Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[MrConservative]

When Canterbury was under review to be purchased the other option for the navy besides buying a new ship would have been remodeling the Charles Upham...

MNZS Charles Upham
Commissioned in 1995, Completed 1982
Displacement: 7955 Light, 10,500 tonnes: Full Load
Dimensions: 131.7m x 21.1m x 6.2m
Endurance: 7000nm : Speed 14kts
Complement: 32, plus 200 Troops
Vehicle deck: 440 lane meters
Ramp: Aft
Notes
Proposed modifications would have included the capability to operate 4 Huey helicopters, deck marked for 2 landing zones, hospital facility, and the fitting of Passive Counter measures.

HMNZS Canterbury L 421
Commissioned in 2007
Displacement: 7200 Light, 8870 tonnes: Full Load
Dimensions: 131 m x 23.4 m x 5.6 sealift, 4.76 patrol
Endurance: 8000 nm : Speed 19 kts
Complement: 53 navy, 10 air force, 7 army, 4 civil, 35 trainees, 250 Troops
Hangar: 1 Seasprite helicopter, 4 NH-90s stored, deck marked for 2 landing zones
Vehicle deck: 403 lane meters, plus 33 containers
Cranes: 2 60 tonnes
Landing craft: 2 LCM-8
Ramp: Aft and Starboard

Specifications for the Canterbury was for an enlarged company group, not a battalion... Comparing size and storage capacity the ships were more or less even, well the lane meters for the Charles Upham was 37 meters longer before conversion., but the Canterbury carries more troops... The Charles Upham's draught was too deep to enter Dili, the Canterbury has enter Dili... Most importantly, the Canterbury carries landing craft for over the beach operations the Charles Upham didn't....

If the Charles Upham was sufficient to meet sea lift specifications than the Canterbury is... If money was the issue, the Charles Upham would have won...

This particular topic has been covered dozens of times - most of have us read the Sealift Review 2000 as well as having the ability to understand the difference in meaning between requirements and specifications, and know how the specifications eventuated (politics at the Select Committee stages which I mentioned 2 months ago when you were again talking about the CY) Requirements and Specifications are simply not the same.

There could be a tangible argument that a single ship was too large at the time of the SLR2000 but there now exists a noted capability gap and finding an optimal capability for a long term acquisition is significant. Get over it will you.

 

[Sea Toby]

Then let us look at the new Dutch JSS:
Name: HNLMS Karel Doorman
Cost: 363 million euro (480 million USD)
Type: Joint Logistic Support Ship
Displacement: 27,800 long tons (28,246 t) full load
Length: 204.7 m (671 ft 7 in)
Beam: 30.4 m (99 ft 9 in)
Draught: 7.8 m (25 ft 7 in)
Complement: 152 crew, 129 landing force
Aircraft carried: 6 × NH90 or Chinook
Aviation facilities: two-spot helideck and hangar for 6 helicopters
Vehicle deck: 1200 lane m

Notice the size of her crew. No landing craft, no well dock. But alike Canterbury I am sure landing craft can be added... Surely New Zealand doesn't need anything so large, but I doubt whether a shorter, smaller ship will have a lesser draught.. A draught unsuitable for Dili and most likely many South Pacific ports...

But alike Canterbury a steel stern door can operate with landing craft...

 

[t68]

chances are if CY was laid up for any reason would sealift even be needed at that particular time anyway, why fund what ifs and concentrate on primarys..

It is the duty of government to plan for what ifs, by having appropriate resource planning in place to minimise the risks. Who would have thought after the Brisbane floods thought a category 5 cyclone was going to bear down on Nth Queensland (which it did as luck would have it lost most of its force overland), what if the category 5 had hit Vanuatu, New Caledonia then Nth Queensland and ADF resource were stretched to cope with the destruction of Nth Queensland, with the 3 amphibious ship tied alongside it and out of action, it would been left to the New Zealander’s to be the lead nation in the distribution of aid to the pacific nations.

Naturally RNZN cannot have a fleet of Canterbury’s, but having complementary or duplicate force is prudent planning on the government’s behalf, another what if HMNZS Canterbury runs onto a well charted but submerged rock reminisce of HMS Nottingham grounding in 2002, it was 23 months before she sailed again, can the RNZN afford to be without be without a sealift capability for such a long time?

I think everyone is focussing on the Hamel ex load at 105% as if it was a shortfall when in actual fact the helos had been airlifted by Aus C17 leaving the hangers empty so why not make use of the space and throw in a few extra vehicles topside to make life easier in Aus, wanted but not nescessarily needed.

All that tells me is that the few extra vehicles where need for the ex Hamel, without the extra lift via C17 you might have been short for the ex, good training for the air crews but leaves you short in sealift requirements, also shows the interoperability for the defence force on both sides of the Tasman.

