New Zealand awards contract for $500 Million Dollar Project "Protector".

[Aussie Digger]

ADI Contracted to Supply MSI Gun Systems for Project Protector

(Source: ADI Ltd.; issued March 3, 2005)

ADI Limited (Australia) has been awarded the contract to supply the main gun systems for the New Zealand Ministry of Defence’s Project Protector program by the lead contractor, Tenix Defence Pty Ltd.

The systems are the MSI DS25M designed by MSI-Defence Systems, UK. This modern modular design enables a smaller calibre gun system to be configured in virtually any format to meet the full spectrum of potential naval configurations, from manned, with basic sighting, to full autonomous control by a ship’s systems or control at a remote station.

The systems for the Protector vessels will incorporate the ATK 25mm M242 Bushmaster cannon, common to the NZ Army’s light armoured vehicles, giving the navy commonality of ammunition and cannon training and support.

“ADI has chosen to continue collaborating with MSI to offer new supply and through life support for the MSI modular gun systems. Previously we produced six 30mm MSI gun systems for the Royal Australian Navy's Huon Class minehunters,†said Mr Lucio Di Bartolomeo, ADI’s managing director.

“ADI considers the MSI modular gun system as the best in the market. It is extremely well designed, very robust, while maintaining a lightweight footprint.

“Its marinisation is excellent. This is critical in achieving reliability and low through life costs. This has resulted in a system capable of withstanding the pounding from heavy seas and green water exposure while then continuing to deliver the best reliability and availability of the systems currently available in the market.â€

MSI has well over a hundred units in service with a range of navies.

Tenix was awarded the Protector Project in July 2004 after an extensive competition involving over 25 shipbuilders worldwide. The Protector fleet will comprise one multi role vessel, two offshore patrol vessels and four inshore patrol vessels to be progressively delivered in 2006 and 2007. The MSI gun systems will be installed on the MRV and the two offshore patrol vessels. Tenix tendered the MSI gun in its baseline offer to the MoD and has been negotiating with ADI to conclude these contractual arrangements now in place.

ADI Limited is a major supplier to the Australian and New Zealand Navy and Army of small arms and medium and large calibre guns systems. It provides logistic support for the majority of the ADF’s gun systems. ADI is also the primary supplier of munitions to the ADF. It constructs and maintains naval ships; designs and integrates combat systems, aviation mission systems and naval communications equipment; designs and manufactures high mobility and protected military and emergency response vehicles.

MSI-Defence Systems is a major company within the UK based MS International Group with its head office and manufacturing facility in Norwich, UK and an important support establishment in Weymouth, UK. It plays a leading role in the design, development and supply of naval systems unrivalled in reliability, flexibility and performance.

-ends-

Well so much for the NZ MOD's stated desire to use these ships for military purposes. This armament will make these ships suitable for basic patrol duties only. They will apparently possess no other defensive armament other than machine guns, meaning even the MRV cannot be used in even a low threat zone... Some replacement for the Leander Class frigate...

The Typhoon 25mm gun is to be the main armament for the RNZN MRV and OPV. They will have a secondary armament of 0.50 Cal HMG's as well. This announcement was made on the 3rd of March 2005 and I originally posted it on the 1st page of this thread.

I think my rather sarcastic comment about the end of RNZN desire to actually use these ships for military operations now really kiicked this thread into gear...

 

[EnigmaNZ]

A contract has been signed for the 25 mm cannon for the MRV and OPV but as to that being their main gun, it doesn't say that. Here is the guidelines from the Ministery of Defence site.
http://www.defence.govt.nz/public_docs/mfr/6cap-req-pol-gaps.shtml

 

[EnigmaNZ]

My mistake, it does say "main gun'' Hopefully a case of "fitted for but not with" roll on the National government sheese. Still I suppose the thinking is the frigates handles any major confrontation, and the 25 mil keeps crew numbers and costs down.

 

[Aussie Digger]

I'm not trying to be "superior" or anything, but this is a strange decision by the RNZN and NZ Government. This weapon system is limited to low level close-in self defence missions. It is not a replacement for a Phalanx type capability and will provide only extremely limited air defence and surface attack capabilities...

The RAN for instance has applied to the Australian Government for funding to allow for the same Typhoon 25mm gun mounting system to be fitted to ALL major RAN surface ships (ANZAC Frigates, FFG Frigates, HMAS Manoora, Kanimbla, Tobruk and Success and their eventual replacements) as a secondary weapon system to defend against USS Cole type attacks...

From the "artist" versions I've seen of the RNZN OPV's the 25mm gun is mounted on the front deck of the craft, much like the Australian Armidale Class Patrol Boats. Not sure about the MRV, but I'm not sure if a "main gun" system can be "fitted for but not with"? Maybe GF or someone knowledgeable about boats can answer this?

 

[gf0012-aust]

From the "artist" versions I've seen of the RNZN OPV's the 25mm gun is mounted on the front deck of the craft, much like the Australian Armidale Class Patrol Boats. Not sure about the MRV, but I'm not sure if a "main gun" system can be "fitted for but not with"?

