Streamlined RNZN fleet for 2035

[whomisdis]

Introduction:
Kia Ora everyone, I have been thinking about this proposal for a while now, and figured I would share it here to see what you guys think.

To make an approximation on what the RNZN will look like into the 2030s, we need to understand what capabilities that is desired for this period. To do this, I have utilized the following references:

1: https://www.defence.govt.nz/publication ... -plan-2019
2: https://www.defence.govt.nz/publication ... ement-2023
3: https://www.defence.govt.nz/publication ... iples-2023
4: https://www.defence.govt.nz/publication ... el-project
5: https://www.defence.govt.nz/publication ... eport-2022
6: https://www.defence.gov.au/about/review ... gic-review

Thus, with these references, the 2035 RNZN fleet was built.

Capability Requirements:
Analyzing the 2019 defence capability plan [1] reveals the following conclusions:

- The plan has made some initial budget estimations for the replacement of the current ANZAC class, OPVs, Manawanui, and Canterbury.
- The plan has also made initial budgets for an additional sea lift vessel to compliment Canterbury in the mid-20s, and an additional OPV specifically for
southern ocean patrol (referred to as the SOPV) in the mid-20s.
- The plan budgeted for a replacement of the SH-2G(I) helicopters.
- Most importantly, the vessels currently in service are due to be replaced at very similar times to each other, in the late 20s to early 30s.

Thus, the defence capability plan has budgeted for 8 new vessels, 6 of which are to be replaced at essentially the same time. Referring to reference 4 shows the the SOPV was deferred (emphasis on deferred, not canceled [4]) due to COVID complications. This means that this vessel will be delayed to a similar timeline as current vessel replacements.
(Note: the 2019 defense capability plan is the latest one available to the public at the current time, there is another one due in 2024, but as that is not currently published, I have to work with the older 2019 plan).

So now we have a fleet 7 of new vessels coming online at the same time, with another sea lift vessel to have recently entered service (<5 years). And from these 7 new vessels, an adequate sealift, dive & hydrographic, ocean patrol, and high end defense capability needs to be provided to the RNZN. (To note: Tanker/Auxiliary capability is already supplied by HMNZS Aotearoa, currently the largest and most modern ship in the RNZN fleet, which wont be retiring for a good long time [5]).

However, before splitting up the new fleet into ship types, a few restrictions need to be considered. The RNZNs primary limiting factors are budget, and personnel. The budget limits the fleet size, and currently the fleet has a lot of variety for the number of ships (from a total of 9 ships, there are 6 classes of vessels). This variety hinders the availability rates and increases operating costs on an already constrained budget.

But its the severe personnel issues that the RNZN currently faces that is the primary restriction (its so poor that the IPVs have been essentially struck, with two being sold to the Irish navy, and the other two being laid up). Personnel retention is poor and manning levels, thus readiness levels, are low.

Thus, with these restrictions in mind, we need a fleet that can cover the wide variety of capabilities provided by the current fleet, while also reducing the number of ship classes/types and overall manning levels.

So lets pair capabilities with vessels:

1 - Sealift:
This has been budgeted for 2 vessels, 1 to compliment Canterbury, and 1 to replace her. These 2 vessels should be of the same type, to reduce fleet variety while providing the same capability.
The vessel I propose would be the Damen Enforcer 10000 series LPD:



I selected this as damen already has a successful history with building sealift vessels, which provides a proven, low risk solution (low risk is outlined in [3] by RNZN as a necessity). Canterbury was also built in a dutch shipyard, thus NZ has already done this sort of procurement process with the dutch before successfully. However, I could see this vessel turning out to be a different type due to the following: Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI) built aotearoa, and will likely push hard for the sealift program. It would also be very seriously considered due to the success the was aotearoa. I personally selected the enforcer due to the type having already been built before, unlike what HHI would propose (likely the HHI HDL-10000). But either option would be good solutions.

2 - High-End Defense:
These are currently budgeted as two vessels to replace the current ANZAC frigates of Te Kaha and Te Mana. And these vessels will be exactly that, a pair of high end, versatile, proven, and inexpensive frigates to give the RNZN a solid, bluewater, high intensity defence capability. And to me, its pretty clearly going to be the babcock AH140 frigate design:



This is because of the following reasons:
- AH140 is based off the proven Iver Huitfeldt class design, which itself is capable and versatile.
- AH140 is already going to be operated by at least 3 different navies, one of which will be the UK. This validates the design, minimizes costs overall and reduces risk.
- AH140 will likely be inexpensive to purchase and maintain to potential competitors, and due to its modularity, have a large breath to its capability as a platform for the price.
- AH140 is built by Babcock. Babcock is already currently contracted by the NZ government as the primary maintainer of the RNZN fleet, and operates the drydock and its facilities in Devonport base. In terms of the AH140, it already has a headstart on competitors purely based on current infrastructure.

