Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Procurement idea

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Procurement idea

    Just surfing the net, and a thought arose.

    There are several countries with requirements similar to Ireland, New Zealand being the most obvious.

    I know they are on the other side of the world, but look at it this way.

    When it comes to the needs and role of their defence force, it is remarkably similar to ours.

    Similar climate reqirements (South Island is like a huge version of North Conemara)
    Small detatchment peace keeping
    Current upgrading of rotary aircraft
    Fisheries protection driven naval policy with a reqirement for overseas support
    Both anglophone countries
    Both post colonial states
    Both small population, Island nations in periheral locations.
    Their defence budget is 1% of GDP, ours about 0.8.

    NZ's procurement program (naval EPV, air Medium lift helo, army APVs etc) are broadly similar.

    NZ having SEATO commitments makes them a bit different, as does our land border and a higher COIN factor needed in contingency planning, but broadly they are very similar to Ireland. Their Army contingent is smaller, but Naval and Aviation forces bigger.

    Now, I realise that there are people in the DoD who deal with procurement and finance, but for certain types of equpment (e.g. Pirhanna/NZLAV, Styer AUG, MEKO type EPV) why has there not been a joint procurement program in the past to reduce costs etc.
    Bulk buying almost always gives better value and returns. ??
    It would also reduce costs for spares and maintainence long term.

    Its certainly worth a look.

    From the Marine side For example, a ship built fr EPV by - for example - the MEKO consortium, nothing to stop it being sold to Ireland or NZ.
    Same as for an Ocean going tug/MPV.
    Same thing could be said for a potential future MPA UAV.
    Same as for a Naval Airwing

    In army terms, artillery, APVs, off road vehicles, trucks etc - the list goes on.

    In terms of aviation, modern (F-16 A[a planned buy was cancelled by Z for budget reasons) or rebuilt (Swiss/Austrian F-5) CAP capable aircraft - Medium lift helos etc.

    Its just an idea.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_zealand_military

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Defence_Forces
    Last edited by simon; 3 March 2009, 15:37.

  • #2
    Its a good idea

    thats why it wont happen
    Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
    Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
    The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere***
    The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
    The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity.

    Comment


    • #3
      If the 2 countries were closer it could be a runner. If New Zealand was to it would probably become involved with Australia.

      Joint programmes eg Eurofighter (Typoon), Joint Strike Fighter etc usually are massive expensive as there a a number of countries involved that want very different things.

      The European Defence Agency (if it ever starts working properly) should bring down development costs, improve interoperability and possibly bring economies of scale (but there are too many competitors in the arms industry in Europe and elsewhere for it to work at its best potential).

      Ireland is in a good position as it isn't usually involved in development, we normally buy off the shelf. The one exception to that is probably NS vessels, having said that Roisin is based on another vessel & Niamh is an improved version of Roisin.

      Good idea though!

      Comment


      • #4
        I know that NZ is closly tied with Austraia, that has always been and will always be the case.
        We have a less integrated and divergent relationship with the UK.

        But for certain types of - for want of a better word - capital investment equipment such as APV, firearms and maritime vessels, there is an argement for it, geographical position does not prevent this.

        All equipment from both natons will be off the shelf, neither has a need or interest in developing a military industrial capability.

        I have an fairly good understanding and interest in military fixed wing aviation, but a professional knowledge of the maritime field so I will stick with what I know.

        HMNZS Canterbury was built at the Merwede Shipyard in the Netherlands, under contract to Tenix.
        Her design is based on a commercial RO-RO ship, Ben-My-Chree in operation in the Irish Sea.
        It would have been a good project to be involved in, and we may have got an additional saving on EU funding. Its still an option in my opinon to copy the type, but with an Oto Melara main gun obviously for standardisation.

        In terms of Ocean going tugs, CPV, OPV or a Maritime UAV, where variations on existing design would most likley be needed, there is a lot of scope for co-operation.
        Hull and plant are fairly standard.
        Both countries use the same standard naval gun armament.

