|
|
Post by senob on Oct 27, 2019 20:24:06 GMT 12
With three very different variants of the design currently planned, which would the RNZN be interested in? The UK variant is probably the least capable, and least costly. If NZ did go for the T26 (who knows what will happen geopolitically in the next decade or how much the cost of the T26 will come down as production ramps up), I think a version of the Canadian vessel might be the best option. It has the CMS 330 and Sea Ceptor which has continuity with the Anzacs, plus you get the advanced AAW capability conferred by LM's SSR + Mk41 + Aegis AAW software module. And all that is on top of, arguably, the best ASW platform. It's a very impressive vessel. I don't think CMS-330 has the AEGIS capability. If we wanted that kind of capability, we'd be better to go with the RAN Hunter class including their CEAFAR radars and probably their SAAB 9lv / LM AEGIS CMS lash up after they have all the bugs ironed out, however I am not overly confident of the RANs success in introducing bespoke software based capabilities. Or even better still, A Hunter class with the AN / SPY-6 AESA radar, which is scalable, and the Lockheed Martin Combatss-21 CMS. This is the new CMS for the Flight 3 Arleigh Burke DDGs and includes AEGIS, ABM (Anti Ballistic Missile) capabilities, as well as CEC (Cooperative Engagement Capability). We may never use the ABM capability, but if we need to then all we have to do is acquire SM-6 missiles. In fact if we acquired those from the start instead of SM-2, they cover both long range AAW and ABM defence. Tad expensive though.
We require a platform that is more than just ASW. It must also undertake AAW and ASuW (Anti Surface Warfare) as well, so in reality it must be a GP frigate. That's where the UK Type 31e, in its present iteration, fails in a NZ context and where the Type 26 would be the better option. If we were to go the Type 31e way we'd be far better just to go straight to OMT, bypassing Babcocks, and acquire a F370 design licence straight from OMT. We could ask OMT or the South Koreans to modify the design to our specifications and build it there.
I have been told that costs fall in a warship build program from hull #9, which is the break even hull. The RAN Hunter build is a continuous build program, so if we were to add 3 hulls to it we could get them at a reasonable price, far cheaper than the UK build which is only 5 hulls, however they are making money from the licensing. The Canadian build is 15 hulls, but it isn't a continuous build, and they will be expensive to buy because shipbuilding in Canada is more expensive than shipbuilding in Australia.
|
|
|
|
Post by beegeetee on Oct 27, 2019 20:57:22 GMT 12
If NZ did go for the T26 (who knows what will happen geopolitically in the next decade or how much the cost of the T26 will come down as production ramps up), I think a version of the Canadian vessel might be the best option. It has the CMS 330 and Sea Ceptor which has continuity with the Anzacs, plus you get the advanced AAW capability conferred by LM's SSR + Mk41 + Aegis AAW software module. And all that is on top of, arguably, the best ASW platform. It's a very impressive vessel. I don't think CMS-330 has the AEGIS capability. Any open architecture CMS can have any AEGIS capability. You need to understand that AEGIS has evolved into a fully modularised software system and any of those modules can be "plugged in" to any open architecture CMS. Trust me, I've worked on open architecture software systems for most of my software engineering career. If you don't believe me watch this interview with Paul Lemmo, vice president and general manager of Lockheed Martin's Integrated Warfare Systems and Sensors. He also clearly states that AEGIS is part of both the Aussie and Canadian T26 programs. |
|
|
|
Post by senob on Oct 28, 2019 13:12:06 GMT 12
I don't think CMS-330 has the AEGIS capability. Any open architecture CMS can have any AEGIS capability. You need to understand that AEGIS has evolved into a fully modularised software system and any of those modules can be "plugged in" to any open architecture CMS. Trust me, I've worked on open architecture software systems for most of my software engineering career. If you don't believe me watch this interview with Paul Lemmo, vice president and general manager of Lockheed Martin's Integrated Warfare Systems and Sensors. He also clearly states that AEGIS is part of both the Aussie and Canadian T26 programs. Thanks for that. I was unsure of that. I will go watch the video. |
|
|
|
Post by mcmaster on Oct 29, 2019 21:27:56 GMT 12
I don't think CMS-330 has the AEGIS capability. Any open architecture CMS can have any AEGIS capability. You need to understand that AEGIS has evolved into a fully modularised software system and any of those modules can be "plugged in" to any open architecture CMS. Trust me, I've worked on open architecture software systems for most of my software engineering career. If you don't believe me watch this interview with Paul Lemmo, vice president and general manager of Lockheed Martin's Integrated Warfare Systems and Sensors. He also clearly states that AEGIS is part of both the Aussie and Canadian T26 programs.] That’s all really interesting stuff thanks. I always associated AEGIS with huge superstructures and the big array panels. |
|
|
|
Post by kiwirob on Oct 30, 2019 0:27:36 GMT 12
UK just announced Arrowhead 140 winner for Type 31e produuction. Provided the programme survives Brexit, then Arrowhead maybe a worthy candidate as a frigate replacement for NZ (more so than the Type 26?) ...certainly maybe more affordable. The 2nd gen. (FFX) Incheon-class frigate may also prove to be a strong contender given the experience NZ has with HHI yards producing vessels for us, I summise. But hey Cabinet & NZDF will have a whole decade (+3-4 elections) to procastinate over the competition and its contenders. I just hope someone sees the logistical wisdom in rebuilding to a 3 (or better yet back to 4) Frigate fleet for replacement.  www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-49670332 As I've posted above, but I'll reiterate. The Type 31e Arrowhead is a UK variant of the OMT F370 frigate that the Royal Danish Navy sail as the Iver Huitfeld class. If NZ was to go down that route we'd be better off acquiring a license from OMT and build a NZ bespoke variant in South Korea, Japan, or Singapore, having it fitted out to NZ specifications. That way we'd avoid all the UK / RN "bright ideas", RN continuously changing its specs, and the MOD cutting costs by cutting corners and capabilities, which would turn out to be very expensive both cost wise and time wise. The other thing with the Type 31e is that the UK would want it built in a UK yard which is expensive in itself.
