Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[Sea Toby]

While the 25-mm Bushmaster has an effective range of 1.5 miles per the US Navy website, it also has a maximum range of 4.3 miles, a bit more range than a 81-mm mortar of about 3 miles.

A naval variant can be used to straf a beach, shoot through sandbags, crush through 3 feet of concrete, and knock out APVs. A 25-mm Bushmaster gun will be an effective weapon against unfortified beaches 1.5 miles off the coast, with a maximum less effective range of 4 miles off the coast.

Therefore, this gun should be useful in SEAL operations. In fact, the US Navy's recently built patrol boats for the SEALS were armed with a 25-mm Bushmaster gun.

Considering the OPVs top speed of 22 knots, the OPVs should be able to close within 4 miles if not 1 mile of a fishing vessel, its main mission of EEZ offshore patrol. Fishing vessels have less steel in their hulls than an APV's shell.

For example, the cinder block homes of Bermuda would not stand up to a 25-mm Bushmaster. While it doesn't have the largest range, it is an effective weapon against unfortified targets.

 

[Gibbo]

That maybe true, I'm not an expert in mortars. There maybe occasions when the OPV may have to put herself within range (i.e escorting the MRV Landing Craft ashore) of shore based weapons. It that happens it has no effective means of counter fire (the need for a larger gun having been discussed elsewhere). Thats the risk NZ has taken in purchasing a single role vessel, something like the French Floreal would have been more appropriate.

Yep correct, larger gun required for this quite possible scenario. Trouble is the vessel's armament hasn't been designed with this type of scenario in mind - all for the sake of saving pennies in purchase costs! The govt states it will provide an anti-terrorist role, but that implies a possibility of receiving fire, something the OPV (and more concerningly the MRV) will have limited capacity to cope with!

Okay given the 'Fiji sceanrio' mentioned above - the OPV quite possibly could be static, so mortars may be a real threat. You certainly would stop LCM's heading to shore by dropping mortar shells randomly in front of them!

As far as I can ascertain the OPV's Bushmaster M242 will be able to pump a round out to about 5km - but naturally you've lost the accuracy at that range. 2 - 2.5km is the effective range, but not the maximum range.

The OPV would have a couple of other useful options in the above scenario:

Firstly you put the SeaSprite up overhead (got to retain altitude & keep moving to reduce chance of small arms fire). M60, sniper fire or even Maverick would suppress the mortar crew...or at the very least scare the hell out of them!

Secondly - put a 30 man SAS team on board OPV (space is allowed in design for them & 2 x 11m SAS RHIBs). Get them ashore (RHIB or chopper) to deal with said mortar crew etc in 'their usual manner'.

In reality I think (& would certainly hope) that in these sorts of scenarios the RNZN would ensure an ANZAC was on hand to support MRV - but the OPV would still provide valuable secondary support. Anyways - we ain't stupid enough to take on Fiji on their own soil, but I think we all realise that!

 

[gf0012-aust]

While the 25-mm Bushmaster has an effective range of 1.5 miles per the US Navy website, it also has a maximum range of 4.3 miles, a bit more range than a 81-mm mortar of about 3 miles.

The difficulty with any range comparison though is the actual requirement differences.

eg LOS as opposed to ballistic arc....

 

[Cuddly]

Yep correct, larger gun required for this quite possible scenario. Trouble is the vessel's armament hasn't been designed with this type of scenario in mind - all for the sake of saving pennies in purchase costs! The govt states it will provide an anti-terrorist role, but that implies a possibility of receiving fire, something the OPV (and more concerningly the MRV) will have limited capacity to cope with!

...

For anti terroris role the OPV need a larger gun. Not to mention the terroris possibly will armed their boats with long range ATGM.

rgds

 

[Whiskyjack]

For anti terroris role the OPV need a larger gun. Not to mention the terroris possibly will armed their boats with long range ATGM.

rgds

Guys I am not against up-arming the OPVs. My preference being a 57mm as I believe that is the direction many navies are headed.