 

[recce.k1]

My concern about the ex-Hamel deployment stretching Canterbury's capacity is two-fold; firstly, the Army's Combined Arms Task Group (Cav) configuration may be a larger self-supporting configuration than the previous structure and which were first envisaged for the Canty.

Background reading on the CATG (cav) support elements for ex-Hamel and Canty's role:
NZ Army - Exercise Hamel
NZ Army - Defence White Paper 2010
RNZN - 071010

Secondly, did the Army have to compromise the CATG (cav) configuration to fit on the Canterbury? Or by concidence it just happens to match the capacity of the Canterbury? If the latter, what would be the chances of that? I would have thought exercises also demostrate what other elements are required to ensure a successful deployment when for real i.e. Army may have figured out it needs extra A, B and C next time etc.

Granted some elements were sent by air (and the C-17 deployment of the helos would be advantageous in that it allowed the Helos to get up and running a lot quicker), but I suspect Defence planners can see a shortfall in the Canty. An exercise is one thing (and RAAF C-17 airlift will be available) but come an "emergency" the RAAF C-17's may be required to support the ADF's deployment operation and not be available to deploy to NZ to pick up helos.

(Clearly again NZ needs heavier airlift to cater for this and getting those refridgerated containers off to disaster areas etc).

In some respects it is also clear the NZG has miscalculated again in that two sealift vessels should have been obtained in the first place (like the RAN has the 2 LPA's and soon 2 new LHD's) to allow for one vessel being unavailable. Seeing Canty cost NZ$177M (2004) and was meant to have been the replacement for the 3rd Frigate (> NZ$500M), two vessels would have been affordable. If that had happened then the Endeavour replacement could have been another cheap Korean AOR. Nevermind :hitwall

(Finally, ok got that Mr C, the replacement Endeavour is also to cater for the above situation of not having a second sealift vessel available for mil. and whole-of-govt tasking).

 

[MrConservative]

LucasNZ did have a good suggestion in that if the proposed LWSV was also able to provide a reasonable degree of supplementary Sealift capability then the E replacement capability could be somewhat reduced. As long as the sum of it can deal with the potential issues that may come up when CY is not around under urgency. The old girls Tui and Monowai were not perfect but were around.

 

[Sea Toby]

An option I like better than a large, expensive JSS is the RMS St. Helena... Two thirds cargo vessel and one third passenger vessel... For a ship two thirds the size of the Canterbury she carries 1800 tons of cargo, either container or dry bulk, and a hundred and fifty troops... She is a very flexible ship useful for humanitarian missions...

But alas, she is not either a replenishment ship or a ro-ro passenger ship....

RMS St Helena (1989) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But I agree with the government and would prefer a small replenishment ship/ro-ro passenger ship of around 12-15k tons displacement...

 

[RegR]

It is the duty of government to plan for what ifs, by having appropriate resource planning in place to minimise the risks. Who would have thought after the Brisbane floods thought a category 5 cyclone was going to bear down on Nth Queensland (which it did as luck would have it lost most of its force overland), what if the category 5 had hit Vanuatu, New Caledonia then Nth Queensland and ADF resource were stretched to cope with the destruction of Nth Queensland, with the 3 amphibious ship tied alongside it and out of action, it would been left to the New Zealander’s to be the lead nation in the distribution of aid to the pacific nations.

Naturally RNZN cannot have a fleet of Canterbury’s, but having complementary or duplicate force is prudent planning on the government’s behalf, another what if HMNZS Canterbury runs onto a well charted but submerged rock reminisce of HMS Nottingham grounding in 2002, it was 23 months before she sailed again, can the RNZN afford to be without be without a sealift capability for such a long time?



All that tells me is that the few extra vehicles where need for the ex Hamel, without the extra lift via C17 you might have been short for the ex, good training for the air crews but leaves you short in sealift requirements, also shows the interoperability for the defence force on both sides of the Tasman.

The government did plan for 'what if', they got CY, and endeavour II is going to supplement that with an appropriate capability, not replace it.

There were 6 extra vehs in the hanger that were mainly air force vehs and were not fully loaded or actually critical and by all accounts did relatively little but park up for the duration of the ex and do nebulous runs, again wants not needs. If you have the space you may as well make use of it.

All missions will be different in complexity and size does'nt mean we need the Titanic on payroll and on standby.

 

[gvg]

Then let us look at the new Dutch JSS:
........
No landing craft, no well dock. ...........

It has davits with 2 LCVP's.

 

[chis73]

It has davits with 2 LCVP's.

Anybody else think that those LCVP davits on the Dutch JSS look exceptionally low to the waterline? I can't help thinking that's going to cause exactly the same sort of problems we had with Canterbury. Maybe there are some protective doors but I don't see any in the sketches I've seen so far.