I really like the F370 design because it's a very practical design that is very maintenance and upgrade friendly because it was built using commercial building practices rather than traditional naval build practices. Cables and piping aren't buried behind bulkheads, decks and deckheads, but out in the open where they are quickly and easily accessible. The ships computing hardware including monitors are all open architecture, meaning that reroling for missions etc., is just a software change and upgrades especially for the AESA radar and new sonars are now software driven. Plus it has plenty of room for future upgrades.
Why would you want the Danish version, the Type 31 has been significantly modernised over the baseline vessel, a lot of the equipment in the Iver's is no longer produced, some of it was downright stupid, they used a lot on non marine spec equipment, like an HVAC system from an office building, commercial land market lighting, they were built very cheaply. Plus why would you want a vessel from a new builder when there's a hot production line in existence building Type 31's? |
|
|
|
Post by beegeetee on Oct 30, 2019 13:13:28 GMT 12
As I've posted above, but I'll reiterate. The Type 31e Arrowhead is a UK variant of the OMT F370 frigate that the Royal Danish Navy sail as the Iver Huitfeld class. If NZ was to go down that route we'd be better off acquiring a license from OMT and build a NZ bespoke variant in South Korea, Japan, or Singapore, having it fitted out to NZ specifications. That way we'd avoid all the UK / RN "bright ideas", RN continuously changing its specs, and the MOD cutting costs by cutting corners and capabilities, which would turn out to be very expensive both cost wise and time wise. The other thing with the Type 31e is that the UK would want it built in a UK yard which is expensive in itself.
I really like the F370 design because it's a very practical design that is very maintenance and upgrade friendly because it was built using commercial building practices rather than traditional naval build practices. Cables and piping aren't buried behind bulkheads, decks and deckheads, but out in the open where they are quickly and easily accessible. The ships computing hardware including monitors are all open architecture, meaning that reroling for missions etc., is just a software change and upgrades especially for the AESA radar and new sonars are now software driven. Plus it has plenty of room for future upgrades.
Why would you want the Danish version, the Type 31 has been significantly modernised over the baseline vessel, a lot of the equipment in the Iver's is no longer produced, some of it was downright stupid, they used a lot on non marine spec equipment, like an HVAC system from an office building, commercial land market lighting, they were built very cheaply. Plus why would you want a vessel from a new builder when there's a hot production line in existence building Type 31's? Absolutely. Not to mention the fact that the T31 will already be in service with a close ally, which means any issues should have been ironed out before any potential NZ purchase and there can be information sharing, joint training, joint upgrade development... all kinds of possibilities that are very advantageous for a small navy. I actually think the biggest impediment to the RNZN getting it's preferred T26 is the existence of the T31. The T26 is going to be a hard sell to the treasury when they see RN T31s sailing all over the world performing the missions required for NZ's future frigates and costing a hell of a lot less than a T26. |
|
|
|
Post by senob on Oct 30, 2019 21:32:44 GMT 12
As I've posted above, but I'll reiterate. The Type 31e Arrowhead is a UK variant of the OMT F370 frigate that the Royal Danish Navy sail as the Iver Huitfeld class. If NZ was to go down that route we'd be better off acquiring a license from OMT and build a NZ bespoke variant in South Korea, Japan, or Singapore, having it fitted out to NZ specifications. That way we'd avoid all the UK / RN "bright ideas", RN continuously changing its specs, and the MOD cutting costs by cutting corners and capabilities, which would turn out to be very expensive both cost wise and time wise. The other thing with the Type 31e is that the UK would want it built in a UK yard which is expensive in itself.
I really like the F370 design because it's a very practical design that is very maintenance and upgrade friendly because it was built using commercial building practices rather than traditional naval build practices. Cables and piping aren't buried behind bulkheads, decks and deckheads, but out in the open where they are quickly and easily accessible. The ships computing hardware including monitors are all open architecture, meaning that reroling for missions etc., is just a software change and upgrades especially for the AESA radar and new sonars are now software driven. Plus it has plenty of room for future upgrades.
