Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

Could be some interesting competitive offers from Canada and Australia on their respective T26 versions assuming Canada goes with the T26. Australia probably has an advantage from a timing point of view as the Australian build will be nearer the goal line by the time NZ considers a replacement compared to Canada and there is the geographic consideration. Our CMS and larger build number might assist us in getting a NZ order.

John Fedup said:

Could be some interesting competitive offers from Canada and Australia on their respective T26 versions assuming Canada goes with the T26. Australia probably has an advantage from a timing point of view as the Australian build will be nearer the goal line by the time NZ considers a replacement compared to Canada and there is the geographic consideration. Our CMS and larger build number might assist us in getting a NZ order.

Click to expand...

I would have thought the standard RN version would have appeal as NZ ANZACS as Sea Ceptor is already fitted to the ANZACs giving the possibility of moving it from the upgraded vessels. lowing initial price. Not to say the ease of tagging on an order with Aus doesn't have appeal.

harryriedl said:

I would have thought the standard RN version would have appeal as NZ ANZACS as Sea Ceptor is already fitted to the ANZACs giving the possibility of moving it from the upgraded vessels. lowing initial price. Not to say the ease of tagging on an order with Aus doesn't have appeal.

Click to expand...

The LM CMS, used by NZ and Canada, is a more important factor than missiles I think. Not sure about Canadian versus Australian appeal but either probably has more than a UK build.

John Fedup said:

The LM CMS, used by NZ and Canada, is a more important factor than missiles I think. Not sure about Canadian versus Australian appeal but either probably has more than a UK build.

Click to expand...

Once the production lines are running efficiently (after hull 2 I suspect) then adding additional hulls for other customers (by increasing the production drum beat) may be practical and reasonably cost effective for what you get and through life support .... BUT... the political optics of a 8800 tonne frigate may be the killer.

alexsa said:

Once the production lines are running efficiently (after hull 2 I suspect) then adding additional hulls for other customers (by increasing the production drum beat) may be practical and reasonably cost effective for what you get and through life support .... BUT... the political optics of a 8800 tonne frigate may be the killer.

Click to expand...

I think the British might be more likely to aim a Couple of Type 31s at the Kiwis.

Redlands18 said:

I think the British might be more likely to aim a Couple of Type 31s at the Kiwis.

Click to expand...

Might be but since NZDF have yet to begin it's study into what frigate RNZN requires post ANZAC no one knows until the RFT is released, if Canada goes the type 26 route as well NZ just might tag onto there build which looks more likely to fit our time line for replacement imho.

Cadredave said:

Might be but since NZDF have yet to begin it's study into what frigate RNZN requires post ANZAC no one knows until the RFT is released, if Canada goes the type 26 route as well NZ just might tag onto there build which looks more likely to fit our time line for replacement imho.

Click to expand...

Don't start soon they will have 40 year old ships before they now it. Mind you from the late 20s there will be a pool of spare parts this side of the Ditch.

Redlands18 said:

Don't start soon they will have 40 year old ships before they now it. Mind you from the late 20s there will be a pool of spare parts this side of the Ditch.

Click to expand...

According to the MoD the RNZN frigate replacement programme is earmarked to formally start in 2019 though an RFI wont likely be released until the middle of next decade.

So 2025 for the RFI, the likely date for the first of 15 CSC ships and if they are T26s, NZ can see three examples of this design during the decision process, not a bad position to be in when considering such a large investment.

Cadredave said:

Might be but since NZDF have yet to begin it's study into what frigate RNZN requires post ANZAC no one knows until the RFT is released, if Canada goes the type 26 route as well NZ just might tag onto there build which looks more likely to fit our time line for replacement imho.

Click to expand...

It seems strange that NZ would button into the Canadian stream when an Australian production line is in full swing and costs down to an industry standard
NZ operates in the Asia Pacific region in many cases with the RAN, the RAN sustainment and supplier stream will be current and readily available.
Why would the RNZN want to operate an orphan system in this part of the world?

We let you win the Bledisloe every year, surely we can get something in return.

alexsa said:

Once the production lines are running efficiently (after hull 2 I suspect) then adding additional hulls for other customers (by increasing the production drum beat) may be practical and reasonably cost effective for what you get and through life support .... BUT... the political optics of a 8800 tonne frigate may be the killer.

Click to expand...

I would like to think the issues and limitations we (and RAN) have had with the current ANZACs (and OPVs) in terms of upgrade paths, weight issues, sea keeping etc would have at least highlighted the benefits of size rather then (again) limit our options for the sake of perceived savings in the short term. Steel is cheap air is free, unless you're trying to modify it after the fact that is, future proofing is the term that comes to mind.

ASSAIL said:

It seems strange that NZ would button into the Canadian stream when an Australian production line is in full swing and costs down to an industry standard
NZ operates in the Asia Pacific region in many cases with the RAN, the RAN sustainment and supplier stream will be current and readily available.
Why would the RNZN want to operate an orphan system in this part of the world?