Also, the Dutch JSS has that crazy ramp system for docking the landing craft - one of the worst features on Canterbury - as it is only useable in glacial sea-states. At 28000 tonnes full-load you would think they could find room for a well-dock.

Anybody know if Canterbury has used her landing craft during the recent quake relief operation in Christchurch?

Chis73

 

[RegR]

Anybody else think that those LCVP davits on the Dutch JSS look exceptionally low to the waterline? I can't help thinking that's going to cause exactly the same sort of problems we had with Canterbury. Maybe there are some protective doors but I don't see any in the sketches I've seen so far.

Also, the Dutch JSS has that crazy ramp system for docking the landing craft - one of the worst features on Canterbury - as it is only useable in glacial sea-states. At 28000 tonnes full-load you would think they could find room for a well-dock.

Anybody know if Canterbury has used her landing craft during the recent quake relief operation in Christchurch?

Chis73

I heard from freinds they loaded her up and used it to land pers/equipment, only 1 onboard however(same as ex Hamel) so maybe other one un-serviceble. Would be a handy peice of kit in those hard to reach bays.

 

[swerve]

Also, the Dutch JSS has that crazy ramp system for docking the landing craft - one of the worst features on Canterbury - as it is only useable in glacial sea-states. At 28000 tonnes full-load you would think they could find room for a well-dock.
Chis73

She's not intended for amphibious operations. The Netherlands has two LPDs for that.

 

[Norm]

Three die in 'Viking' yacht off Antarctica | Stuff.co.nz

New OPV HMNZS Wellington has encountered winds of 182Km/hr & 8 m Swells in the Antarctic on Tuesday responding to a Mayday signal from the 45m steel yacht " Bersek". The Sea Sheperd vessel Steve Irwin has subsequently locate debris from the "Berserk" and a liferaft.

The skipper of HMNZS Wellington is reported as saying the ship was up to the conditions,some damage eg Aerials,lighting swept away. The OPVs do catch the wind I've been told and the crew has learnt how to handle that aspect,stabilisers work a treat .So this storm [sadly the loss of the Berserk] has shown the OPV's are up to handingly the big stuff.

 

[CJohn]

An interesting press release from DefMin Mapp (dated 25/2/11) concerning HMNZS Canterbury's schedule over the next few days. This just demonstrates the versatility of this ship in adverse situations and arguers well for continued and possibly enhanced sealift in the Navy's future plans.

The Navy multi-role vessel HMNZS Canterbury will sail to Wellington from Lyttelton tomorrow to load up with disaster relief supplies for its namesake province.

Defence Minister Wayne Mapp said that Canterbury will arrive in Wellington at approximately 6pm on Sunday and after refuelling will embark a wide range of supplies and equipment for the earthquake recovery effort. The cargo list is expected to include:

a 28,000 litre fuel truck
29 4 x 4 vehicles
six 20’ containers (including four refrigerated)
eight pallets of water and Telecom equipment
a front end loader.
an Army Bailey bridge.

Further items are expected before sailing time at 4am on Monday.

“Canterbury was in Lyttelton when the earthquake struck. Her crew have done a tremendous job there,” Dr Mapp said. “In particular they have provided hundreds of meals to the community. I visited Lyttelton on Thursday and people spoke very highly of the support the ship has provided.

“The same can be said of all Defence Force personnel deployed to help in Canterbury. From the soldiers on the cordon, to the Army engineers who set up a desalination system yesterday, to the round the clock air support that the RNZAF has maintained, the services have done a first-class job.

“There is a long way to go for Canterbury but the Defence Force will be there, doing whatever it can to help,” he said.

HMNZS Otago and HMNZS Pukaki will continue the naval support role in Lyttelton while Canterbury is away.

 

[recce.k1]

Three die in 'Viking' yacht off Antarctica | Stuff.co.nz

New OPV HMNZS Wellington has encountered winds of 182Km/hr & 8 m Swells in the Antarctic on Tuesday responding to a Mayday signal from the 45m steel yacht " Bersek". The Sea Sheperd vessel Steve Irwin has subsequently locate debris from the "Berserk" and a liferaft.

The skipper of HMNZS Wellington is reported as saying the ship was up to the conditions,some damage eg Aerials,lighting swept away. The OPVs do catch the wind I've been told and the crew has learnt how to handle that aspect,stabilisers work a treat .So this storm [sadly the loss of the Berserk] has shown the OPV's are up to handingly the big stuff.

RNZN have a news feature on the OPV's successful Antarctic sea trials:
RNZN - Media Releases

“The trials have helped determine the ship’s capabilities and limitations, and have allowed us to become familiar with the dynamics of the Ross Sea area” said Commanding Officer of HMNZS WELLINGTON, Lieutenant Commander Simon Griffiths.