Why would you want the Danish version, the Type 31 has been significantly modernised over the baseline vessel, a lot of the equipment in the Iver's is no longer produced, some of it was downright stupid, they used a lot on non marine spec equipment, like an HVAC system from an office building, commercial land market lighting, they were built very cheaply. Plus why would you want a vessel from a new builder when there's a hot production line in existence building Type 31's? Because we would be after the OMT design, not the UK design with all the expensive UK alterations and stuff ups that they tend to make. The RN will undoubtedly change its mind at least once on the specs before hull #1 is launched. If we went with the original OMT design, we can undertake any alterations and fit it out to our specs as I've posted above. Why would we buy the UK Type 31 when it won't suit our requirements, be less capable than what we have now, wouldn't survive in a medium to high threat environment, will be very expensive to acquire from the UK? Whereas like I said we can acquire a licence from OMT and have a NZ variant built cheaper, quicker, and probably to a higher quality, in South Korea. That's why. |
|
|
|
Post by senob on Oct 30, 2019 22:06:04 GMT 12
Why would you want the Danish version, the Type 31 has been significantly modernised over the baseline vessel, a lot of the equipment in the Iver's is no longer produced, some of it was downright stupid, they used a lot on non marine spec equipment, like an HVAC system from an office building, commercial land market lighting, they were built very cheaply. Plus why would you want a vessel from a new builder when there's a hot production line in existence building Type 31's? Absolutely. Not to mention the fact that the T31 will already be in service with a close ally, which means any issues should have been ironed out before any potential NZ purchase and there can be information sharing, joint training, joint upgrade development... all kinds of possibilities that are very advantageous for a small navy. I actually think the biggest impediment to the RNZN getting it's preferred T26 is the existence of the T31. The T26 is going to be a hard sell to the treasury when they see RN T31s sailing all over the world performing the missions required for NZ's future frigates and costing a hell of a lot less than a T26. I think that the UK may find that exporting the Type 31 is going to be harder than they think. The current Type 31 specs for the RN is cheap because it will have minimum weapons and sensors. What do you expect for £250m (~NZ$500 million). The weapons and sensors are the very expensive bits, so a fully kitted out warry one could be £700 - 900 million +. However, if we were to build an NZ variant of the OMT F370 as I have suggested, we could have 3 GP frigates with capabilities similar to the Type 26 for the price of 2 Type 26. At present the Type 26 is greater than £1 billion (~NZ$2 billion) each so if we can build 3 OMT F370 NZ variants for about NZ$1.0 - 1.5 billion each then we will be doing well. It all depends on what we want to fit them out with and for.
This presupposes that we were to go down that track. Plenty of things will happen between now and then and a few elections.
|
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Oct 31, 2019 1:00:08 GMT 12
There is also the backlog in the Type 23s concurrent (PGMU) engine upgrade and deep life extension (LIFEX) refits and that are being juggled with the TYpe 26 & 31e construction programmes. Babcock has 3 drydocks overcrowded with Type 23s behind in schedule. Summary of where the Type 23s were at in 2019 can be found here: www.savetheroyalnavy.org/progress-on-extending-the-life-of-the-royal-navys-type-23-frigates/The idea was that the PGMU & LIFEX programmes were to complement the delivery schedule of the Type 26 & 31e - to enable a one for one decommissioning plan. This was to ensure 19 Frigates would always be active in the fleet through to 2045. There is a great inforgraphic depicting the plan here: www.savetheroyalnavy.org/making-sense-of-the-royal-navys-frigate-building-schedule/On Oct 23, the Secretary for Defence was updating the House of Commons Defence Select Committee. It was reported that of 23 major surface combat vessels, only 10 were active: HMS Queen Elizabeth (not yet operational) Albion (LPD), Defender, Dragon (T45), Montrose, Kent, Argyll, Sutherland, Northumberland and Westminster (T23s). Currently, the remaining fleet are all either awaiting refit or undergoing refit at Devonport. Delays in the LIFEX Frigate refits and remediation work to the Type 45s are contributing to lower than usual numbers of combat vessels available. Based on current UK shipbuilding situation and that the Type 26 build is also already on a "go-slow", I dont think the UK dockyards would foreseeable have the capacity to entertain building either the Type 31e or Type 26 in the UK for NZ before 2045 (or later) anyhow. |
|
|
|
Post by beegeetee on Oct 31, 2019 2:00:32 GMT 12
