Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

S

swerve

Super Moderator
StevoJH said:
Are the Mk.41’s replacing the mushroom farm or in addition?

If a replacement, the RN (and possibly Poland) will have to pay for integration. It also opens up the possibility of the longer ranges CAMM variants.
Click to expand...
Poland is building frigates with Mk41 from the start, & intends to use it for CAMM. 32 cells according to what I've read. MBDA & LM qualified CAMM in Mk 41 via Host ExLS, with CAMM supplied in a 4 round canister, back in the late 2010s. Links in post no 9898, to ADMk2.

Poland wants to use CAMM-ER, which I imagine would need some integration, & eventually CAMM-MR, but that's still under development (which I think Poland is taking part in) & is planned for dual-packing (too big for quad), which'd complicate matters a bit, but Poland's heavily committed to the CAMM family for both land-based & naval use. It's currently building a factory to make CAMM-ER, for example.
 
d-ron84

d-ron84

Active Member
recce.k1 said:
Early renditions show it there - perhaps the DefPros with knowledge of the project can explain the changes?

View attachment 54921

Was that original position chosen to provide an additional Mk41 VLS (2x 4 cell SD length) option on the fo'c'sle? If so it doesn't show on the above plan. However wonder if 2x ExLS launching systems could be fitted nowadays? :D
Click to expand...
Remour I heard years ago:
RAN FFH's had the space for 2 x MK41's but only fitted 1, as well as not fitting Phalanx.
Due to this they weren't reinforced to take the weight, this prevented the second cell or CIWS being fitted since.
This "apparently" also prevented Harpoon being fitted aft of the mast. Since the upgrade to the CEA Mast, they are to top heavy to have NSM up that high so they remain aft of the gun.
Not sure how true but seems plausible :)
 
W

Warhawk

Member
Timelines for MH-60R helicpters? How long will NZ Navy wait for their new helicopters with South Korea just putting in large order and India to follow. If not already.Just seen video of our flying museum helicopters flying current excise great helicopters in its day. But they looked extremely tired got give maintenance crew there dues they do great job keeping them flying and deserve better.
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
d-ron84 said:
Remour I heard years ago:
RAN FFH's had the space for 2 x MK41's but only fitted 1, as well as not fitting Phalanx.
Due to this they weren't reinforced to take the weight, this prevented the second cell or CIWS being fitted since.
This "apparently" also prevented Harpoon being fitted aft of the mast. Since the upgrade to the CEA Mast, they are to top heavy to have NSM up that high so they remain aft of the gun.
Not sure how true but seems plausible :)
Click to expand...
I think the issue was top wait not space.
The void for the proposed second VLS was certainly evident on an open day walk through some decades ago.
What that space looks like today I cannot say.
The ability to quad pack ESSM enabling a total of 32 missiles was I feel the big plus.

A Mk 41 with 32 missile weighs a lot and as such influenced the RAN weapons array and locations across the ship.

NZ of course adopted a different mix of systems and weapons.

Going forward it will be very interesting as to what ship New Zealand chooses; how many are selected and what weapons and systems are employed

A very important project

Cheers S
 
K

kiwi in exile

Well-Known Member
Interoperability aside, on a 1:1 basis what is the better ship, upgraded Mogami or T31? Thoughts?

I get the feeling most here are in favour of the Mogami. Perhaps this is because the T31 is marketed as 'affordable" and lower tier.
But the type 31 is based on the Ivar Huttfiled hull, which has been discussed her plenty.
And it can have potentially very similar armamment to the Mogami (1 x 32cell strike VLS with identical missile loadout, 1 x big gun, 8 x SSMs).
Can be fitted with towed array sonar and hull mounted sonar (Mogami may be 'quiter')
I dont know much about radars/sensors but the Type 31 can host a number of radar systems. I have seen a graphic or an air to air version with a 2nd rear radar mast.

The type 31 is cheaper. We all agree that we need more that 2 frigates. Wouldn't 3, possibly 4 type 31s be better than 2 mogamis, for us and Australia, the wider SW pacific?
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
kiwi in exile said:
Interoperability aside, on a 1:1 basis what is the better ship, upgraded Mogami or T31? Thoughts?

I get the feeling most here are in favour of the Mogami. Perhaps this is because the T31 is marketed as 'affordable" and lower tier.
But the type 31 is based on the Ivar Huttfiled hull, which has been discussed her plenty.
And it can have potentially very similar armamment to the Mogami (1 x 32cell strike VLS with identical missile loadout, 1 x big gun, 8 x SSMs).
Can be fitted with towed array sonar and hull mounted sonar (Mogami may be 'quiter')
I dont know much about radars/sensors but the Type 31 can host a number of radar systems. I have seen a graphic or an air to air version with a 2nd rear radar mast.

The type 31 is cheaper. We all agree that we need more that 2 frigates. Wouldn't 3, possibly 4 type 31s be better than 2 mogamis, for us and Australia, the wider SW pacific?
Click to expand...
The question should be 4 type 31s versus 3 Mogamis, not 2! Surely the limitations of only 2 frigates has been learnt. Given the current geopolitical environment four of either is the best option. The choice could fastest delivery wins.
 
S

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Could NZ crew those extra frigates ? I think the minimum for a 31 is 90 plus any aviation detachment - multiply that by about 3 to allow for training courses. leave, etc.
 
