This is a discussion on Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; There was some excitement this morning in the news media with "Navy ship hits rocks, taking on water" ...while not ...
There was some excitement this morning in the news media with "Navy ship hits rocks, taking on water" ...while not as bad as initially reported, it was still very embarrassing with the Navy's VIP barge hitting rocks and taking on significant amounts of water.
Not much more that you can say really - very embarrassing, but I thought I should add it for thread completeness - it will be interesting to see the eventual report into the incident.
There was some excitement this morning in the news media with "Navy ship hits rocks, taking on water" ...while not as bad as initially reported, it was still very embarrassing with the Navy's VIP barge hitting rocks and taking on significant amounts of water.
Not much more that you can say really - very embarrassing, but I thought I should add it for thread completeness - it will be interesting to see the eventual report into the incident.
Im sure the sailors and officers of devonport are devestated their fishing boat has sunk. While over working with RNZN i watched it sail out, spin around the harbour, then drop a line before coming home at 1500...
Im sure the sailors and officers of devonport are devestated their fishing boat has sunk. While over working with RNZN i watched it sail out, spin around the harbour, then drop a line before coming home at 1500...
The Minister Of Defence is not impressed at all. He said it is embarrassing and wants a full report. Methinks someones promotion chnaces have just come to a screaming halt, especially as the Minister was having to front up on national TV over it.
Im sure the sailors and officers of devonport are devestated their fishing boat has sunk. While over working with RNZN i watched it sail out, spin around the harbour, then drop a line before coming home at 1500...
A sarcastic comment, but warranted nonetheless. The VIP barge should not be used for fishing or anything contrary to the intent of what it was given to the RNZN for.
And will this mean that an OOW will now be posted to the barge (if it is salvageable) for these types of deployments?
A sarcastic comment, but warranted nonetheless. The VIP barge should not be used for fishing or anything contrary to the intent of what it was given to the RNZN for.
And will this mean that an OOW will now be posted to the barge (if it is salvageable) for these types of deployments?
There's things that happen that shouldn't but they do and as long as they aren't dangerous or criminal then no harms done. There is no need for an officer or NCO to be overly officious. Swings and roundabouts. If it doesn't prejudice the service nor the discipline then you just have to know where to draw the line.
I've served with officers and NCOs who have been overly officious and I did not want to go to sea with them, because nine times out of ten, they did't know their job, nor did I want to go into combat with them because they would've gotten us killed. There are other officers and NCOs whom knew when to turn a blind eye and when to lay down the law. Those I would've gone to sea with anytime, any where and same if I had to go into combat because I trusted their judgement I knew that they knew their job.
If the OOW gets posted to the barge then thats what he / she's paid for and that's why he / she's an officer. If he / she can't take a joke he / she shouldn't joined the navy. As you can probably tell my class prejudices are starting to show and I was on the lower deck, with no intention of being dragged up through the hawse pipe, no matter how many university quals I accumulated.
I certainly wasn't suggesting that the puss shouldn't go fishing ... just that it should be done somewhere a little more discreet than in the middle of the harbour off the VIP barge.
My query regarding an OOW, was simply due to there being an OOW on every RNZN vessel except the RHIBs and the barge. This may have the potential to change that, it may not, let's wait and see.
I certainly wasn't suggesting that the puss shouldn't go fishing ... just that it should be done somewhere a little more discreet than in the middle of the harbour off the VIP barge.
My query regarding an OOW, was simply due to there being an OOW on every RNZN vessel except the RHIBs and the barge. This may have the potential to change that, it may not, let's wait and see.
Ok fair enouigh and apologies. It had been known for a spot of water skiing to occur behind the odd IPC. And boggy boarding. Used the wooden door off the greenies lockup.
Ok fair enouigh and apologies. It had been known for a spot of water skiing to occur behind the odd IPC. And boggy boarding. Used the wooden door off the greenies lockup.
Somebody in the 1980's pinched (or neglected to return to put it more kindly) a parachute from the RNZAF S & S boys and his IPC crew then proceeded to perform para-sailing experiments Club Med style.
One of the water-skiing incidents happened at Milford Sound. An ex crew member told me they got snapped because a very senior defence force person holidaying with his foreign guests saw it happen from a nearby tourist boat. Needless to say a very dim view was taken of it by COMAUCK.
Subs- laughable actually: limited NZ useful options, expensive, technically intensive, crew intensive(training and retention wise), therefore would have been a waste of time, money and capability. Leave them to the big navies.