They're a non-intrusive system - so IMV it makes sense to fit the suckers to as amny boats as possible. Even if that just means fitting bases so that weapons can be shifted between hulls as necessary (eg Armidales/Customs etc...)

Logistically it makes sense to fit it to any hull that doesn't need hull/topdeck/structural changes. There isn't enough recoil in them to preclude them from a strengthened deck.

 

[EnigmaNZ]

Published in Janes Navy International April 2002

Rear Admiral Peter McHaffie, Chief of Naval Staff of the Royal New Zealand Navy, talks to Richard Scott


The projected MRV will be ice-strengthened for maritime patrol operations in the Southern Ocean. Other requirements include long range, a limited tactical sealift capability (including transport of Army LAV III light armoured vehicles), support and sustainment for the deployed group for up to 30 days, and the ability to offload personnel and equipment without access to port facilities. The ship will also take over the training role currently performed by Canterbury.

Rear Adm McHaffie noted that “the MRV will be able to support disaster relief operations in the South Pacific as a major humanitarian role. For that, you will be using helicopters and landing sizeable amounts of equipment ashore in remote areas. That drives the requirement to land across a beach rather than through a port. That also gives you the ability to land army equipment and support army operations ashore.â€

He added: “The funding available for the MRV is NZ$250 million. That of course will have an impact on the size and type of vessel. What we’re going to do is go to industry, tell them how much money we have, and then ask them to best satisfy our capability requirements. We’re not going to dictate the design solution to them – it will be cost and capability driven.â€

With regard to the OPVs, Rear Adm McHaffie points out that a length of about 80m is regarded as the minimum to cope with the sea conditions encountered in the New Zealand economic exclusion zone. “That is driven by sea state and hull shape. But an advantage of having a vessel of that length is that we can then look seriously at helicopter operations from the vessel. If the OPVs can operate our new SH-2G helicopter then that is a definite plus. If there is some form of hangar facility available, than that’s even better.â€

With the cost of the MRV taking half the budget on its own, plus the 2 OPV and the 4 IPV, probably a good idea to get hulls in the water while the will is there, the green members of government are a vocal lot when mention is made of weapons and anything military, gets the hulls built then quietly upgrade hehe, a new form of "stealth" eh.
There are pics of the MRV, OPV and IPV below.

 

[EnigmaNZ]

Hmm, try pics again

 

[EnigmaNZ]

Here are pics of what the MRV and OPV are supposed to be like.

 

[EnigmaNZ]

Here is the IPV. I seem to be hitting some image limit. Well this is the site anyways.
http://www.defence.govt.nz/public_docs/soi2005/part2-outcls-mgmtep.shtml

 

[Jason_kiwi]

I think NZ is doing awesome!!!!!
we have got one of the best DF's for our size
I mean look at what we have purchased...
105 lavs
352 lovs
24 anti armour weapons
direct fire support weapons
12 NH90's
Air defence missiles
1 MRV
2 OPV
4 IPV
Upgraded c-130's and orions with missiles
Ans getting upgraded Frigates
Wow!!!
NZ is gettin good

 

[Supe]

12 NH90's? I've not seen that confirmed. (I'd like to see the Kiwis get nothing less than 12 but we'll see) The MRV and OPV will be essentially defended by pop guns. As Aussie Digger has stated, the proposed main armarment "will provide only extremely limited air defence and surface attack capabilities..." Having something a bit more substantial firepower wise on these ships makes for great insurance. Those Typhoon's spell 'defence done cheap'.


Regarding the Orion upgrade. I see no mention of weapons upgrades... (link)

Under the deal signed by Burton, the Orions will get new radars and electronic sensors, communications and navigation systems

 

[EnigmaNZ]

Hi Jason, good to see your enthusiam. Here are some images of the kiwi Mistals.
http://riv.co.nz/rnza/hist/local/mistral.htm
Prior to the Mistral, I think we fielded the Bofors Rbs 70 SAM, that was getting back into the 1980's and "90's. The Mistral we have had since 1999, but we only acquired the launching system, the new purchases are of the alerting and cueing system for the Mistral very low level air defence system (VLLADS) that finds the targets and ensures they are not friendly A/C.
http://www.defence.govt.nz/Industry/vllad.shtml
Image of the A/C system
http://www.defence.govt.nz/Industry/vllad-image.shtml
BTW, this properly belongs in Land Forces Jason

 

[Aussie Digger]

Jason, it's good to see your enthusiasm but here's some facts; NZ doesn't yet have upgraded ANZAC frigates, (the project isn't even approved yet, let alone contracts signed), and only possessing 2 means the RNZN can't deploy a frigate for more than 6 months and still be able to rotate your forces.

It's Orions and Hercules have yet to be upgraded and no program has been announced to acquire a missile capability for the Orions, a Torpedo replacement program has been announced, but not yet approved.
The MRV, OPV and IPV's are going to be extremely limited capabilities. The MRV for instance, will only have a company lift capability...

The Mistral SAM's are NZ's first ever SAM capability IIRC. The alerting and cueing system will greatly improve their capability, which is basically stand alone at present... They bought them after the Brits got a bit uptight at having to provide basic low level air defence for NZ's deployed force to Bosnia.

