Novascotiaboy
Active Member
Will the arrival of HMNZS Aotearoa coincide with the first of the frigates from Seaspan? Has there been talk of a dual deployment of these two ships to Rimpac or some other 2020 major exercise?
Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Padman
- Start date
kiwipatriot69
Active Member
Given how small a navy we have now, sending two ships RIMPAC would be a surprise, does anyone know when on record Nz sent two ships to RIMPAC simultaneously?
Only one at a time has attended though trusting my memory. However, it would not surprise me and makes complete sense if the Aotearoa and an upgraded Anzac attended together (2020 is too soon), worked together and with our Pacific partners to achieve interoperable benchmarks - after all it is the major PacRim maritime exercise.
Yip, TEK and END attended in 2012. Tanker makes a good date to a major ex as it can actually support the other ship or ships if it transits with say RAN.
Don't think the size of the navy has much bearing on attendance rather availability of actual vessel considering the completely different roles of say a frigate and a tanker (sending 2 frigates would be another story given the size factor) but I think a combatant and a support ship is actually the ideal as 2 roles gain exposure in their given feilds of expertise benefitting the wider navy overall.
Thanks Reg. So Endeavour did go in 2012. Good to have your sharp wits around here. Good summation too on why it is more meaningful for a AOR and Frigate to attend together in such an exercise.
Just checking the old Naval Board Reports indeed two frigates Canterbury and Waikato did attend RIMPAC 80. Two would often attend the Australian exercises such as Kangaroo and one year all four participated in Guardex.
Yeah, I was there, a decent antipodean TG - Melbourne, Brisbane, Torrens, Supply, Waikato and another Kiwi - although not sure about Canterbury, I've got a piccy of the TG with Otago in it, but not one with Cantab.... There was a submarine, too, but I can't remember which one.
Worthy contender design to replace the two current OPV's and likely to have synergies with the VARD 7-100 ICE design that seems to tick the boxes for a SOPV.
https://vardmarine.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/VARD-7-125.pdf
The VARD 7 125 is a multi-purpose patrol vessel designed to enhance and maintain comprehensive defence capabilities, provide maritime strike and interdiction support, perform EEZ patrol, and aid in humanitarian assistance operations. The vessel’s hull form offers high speed and significant range for operational versatility along with excellent seakeeping characteristics for a safe, efficient passage.
https://vardmarine.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/VARD-7-125.pdf
The VARD 7 125 is a multi-purpose patrol vessel designed to enhance and maintain comprehensive defence capabilities, provide maritime strike and interdiction support, perform EEZ patrol, and aid in humanitarian assistance operations. The vessel’s hull form offers high speed and significant range for operational versatility along with excellent seakeeping characteristics for a safe, efficient passage.
The VARD 7-100 ICE is a derivative of the VARD 7-100, so more synergies with that or the VARD 7-110. Replacing 6 vessels with 3 is still not very good; quantity has a quality of its own and it's a huge large area for only 3 vessels to be responsible for. IMHO a down right stupid proposition, especially as the area they're supposed to cover basically goes from the equator to the ice, and between a third to half way to South America.
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
Nice big design. So let’s be realistic here when considering this as an OPV replacement in ten years time or less.
it’s been proven by experience that a larger hull is required for Pacific operations. Large helo facilities are beneficial. Why not four to replace six? Redundant engine rooms in case of hull breech. Enhanced firefighting ability. Multiple large RHIBS. Overall a very nice platform.
it’s been proven by experience that a larger hull is required for Pacific operations. Large helo facilities are beneficial. Why not four to replace six? Redundant engine rooms in case of hull breech. Enhanced firefighting ability. Multiple large RHIBS. Overall a very nice platform.
Specifications do tell a story in themselves. Which I invite people to examine and draw conclusions from.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
From the respectable Point of Order political blogsite, a brief mention of RNZN interest in the Type 26 Frigate ... "Early reports indicate the Type 26 fits RNZN’s specifications “like a glove”, a naval architect tells our correspondent."
Hear hear! With the proliferation of submarines in the Asia-Pacific region it would seem logical that the RNZN have "sub-hunter" capabilities to counter them, fitting hand in glove with the RNZAF P-8 acquisitions (and other allied sub-surface/surface intelligence gathering assets).
Although it is still early days (in terms of replacing the ANZAC's), at least we know NZ thinking aligns with our closest allies and friends.
Also interesting to note the comment that the ANZAC's "had to be driven hard – notably in the Gulf – with only two frigates in the fleet". Will these experiences allow for a 3rd vessel to be considered?
Navy firms its thinking about frigate replacements
Hear hear! With the proliferation of submarines in the Asia-Pacific region it would seem logical that the RNZN have "sub-hunter" capabilities to counter them, fitting hand in glove with the RNZAF P-8 acquisitions (and other allied sub-surface/surface intelligence gathering assets).
