Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[MrConservative]

A new naval base in the Northland seems to have many benefits none the least of which is housing and the cost of living for naval personnel.

Operationally it looks like there is plenty of land available in the port lands area. The question that keeps going thru my mind is what would the value of Devonport be if it were to be sold for private development?

Would it not make sense to also consider a south island naval facility for the one or two SOPV(s)? This would be closer to the Southern Ocean area of operations as well.

A South Island naval facility has been rumoured at a cost of $180m and capable of berthing 4 vessels. Devonports 11Ha site had a GV of $350m 2 years ago.

Dunedin navy base rumour

 

[Xthenaki]

This would give impetus to eventually shifting the RNZN to Whangarei as well. Possibly sooner

The best location for the new Port of Auckland is at Matingarahi Point on the Firth of Thames and only 25kms of new connecting infrastructure to the city is required versus 160 kms at NorthPort which would double the cost of the Port. The Navy at Whangarei would be a good 2nd prize for Shane Jones and Winston Peters in their quest to spend as much of the taxpayers money as possible in Northland buying NZ First a Parliamentary seat.

If the decision is made to locate a graving dry dock in Northland then sufficient adjacent land needs to be procured for dock and slipway infrastructure and a naval base. If Matingarahi Point is chosen for Ports of Auckland would a graving dock (reclaimed land) be considered.

 

[Xthenaki]

A South Island naval facility has been rumoured at a cost of $180m and capable of berthing 4 vessels. Devonports 11Ha site had a GV of $350m 2 years ago.

Dunedin navy base rumour

No problem with Dunedin but if as Ngati suggested developing or extending Timaru airport for defence purposes (shifting from Burnham), then if land was also available at Timaru port a further option may lie there.

 

[MrConservative]

If the decision is made to locate a graving dry dock in Northland then sufficient adjacent land needs to be procured for dock and slipway infrastructure and a naval base.

The NorthPort location for a Dry Dock has two sites. The first at the current Marsden Point location being most likely. The second at Port Whangarei (the former Port site) further up the harbour close to the old Whangarei Engineering ship yard.

If Matingarahi Point is chosen for Ports of Auckland would a graving dock (reclaimed land) be considered.

I would doubt it. The future Auckland "Green" Port concept there is to be highly automated and container focused with a small footprint that will see unloaded containers loaded straight on to positioned rolling stock and transported immediately to an Inland Port 25-30kms away. Tainui Group have actually secured a huge parcel of land off Solid Energy at nearby Maramarua for this potential purpose. Incidently Tainui Iwi also are partners in the Ruakaka Inland Port near North Port.

 

[MrConservative]

No problem with Dunedin but if as Ngati suggested developing or extending Timaru airport for defence purposes (shifting from Burnham), then if land was also available at Timaru port a further option may lie there.

I suggested Timaru as a potential future site (see Post 7690) for any RNZAF expansion or basing of a foreign fighter contingent as per Singapore.

I actually visited the Timaru Port on Friday morning. Only a single large ship a week is currently using the port. There is scope there in my view for a limited Naval basing facility. I also checked out the local airport out of interested and again their ample space for expansion. The airport was close to losing the few Air NZ flights there each day last year. OH like WB has potential resource consenting issues with respect to noise. Timaru airport though is 9kms from a built up area which mitigates that.

Having at least Burnham near CHCH is important with respect to the security of the city. I also don't think a mixed Army-RNZAF-Civilian site would work. It is too complicating. Joint defence only - yes. Joint Mil-Civ aviation - yes, but a civvy street airport and a joint Army-Air Force complex - no.

 

[ngatimozart]

Where did you learn geography Ngāti, on the back of a weatbix box maybe?

Fiji isn’t Polynesian, it’s geographically part of Melanesia, the Fijian people migrated from Melanesia around 3500 years ago. Indigenous Fijians are predominantly ofMelanesian extraction, with somePolynesian admixture. Besides that Fijians look completely different from Polynesians, they are darker, have curly hair and physically have a different build.