        Our type P50's are based on an Australian designed all-steel hull based on the Mauritian Vigilant patrol vessel launched in 1995, but without the helicopter deck and hangar facilities.

        With an EPV/MRV based around a MEKO hull form and plant are planned by both nations, idealy we require two, may get lucky and get one.
        New Zealand
        Whatever the sensor fit, even the weapons fit would be, the hull form and accommodation would be the same, which would save a lot of cash.

        This is a list of the RNZN planned developments.

        x = in my opinion not an Irish requirement
        * = possible room for co-operation
        ~ = NZ have already developed a program

        2 x ANZAC Frigates x Not needed by Ireland

        1 x Multi-role vessel ~ (New Irish MRV/EPV - P20 Eithne replacement) HMNZS Canterbury

        2 x Offshore Patrol vessels x (P50 class - P20 Dierdre replacement) Divergence, NZ Otago type their take on, they have helicoptor capability.

        4 x Inshore Patrol vessels x (P40 replacement) I think their Rotoiti IPV class may be too small for Atlantic conditions.

        1 x Replenishing ship x (with our type of deployment/ no NATO-SEATO commitments it is not needed)

        1 x Dive Support vessel* (Varient on the idea of a semi commercial ocean goig tug for Ireland)

        1 x Hydrographic Survey vessel x (covered by Voyager and explorer)

        However, if we were working in co-operation, we could have helped them with their Otago project, with its problems, and they could have advised us on an airwing for a small naval force, with which we had problems.
        Looking at what has been in the past 40 years in the military development of both countries makes it obvious that there will be similar projects in the future.

        As well as that both countries are the leading rugby nations in their hemisphere. Thats good enough for me.

        Comment


        • #5
          Have a look at the Project Protector thread. The Kiwis are having woeful trouble with the Canterbury and the OPVs(which are also based on the Canadian designed Guardian class- same as out P50s).

          I do believe we could share experience and Ideas though. I know there was an officer exchange program a few years ago, I'm not sure if any of ours got the return trip though.


          Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

          Comment


          • #6
            If Canterbury was the lead of a class, follow up vessels could avoid known problems.

            Our experience with P-50 would have ben valuable to them

            Comment


            • #7
              The one thing that people seem to be ignoring is that the Kiwis seem to be more willing to spend the $$$$ on Defence. Also, their DF are also much more geared toward Naval expenditure/deployment. They seem to realize that they're on an island. I think that's where the fall down will be. While some projects will undoubtedly dovetail nicely, I think that they're ability to see that Defence is a necessary expenditure means that the majority of things they wish to purchase will be declined by the DoD (or to be honeslt, the DoF)
              Meh.

              Comment


              • #8
                Acording to the New zealand Herald the NZLAVS are turning in to white elephants. Not
                suitable for deployment abroad so far. and projected maintenance cost of 10 million now running at around 45 million

                Comment


                • #9
                  It's a pity a sensible suggestion comes on the same day that a Government Minister calls for withdrawal from the European Defence Agency, it appears some won't be happy unless we isolate ourselves completely... and throw stones at anyone that wants to interfere with us!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Not scientific, just lifted from CIA factbook - there does not seem to be that big a difference in expenditure.

                    Irelands GDP (purchasing power parity) $198.5 billion (2008 est.)
                    Military expenditures: 0.9% of GDP (2005 est.)

                    New Zealand GDP (purchasing power parity): $118.9 billion (2008 est.)
                    Military expenditures: 1% of GDP (2005 est.)

                    So, in theory, the funds used are not too different. But, then again, with an Army about twice the size of NZ's and pay difference, our payroll would be bigger.
                    But I think the comparison is still valid.
                    Certainly makes for an interesting debate/topic

                    We could probably get funding on hull and plant from the EU provided we build vessels in EU.
                    Certainly in terms of expenditure after visiting that wonderful country I can say that our road system is better, because of the EU

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X