Why would you want the Danish version, the Type 31 has been significantly modernised over the baseline vessel, a lot of the equipment in the Iver's is no longer produced, some of it was downright stupid, they used a lot on non marine spec equipment, like an HVAC system from an office building, commercial land market lighting, they were built very cheaply. Plus why would you want a vessel from a new builder when there's a hot production line in existence building Type 31's? Because we would be after the OMT design, not the UK design with all the expensive UK alterations and stuff ups that they tend to make. The RN will undoubtedly change its mind at least once on the specs before hull #1 is launched. If we went with the original OMT design, we can undertake any alterations and fit it out to our specs as I've posted above. Why would we buy the UK Type 31 when it won't suit our requirements, be less capable than what we have now, wouldn't survive in a medium to high threat environment, will be very expensive to acquire from the UK? Whereas like I said we can acquire a licence from OMT and have a NZ variant built cheaper, quicker, and probably to a higher quality, in South Korea. That's why. Where are you getting this from? "it won't suit our requirements". The requirements haven't been decided yet, so how can you say it won't suit them? "...be less capable than what we have now". You can't be serious. It's faster, has a longer endurance, greater stealth features, can carry more mission equipment, larger hangar, better accommodation, smaller core crew, vastly superior weight and power margins. I actually can't think of a single metric that an ANZAC frigate could win. "...have a NZ variant built cheaper, quicker, and probably to a higher quality, in South Korea". What are you basing this on? What's your source for this information? "I think that the UK may find that exporting the Type 31 is going to be harder than they think. The current Type 31 specs for the RN is cheap because it will have minimum weapons and sensors. What do you expect for £250m (~NZ$500 million). The weapons and sensors are the very expensive bits, so a fully kitted out warry one could be £700 - 900 million +. However, if we were to build an NZ variant of the OMT F370 as I have suggested, we could have 3 GP frigates with capabilities similar to the Type 26 for the price of 2 Type 26. At present the Type 26 is greater than £1 billion (~NZ$2 billion) each so if we can build 3 OMT F370 NZ variants for about NZ$1.0 - 1.5 billion each then we will be doing well. "
So you say a fully kitted out T31 is NZ$900m and your OMT F370 NZ variant would be about NZ$1.0 - 1.5 billion. But in the quote above that you said a NZ OMT variant could be built cheaper than a NZ T31. Of course the whole thing is a joke because you have no idea how much a NZ spec'd T31 would cost or how much a licensed OMT version would cost. "It all depends on what we want to fit them out with and for." Yeah, exactly. |
|
|
|
Post by senob on Oct 31, 2019 20:09:03 GMT 12
Because we would be after the OMT design, not the UK design with all the expensive UK alterations and stuff ups that they tend to make. The RN will undoubtedly change its mind at least once on the specs before hull #1 is launched. If we went with the original OMT design, we can undertake any alterations and fit it out to our specs as I've posted above. Why would we buy the UK Type 31 when it won't suit our requirements, be less capable than what we have now, wouldn't survive in a medium to high threat environment, will be very expensive to acquire from the UK? Whereas like I said we can acquire a licence from OMT and have a NZ variant built cheaper, quicker, and probably to a higher quality, in South Korea. That's why. Where are you getting this from? "it won't suit our requirements". The requirements haven't been decided yet, so how can you say it won't suit them? "...be less capable than what we have now". You can't be serious. It's faster, has a longer endurance, greater stealth features, can carry more mission equipment, larger hangar, better accommodation, smaller core crew, vastly superior weight and power margins. I actually can't think of a single metric that an ANZAC frigate could win. "...have a NZ variant built cheaper, quicker, and probably to a higher quality, in South Korea". What are you basing this on? What's your source for this information? "I think that the UK may find that exporting the Type 31 is going to be harder than they think. The current Type 31 specs for the RN is cheap because it will have minimum weapons and sensors. What do you expect for £250m (~NZ$500 million). The weapons and sensors are the very expensive bits, so a fully kitted out warry one could be £700 - 900 million +. However, if we were to build an NZ variant of the OMT F370 as I have suggested, we could have 3 GP frigates with capabilities similar to the Type 26 for the price of 2 Type 26. At present the Type 26 is greater than £1 billion (~NZ$2 billion) each so if we can build 3 OMT F370 NZ variants for about NZ$1.0 - 1.5 billion each then we will be doing well. "
So you say a fully kitted out T31 is NZ$900m and your OMT F370 NZ variant would be about NZ$1.0 - 1.5 billion. But in the quote above that you said a NZ OMT variant could be built cheaper than a NZ T31. Of course the whole thing is a joke because you have no idea how much a NZ spec'd T31 would cost or how much a licensed OMT version would cost. "It all depends on what we want to fit them out with and for." Yeah, exactly. If you actually read what I wrote I said: The weapons and sensors are the very expensive bits, so a fully kitted out warry one could be £700 - 900 million +. That's UK£, not NZ$ which would be in the region of NZ$1.4 - 1.8 billion, so I think my range of NZ$1.0 - 1.5 billion is a bit cheaper.
