I’m slightly confused by where the American’s (USA) come into this discussion.
Harry De Wolf is Canadian, Polar Star supports the US Antarctic stations.
A few other nations also operate out of Hobart at various times of year.
Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Padman
- Start date
Harry De Wolf is Canadian, Polar Star supports the US Antarctic stations.
A few other nations also operate out of Hobart at various times of year.
" Polar Star" is operated by the USCG and is used to provide maritime access to McMurdo Sound for both Us and Nz depots there.
"Polar Star" could be retired due to its age and if Nz choose to fill the breech and this suited both parties then the icebreaker could be based at Lyttleton.
As we live with uncertainty with Trump
Continually changing the boundaries it may be necessary for Nz to go alone.
Food for thought - we would be supporting our most dominant allie.
What capability does RNZN need and what capability does the Polar Star offer that isn't already in service?
RNZN needs to supply Scott base with access with bulk fuel; construction materials, large machinery and bulky items. Equipment needed in bulk for scientific use. The "Polar star" provides that access each year and stands by as required. If another vessel becomes ice.bound in the broader area it can assist in freeing up and expediting a safe exit. Providing access to marginal areas for scientific purposes.
The USCG has under construction two Polar Security Cutters, and is planning a third. These are to replace Polar Star and her long out of service sister, Polar Sea. So while NZ may well decide to acquire a high capacity ice breaker, it won’t be to provide a service to the. US by replacing Polar Star.
Last edited:
CJohn
Active Member
Yes Almirante Viel would be a good example. It is a Vard 9 series icebreaker design with long range and endurance, able to resupply NZ's Antarctic Islands, perform scientific operations for Government and act as a icebreaker if required in McMurdo Sound.
en.wikipedia.org
Chilean icebreaker Almirante Viel - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Sad part about this version of ship was offered and feels like after SOPV was delayed if here are again repeating same history all over again.Yes Almirante Viel would be a good example. It is a Vard 9 series icebreaker design with long range and endurance, able to resupply NZ's Antarctic Islands, perform scientific operations for Government and act as a icebreaker if required in McMurdo Sound.
Chilean icebreaker Almirante Viel - Wikipedia
Thanks for the info - Just read about the PSC program and interim measures to sustain continuence.
Further - According to a USCG report released on April 16th, 2026. USCG announces homeporting of the first two Arctic security cutters in Alaska
with delivery by end of 2028. Finland will construct up to four and US shipyards up to seven more. Additional informatiion is provided within the article. So its "Gung ho"for the USCG.
Supporting the Icebreaker principal - both neighbours Australia and Chile have their own. The chilean navy t/s Esmeralda first visited Auckland in June 1961 and last visit departed Wellington on June 2012. At the time of this post at sea off chile.Yes Almirante Viel would be a good example. It is a Vard 9 series icebreaker design with long range and endurance, able to resupply NZ's Antarctic Islands, perform scientific operations for Government and act as a icebreaker if required in McMurdo Sound.
Chilean icebreaker Almirante Viel - Wikipedia
Thats right. Visited her in Wellington when she berthed at Queens Wharf last visit to NZ. A beautiful vessel immaculately kept. To expand - the chilean navy have made a number of goodwill visits to NZ and seem to be the only Navy from South America to do that. Eastern Antarctic fishery patrols for their icebreaker.
As Ngātimotzart pointed out, we are currently operating in a state of borrowed time. We rely on the US for the path (Polar Star) and use a massive tanker for tasks that require a nimble scout. The world as it operates today is a "Category B" navy trying to do "Category A" work with a single high-value target and a fleet of undersized patrol boats. The Bottom Line is that until New Zealand acquires a 100m+ hull with a Polar5 rating, we have mass (in the Aotearoa) but no independent manoeuvre. We are a "follow-on" force, entirely dependent on others to open the gate. And again. Ngati was bang on. And second. I would love to get into fantasy fleets, I really, really would, but we must accurately describe the world in which the RNZN operates in before we can prescribe things that would be way better if not for these politicians. And we are spending tens of millions on getting the Protector OPVs back in service. Another thing Ngati said was that those things roll on wet grass. cheers.
kiwi in exile
Well-Known Member
Australia is spending AUD$1.7 billion on 'dozens' of ghost sharks long range UUVs. These will be manufactured locally. And can be produced quickly. "soverign cpability' etc. NZ spending a some millions of dollars for a small (3 or so to start) fleet of these to test and use would be a great idea. I gets us into autonomous systems, offers long range ISR/detererrence/maritime domain awareness. We gain further interoperability with the ADF/RAN. Less operational costs/crewing issues.
I hope at the least the RNZN is getting brifed about what the RAN is learning from its work with the Ghost Shark.
Australian analyst-says-smaller-smarter-autonomous-systems-is-the-way-forwa/106573388
I agree that the balance betewwn smaller chaepar unmanned and autonomous netwoked systems an big expensive to buy, crew and operate (imported fuelsetc) is wrong in th NZDF and we dont seem to be making any clear plan to rectify this.
I hope at the least the RNZN is getting brifed about what the RAN is learning from its work with the Ghost Shark.
Australian analyst-says-smaller-smarter-autonomous-systems-is-the-way-forwa/106573388
I agree that the balance betewwn smaller chaepar unmanned and autonomous netwoked systems an big expensive to buy, crew and operate (imported fuelsetc) is wrong in th NZDF and we dont seem to be making any clear plan to rectify this.
Hello friend. In short, not on an aspirational 2% budget. Even on a 3% budget, the best we could "hope" for is 6x P8s and 9 seaguardians. And aligning with SEA 3000 is going to take everything NZ has, friend.
A good appraisal - thanks. I respect Ngati's decision making and the reasoning given. Always have.
Since the frigates provide the teeth of our Navy I have to make their replacement a priority. Yes the ANZAC's lives have been extended but an approved funding and commitment to purchase needs to be made so that we enter a continuous cycle. Funding is then spread over long term avoiding massive one off funding or deferment of a critical need. I am against batch or class purchasing as all the units require mid life upgrades and finally replacement at the same time. Yes your initial cost per vessel is cheaper but by staggering your new builds you can have the latest or best available. Once the frigate replacement program is agreed upon you are free to prioritise the rest of the fleet replacement. Frigate funding would need to include the added cost oif munitions.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
I think you will find he was referring to the 27m length Moa-class IPC, that the Naval Volunteer Reserve once operated (and which he served on), which whilst operating in Cook Strait would "roll like on wet grass".
Anything of that length, like the original Brooke Marine built Lake-class patrol vessels (33m length/135 tonnes loaded), suffered badly in NZ's coastal conditions.
The larger and heavier Project Protector Lake-class IPV's (55m length/340 tonnes loaded) and OPV's (85m length/1900 tonnes) were designed to better handle NZ's sea conditions and from accounts perform well.
The CN posted an update on OPV Otago's regeneration writing "It has been rewarding to speak to key stakeholders to understand the unique project being undertaken, with modernisation and development opportunities to extend the ship’s end of life and increase capability."
I am wondering then if the two OPV's end of life can be pushed out to 2040 (i.e. 30 year lifespan 2010-2040) then funding that was intended for their replacements in the early/mid-2030's could perhaps instead be redirected to shoring up decent combatant replacements and other vessels (SOPV's and long range USV's/UUV's etc) as part of the current DCP 2025-2039. Also looking forward to us finding out what increases in capability are being developed.
The OPV's are well designed vessels (in terms of their functionality) so if they can be extended, rather than replaced next decade, I'd rather (replacement) funding be directed to other higher priority needs including warfighting (eg at least 3-4 combatants). It could also be that the planned SOPV may be able to take over their Pacific role once they are operational, if so, then that should mean acquiring more than the single vessel that was originally planned (so 2-3 SOPV).
Last edited:
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Guessing the "teeth" could be improved sensor/detection/counter measure systems and possibly to trial carrying and operating USV's (and perhaps UUV's in the future) to enhance patrol and MCM capabilities? This could help better inform future replacement vessel options, designed specifically to carry such systems. With the loss of Manawanui, which could have been a versatile platform to use for such trials, at least the OPV's have a crane and the provision to carry containerised systems. Plus a hanger and flight deck for UAV system trials.
Yet dialogue must be reached that shifts RNZN from a category B navy into a category A navy and indeed NZDF more generally. It should reflect a primary focus away from low end threats and regional support to high end stuff and interoperability.
I wouldn't be having a big bitch about it if the GOTD selected a like for like replacement of the B757 but oh well.
I would like to see some thought put into transferring containers and awkward loads from ship to shore in the middle of the Ross Sea ice shelf. It would IMO have some sort of ramp attachment and attach a cable then drag it off with the loader. Or something approximating a ship to shore transfer system for Antartica.
I wouldn't be having a big bitch about it if the GOTD selected a like for like replacement of the B757 but oh well.
I would like to see some thought put into transferring containers and awkward loads from ship to shore in the middle of the Ross Sea ice shelf. It would IMO have some sort of ramp attachment and attach a cable then drag it off with the loader. Or something approximating a ship to shore transfer system for Antartica.