Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
A lot of NZers and NZ politicians are tree hugging hippies who think putting offensive weapons on ships is too aggressive for our peace loving nation.

When NZ ordered P-8s there were suggestions in parliament that they not be armed at all. Seriously. Bunch of filthy hippies.
Calling NZers and their pollies hippies is incorrect. I suspect they are more like pseudo Canadians, people who expect endless social handouts funded by the poor fools that actually produce wealth. They remain totally ignorant about the geopolitical realities today because they are too busy whining for more freebies.
 

oldsig127

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Calling NZers and their pollies hippies is incorrect. I suspect they are more like pseudo Canadians, people who expect endless social handouts funded by the poor fools that actually produce wealth. They remain totally ignorant about the geopolitical realities today because they are too busy whining for more freebies.
I think this is profoundly unfair to our trans Tasman neighbours. I'm quite sure that they, in general, are well aware of what is happening in the world and their place and responsibilities, but their electoral system fails them in the same way as many do - including Australia's - by almost ensuring a fairly toothless government which is hostage to small factions that may not be offended. Add their apparently benign position and it is quite easy to ignore defence in favour of policies which will maintain their positions untroubled by their own putative allies. After all, the voters have been told for 30+ years that NZ faces no military threat (except from France and the USA)
 

Novascotiaboy

Active Member
Watching Ret. Admiral Kevin McCoy, President of Irving Shipbuilding, on local Halifax news talking about the recently launched AOPS1 the yet to be named "HMCS Harry Dewolfe"

One of the questions asked was is Irving looking for foreign sales. One country who wishes to remain anonymous at this time is looking.

I wonder if this country could be NZ?
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Watching Ret. Admiral Kevin McCoy, President of Irving Shipbuilding, on local Halifax news talking about the recently launched AOPS1 the yet to be named "HMCS Harry Dewolfe"

One of the questions asked was is Irving looking for foreign sales. One country who wishes to remain anonymous at this time is looking.

I wonder if this country could be NZ?
Probably, it would be a useful addition to the RNZN.

It is becoming the Jacinta and Justin marriage made in heaven. We could then move the Shakey Isles to the BC coast so they could share that side of the “ring of fire” with the effect that the Kiwis would all stop playing Rugby and take up Ice Hockey.
The result would be that our poor suffering Wallabies would not get flogged so often
 

spoz

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Watching Ret. Admiral Kevin McCoy, President of Irving Shipbuilding, on local Halifax news talking about the recently launched AOPS1 the yet to be named "HMCS Harry Dewolfe"

One of the questions asked was is Irving looking for foreign sales. One country who wishes to remain anonymous at this time is looking.

I wonder if this country could be NZ?
If they are, Kiwi would be better off going back to Norway to buy the original, it seems to be a lot less pricey.
 

beegee

Active Member
Watching Ret. Admiral Kevin McCoy, President of Irving Shipbuilding, on local Halifax news talking about the recently launched AOPS1 the yet to be named "HMCS Harry Dewolfe"

One of the questions asked was is Irving looking for foreign sales. One country who wishes to remain anonymous at this time is looking.

I wonder if this country could be NZ?
It probably is. The navy is looking for an ice capable third OPV for southern ocean patrol duties and the Dewolfe would fit the requirements perfectly, but... that sticker price, ouch. Maybe you could do us a cheap deal in compensation for over charging us on the frigate upgrade?:p
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Probably, it would be a useful addition to the RNZN.

It is becoming the Jacinta and Justin marriage made in heaven. We could then move the Shakey Isles to the BC coast so they could share that side of the “ring of fire” with the effect that the Kiwis would all stop playing Rugby and take up Ice Hockey.
The result would be that our poor suffering Wallabies would not get flogged so often
The ship would definitely be. But regarding the rugger, no such luck. The Canucks would get a lot better and become probably as good as Los Pumas :D
Watching Ret. Admiral Kevin McCoy, President of Irving Shipbuilding, on local Halifax news talking about the recently launched AOPS1 the yet to be named "HMCS Harry Dewolfe"

One of the questions asked was is Irving looking for foreign sales. One country who wishes to remain anonymous at this time is looking.

