Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[KH-12]

Not sure I under stand your scenario, are you saying that the RNZN will find a high speed suicide boat out in the Pacific, or in a harbour?

In the Pacific (apart from running out of gas, and not sure what it would be doing there) you launch a Seasprite with a Mav, in harbour the range and options would be down to the 12.7/25mm?

Unless yoy know what you are shooting at, I doubt you would ever put rounds into a ship out of visual range, could be packed with explosives, drugs, fish, people etc etc..

I'm thinking coastal , the suspects are heading in the direction of a port facility, the Sprite is down for maintenance, the vessel is faster than the OPV and is pulling away, Intel says very bad guys aboard and must be stopped, they are within visual range but outside the 25mm parameters. ope :soldier

 

[Whiskyjack]

I'm thinking coastal , the suspects are heading in the direction of a port facility, the Sprite is down for maintenance, the vessel is faster than the OPV and is pulling away, Intel says very bad guys aboard and must be stopped, they are within visual range but outside the 25mm parameters. ope :soldier

To be honest, I would look at the NLOS missile system, rather than a gun. In situations where a target needs to be hit a guided missile is better then gun. I personally would like to see a few NLOS systems purchased for use by the army and the navy.

 

[Lucasnz]

I'm thinking coastal , the suspects are heading in the direction of a port facility, the Sprite is down for maintenance, the vessel is faster than the OPV and is pulling away, Intel says very bad guys aboard and must be stopped, they are within visual range but outside the 25mm parameters. ope :soldier

My understanding from looking up various sites on the web is that the 25mm will have a range of 2.5km at most (though I stand to be corrected). The 57mm (2kg shell) offers a more suitable calibre for EEZ patrol, while providing for some AAW capability. Personally I would go for the 76mm, with its 6kg shell, given it provides for a marginal NGS capability. Range wise they're similar, however that ignores the impact of any extendend range ammo.

 

[Sea Toby]

A fast sucide boat would most likely run out of fuel a long distance from New Zealand. The OPVs were designed for offshore patrolling, the IPVs were designed for inshore patrolling. I doubt whether an OPV would be available close to shore, its most likely an IPV might be available. Considering the number of fast boats in New Zealand waters, how would any patrol ship recognize a sucide boat? If Intelligence had recognized a fast sucide boat, the P-3 Orions or Hercules aircraft or Huey or other SeaSprites nearby could easily track the offending boat allowing a frigate, OPV, or IPV to intercept it. This whole scenario doesn't make sense!

Yes, I would prefer a larger gun on the OPVs. However, the SeaSprites have much more range than any gun. At least New Zealand OPVs have a hangar and deck for the handling of helicopters. Many other navies don't. Also the speed of a helicopter is far quicker than the speed of a fast sucide boat. Most of the merchant vessel and fishing boats the OPVs and IPVs will investigate have a slower speed.

While it is nice to have a larger gun for shore bombardment, the 25-mm should be able to straff a beach. I can't recall the last naval battle when guns were excusively used to strike another ship, my best recollection is the Gulf of Tonkin. No wonder the British built a few frigates during the 1980s without a large naval gun mount.

 

[KH-12]

A fast sucide boat would most likely run out of fuel a long distance from New Zealand. The OPVs were designed for offshore patrolling, the IPVs were designed for inshore patrolling. I doubt whether an OPV would be available close to shore, its most likely an IPV might be available. Considering the number of fast boats in New Zealand waters, how would any patrol ship recognize a sucide boat? This whole scenario doesn't make sense!

OK, they have used a larger vessel as cover to get close to NZ terriotorial waters, no reason why a fast boat could'nt have a couple of hundred miles of range, I'm saying that Intel has indicated that the target is hostile and needs to be dealt with. Remeber the A-4's are in a shed in Blenheim hwell

I don't think any scenario is unfeasible, who would have thought of a multiple airliner attack in the US or the Limpet mining of a ship in Auckland harbour for example - expect the unexpected

 

[Whiskyjack]

OK, they have used a larger vessel as cover to get close to NZ terriotorial waters, no reason why a fast boat could'nt have a couple of hundred miles of range, I'm saying that Intel has indicated that the target is hostile and needs to be dealt with. Remeber the A-4's are in a shed in Blenheim

hwell

Arm the P3s. Faster response.

I don't think any scenario is unfeasible, who would have thought of a multiple airliner attack in the US or the Limpet mining of a ship in Auckland harbour for example - expect the unexpected

I don't disagree, but how do you prevent limpet mining, I would argue not by placing a larger gun on an OPV.

 

[KH-12]

hwell

Arm the P3s. Faster response.



