Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[Catalina]

Te Kaha and Te Mana Sea Ceptor capabilities against incoming Chinese HQ-9B missiles





Our FSU has equipped our frigates with the Sea Ceptor anti-missile system with a 15nm anti-air range at 1160 kt (under 10,000') and a maximum target engagement speed of only 1350 kt.

Meanwhile as part of Xi's stated goal to turn Communist China into a 海洋强国 (hǎiyáng qiángguó - Maritime Great power), the Peoples Liberation Army Navy is equipping its incredibly expanding fleet with eight 13,000 ton Type 055 cruisers. These massive warships are comparable to the USN Ticonderoga class and are equipped with 112 vertical launch cells. Their missile load out includes the CJ-10A land attack cruise missiles with a 500nm range, YJ-18 anti-ship cruise missiles with a 290nm range, and HQ-9B surface to air missiles with an anti-air range of 80nm and, here is the kicker, an anti-surface range of 25nm. Speeds of the three missiles when under 10,000' in sea skimming mode are 500 kt, 530 kt and 2230kt respectively. HQ-9Bs are also installed in the Chinese 7,500 ton Type 052Ds, known as the Chinese Aegis, of which the 20th was launched on 190510. HQ-9Bs are exceptionally fast missiles that travel at 2230 kt low level and up to 3450 kt at higher level - double and triple the speeds of our Sea Ceptors, and thus well above the stated target intercept speed of our most modern missile defence system.

I therefore have 5 questions regarding our Sea Ceptors that I hope someone can answer please.

(1) In a 3 minute period how many Sea Ceptors can be launched? Can all 32 be fired?

(2) Does the RNZN have the capability to restock Sea Ceptors onto our frigates while underway, and if so which vessel(s) would provide replenishment?

(3) How many Sea Ceptor missiles has our nation purchased?

(4) Chinese HQ-9Bs are dual purpose and can be launched against both aerial and surface targets. Can our Sea Ceptors likewise be deployed against surface targets, if not now, does a future potential for a SSM capability exist for our frigates?

(5) Sea Ceptor missiles have a maximum target engagement speed of 1350 knots. HQ-9Bs travel at 2230 kt in sea skimming mode. Does this mean that our sea ceptor SAM systems are unable to engage the most common modern missile equpping PLAN Type 052D and Type 055 warships?

Any answers would be most gratefully appreciated thank you.

Yours Faithfully
Catalina




@Catalina You have been here long enough to know that you are required to provide links / sources for material that you post instead of just cutting and posting. This is protect both DT and you from allegations of plagiarism. Don't do it again or the Moderators will consider sanctions against you.

Ngatimozart 26/7/2019.

 

[ngatimozart]

I therefore have 5 questions regarding our Sea Ceptors that I hope someone can answer please.

(1) In a 3 minute period how many Sea Ceptors can be launched? Can all 32 be fired?

How quickly they can be fired would be regarded as being OPSEC. The missiles would be able to be ripple fired. There are only 20 missiles per RNZN FFH.

(2) Does the RNZN have the capability to restock Sea Ceptors onto our frigates while underway, and if so which vessel(s) would provide replenishment?

That is an unknown, but as a rule of thumb the answer is generally no because of the inherent safety problems to personnel and missiles, loading missiles at sea due to ship motion and swinging missile payloads.

(3) How many Sea Ceptor missiles has our nation purchased?

That is an unknown and the level of war stocks held would generally be OPSEC.

(4) Chinese HQ-9Bs are dual purpose and can be launched against both aerial and surface targets. Can our Sea Ceptors likewise be deployed against surface targets, if not now, does a future potential for a SSM capability exist for our frigates?

If you researched the open literature on CAMM(M) aka Sea Ceptor you would've noted that it can hit a fast moving surface target > than 1 km from the ship it's launched from.

(5) Sea Ceptor missiles have a maximum target engagement speed of 1350 knots. HQ-9Bs travel at 2230 kt in sea skimming mode. Does this mean that our sea ceptor SAM systems are unable to engage the most common modern missile equpping PLAN Type 052D and Type 055 warships?

In a stern chase yes, but not in a head on interception. Again some research and thought would've answered most of these questions for you.

 

[milliGal]

To add to @ngatimozart 's answers. Anti-surface warfare capabilities in the RNZN are quite dependent on the embarked SH-2G(I) Seasprites from what I understand (at least in terms of longer range engagements). We employ the Penguin ASM from these platforms, and don't have a surface launched ASM capability as far as I am aware.