I wonder if this country could be NZ?
Bloody hope not. Whilst it would be ideal for our needs, a Canadian built one would be as expensive as hell, unless Justin gives Jacinda a significant others discount.
Having exactly the same systems is not necessary to achieve interoperability, The personal training standards and experience cycles are important and so is system communications. What also must be kept in mind is the NZ government's reluctance to spend money on defence, as to get the numbers we either get a simplified outcome, or reduced numbers of fully equipped units. What I was suggesting however was that any ship we replaced the ANZAC's with would unlikely to have been currently in service for a significant period of time as by the time we would be getting our replacements the design would be getting old. Something of the same era as the type 26 would be fine, but something designed over 10 years ago would be starting to look a little old by the time we put it into service in terms of hull design, machinery, noise reduction and crew requirements, etc.
Ahem, the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke is how old? First built 1988. The Flight III variant has just begun. It's not the hull shape per se, that needs drastically to change, for a change in capability, because unless you want an increase in speed, the shape doesn't need to change. It's what's within the hull that changes over time and in the case of the F370 Ivers, the compartments nor machinery don't need changing. It's the weapons, sensors etc., that need upgrading. Noise reduction within the platform can be achieved without a major redesign, as spoz pointed out earlier. Crew requirements of the Ivers are similar to other new platforms. You are right about about interoperability to a point. Being able to exchange and act upon data quickly and efficiently in a tactical situation is paramount between partners. Having the same operational procedures, methodologies and tactics are also advantageous, and being able to use the same weapons is an advantage due to quick supply, especially if the USN fleet supply train is being utilised. However not all partners use the same languages, weapons, operational procedures or tactics so that is where exercises like RIMPAC have a role in ironing out differences.
I think this is profoundly unfair to our trans Tasman neighbours. I'm quite sure that they, in general, are well aware of what is happening in the world and their place and responsibilities, but their electoral system fails them in the same way as many do - including Australia's - by almost ensuring a fairly toothless government which is hostage to small factions that may not be offended. Add their apparently benign position and it is quite easy to ignore defence in favour of policies which will maintain their positions untroubled by their own putative allies. After all, the voters have been told for 30+ years that NZ faces no military threat (except from France and the USA)
I think that is true of our current govt who are beholden to Winston Peters, Leader of NZ First, Deputy PM, and easily offended. The govts from 1999 to 2017 were not so much with fairly strong leaders who in some cases lead minority govts in a MMP environment. However in the current govt, a minor party, NZ First, is leading the quite larger party, NZ Labour around by the means of a ring through the nose and hence the NZG. If Winston doesn't like it, it doesn't happen and what Winston wants Winston gets. Quite entertaining actually.

Personally I like MMP, because the First Past the Post (FPP) system didn't truly reflect the electorates wishes. NZ's closest ever version of a dictator was Muldoon (National 1975 - 1984, elected under FPP) followed by Clark (Labour 1999 - 2008, elected under MMP ) and he did a lot of damage to NZ, followed closely by Clark. Winston is a Muldoon acolyte. So whilst I can't stand Winston, he is preventing the current govt from undertaking a radical shift to the left like Clark did.

There are a small very vocal minority of left leaning peaceniks who make the Green Party defence party look positively militant. They are the ones who grew out of the anti Nam War protest movement and were part of the anti nuke movement in NZ and the protested the USN nuke ship and sub visits. Clark and senior members of her govt were part of that movement. However small pacifist movements within NZ go back WW1 and beyond.
 

