t68
Well-Known Member
Acronym used by Aussie sailors : Shit Cooked by Royal Australian Navy
I heard it back in the day and often wondered what it meant, then I heard it brought up on the tv series sea patrol then it made sence
Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Padman
- Start date
I heard it back in the day and often wondered what it meant, then I heard it brought up on the tv series sea patrol then it made sence
I used to love going to HMAS Albatross just for the Scran. Somehow, soldiers always managed to get rice bubbles in the milk bladder, tins of battery acid (pineapple juice) and left overs from dinner. Scran was luxury!
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Has there ever been an international assessment of which navy has the worst food? On a serious note, given the extended time at sea with only one venue, I would think crew retention would benefit from an enhanced mess.
Actually, the food in the RAN and the RNZN is pretty good these days, although a bit does depend on the individual skills and interest level of the senior chefs. But the one right all sailors have is to complain (sometimes in jest), and food is a natural.
Agreed, the worst food I had in the service was always ashore on base messes, and that's usually because these days it's schlepped by private companies like serco. At sea your food is as good as the last resupply, so on deployments it can be hit and miss but bad Navy cooks don't last long on a ship. The best shore based food in the RAN is at Kuttabul, as most trainee cooks start there after completing IET and they're working through their comp logs, always good.
donald_of_tokyo
New Member
Sorry for late comment. I can at least see 16 CAMM mushroom-heads. Of course there will be some silo yet with heads, and some hidden behind the cover surrounding the VLS area.
So surely more than 16 (4x4), but actually how many? 20 (5x4) or 24 (6x4) ?
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I believe the planned number is a total of 20 cells for Sea Ceptor
One of my cousins was a navy cook for over 20 years. IIRC his last ship was HMS Illustrious, & then he went to Northwood for a while before hitting the barrier of nowhere to be promoted to, & too long in the job. Northwood was handy, because he could see his wife & daughters every day, & he managed to keep doing the same job for a couple of years as a civvie.
I've eaten stuff he's cooked, & always enjoyed it.
Nighthawk.NZ
Well-Known Member
Grey on Grey. #HMNZSTeKaha emerges out of the mist at CFB Esquimalt, Canada’s Pacific Coast Naval Base, as she cold moves to the re-fuelling wharf. Te Kaha has been undertaking an upgrade at Esquimalt to ensure the ship remains relevant in 21st century combat.
Nighthawk.NZ
Well-Known Member
According to the Facebook post (of the same image and rant)
Shortly HMNZS Te Kaha will be conducting extensive sea trials off the coast of British Colombia before she returns home.
All I know is she is due home by years end...
Shortly HMNZS Te Kaha will be conducting extensive sea trials off the coast of British Colombia before she returns home.
All I know is she is due home by years end...
shipJGR
New Member
It is hard to see, but there appear to be four rows of five “mushrooms” athwartships. The four along the centerline also appear to have two angled to port and two to starboard. IOW, 20 total as mentioned in the quoted post.
To be an optimist, 20 is a lot more than 8.
Last edited:
Will these cells be able to be quad packed, or individual missiles?
shipJGR
New Member
I have heard that there will be 20 missiles total. That Is one per angled “mushroom “ using the same launcher as the Type 23s (which have 32). FWIW, they certainly look like the same launchers in the overhead view on Twitter (but the details shown are minimal).
UK’s £850mn missile system enters service
The UK has put the finishing touches on its Sea Ceptor missile defense system.
www.presstv.com
Last edited:
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I would be shocked if they could be quad-packed. The individual cells in a Mk 41 VLS are large enough to be quad-packed, but the Mk 41 VLS was removed to reduce topweight but installing a new VLS which does not require the same size or displacement because it does not permit hot launch, since the Sea Ceptor is a cold launch missile. The RIM-7 Sea Sparrow which is/was replaced is a hot launch missile, which requires the VLS cells to be able to handle the hot exhaust gases from a launching missile.
donald_of_tokyo
New Member
Dear shipJGR-san
Thanks a lot. Your point makes clear sense, on analyzing the image of VLS. So I agree it looks like 20 CAMM, 10 angled port, 10 angled starboard.
