fiji | Radio New Zealand News

More recent update:

Seven fishing vessels have been sent back to port in Fiji in the past week because of licensing and maritime safety issues. The seven were from a total of 70 vessels boarded by combined New Zealand/Fiji naval team during the week.

A New Zealand Navy inshore patrol vessel, HMNZS Hawea, is in Fiji, providing help through to October while a Fiji vessel undergoes maintenance.

 

[40 deg south]

Navy's Endeavour returns home after final deployment | Checkpoint | RNZ

The Navy's only tanker, the HMNZS Endeavour, has completed its last long-term deployment before it is decommissioned.

A full crew of 52 returned home to the Devonport naval base in Auckland this morning, after more than four months working around South East Asia - Brunei, Singapore, Cambodia - and Australia.

I caught the tail end of a Radio NZ piece on the Endeavour a couple of days ago - here is an article from their website. It should have a link to a longer recording of the broadcast.

It confirms that Endeavour is being decommissioned in December. I had guessed they would try and keep her running for another year or so to preserve refueling skills while waiting for the new tanker to be built. Evidently not. That means Aust. and NZ are going to be pretty short of refueling options until about 2020.

 

[40 deg south]

An update that appears to have been missed at least by me; HMNZS Hawea is currently deployed in Fiji having arrived in April on a 6 month deployment. Probably not worth too much discussion, but it does spell the first deployment of an IPV outside NZ, and signals a bit more of a thaw in NZ/Fiji relations.

NZ vessel leaves for 6-month patrol mission in Fiji | Radio New Zealand News

More recent update:

Fiji had three Australian-provided Pacific Patrol Boats, but I understand only one is still operational. They will be pleased to have an extra vessel on hand, and NZ is keen to improve relations with the Fiji military.

Another factor might relate to my previous post. With Endeavour retiring in December and Te Kaha (?) heading to Vancouver soon for a mid-life upgrade, the navy might have a few sailors without a ship to serve on.

 

[40 deg south]

If Irving's Dewolfe comes in at less than $700m I would be shocked. If NZ wanted a ship like the DeWolfe, buy it from the country that designed the original, Norway. Oh, and you will probably save 50%.

A belated comment.

Given that Norway opted to have its replacement frigates built in Spain as local production wasn't considered affordable, that really says something about the costs of building ships in Canada!

 

[MrConservative]

With Endeavour retiring in December and Te Kaha (?) heading to Vancouver soon for a mid-life upgrade, the navy might have a few sailors without a ship to serve on.

The Manwanui is also getting decommed in February 2018 as well. I gather that the extended onshore time is going to be used getting familiar with the new systems that they will have to work with.

 

[John Fedup]

A belated comment.

Given that Norway opted to have its replacement frigates built in Spain as local production wasn't considered affordable, that really says something about the costs of building ships in Canada!

No kidding. I think the debate some countries need to have is what is the tipping point for local versus foreign build as it relates to industrial benefits and locally developed intellectual property versus cost. The other factor is sovereignty, is it necessary to retain the ability to manufacture your own kit? In the case of the latter, nations out source fast jet purchases because they are so expensive to develop. Given the projected cost of our CSC program, naval ship costs are now incredibly expensive as well. The prospect for any export potential is minimal.

 

[40 deg south]

The Manwanui is also getting decommed in February 2018 as well. I gather that the extended onshore time is going to be used getting familiar with the new systems that they will have to work with.

Good point - I'd forgotten that. So the 11 ships will be down to nine, with one or other of the two frigates in dry dock for most of the next 18 months. I hope someone in head office has a cunning plan to keep the crews busy, or they they'll drink NZ's strategic rum reserve dry.

 

[MrConservative]

Good point - I'd forgotten that. So the 11 ships will be down to nine, with one or other of the two frigates in dry dock for most of the next 18 months. I hope someone in head office has a cunning plan to keep the crews busy, or they they'll drink NZ's strategic rum reserve dry.

But they really don't have a cunning plan. The cunning plan would have been to replace the LOSV 3 years ago, the tanker next year and the SOPV - well that has been a known capability gap since 2011.

They will struggle to keep them interested and they will leave. It is simple as that.

Aotearoa wont be commissioned until 2021, The LOSV possibly wont be commissioned until 2022, and the SOPV probably the year after.

If the maritime environment in the Asia Pacific deteriorates in the next 5 years we will be in serious trouble. That cannot be discounted. It is going to take a scare.

 

[Gibbo]

But they really don't have a cunning plan. The cunning plan would have been to replace the LOSV 3 years ago, the tanker next year and the SOPV - well that has been a known capability gap since 2011.

They will struggle to keep them interested and they will leave. It is simple as that.

Aotearoa wont be commissioned until 2021, The LOSV possibly wont be commissioned until 2022, and the SOPV probably the year after.

If the maritime environment in the Asia Pacific deteriorates in the next 5 years we will be in serious trouble. That cannot be discounted. It is going to take a scare.

Yes I really don't understand why NZDF takes this approach, it risks not only skills going stale; loss of personnel interest etc; but it risks sending a message to Govt, Treasury etc that the platforms aren't really mission critical - if you can do 2-3 years without an AOR or LOSV then Govt etc could legitimately start questioning their need. Anything to save $$$.

I'm sure budgetary & other 'political' influences are behind this but I can't get past thinking someone was asleep at the wheel. I do however put my hand up & admit I know very little about asset procurement.

 

[KiwiRob]

A belated comment.

Given that Norway opted to have its replacement frigates built in Spain as local production wasn't considered affordable, that really says something about the costs of building ships in Canada!

There's only a single yard left in Norway which has the ability to build a complete hull, that's Klevern, the builders of Mr Harts two wee toys, sad that this is all that's left of Norway's shipbuiulding tradition, all the other yards fit out hulls built in Poland and Romania.

 

[MrConservative]

Yes I really don't understand why NZDF takes this approach, it risks not only skills going stale; loss of personnel interest etc; but it risks sending a message to Govt, Treasury etc that the platforms aren't really mission critical - if you can do 2-3 years without an AOR or LOSV then Govt etc could legitimately start questioning their need. Anything to save $$$.

I'm sure budgetary & other 'political' influences are behind this but I can't get past thinking someone was asleep at the wheel. I do however put my hand up & admit I know very little about asset procurement.

I do have a personal theory on this. CHCH was a setback following on from the GFC - if it had not happened we would have been able to move things along quicker and even though Jono Coleman made a reasonable fist of it in a managerialist sense - having Big Gerry in from 2011 in the DefMin role rather than 2014 would have made a huge difference because he certainly got things cracking.

 

[40 deg south]

I do have a personal theory on this. CHCH was a setback following on from the GFC - if it had not happened we would have been able to move things along quicker and even though Jono Coleman made a reasonable fist of it in a managerialist sense - having Big Gerry in from 2011 in the DefMin role rather than 2014 would have made a huge difference because he certainly got things cracking.

Very plausible. As a public servant when the new government came in during 2008, I can remember how tightly spending was screwed down. It was clear they didn't know how bad the global economy was going to get, and were preparing for the worst. If Defence has put up any requests for capital spending at that time, they would have been turned down flat.

The earthquake certainly prolonged the squeeze, and, just as importantly, sucked up huge amounts of government time and attention. As a junior Minister, I suspect Coleman simply didn't have the clout to get funding for the programmes that were needed.

Hence, we are having to retire old equipment before replacements have even been ordered, let alone bought. I hope that there has been some creative thought into how best to maintain skill levels and prevent attrition, but am not holding my breath. Presumably the rumoured lease of an platform support vessel as a stopgap to cover the LOSC capability has these objectives in mind, but nothing has been heard of that plan for some time.

 

[40 deg south]

https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/875261600571240452/photo/1

That link should lead to the first pic I have seen giving a good view of SeaCeptor on a Type 23 frigate. I can see where the 'mushroom farm' nickname came from.

 

[Gibbo]

Interesting comments in latest RNZN News from Chief of Navy...

"...All this work could not go on if it weren’t for the training delivered by MANAWANUI and our IPVs. The efforts of these ships is central to how we work as a Navy. With two ships in refit – we just may need more ships if we are going to keep this up in the future!"

Wonder if such a bold public (of sorts) statement suggests they might be changing their minds on getting rid of all 4 IPVs. I've always felt 2 should be retained. Once the 'new' fleet is in operation there will be no 'small' ships without the IPVs and that fleet will all be busy with operational taskings. On-shore training sims etc can only do so much in prepping sea-going officers & crew.

http://www.navy.mil.nz/downloads/pdf/navy-today/nt211.pdf