We let you win the Bledisloe every year, surely we can get something in return.

Click to expand...

As idealistic as that sounds our ANZACs have not been the same pretty much since they rolled off the slipway bar baseline and subsequent upgrades and modifications have only furthered their individual paths. Orphan is a relative term with the main benefits being more industrial and political than interchangable and operational in most regards.

MrConservative said:

According to the MoD the RNZN frigate replacement programme is earmarked to formally start in 2019 though an RFI wont likely be released until the middle of next decade.

Click to expand...

RFI about 2025, selection 2028-30, first steelcut 32-33, in commision 36-38,
So 40yo Ships it is.

It seems to me that NZs best bet would be talking to the likes of Britain, France, Italy, Spain etc about adding their Ships to existing production runs. It will get expensive to set up a production run of just 2-3 Ships and there is a large number of production runs either just started or will start in the next couple of years running well into the 30s. There is plenty of choices at the lower end especially.

Redlands18 said:

RFI about 2025, selection 2028-30, first steelcut 32-33, in commision 36-38,
So 40yo Ships it is.

Click to expand...

That time line doesn't sound like it will marry up with T31-e unless the UKG orders all 10 T31-e's, I'm sceptical that the UK will build all 10 before they move onto the next big thing. I have been hearing Chinese whispers that they may build the T45 replacement early after the T26 run not sure what to make of that as HMS Daring will only be 24 years old by 2030 but does make sense if your not going to put money into refits.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...data/file/642419/04092017a_NSBS_Factsheet.pdf

MrConservative said:

According to the MoD the RNZN frigate replacement programme is earmarked to formally start in 2019 though an RFI wont likely be released until the middle of next decade.

Click to expand...

From my POV, the replacement frigate programme timeline is going to be dependent on just how much work has been done prior to the formal start of the programme.

Using some of the recent historical Oz/Kiwi capital defence projects as a guide, it seems to take on average about 14 years between the formal start of a programme and IOC, assuming the acquisition is a planned acquisition as opposed to an 'emergency' acquisition.

Looking at Oz and the SEA 5000 programme (in terms of the timeline of events only) there had been mentions of the need to replace the RAN's ANZAC-class FFH's in both the 2009 and 2013 Defence White Papers which were both well before the formal start of the SEA 5000 programme in 2015. This was not unlike how the subject of the Future Surface Combatant to replace the RNZN's ANZAC-class frigates has been mentioned in the 2016 Defence Capability Plan, which was anticipating that programme starting sometime in late 2018, and with procurement at least well underway if not necessarily actually in service by 2030. I have taken that to mean that it is expected that the future design and construction yards will have already been settled on by 2030, with the potential for first steel to have already been cut as well.

Again, looking to the SEA 5000 timeline, the programme formally commenced in 2015 and a year latter three designers were short-listed. A year after that an RFT was released, and a little more than a year after the RFT was released, the winning entry was selected and announced.

What this suggests to me is that if the RNZN, NZDF and gov't starts out with a fair (and reasonable) idea of what capabilities are desired in the RNZN's replacement frigates, then selection of the replacement design could occur within as little as about three years, which would be around 2022. If (big IF) that decision is made in 2022, alongside the selection of the build yard, then first steel might be able to be cut in 2025 or 2026 which could see the first of class in service around 2030.

IMO there would be several caveats and concerns about this though. One of the first being the actual degree to which the RNZN, NZDF and gov't start the replacement programme having already established a minimum capability baseline. The more time and resources which need to be committed to the study and analysis of then current and projected future threats and developments, the further back any RFI or RFT will occur, and with it the further back decisions will be made.

An area of significant concern for me, particularly given the history over the last generation of Kiwi defence acquisitions, is that the future frigate is also going start out with a low capability requirement as a baseline. In that respect, it would not be unlike the capabilities the ANZAC-class frigates started with, which was a limited ASuW capability via the 5"/127 mm gun, limited ASW capability via a single naval helicopter sans dipping sonar, backed up by LWT launchers and a hull-mounted sonar aboard ship, and a limited AAW self-defence capability via RIM-7 Sea Sparrow missiles and a Mk 15 Phalanx CIWS. Here we are, nearly 30 years after the design and capabilities were selected, and such capabilities would now be considered obsolete and inadequate even for just a self-defence capability, never mind if the vessels were required to escort and defend other vessels like commercial shipping. It is unfortunate that I consider there to be real potential that security threats to NZ, especially in the maritime domain, could be ignored either due to ideological limitations decision-makers suffer from, or as a result of ignorance which has been referred to as "sea blindness". If the RNZN were to again get "combat vessels" primarily suited for operating and patrolling in NZ's EEZ, then the RNZN would be degraded to a more Coast Guard or constabulary role. This in turn would be a force ill-suited to Chapt. VII operations should they either become necessary, or get forced upon NZ. Even Chapt. VI operations might be beyond the realistic scope of NZ capabilities, if a low baseline capability is selected.

t68 said:

That time line doesn't sound like it will marry up with T31-e unless the UKG orders all 10 T31-e's, I'm sceptical that the UK will build all 10 before they move onto the next big thing. I have been hearing Chinese whispers that they may build the T45 replacement early after the T26 run not sure what to make of that as HMS Daring will only be 24 years old by 2030 but does make sense if your not going to put money into refits.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...data/file/642419/04092017a_NSBS_Factsheet.pdf

Click to expand...

31e will be five ships, not ten, or so it's intended right now - as one for one replacements for the GP (ie, non-TSA type 23's)

31e would potentially be a significant improvement for the Kiwi's as it'll be a roomier, more stable hull with more space for boats, better sea keeping etc. Timing wise, they can be ordered any time that suits but ideally, a decision made sooner rather than later would be best

On replacing Type, I did suggest this might happen sooner than usually expected in order to get the RN's AWD platform off an orphan set of technologies (Wr21 for instance) That's going to get to be an expensive ship to keep in service in later years..

StobieWan said:

31e will be five ships, not ten, or so it's intended right now - as one for one replacements for the GP (ie, non-TSA type 23's)

Click to expand...

I thought I read some where that T31-e could be up to ten hulls to get the number of perceived escorts up. I'm not expecting 10 to be built as I said just thought I read somewhere that 10 could be built.

StobieWan said:

31e would potentially be a significant improvement for the Kiwi's as it'll be a roomier, more stable hull with more space for boats, better sea keeping etc. Timing wise, they can be ordered any time that suits but ideally, a decision made sooner rather than later would be best

Click to expand...

Oh no doubt, that depends on the actual design selected it is encouraging seeing designs put forward as the Arrowhead 140. but going by the time suggested by some on the board there appears to be a gap that would be possibly the last T31 for the UK and cutting of steel for NZ, as Tod was suggesting NZG might have to bring forward some of there planning. But its not encouraging when you see the procrastinating going on with FAMC/FASC programmes

StobieWan said:

On replacing Type, I did suggest this might happen sooner than usually expected in order to get the RN's AWD platform off an orphan set of technologies (Wr21 for instance) That's going to get to be an expensive ship to keep in service in later years..

Click to expand...

its a pity the way its worked out for T45 and the troubles but that's life, things don't always go as planned and end up cost more taking away funds from other areas of need. they may be able to off load these cheap to someone else if the can get a bit more reliability from them.

t68 said:

Oh no doubt, that depends on the actual design selected it is encouraging seeing designs put forward as the Arrowhead 140. but going by the time suggested by some on the board there appears to be a gap that would be possibly the last T31 for the UK and cutting of steel for NZ, as Tod was suggesting NZG might have to bring forward some of there planning. But its not encouraging when you see the procrastinating going on with FAMC/FASC programmes

Click to expand...

The willingness on the part of gov't to actually make decisions (as opposed to putting them off like has been the modus operandi of the last 15+ years) as well as giving due consideration to contingency planning.

Due to decisions which led to the options to purchase two additional ANZAC-class frigates not being exercised prior to those options expiring in 1997 the RNZN is going to find itself either a single frigate, or no frigate navy over the next ~four years or so for periods of time, as the Sea Ceptor upgrades are being fitted and brought into service.

Based off the upgrades the RNZN frigates have already received and the Sea Ceptor upgrades which are pending, the vessels should be fairly serviceable for about another 15 years or so before either requiring replacement or another MLU. One must keep in mind that Te Kaha and Te Mana went through two Platform System Upgrades with Phase 1 being completed in 2010, and Phase 2 running from 2013-2016 to improve or replace the propulsion systems, HVAC, IPMS and BDCS to extend the operational life of the vessels through the mid-2020's. These refits were separate from the Frigate System upgrade which is replacing the Sea Sparrow missile with Sea Ceptor and associated systems like radar, CMS, etc.

The above would in turn mean that come 2030, the RNZN frigate force would really no longer be fit for purpose, assuming of course nothing bad happened beforehand like hostilities breaking out on the Korean Peninsula, or in the ECS, SCS, or one of the archipelagos which bound the SCS.

What I would like to see the RNZN do, aside from selecting a GP frigate (or destroyer...) that is capable of performing multiple roles like ASW, ASuW, NGS and air defence, is for the RNZN to commit to rebuilding the number of combatants in service to at least three and preferably four. If the planning is done for this properly, and the decision-makers do not drag their feet, it might be possible to get the first of class for the future surface combatant in service by 2030, and have later vessels brought into service as Te Kaha and Te Mana are decommissioned.

Of course this would also require gov't being willing to fund the replacements...

I would suggest that by the time a decision on replacing the ANZAC comes along the Chinese will be deploying regularly to the South Pacific and there will be a much stronger case for a top end ASW frigate such as the Type 26.