But where will a OPV inb the South Pacific run into terrorists with ATGMs?

I think the NLOLS system is something the NZDF should give serious consideration to. It is light, easily deployed in both land and sea and has the range to give the OPVs precision strike out to the 50km-70km mark.

Would need to be used in conjunction with a UAV to provide recon and targeting data.

Something that is duel use with both the RNZN and NZ Army being able to use.

 

[Lucasnz]

Guys I am not against up-arming the OPVs. My preference being a 57mm as I believe that is the direction many navies are headed.

But where will a OPV inb the South Pacific run into terrorists with ATGMs?

I think the NLOLS system is something the NZDF should give serious consideration to. It is light, easily deployed in both land and sea and has the range to give the OPVs precision strike out to the 50km-70km mark.

Would need to be used in conjunction with a UAV to provide recon and targeting data.

Something that is duel use with both the RNZN and NZ Army being able to use.

I've got some problems with the 57mm, though I admit that its probably suitable for low level ops in the South Pacific. The problems I have are...

• The gun has to goto the fore and aft position to be reloaded
• The reloading time is about 5 minutes, from what I've read about the system. Not what you want if things are really nasty or if troops need sustained support.
• The NGS capability is suitable against unprotected targets only

The advantage of the 57mm is that it can be fitted quickly.

 

[Gibbo]

Guys I am not against up-arming the OPVs. My preference being a 57mm as I believe that is the direction many navies are headed.

But where will a OPV inb the South Pacific run into terrorists with ATGMs?

I think the NLOLS system is something the NZDF should give serious consideration to. It is light, easily deployed in both land and sea and has the range to give the OPVs precision strike out to the 50km-70km mark.

Would need to be used in conjunction with a UAV to provide recon and targeting data.

Something that is duel use with both the RNZN and NZ Army being able to use.

Re: "But where will a OPV inb the South Pacific run into terrorists with ATGMs?" - true current form would suggest this is unlikely, but there's 2 things to consider... (1) the world is an ever-changing place and the Sth Pacific certainly seems to be facing more 'issues' - an unstable state is always an ideal stepping stone for terrorists. We can't assume ATGM's won't ever be seen in terrorist hands down this way (2) the OPV quite realistcially could be tasked to S. E. Asia (Malacca Straits for example) on anti-terrorist patrols, where the threat is more significant.

Yes I agree the OPV is fine as is for the tasks envisaged, but they are limited with regard to ability to operate in an elevated-risk environment. For small navies such as the RNZN the key to success is to ensure their vessels can perform as many tasks as possible. Hence the OPV's should have been military spec corvettes in my mind - with the weapons & systems fit to match.

However, they're not, and never will be! Yes they can be up-armed, but without the full military spec hulls & systems they are still limited as to what the can deal with.

What would be the catalyst to up-arm them? It would take something to drive this change - and my concern is this may well be something that involves significant damage and / or loss of life!

It could be that someone kicks the OPV's backside & it limps away with it's tail between it's stern! Or alternatively we find out the hard way there are terrorists in the area with ATGM's. Either way politicians then wipe the egg off their faces & immediately start writing cheques for a new weapons fit! Let's stop being reactive!

 

[Todjaeger]

Regarding the OPV, have any firm decisions made about deployment areas? If OPV operations is restricted to NZ & Antarctic areas, the armament as it stands is fine. If it will also be used for showing the flag and/or operations in any islanded area, then it can have problems.

I would consider at first the mini-Typhoon stations more important than an upgrade of the Bushmaster. As it stands now, the OPV (and MRV) is vulnerable to anything approaching from astern. If the OPV ends up operating in or just passing through Indonesia or for that matter the Phillippines, then it may very well find itself on the receiving end of some unfriendly attention. Once the mini-Typhoons have been fitted (and it's disheartening to think it's in the late 07 to 08 timeframe) then some sort of naval gun system should be considered. My personal preference would be an OTO Breda (or is it Melara?) 76mm/62 Super Rapid. Large enough to provide some anti-shipping capability as well as naval fire support in need be. Though I agree, it is far better to use the frigate for such a role as they are better suited.

