Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

Nighthawk.NZ

Active Member
Is it (one of) the reason why RNZN did not adopt Australian version of modification? RAN's ANZAC class modification apparently looks top heavy. As you said, RAN's large mast with AESA radars on the top, added with significantly improved wiring, analysis power of CMS, and "quad-packed 32 ESSM in their Mk.41 VLS" shall be very heavy. Compared to that, RNZN Te Kaha and Te Mana "looks" much more "stable".

#or RAN is handling it with adding ballast? Losing fuel efficiency but keeping CoG balance?
I believe at the time they didn't go with the Aussie option is when they first started to upgrading theirs the gubberment of the time hadn't decided what they wanted and in turn, watched and learned how the Aussie frigates turned out, while capable does have a top weight issue and so ballast added reducing speed and CoG (this we all know) ... and also at the time most likely budget... (which now in hindsight probably would have been cheaper per frigate lol)

The other thing is the Ross Sea and the Southern Ocean while the Aussie frigates handle it ... Ohhhh kaaaaay, they aren't the best but neither were the kiwi frigates. Hence Project Protector and the 2 OPV's. (Also the Government realised 2 Frigates can't be in 4 places at once... lol (Read into that what you will lol.)

The Kiwi frigates were faster, and were more stable I guess time will tell how this is post upgrades.
 

alexsa

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I believe at the time they didn't go with the Aussie option is when they first started to upgrading theirs the gubberment of the time hadn't decided what they wanted and in turn, watched and learned how the Aussie frigates turned out, while capable does have a top weight issue and so ballast added reducing speed and CoG (this we all know) ... and also at the time most likely budget... (which now in hindsight probably would have been cheaper per frigate lol)

The other thing is the Ross Sea and the Southern Ocean while the Aussie frigates handle it ... Ohhhh kaaaaay, they aren't the best but neither were the kiwi frigates. Hence Project Protector and the 2 OPV's. (Also the Government realised 2 Frigates can't be in 4 places at once... lol (Read into that what you will lol.)

The Kiwi frigates were faster, and were more stable I guess time will tell how this is post upgrades.
Not sure you can state the NZ frigates were more stable without evidence. Further it is not entirely about intact stability as damage stability also needs to be considered. The Australian ANZAC frigates had the quarter-deck (Poop for those merchant navy types) enclosed to increase the buoyant volume of the vessel. The Kiwi frigates only partially enclosed that space and is likely to have had a lower buoyant volume despite being light draft.

Without seeing the stability data we cannot say which is 'more stable' pre or post refit with any certainty. Certainly the additional ballast has resulted in the Australian ANZACs being deeper in the water but that may have made them more stable than their unmodified Kiwi cousins. We simple don't know for sure. About the only think we can say with certainty is that the unmodified Kiwi ANZAC was quicker than the Australian modified vessels.
 
Last edited:

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
I believe at the time they didn't go with the Aussie option is when they first started to upgrading theirs the gubberment of the time hadn't decided what they wanted and in turn, watched and learned how the Aussie frigates turned out, while capable does have a top weight issue and so ballast added reducing speed and CoG (this we all know) ... and also at the time most likely budget... (which now in hindsight probably would have been cheaper per frigate lol)

The other thing is the Ross Sea and the Southern Ocean while the Aussie frigates handle it ... Ohhhh kaaaaay, they aren't the best but neither were the kiwi frigates. Hence Project Protector and the 2 OPV's. (Also the Government realised 2 Frigates can't be in 4 places at once... lol (Read into that what you will lol.)

The Kiwi frigates were faster, and were more stable I guess time will tell how this is post upgrades.
Another consideration was that the RNZN frigates are also armed with a Mk 15 Phalax CIWS (recently upgraded to Block 1B IIRC) aft above the hangar, which would add ~6 tonnes to the Kiwi frigate's topweight. Had NZ joined Australia's frigate upgrade programme, then either additional ballasting would have been required leaving their vessels even lower in the water (if that was even an option) or the Mk 15 Phalanx would have to have been deleted.
 