Rob c

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Ahem, the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke is how old? First built 1988. The Flight III variant has just begun. It's not the hull shape per se, that needs drastically to change, for a change in capability, because unless you want an increase in speed, the shape doesn't need to change. It's what's within the hull that changes over time and in the case of the F370 Ivers, the compartments nor machinery don't need changing. It's the weapons, sensors etc., that need upgrading. Noise reduction within the platform can be achieved without a major redesign, as spoz pointed out earlier. Crew requirements of the Ivers are similar to other new platforms. You are right about about interoperability to a point. Being able to exchange and act upon data quickly and efficiently in a tactical situation is paramount between partners. Having the same operational procedures, methodologies and tactics are also advantageous, and being able to use the same weapons is an advantage due to quick supply, especially if the USN fleet supply train is being utilised. However not all partners use the same languages, weapons, operational procedures or tactics so that is where exercises like RIMPAC have a role in ironing out differences.
While most of what you say is correct, We would not be buying something of the size of an Arleigh Burke wich has the size and volume for continuous upgrading. Getting the F370 Ivers noise levels down to those of a type 23 or 26 would be extremely difficult if not impossible due to their machinery layout. Agree on your comments in regard to operational procedures, methodologies and tactics . My personal view on weapons is that we should have the best available that suits our defence requirements and that having the same as our allies is desirable it should not override our primary interests.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
While most of what you say is correct, We would not be buying something of the size of an Arleigh Burke wich has the size and volume for continuous upgrading. Getting the F370 Ivers noise levels down to those of a type 23 or 26 would be extremely difficult if not impossible due to their machinery layout. Agree on your comments in regard to operational procedures, methodologies and tactics . My personal view on weapons is that we should have the best available that suits our defence requirements and that having the same as our allies is desirable it should not override our primary interests.
@Rob c you are not getting point and are purely arguing semantics. The size of the DDG-51 has nothing to do with it at all. It's just an example of a long serving design in service. The F370 Iver has the room for future upgrades because that was a requirement from the RDN. What is sound? It is a vibration moving through a substance, is it not? It moves in a wave and dampening such a vibration does not require extensive redesign of a hull. What it does require is mounting of the machinery on vibration dampeners. Subs do the same BTW. Did you read the link to spozs post? Spoz is somewhat knowledgeable in this area.
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Not sure why there is an assumption that NZ somehow made a bad decision going with the Lockheed Martin Canada solution to upgrade their ANZACs. I think it is a bit insulting to assume the RNZN didn't do its home work when this choice was made. I know the RCN is ecstatic with the performance of the CMS330/Smart-S combination, so there is no reason why the RNZN wouldn't be either. And while there is a good argument to be made that they should have stayed with ESSM for commonality, CAMM is an excellent system, so this is hardly a "bad" decision.
I said surprised.
I was surprised because I don't think Canada has exactly the runs on the board regarding efficient, cheap, timely ship building. Integration of CAMM, I believe they still operate the old ESSM on the Halifax, so curious I thought going down that road. I was also quite surprised on dumping the Saab combat system given Australia's commitment to expand and continue it (on every surface ship), I am not as confident on Canada's commitment to their setup given a budget which is fast approaching zero and procurement that has degenerated to acquiring 30 year old cast offs from, well Australia. They are also effectively out of region. If you wanted a project to sift through builders, an upgrade would be an ideal one.

Given the future of warfare is quite likely going to involved higher levels of networking and cooperative operations, not sure how ten or twenty years worth of future development will see CMS330 and 9LV in the same park. Maybe that isn't a valid concern, but I can't help but feel Australia is on the threshold of doing some interesting stuff with its radars and combat system as it roles it out and up to the AWD's.

Of course as an Australian watching your nearest neighbor ditch the same combat system, radar, and weapons and then go with, Canada for integration, feels like we are drifting apart. Or on different pages at least, heading in different directions. Not that we have to be the same, but I can't help and wonder how easily things will mesh in the future.
 

Gibbo

Well-Known Member
Watching Ret. Admiral Kevin McCoy, President of Irving Shipbuilding, on local Halifax news talking about the recently launched AOPS1 the yet to be named "HMCS Harry Dewolfe"

One of the questions asked was is Irving looking for foreign sales. One country who wishes to remain anonymous at this time is looking.

I wonder if this country could be NZ?

Don't get me wrong, it would be a fantastic addition to the RNZN and I'd love to see one with a kiwi in the stack but at no point have I seen any suggestions from NZDF, RNZN, MinDef etc etc that anything more than a ice-capable patrol vessel is being considered... this is pretty much a full-on ice-breaker isn't it? It is pretty pricey & I wouldn't at all be surprised to see ice-breaker capability foregone to reduce purchase price, which means it'd be crazy ($$$ wise) for NZ to pursue an orphan version of it with no breaker capability.
 
Last edited:

beegee

Active Member
Of course as an Australian watching your nearest neighbor ditch the same combat system, radar, and weapons and then go with, Canada for integration, feels like we are drifting apart. Or on different pages at least, heading in different directions. Not that we have to be the same, but I can't help and wonder how easily things will mesh in the future.
While I don't necessarily disagree with what you are saying, it's also worth considering the benefits of the two countries having different systems. If two allies have the same kit, they also have the same strengths and weaknesses, but different systems with different capabilities can complement each other and cover for each other's possible weaknesses.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I said surprised.
I was surprised because I don't think Canada has exactly the runs on the board regarding efficient, cheap, timely ship building. Integration of CAMM, I believe they still operate the old ESSM on the Halifax, so curious I thought going down that road. I was also quite surprised on dumping the Saab combat system given Australia's commitment to expand and continue it (on every surface ship), I am not as confident on Canada's commitment to their setup given a budget which is fast approaching zero and procurement that has degenerated to acquiring 30 year old cast offs from, well Australia. They are also effectively out of region. If you wanted a project to sift through builders, an upgrade would be an ideal one.

Given the future of warfare is quite likely going to involved higher levels of networking and cooperative operations, not sure how ten or twenty years worth of future development will see CMS330 and 9LV in the same park. Maybe that isn't a valid concern, but I can't help but feel Australia is on the threshold of doing some interesting stuff with its radars and combat system as it roles it out and up to the AWD's.

Of course as an Australian watching your nearest neighbor ditch the same combat system, radar, and weapons and then go with, Canada for integration, feels like we are drifting apart. Or on different pages at least, heading in different directions. Not that we have to be the same, but I can't help and wonder how easily things will mesh in the future.
CMS330 is a Lockheed Martin product, not Canadian, with the RAN SAAB9LV basically being a bespoke RAN product with the RAN having to cover the cost and the risk of integrating AEGIS into it. Whereas the CMS330 being a Lockheed product, I would suggest that if the RCN and / or the RNZN were to go down the AEGIS path, integration may be an easier and cheaper. Also the ADF has not exactly covered itself in glory around the integration of new software into existing systems has it? Remember the Seasprite saga? Or the integration of Army software into the Tiger?

ESSM is not the be all to end all either, no matter how much our Aussie posters may believe so. It still has to have a dedicated radar for targeting where as CAMM doesn't. Whilst ESSM Block II is still under development, CAMM is already in fleet wide issue with the RN and it's land variant is not far off being issued to the pommy army. Just saying. We could always talk about rugby union. :)
 
Last edited:

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
CMS330 is a Lockheed Martin product, not Canadian, with the RAN SAAB9LV basically being a bespoke RAN product with the RAN having to cover the cost and the risk of integrating AEGIS into it. Whereas the CMS330 being a Lockheed product, I would suggest that if the RCN and / or the RNZN were to go down the AEGIS path, integration may be an easier and cheaper. Also the ADF has not exactly covered itself in glory around the integration of new software into existing systems has it? Remember the Seasprite saga? Or the integration of Army software into the Tiger?
CMS 330 is a Lockheed Martin Canada subsidiary division product, while the Aegis combat system is a US-developed Lockheed Martin product. The Swedish 9LV combat system or CMS (depends on version) from Saab is another product as well. IIRC the ANZAC-class frigates were originally kitted out with the CelsiusTech 9LV Mk 200 CMS, which was subsequently taken over by SaabTech or now Saab, with the RAN frigates getting the CMS upgraded to the 453 version.