OPVs- We maintain the frigates to take care of the high end tasks, OPVs for the low end and anything in between shared dependant on which end of the scale it falls. Lets be honest NZ low end is anything from a disgruntled poacher to a drug smuggleing pirate so do we need up-gunned, sensored up, gucci OPVs that will spend most of their life re-supplying DOC islands, flying the flag in the islands and patrolling the southern ocean.
Equip the types properly for their relevant tasks and focus instead of trying to have everyship in the fleet at its 'max' potential. On the anti-piracy subject our govt has twice declined sending frigates so what would be the point of fitting out more ships to be able to do the job. Surely the 2 ANZACS are not just for excercises and NZ ops otherwise they are a waste and we would just get more numbers of a smaller class but the fact is frigates give us reach, options and punch therefore are IMHO needed (although I once thought that about ACF and look what happened).
helos- again the same, tailor to suit their respective tasks(or majority of) so no need for every one to be a overly expensive asset for no real need.
The RNZN of tommorow I would like to see and fitted out accordingly is therefore:
3 frigates (concentrate on these for mid-major combat,ie 99 ET, MEAO anti-piracy))
2 OPVs (for the low end/ minimum conflict patrolling, ie Bougainville, poachers)
1 MR tanker (secondary minor lift capability for small deployments/added capacity)
1 MRV (primary lift with added self-protection ie phalanx or similar CIWS)
1 Littoral (covers navy 'other' tasks through modularity ie divers/survey/civ tasks)
4 IPVs (local needs ie illegal fisheries/civ tasks/customs)
3 fully gucci naval 90s/60s (90s for commonality with RNZAF or 60s with RAN)
2 marinsed 90s/60s (basic less sensors, more for lift and supply)
2 marinised A109s (commonality with RNZAF, again basic)
-NFH90s would keep fleet types down but if not fully squared then romeo60s maybe turn out a better option in the long run. Also think Sweden has a naval version of A109 (with shorter tail and presumably folding rotors, strengthened landing gear) so marinised variants are out there and are surely cheaper to aqquire and operate then a 90/60 type.
No vastly drastic pipe dream numbers or classes but enough to do the job effectively.
The helos would cover the 3 frigates, 2 support vessels and 2 OPVs taking into account not every vessel will be at sea at any given time or that a ship will in fact require helo support on every deployment to cover maintanence, training and availability(maybe more efficient maint cycles would be required).
The slim numbers are for 1 for 1 seasprites and the 2 109s being freed up from when RNZAF gets the extra 3 frames. More numbers and fully specced would obviously make life easier but I am just accounting for our 'financial' constraints and govt way of thinking of make due, make it work. Somehow aircraft fleets are not like LAVIIIs and instead you get bare minimum.
The only other extra that has not already been mooted by govt shipwise (or at least was) was the 3rd frigate which I think is operationally required to maintain at least 1 always available for new/unexpected/urgent tasking. It is also a big ticket item so in these lean times a big ask when added to the list of other capabilities, if done properly anyway.
Somebody in the 1980's pinched (or neglected to return to put it more kindly) a parachute from the RNZAF S & S boys and his IPC crew then proceeded to perform para-sailing experiments Club Med style.
One of the water-skiing incidents happened at Milford Sound. An ex crew member told me they got snapped because a very senior defence force person holidaying with his foreign guests saw it happen from a nearby tourist boat. Needless to say a very dim view was taken of it by COMAUCK.
It wasn't us that liberated the chute. Probably the crew off the Moa. If we had acquired a chute you wouldn't have known who had taken it. I've got photos of us skiing in the Sounds. We used to pick are quiet location because a few Admirals had bachs around the Sounds. IPCs could only do 12 knots and that was down hill woth a tail wind. If riding the boogy board had to be on the ball or othewise joined the submarine service real quick because it would dive real quick.
Subs- laughable actually: limited NZ useful options, expensive, technically intensive, crew intensive(training and retention wise), therefore would have been a waste of time, money and capability. Leave them to the big navies.
OPVs- We maintain the frigates to take care of the high end tasks, OPVs for the low end and anything in between shared dependant on which end of the scale it falls. Lets be honest NZ low end is anything from a disgruntled poacher to a drug smuggleing pirate so do we need up-gunned, sensored up, gucci OPVs that will spend most of their life re-supplying DOC islands, flying the flag in the islands and patrolling the southern ocean.
