|
|
Post by beegeetee on Jun 11, 2019 12:42:53 GMT 12
Defence-Capability-Plan-201969. Recognising the high value of sealift to humanitarian and disaster relief, and the sustainment of deployed forces, in the mid-2020s an additional sealift vessel will be
acquired. Operating alongside HMNZS Canterbury, this acquisition will provide two sealift vessels, and will greatly improve the effectiveness of the Defence Force, and the resilience of the nation, and the region. 70. The enhanced sealift vessel will have greater lift capacity
than HMNZS Canterbury. The capability will provide a highly flexible military asset, including hospital facilities, planning spaces, and self-defence capabilities. It will also provide support for the deployment of a range of capabilities, including Special Forces, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and NH90 helicopters. The enhanced sealift capability will also improve the New Zealand Defence Force’s amphibious operations. Through the provision of a well dock, it will be able to conduct operations in a wider range of sea conditions, and will have the size and capacity to carry large equipment, and sufficient aviation capacity to allow extended, long duration operations. Its size will also provide for the transport of a larger number of personnel, allowing for the value of the increased size of the New Zealand Army to be realised. 71. Collectively, these enhancements will significantly increase our ability to respond to humanitarian and security events in the Pacific region. While a future project will determine detailed requirements for this capability, a Landing Platform Dock is an example of
the type of vessel that will be considered.72. Following 2030, HMNZS Canterbury will be withdrawn
from service. At this time an investment will be made to
further improve the Defence Force’s sealift capability with
an additional vessel. Options will be explored against the composition of the fleet, the wider Defence Force and the prevailing strategic environment. Budget >$1 billion
|
|
|
|
Post by nighthawknz on Jun 11, 2019 17:02:12 GMT 12
a couple of elections and that will all change... Although it sounds promising ;-) Endurance 170 LHD... to me seems suitable... but yeah I doubt it ...lol |
|
|
|
Post by 30sqnatc on Jun 11, 2019 17:30:46 GMT 12
Para 70 '.... deployment of a range of capabilities, including Special Forces, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles...'. So were getting an aircraft carrier  |
|
|
|
Post by beegeetee on Jun 12, 2019 1:37:30 GMT 12
The requirement and time frame looks similar to the Malaysian Navy MRSS. I'm sure the MOD will be looking closely at the proposals in that competition.
|
|
|
|
Post by senob on Jun 13, 2019 21:52:29 GMT 12
The Singaporeans are building two Joint Multi Mission Ships and at the moment it looks like the Endurance E-170, because full program requirements haven't been finalised yet. The build program that the Singapore Navy has planned would actually work in well with the timetable outlined in the DCP and the NZ govt and Singapore govt recently signed an agreement that enhanced the partnership between NZ and Singapore, including defence and security. So a build of 4 such vessels could work favourably for both govts.
|
|
|
|
Post by beaufighter4 on Jun 19, 2019 19:46:46 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by senob on Jun 20, 2019 20:10:17 GMT 12
Interesting, but the hangar is to small compared to that of the Canterbury. Would need hangarage for at least three medium sized helicopters in the 10 tonne range and probably four smaller helicopters, like the A109. Cannot remember offhand what the Canterbury hangarage is but think it is 2 NH90s and 2 or 3 Seasprites. The ship also needs to be able to operate a3 or four helicopters at the same time from its flight deck, and the flight deck must be capable of handling the CH-47 Chinook and the MV-22 Osprey and probably the CH-53 Super / King Stallion. So in order to operate one of those and a NH90 / Seasprite / A109 at the same time, a through deck ship type such as the LHD would be the best option. I asked around and the general consensus is that the indicated budget of $1 billion is for the first ship only and the actual Canterbury replacement, being the second ship, should by rights be a sister ship to the first ship, so wouldn't be as expensive because most of the one off expensive stuff, design costs etc., would be incurred with the first ship. |
|
|
|
Post by nighthawknz on Jun 21, 2019 0:27:21 GMT 12
Interesting, but the hangar is to small compared to that of the Canterbury. Would need hangarage for at least three medium sized helicopters in the 10 tonne range and probably four smaller helicopters, like the A109. Cannot remember offhand what the Canterbury hangarage is but think it is 2 NH90s and 2 or 3 Seasprites. The ship also needs to be able to operate a3 or four helicopters at the same time from its flight deck, and the flight deck must be capable of handling the CH-47 Chinook and the MV-22 Osprey and probably the CH-53 Super / King Stallion. So in order to operate one of those and a NH90 / Seasprite / A109 at the same time, a through deck ship type such as the LHD would be the best option. I asked around and the general consensus is that the indicated budget of $1 billion is for the first ship only and the actual Canterbury replacement, being the second ship, should by rights be a sister ship to the first ship, so wouldn't be as expensive because most of the one off expensive stuff, design costs etc., would be incurred with the first ship. Canterbury's flight deck has 2 helicopter spots and the hangar spots for two ie; helos that are used for flight operations, the SHG2(i) Super Seasprite. and hangar storage for four medium sized helicopters ie; upto 4 NH-90s at a squeeze. But these are only for transport to them and not operate at sea... as she is designed to only operate the 2 helo's at once. The flight deck can also handle a Chinook-size helicopter.  