Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[chis73]

An interesting find while doing a google search today for "hmnzs endeavour replacement":

Independent Conceptual Capability Study for the HMNZS Endeavour Replacement Project: OnBid

Good to see some progress at last. I wonder if this means the 2018-2019 timeframe has changed?

Chis73

 

[ngatimozart]

An interesting find while doing a google search today for "hmnzs endeavour replacement":

Independent Conceptual Capability Study for the HMNZS Endeavour Replacement Project: OnBid

Good to see some progress at last. I wonder if this means the 2018-2019 timeframe has changed?

Chis73

Don't get your hopes up. This is just the beginning. All they have done is called for bids for the conceptual study - doesn't mean that they have to accept any tender or act upon it.

 

[Vanguard]

I doubt the JSS would be within the NZDF's budget range for a replacement, even a smaller version based on the Rotterdam is going to be over $200 million, for less they could buy something like the Wave Knight class from Britain which is probably to big for New Zealand but has the required armaments.

Rolls Royce offered a 14, 000 dwt vessel to the RFA for their MARS program which could be an idea. It has good cargo space, is relatively cheap and would have the armament facilities that New Zealand wants.

Other potential options could be a new version of the Cheonji Class if we were to buy cheap from Asia. There is also the Mashu class from Japan or one of its smaller sister classes (i.e. Towada).

 

[donuteater]

So why ask the question? New Zealand isn't powerful enough without the Australians, and neither will mount a military operation without the support of the rest of the Pacific forum nations.

Australia soon will be powerful enough when we get our LHD's.

 

[ngatimozart]

So why ask the question? New Zealand isn't powerful enough without the Australians, and neither will mount a military operation without the support of the rest of the Pacific forum nations.

Australia soon will be powerful enough when we get our LHD's.

What are you going on about? Exactly who are NZ and Australia supposed to be mounting an operation against? What is the context?

 

[Volkodav]

What are you going on about? Exactly who are NZ and Australia supposed to be mounting an operation against? What is the context?

Perhaps hes thinking of the Kamerians and/or the Masurians. They were who we usually trained to fight when I was in uniform.nfloorl:

What everyone needs, invented enemies whose weaknesses perfectly fit your strengths allowing you to ignore the capabilities that will be required for real world senerios.

 

[t68]

double post

 

[t68]

Australia soon will be powerful enough when we get our LHD's.

2x LHD wont make Australia any more powerful than we currently are, all the Canberra’s/Bay class will do is make the ADF more flexible compared the previous RAN assets on how it responses to humanitarian/low intensity events, we wont be conducting high intensity over the horizon beach landings without additional assets.

In a few years time Australia and New Zealand combined has the starting blocks to make a fairly decent task force for a similar mission like INTERFET in 1999 without outside assistance, hope fully NZ will go the way of the RAN Sea 5000 NGC.

Indecently on Fox this afternoon featured the USCG Bertholf on the show Mighty Ships, looks like a handy piece of kit, RNZN would do all right with a couple up armed versions of these running around the South Pacific.

 

[Vanguard]

The Legend Class is offered as a Light Frigate as well and was suggested as a possible option if the LCS program failed or even as an LCS candidate. It could be an option for New Zealand but I doubt the funding is there at the moment for another big naval program before the Anzacs are due for replacement. Especially with the Air Force needing new transport jets and other key requirements.

 

[ngatimozart]

2x LHD wont make Australia any more powerful than we currently are, all the Canberra’s/Bay class will do is make the ADF more flexible compared the previous RAN assets on how it responses to humanitarian/low intensity events, we wont be conducting high intensity over the horizon beach landings without additional assets.

In a few years time Australia and New Zealand combined has the starting blocks to make a fairly decent task force for a similar mission like INTERFET in 1999 without outside assistance, hope fully NZ will go the way of the RAN Sea 5000 NGC.

Indecently on Fox this afternoon featured the USCG Bertholf on the show Mighty Ships, looks like a handy piece of kit, RNZN would do all right with a couple up armed versions of these running around the South Pacific.

Actually 2 or 3 more of the Protector class OPVs we have, built to milspecs with helo magazines and a bit more armament on them. Remount the 25mm Bushmaster down aft over the hanger or slightly fo'ard of that and mount an auto 57mm in its place fo'ard. M2 .50 cal port & starboard and x number MAG 58 7.62mms where they can be best suited. I've been following the 76mm Vs the 57mm discussion on the RAN thread and maybe an auto 76mm instead of a 57mm. That would give us vessels that would be good for South Pacific plus we know they can operate around and in Antarctica. They would also IMHO be good for the anti-piracy ops off Somalia. Wouldn't cost as much as a frigate and would give more capability than present, but less cost and take some pressure of frigates. Put a platoon of crunchies aboard for anti-piracy ops and let em loose on pirates. Since the US have taken the fight ashore (about time too) I think others will now. For helo, a marinised A109 with light attack capability. They are cheap (according to our PM) and small enough.