Equip the types properly for their relevant tasks and focus instead of trying to have everyship in the fleet at its 'max' potential. On the anti-piracy subject our govt has twice declined sending frigates so what would be the point of fitting out more ships to be able to do the job. Surely the 2 ANZACS are not just for excercises and NZ ops otherwise they are a waste and we would just get more numbers of a smaller class but the fact is frigates give us reach, options and punch therefore are IMHO needed (although I once thought that about ACF and look what happened).
helos- again the same, tailor to suit their respective tasks(or majority of) so no need for every one to be a overly expensive asset for no real need.
The RNZN of tommorow I would like to see and fitted out accordingly is therefore:
3 frigates (concentrate on these for mid-major combat,ie 99 ET, MEAO anti-piracy))
2 OPVs (for the low end/ minimum conflict patrolling, ie Bougainville, poachers)
1 MR tanker (secondary minor lift capability for small deployments/added capacity)
1 MRV (primary lift with added self-protection ie phalanx or similar CIWS)
1 Littoral (covers navy 'other' tasks through modularity ie divers/survey/civ tasks)
4 IPVs (local needs ie illegal fisheries/civ tasks/customs)
3 fully gucci naval 90s/60s (90s for commonality with RNZAF or 60s with RAN)
2 marinsed 90s/60s (basic less sensors, more for lift and supply)
2 marinised A109s (commonality with RNZAF, again basic)
-NFH90s would keep fleet types down but if not fully squared then romeo60s maybe turn out a better option in the long run. Also think Sweden has a naval version of A109 (with shorter tail and presumably folding rotors, strengthened landing gear) so marinised variants are out there and are surely cheaper to aqquire and operate then a 90/60 type.
No vastly drastic pipe dream numbers or classes but enough to do the job effectively.
The helos would cover the 3 frigates, 2 support vessels and 2 OPVs taking into account not every vessel will be at sea at any given time or that a ship will in fact require helo support on every deployment to cover maintanence, training and availability(maybe more efficient maint cycles would be required).
The slim numbers are for 1 for 1 seasprites and the 2 109s being freed up from when RNZAF gets the extra 3 frames. More numbers and fully specced would obviously make life easier but I am just accounting for our 'financial' constraints and govt way of thinking of make due, make it work. Somehow aircraft fleets are not like LAVIIIs and instead you get bare minimum.
The only other extra that has not already been mooted by govt shipwise (or at least was) was the 3rd frigate which I think is operationally required to maintain at least 1 always available for new/unexpected/urgent tasking. It is also a big ticket item so in these lean times a big ask when added to the list of other capabilities, if done properly anyway.
Just my thoughts anyway
Agre on most except the OPVs. I reckon we ned another 2 max 3, with a 57mm or 76mm gun up for'ard. Yes the NZG declined twice to send frigate for the antipracy TF but I would surmise because we didn't have one available. The OPVs would be ideal for that role. Also the extra OPVs means we can have a greater presence in the SW Pacific and the Southern Ocean. A 3rd frigate is definitely needed. My reckonoing is that having 4 or 5 OPVs takes some of the pressure of the frigates and means that they get to have maintenace done when it is due and it's con been alwys put off because of operational requirements. Secondly reduces wera and tear on frigates, so they will last longer in a better condition. Also means more preventative maintenance, that does not need dockyard support, is done. In the long term this may be a very cost effective option.
It wasn't us that liberated the chute. Probably the crew off the Moa. If we had acquired a chute you wouldn't have known who had taken it. I've got photos of us skiing in the Sounds. We used to pick are quiet location because a few Admirals had bachs around the Sounds. IPCs could only do 12 knots and that was down hill woth a tail wind. If riding the boogy board had to be on the ball or othewise joined the submarine service real quick because it would dive real quick.
The waterskiing trick was done on the Taupo in the early to mid 80's. Those Lake class were a bit quicker than the Moa's - frankly what wasn't - though a lot wobblier when on the watery stuff of course. You are going to have to put the more amusing snaps up on the DT gallery Ngati.
The waterskiing trick was done on the Taupo in the early to mid 80's. Those Lake class were a bit quicker than the Moa's - frankly what wasn't - though a lot wobblier when on the watery stuff of course. You are going to have to put the more amusing snaps up on the DT gallery Ngati.
Yes I will and I never said I was on the Moa, which I wasn't. I just blamed them for acquiring a certain item. They also got blame for the misappropriation of a brand new dunny that was sitting on the jetty at the Portage in the Sounds one FTP. It was another IPC that "borrowed" it because the crew were sick of a certain CPO whinging about not having a proper head to sit on. I wasn't on that trip so no photos. I have to dig some photos out. they are in a box somewhere.
- very embarrassing, but I thought I should add it for thread completeness - it will be interesting to see the eventual report into the incident.
. 