Now the only exception to which the the RNZN does not select the AH140 would be solely dependent on what the RAN selects for its tier 2 combatant requirement [6]. The AH140 design presented above is currently designed under the assumption that the RAN selects the AH140 as its tier 2 combatant (for similar reasons mentioned previously) and locally builds australianized AH140s (CEAFAR radar, saab 9lv, etc). This allows NZ to just add 2 onto the order list and operate them as they did with the ANZAC frigates. If the RAN does not select the AH140 for the tier 2 combatant, then this could potentially sway NZ away as well [2]. But overall, the AH140 is still the primary contender.

So lets review our current fleet makeup:
- 2 sealift vessels: Damen Enforcer 10000 LPD.
- 2 high end defense: Babcock AH140 (australianized).
- 1 tanker/axillary: The current HMNZS Aotearoa.

This gives us a current total of 5 ships of 3 types. What this leaves leftover is the budget for 4 more patrol sized ships that need to cover dive & hydrographic, inshore & offshore patrol, and southern patrol capabilities, while also considering the reduction of class variety in the fleet.

3 - Multipurpose Patrol Vessel:
With this is mind, I propose that the final capabilities are all covered by a single ship type, of which four would be purchased from the rest of the budget. This would be a multipurpose vessel, with the ability to switch out different modules to allow for one vessel to tackle different mission profiles. This module system would be the Cube system by SH Defence, with the ship selected being the Fassmer MPV90:



This vessel can carry a significant amount of equipment, and is designed around the Cube modularity concept. This vessel could be outfitted for offshore patrol duties one day, then have modules switched out for dive & hydrographic work another day. It would allow for the RNZN to retain its breadth in capability that it desires, while also reducing class types in the fleet (reducing operating costs), as well as overall manning levels (allowing for greater individual pay increasing personnel retention). This vessel type would essentially be the workhorse of the RNZN, as with the right module setup, it can also assist the sealifts and frigates in their mission profile as well.
A potential alternative to the Fassmer MPV90 would be the OMT MPV-80. The MPV-80 is being designed for the Danish navy with the Cube system in mind, as well as for artic conditions. This ship would also be ideal for NZ requirements, but the Fassmer MPV90 looked easier to draw so I chose that one instead!!

Overall Fleet:
So lets have a look at the final overall fleet for 2035:
- 2 x damen enforcer 1000 lpd
- 2 x babcock ah140
- 4 x fassmer mpv90
- 1 x hmnzs aotearoa
Thus we have gone from a fleet of 9 ships over 6 classes, to a fleet of again 9 ships, but with only 4 classes. Lets check the total required crew compliment to see if this fleet is actually feasible personnel wise:

Current fleet:
2 x anzac = 2 x 179 = 358
1 x aotearoa = 98
1 x canterbury = 123
2 x protector opv = 2 x 48 = 96
2 x lake ipv = 2 x 32 = 72
1 x manawanui = 39

This gives a total current crew compliment of 786 (714 if we fully exclude the ipvs).

Proposed 2035 fleet:
2 x damen enforcer 1000 lpd = 2 x 95
2 x babcock ah140 = 2 x 80
4 x fassmer mpv90 = 4 x 60
1 x hmnzs aotearoa = 98

This give a 2035 total of 688, almost 100 less than the current 786 requirement (and even 26 less when excluding the ipvs).

Thus, the new proposed fleet provides the same capability breadth, with a significant increase in depth, for a reduced operating and maintaining cost, reduced personnel requirements, and likely greater availability rates as well as increased personnel retention in comparison to the current fleet composition.

Maritime Helicopter Replacement:
Now onto the final aspect concluded from the 2019 defense capability plan, the replacement of the SH-2G(I) Super Seasprite helicopters. These current helicopters provide the primary ASW and ASuW capability for the RNZN, and all within a compact, proven, airframe design.