Makes you wonder why politicians think other Countries won't have a problem providing for the capabilities that NZ has deliberately chosen not to acquire...

 

[EnigmaNZ]

The MU90 torpedo
"It is presently in mass production for Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Poland and selected, as single source, by Australia and New Zealand."
http://www.naval-technology.com/contractors/missiles/eurotorp/

I am sure I read recently that we had selected the same torpedo as the Australians, I remember being disappointed it was not the US mk 50, until I read the specs on the MU90. I am going to hunt it down. Will post when I find the article.

 

[Jason_kiwi]

Back to the project protector ships the NZ ships haven't fired a shot in anger for ages so y spend so much money arming them??? I am sure if there was a threat they would army them.Plus the helecopters on board will provide great fire power.

The anzacs...well aussie has 5 times NZ's population so they should have 5 times the amount of frigates...they dont. The project of upgrading the anzacs is going to be decided soon.

The IPV's are perfect for NZ. The opvs have good enough armarment with there helis:25mm cannon,50 cals,missiles,torpedos,etc.

I think they will definately get 12 NH90's

The MRV is perfect for NZ's needs.

 

[Jason_kiwi]

Please got to http://www.defence.govt.nz/public_docs/ltdp2004/contents.shtml


It will show you how commited NZ is to defence.

Please read most of it...all of the projects.

 

[Supe]

Back to the project protector ships the NZ ships haven't fired a shot in anger for ages so y spend so much money arming them???

With that mindset, why arm them at all? You could have fake guns with little banners that say Bang! when you press the trigger. Lets go even further, why have ships at all? Ditto to to the new LAV's and anything else defence related. By your reasoning, you could conclude there is no need for them. Most here would know the folly of that but it appears that those responsible for such decisions in NZ clearly don't. Some lessons are learn't the hard way.

The opvs have good enough armarment with there helis:25mm cannon,50 cals,missiles,torpedos,etc.

I agree. Pefect platforms for RAMSI type operations where danger is slight. God forbid, they go anywhere near a high threat environment though.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Actually Jason, Australia's current frigate force is at 12 frigates, so that's 6 times NZ's force and the difference in capabilities between Australian and NZ frigates is so vast as to be almost incompatible. 3 out of 6 RAN ANZAC frigates are already equipped with ESSM.

The 2 remaining ANZAC frigates that are to be delivered by June 2006 will have ESSM fitted as new and the remaining 3 ANZAC frigates will be equipped in due course.

HMAS Warramunga (ANZAC 05) has already been fitted with Harpoon Block II. The remainder of the RAN ANZAC fleet is to be fitted out by December 05. I could go on about the differences, but it's a pointless and rather childish game...

The point of arming a ship is to allow it to be used in an operational environment. If you want to be able to put your ships in harm's way they need to be able to defend themselves. If they can't defend themselves adequately, (which non-upgraded ANZAC's arguably can't), they are next to useless.

Neither the MRV, OPV or IPV are to be equipped with missiles, torpedo's etc. The 25mm and 50 cals are it. Not even the infamous "fitted for but not with" is being proposed for these ships...

I have read NZ's project list. The list of kit seems impressive, but most of the projects have yet to be approved and is the basic necessities of modern warfare, nothing more. Plus, you should never count on receiving defence capability until you have the weapon in your hands...

 

[EnigmaNZ]

The truth of the matter Jason is that NZ has let it's Defence budget slip significantly over the years vis a vis Australia and other nations. Less money equals less bang. The IPV OPV MRV are possibly envisaged to have to shot at nothing more than the odd trawler in our fishing zone, they are armed as auxilaries, as is the Endeavour, which only has light arms. When the contracts for Project Protector were being tendered out, it was thought publicly that the NZ$500 million available would only be enough for the MRV and OPV, the Moa class were to be upgraded. There seems to have been a slight massaging of the budget, less bang but 4 more IPV hulls, the Moa with their 12 knots were never good enough to act as a deterent to a 20 knot trawler.
Part of the problem Jason, I feel, is the way the budget is broken down these days. Once the budget would have read "11 billion for health, $11 billion for education, $1 billion for defence and everyone was happy" Today it is read "an additional $50 million for 2000 more cataract operations, and additional $30 million for 500 more hip operations, an additional $7 million for low decile schools, an additional $4 billion over the next 10 years for defence" and people start complaining about health waiting lists, low benefit levels etc and how all the problems in their particular area could be solved with that obscene amount going on "toys for arm chair generals" We now have vocal Green MPs that make no secret of their desire to reduce defence to IPVs and OPVs only. It puts defence funding on the back foot, and politically unpopular,having to explain why money needs to be spent on guns instead of hip operations.
A lot of the new defence funding merely covers inflation, upgrading infrastructure that is long overdue, eg housing that is generally old and run down, bringing salaries up to the levels of those in the private sector, and bringing capabilties up to very limited standards so we can operate with others in peacekeeping.

 

[Jason_kiwi]

I said that they have helis which are armed with torpedos and missiles.

how many frigates will the aussies have when they finish decomishining the older ones???
about 8???