John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Agree, an additional P-8 should be in the plan. WRT new naval vessels, an accelerated requirement definition combined with an assessment of what/where vessels can be realistically built asap would be nice.
NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
Wouldn't we all love to be a fly on the wall during those meetings.
I think that two additional P-8A would be doable now, along with the LRASM and NSM. However FFG are a different kettle of fish. Apparently they started a frigate replacement study a couple of years ago or so, but it is unknown when the study was or will be completed. I think that events since New Year will have changed what kind of FFG capabilities that they will consider. IMHO running around like a headless chook and panicking about FFGs at the moment isn't going to achieve anything. They will wait until the Australian government makes its choice between the MEKO 200 and the Mogami before the make a decision about FFG acquisition.
In the meantime they can acquire and fit the NSM to the two Anzac FFG, the same way and time that the RAN does. They will also have to have the NSM integrated into the CMS. I did think that they could take the opportunity to change the CMS from the current LMC (Lockheed Martin Canada) CMS330, but upon reflection they would have to have the SeaCeptor SAM integrated into and I don't have a lot of faith that Australian Defence could deliver such an integration on time and within budget. The RAN has a history of problems with the integration of complex capabilities. However Saab is a different story and they may be able to undertake the integration on time and within budget.
The RCN are integrating SeaCeptor into the CMS330 and that will also have NSM integrated into it. It might be wiser for us to stay with our current CMS and not don't consider a change of CMS until the new FFG. However in saying that there might be advantages to us staying with the LMC CMS330 upgrading to the newer version when it goes into service with the RCN because it will already have all the weapons we are liable to use integrated into it enabling us to use both SeaCeptor and ESSM Blk II, plus SM2 etc. The only difference is that the RCN is adopting the Leonardo 127mm gun, rather than the US Mk-45 Mod 4 5in gun currently used by the RAN and RNZN.
I would like a third FFG sooner rather than later and once the RAN makes its decision we should order one of the same from the OEM shipyard to the same specs as the RAN ships. I,would suggest not fitting SeaCeptor to this and subsequent new FFG, instead adopting the ESSM Blk II and fitting the SeaCeptor on Aotearoa and whatever vessels replace Canterbury. SeaCeptor is ExLS launchable and ExLS is not a deck piercer, being able to be fitted just about anywhere.
Nighthawk.NZ
Well-Known Member
Wonders will they actually fit the Phalanx CIWS to HMNZS Aotearoa instead of this silly idea of "fitted for but not with"
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Depending on how FFBNW is handled, it can be a sensible approach, particularly for something like the Mk 15 Phalanx. If NZ (or some other user for that matter) maintains Phalanx systems in a pool, then instead of the NZDF needing to purchase a unit for every potential mounting, a somewhat smaller number might be owned/maintained and fitted on a rotating basis depending on what the threat conditions are perceived to be for potential deployments.
The advantages of such an arrangement could be slightly lower costs since not every vessel would need a system purchased, and potentially greater operational availability if/when needed. After all, if Aotearoa never ends up deploying to an area where a hostile could fire upon, then any permanently fitted CIWS (if that ever happens) would just have ended up being an extra, unneeded expense.
Now me being me, it might be nice if the RAN and RNZN would run their respective Phalanxes in pool configurations that are shared, so that if the RAN has an upcoming deployment but no available Phalanx to fit, a RNZN one could be installed instead, and vice versa.
I would also like to see more/additional options to fit modular capability systems which could be shared/pooled across the Tasman Sea, but that might just be me.
Who knows? my own opinion of "fitted for but not with " is that if you don't have the gear to fit when needed the the term is just hot air, the procurement of such items is usually some time away when needed. In the case of Aotearoa I think getting the necessary equipment would be a good idea but keeping it in storage until needed would make sense as it's location on the ship is very exposed and could lead to high maintenance.
My understanding is that the RNZN has a pool of the Phalanx CIWS so would only fit as required.
From memory we only purchased 2 and when they were sent for upgrade to block 1a the ship had none. the info on the internet suggests only two.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
If this is accurate, then expand the pool if a the decision is made to retain Phalanx and see it fitted to further RNZN vessels. OTOH it also might get decided that Phalanx as a capability has had it's day, and more capable alternatives should be sought.