Twin Helo Operations From HMNZS CanterburyTo improve on this capability I agree a through deck ship type such as the LHD would be the best option, we would want to be able to handle 100% of the Helo's our allies have as a spare or emergency deck, and cross deck operations. ie; the Endurance 170 would be perfect fit for what has been laid out... She has an increase in flight operations for helo and UAV, increase sealift capability can carry anything we have and probably anything our allies have..., increase in troop deployment from 250 to 400, has the well deck so can deploy in a higher sea state, would be good for peaceful and emergencies operations and would be able to help our allies in the time of need in armed conflict if needed or deploy our own troops... |
|
|
|
Post by beegeetee on Jun 21, 2019 9:53:51 GMT 12
NZ recently signed an agreement with South Korea for closer co-operation in the defence industry. Given the success (so far) of the Aotearoa project, I'd say getting SK to build us a bespoke vessel is probably quite likely. The ROKS Dokdo was built for US$296 million in 2005 (that's NZ$450m). Now it's way too much ship for NZ, but a smaller version, designed specifically for NZ's needs would be perfect, IMHO.  |
|
|
|
Post by kiwiruna on Jun 21, 2019 11:19:11 GMT 12
Something like that could just about the entire rotary wing of the RNZAF in one go.
|
|
|
|
Post by delticman on Jun 21, 2019 13:08:29 GMT 12
NZ recently signed an agreement with South Korea for closer co-operation in the defence industry. Given the success (so far) of the Aotearoa project, I'd say getting SK to build us a bespoke vessel is probably quite likely. The ROKS Dokdo was built for US$296 million in 2005 (that's NZ$450m). Now it's way too much ship for NZ, but a smaller version, designed specifically for NZ's needs would be perfect, IMHO. This vessel is just a shade larger than the "Kaitaki" and will certainly be smaller than the new rail ferries. Go with it Ron. Might as well go for it and put some rails on the lower deck. |
|
|
|
Post by madmac on Jun 21, 2019 15:51:11 GMT 12
Something like that could just about the entire rotary wing of the RNZAF in one go. With out some more warships or even a containerized missle system, i might suggest that should have read "Something like that could just about sink with the entire rotary wing of the RNZAF in one go" |
|
|
|
Post by senob on Jun 21, 2019 16:29:08 GMT 12
NZ recently signed an agreement with South Korea for closer co-operation in the defence industry. Given the success (so far) of the Aotearoa project, I'd say getting SK to build us a bespoke vessel is probably quite likely. The ROKS Dokdo was built for US$296 million in 2005 (that's NZ$450m). Now it's way too much ship for NZ, but a smaller version, designed specifically for NZ's needs would be perfect, IMHO. The Dokdo class is not necessarily to much ship, it's about the largest size we would look at but it is how the interior spaces could be utilised that may make it attractive to NZ. However there would have to be some definite changes to the shipboard systems to reduce the crewing requirements which are listed at 330. I would suspect that the 330 includes the aviation component, however the South Korean navy run a similar system to the USN, which is heavy on personnel, so with plenty of automation, crewing requirements could be substantially and safely reduced. Having about 18,800 tonnes fully loaded displacement, it is lighter than the Aotearoa (27,000 tonnes) but is 27 m longer, has a 6.5 wider beam and a draught that is 1.5 m less than Aotearoa. As nighthawknz has said the other option is the ST Endurance E-170 which would also meet NZ's requirements. But we should stay away from European, British, Australian and North American shipyards because of the sheer expense of building there. Singapore, South Korea and Japan offer us the best quality and value for money. |
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Jun 21, 2019 17:46:25 GMT 12