Nighthawk.NZ

Active Member
Without seeing the stability data we cannot say which is 'more stable' pre or post refit with any certainty.
That's a fair call... my unscientific claim actually came from an old Aussie friend, (yes I have friends... even if they are Aussie lol) that did a stint on a kiwi frigate, and said compared to the modified Aussies frigates it was more stable and comfortable in certain seas...

Kind of like back in the day with HMNZS Waikato her modifications (hanger and Seacat etc...) and her dollop of concrete ballast...she was stable enough and worked well and if you didn't know any different then that's all you know. But compared to the other Leanders in the fleet at the time she rolled like a hippie rolling their nuggies on a Friday night... lol


Another consideration was that the RNZN frigates are also armed with a Mk 15 Phalax CIWS (recently upgraded to Block 1B IIRC) aft above the hangar, which would add ~6 tonnes to the Kiwi frigate's topweight.
Good point... forgot about that...
 

spoz

The Bunker Group
There is a sweet point in stability. Too much Metacentric height (GM) and the ship will be stiff with a quick (and unpleasant) roll. Too little and the ship will roll too easily, will “hang” at the end of a roll, and in the ultimate will have a point of vanishing stability which is less than the angle of heel likely to be experienced. GM is the vertical distance between the metacentre and the centre of gravity (actually measured by a small displacement of the centre of buoyancy hence the inclining test) so as the centre of gravity rises, all else being equal, the metacentric height reduces, as does the absolute intact stability. So when you are designing or modifying a ship you seek to remain close to what you have decided is the appropriate metacentric height for that particular ship. As you add top weight you may well need to add ballast to retain the appropriate GM- but not too much.
 
Last edited:

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Wasn't there some incident earlier in the year where a couple of sailors were selling

Sailor facing raft of charges relating to a banned substance
Sailor facing raft of charges relating to a banned substance
From memory I think that you are correct. Some people never learn. It's crap we don't need in the services and maybe the deterrent effect isn't strong enough. In my day, 28 days Ardmore SCE was something to be avoided where absolutely possible. I managed to avoid the pleasure of accommodation there, but on a couple of occasions by the skin of my teeth.
 

Lucasnz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
From memory I think that you are correct. Some people never learn. It's crap we don't need in the services and maybe the deterrent effect isn't strong enough. In my day, 28 days Ardmore SCE was something to be avoided where absolutely possible. I managed to avoid the pleasure of accommodation there, but on a couple of occasions by the skin of my teeth.
Yep - knew one guy sent to Ardmore lasted about 4 days before he was sent to hospital on a 24 hour watch. Apparently they're much nicer at Burnham. If I'd hit my 18th birthday the CO of Philomel would have enjoyed sending me for a excursion there, after I dented his car.

On another note good to see Te Kaha back at sea, the profile is so different, but the paint job leaves much to be desired - must be a new camouflage scheme ;). It will be very interesting to see how the sea trials go, given the extended stay in Canada.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Yep - knew one guy sent to Ardmore lasted about 4 days before he was sent to hospital on a 24 hour watch. Apparently they're much nicer at Burnham. If I'd hit my 18th birthday the CO of Philomel would have enjoyed sending me for a excursion there, after I dented his car.

On another note good to see Te Kaha back at sea, the profile is so different, but the paint job leaves much to be desired - must be a new camouflage scheme ;). It will be very interesting to see how the sea trials go, given the extended stay in Canada.
We had a MT driver at Shelly Bay who did two 28 day lags there. Both for driving service vehicles whilst drunk. After the second lag he was dishonourably discharged.
 