I stand corrected, however I do not judge by looks alone because looks can be deceiving. I am a physical geographer and ethnicity is the social part of the discipline which I didn't study because I specialised in earth sciences. Geography as a discipline is far more than what was taught in school, reciting countries capitals, statistics like GDP and looking at a map.

 

[Todjaeger]

We used to take the Moa class IPC 200 nm offshore if we had too, and they rolled on wet grass. The droggies (Hydrographic Branch) used to take their ISCs which had the same same hull as the Moa IPC all over the place. The current IPVs are more capable in all aspects than the IPCs ever were. In the pre Moa class days it was done with HDMLs which were WW2 Fairmile launch MTB / MGB hulls and they were wet boats to say the least.

Define offshore. Is defined by a prescribed distance from a particular datum, of by a prescribed depth of water under the keel? Just for your info, there are two stretches of water in NZ that are the second and third roughest pieces of water in the world and they are no further than 30 nm from land at their widest point. Cook Strait between the North and South Islands, and Foveaux Strait between the South Island and Stewart Island, both of them only eclipsed by Cape Horn.

It is my understanding that NZ has, more or less, two distinct types of 'zones' that require patrolling for constabulary purposes, like EEZ/resource enforcement, fisheries and pollution control, etc. Broadly, these two zones are inshore and offshore areas with the inshore area being generally within the 12 n mile limit for territorial waters, and the offshore area covering basically all the EEZ claims of NZ as well as those of various S. Pacific islands that NZ has agreements to provide EEZ patrols.

Now as Mr.C pointed out in post #6959, it does seem as though most of the needed inshore patrolling is actually within 3 n miles and for recreational smallcraft vs. large/commercial vessels like when the maritime review was conducted nearly 20 years ago... Now I could be mistaken, but I would strongly suspect that using a 55 m IPV is a bit overkill if the vessels of concern are smallcraft, and then smaller, faster vessels which can operate more effectively close in to coastlines and require smaller crews would be more effective.

As for offshore operations, I am aware that the Moa-class at times did operate offshore as opposed to inshore, and I would expect the newer, larger and more advanced IPV''s would have superior capabilities over the IPC's in that regards. Having said that though, the ability of the IPV's to operate in some areas of the 200 n mile EEZ limit in some conditions is not the same as the capabilities of the OPV's to operate throughout the areas of EEZ claims. As an example, I would suspect that an IPV would be hard pressed to safely transit to the Chatham Islands and then sustain patrols 200 n miles to the SE.

So over all I think your argument is somewhat specious because you aware unaware of the local conditions and how the previous craft were operated. You are also unaware of the RNZN culture, especially in the wardroom, where the reserves are looked down upon and devalued - a cultural class hangover from the RN days. It took the RNZAF officer corp years to rid itself of most of the inherent class snobbery inherited from the RAF.

The Protector class IPVs would be ideal vessels for reserve divisions to operate, especially the Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin divisions.

You are of course free to think so. At present though, it does seem as the the patrolling needs of the NZG centre largely on either closer to shore than the IPV's were really intended for, or further away from land, and especially ports suitable to operate the IPV's from. In short, the IPV's seem too large for the one role, and yet too small for the other. If that is the actual case, then I would much prefer that the NZG get the proper kit for the needed roles. I am not too fussed about whether or not the kit is operated by the RNZN, RNZNR, or some other agency or group of agencies.

Side note, given the Capital Charge which IIRC still appears on the Vote Defence budget each year, I would be delighted if several NZD$35 mil. assets were to be replaced with more effective/efficient assets. Why pay the operational costs for a 55 m vessel to do RHIB/motor launch-type work, assuming that is accurate.

 

[Donnzy]

360 deg tour of the Manawanui, looks really nice esp the bridge... lots of wood to polish

 

[ASSAIL]

360 deg tour of the Manawanui, looks really nice esp the bridge... lots of wood to polish

A great capability has been acquired, good luck and smooth sailing for the RNZN.
I liked the video tour but the lens they used drove me nuts!

 

[ngatimozart]

It is my understanding that NZ has, more or less, two distinct types of 'zones' that require patrolling for constabulary purposes, like EEZ/resource enforcement, fisheries and pollution control, etc. Broadly, these two zones are inshore and offshore areas with the inshore area being generally within the 12 n mile limit for territorial waters, and the offshore area covering basically all the EEZ claims of NZ as well as those of various S. Pacific islands that NZ has agreements to provide EEZ patrols.

Now as Mr.C pointed out in post #6959, it does seem as though most of the needed inshore patrolling is actually within 3 n miles and for recreational smallcraft vs. large/commercial vessels like when the maritime review was conducted nearly 20 years ago... Now I could be mistaken, but I would strongly suspect that using a 55 m IPV is a bit overkill if the vessels of concern are smallcraft, and then smaller, faster vessels which can operate more effectively close in to coastlines and require smaller crews would be more effective.

As for offshore operations, I am aware that the Moa-class at times did operate offshore as opposed to inshore, and I would expect the newer, larger and more advanced IPV''s would have superior capabilities over the IPC's in that regards. Having said that though, the ability of the IPV's to operate in some areas of the 200 n mile EEZ limit in some conditions is not the same as the capabilities of the OPV's to operate throughout the areas of EEZ claims. As an example, I would suspect that an IPV would be hard pressed to safely transit to the Chatham Islands and then sustain patrols 200 n miles to the SE.



You are of course free to think so. At present though, it does seem as the the patrolling needs of the NZG centre largely on either closer to shore than the IPV's were really intended for, or further away from land, and especially ports suitable to operate the IPV's from. In short, the IPV's seem too large for the one role, and yet too small for the other. If that is the actual case, then I would much prefer that the NZG get the proper kit for the needed roles. I am not too fussed about whether or not the kit is operated by the RNZN, RNZNR, or some other agency or group of agencies.

Side note, given the Capital Charge which IIRC still appears on the Vote Defence budget each year, I would be delighted if several NZD$35 mil. assets were to be replaced with more effective/efficient assets. Why pay the operational costs for a 55 m vessel to do RHIB/motor launch-type work, assuming that is accurate.

The IPVs are quite capable of safely transiting to the Chatham Islands and undertaking a patrol of the EEZ. If they can transit to Fiji, then the Chathams is a walk in the park, so to speak. With regard to IPVs 12 nm or 200 nm in NZ is no real difference because they are required to handle the conditions off the south and west coasts of the South Island as well as around Stewart Island. Operating ships, especially small craft, off the east coast of the North & South Islands is totally different to operating small craft off the west coast of the North Island and the southern and west coast the South Island. It has to do with the prevailing winds, westerlies that blow around the Great Southern Ocean with only South America to hinder them at NZ's latitude, which means a very long fetch and big seas / swells. The eastern coasts of NZ are sheltered from this by the land mass of NZ whilst Cook Strait has the predominant westerly funnelled through it as a northerly because the wind is refracted around the top of the South Island.



This a video of a fishing boat crossing the Greymouth bar on the west coast of the South Island. This looks like it was on a reasonably good day. When we used to go down there on the IPCs if a northerly was blowing we couldn't cross the Westport or Greymouth bars, so it was a long haul back to Nelson past Cape Foulwind (aptly named) and up and around the top of the South Island. Quite a few have died crossing bars on the west coast of NZ.

I am quite happy for the RNZN to continue undertaking constabulary patrolling of NZ waters because of the value those roles have for the RNZN in training and experience for crews. However NZDF should be fully funded / refunded by the appropriate govt departments; Customs, MPI, DOC, etc., for the RNZN participation.

 

[John Fedup]

Your map gives Northen Hemisphere dwellers perspective.

 

[ngatimozart]

Your map gives Northen Hemisphere dwellers perspective.

It's the proper way of viewing the world too

 

[htbrst]

I liked the video tour but the lens they used drove me nuts!

Just noting in case it wasn’t obvious - It’s a 360 degree setup - so you can “look around” using your mouse at any point in the video to see the entire room not just what is initially in focus.