 

[Rob c]

(4) Chinese HQ-9Bs are dual purpose and can be launched against both aerial and surface targets. Can our Sea Ceptors likewise be deployed against surface targets, if not now, does a future potential for a SSM capability exist for our frigates?

I note that the Chinese missile is semi active radar, which would mean that in the surface to surface role it would be confined to a line of sight engagement as it is reliant on the target being "painted" by the ships radar.

 

[Catalina]

Te Kaha and Te Mana Sea Ceptor capabilities against incoming Chinese HQ-9B missiles


View attachment 46676
View attachment 46675

Our FSU has equipped our frigates with the Sea Ceptor anti-missile system with a 15nm anti-air range at 1160 kt (under 10,000') and a maximum target engagement speed of only 1350 kt.

Meanwhile as part of Xi's stated goal to turn Communist China into a 海洋强国 (hǎiyáng qiángguó - Maritime Great power), the Peoples Liberation Army Navy is equipping its incredibly expanding fleet with eight 13,000 ton Type 055 cruisers. These massive warships are comparable to the USN Ticonderoga class and are equipped with 112 vertical launch cells. Their missile load out includes the CJ-10A land attack cruise missiles with a 500nm range, YJ-18 anti-ship cruise missiles with a 290nm range, and HQ-9B surface to air missiles with an anti-air range of 80nm and, here is the kicker, an anti-surface range of 25nm. Speeds of the three missiles when under 10,000' in sea skimming mode are 500 kt, 530 kt and 2230kt respectively. HQ-9Bs are also installed in the Chinese 7,500 ton Type 052Ds, known as the Chinese Aegis, of which the 20th was launched on 190510. HQ-9Bs are exceptionally fast missiles that travel at 2230 kt low level and up to 3450 kt at higher level - double and triple the speeds of our Sea Ceptors, and thus well above the stated target intercept speed of our most modern missile defence system.

I therefore have 5 questions regarding our Sea Ceptors that I hope someone can answer please.

(1) In a 3 minute period how many Sea Ceptors can be launched? Can all 32 be fired?

(2) Does the RNZN have the capability to restock Sea Ceptors onto our frigates while underway, and if so which vessel(s) would provide replenishment?

(3) How many Sea Ceptor missiles has our nation purchased?

(4) Chinese HQ-9Bs are dual purpose and can be launched against both aerial and surface targets. Can our Sea Ceptors likewise be deployed against surface targets, if not now, does a future potential for a SSM capability exist for our frigates?

(5) Sea Ceptor missiles have a maximum target engagement speed of 1350 knots. HQ-9Bs travel at 2230 kt in sea skimming mode. Does this mean that our sea ceptor SAM systems are unable to engage the most common modern missile equpping PLAN Type 052D and Type 055 warships?

Any answers would be most gratefully appreciated thank you.

Yours Faithfully
Catalina

View attachment 46678
View attachment 46677

@Catalina You have been here long enough to know that you are required to provide links / sources for material that you post instead of just cutting and posting. This is protect both DT and you from allegations of plagiarism. Don't do it again or the Moderators will consider sanctions against you.

Ngatimozart 26/7/2019.

Apologies Ngatimozart.

The pictures of the 055 and 05D were from the https://thediplomat.com
The missile data was from the Command Modern Naval Air Operations database.

 

[At lakes]

Vard Marine Inc on Instagram: “The Vard 7 125 is a multipurpose Offshore Patrol Vessel that supports helicopter and SAR operations, coastal surveillence and over the…”



Recently I saw a video clip from Vard Marine design. It was at some Defence Expo and the presenter gave a presentation on the 7 313 and the 7 510 and there was a third design in the presentation but he made no mention of that. Close examination of the photo showed it to be the Vard 7 125. The Vard Marine web site shows no such design with that designation and I could not find anything on any web site, so I sent them an email and this is what came back.

The Vard 7 125 is not a hugely public program yet but is a vessel under contract and in build.
Lee Grace
Sales Manager
Senior Naval Architect

Now the figure 125 suggests its about 125metres long and it appears to be on appearances a solid vessel, my unqualified eye suggests it could be upwards of 2500 tonne, and as I am a non-naval type I am sure some of you who better qualified than I will comment whether such a design would be suitable for operations by RNZN south of the 45th parallel.

 

[Redlands18]

Vard Marine Inc on Instagram: “The Vard 7 125 is a multipurpose Offshore Patrol Vessel that supports helicopter and SAR operations, coastal surveillence and over the…”



Recently I saw a video clip from Vard Marine design. It was at some Defence Expo and the presenter gave a presentation on the 7 313 and the 7 510 and there was a third design in the presentation but he made no mention of that. Close examination of the photo showed it to be the Vard 7 125. The Vard Marine web site shows no such design with that designation and I could not find anything on any web site, so I sent them an email and this is what came back.

The Vard 7 125 is not a hugely public program yet but is a vessel under contract and in build.
Lee Grace
Sales Manager
Senior Naval Architect

Now the figure 125 suggests its about 125metres long and it appears to be on appearances a solid vessel, my unqualified eye suggests it could be upwards of 2500 tonne, and as I am a non-naval type I am sure some of you who better qualified than I will comment whether such a design would be suitable for operations by RNZN south of the 45th parallel.

125m long? That’s about 5m longer than an Anzac, I would say closer to 3500t then 2500t, that is a big OPV.

 

[wowu5]

The Taiwanese coast guard has contracted for a licensed local build of four Vard 7 vessel of 125m class (the first one began construction last Feb and expected to be launched next year) and they refer to it as the "4000~ tons frigate". I suspect that Vard Marine is a bit reluctant to promote the design in high profile due to the political complication with this first customer of the ship class.

 

[Gibbo]

The Taiwanese coast guard has contracted for a licensed local build of four Vard 7 vessel of 125m class (the first one began construction last Feb and expected to be launched next year) and they refer to it as the "4000~ tons frigate". I suspect that Vard Marine is a bit reluctant to promote the design in high profile due to the political complication with this first customer of the ship class.

Nice vessel, just looks a little 'naked' without a decent gun at front! I guess in a NZ context it could double as a training vessel as well as undertaking Southern Ocean (& other) patrol. However first & foremost is it ice-capable?...as that & the associated sea-keeping for the Southern Ocean is the primary requirement.

 

[ASSAIL]

Nice vessel, just looks a little 'naked' without a decent gun at front! I guess in a NZ context it could double as a training vessel as well as undertaking Southern Ocean (& other) patrol. However first & foremost is it ice-capable?...as that & the associated sea-keeping for the Southern Ocean is the primary requirement.

I don’t know much about ice but I suspect that with a bow like that it may be rather limited.

 

[MrConservative]

The Taiwanese coast guard has contracted for a licensed local build of four Vard 7 vessel of 125m class (the first one began construction last Feb and expected to be launched next year) and they refer to it as the "4000~ tons frigate". I suspect that Vard Marine is a bit reluctant to promote the design in high profile due to the political complication with this first customer of the ship class.

From the Crystal Tu @ Medium Blog

"The 4,000-ton class cutters will be the largest ever built by CGA, as a response to the increasing law enforcement mission demands in the East and South China Seas. The design reportedly will be based on a next generation frigate (also known as Project Cheng-Hai (震海計畫)) of the Taiwan Navy, and it will "); reserve space for operation and weapon systemthat can be rapidly installed during wartime. It will also include medical facility and personnel onboard for conducting humanitarian missions as afield hospital.” In accordance with the policy guideline of promoting indigenous shipbuilding (國艦國造), the NT$ 10.4 billion contract (US$ 347.9 million) of 4,000-ton class cutters has been awarded to CSBC Corporation (台灣國際造船) in July 2018."

Thus if the above is correct it seems that the VARD 7-125 design will serve as the basis for a class of 12 locally built 4500 tonne 138m Frigates with 32 Mk41 VLS cells, the Mk72 CIWS (The local clone of RIM-116) and/or Mk15 Phalanx, 76mm Oto and 2 further RWS. No information on radars, sensors and CMS.

 

[old faithful]

So ha NZ shown any interest in this ship as a possible OPV, or is it a case of some one wishing they would?
I can't see NZ , under its current government looking at much more than what they have as far OPV , in that it might be a little bigger and ice capable, but I doubt it will be frigate sized, if it even happens at all.

 

[Oberon]

I don’t know much about ice but I suspect that with a bow like that it may be rather limited.

What need would Taiwan have for a icebreaker?

