|
|
Post by SEAN on Oct 25, 2013 11:12:46 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Oct 25, 2013 11:41:50 GMT 12
"Littoral"= Inshore! I had to look it up!
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Oct 25, 2013 13:42:18 GMT 12
I imagine the first page of the official document will have written on it in 48pt font: MUST BE CHEAP.  |
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Oct 25, 2013 16:49:44 GMT 12
wonder if they go second hand, near new.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Oct 25, 2013 17:07:27 GMT 12
They are already checking TradeMe Beagle.
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Oct 25, 2013 17:20:30 GMT 12
bet they bought some tickets for that big lotto jackpot a few weeksago
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Oct 25, 2013 21:32:56 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Oct 26, 2013 7:31:27 GMT 12
Tim Wallis may still have a couple of old coastal steamers he wants to get rid of!
|
|
|
|
Post by meo4 on Oct 26, 2013 10:28:05 GMT 12
With a 25 year life of the ship it will be a new build ship. The RFI sounds like it will be the size of frigate or OPV .
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Oct 26, 2013 11:45:41 GMT 12
25 year life could still easily be second hand. By the time it is replaced Manawanui will be nearly 40 years old. or are you basing that claim on the fact they buy cheap these days and it won't last such a distance?
Why does the navy still need a hydrographic survey ship? I would have thought most places they need to chart around NZ are well and truly charted by now, and any further charting that might arise could be done by a civil contractor? Or are there other roles this ship did? Resolution has been out of service for a year and a half, have they missed it?
|
|
|
|
Post by meo4 on Oct 26, 2013 21:44:31 GMT 12
Minimum of 25 years so probably want 30 40 years out of ship. Resolution use to do the LINZ contract and at the time was the only ship in the Navy that payed for itself.
This replacement ship will carry the multi beam sonar along with the dive bell decompression chamber etc. Probably used to survey harbour prior to larger assets such as Canterbury enter unknown harbour in amphibious operation. Also clear mine fields find navigation hazards , downed aircraft ship wrecks, survey harbours after earthquakes e.g. Lytleton .
Basically to ensure shipping both civil and military can navigate safely.( 99% of NZ trade by sea)
|
|
|
|
Post by stereoimage on Jan 14, 2014 22:23:40 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jan 16, 2014 20:51:20 GMT 12
Looks ok but worried there is no helo hangar
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2014 22:55:05 GMT 12
Looks ok but worried there is no helo hangar And the flight deck is in the wrong place. Would have water coming over the bow in heavy seas. The 2012 report by Stringer et al., was submitted as an assessment work towards an engineering degree approximately 12 months before NZ MoD released its RFI for a LWSC. Therefore it could be that they have made educated guesses on what a NZ RFI would stipulate. Secondly, I have gone through their references and note that they cite NZBR 45 and NZBR 2170 but neither of those are listed in the references - naughty. So did they actually read both the NZBRs or did they just pick the titles off the web? I'd be picky about the hydrographic requirements probably going for GPSS rather than DGPS and also would want a platform mounted laser survey positioning system as well. Having read the actual RFI they are looking at something about 3000 - 3500 tonne displacement give or take,so slightly smaller than a RNZN ANZAC frigate. We think BMT have replied which would've been a given because we know that they have replied to the Endeavour Replacement RFI. How we know this is that in September that they gave a presentation based on their concept for the Endeavour Replacement It's a 29 page pdf file. The presentation was done with the permission of the NZ MoD. BMT are building the four MARS replenishment ships for the poms. The ships are being built in Korea and fitted out in the UK. They are based on the BMT Aegir Design. The LWSC is required to be able to do mine counter measures, hydrographic work, dive team support plus other taskings such as EEZ patrol etc. Both the Endeavour replacement and the LWSC will be new builds that way we get what we want and get the full service life out of the ships. Better economics and value for money in the long term. |
|
|
|
Post by exkiwiforces on Apr 19, 2014 20:22:42 GMT 12
In the Latest Navy Magazine (The magazine of the Navy League of Australia)Apr-Jun 2014. Has a done spread on NZ Navy, saying the New Littoral Warfare Support Ship is expected to be delivered in the 2018 and the replacement for the Endie is scheduled to be in service by 2019. Looks like the Senior Service is going to be busy in the coming years.
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwirob on May 8, 2014 20:25:08 GMT 12
Having the flight deck at the front is only a plan someone who has never attempted a winch ex forward would dream up. It would also make the approach and landing pretty dangerous, with the pilot having very poor visual references. It's pretty much standard practice for offshore vessles, the vast majority have the helidecks forward and above the bridge.
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on May 10, 2014 13:50:22 GMT 12
Having the flight deck at the front is only a plan someone who has never attempted a winch ex forward would dream up. It would also make the approach and landing pretty dangerous, with the pilot having very poor visual references. It's pretty much standard practice for offshore vessles, the vast majority have the helidecks forward and above the bridge.
How many of those vessels operate helicopters that carry out rotors running weapon loads with 600lb torpedos or missiles? |
|
|
|
Post by kiwirob on May 11, 2014 18:19:46 GMT 12
Probably about as often as this vessel, it's not a combat vessel, it's a littoral support ship, it's replacing HMNZS Manawanui, HMNZS Resolution, so I don't see a need for an helicopter to be armed up if deployed onboard.
|
|
|
|
Post by corsairarm on May 11, 2014 19:38:09 GMT 12
Just to clarify this actual ship is replacing Manawanui and Resolution or are you saying this is what we could end up with in design as a replacement.
As far as looks go it's fugly.
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwirob on May 12, 2014 22:06:08 GMT 12
Not at all, someone pointed out that putting the helideck on the front of the vessel was a bad idea, I countered that with the fact that the vast majority, if not all vessels working in the offshore industry have helidecks in front, the photo was an example of what most of them look like.
|
|