R

Rob c

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
StobieWan said:
Could NZ crew those extra frigates ? I think the minimum for a 31 is 90 plus any aviation detachment - multiply that by about 3 to allow for training courses. leave, etc.
Click to expand...
Yes, if the government were not so tight a-e about terms and conditions ānd treasury stayed out of the debate on terms and conditions as they as bean counters, dont understand people. The armed forces terms and conditions were radically reduced in 2012 on treasury advice, just when the 2011 defence white paper avised inprovments in some area's. The bean counters got their way and the navy and air force have struggled to retain technical personal ever since .
 
spoz

spoz

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
The T31, or rather the Arrowhead 140, is really only significantly cheaper than a Mogami if either it is not particularly well equipped (the actual T31 as originally scoped and priced) or is equipped with systems which are not something common to western navies - and may well be being provided at “mates rates” - the Indonesian example. A T31 with good sensors, both HMS and TAS, 32 Mk 41, SeaRAM and a 5/62 main gun is going to be a lot closer to a Mogami.

In any case do not compare Aust prices for a Mogami with UK prices for a T31 - the cost basis is very different.
 
S

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Very true. The UK’s type 31 costed out about 250 million British beer vouchers, and they're going straight into capability insertion, right after commissioning if we're lucky. They're running over budget, which would have hurt us except for the contract structure.

Get it closer to the mogami in terms of fit out, then it gets closer to the same sticker price.
 
W

Warhawk

Member
Hopefully we have learnt from when both frigates were updated in Canada when ended up no ships to patrol . Has to be 3 can't see 4. I like Type 31 being modular you can have 2 frigates kitted up and 1 semi kitted used for backup and training/Patrol . And when 1 frigate comes in maintenance you move the modules to other frigate.
 
RubiconNZ

RubiconNZ

The Wanderer
Warhawk said:
Hopefully we have learnt from when both frigates were updated in Canada when ended up no ships to patrol . Has to be 3 can't see 4. I like Type 31 being modular you can have 2 frigates kitted up and 1 semi kitted used for backup and training/Patrol . And when 1 frigate comes in maintenance you move the modules to other frigate.
Click to expand...
By the time the two replacement frigate hulls enter the water, the current OPVs will also be nearing the end of their service lives. Replacing them on a 4-for-4 basis would not be unrealistic, particularly if defence spending rises to the planned 2% of GDP.

On the personnel side, the planned Devonport upgrades, combined with the new housing developments at Narrowneck and Bayswater, should significantly improve retention. The overall number of personnel at sea would remain broadly similar, though the mix of roles and specialisations would naturally shift.

Additionally, the Inshore Patrol Vessels (IPVs) will soon require replacement. This presents a good opportunity to introduce a dedicated Southern Ocean OPV and bolster littoral capabilities, particularly when paired with Bluebottle USVs.

Point being, there is a strong case of build it and they will come. Imagine the recruitment potential of four modern frigates for New Zealand.
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
RubiconNZ said:
By the time the two replacement frigate hulls enter the water, the current OPVs will also be nearing the end of their service lives. Replacing them on a 4-for-4 basis would not be unrealistic, particularly if defence spending rises to the planned 2% of GDP.

On the personnel side, the planned Devonport upgrades, combined with the new housing developments at Narrowneck and Bayswater, should significantly improve retention. The overall number of personnel at sea would remain broadly similar, though the mix of roles and specialisations would naturally shift.

Additionally, the Inshore Patrol Vessels (IPVs) will soon require replacement. This presents a good opportunity to introduce a dedicated Southern Ocean OPV and bolster littoral capabilities, particularly when paired with Bluebottle USVs.

Point being, there is a strong case of build it and they will come. Imagine the recruitment potential of four modern frigates for New Zealand.
Click to expand...
It’s an interesting situation whereby NZ is pretty much replacing its entire fleet ,but for its existing supply ship.
Opportunity of bounds.
Replace like for like, or create a different mix of ships.
Make some good decisions and NZ will be well placed going forward.

But please get moving and don’t kick the can down the road

Cheers S
 
C

CJR

Active Member
StobieWan said:
Very true. The UK’s type 31 costed out about 250 million British beer vouchers, and they're going straight into capability insertion, right after commissioning if we're lucky. They're running over budget, which would have hurt us except for the contract structure.

Get it closer to the mogami in terms of fit out, then it gets closer to the same sticker price.
Click to expand...
Type 31 has three different users (UK, Poland, Indonesia) with different weapons and combat systems fits, so three distinct and different supply chains with only one in region (and the one in region is potentially unreliable). The improved Mogamis look to be on track for two regional users with a common weapon and combat systems fit (with further interest from India, Indonesia and Taiwan), so two inter-compatible regional supply chains.

Suggests to me it's likely improved Mogamis would have a lower through-life cost and be easier to maintain (spares available relatively nearby) than a Type 31 derivative.
 
S

swerve

Super Moderator
CJR said:
Type 31 has three different users (UK, Poland, Indonesia) with different weapons and combat systems fits, so three distinct and different supply chains with only one in region (and the one in region is potentially unreliable). The improved Mogamis look to be on track for two regional users with a common weapon and combat systems fit (with further interest from India, Indonesia and Taiwan), so two inter-compatible regional supply chains.

Suggests to me it's likely improved Mogamis would have a lower through-life cost and be easier to maintain (spares available relatively nearby) than a Type 31 derivative.
Click to expand...
The UK & Poland will both use CAMM & Mk 41, so not completely different. But yes, a long, long away away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top