The RN Type 31 will be fitted out as follows: 1 Bofors 57 mm Mk 110 gun 2 Bofors 40 mm Mk 4 guns 24 Sea Ceptor missile VLS silos Thales UMS bow mounted sonar Mirador EO director Vigil ESM
The Type 31 as spec'd for the RN doesn't fir RNZN / NZDF CONOPS. It has no ASW torpedoes, CIWS, 5 " gun for NGS, lacks IRST, AESA and 3D radar, hull mounted sonar, missile and torpedo decoys, EW capabilities, etc. This is the £250m (~NZ$500 million) that you seem to think fits the bill. Like I said it is less capability than our current ANZACs. I do have a rough idea of how much a NZ spec'd OMT F370 would be cost - NOTE I said OMT F370, not Type 31, because I know how much the original Iver Huitfeld cost the Royal Danish Navy which was US$353 million (Source: www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=1266 ) They saved costs by building the ships using commercial ship building practises and by pulling through gear from the preceding frigates. They also use the STANFLEX modular weapons system.
Yes a fully kitted out OMT 370 would cost the figures I stated if built in a South Korean yard. The AESA radar capable of S, X, L & C bands, EW gear, 5 " gun etc., CMS that includes AEGIS (AEGIS is now open architecture), IRST, decoys, hull sonar, towed array, a CIWS that is at least 30 mm calibre, all soon mounts up in cost. I look at what other frigates cost and I look at what the South Koreans pay for their FFGs and DDGs, plus what the Japanese pay for theirs. I then compare that to what the Australians, French, Canadians, & UK pay for their FFGs and work out where the best VfM (Value for Money) is. I also look at where the RNZN operates its ships, where NZs areas of interests are and most importantly where our SLOC (Sea Lanes Of Communication) are. Secondly I read the DWPs and the paragraphs that state the following:
National Security and Defence
1.6 Defence is a key part of New Zealand’s broader security system, and works alongside other government agencies to protect and advance New Zealand’s security interests. In particular, Defence contributes to New Zealand’s security through:
• the promotion of a safe, secure and resilient New Zealand, including its border and approaches;
• the preservation of a rules-based international order which respects national sovereignty;
• a network of strong international relationships; and
• the maintenance of New Zealand’s prosperity via secure sea, air and electronic lines of communication.
1.7 New Zealand’s national security interests, in combination with its strategic outlook, are the key factors shaping the roles and tasks the Defence Force must be prepared to undertake.
Defence Force Roles and Tasks
1.21 The Defence Force must be able to undertake a range of roles and tasks across diverse geographical and operating environments. The principal roles of the Defence Force are to:
• Defend New Zealand’s sovereign territory;
• Contribute to national resilience and whole of government security objectives;
• Meet New Zealand’s commitment as an ally of Australia;
• Support New Zealand’s civilian presence in the Ross Dependency of Antarctica, and participate in whole of government efforts to monitor and respond to activity in the Southern Ocean;
• Contribute to, and where necessary lead, operations in the South Pacific;
• Make a credible contribution in support of peace and security in the Asia-Pacific region;
• Protect New Zealand’s wider interests by contributing to international peace and security, and the international rule of law;
• Contribute to the advancement of New Zealand’s security partnerships;
• Participate in whole of government efforts to monitor the strategic environment and
• Be prepared to respond to sudden shifts in the strategic environment. Source: 2016 Defence White Paper, PP.9 & 11.
Unfortunately the politicians never completely match the rhetoric. I also happen to read reasonably widely on the subject too. Yes I wasn't issued with a crystal ball and this is conjecture, this was prefaced with an if. However, I am able to back up my suppositions with basic facts.
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwirob on Oct 31, 2019 21:43:34 GMT 12
Why would you want the Danish version, the Type 31 has been significantly modernised over the baseline vessel, a lot of the equipment in the Iver's is no longer produced, some of it was downright stupid, they used a lot on non marine spec equipment, like an HVAC system from an office building, commercial land market lighting, they were built very cheaply. Plus why would you want a vessel from a new builder when there's a hot production line in existence building Type 31's? Because we would be after the OMT design, not the UK design with all the expensive UK alterations and stuff ups that they tend to make. The RN will undoubtedly change its mind at least once on the specs before hull #1 is launched. If we went with the original OMT design, we can undertake any alterations and fit it out to our specs as I've posted above. Why would we buy the UK Type 31 when it won't suit our requirements, be less capable than what we have now, wouldn't survive in a medium to high threat environment, will be very expensive to acquire from the UK? Whereas like I said we can acquire a licence from OMT and have a NZ variant built cheaper, quicker, and probably to a higher quality, in South Korea. That's why. Clearly you didn't read what I wrote, the UK redesign updates and fixes all the issues with the original Danish design, a lot of the equipment used on that design is no longer on the market or was completely unsuitable for marine use in the first instance. If you bought the Danish version you'd have to go back and fix all those faults which the Babcock has already fixed, plus you would never be able to build it as cheaply as the Danes did, they used conscript sailors to complete a lot of the fitout and dragged equipment over from the vessels they were replacing. The idea that the Koreans would build to a higher standard is also laughable, anyone who has had anything to do with the new Tide Class vessels will quickly tell you about all the problems they have had to fix, the major issue on the vessels at the moment is the wiring, it was poorly design and badly installed. The UK will have a hot production line, they will know who to build them, they will have worked out all the issues and by the time the last vessel has been completed they will likely be able to offer additional vessels at a lower price. Setting up a new production line somewhere else to build a design they have never built before is not a cheap or practical solution. |