I don't disagree, but how do you prevent limpet mining, I would argue not by placing a larger gun on an OPV.

True (unless you sink the yacht before the operatives land ) , I was just using it as an example of unlikely scenarios. Arming the P3's is a good solution, still 57mm ammunition is a lot cheaper than a Maverick.

 

[Whiskyjack]

True (unless you sink the yacht before the operatives land ) , I was just using it as an example of unlikely scenarios. Arming the P3's is a good solution, still 57mm ammunition is a lot cheaper than a Maverick.

The issue for me is where is the threat coming from. If it is coming from a ship on the way here and will be launched by that ship, or off that ship, then that is where a ISTAR network comes into play. You want that ship identified, bordered and searched before it comes close.

If a ship/plane are being used to smuggle people/equipment into the country, where an operation is being put into place to launch an operation from NZ soil, then it becomes a customs/police issue, that will also have help from the NZDF.

As examples for both:

For the first read some of the commando operations in WWII where small merchant/fishing vessels were used to launch attacks on harbours and ships, or even the merchant raiders that laid mines (including off the Waitemata).

For the second the Rainbow Warrior would be a good example.

Now for NZ I would say the second is the most likely scenario, due to logistics and capabilities.

 

[Sea Toby]

If intelligence had located the enemy, how does the enemy know the SeaSprites are not operational? Wouldn't it be easier to just bomb the target aka Rainbow Warrior than use an expensive sucide boat?

We can play what if games for the rest of our lives. I can easily come up with a scenario every day.

Not even the United States of America, with its huge intelligence agencies, dreamed up using passenger filled airliners as guided missiles.

 

[KH-12]

Not even the United States of America, with its huge intelligence agencies, dreamed up using passenger filled airliners as guided missiles.

Precisely ! they had lost the ability to think like a terrorist, their intel was based on a cold war mentality.

I said what if the SH-2G is unavailable, nice to have a backup.

Still to be confirmed whether or not the SeaSprites will be embarked on the OPV's as a matter of course as per the ANZAC's, will soon have 5 Helicopter capable vessels and 5 aircraft with no backup, will have to time maintenance and training carefully during dock time.

 

[Sea Toby]

There will always be a few SeaSprites at home because New Zealand does not deploy all of their ships at the same time. No sailor likes to be at sea all of the time either. The backup are the SeaSprites not deployed. You didn't think all of your naval ships were deployed 365 days a year did you?

Of course, having a air combat force would eliminate the need of having undeployed SeaSprites around. I suggest the F-50 Golden Eagle. It can shoot Mavericks and drop bombs too.

Terrorists can target just about anything. There is no way any government can cover and guard every transmission line tower. With one or two transmission lines down, watch a city go dark. There is no need to target the power plant.

 

[KH-12]

There will always be a few SeaSprites at home because New Zealand does not deploy all of their ships at the same time. No sailor likes to be at sea all of the time either. The backup are the SeaSprites not deployed. You didn't think all of your naval ships were deployed 365 days a year did you?

Of course, having a air combat force would eliminate the need of having undeployed SeaSprites around. I suggest the F-50 Golden Eagle. It can shoot Mavericks and drop bombs too.

Yes but 6 Sqn is only obliged to have 3 SH-2G available for operations at any one time, and if you lose one through a major accident (as has happened) you might come up short.

The A-50 looks OK but with S Korea as the only customer it might be abit of a white elephant.

P-3 with Maves looks like the best bet , plus you can ident the Al Qaeda boys using the new electro-optic system before you send them a package. :rel

 

[Whiskyjack]

Yes but 6 Sqn is only obliged to have 3 SH-2G available for operations at any one time, and if you lose one through a major accident (as has happened) you might come up short.

The A-50 looks OK but with S Korea as the only customer it might be abit of a white elephant.

P-3 with Maves looks like the best bet , plus you can ident the Al Qaeda boys using the new electro-optic system before you send them a package. :rel

I think NZ needs to be looking at the P3 first up and moving on to UAV systems that can project from the coast. The Mariner for instance can carry a 2,000lb external payload.

Range and endurance.

 

[Sea Toby]

Another backup idea would be to add Harpoon/Exocet anti-ship missiles to the fleet, plus the Orions. You don't necessarily have to have 8 tubes for each ships, 4 would do on the OPVs and 2 would be enough on the IPVs. This would cost much less than acquiring an air combat force, with much more range than a larger gun.