“The trials also prove that the ship can conduct small boat operations, can land and operate personnel along the Antarctic coastline and can conduct reconnaissance and surveillance operations throughout the Ross Dependency.”

This new capability can now be developed further to allow the RNZN to work alongside other government agencies to conduct various surveillance and support operations in Antarctic waters.

RNZN's flicker site features some photos of the ice build up on the OPV HMNZS Wellington:
[ame="http://www.flickr.com/photos/nzdefenceforce/sets/72157626046921527/with/5487692875/"]HMNZS WELLINGTON Deployment to Ross Sea - a set on Flickr[/ame]

And found this on Scoop, "RNZN Ahead and Astern", the year in review 2010:
RNZN Ahead and Astern | Scoop News
http://img.scoop.co.nz/media/pdfs/1012/AA_Proof_lores.pdf

Finally, it's been a busy time for the RNZN with both Frigates recently deploying to an Australian exercise (Exercise Triton Storm 2011) following their engine upgrades and both OPV's at sea etc. Looks like the RNZN has reached its optimum personnel levels (i.e. something RNZN has been striving for to meet the Project Protector commissioning)?

 

[Gibbo]

.....Looks like the RNZN has reached its optimum personnel levels (i.e. something RNZN has been striving for to meet the Project Protector commissioning)?

Well hopefully if that's the case then they'll send one of the frigates over for piracy patrol as the UN has again asked for. I guess however the Chch operation is sucking resources so this may delay any decision.

Gee if RNZN don't agree to sending a frigate at some point this year then when will they ever!?! We could start to lose credibility at UN if we are seen to be fully operational & not contributing. Personally I think it will happen, but when is anyone's guess.

 

[RubiconNZ]

Well hopefully if that's the case then they'll send one of the frigates over for piracy patrol as the UN has again asked for. I guess however the Chch operation is sucking resources so this may delay any decision.

Gee if RNZN don't agree to sending a frigate at some point this year then when will they ever!?! We could start to lose credibility at UN if we are seen to be fully operational & not contributing. Personally I think it will happen, but when is anyone's guess.

Personally I would think the Canterbury would be of more use for the anti-piracy ops acting in a mother ship role with 4 RHIBS, a platoon of Soldiers and a pair of Sea Sprites would be quite the effective anti-piracy tasking.

Of course a well deck with a pair of CB 90's or Mark 5's would be that little bit better.

Seriously though I think its important as you say for the RNZN to send something now, its a bit easier with both out of refit, it also again reinforces the importance of Frigates to the public.

 

[swerve]

You can operate CB90s without a well deck. The Danes operate the similar SRC90 from Absalon & Esbern Snare via a stern door & extending crane, & they can be operated from davits.

 

[aussienscale]

Personally I would think the Canterbury would be of more use for the anti-piracy ops acting in a mother ship role with 4 RHIBS, a platoon of Soldiers and a pair of Sea Sprites would be quite the effective anti-piracy tasking.

Of course a well deck with a pair of CB 90's or Mark 5's would be that little bit better.

Seriously though I think its important as you say for the RNZN to send something now, its a bit easier with both out of refit, it also again reinforces the importance of Frigates to the public.

Would be a good option for all intensive purposes, but I don't think the NZ Government woul be too keen to see her too far away at the moment, it will now also depend on the AUS/NZ agreement on sharing her and what workload they have planned for thus far ?

If they are going to do it NZ will just have to bite the bullet and send and Anzac

 

[RubiconNZ]

Would be a good option for all intensive purposes, but I don't think the NZ Government woul be too keen to see her too far away at the moment, it will now also depend on the AUS/NZ agreement on sharing her and what workload they have planned for thus far ?

If they are going to do it NZ will just have to bite the bullet and send and Anzac

Yes you are probably right re the Frigate, It would be great if a nation would start operating in that way in Anti-Piracy ops rather than Destroyers, Anzac's on the other hand are perfect nice Patrol Frigates

@ Swerve thanks for the information, the CB90 seems like a fantastic vessel.

 

[tongan_yam]

Phil Goff the Peacenik

Really a disappointing comment from ex MOD Phil Goff.

"If the infrastructure of Christchurch needs to be rebuilt, that comes before putting a new missile system on frigates, it comes before a 'holiday highway' north of Auckland."

Now more than likely he's trying to get some political headway since the ChCh EQ, but under pressure his true colours come out. Considering that it was his ministry that green lighted the MLU.

Maybe it's more a reflection of the title he held 'Minister of Defence and Disarmament'

As has been pointed out here before, it's our leaders (and opp. leaders) lack of appetite for putting defence in it's rightful place as enabler of trade and enterprise that really has me frustrated. Rant over:el