And I also have to agree, it is better for NZ to anticipate than to react.

-Cheers

 

[Sea Toby]

Considering the OPVs armament, I doubt whether they will ever be deployed west of Papua New Guineau and Australia, or further north than Nauru and Kiribiti. Therefore, their armament should be okay. They can be upgraded at a later date if needed. Surely NZ and Australian intelligence would notice a higher threat in the South Pacific.

I'm more worried about the armament of the Anzac frigates. I would prefer harpoons, Evolved Sea Sparrow missiles, and up to date ASW torpedoes.

 

[Todjaeger]

Considering the OPVs armament, I doubt whether they will ever be deployed west of Papua New Guineau and Australia, or further north than Nauru and Kiribiti. Therefore, their armament should be okay. They can be upgraded at a later date if needed. Surely NZ and Australian intelligence would notice a higher threat in the South Pacific.

I'm more worried about the armament of the Anzac frigates. I would prefer harpoons, Evolved Sea Sparrow missiles, and up to date ASW torpedoes.

The Anzac upgrade is a concern. I'm not so sure about the need for Harpoon, at least relative to other areas. Replacement of the RIM-7 Sea Sparrow with ESSM is definately a must, as well as replacement torpedoes given the dwindling shelf-life of existing stocks. As mentioned with the OPVs, I think mini-Typhoons should be gotten sooner, rather than later to cover the sides & aft of the Anzacs. After all, these ships are the ones most likely to be sent into harms way. As possible alternative to the Harpoon, might NZ be interested in the Kongsberg NSM? In addition to ship mounts, it could be carried aboard the P-3K as well as the NH-90s when they enter service. That would give all three platforms standoff AShM, with superior range to the currently useged Maverick AGM.

-Cheers

 

[Aussie Digger]

The Anzac upgrade is a concern. I'm not so sure about the need for Harpoon, at least relative to other areas. Replacement of the RIM-7 Sea Sparrow with ESSM is definately a must, as well as replacement torpedoes given the dwindling shelf-life of existing stocks. As mentioned with the OPVs, I think mini-Typhoons should be gotten sooner, rather than later to cover the sides & aft of the Anzacs. After all, these ships are the ones most likely to be sent into harms way. As possible alternative to the Harpoon, might NZ be interested in the Kongsberg NSM? In addition to ship mounts, it could be carried aboard the P-3K as well as the NH-90s when they enter service. That would give all three platforms standoff AShM, with superior range to the currently useged Maverick AGM.

-Cheers

Whilst the commonality benefits would be welcome, the NSM has a very small warhead compared to Harpoon and is less suited to attacking "larger" ships than Harpoon.

It supposedly possesses a substantial range enhancement over Harpoon (in the order of some 50k's) but this is the air launched variant, AFAIK. The ship launched variant is not going to have such a great range and may not be much greater than ship launched Harpoon in any case.

I'm not saying it's the wrong choice, but it's benefits would have to be carefully weighed.

It also does not possess a land attack capability AFAIK, unlike Harpoon II and of course, Maverick...

 

[Todjaeger]

Whilst the commonality benefits would be welcome, the NSM has a very small warhead compared to Harpoon and is less suited to attacking "larger" ships than Harpoon.

It supposedly possesses a substantial range enhancement over Harpoon (in the order of some 50k's) but this is the air launched variant, AFAIK. The ship launched variant is not going to have such a great range and may not be much greater than ship launched Harpoon in any case.

I'm not saying it's the wrong choice, but it's benefits would have to be carefully weighed.

It also does not possess a land attack capability AFAIK, unlike Harpoon II and of course, Maverick...

