Nicely articulated there Twickiwi.
Agreed - RNZN's combat arm (Frigates) integrates seamlessly with RAN's combat arm. Done, yes?
In terms of "larger", agreed, in that NZ if it really wanted to, could probably only afford one AWD, so why run an orphan system? Not economic then (not unless say the day is reached where there is a true joint-ANZAC Navy - then that could make a lot of sense for a variety of reasons). Personally if NZ were to ever expend that amount of money at once, then I'd be aiming for sub(s) rather than AWD - makes more sense in terms of deterrence of the South Pacific and those other tasks they are handy for eg SF insertion etc. Anyway not likely, nice dream ... (but I did hear something on the radio news today about a gas or oil potential somewhere off shore with a possible $30B/year earnings? Think about how much that would keep everyone happy i.e. health, education, infrastrucure development, defence and social services. So the future is kinda interesting perhaps).
Agreed - Pacific Patrolling. We'll get some of that with the OPV's. But we could do better. For example NZ (and others) aid investment in building up infrastructure such as wharves on several island groups. Add in civil telecommunications, basic (but cycloned hardened) health buildings and shelters and so on. From a patrolling perspective the Navy gets more access to wharves and replenishment facilities, dual-civil-military use of mini-hospital services in times of natural disaster and (hopefully never, but alas life doesn't stay like that) conflict (of one sort or another) etc.
Economically these island groups have then the means to become more self sufficient (eg fishing, tourism, commerce, distance education via telcos, better health etc), on the flip-side the locals have better access to police and defence staff in terms of alerting the authorities to criminal gangs, people, narcotics, arms traffickers, and no doubt the odd terrorist en-route and geo-politcally reaffirm the alignment to western forms of governance and transparency etc. Otherwise others will step in, as one does and are, and ultimately it would only makes NZ's (and Aust/EU/US etc) lot harder in all manner of ways etc. In terms of aid expenditure this doesn't happen overnight but sustrained over time etc. And jointly with our bigger friends etc.
So for NZ OPV's (and PI patrol craft) would largely be fine. All I would wish for though are any future OPV's get extra "modular" capabilities such as MCM, perhaps even a diving or underwater craft option (seeing the OPV's have a crane), and ideally some provision for sub detection sensors. Armament would then need to include something like torps and improved self-protection from a stand-off anti-ship missile should there be tensions in the region nearby. FIAC mini-guns for sneaky speed boats and a 57/76mm cal would be useful for picking off a raider vessel. Anything more intense like conflict would then have to involve the Frigates (as there's no point arming an OPV to Frigate level etc).
Agreed - Ross Sea patrolling. Again the OPV's are the key. Fly the flag. Deter fishing poachers and drift netters etc. Observe other nations warships or survey vessels in the area etc. Must make nice submarine routes so far away from the southern hemisphere continents. Those ASW sensors would be useful.
Agreed, ice breaker in due course. There's been some talk about this possibility elsewhere but the thoughts seem to be NZ wouldn't get enough use to make it viable. Bollocks! It's actually saying we're here and we can move around freely. Would also be handy for rescuing those crazy cruise ships which seem to sink etc. Good for containing oil spills. Even Greenpeace would support this one!
Agreed - Sealift. NZ needs another Canterbury to ensure a vessel is always available and/or to re-supply/aid more than one deployment/disater area at a time.
Alternatively, personally, if I could spend the money, perhaps rather than rebuild to a 4 Frigate combat force, have a 3 Frigate combat force (3 really is the min, not 2) and instead use that $1B or so and get a decent sealift ship with stern dock, plenty of troop/people and cargo carrying capacity etc. Perhaps NZ ought to think big and buy a Canberra Class LHD? Why not eh? But maybe the Canberra LHD is just tooo big for NZ. It's a true expeditionary asset - it also has hanger space for 12 helos and 12 on the top deck!. It would almost take the entire NZ Army and entire RNZAF helos! So maybe let's be realistic. Something in between the Canterbury and the Canberra. Eg something with say 4 helo landing spots (eg one for the Naval helo eg Seasprite or future NFH90, with surface search radar to quickly look for downed troop carrying helos or boat sinking survivors etc. Then 3 (4 at a stretch maybe?) landing spots for the troop carrying helos (in this case, it will be RNZAF NH90's), so that the 3 (or 4) troop/cargo helos can land troops quickly, turn around etc, or similary deliver disaster aid and return medivac'ed personel and people etc). No worries about seastates for the docked landing craft. One could also use amphibious vehicles etc.
Totally agree - "The key to developing the RNZN in the future isn't an increased combat capability. Having assets at sea in areas NZ considers important will eventually create the need for more combat capability as deterence".
Sure Frigates for Gulf, FPDA, NKorea? and Australasian taskings etc.
But for the Pacific and Ross Sea, patrol boats (with overhead maritime survellience assets) are acceptable and practical, and would enjoy popular support within NZ and in the islands because of the other dual civil/military roles and taskings. It's also a presence and diplomacy thing. It also gets NZ better engaged in the region and keep a better eye on the area and its resources. (And again, all this doesn't happen overnight).
Should things hot up for whatever reason, capabilities can be upgraded and expanded for better deterence factors but at least the institutional knowledge already exists by being engaged in the region and this would be advantageous etc.
Edit: One more thing I will throw in (as its the RNZN thread). This might upset some people (both left and right). NZ & US are going hard on improving the relationship, things are moving again since both changes of Govt last year. One day the US Navy would want to come back to NZ. I don't think a visit to Devonport would be a good idea. Why because, despite I believe the issue of accident liability (the terms popped out of my head) had been resolved prior to the anti-nuke ban thing (or has it not? I thought it had!), the fact is in this age of terrorism some upstart or group or cell (or even protestors - they painted a RAN LPA a few years ago) could attack the visiting warship by speed boat or mine etc, I don't think NZ's protection of the ship would be sufficient. It's not like the RNZN can arm its naval weapons, have flippin Seasprites flying 24/7 etc to prevent a USS Cole type incident, as Devonport sits amongst civilian housing and the CBD is only a kilometer or two away etc. Shells would rip into the CBD!
In fact Devonport is probably not terribly viable long term as a naval base. due to the escalating land values.
If it were up to me, I'd get the US to thrown a peanut out of its defense budget our way and contribute a couple of hundred million or so and build a new naval base near Auckland but well away from civilian housing etc. That way the peaceniks would be less troubled by a visit due to less potential for impact, the NZDF can protect the ship (no insult intended), the RNZN gets a 21st Century state of the art base, networked, defensive countermeasures and berthing to accomodate much larger ships, room for expansion, room for RO/RO facilities (now I know why you suggested Picton last year, Lucas, when the interisland ferries move to Blenhiem's coast!) and plenty of room for joint force purposes eg land to preposition army vehicles and landing spots for helos. And so on. Win-win for NZ and US and Aussie. Solves one of the elephant in the room issues. Easy eh.
