That's what my + was for it basically means I would love to see it but I damn well know it not going to happen, at best "San Giorgio class" but most likely some thing like what CJohn posted basically Canterbury with a proper well dock...
Either the improved San Giorgio class or a modified RSN Endurance class could provide a usable replacement for HMNZS Canterbury, so long as 2 of the chosen design were brought into service. There would be some compromises regarding either manning or endurance needed to fit within the RNZN limitations.
Naval officers face charges over sinking of HMNZS Manawanui
At least the crew all got off safely and they removed all the contaminants , they would of sealed the hull from further leaks.
The Mavericks they replace had twice the range...
Not really. The AGM-65 Maverick is an air-to-ground PGM, not an air-to-air missile which means that a Maverick would be worth SFA trying to down a hostile drone or other aircraft.
I'd also expect the range of an AGM-65 launched low and slow from a helicopter is significantly less than it's nominal maximum (>22km to >27km depending on variant) which is likely when launched high and fast from a fighter...
For me there really is no value question when the targets are completely different types. Even if a Kiwi helicopter was able to carry and launch 100 AGM-65's, that would still provide no relevant capability if the helicopter needed to provide some air-to-air or counter-UAS capability. The target sets are different, so the ability to use a specific missile to engage one type (the Maverick) does not provide any capability vs. hostile aircraft like helicopters or drones.
Agreed. My mistake. In todays threat environment drones would be probably the highest likely threat? Given how fast and how cheap they can be manufactured?
Hard to say, without having a better understanding of the tactical enviros. The potential drone threat in/around Kiwi waters would be minimal IMO, especially for the smaller and shorter-ranged drones that tend to be cheap and able to be deployed in swarms. A major player like the PRC could likely (I do not know what they have in inventory or how they use it) deploy and sustain some sort of MALE or HALE drones in/near NZ but those would likely need a proper air defence capability and TBH even Sea Ceptor might have difficulties hitting drones at HALE flight altitudes.
Wouldn't our phalanx ciws mitigate that risk , on our frigates at least? What about the 25mm we have in them and the Opvs and Canterbury.Does Aotearoa have any sort of anti drone defence i wonder ?
The Mk 15 Phalanx CIWS does have some CUAS capability as well as anti-FAC after the recent upgrades to my understanding. However it is a bit limited in terms of range (~1.5 km vs. 3km+ for many of the larger calibre 30mm to 40mm guns). From my POV the problems with trying to rely upon a RNZN Phalanx is that the firing arcs are wide but limited, with little to no ability to engage targets approaching from ahead of the ships towards the bow or forward sections. The shorter range of the Phalanx is also compounded by there only being a single such gun per vessel, which means that a drone swarm could not be engaged until within 1.5km and the gun could either be overwhelmed with targets and/or run out of ready rounds before a swarm is downed. Hence my interest in there being both more, and more capable guns. It is my understanding that the RNZN frigates as well as Aotearoa are also armed with mini-Typhoon mountings with 0.5"/12.7mm HMG's or smaller, not useless but also very much a last line of defence vs. very close hostiles.