 

[Lucasnz]

Actually 2 or 3 more of the Protector class OPVs we have, built to milspecs with helo magazines and a bit more armament on them. Remount the 25mm Bushmaster down aft over the hanger or slightly fo'ard of that and mount an auto 57mm in its place fo'ard. M2 .50 cal port & starboard and x number MAG 58 7.62mms where they can be best suited. Since the US have taken the fight ashore (about time too) I think others will now. For helo, a marinised A109 with light attack capability. They are cheap (according to our PM) and small enough.

Upgrading to Milspec might be a bit to costly and lead us down the LCS path when the USN made a raft of changes to the design. Acquiring a OPV without the ice belt would free the weight up for a 57mm. I've come to the opinion the 57 is good for low end operations but for mid to high end operations the sustained fire and increased explosive capability of the 76mm outweighs the Rapid Fire of the 57mm.

If you're talking low end policing like piracy then is Milspec really needed. Based on current ops it seems to me range and endurance are some of key requirements.

MSI offers a version of the 25mm with 3 x Mistral Missiles mounted so the upgrade could add a further capability.

I agree about the A109, maybe with a mod that would allow LWT to be carried like the WASP.

 

[ngatimozart]

Upgrading to Milspec might be a bit to costly and lead us down the LCS path when the USN made a raft of changes to the design. Acquiring a OPV without the ice belt would free the weight up for a 57mm. I've come to the opinion the 57 is good for low end operations but for mid to high end operations the sustained fire and increased explosive capability of the 76mm outweighs the Rapid Fire of the 57mm.

If you're talking low end policing like piracy then is Milspec really needed. Based on current ops it seems to me range and endurance are some of key requirements.

MSI offers a version of the 25mm with 3 x Mistral Missiles mounted so the upgrade could add a further capability.

I agree about the A109, maybe with a mod that would allow LWT to be carried like the WASP.

Eurocopter have a variant of the A109 that is armed as LAH, but yes the LWT would be a good option if we were going to give the OPVs ASW capability. Yes when I think about your comment on milspec it wouldn't be necessary but we'd need to keep the icebelt. That way we'd have 4 - 5 Protector OPVs with same specs and no orphans. Also from what I saw on the RAN thread we wouldn't need to buy 5 main guns because IIRC there are modular variants available but then they also mentioned that having the modular capability carries its own penalties as well. We'd still have to install a helo magazine.

 

[MrConservative]

The 109 is a brilliant bird and I agree we could do with more – particularly in the maritime support role. We are pencilled in for 3 extra 109 Powers for the training role – but in my humble opinion 5 of the LUH is not enough. The future rotary study done by the NZDF/MinDef was back in 2003 and came up with the magic number of 8 airframes. In the context of a decade later it should 6 LUH in the Army/MAOT/CT support role, 3 Powers in the training role and another 3 LUH speced for the maritime support role. About those leased RAN 109 Powers – being replaced by the Bell 429. Raytheon will be looking for a home for them in a couple of years – cheeky offer time Mr Coleman.

 

[mug]

Remount the 25mm Bushmaster down aft over the hanger or slightly fo'ard of that

Might be a bit tricky with two funnels significantly obscuring the firing arcs.

 

[alexsa]

Actually 2 or 3 more of the Protector class OPVs we have, built to milspecs with helo magazines and a bit more armament on them. Remount the 25mm Bushmaster down aft over the hanger or slightly fo'ard of that and mount an auto 57mm in its place fo'ard. M2 .50 cal port & starboard and x number MAG 58 7.62mms where they can be best suited. I've been following the 76mm Vs the 57mm discussion on the RAN thread and maybe an auto 76mm instead of a 57mm. That would give us vessels that would be good for South Pacific plus we know they can operate around and in Antarctica. They would also IMHO be good for the anti-piracy ops off Somalia. Wouldn't cost as much as a frigate and would give more capability than present, but less cost and take some pressure of frigates. Put a platoon of crunchies aboard for anti-piracy ops and let em loose on pirates. Since the US have taken the fight ashore (about time too) I think others will now. For helo, a marinised A109 with light attack capability. They are cheap (according to our PM) and small enough.

All well and good but you cannot simply bolt things onto a design as any weapon needs structural support and supporting FC systems. A a bigger gun requires more structure and all the bits and bobs you are looking at add weight. In this case top weight.

The 57mm would appear to have less impact on structure but the 76mm would require quite substancial redesign due to the fact a gun house is required to be situated under the mount in what is now accomodation. If you want more rounds that the 80 to 85 (depending on version) contained in the rotary mag then you also need a hoised to the gun house from the magazine.



Italian 76 mm/62 (3") Compact, SR and USA 76 mm/62 (3") Mark 75

Given a 76mm adds 8.5 tonnes above the CoG fitting of a such a system may required lengthering of the hull to cater for the additional space and weight for the gun and its FC system. This all of a sudden becomes a new design and, while it may be entirely practical, is not likely to be as simple as you suggest it may be.

 

[alexsa]

Upgrading to Milspec might be a bit to costly and lead us down the LCS path when the USN made a raft of changes to the design. Acquiring a OPV without the ice belt would free the weight up for a 57mm. I've come to the opinion the 57 is good for low end operations but for mid to high end operations the sustained fire and increased explosive capability of the 76mm outweighs the Rapid Fire of the 57mm.
.

I cannot accuraetly assess how much weight you would save by deleting structure related to the ice class notation, however, additional structure wouel be required to support the mount and any FC. Without quite a bit of redesign I think you would have problems give the weight distribution issues.

Ice class reinforcing tends to be mainly below the CoG where all the mass associated with the 57mm (even with minimal deck penitration ) is above the CoG. Noting the mount without ammunition is 7.5 tonnes this is no small issue and added to that is structural support, FC, ammunition etc etc. Finally it si possible that the power supply of the vessel may need to have additional capacity.

As noted above I am not running the idea down as impractical but making the point this is likely to end up as a substancial redesign with greater cost and risk rather than being cheap and cheerful.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Australia soon will be powerful enough when we get our LHD's.

australia is not going to militarily and unilaterally act in the PACRIM without discussing anything with allies first

its got little to do with military power, its about resolving and attending to issues via political means and concensus with like minded partners

military response is the last card

I'd add, that in a number of areas in the PACRIM, the kiwis are regarded as the lead player, and thats recognised by Aust, the US and France.

 

[htbrst]

On the midday news this afternoon there was mention that at the joint cabinet meeting being held today between the NZ and AU cabinets, there was expected to be an announcement by the defence ministers of the "joint purchase of a Navy ship by the two countries" or words to that effect.

Being a sunday, the news sites are a bit slack at updating their websites... and there hasn't been any words to that effect come out yet.

If this isn't just the media getting confused with prior announcements of AU's access to HMNZS Canterbury - Does anyone have any ideas what they are talking about ?:coffee

 

[htbrst]

Found a quote on the TVNZ Website here:

Trans-Tasman joint cabinet meeting kicks off | POLITICS News

"Defence Minister Jonathan Coleman has been meeting his Australian counterpart this morning, with closer ties in the defence expected to be discussed with an announcement due this afternoon. That's expected to include a deal to buy vessels together."

Buying Vessels together is a bit different to a joint ship - but the question is still out there - what vessels ?

Perhaps an OCV purchase as the littoral ship mentioned in the NZ whitepaper a while ago ? Hopefully we find out soon !

 

[ngatimozart]

On the midday news this afternoon there was mention that at the joint cabinet meeting being held today between the NZ and AU cabinets, there was expected to be an announcement by the defence ministers of the "joint purchase of a Navy ship by the two countries" or words to that effect.

Being a sunday, the news sites are a bit slack at updating their websites... and there hasn't been any words to that effect come out yet.

If this isn't just the media getting confused with prior announcements of AU's access to HMNZS Canterbury - Does anyone have any ideas what they are talking about ?:coffee

I caught the tail end of the midday news on MoreFM and something was said about a joint purchase of a navy frigate. To the media if it's painted battleship grey and flies the white ensign it's gotta be a frigate, even if it has wings and breathes fire :dance I've had a look at the 3News site and all they've said is that the Defence Ministers have agreed to closer cooperation between NZDF and the ADF including technology and purchasing. This cooperation will be include both civilian and military personnel. I haven't been able to find a joint statement yet. http://www.3news.co.nz/NZ-and-Australia-....11/Default.aspx

I had a look at the TVNZ one and that was updated at 13:15 where as the 3News one was updated at 14:41