|
|
|
Post by senob on Oct 31, 2019 22:47:56 GMT 12
Because we would be after the OMT design, not the UK design with all the expensive UK alterations and stuff ups that they tend to make. The RN will undoubtedly change its mind at least once on the specs before hull #1 is launched. If we went with the original OMT design, we can undertake any alterations and fit it out to our specs as I've posted above. Why would we buy the UK Type 31 when it won't suit our requirements, be less capable than what we have now, wouldn't survive in a medium to high threat environment, will be very expensive to acquire from the UK? Whereas like I said we can acquire a licence from OMT and have a NZ variant built cheaper, quicker, and probably to a higher quality, in South Korea. That's why. Clearly you didn't read what I wrote, the UK redesign updates and fixes all the issues with the original Danish design, a lot of the equipment used on that design is no longer on the market or was completely unsuitable for marine use in the first instance. If you bought the Danish version you'd have to go back and fix all those faults which the Babcock has already fixed, plus you would never be able to build it as cheaply as the Danes did, they used conscript sailors to complete a lot of the fitout and dragged equipment over from the vessels they were replacing. The idea that the Koreans would build to a higher standard is also laughable, anyone who has had anything to do with the new Tide Class vessels will quickly tell you about all the problems they have had to fix, the major issue on the vessels at the moment is the wiring, it was poorly design and badly installed. The UK will have a hot production line, they will know who to build them, they will have worked out all the issues and by the time the last vessel has been completed they will likely be able to offer additional vessels at a lower price. Setting up a new production line somewhere else to build a design they have never built before is not a cheap or practical solution. I didn't say anything about buying the RDN Iver Huitfeld class and yes I know that they pulled stuff through because I actually state that in my post above. I have said that IF we went down that route we would be buying an OMT F370 design license and fitting it out / equipping it to our specs.
Regarding the Tide Class ships, they are not a South Korean design, but a BMT design, so if there are wiring design problems then that is a BMT problem, not a Daewoo problem. Secondly, if there are build quality problems then both BMT and the RN / MOD were somewhat slack in their project management. Thirdly, haven't Daewoo have been having problems anyway and have had to be bailed out? Aren't HHI supposed to be taking them over at some stage? Probably a good thing Aotearoa is being built by HHI. Sounds like the UK MOD and / or BMT didn't undertake proper due diligence of DMSE, which is what the NZ MOD does with all of its tenders now, and has been doing since around 2015.
Like I said above this is all conjecture at the moment, but worthy of discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by beegeetee on Oct 31, 2019 23:48:50 GMT 12
Where are you getting this from? "it won't suit our requirements". The requirements haven't been decided yet, so how can you say it won't suit them? "...be less capable than what we have now". You can't be serious. It's faster, has a longer endurance, greater stealth features, can carry more mission equipment, larger hangar, better accommodation, smaller core crew, vastly superior weight and power margins. I actually can't think of a single metric that an ANZAC frigate could win. "...have a NZ variant built cheaper, quicker, and probably to a higher quality, in South Korea". What are you basing this on? What's your source for this information? "I think that the UK may find that exporting the Type 31 is going to be harder than they think. The current Type 31 specs for the RN is cheap because it will have minimum weapons and sensors. What do you expect for £250m (~NZ$500 million). The weapons and sensors are the very expensive bits, so a fully kitted out warry one could be £700 - 900 million +. However, if we were to build an NZ variant of the OMT F370 as I have suggested, we could have 3 GP frigates with capabilities similar to the Type 26 for the price of 2 Type 26. At present the Type 26 is greater than £1 billion (~NZ$2 billion) each so if we can build 3 OMT F370 NZ variants for about NZ$1.0 - 1.5 billion each then we will be doing well. "
So you say a fully kitted out T31 is NZ$900m and your OMT F370 NZ variant would be about NZ$1.0 - 1.5 billion. But in the quote above that you said a NZ OMT variant could be built cheaper than a NZ T31. Of course the whole thing is a joke because you have no idea how much a NZ spec'd T31 would cost or how much a licensed OMT version would cost. "It all depends on what we want to fit them out with and for." Yeah, exactly. If you actually read what I wrote I said: The weapons and sensors are the very expensive bits, so a fully kitted out warry one could be £700 - 900 million +. That's UK£, not NZ$ which would be in the region of NZ$1.4 - 1.8 billion, so I think my range of NZ$1.0 - 1.5 billion is a bit cheaper.