As things stand, the Saab Australia subsidiary is working on developing and integrating some interfaces so that certain pieces of Australian-sourced kit can be integrated with the US-sourced Aegis combat system which will be fitted to the RAN's Hunter-class frigates. I suspect (but do not know) that the interfaces being developed are to pass data back and forth between the Aegis combat system and things like the CEAFAR2 radar array, and/or the CEAMOUNT illuminator. Nothing I have come across has provided any indication that the 9LV CS or CMS will be integrated with the Aegis CS as that would be redundant. By the same token, integrating CMS330 with the Aegis CS would also be redundant, as well as involving IP control issues.
 

Joe Black

Active Member
CMS330 is a Lockheed Martin product, not Canadian, with the RAN SAAB9LV basically being a bespoke RAN product with the RAN having to cover the cost and the risk of integrating AEGIS into it. Whereas the CMS330 being a Lockheed product, I would suggest that if the RCN and / or the RNZN were to go down the AEGIS path, integration may be an easier and cheaper. Also the ADF has not exactly covered itself in glory around the integration of new software into existing systems has it? Remember the Seasprite saga? Or the integration of Army software into the Tiger?
:)
I would have thought the Saab 9LV CMS solution RAN simply have the additional Australia Tactical Interface and additional integration with CEFAR/CEAMount and non swedish sensors such as the Safran Vampir. I wouldn't call it a bespoke solution, albeit, one that has been customised with possibly added software libraries, and functionality.

With the new Hunter class, Saab and LM would possibly need to find a integration/middleware/bridge solution to interface the AEGIS CMS with the additional 9LV software components (possibly code to interface with CEAFAR/CEAMount) and other sensors.
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
Calling NZers and their pollies hippies is incorrect. I suspect they are more like pseudo Canadians, people who expect endless social handouts funded by the poor fools that actually produce wealth. They remain totally ignorant about the geopolitical realities today because they are too busy whining for more freebies.
Not to get to political but the alternative is a US like system which isn't beneficial for anyone except the rich.
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
If they are, Kiwi would be better off going back to Norway to buy the original, it seems to be a lot less pricey.
Norway is also building 3 new arctic patrol vessels, the price is pretty decent, 1 billion NZD for three large ice class OPV's, they could replace the Protectors, or just order 1 as the third Southern Ocean OPV and two more later as Protector OPV replacements.

Norway's new Coast Guard vessels for Arctic waters
 

Calculus

Well-Known Member
I said surprised.
I was surprised because I don't think Canada has exactly the runs on the board regarding efficient, cheap, timely ship building. Integration of CAMM, I believe they still operate the old ESSM on the Halifax, so curious I thought going down that road. I was also quite surprised on dumping the Saab combat system given Australia's commitment to expand and continue it (on every surface ship), I am not as confident on Canada's commitment to their setup given a budget which is fast approaching zero and procurement that has degenerated to acquiring 30 year old cast offs from, well Australia. They are also effectively out of region. If you wanted a project to sift through builders, an upgrade would be an ideal one.

Given the future of warfare is quite likely going to involved higher levels of networking and cooperative operations, not sure how ten or twenty years worth of future development will see CMS330 and 9LV in the same park. Maybe that isn't a valid concern, but I can't help but feel Australia is on the threshold of doing some interesting stuff with its radars and combat system as it roles it out and up to the AWD's.

Of course as an Australian watching your nearest neighbor ditch the same combat system, radar, and weapons and then go with, Canada for integration, feels like we are drifting apart. Or on different pages at least, heading in different directions. Not that we have to be the same, but I can't help and wonder how easily things will mesh in the future.
Ever consider that the RNZN selected CMS330 because it was the best option? This system is very modular, open, and easy to upgrade. It will have a deployed base of over 25 ships, if you include all 12 Halifax class, 6 AOPS, 2-3 JSS, 2 ANZACs, and the 3 Chilean T23. It has also been down selected to the final 3 (of which Atlas Electronik and Saab are the other 2) in the Finnish Squadron 2020 project. LM is so confidant in the flexibility and growth potential of this CMS, in fact, that they included it as part of the T26 bid for the CSC. With a software system (which is fundamentally what a CMS is) it really doesn't matter if you are "out of region", and LM has created a full support and training infrastructure in NZ anyway, so that argument is really not valid.
 
Top