20 CAMM is "so-so nice" I think. 10 SAM (SeaMICA) is the standard for modern heavy corvette (Damen 10515, Gowind-2500, Al Khareef etc). It will better be 32 (as RAN Anzac has 32 ESSM, soon to be Blk.II, I guess), but RNZN TeKaha and TeMana is not so heavily inclined for AAW, like RAN does.
On the photo (and official rendering), RNZN Te Kaha and Te Mana carries SeaSentor torpedo defense system, Floating Decoy System (FDS), and modern chaff/flare launcher MASS, I think it is nicely balanced. Nice ship.
# If anything to add, I hope for CAPTAS-2 or even CAPTAS-1 or alike, and 4-8 NSMs, but its just a wish...
Not likely to happen because of NZ CONOPS (Concept of Operations), NZ governments penny pinching, and top-weight issues with the ANZAC frigates which affect the ships stability.
It appears the new mushroom farm is taking up the space of both Mk41 positions. I wonder why they didn't use ExLS launchers which would have been more space efficient? 2 x 3-cell ExLS would provide 24 x CAMM and would seem to only take up the space of 1 x Mk41 VLS so that whatever was in the space of the second Mk41 VLS position (gym?) could have remained.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
IMO a more appropriate question to seek the answer to would be what the displacement and topweight of a 2x3 ExLS quad-packed Sea Ceptor setup would have been vs. the setup which was actually installed. I suspect that the issue was less about space and more about topweight and displacement.
Nighthawk.NZ
Well-Known Member
Top weight as well as the space-saving below they now have room for the new pool table and senior rates bar...
Anywho... my understanding from what I read many moons ago, there was top-weight saving and saving in the space below to be converted to... <insert compartment here> new washing machine and dryer... or systems and power supply for some of the new systems being installed. I have no idea if that was the reason it wouldn't surprise me if it came down to maintenance costs and was cheaper than buying another couple of MK41 Launchers per frigate.
The mushroom launchers are not as complicated and probably require less maintenance than the MK41 using compressed air or something to launch the missile out of the mushroom before the missile motor ignites...
Remembering that there is the new solid mast, Smart-S Mk2 radar, and other new components which is a lot heavier than the old lattice mast and bits and bobs... Also, remember it not just on the upper deck the bits you see, but also the systems, power supply modules and cabling below that all add up for the weight considerations. It's not just the component you see on the upper deck.
donald_of_tokyo
New Member
Thanks, Nighthawk.NZ-san.Top weight as well as the space-saving below they now have room for the new pool table and senior rates bar...
Anywho... my understanding from what I read many moons ago, there was top-weight saving and saving in the space below to be converted to... <insert compartment here> new washing machine and dryer... or systems and power supply for some of the new systems being installed. I have no idea if that was the reason it wouldn't surprise me if it came down to maintenance costs and was cheaper than buying another couple of MK41 Launchers per frigate.
The mushroom launchers are not as complicated and probably require less maintenance than the MK41 using compressed air or something to launch the missile out of the mushroom before the missile motor ignites...
Remembering that there is the new solid mast, Smart-S Mk2 radar, and other new components which is a lot heavier than the old lattice mast and bits and bobs... Also, remember it not just on the upper deck the bits you see, but also the systems, power supply modules and cabling below that all add up for the weight considerations. It's not just the component you see on the upper deck.
Is it (one of) the reason why RNZN did not adopt Australian version of modification? RAN's ANZAC class modification apparently looks top heavy. As you said, RAN's large mast with AESA radars on the top, added with significantly improved wiring, analysis power of CMS, and "quad-packed 32 ESSM in their Mk.41 VLS" shall be very heavy. Compared to that, RNZN Te Kaha and Te Mana "looks" much more "stable".
#or RAN is handling it with adding ballast? Losing fuel efficiency but keeping CoG balance?