The RN Type 31 will be fitted out as follows: 1 Bofors 57 mm Mk 110 gun 2 Bofors 40 mm Mk 4 guns 24 Sea Ceptor missile VLS silos Thales UMS bow mounted sonar Mirador EO director Vigil ESM
The Type 31 as spec'd for the RN doesn't fir RNZN / NZDF CONOPS. It has no ASW torpedoes, CIWS, 5 " gun for NGS, lacks IRST, AESA and 3D radar, hull mounted sonar, missile and torpedo decoys, EW capabilities, etc. This is the £250m (~NZ$500 million) that you seem to think fits the bill. Like I said it is less capability than our current ANZACs. I do have a rough idea of how much a NZ spec'd OMT F370 would be cost - NOTE I said OMT F370, not Type 31, because I know how much the original Iver Huitfeld cost the Royal Danish Navy which was US$353 million (Source: www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=1266 ) They saved costs by building the ships using commercial ship building practises and by pulling through gear from the preceding frigates. They also use the STANFLEX modular weapons system.
Yes a fully kitted out OMT 370 would cost the figures I stated if built in a South Korean yard. The AESA radar capable of S, X, L & C bands, EW gear, 5 " gun etc., CMS that includes AEGIS (AEGIS is now open architecture), IRST, decoys, hull sonar, towed array, a CIWS that is at least 30 mm calibre, all soon mounts up in cost. I look at what other frigates cost and I look at what the South Koreans pay for their FFGs and DDGs, plus what the Japanese pay for theirs. I then compare that to what the Australians, French, Canadians, & UK pay for their FFGs and work out where the best VfM (Value for Money) is. I also look at where the RNZN operates its ships, where NZs areas of interests are and most importantly where our SLOC (Sea Lanes Of Communication) are. Secondly I read the DWPs and the paragraphs that state the following:
National Security and Defence
1.6 Defence is a key part of New Zealand’s broader security system, and works alongside other government agencies to protect and advance New Zealand’s security interests. In particular, Defence contributes to New Zealand’s security through:
• the promotion of a safe, secure and resilient New Zealand, including its border and approaches;
• the preservation of a rules-based international order which respects national sovereignty;
• a network of strong international relationships; and
• the maintenance of New Zealand’s prosperity via secure sea, air and electronic lines of communication.
1.7 New Zealand’s national security interests, in combination with its strategic outlook, are the key factors shaping the roles and tasks the Defence Force must be prepared to undertake.
Defence Force Roles and Tasks
1.21 The Defence Force must be able to undertake a range of roles and tasks across diverse geographical and operating environments. The principal roles of the Defence Force are to:
• Defend New Zealand’s sovereign territory;
• Contribute to national resilience and whole of government security objectives;
• Meet New Zealand’s commitment as an ally of Australia;
• Support New Zealand’s civilian presence in the Ross Dependency of Antarctica, and participate in whole of government efforts to monitor and respond to activity in the Southern Ocean;
• Contribute to, and where necessary lead, operations in the South Pacific;
• Make a credible contribution in support of peace and security in the Asia-Pacific region;
• Protect New Zealand’s wider interests by contributing to international peace and security, and the international rule of law;
• Contribute to the advancement of New Zealand’s security partnerships;
• Participate in whole of government efforts to monitor the strategic environment and
• Be prepared to respond to sudden shifts in the strategic environment. Source: 2016 Defence White Paper, PP.9 & 11.
Unfortunately the politicians never completely match the rhetoric. I also happen to read reasonably widely on the subject too. Yes I wasn't issued with a crystal ball and this is conjecture, this was prefaced with an if. However, I am able to back up my suppositions with basic facts.
I said nothing of the sort. The sensor and armament fit for a potential NZ T31 is completely unknown. That's why quoting what the ships would cost is ridiculous beyond words. The only thing I said was that the T31 would be cheaper than the T26, which is obvious. I was told by an RN officer that the T26 propulsion system alone costs more than the T31. He may have been talking out his ass, but that's what he said. "Yes a fully kitted out OMT 370 would cost the figures I stated if built in a South Korean yard." LOL. Nobody knows how much they'll cost, because nobody even knows what the requirements are. Your method for working out the cost by comparing apples to oranges from open source information is ridiculous and so horribly fanboy. |
|
madmark
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 78
|
Post by madmark on Nov 1, 2019 11:18:13 GMT 12
Oh God, its the Orion replacement thread all over again!
|
|
|
|
Post by senob on Nov 1, 2019 13:22:50 GMT 12
"This is the £250m (~NZ$500 million) that you seem to think fits the bill." I said nothing of the sort. The sensor and armament fit for a potential NZ T31 is completely unknown. That's why quoting what the ships would cost is ridiculous beyond words. The only thing I said was that the T31 would be cheaper than the T26, which is obvious. I was told by an RN officer that the T26 propulsion system alone costs more than the T31. He may have been talking out his ass, but that's what he said. "Yes a fully kitted out OMT 370 would cost the figures I stated if built in a South Korean yard." LOL. Nobody knows how much they'll cost, because nobody even knows what the requirements are. Your method for working out the cost by comparing apples to oranges from open source information is ridiculous and so horribly fanboy. Since we are not in a position to access or publish restricted material, open sourced materials are used. I have used the F370 design as an exemplar and whilst I do like the design for a variety of reason I am definitely no fanboy as you claim. There is Singaporean ST MRC design that shows great promise, the Aussie Hunter Class T-26 itself if we could get enough funding from the govt for 3 vessels, the Navantia F110 design. At present the requirements are assumed to be at a minimum what is currently will be the capabilities of the RNZN ANZAC FFH after the latest upgrade in Canada. Like I said plenty can and will happen between now and when the frigates are replaced, such as 3 so elections to be endured, unless something major happens prior.