Indeed you're right about the warhead. My reasoning behind such a switch was the commonality though. Currently the Mavericks equip the Seasprites and are supposed to be getting added to the Orions if they aren't already. IMO the Maverick is much too short-ranged for ASV use, therefore a longer range is desired. If the Seasprites & Orion make the changeover, then NSM could also be used aboard the Anzac. I think the range profile of ship launched NSM & Harpoon II is fairly similar, about 130km IIRC. The Harpoon II is a superior (larger) weapon, but currently RNZN doesn't seem to be making any moves to purchase any AShM for the Anzac, so NSM would be better than nothing for the Anzac, and extend the safe area of engagement for the aircraft.

-Cheers

 

[Whiskyjack]

Re: "But where will a OPV inb the South Pacific run into terrorists with ATGMs?" - true current form would suggest this is unlikely, but there's 2 things to consider... (1) the world is an ever-changing place and the Sth Pacific certainly seems to be facing more 'issues' - an unstable state is always an ideal stepping stone for terrorists. We can't assume ATGM's won't ever be seen in terrorist hands down this way (2) the OPV quite realistcially could be tasked to S. E. Asia (Malacca Straits for example) on anti-terrorist patrols, where the threat is more significant.

Yes I agree the OPV is fine as is for the tasks envisaged, but they are limited with regard to ability to operate in an elevated-risk environment. For small navies such as the RNZN the key to success is to ensure their vessels can perform as many tasks as possible. Hence the OPV's should have been military spec corvettes in my mind - with the weapons & systems fit to match.

However, they're not, and never will be! Yes they can be up-armed, but without the full military spec hulls & systems they are still limited as to what the can deal with.

What would be the catalyst to up-arm them? It would take something to drive this change - and my concern is this may well be something that involves significant damage and / or loss of life!

It could be that someone kicks the OPV's backside & it limps away with it's tail between it's stern! Or alternatively we find out the hard way there are terrorists in the area with ATGM's. Either way politicians then wipe the egg off their faces & immediately start writing cheques for a new weapons fit! Let's stop being reactive!

I understand where you are coming from but in reality, how will having a bigger gun stop a ship/boat firing a ATGM? In the Malacca Straights by the time they know they are under attack they would be hit, it is then a response not a prevention. (I hope that makes sense) The weapons on a OPV are less important than the ELINT when it comes to fighting terrorists IMHO.

In relation to the Malacca Straights example. I accept there is the possibility that they may be tasked with something along those lines, but it would be a multinational effort where they were policing merchant vessels etc.. There is no conventional risk i.e. subs and air attack. It would be continuation of their NZ duties.

If the risk was higher then it would be a frigate tasking. And no one here denies that another frigate or two is needed, as well as an upgrade of the present ones. The OPVs are not and are not meant to be corvettes. They are meant to patrol NZ waters where the ‘enemy’ is criminal and economic. They are also supposed to free up the Frigates for more active operations globally.

Many Navies OPVs are armed in a similar way, as posted above I think a solution like NLOS-LS that can be fitted in a minimal time, but also used by the army is something to be looked at.

The OPVs fit a nessasary role.

I agree with other posts, I would rather see the ANZACs upgraded and another surface combatant added to the fleet. That would be a balanced fleet.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Considering the OPVs armament, I doubt whether they will ever be deployed west of Papua New Guineau and Australia, or further north than Nauru and Kiribiti. Therefore, their armament should be okay. They can be upgraded at a later date if needed. Surely NZ and Australian intelligence would notice a higher threat in the South Pacific.

I'm more worried about the armament of the Anzac frigates. I would prefer harpoons, Evolved Sea Sparrow missiles, and up to date ASW torpedoes.

I agree, whilst a bit more "oomph" would be nice, the Bushmaster mount could be easily upgraded to 30mm or even 35/50mm Bushmaster IV mounts if necessary, which should easily deal with the range limitations of the 25mm gun.

They also come with "dual feeds" so that a combination of ammunition, say AP "dual purpose" and an "anti-air" round could be fired as desired and "kill" 2 birds with one stone?