Now reviewing the competitors, i think the replacement helicopter is a pretty clear choice, primarily because the replacement is due in service by 2028, just before the introduction of the new vessels. This is important because there will be 2 years of vessels with the small hangers (ANZACs & the OPVs). This means that the only reasonable choice will have to fit within these hangers, else the RNZN will go without its primary ASW & ASuW capability for 2 years (an unacceptable compromise for national security).

With this in mind, the helicopter selected is the AW159 Wildcat. This is perhaps the most advanced naval helicopter available currently, with AESA radar, and other advanced sensors/munitions. It comes in a compact airframe that can fit in the confines of the older RNZN hangers. It is also a low risk proven design, currently in service with other navies (such as the UK, which will also operate the AH140, providing a chance for commonality etc). The MH60 and NH90 can technically fit in the ANZACs hanger, but barely so, and neither stand a chance of fitting in the opvs hanger. The AW101 merlin is out of the question. Along with the helicopter replacement, the RNZN is looking to support them with a UAS vehicle. This will likely be the S-100 Camcopter due to it being proven, cheap, capable, and will be in service with the RN & RAN.

Conclusion:
If you have gotten this far, then I applude you, give yourself a much deserved pat on the back for going through this wall of text attempting to justify the few drawings within! I wish to flesh out this post with more drawings in the future (im thinking of drawing the hdi-10000, mpv80, aw159, & aotearoa) but in the mean time I want to thank you for giving this post a read, and leave a comment of what you think.

Cheers

[LEUT_East]

I love the designs and the introduction is fantastic.

[whomisdis]

I love the designs and the introduction is fantastic.

Cheers for the positive feedback, really appreciate it!

[whomisdis]

Here are some kit-bashes of potential Aussie build T31 configurations:

The first one here is if they decided to opt for the AH140 MNP configuration:


And this one is the enhanced general purpose frigate with the full six-sided CEAFAR radar arrangement:

[Rainmaker]

Really nice work in this thread, keep up the good work.

I feel as though the Fassmer MPV 90 is one of those designs that could really benefit from a top view, or even a fore/aft view, as it's quite an unusual design and the side view doesn't give the viewer a full understanding of the general arrangement of the vessel. Upon viewing it for the first time, I thought to myself "huh, that's odd", and then I Googled it to get a better idea of what's going on with the design.

[LEUT_East]

Here are some kit-bashes of potential Aussie build T31 configurations:

The first one here is if they decided to opt for the AH140 MNP configuration:


And this one is the enhanced general purpose frigate with the full six-sided CEAFAR radar arrangement:

These T31 configurations are amazing. I particularly like the placement of the CEAFAR arrays.

[whomisdis]

Really nice work in this thread, keep up the good work.

I feel as though the Fassmer MPV 90 is one of those designs that could really benefit from a top view, or even a fore/aft view, as it's quite an unusual design and the side view doesn't give the viewer a full understanding of the general arrangement of the vessel. Upon viewing it for the first time, I thought to myself "huh, that's odd", and then I Googled it to get a better idea of what's going on with the design.

That is such a fair comment! It does have an odd configuration particularly forward of the bridge. I'll have a go at the top view once I complete my next project. Thanks for the advice!

[whomisdis]

Here are some kit-bashes of potential Aussie build T31 configurations:

The first one here is if they decided to opt for the AH140 MNP configuration:


And this one is the enhanced general purpose frigate with the full six-sided CEAFAR radar arrangement:

These T31 configurations are amazing. I particularly like the placement of the CEAFAR arrays.

Cheers for the compliments, super humbled! Yeah it took a bit of scheming and reworking to get the six-sided CEAFAR to fit on the T31 without it looking like the ship would capsize due to the smallest wave.

[whomisdis]

SOPV:

So I’ve been doing some digging into the Southern Ocean Patrol Vessel RFI (Request For Information) published by the NZ MoD (https://www.scribd.com/document/5082807 ... Vessel-RFI) recently as I wanted to fully understand the requirements set by the RNZN and to see if the Fassmer MPV90m would actually fulfill them. Here is the order of conclusions I came to from reading the RFI:

- “The SOPV is to be designed and built to commercial standards.“
- “The commercial standards will not preclude the design from military off-the-shelf solutions.”
- “The SOPV is expected to be an ice-strengthened patrol vessel. It will be able to conduct patrols across a wider range of ice, sea state, and temperature conditions than is possible with the present naval patrol fleet, noting it will be traversing one of the roughest seas in the world, and must be able to operate safely in Ross Sea ice conditions.”