 

[MrConservative]

So ha NZ shown any interest in this ship as a possible OPV, or is it a case of some one wishing they would?
I can't see NZ , under its current government looking at much more than what they have as far OPV, in that it might be a little bigger and ice capable, but I doubt it will be frigate sized, if it even happens at all.

Probably, not interested in this particular 125m VARD vessel as it has been designed to quickly be able to be turned into a Frigate.

The OPV replacement nevertheless is not going to be replaced under this current government. But what we do know is that in the DCP19 (which has been accepted by the current opposition in a bi-partisan sense) is that the OPV's will have a 3rd Ice capable vessel added by 2027 and that the current OPV's will be replaced 5 years later.

Southern Ocean Patrol Vessel
Introduction into Service – 2027
Indicative capital cost: From $300–$600m

Offshore Patrol Vessel Replacement
Introduction into Service – 2032
Indicative capital cost: From $600m–$1b

 

[Gibbo]

So ha NZ shown any interest in this ship as a possible OPV, or is it a case of some one wishing they would?
I can't see NZ , under its current government looking at much more than what they have as far OPV , in that it might be a little bigger and ice capable, but I doubt it will be frigate sized, if it even happens at all.

Just a wish as far as I can see...nice looking but not something RNZN is looking for. The SOPV has already been fairly clearly defined as similar to the existing OPV in thinking but ice-strengthened...ie: it is not intended to get anything significantly greater in size nor capability and is most definitely not going to be an ice-breaker. I do however think it will happen.

 

[Gibbo]

What need would Taiwan have for a icebreaker?

Probably about as much as Fiji

 

[Rob c]

So ha NZ shown any interest in this ship as a possible OPV, or is it a case of some one wishing they would?
I can't see NZ , under its current government looking at much more than what they have as far OPV , in that it might be a little bigger and ice capable, but I doubt it will be frigate sized, if it even happens at all.

I would suspect that the southern ocean patrol vessel will be significantly bigger than the current OPV's as they have had significant sea keeping issues in the southern ocean and during the late 1990's and early 2000's when at times an ANZAC was sent south to patrol they suffered some damage while in the southern ocean. As Mr C pointed out the indicative cost was $300m to $600m and they are to be built to commercial standards would suggest a significantly sized vessel is proposed as HMNZS Aotearoa price falls within this range. My guess is somewhere in the 4-6000 tonne range. However time will tell.

 

[ASSAIL]

What need would Taiwan have for a icebreaker?

I posted in reply to Gibbo who was deliberating on its suitability for NZ CONOPS

 

[Gibbo]

I posted in reply to Gibbo who was deliberating on its suitability for NZ CONOPS

Yep in which I basically concluded 'nah, thanks...nice looking vessel but not what we're looking for'.

 

[wowu5]

From the Crystal Tu @ Medium Blog

"The 4,000-ton class cutters will be the largest ever built by CGA, as a response to the increasing law enforcement mission demands in the East and South China Seas. The design reportedly will be based on a next generation frigate (also known as Project Cheng-Hai (震海計畫)) of the Taiwan Navy, and it will "); reserve space for operation and weapon systemthat can be rapidly installed during wartime. It will also include medical facility and personnel onboard for conducting humanitarian missions as afield hospital.” In accordance with the policy guideline of promoting indigenous shipbuilding (國艦國造), the NT$ 10.4 billion contract (US$ 347.9 million) of 4,000-ton class cutters has been awarded to CSBC Corporation (台灣國際造船) in July 2018."

Thus if the above is correct it seems that the VARD 7-125 design will serve as the basis for a class of 12 locally built 4500 tonne 138m Frigates with 32 Mk41 VLS cells, the Mk72 CIWS (The local clone of RIM-116) and/or Mk15 Phalanx, 76mm Oto and 2 further RWS. No information on radars, sensors and CMS.

I am sorry to point that out but that's not exactly how the plan is.
The original idea was for the new FFG to be designed first, and then to use that as a baseline for the coast guard cutter, not the other way around.
And that this thought has already been abandoned as the progress for the FFG was delayed (due to a delay in the development of the CMS-suite by NCSIST) and the coast guard/CSBC switch to adopt a separate design from Vard for their cutter.
The Taiwanese has still planned for a number of FFBNW weapons and equipment for the coast guard cutters in the time of escalation but it would definitely not be as much as 32 Mk41 VLS, probably just ASM and CIWS. The base design includes RWS and naval rocket launchers.