When someone claims 1 RR GT, 4 MTU diesels and the electric propulsion, are going to cost more than £250 million - NZ$500 million it does on the face of it give cause to ponder their accuracy & reliability. I wonder if he meant the total cost for the RN Type 26 program being that amount. However, on the T-26 the rafting of the machinery will be expensive. For those unfamiliar with the term, rafting is the technique used to prevent noise from the machinery being transmitted outside the hull. It's a rather expensive operation, but along with the acquisition of the machinery I don't think it would cost £250 million - NZ$500 million per ship; maybe 40% of it at a guess. I know someone on the UK T-26 project, so I could ask them.
|
|
|
|
Post by nighthawknz on Nov 1, 2019 16:08:28 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by richard1098 on Nov 1, 2019 19:25:53 GMT 12
With three very different variants of the design currently planned, which would the RNZN be interested in? The UK variant is probably the least capable, and least costly. If NZ did go for the T26 (who knows what will happen geopolitically in the next decade or how much the cost of the T26 will come down as production ramps up), I think a version of the Canadian vessel might be the best option. It has the CMS 330 and Sea Ceptor which has continuity with the Anzacs, plus you get the advanced AAW capability conferred by LM's SSR + Mk41 + Aegis AAW software module. And all that is on top of, arguably, the best ASW platform. It's a very impressive vessel. The RNZN's requirements probably align most closely with Canada's. The UK will operate their Type 26s as dedicated ASW ships, while the RAN will be fitting their's out as full multirole warships able to support expeditionary warfare including providing anti air protection for a taskforce. |
|
|
|
Post by kiwirob on Nov 1, 2019 20:17:19 GMT 12
Clearly you didn't read what I wrote, the UK redesign updates and fixes all the issues with the original Danish design, a lot of the equipment used on that design is no longer on the market or was completely unsuitable for marine use in the first instance. If you bought the Danish version you'd have to go back and fix all those faults which the Babcock has already fixed, plus you would never be able to build it as cheaply as the Danes did, they used conscript sailors to complete a lot of the fitout and dragged equipment over from the vessels they were replacing. The idea that the Koreans would build to a higher standard is also laughable, anyone who has had anything to do with the new Tide Class vessels will quickly tell you about all the problems they have had to fix, the major issue on the vessels at the moment is the wiring, it was poorly design and badly installed. The UK will have a hot production line, they will know who to build them, they will have worked out all the issues and by the time the last vessel has been completed they will likely be able to offer additional vessels at a lower price. Setting up a new production line somewhere else to build a design they have never built before is not a cheap or practical solution. I didn't say anything about buying the RDN Iver Huitfeld class and yes I know that they pulled stuff through because I actually state that in my post above. I have said that IF we went down that route we would be buying an OMT F370 design license and fitting it out / equipping it to our specs.
Regarding the Tide Class ships, they are not a South Korean design, but a BMT design, so if there are wiring design problems then that is a BMT problem, not a Daewoo problem. Secondly, if there are build quality problems then both BMT and the RN / MOD were somewhat slack in their project management. Thirdly, haven't Daewoo have been having problems anyway and have had to be bailed out? Aren't HHI supposed to be taking them over at some stage? Probably a good thing Aotearoa is being built by HHI. Sounds like the UK MOD and / or BMT didn't undertake proper due diligence of DMSE, which is what the NZ MOD does with all of its tenders now, and has been doing since around 2015.
Like I said above this is all conjecture at the moment, but worthy of discussion.
So now you're stating facts that "if we went down that route we would be buying an OMT F370 design license", prove it. I very much doubt we would, that ship is now outdated, it needs significant and I guess expensive modifications to make it buildable today, this is what Babcocks have already done, so why would we want to do it all over again? BMT provided the class design, the way the ship is built is down to the shipyard and there workshop design. |
|
|
|
Post by beegeetee on Nov 2, 2019 2:58:44 GMT 12
"This is the £250m (~NZ$500 million) that you seem to think fits the bill." I said nothing of the sort. The sensor and armament fit for a potential NZ T31 is completely unknown. That's why quoting what the ships would cost is ridiculous beyond words. The only thing I said was that the T31 would be cheaper than the T26, which is obvious. I was told by an RN officer that the T26 propulsion system alone costs more than the T31. He may have been talking out his ass, but that's what he said. "Yes a fully kitted out OMT 370 would cost the figures I stated if built in a South Korean yard." LOL. Nobody knows how much they'll cost, because nobody even knows what the requirements are. Your method for working out the cost by comparing apples to oranges from open source information is ridiculous and so horribly fanboy. I know someone on the UK T-26 project, so I could ask them.
I'd love to know what he has to say on the matter, if you don't mind asking on my behalf. Thanks. |
|
