Which is kind of ironic ,considering the lack of 'protection' those Opv and Ipv can offer, outside of scarering would be poachers from nicking fish ,especially since only in recent years the ipv have been deployed much.Ive mates that work the boats for sealord, they reckon they rarely see a RNZN ship around, its like spotting a mermaid.
It seems the variant with the Kiwi markings is the updated ice capable 7-110 design that according to Chuck Hill's blog has a revised enclosed superstructure to patrol the “increasingly accessible Arctic” for the USCG. The older 7-110 design dates from the 2013 collaboration study by Eastern and Vard then proposed for the USCG.
True. However, the RCN AOPS (AOPV) is an enhanced version of the basic Vard design (Halifax Shipyard launches Canada’s lead Arctic and Offshore Patrol Vessel). The RCN vessels are 103.6 metres long (vice 98 for the Vard 7-100-ICE), and 6615 tons vice 6350 tons. The RCN vessels are also enhanced in that the bow is designed to Arctic PC4 standard, with the rest of the hull at PC5+ (vice PC5 for the entire hull on the Vard 7-100-ICE), thus allowing the RCN vessels to break through slightly thicker ice (120 cm vice 100 cm). The RCN ships also have fin stabilizers for rough open sea navigation as they have been designed to be used as OPVs in all climates. Those are the most obvious differences, but there are internal changes as well resulting from unique RCN operational and habitability requirements. Both vessels are designed for pretty extreme ice conditions, and either one would seem like good candidates for the RNZN.The RCN AOPS is the Vard 7-100-ICE, which I think is the better option for SOPV, because by the time we order one and start building it should be derisked. Also they have the VARD 7 100 - Vard Marine which would be an ideal replacement for the current Protector class OPVs. For the IPV replacement maybe the VARD 7 055 - Vard Marine or the VARD 7 065 - Vard Marine. Yes we await the DCP. They who wait also serve. The old service carry on - hurry up and wait.
Indeed. Two 85m vessels + four 55m vessels + the CY = NZ$500m budget = an extremely economically constrained and compromised project that was NOT "a sustainable defence force to meet New Zealand's needs."
I disagree with the assumption that the IPVs are “not for the RNZN”.
Yes, the recent deployment of an IPV to Fiji was a very tangible expression of assistance, as it reportedly included extensive sea training for Fijian personnel and lead to a lot more inspections of fishing vessels. It may also have helped cool tensions between Island States (viz, the reported stand-off between Tonga and Fiji over the Minerva Reef), given the RNZN's reputation.
It will be interesting to see whether this is a new aircraft fit for purpose King Air 350ER Special Mission Aircraft - Naval Technology or a retired Equal to the task: 38 Squadron calls time - Australian Aviation .
They are two King Air 200 units fitted with high tech surveillance systems as reference in my link above (post #6851)
Well done that man, you spotted my deliberate mistake!
How on earth did I miss that...thanks for the loop back.
Certainly an interesting looking ship and it's of similar size to Canterbury (Length: 131 m, Beam: 23.4 m, Draught: 5.4 m, displacement: 9,000 tonnes [full load]) except for having a significantly narrower beam of 13 m. It's ice classification is PC 6 the same as the Aotearoa, so would meet the requirement for operating in an around Antarctica. A good sized hangar and with room for two NH90 sized helos means that it could carry a Sprite and a UAV if need be, plus it appears to have an armoury in the hangar. The oil spill capability would be a good capability to have and the towing ability stated must be over and above a normal warship / coastguard ship towing capabilities, so that would be a good capability to have as well. Having eight weeks endurance, it theoretically could spend the summer in the region checking FFVs etc., with RAS from Aotearoa and / or refuelling and revictualling at Bluff then returning to the ice. When the ship is not down south it could be used for HADR missions, training and DOC work on Raoul Island and in the Sub Antarctic Islands etc. Definitely something that we should keep an eye on. Nice find.
The beam of the Jan Mayen Class or P6615 is now 22m according to the link below after all it does have a twin hangar for NH90's. They are going to build three vessels with the project cost estimated at Eur550m or NZD$315m a vessel.
The environmental protection and cleanup capability should have no problems politically in the virtue signalling sense. Will come with Saab's 9LV Fire Control System, Mk57 and also be pretty handy as an open waters patrol vessel.
If we were smart we could try tacking one or two vessels on the end of their build.
Yep, and TBH it is a capability sorely lacking here.
Agree regarding it as an open waters PV. TBH I'd rather we stuck to a single CMS because it saves a lot in the long run, so forget the SAAB 9LV and go with either the Lockheed CMS 330 or a cut down version of it if one exists. It just keeps things simpler and when push comes to shove that can make a big difference. Mount a 35 mm Millennium Gun up forward and a Typhoon mount with a 25 mm aft on top of the hangar, plus the usual manual 50 cal HB HMGs. Make sure it has Link 16 so if it has a Sprite etc., it can receive all the necessary data, video etc.
It certainly does. The CMS on the RCN AOPV is a "light" version of CMS330, but light only in that as delivered it supports a subset of capabilities. The interface is identical to the full bore version.
I agree with ASSAIL. There is a mighty battle for influence going on in our front yard and the more forward presence we deploy the better please.
Fortunately, at this stage it's a battle for diplomatic influence. There are plenty of non-military tools to consider; increased aid, educational scholarships targeting future leaders, guest worker programmes etc.