Shanesworld

Active Member
We had a MT driver at Shelly Bay who did two 28 day lags there. Both for driving service vehicles whilst drunk. After the second lag he was dishonourably discharged.
I knew one guy who went during recruit training for 7 days. Straight off the bus, roll bag in arms and had to mark time till his legs gave out. Then had to go for an rfl.and that didn't stop till he did his 7 days. Apparently its changed alot now.
Guys volunteer to go there now prior to leaving army to develop other skills so they can transfer into the civi labour market.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Is NZ looking for a Southern Ocean patrol vessel or an ice breaker? Seems a bit like overkill to me.
oldsig
The VARD 7-100-ICE-AOPV isn't an icebreaker, but is ice strengthened to PC-4 / 5 which means that it is able to get in amongst the ice if necessary. That is what's required so is definitely not overkill. I actually think a Kiwi icebreaker wouldn't be a silly idea.
 

Nighthawk.NZ

Active Member
The VARD 7-100-ICE-AOPV isn't an icebreaker, but is ice strengthened to PC-4 / 5 which means that it is able to get in amongst the ice if necessary. That is what's required so is definitely not overkill. I actually think a Kiwi icebreaker wouldn't be a silly idea.
Isn't the Canadian Harry DeWolf basically the Vard-7 100.... from memory...
 

At lakes

Active Member
Isn't the Canadian Harry DeWolf basically the Vard-7 100.... from memory...
It certainly is have a look at the attached link. I think this is a CGI of the Harry De Wolf
 

Calculus

Well-Known Member
It certainly is have a look at the attached link. I think this is a CGI of the Harry De Wolf
Similar, but not the same. The Harry DeWolf is an "improved" Vard 7-100. It's been modified to operate in all conditions (cold and hot climates), as it is multi-roled to be not only an Arctic patrol vessel, but a general purpose patrol vessel that can be employed anywhere in the world. It's 5.6 m longer than the 7-100 (it was lengthened specifically to improve sea keeping in the open waters of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic oceans), 400 tons heavier, has a reinforced bow (to PC4), and is fitted with fin stabilizers, also for improved handling in open waters. It's been commissioned with a combat/command management system (CMS330) and a substantial communications suite. The radar is also substantially improved (Terma Scanter 6002 SCANTER 6002 selected for Canada’s Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships program). It's also rumoured it has some sigint capabilities, given it will be operating in close proximity to Russian assets while patrolling in Arctic waters. Finally, the flight deck was enlarged and strengthened to handle the Cyclone and Cormorant helicopters, and the hangar was enlarged for the same reason. Eight of these ships are being built (6 for the RCN, and two for the Coast Guard).

Here are a few fact sheets: https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/61...__Media_Advisory__Last_major_section_of_f.pdf
https://navy-marine.forces.gc.ca/assets/NAVY_Internet/docs/en/rcn_aops_factsheet-8x11_web.pdf

And here a few videos of the lead ship HMCS Harry DeWolf on sea trials:
 
Last edited:

Nighthawk.NZ

Active Member
Most vessels are based on an original design and then modified to suite...

HMNZS Otago and Wellington are also based on the Vard 7 and now basically advertise as VARD 7 085 - Vard Marine

And going by this bit of news and budget from the DCP 2019 you just about pick the vessel... with modifications to suite the SOPV RFI
 

Shanesworld

Active Member
Most vessels are based on an original design and then modified to suite...

HMNZS Otago and Wellington are also based on the Vard 7 and now basically advertise as VARD 7 085 - Vard Marine

And going by this bit of news and budget from the DCP 2019 you just about pick the vessel... with modifications to suite the SOPV RFI
Regards the opv's anyone know the weight limit for the station currently used by the 25mm typhoon? And are there any other positions intended for weapons?
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Most vessels are based on an original design and then modified to suite...

HMNZS Otago and Wellington are also based on the Vard 7 and now basically advertise as VARD 7 085 - Vard Marine

And going by this bit of news and budget from the DCP 2019 you just about pick the vessel... with modifications to suite the SOPV RFI
I have been wondering about the positioning of the RHIBS in the alcoves below the bridge. In the great southern ocean I reckon that anything in there will take a fair hammering. Maybe hydraulically operated protective doors could be added. I was thinking about the problems Canterbury (L421) had with its original ships boats alcoves.
 
Top