Add a couple of 12.7mm "Mini-Typhoon" mounts and the vessel would be well armed enough for the South Pacific OR anti-pirate operations...

 

[Norm]

Joining RNZN

Eta next week for some info.Every ones away at the moment!

Caught up with some serving RNZN types.They felt the best channel is via the Recruiters (phone book Government Departments D section defence Force recruiting). Recruiters are very experienced, looking for good people and can spot tyre kickers and dreamers very quickly.If the feel you are right they can arrange a day visit to the base,you can thentalk to everyone you meet and get a good idea if it's for you.The Navy also runs a week on the base for High school "high flyer's" details with School Guidance Councilors, need to be still at Scool and the right age group 16-17 I'd imagine.

Outside of that you could strike up a conversation with uniformed Navy types relaxing in Devonport.The number around varies ,sometimes they are every where then no one's around. Navy will likely have an open day in Nov 2007 which is a fantastic opportunity to check it out. Four intakes p.a. next which is full enters induction training on the 16/1/07.

 

[stryker NZ]

Caught up with some serving RNZN types.They felt the best channel is via the Recruiters (phone book Government Departments D section defence Force recruiting). Recruiters are very experienced, looking for good people and can spot tyre kickers and dreamers very quickly.If the feel you are right they can arrange a day visit to the base,you can thentalk to everyone you meet and get a good idea if it's for you.The Navy also runs a week on the base for High school "high flyer's" details with School Guidance Councilors, need to be still at Scool and the right age group 16-17 I'd imagine.

Outside of that you could strike up a conversation with uniformed Navy types relaxing in Devonport.The number around varies ,sometimes they are every where then no one's around. Navy will likely have an open day in Nov 2007 which is a fantastic opportunity to check it out. Four intakes p.a. next which is full enters induction training on the 16/1/07.

thanks alot i will go and do that (i was actually chosen and went on that navy week thing but i just need a little bit more info before i choose between them or the Airforce)

 

[Gibbo]

I understand where you are coming from but in reality, how will having a bigger gun stop a ship/boat firing a ATGM? In the Malacca Straights by the time they know they are under attack they would be hit, it is then a response not a prevention. (I hope that makes sense) The weapons on a OPV are less important than the ELINT when it comes to fighting terrorists IMHO.

In relation to the Malacca Straights example. I accept there is the possibility that they may be tasked with something along those lines, but it would be a multinational effort where they were policing merchant vessels etc.. There is no conventional risk i.e. subs and air attack. It would be continuation of their NZ duties.

If the risk was higher then it would be a frigate tasking. And no one here denies that another frigate or two is needed, as well as an upgrade of the present ones. The OPVs are not and are not meant to be corvettes. They are meant to patrol NZ waters where the ‘enemy’ is criminal and economic. They are also supposed to free up the Frigates for more active operations globally.

Many Navies OPVs are armed in a similar way, as posted above I think a solution like NLOS-LS that can be fitted in a minimal time, but also used by the army is something to be looked at.

The OPVs fit a nessasary role.

I agree with other posts, I would rather see the ANZACs upgraded and another surface combatant added to the fleet. That would be a balanced fleet.

Yes agree - my ideal is that a third Frigate in addition to the 'Protector' fleet would be the best option. However given the shortage of personnel I'm not sure the RNZN could support any additional vessels in the short to medium term, even if the govt of the day did decide to make such a purchase (I wouldn't hold my breath for that, even given the apparent softening to the idea from National's Wayne Mapp).

Where I was coming from with regard to the OPV's being under-gunned is that I was working on the assumption that a thrid frigate is highly unlikely, and that in the absence of such the OPV's should have been purchased with a lower-level combat capability (effectively a corvette, including the military spec hull & systems etc) - and hence a more serious weapons fit - of which a bigger gun is only one particular part.

In reality of course corvettes were never likely with the current bunch in power. 2 Frigates & 2 Corvettes would have provided the RNZN with a nice two-tier force that would have been very valuable in the region, and given a significant degree of operational flexibility.