Interesting, but the hangar is to small compared to that of the Canterbury. Would need hangarage for at least three medium sized helicopters in the 10 tonne range and probably four smaller helicopters, like the A109. Cannot remember offhand what the Canterbury hangarage is but think it is 2 NH90s and 2 or 3 Seasprites. The ship also needs to be able to operate a3 or four helicopters at the same time from its flight deck, and the flight deck must be capable of handling the CH-47 Chinook and the MV-22 Osprey and probably the CH-53 Super / King Stallion. So in order to operate one of those and a NH90 / Seasprite / A109 at the same time, a through deck ship type such as the LHD would be the best option. I asked around and the general consensus is that the indicated budget of $1 billion is for the first ship only and the actual Canterbury replacement, being the second ship, should by rights be a sister ship to the first ship, so wouldn't be as expensive because most of the one off expensive stuff, design costs etc., would be incurred with the first ship. Canterbury's flight deck has 2 helicopter spots and the hangar spots for two ie; helos that are used for flight operations, the SHG2(i) Super Seasprite. and hangar storage for four medium sized helicopters ie; upto 4 NH-90s at a squeeze. But these are only for transport to them and not operate at sea... as she is designed to only operate the 2 helo's at once. The flight deck can also handle a Chinook-size helicopter. Twin Helo Operations From HMNZS CanterburyTo improve on this capability I agree a through deck ship type such as the LHD would be the best option, we would want to be able to handle 100% of the Helo's our allies have as a spare or emergency deck, and cross deck operations. ie; the Endurance 170 would be perfect fit for what has been laid out... She has an increase in flight operations for helo and UAV, increase sealift capability can carry anything we have and probably anything our allies have..., increase in troop deployment from 250 to 400, has the well deck so can deploy in a higher sea state, would be good for peaceful and emergencies operations and would be able to help our allies in the time of need in armed conflict if needed or deploy our own troops... AIUI Canterbury had storage / transit space for up to 4 x NH-90 and 1 ship-operated SH2G, but that with relocation of the RHIBs to the new location & associated works, the storage / transit space has been reduced to 2 x NH-90 (no change to 1 x SH2G)....happy to be corrected. |
|
|
|
Post by nighthawknz on Jun 21, 2019 18:12:10 GMT 12
AIUI Canterbury had storage / transit space for up to 4 x NH-90 and 1 ship-operated SH2G, but that with relocation of the RHIBs to the new location & associated works, the storage / transit space has been reduced to 2 x NH-90 (no change to 1 x SH2G)....happy to be corrected. Ok... I didn't know that the alterations to the alcoves altered that much to the hangar space... learn something new every day... "I stand corrected." |
|
|
|
Post by frankly on Jun 22, 2019 8:37:21 GMT 12
CY has been reduced to 3 + 1. Originally designed as 3+4, but it was never a good fit with poorly designed lashing points etc. Much like CYs '2-spot' flight deck that only has space for one machine with rotors turning and one static.
The proposed LPD is due for design and build in the same period HMAS Choules is. Albion and Bulwark are also in the same time period.
With a well deck, and 'a significant increase' in cargo space, it's likely that space for a large flight deck will be a consequence of the overall dimensions. Landing spaces for 2-3 NH90s should be easily achievable.
If there was a desire for a flat top then something like the Japanese Osumi would be about the right size and complexity.
|
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Jun 22, 2019 11:15:32 GMT 12
CY has been reduced to 3 + 1. Originally designed as 3+4, but it was never a good fit with poorly designed lashing points etc. Much like CYs '2-spot' flight deck that only has space for one machine with rotors turning and one static. The proposed LPD is due for design and build in the same period HMAS Choules is. Albion and Bulwark are also in the same time period. With a well deck, and 'a significant increase' in cargo space, it's likely that space for a large flight deck will be a consequence of the overall dimensions. Landing spaces for 2-3 NH90s should be easily achievable. If there was a desire for a flat top then something like the Japanese Osumi would be about the right size and complexity. Is that 3 in the 'storage' hangar & 1 in the 'operational' hangar? Can't imagine where 3 + 4 would ever have been accommodated. JSDF Osumi is a fine looking design, but seems it might be light on vehicle lane metres!?! |
|
|
|
Post by nighthawknz on Jun 22, 2019 13:43:44 GMT 12
Landing Helicopter Dock
- ST Endurance 170 LHD
- San Giorgio class.
- Damen Enforcer 18000 LHD
- Ōsumi-class tank landing ship
- Dokdo-class amphibious assault ship
- Mistral-class amphibious assault ship
- Spanish ship Juan Carlos I/Canberra Class amphibious assault ship
LPD/LSD/LSL
- Makassar/Tarlac-class landing platform dock
- Albion-class landing platform dock
- Damen Enforcer 13000 LPD (Below ships based off the Enforcer design)
- HNLMS Rotterdam.
- Bay Class LSD / HMAS Choules
- Galicia-class landing platform dock
Want to bust the bank class
- Amercia Class LHA
- WASP Class LHD
- San Antonio-class – LPD
- Trieste - LHD
There are a few others as well but I couldn't be bother listing them all... ;-) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amphibious_warfare_ships
|
|
|
|
Post by 30sqnatc on Jun 22, 2019 14:00:21 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Jun 22, 2019 14:09:00 GMT 12
This vessel is just a shade larger than the "Kaitaki" and will certainly be smaller than the new rail ferries. Go with it Ron. Might as well go for it and put some rails on the lower deck. Are you suggesting that NZDF pay for Kiwirail's design costs? Clever! |
|
