Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Zealand Project Protector.

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

  • The ice belt is the problem what with 100 tonnes overweight it brings. And it’s too low to be considered within safe operating margins even for first year ice. Also the weight distribution makes it not ideal for sustained patrols south of Stewart Island in winter and Auckland Island in the summer.

    I’m of the view that maybe the whole Southern Ocean tasking should be abandoned by the Protector Vessels and the OPV’s Ice Belt removed losing the excess 100 tonnes of weight, and hopefully curing the vessel of its stability issues. There is more than enough patrol work for the OPV’s north of 47 degrees South around our EEZ as well as the South Pacific Dependencies, which have not seen regular RNZN patrols for over a decade. New Zealand, along with Australia and Brazil, is one of just three countries to be granted sovereign rights to its continental shelf by the United Nations. We now have rights over 5.45 million sq km of our continental shelf - an area three times the size of France.
    Of course it would mean that at least a new vessel would be required.

    The Australian Customs vessel Ocean Viking would have been the right vessel for the tasking needs in the Ross Sea or NZ’s National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) a government entity, which operates the 70m, ice strengthen (1-C) RV Tangaroa. Both also would have also been able to stow and deliver all those awkward and larger items down to Scott Base during the busy summer season on the ice for the Antarctica NZ programme that the US currently assists with when they have spare capacity. The Ocean Viking is putting on over 200 patrol days a year in the South Ocean which is quite an impressive workload. The RV Tangaroa has a respectable 60 day endurance and was bought new in 1991 for $27 million as a specialist research ship. Much of that cost though was due to the specialist scientific equipment required. I wonder what a good large 70 to 80m no frills commercial Trawler with 1-C ice strengthening would cost. Actually does the Navy have to pay and operate a Ross Sea ship? Could the Ministry of Fisheries, Antarctica NZ, Customs, DOC operate it and pay for it? I have also heard the argument lately that does the NZ Navy really have to do Oceanographic Surveying and pay for the replacement of the Resolution? These were good issues raised during the recent Defence Forum I attended. It’s not like the Navy has a mortgage on maritime activities.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Te Kaha View Post
      These were good issues raised during the recent Defence Forum I attended. It’s not like the Navy has a mortgage on maritime activities.
      Do you mind me asking what you do in relation to attending these Defence Forums? And who attends and organises these forums?

      Just curious.
      "The Question is not: how far you will take this? The Question is do you possess the constitution to go as far as is needed?"

      Comment


      • Originally posted by ZULU View Post
        Do you mind me asking what you do in relation to attending these Defence Forums? And who attends and organises these forums?

        Just curious.
        No problem. They are organised by the Defence Ministry. We in NZ are going through a Defence White Paper process. The first time in 13 years. The public and various departmental officials are invited to attend the forums throughout venues spread around the country. It gives the public the chance to give their opinions about the future defence direction. The forums are attended by the DefMin, Assoc DefMin, senior DefMin officials, and usually a Senior NZDF officer. They get to present there 'where its at' speech and the public who made written submissions get to challenge them and say their bit. You get the loonies of course but you also get people with real knowledge, recently retired Brigadiers and Rear Admirals who give the DefMin / Politicians side a bloodly good going over, which is actually great entertainment.

        Comment


        • If only we could take a leaf out of your operating manual! Or does something like that happen here? I've never been aware of it. Thanks for the info. Sounds like a great way of engaging some who might have some good advice.
          "The Question is not: how far you will take this? The Question is do you possess the constitution to go as far as is needed?"

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ZULU View Post
            If only we could take a leaf out of your operating manual! Or does something like that happen here? I've never been aware of it. Thanks for the info. Sounds like a great way of engaging some who might have some good advice.
            We actually stole the idea from the Australians, who have had a solid history in involving the general public and ex defence people their input into Defence. The result being that over time Australia has evolved into a first class military that has strong public support, a public who understands what national security is about and generally do not mind a measured and robust spending plan. Essentially the White Paper in 1997 also had the public forum format as well as Public Submissions and the publics opportunity to appear before the Foreign Affairs and Defence Select Committee as part of the process. Its a very good open transparent system that tests the officials and also gives the politicians a reality check.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Te Kaha View Post
              We actually stole the idea from the Australians, Its a very good open transparent system that tests the officials and also gives the politicians a reality check.
              Well the Australians developed this process after totally blowing their defense preparations before WWII. A nation learns much about the usefulness of an air force after being bombed over two hundred straight days with their best fighter being a few gypsy moths. There for a while their only fighter aircraft were ex-German Messersmiths which had been captured on the ground. They weren't of much use defending Australia being in North Africa.

              As I recall Australia at the beginning of WWII didn't have any tanks, any submarines, or much of any fighter aircraft. I know the depression wasn't of any help building up their defense forces....many other nations had the same problems financially....