I believe that Phalanx has had its day because the 20mm round no longer has the range nor lethality required to meet modern threats. I think that a 30mm calibre gun such as the Millennium Gun would be ideal. If SeaRAM is selected then it should be in conjunction with an autocannon. The South Korean company LIG Nex is manufacturing a 30mm CIWS based on the GAU-8 Avenger. Maybe it is something we should consider acquiring.
The Goalkeeper though lethal has been around for forty years modern 40 mil cannons like Bofors 40 mil come in different applications including non deck piercing with greater range ,the R.N and German navy replaced their Goalkeepers ,the Millenium gun an ideal candidate is 35 mill
www.naval-technology.com
www.navylookout.com
Oerlikon Millennium® Gun: 35mm Multi-Role Weapon System
The Oerlikon Millennium Gun uses a 35mm revolver cannon and is a multi-mission weapon system designed for a wide operational…
www.naval-technology.com
In focus: the Bofors 40mm Mk 4 gun that will equip the Type 31 frigates - Navy Lookout
The Type 31 frigates will introduce two guns types new to Royal Navy service. In the first of two articles examining these weapons, we look at the Bofors 40mm Mk 4 gun. Background The RN has not had a 40mm gun in service since the Bofors 40mm L/60 Mark IX was phased out in the
www.navylookout.com
The South Koreans have modernised their variant of it. Even so the original Goalkeeper is still a lethal weapon and it actually sends far more projectile down range per minute than the Millennium Gun does. Yes 40mm weapons are available but not everyone wants a 40mm weapon for a variety of reasons. It's swings and roundabouts.The Goalkeeper though lethal has been around for forty years modern 40 mil cannons like Bofors 40 mil come in different applications including non deck piercing with greater range ,the R.N and German navy replaced their Goalkeepers ,the Millenium gun an ideal candidate is 35 mill
Oerlikon Millennium® Gun: 35mm Multi-Role Weapon System
The Oerlikon Millennium Gun uses a 35mm revolver cannon and is a multi-mission weapon system designed for a wide operational…In focus: the Bofors 40mm Mk 4 gun that will equip the Type 31 frigates - Navy Lookout
The Type 31 frigates will introduce two guns types new to Royal Navy service. In the first of two articles examining these weapons, we look at the Bofors 40mm Mk 4 gun. Background The RN has not had a 40mm gun in service since the Bofors 40mm L/60 Mark IX was phased out in the
What ever the choice,I’d suggest purchase more than two units.
Two frigates, a supply ship and a amphib should all have this capability.
Cheers S
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Remember the recent NZDF recruiting campaign over the last few years featuring "codewords" that was seemingly aimed at the social media generation (but seemed maybe just a "wee-bit" obscure if not bizarre to anyone else)?
NZDF appears have listened to criticism and have launched a new recruiting campaign that gives a more "exciting" perspective on life in the NZDF and importantly, team comradeship when in action or deployment (rather than on a "boring" staged set as per "codewords)". Well done NZDF and the creative agency!
campaignbrief.co.nz
NZDF appears have listened to criticism and have launched a new recruiting campaign that gives a more "exciting" perspective on life in the NZDF and importantly, team comradeship when in action or deployment (rather than on a "boring" staged set as per "codewords)". Well done NZDF and the creative agency!
New Zealand Defence Force recruits Special Wellington as new creative agency; launches new ‘Join a team you can count on’ campaign
Special Wellington has joined the New Zealand Defence Force recruitment frontline, alongside MBM following competitive creative and media pitches in late 2024. The first recruitment campaign, ‘Join a team you can count on,’ has begun rolling out around the country, building on the brand...
campaignbrief.co.nz
kiwi in exile
Well-Known Member
Not really a fan. it's similar to the code words ads in that it just appeals to ideas about teamwork, comradship etc. I think the narration sounds pretty dumbed down. Its a bit soft. If people want that they can join a sports team. I feel that NZDF recruiting should appeal to high values: duty, helping people in a real crisis, protecting NZ, stanfing uo for freedom etc. And like the DCP, it should sell NZDF as a fighting force.Remember the recent NZDF recruiting campaign over the last few years featuring "codewords" that was seemingly aimed at the social media generation (but seemed maybe just a "wee-bit" obscure if not bizarre to anyone else)?