Although it is still early days (in terms of replacing the ANZAC's), at least we know NZ thinking aligns with our closest allies and friends.
Also interesting to note the comment that the ANZAC's "had to be driven hard – notably in the Gulf – with only two frigates in the fleet". Will these experiences allow for a 3rd vessel to be considered?
Navy firms its thinking about frigate replacements
Point of Order and Richard Harmon's Politik blogs are very much plugged into the beltway networks - better than anyone in the media.
The Type 26 is the front runner, but the FFG(X) will possibly come into play once it is finalised and a UK built Type 31 hull and machinery with combat systems and weapons integration either by LM at Vancouver or BAe in South Australia, is another alternative rumoured to be discussed. Like the P-8A they are loath to step outside the 4 other close partners for this project and their deep vetted primes and contractors.
At 10000nm the 4500 ton VARD 125 has 4000nm more range and 30% more sea days availability p.a than the current VARD 85, with the substantial increase of capability from the Aotearoa for replenishment at sea, the ever increasing robustness of baseline systems and onshore augmented reality training, will allow for far greater vessel utilisation and time on station in areas of interest and the ability to rapidly relocate if directed. The O in OPV is becoming more closer in meaning to Ocean than Offshore in the RNZN maritime sense.
However, people need to bear in mind that the RNZN will prior to the OPV replacement be introducing a brand new $1B Enhanced Sealift Capability to complement the CY that will possess further long range patrolling capabilities in excess of 7000nm amongst its suite of proposed capabilities. If the VARD 7-100 ICE / AOPS is selected for the SOPV capability that is another vessel with a 7000nm range and the ability to provide circa 240 sea days per annum.
Along with that there will be a whole raft of air and space domain capabilities (that I recently outlined in the RNZAF thread) that will inform the sea domain in a transformational sense (we are becoming well beyond the last century tasking schemata which mean't patrol capability was having lots of vessels out their running around blind trying to find vessels to board), including a new long range UAV capability post 2030 to extend the P-8A capability, as well as two-three very high end surface combatants and a further Enhanced Sealift Capability to replace the CY immediately following that.
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
MrC if I can add to your post there is also the likely capability of a naval shipboard RPAS either fixed wing such as Scan Eagle and / or a rotary version such as Skeldar or Sciebel S100. These RPAS for over the horizon ISR will greatly enhance the ability of these Ocean PVs to give NZ a better understanding of its maritime domain.
With the introduction of new naval helicopters prior to the arrival of these new platforms the helo facilities will be optimised for the new aircraft. Even better would be to have a primary helo hangar and a sub hangar for the RPAS.
I feel that I have seen this design before for the Korean Coast Guard. I will look to see where I saw that. The two forward water cannons remind me of another design.
With the introduction of new naval helicopters prior to the arrival of these new platforms the helo facilities will be optimised for the new aircraft. Even better would be to have a primary helo hangar and a sub hangar for the RPAS.
I feel that I have seen this design before for the Korean Coast Guard. I will look to see where I saw that. The two forward water cannons remind me of another design.
That is a further attraction of this larger OPV.
The VARD 7-125 is basically a long hull version of the VARD 7-110 which is the new Heritage Class OPC for the USCG, which is of itself an evolution of the smaller VARD 85m Protector design. One could expect over the next 5-7 years when requirements for the RNZN are refined and offered to industry per an RFI this 125m design would evolve further.
Recce
Point of Order have updated their post with more on the future Future Surface Combatant
Australians hope NZ will buy Hunter class frigates but size and price will come into Defence considerations
They mention the Legend Class, though strictly speaking it would likely be the evolution of that which Huntington Ingalls are reputed to be offering for the FFG(X) because a legend Class "as is" and a Type 26 are like chalk and cheese. The Type 31 is also mentioned in the context of its Iver F370 roots.
If we had to choose a package deal would we go with 2 T26 or 3 T31 based on cost, options etc? Both options have merit either way I just wonder with current thinking which way "we" would lean? Capability or quantity, as ngati says both important in their own right, obviously both would be the best outcome but not a option thrown around alot with any of our govts.
I think improved OPVs will be a no brainer going forward but the frigates could either falter, status quo or pleasantly surprise depending on who has the captains hat on for the next wee while (which is unfortunately still awhile). The seeds of understanding are growing but will anyone take note is the $billion question?
In some respects one would need to examine both the future surface combatant capability and the future OPV replacement capability together. For example two Type 26 and a largish OPV that possessed latent combatant capabilities.
Also there is the FFG(X) solution, which has a very capable suite of GFE systems and is to be built in numbers (20+) under a new and competitive contractual regime. We will know how that 3rd pathway sits by the middle of next year as an option and how close to the USD$800-900m price point it is.