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ZULU View Post
                If only we could take a leaf out of your operating manual! Or does something like that happen here? I've never been aware of it. Thanks for the info. Sounds like a great way of engaging some who might have some good advice.
                the department called for submissions from all parties regarding the last defence white paper, and recieved one from a golf club

                Comment


                • Originally posted by paul g View Post
                  the department called for submissions from all parties regarding the last defence white paper, and recieved one from a golf club
                  Brilliant!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by paul g View Post
                    the department called for submissions from all parties regarding the last defence white paper, and recieved one from a golf club
                    From all political parties? Or from public? Where did they advertise this request? Just interested to know. Thanks.

                    Heres the Aussie method

                    Last edited by ZULU; 2 November 2009, 21:02.
                    "The Question is not: how far you will take this? The Question is do you possess the constitution to go as far as is needed?"

                    Comment


                    • It could have been the Curragh Golf Club

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Te Kaha View Post
                        The ice belt is the problem what with 100 tonnes overweight it brings. And it’s too low to be considered within safe operating margins even for first year ice. Also the weight distribution makes it not ideal for sustained patrols south of Stewart Island in winter and Auckland Island in the summer.

                        I’m of the view that maybe the whole Southern Ocean tasking should be abandoned by the Protector Vessels and the OPV’s Ice Belt removed losing the excess 100 tonnes of weight, and hopefully curing the vessel of its stability issues. There is more than enough patrol work for the OPV’s north of 47 degrees South around our EEZ as well as the South Pacific Dependencies, which have not seen regular RNZN patrols for over a decade. New Zealand, along with Australia and Brazil, is one of just three countries to be granted sovereign rights to its continental shelf by the United Nations. We now have rights over 5.45 million sq km of our continental shelf - an area three times the size of France.
                        Of course it would mean that at least a new vessel would be required.

                        The Australian Customs vessel Ocean Viking would have been the right vessel for the tasking needs in the Ross Sea or NZ’s National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) a government entity, which operates the 70m, ice strengthen (1-C) RV Tangaroa. Both also would have also been able to stow and deliver all those awkward and larger items down to Scott Base during the busy summer season on the ice for the Antarctica NZ programme that the US currently assists with when they have spare capacity. The Ocean Viking is putting on over 200 patrol days a year in the South Ocean which is quite an impressive workload. The RV Tangaroa has a respectable 60 day endurance and was bought new in 1991 for $27 million as a specialist research ship. Much of that cost though was due to the specialist scientific equipment required. I wonder what a good large 70 to 80m no frills commercial Trawler with 1-C ice strengthening would cost. Actually does the Navy have to pay and operate a Ross Sea ship? Could the Ministry of Fisheries, Antarctica NZ, Customs, DOC operate it and pay for it? I have also heard the argument lately that does the NZ Navy really have to do Oceanographic Surveying and pay for the replacement of the Resolution? These were good issues raised during the recent Defence Forum I attended. It’s not like the Navy has a mortgage on maritime activities.
                        I am of the opinion an Otago OPV can be designed for multiple purposes with plug in containers built for different missions, similar to the Spanish BAM or the US LCS. I can see such an OPV being capable of not only patrolling, but mine hunting, oceanographic, dive tendering, and/or hydrographic missions properly one mission at a time. One ship, not five ships. Change the container modules to use the ship for a different mission. Of course this would require five container modules designed specifically for each of the missions. Plug and play.... Keep in mind the Otago's can carry three containers and has a workdeck below the helicopter deck. I would think NZ would require two such vessels. One for patrolling/mine hunting, with the other geared more for oceanographic/hydrographic work. But when faced with a huge mine hunting task, both can be used as such with a switch of the container modules. Not to mention the current two OPVs. From zero mine hunters to four, although at a cost of doing other missions for a short period of time.

                        Canada is doing something similar with their new patrol boats/corvettes, at a smaller scale, being able to be switched to a mine hunting role with a change of a container and equipped with mine countermeasures equipment. Most of the time they are used as patrol boats, but one of the twelve always has mine countermeasures gear aboard. I believe the Canadians have bought four mine hunting container mission modules.

                        While I will admit its not the best whatever, being able to multi-task when appropriate is nice with a small number of ships especially for a small navy. Even the largest navy is thinking in the same terms. More bang for the buck.
                        Last edited by Sea Toby; 6 November 2009, 19:46.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Sea Toby View Post
                          More bang for the buck.

                          It's a great idea.



                          "When you arise in the morning, think of what a precious privilege it is to be alive - to breathe, to think, to enjoy, to love."


                          Marcus Aurelius Roman Emperor (161 to 180 A.D.)

                          Comment


                          • Ex Wolf III

                            Foud a video of HMNZS Canterbury doing Amphip drills

                            "The Question is not: how far you will take this? The Question is do you possess the constitution to go as far as is needed?"

                            Comment


                            • nice video
                              Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.

                              Comment


                              • The RNZN has deployed the delivery crew for the first OPV HMNZS Otago. Reports in the Dominion post say that BAE have solved the weight problem and that other issues are stil to be resolved.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X