Being the most recent, newest and only supersonic trainer/light fighter on the market, Lockheed sees a market to sell over 2,000 of them. The US Congress, refusing to upgrade the expensive to operate Talons, wishes to start acquiring F-50s next year, over 500 are needed to replace the 40 year old Talons. While this order has not been confirmed, its very likely. There are many nations which operate the F-5 Freedom Fighters looking for a cheaper alternative than the F-16. The F-50 appears to be a winner, using the same highly efficient and ready F-18 engine.

 

[KH-12]

Another backup idea would be to add Harpoon/Exocet anti-ship missiles to the fleet, plus the Orions. You don't necessarily have to have 8 tubes for each ships, 4 would do on the OPVs and 2 would be enough on the IPVs. This would cost much less than acquiring an air combat force, with much more range than a larger gun.

Being the most recent, newest and only supersonic trainer/light fighter on the market, Lockheed sees a market to sell over 2,000 of them. The US Congress, refusing to upgrade the expensive to operate Talons, wishes to start acquiring F-50s next year, over 500 are needed to replace the 40 year old Talons. While this order has not been confirmed, its very likely.

The USAF does'nt want them, they are quite happy with the T-38's that had an avionics upgrade quite recently (they would prefer more F-22's than trainers), probably some congressman with a vested interest in T-50 sales. Apparently someone overestimated the T-38 operating costs

 

[Whiskyjack]

Another backup idea would be to add Harpoon/Exocet anti-ship missiles to the fleet, plus the Orions. You don't necessarily have to have 8 tubes for each ships, 4 would do on the OPVs and 2 would be enough on the IPVs. This would cost much less than acquiring an air combat force, with much more range than a larger gun.

Being the most recent, newest and only supersonic trainer/light fighter on the market, Lockheed sees a market to sell over 2,000 of them. The US Congress, refusing to upgrade the expensive to operate Talons, wishes to start acquiring F-50s next year, over 500 are needed to replace the 40 year old Talons. While this order has not been confirmed, its very likely.

I agree with the ANZACs getting Harpoon, OPVs and IPVs is just overkill IMO. We are talking about dealing with Merchant and Fishing vessels here!

If the strategic contect changes then yes the option should be looked at.

F-50s are just not suited for the NZ environment, range wise they just don't get anywhere.

If the Govt decides it wants combat aircraft to deploy for overseas contributions (which will be a cold day in hell!) then NZ will have to bite the bullet and go the whole hog and buy something that will operate with NZ's allies and be capable of plugging into their logistics systems. The T50 in a modern combat environment would be a liability IMO.

 

[KH-12]

I agree with the ANZACs getting Harpoon, OPVs and IPVs is just overkill IMO. We are talking about dealing with Merchant and Fishing vessels here!

If the strategic contect changes then yes the option should be looked at.

F-50s are just not suited for the NZ environment, range wise they just don't get anywhere.

If the Govt decides it wants combat aircraft to deploy for overseas contributions (which will be a cold day in hell!) then NZ will have to bite the bullet and go the whole hog and buy something that will operate with NZ's allies and be capable of plugging into their logistics systems. The T50 in a modern combat environment would be a liability IMO.

I agree, you either get a proper combat aircraft or forget about it.

If you start trying to put Harpoon on the OPV's you will be up for alot of additional Systems costs apart from the not inconsiderable missle costs, sounds like trying to turn an OPV into a frigate When those illegal fishing boats see that Harpoon bearing down on them they will know we take our EEZ seriously :gun , will make them think twice about taking that extra Blue Fin.

Would protection of offshore oil rigs (eg Southern Basin) fall in the role of the OPV or IPV ?

 

[Stuart Mackey]

snippage

So I am interested in what system/calibre and why people feel it needs to be that system.

My concern is that the MRV is supposed to be able to ship an army company into a medium threat environment and it has no CIWS. I understand there is a 57mm that can double as CIWS and as a GP weapon to scare fish poachers. I think the OPV's/IPV's are adequetly armed for their usesage, however.

 

[KH-12]

My concern is that the MRV is supposed to be able to ship an army company into a medium threat environment and it has no CIWS. I understand there is a 57mm that can double as CIWS and as a GP weapon to scare fish poachers. I think the OPV's/IPV's are adequetly armed for their usesage, however.

What about the Phalanx system off the Canterbury (the old one) , could this not be put on the MRV ? , how much integration is required.

 

[Stuart Mackey]

What about the Phalanx system off the Canterbury (the old one) , could this not be put on the MRV ? , how much integration is required.

Both CIWS systems are on the Frigates. As to how much work would be needed..no more than any other ship I guess, but I dont know how much structural work would be needed to put it in the right place for ship defence if one wanted Phalanx.