Anyway that said, I'm sure the OPV's are going to prove very valuable at the kind of tasks for which they are envisaged. Yes granted - a bigger gun won't stop an ATGM, but it may allow you to take out the launch vessel before it gets in range of you! Yes - ELINT is a critical factor, it's not just the weapons that you need, you need effective systems for detection; identification; tracking & targetting if necessary.

The OPV's won't always have a SeaSprite embarked, but when tasked to potentially 'higher-risk' scenarios I'm sure there will be one on board - and that will add a huge punch to the vessel (perhaps a little conditional though - depending on servicability, weather extremes etc).

The OPV's are to have a secondary anti-terrorist role, however no-one (including the RNZN) has defined what this means. I'd speculate this assumes a potential for taking fire, so in that case ELINT etc & weapons are a critical factor.

Publicity material so far seen suggests the OPV's will operate NZ EEZ; Southern Ocean; Sth Pacific & Australian waters. Perhaps Malacca Straits patrol will only ever be attempted with a Frigate, not that there is a mandate for NZ to undertake that at present.

The OPV's 25mm Bushmaters on the MSI mount operated as a RWS with electro-optical control - it will be a VERY effective weapon and while the effective range is about 2km, it can hit out to about 5km - with less accuracy of course, but enough to give a potential terrorist craft something to think about before it attempts to get closer.

The 2 Browning 12.75mm are also something you don't argue with - there's nothing to suggest these will utilise the mini-typhoon mount - but I'd like to see that done as it makes them far more effective deterrent.

So okay, given their planned role the OPV's are going to be excellent platforms. The only thing I still maintain is that they should have a rear-facing Browning 12.75mm in a mini-typhoon mount so that they have 360 coverage day/night with accuracy!

 

[Whiskyjack]

Yes agree - my ideal is that a third Frigate in addition to the 'Protector' fleet would be the best option. However given the shortage of personnel I'm not sure the RNZN could support any additional vessels in the short to medium term, even if the govt of the day did decide to make such a purchase (I wouldn't hold my breath for that, even given the apparent softening to the idea from National's Wayne Mapp).

Where I was coming from with regard to the OPV's being under-gunned is that I was working on the assumption that a thrid frigate is highly unlikely, and that in the absence of such the OPV's should have been purchased with a lower-level combat capability (effectively a corvette, including the military spec hull & systems etc) - and hence a more serious weapons fit - of which a bigger gun is only one particular part.

In reality of course corvettes were never likely with the current bunch in power. 2 Frigates & 2 Corvettes would have provided the RNZN with a nice two-tier force that would have been very valuable in the region, and given a significant degree of operational flexibility.

Anyway that said, I'm sure the OPV's are going to prove very valuable at the kind of tasks for which they are envisaged. Yes granted - a bigger gun won't stop an ATGM, but it may allow you to take out the launch vessel before it gets in range of you! Yes - ELINT is a critical factor, it's not just the weapons that you need, you need effective systems for detection; identification; tracking & targetting if necessary.

The OPV's won't always have a SeaSprite embarked, but when tasked to potentially 'higher-risk' scenarios I'm sure there will be one on board - and that will add a huge punch to the vessel (perhaps a little conditional though - depending on servicability, weather extremes etc).

The OPV's are to have a secondary anti-terrorist role, however no-one (including the RNZN) has defined what this means. I'd speculate this assumes a potential for taking fire, so in that case ELINT etc & weapons are a critical factor.

Publicity material so far seen suggests the OPV's will operate NZ EEZ; Southern Ocean; Sth Pacific & Australian waters. Perhaps Malacca Straits patrol will only ever be attempted with a Frigate, not that there is a mandate for NZ to undertake that at present.

The OPV's 25mm Bushmaters on the MSI mount operated as a RWS with electro-optical control - it will be a VERY effective weapon and while the effective range is about 2km, it can hit out to about 5km - with less accuracy of course, but enough to give a potential terrorist craft something to think about before it attempts to get closer.

The 2 Browning 12.75mm are also something you don't argue with - there's nothing to suggest these will utilise the mini-typhoon mount - but I'd like to see that done as it makes them far more effective deterrent.

So okay, given their planned role the OPV's are going to be excellent platforms. The only thing I still maintain is that they should have a rear-facing Browning 12.75mm in a mini-typhoon mount so that they have 360 coverage day/night with accuracy!

Fair enough. My overly optomistic mood (which will probably not last long) still suggests that a third combatant is not out of the question, although the term combatant may be a stretch I guess.

The key to me is a feeling I have that the public are a bit more reasonable when it comes to defence. When the country is making surpluses, unemployment is low and the NZDF can be seen to be doing 'good' things, then the public will always be more supportive, or at least not hostile.

When the last frigates were ordered (late 80s) RNZN frigates had not really seen an operational deployment in a long long time (as far as I know) yet since then they have. Much easier to sell something that can be seen to be used than something that might be used.

Sorry for the ramble.

As for the third ship I think if the logistics can be made to fit the ANZAC footprint, as well as the training then we may get there.

 

[Gibbo]

Fair enough. My overly optomistic mood (which will probably not last long) still suggests that a third combatant is not out of the question, although the term combatant may be a stretch I guess.

The key to me is a feeling I have that the public are a bit more reasonable when it comes to defence. When the country is making surpluses, unemployment is low and the NZDF can be seen to be doing 'good' things, then the public will always be more supportive, or at least not hostile.

When the last frigates were ordered (late 80s) RNZN frigates had not really seen an operational deployment in a long long time (as far as I know) yet since then they have. Much easier to sell something that can be seen to be used than something that might be used.

Sorry for the ramble.

As for the third ship I think if the logistics can be made to fit the ANZAC footprint, as well as the training then we may get there.

No worries - wasn't a ramble - good arguments! Yeah I have this overly-pessimistic view of NZ Defence - but I agree the public seem to realising the NZDF do have a positive role to play & that we won't see a repeat of the divisive agruments about Frigates we saw in the 80's.

As you say the NZDF has a pretty good profile now with all the work they're doing around the globe, plus the change in thinking around 9/11 etc.

There has bene barely a murmur with regard to the amount of money allocated to LTDP & DSI initiatives. I still pick there will be a fight for a 3rd Frigate though as that would mean Labour are in opposition and they'd be guaranteed to try & make political capital out of National going for a 3rd combatant. Yes perhaps it will require a bit of 'creative interpretation' of the term combatant - oooh wouldn't an 'Absalon' type vessel be a nice additon to the MRV & Frigate fleet!?!

The fact that any new combatant would be an orphan is not actually that big an issue. While certainly not the most cost-effective way to operate, it has to be remembered in 18 months time the RNZN fleet will comprise 12 vessels of 7 types - 4 will be 'orphan types' (Canterbury; Endeavour; Manawanui; Resolution).

So in the meantime the RNZN can bed in the 'Protector Fleet' which with it's more local focus will add significantly more 'PR' benefits to the RNZN which can only longer term improve recruitment & hopefully strengthen the case for another combatant.

 

[Lucasnz]

1st IPC Patrol Decommissioning Date Set / RNZNVR

According to the latest navy news HMNZS Hinau is to be the first IPC decommissioned, around the 28-31 Jan 2007.

Though younger than the other IPC's, Hinau is in a poor state having been used by the RNZN (Based in Auckland, when attached to the Auckland RNZNVR) on a more regular basis, than the other vessels.

Other changes introduced in relation to the RNZNVR, according to the navy news are...

• Retention on the Maritime Trade Organisation (NCS)
• Opening of Regular Force branches to RNZNVR personnel (For ex RNZN personnel, who are unable to stay in the same trade, with the result that the navy loses skilled people)
• Training of new personnel off the street for IPV operations.
• Easier transfer from the RNZN to RNZNVR.
• Removal of the need to attend weekly divisional training.