Now let's pause the inspection here. The RFI states that the vessel needs to be ice-strengthened, which is what the current OPVs HMNZS Otago and Wellington are. But they want it built to be stronger than the current OPV fleet. Note how it does not mention the ship needs to be capable of breaking ice (hence, it doesn't need to be an icebreaker). Thus, if this is the final case for ice requirements, then the Fassmer MPV 90m would satisfy the southern patrol requirement, and the 4 x MPV90s for the 2035 fleet can remain as is. But also note that it doesn't specify thus far the state of the Ross Sea ice conditions if its summer or winter.

Now, let's continue with the inspection of the RFI:

- “The SOPV project will deliver a capability that is compliant with the International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters (The Polar Code). The Polar Code covers the full range of design, construction, equipment, operational, training, search and rescue, and environmental protection matters relevant to ships operating in polar waters. This also includes mandatory measures and provisions to cover safety and pollution prevention. Intended compliance to the Polar Code reflects the New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) policy to follow civilian best practice safety regulations for personnel and operations whenever feasible.”

Okay, let's pause again and analyze what they want here with this statement. Firstly, the RFI states the vessel needs to be compliant with the polar code (https://www.dnv.com/maritime/polar/index.html), but it doesn't explicitly state what category it needs to achieve (A, B, or C). If we compare the polar code against the current Otago class, we see that the vessel was not designed for ice pacts, but was strengthened to enable entry to the Ross Sea. Based on this, I would personally place the Otago under the ICE-C/E to ICE-1C/E1 sub-category of the polar code. Anything higher and we start entering icebreaker territory, something the bow of the Fassmer MPV90 cannot achieve. So now let's do a quick summary and go from there:

- Current patrol vessels have a rough polar code of ICE-C/E to ICE-1C/E1 (because I don't know the exact code I cannot be 100% certain).
- The SOPV states it needs to be ice-strengthened, but stronger than the current OPV fleet for Ross Sea patrol.
- Anything stronger than ICE-C/E to ICE-1C/E1 is starting to enter icebreaker territory, something the current Fassmer cannot achieve.

Now I have two trains of thought to continue from here depending on what the MoD wants the RNZN to do. If they want a stronger hull for greater reliability with the current OPVs polar code ratings (ICE-C/E to ICE-1C/E1), then the Fassmer MPV90m can achieve this, and the fleet with utilize four of them as stated in the OP.

However, if the MoD wishes for the RNZN to have greater polar code capability (high category C to category A PC4 (higher PCs get expensive and huge)), then a new, ice-breaking capable ship is required. So with this in mind, this vessel is supposed to fill the proposed alternative scenario.

Thus, we want a ship that has moderate ice-breaking capabilities, that can also perform the patrol requirements set out by the RFI, built to commercial standards with the potential to equip military off-the-shelf solutions. With this in mind, I would select the Vard 9 201:



This vessel was selected for the following reasons:

- Polar class of PC5, meaning it can perform year-round operation in medium first-year ice, which may include old ice inclusions.
- Is a commercially designed ship, thus built to commercial standards.
- Large enough to equip military off-the-shelf solutions.
- It has a large range of 12000 NM and an endurance of 60 days.
- Smaller crew complement required compared to similar vessels at only 50, a big influence for RNZN selection.
- It can carry a significant amount of cargo stores, thus providing resupply capabilities to Scott base and other Antarctica operations in place of Aotearoa.
- It is a multipurpose vessel, so can also perform hydrographic and dive capabilities to replace the current HMNZS Manawanui.

Thus, this vessel would replace one of the Fassmer MPV90m patrol vessels, and reduce overall the required crew complement by 10. The disadvantage this brings is that the overall fleet variety is increased from 9 ships of 4 classes to 9 ships of 5 classes (this is still one less class than the current fleet make up with fewer crewing requirements).

Cheers for reading this, let me know your thoughts.

[whomisdis]

Really nice work in this thread, keep up the good work.

I feel as though the Fassmer MPV 90 is one of those designs that could really benefit from a top view, or even a fore/aft view, as it's quite an unusual design and the side view doesn't give the viewer a full understanding of the general arrangement of the vessel. Upon viewing it for the first time, I thought to myself "huh, that's odd", and then I Googled it to get a better idea of what's going on with the design.

Finally did the top view: