John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The design changes you mention partially explain the huge payment (reportedly in access of 200 million) to Irving.
Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Padman
- Start date
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
@Novascotiaboy ....interesting, offering NZ a slot at 4 or 5 and assuming the GoC is on board for a 7th might be workable. Starting to feel bad about hogging the RNZN thread, we should continue the Irving stuff at the RCN thread.
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
Our two nations are very simikar as has been noted on this forum.
Having seen the the Chief of the NZ Navy was here in May he would have seen the future Harry Dewolfe almost complete. The fact he was here to see for himself what could be an option for his navy say alot.
Once the first of class bugs are worked out this class of ship will IMHO prove themselves as multi purpose platforms.
If the NZG is prepared to make a commitment it makes sense to give up a slot and pass one off sooner than later. Not too soon though as RNZN crew can cross deck and learn how to operate alongside RCN crew before taking there own vessel home.
My personal preference would be for this new vessel if acquired by the RNZN to be named Monowai.
The original was a similar multi purpose vessel that served NZ well.
Having seen the the Chief of the NZ Navy was here in May he would have seen the future Harry Dewolfe almost complete. The fact he was here to see for himself what could be an option for his navy say alot.
Once the first of class bugs are worked out this class of ship will IMHO prove themselves as multi purpose platforms.
If the NZG is prepared to make a commitment it makes sense to give up a slot and pass one off sooner than later. Not too soon though as RNZN crew can cross deck and learn how to operate alongside RCN crew before taking there own vessel home.
My personal preference would be for this new vessel if acquired by the RNZN to be named Monowai.
The original was a similar multi purpose vessel that served NZ well.
There was some discussion here about cost for future HMNZS Aotearoa.
According to the link the contract to HHI was “around $500m
HHI Lays Keel of Royal New Zealand Navy Future HMNZS Aotearoa Tanker
According to the link the contract to HHI was “around $500m
HHI Lays Keel of Royal New Zealand Navy Future HMNZS Aotearoa Tanker
Definitely NZ$493 million as per the ministerial release.
New naval tanker to have enhanced capabilities
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
Sorry I didn't explain that well. The cost is definitely NZD$493m, as per Ngati's post. But it's not clear exactly what that sum covers. For some other acquisitions, there has been a breakdown provided of initial purchase cost and ongoing service cost.
Maritime Sustainment Capability | Ministry of Defence Website
Just looking on the MOD site, it says
which sort of implies that is simply the cost to build the ship and get it into service.
However, the following para definitely mentions a support package. We just don't know what it covers, and for how long.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
An exceedingly long bow, but hey, this is the internet. Wild speculation is the whole purpose of it.
I'm pretty sure I've seen our Chief of Navy photographed beside a Collins-class submarine, a Japanese AEGIS frigate and a nuclear-powered USN carrier. I think we can safely assume visiting a foreign vessel doesn't indicate a firm intent to purchase!
The AOPS is a little different, as NZ definitely is in the market for an ice-strengthened patrol vessel (rather than an actual icebreaker, light or otherwise). As the world isn't exactly awash with programmes building vessels of this type, it is almost be more remarkable if NZ wasn't keeping a close eye on developments in Canada.
Worth remembering that NZ's procurement rules require a contested buying process. It should go (in summary form):
1) Request for information, followed by analysis to develop tender docs
2) Request for proposals (i.e. a tender)
3) Best and Final Offer (usually pitting the top two bidders against each other)
4) Contract offer and acceptance
Sometime in the next few years, NZ will put out an RFP, and Irving will almost certainly bid. They will certainly out-score any other competitor in the 'Currently in Production' and 'In Service with International Partners'' categories. The questions will be how well they score against NZ requirements (may be more ice-hardened than required, at expense of speed/handling) and how the value for money stacks up.
Either way, it's going to be a fascinating process to watch.
Ideally we would need something a lot closer, because Manus is 1500-2000 nautical miles away in Melanesia from the NZ aligned small states located in Polynesia.
Having facilities in both Melanesia (OZ) and Polynesia (NZ) that both can use and access in a support role would be very helpful.
Yes thought maybe abit west for what we would be trying to achieve and yes agreed another option in the pacific with their (no doubt) mega base (if the yanks are involved haha) and any sattelite base we would establish.
Interesting turn of events nonetheless and somewhat of a ramp up in the pacific if it all goes ahead.
FoxtrotRomeo999
Active Member
Not getting too excited but there are a number of friendly states that could support sensibly naval and air assets - PNG (Manus or elsewhere), Solomons, Vanuatu, Fiji, Tonga. Of course, Aus/NZ can't permanently station assets across this chain but we could occasionally practice deployments, eg., in support of the Australian gifted patrol boats.
And don't forget to add to the mix:
And don't forget to add to the mix:
- the current French forces in New Caledonia and to the East,
- the US with a number of mid-Pacific dependencies,
- Indonesia.
There are issues with countries other than Australia and NZ parking assets in the region.
There would be issues with the US parking assets in here directly on issues like status of forces etc. They also have Samoa and Hawaii, Australia tends to prefer limited US involvement in the region. Managing a superpower can be difficult, negotiating a status of forces agreement etc. Probably best to stay below the radar. I find it curious that NZ'ers would be inclined to bring those nations in to the region given the historic issue NZ has as a country with US naval assets.
Indonesia operating in this region would I think be very difficult outside of say a HDAR mission. To be honest they are more likely to be preoccupied around themselves.
US and France are likely to be minor players in this. Best they operate through intermediaries like Australia and NZ.
Tonga, Cook Is, Tuvalu I think would be more NZ scene.
There would be issues with the US parking assets in here directly on issues like status of forces etc. They also have Samoa and Hawaii, Australia tends to prefer limited US involvement in the region. Managing a superpower can be difficult, negotiating a status of forces agreement etc. Probably best to stay below the radar. I find it curious that NZ'ers would be inclined to bring those nations in to the region given the historic issue NZ has as a country with US naval assets.
Indonesia operating in this region would I think be very difficult outside of say a HDAR mission. To be honest they are more likely to be preoccupied around themselves.
US and France are likely to be minor players in this. Best they operate through intermediaries like Australia and NZ.
Tonga, Cook Is, Tuvalu I think would be more NZ scene.
Last edited:
That’s an extraordinary looking stern, I haven’t seen that before, any comment Alex?Navy posted first look of the Aotearoa being built couple days ago on facebook
It gives a great look at the tankage arrangements....I think?
I think I can see how the stern/shaft line works.
http://navy.mil.nz/nr/rdonlyres/ee636afc-6922-4589-9980-9c5df2d84e8a/0/hmnzsaotearoa.png
If you look at the first main image there seems to be a shaft hole near the very top of the “twin”sterns and the whole aft section and flight deck above come a long way further aft.
http://navy.mil.nz/nr/rdonlyres/ee636afc-6922-4589-9980-9c5df2d84e8a/0/hmnzsaotearoa.png
If you look at the first main image there seems to be a shaft hole near the very top of the “twin”sterns and the whole aft section and flight deck above come a long way further aft.
So the rudders etc are further aft and higher up the hull then? I'm just trying to locate what part of the hull this may be.
I believe it has twin pods aft and the construction pic shows the bottom half of those pods, it’s almost a cat shape underwater aft.
You can clearly see the machine spaces, the large flat area and the fuel/liquid cargo tankage sections in the pic.
No expert, just my supposition and maybe that aft cat shape protects the props from the ice?
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
Bloody hell. It's only six weeks since the keel-laying ceremony, from memory. Those Hyundai dockyard guys aren't wasting any time.