There were few people doing things that may not have realised they were on camera, but the crew coming off the ship in the intro noticed the captain was on camera eventually - that was a quick about face a few meters down the gangplank

 

[ASSAIL]

Just noting in case it wasn’t obvious - It’s a 360 degree setup - so you can “look around” using your mouse at any point in the video to see the entire room not just what is initially in focus.

There were few people doing things that may not have realised they were on camera, but the crew coming off the ship in the intro noticed the captain was on camera eventually - that was a quick about face a few meters down the gangplank

Thanks, hadn’t noticed.

 

[old faithful]

The IPVs are quite capable of safely transiting to the Chatham Islands and undertaking a patrol of the EEZ. If they can transit to Fiji, then the Chathams is a walk in the park, so to speak. With regard to IPVs 12 nm or 200 nm in NZ is no real difference because they are required to handle the conditions off the south and west coasts of the South Island as well as around Stewart Island. Operating ships, especially small craft, off the east coast of the North & South Islands is totally different to operating small craft off the west coast of the North Island and the southern and west coast the South Island. It has to do with the prevailing winds, westerlies that blow around the Great Southern Ocean with only South America to hinder them at NZ's latitude, which means a very long fetch and big seas / swells. The eastern coasts of NZ are sheltered from this by the land mass of NZ whilst Cook Strait has the predominant westerly funnelled through it as a northerly because the wind is refracted around the top of the South Island.

View attachment 46642

This a video of a fishing boat crossing the Greymouth bar on the west coast of the South Island. This looks like it was on a reasonably good day. When we used to go down there on the IPCs if a northerly was blowing we couldn't cross the Westport or Greymouth bars, so it was a long haul back to Nelson past Cape Foulwind (aptly named) and up and around the top of the South Island. Quite a few have died crossing bars on the west coast of NZ.

I am quite happy for the RNZN to continue undertaking constabulary patrolling of NZ waters because of the value those roles have for the RNZN in training and experience for crews. However NZDF should be fully funded / refunded by the appropriate govt departments; Customs, MPI, DOC, etc., for the RNZN participation.

Horrific bar crossing! Those fishos need to rethink their boats, need more power! Need another 8 knots at least.

 

[ngatimozart]

Horrific bar crossing! Those fishos need to rethink their boats, need more power! Need another 8 knots at least.

Shippers, they're touched in the head. Nah, they do it all the time so know what they're doing. Still she's heart in the mouth material. The sediment in the water is most likely been washed down by the Grey river which has a high water flow if the rainfall has been decent. Considering the locals measure their rainfall in metres and from memory I think it's 6 or 7 m a year a fair whack of sediment gets washed down the river. There still be some gold in them thar mountains, hills and river.

 

[Rob c]

Side note, given the Capital Charge which IIRC still appears on the Vote Defence budget each year, I would be delighted if several NZD$35 mil. assets were to be replaced with more effective/efficient assets. Why pay the operational costs for a 55 m vessel to do RHIB/motor launch-type work, assuming that is accurate.

The simple answer to what you want is that the government won't stump up the money and always goes for one size fits all approach. The other problem is simply as Ngati pointed out is the sea states of the west coast is vastly different than the east coast and if you want to be at sea in winter on the west coast in winter a significant amount of the time you need size and that is why 55m was chosen for the ipv's as it was found that the earlier 33m ipc's could not operate on the west coast in winter unless there was shelter nearby. smaller boats sound good but the would need to be locally based and in significant numbers to be effective. In other words you would need to set up a number of patrol bases around the country so that the boats are never to far from selter during winter. However local commercial fishing can now be monitored more cheaply electronically so the need is less for a physical presence

 

[Redlands18]

Your map gives Northen Hemisphere dwellers perspective.

Do we start calling Canada the land Down Under

 

[spoz]

It shows how much New Zealand is protected by Australia...

Manawanui does look like a comfortable ship for her purpose. Provided the hull is sound, and the pre purchase survey should have shown that, she should give many years of good dervice. Look forward to seeing her “in the flesh” at some point, hopefully not too far into the future.

 

[MrConservative]

It shows how much New Zealand is protected by Australia...

Yes that huge Great Barrier Sand Bar between Godszone and Asia.