NZDF appears have listened to criticism and have launched a new recruiting campaign that gives a more "exciting" perspective on life in the NZDF and importantly, team comradeship when in action or deployment (rather than on a "boring" staged set as per "codewords)". Well done NZDF and the creative agency!
New Zealand Defence Force recruits Special Wellington as new creative agency; launches new ‘Join a team you can count on’ campaign
Special Wellington has joined the New Zealand Defence Force recruitment frontline, alongside MBM following competitive creative and media pitches in late 2024. The first recruitment campaign, ‘Join a team you can count on,’ has begun rolling out around the country, building on the brand...
NZ police have redone a classic recently.
Thank you NZ police
You probably mean the Netherlands.
Germany only used Goalkeeper for 1-2 years during OP Sharp Guard as an adhoc upgrade since RAM wasn't available in sufficient numbers yet. This was obscure enough that there aren't even any pictures of it, and the number of frigates temporarily upgraded with it isn't publicly known either (anywhere from 1-3). I also actually wouldn't be surprised if the gun(s) used back then were then reused in the Netherlands for LPD Rotterdam commissioning 2 years later.
Germany functionally replaced 40mm guns with RAM (Mk49), but also added widely available old 20mm guns since at the time they felt they still needed an autocannon. The 20mm were then replaced with 27mm guns (MLG27) 5-10 years later.
kiwi in exile
Well-Known Member
The Goalkeeper though lethal has been around for forty years modern 40 mil cannons like Bofors 40 mil come in different applications including non deck piercing with greater range ,the R.N and German navy replaced their Goalkeepers ,the Millenium gun an ideal candidate is 35 mill
Oerlikon Millennium® Gun: 35mm Multi-Role Weapon System
The Oerlikon Millennium Gun uses a 35mm revolver cannon and is a multi-mission weapon system designed for a wide operational…In focus: the Bofors 40mm Mk 4 gun that will equip the Type 31 frigates - Navy Lookout
The Type 31 frigates will introduce two guns types new to Royal Navy service. In the first of two articles examining these weapons, we look at the Bofors 40mm Mk 4 gun. Background The RN has not had a 40mm gun in service since the Bofors 40mm L/60 Mark IX was phased out in the
I like theses systems for future platforms and commonality across the fleet.
My idea (wishful thinking) would be that we aquirre a spare system (truck mounted) as a 'dry' training gun for naval gunners etc. We allready have the trucks.
BAEs 40mm Tridon Mk2
rhienmetal skyshield on truck
Could be used as a training gun for naval personell, battle labed for SHORAD/CUAS capability and juts a nice toy to have
CJohn
Active Member
Just wondering with regard to the DCP aims for near term (2025-2028) enhanced strike capacity in the maritime domain is there space and favorable weight margins to install eight NSM on the NZ Anzac frigates ? Note the tactical length Mk 41 launcher midships has been removed, and CAMM is housed in a twenty shot mushroom farm.
Nighthawk.NZ
Well-Known Member
Short answer is yes...
Long answer is our ANZAC's are much lighter than our Aussie counterparts so weight is not a problem... This was one of the concerns for the refits etc...Adding a few NSM canisters under the bridge like where the Aussie have their Harpoon also shouldn't be an issue. They were fitted for but not with for Harpoon when built, so shouldn't take to much to rewire it up for NSM...
That being said take it with a grain of salt anything can go wrong and as it will be a government project after all..
Catalina
Active Member
I agree with Kiwi in Exile.
Every dollar spent on the army is a dollar not spent on our navy.
Following on from that, in some ways it could be argued that the greatest threat to the Royal New Zealand Navy is the army.
New Zealand is a modern maritime island nation facing threats from PLAN submarines, warships, aircraft, and drones for control of our sea lines of communication, yet the army has some 6,781 active personal, while our Navy has only 2,830 active personal. Naval retention problems could be helped in large part by greatly increasing naval salaries through downsizing the army by a few thousand.
Case in point, it was great to see in February this year the RNZN & RNZAF cooperation in together tracking PLAN Task Group 107 in the Tasman Sea while our army was . . . polishing little tanks and firing little 105s both of which will be eliminated by enemy drones in any modern peer conflict...
The money being spent (wasted?) on updating turrets on LAVs and endlessly on army facilities is a painful lost opportunity cost for our navy.
Last edited: