Your points are taken, and i do agree that the harpoon would be the most likely choice for the ANZACs and P3. If you read my response to Todjaeger you will get a better understanding of where i am coming from.
NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
Project Protector and especially the OPVs are there due to the issues in relation to coastal and more extensive sea patrol for illegal fishing basically as well as augmenting the ANZACs. We currently dont have a substantial coverage to monitor our exclusive zone due to the extensive area we have.
However the IPVs and OPVs will step up this capability and good on the government for doing something for the Navy.
However the IPVs and OPVs will step up this capability and good on the government for doing something for the Navy.
P3s at "Altitude <sic>"
nfloorl:
(Actually think max ceiling for P3 is only around 25 - 30000 feet - might struggle a tad)
Re Zunis -- the story I was told as a young mech when I worked on 5 SQN, was that the "boys" got a bit carried away (late '70's, read "having far too much fun") and 75 SQN got a tad jealous, hence the "removal" of ZUNI stocks to Ohakea
Another point - its been mentioned in the P3-K thread that P3-Ks can already fire Harpoon (Block i) - and have been capable since Rigel fit -- just cannot do the fancy stuff re block II, so maybe the Aussies can lend us a harpoon or two to trial
Re MAD - Marcus,would be interesting to know when you think this was removeded -- it was certainly still fitted post Rigel, ie late '87.
Even if gone, its not a biggie, from what I understand it needed to be used below a 1000 feet, and only good out to 50 yards either side of track ( or some thing like that) -- not too sure it would be that effective against modern subs
So, the couple of times I "hitched" a ride on th P3s -- and we went below a 1000 feet to have a looksie MUST have been pure imagination
nfloorl: (Actually think max ceiling for P3 is only around 25 - 30000 feet - might struggle a tad)
Re Zunis -- the story I was told as a young mech when I worked on 5 SQN, was that the "boys" got a bit carried away (late '70's, read "having far too much fun") and 75 SQN got a tad jealous, hence the "removal" of ZUNI stocks to Ohakea
Another point - its been mentioned in the P3-K thread that P3-Ks can already fire Harpoon (Block i) - and have been capable since Rigel fit -- just cannot do the fancy stuff re block II, so maybe the Aussies can lend us a harpoon or two to trial
Re MAD - Marcus,would be interesting to know when you think this was removeded -- it was certainly still fitted post Rigel, ie late '87.
Even if gone, its not a biggie, from what I understand it needed to be used below a 1000 feet, and only good out to 50 yards either side of track ( or some thing like that) -- not too sure it would be that effective against modern subs
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
That was a sarcastic comment in relation to a comment I felt was misinformed or perhaps hastily posted by Markus40 in relation to the potential of Hellfire missiles being used for maritime strike roles.So, the couple of times I "hitched" a ride on th P3s -- and we went below a 1000 feet to have a looksie MUST have been pure imagination
(Actually think max ceiling for P3 is only around 25 - 30000 feet - might struggle a tad)
Re Zunis -- the story I was told as a young mech when I worked on 5 SQN, was that the "boys" got a bit carried away (late '70's, read "having far too much fun") and 75 SQN got a tad jealous, hence the "removal" of ZUNI stocks to Ohakea
Another point - its been mentioned in the P3-K thread that P3-Ks can already fire Harpoon (Block i) - and have been capable since Rigel fit -- just cannot do the fancy stuff re block II, so maybe the Aussies can lend us a harpoon or two to trial
Re MAD - Marcus,would be interesting to know when you think this was removeded -- it was certainly still fitted post Rigel, ie late '87.
Even if gone, its not a biggie, from what I understand it needed to be used below a 1000 feet, and only good out to 50 yards either side of track ( or some thing like that) -- not too sure it would be that effective against modern subs
I am aware that MPA aircraft often descend to low level to "confirm" a contact visually.
In relation to the Harpoon, yes it's something most P-3's share. Yet another reason why I think it will be selected if ANY anti-ship missile is chosen. It can be integrated with the least amount of effort, yet provides obviously worldclass capability. I'm not sure ADF has ALL that many to spare however. A captive carry version, "perhaps"...
Regards
AD.
No worries - aware that you not serious
but couldn't resist a little bit of Aussie baiting .... At the time I served on 5 SQN, it seemed that all flying was done below 5000 feet -- there was a certain "keeness" for the high speed low level mode of operation ---- certainly was interesting in being a passenger / jibbering ballast down back.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
True, but they did not have the EO/IR sensor and (I presume) new maritime radar back then I suppose...No worries - aware that you not serious
At the time I served on 5 SQN, it seemed that all flying was done below 5000 feet -- there was a certain "keeness" for the high speed low level mode of operation ---- certainly was interesting in being a passenger / jibbering ballast down back.
Didn't pick up the baiting at all. (Smacks self in forehead)...
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I'm not so sure that the P-3K Orions and the RNZN Anzacs would get the same missile. I would think that the Anzac would get the Harpoon Block II like the RAN frigates. The RNZAF P-3K I would think would get the Harpoon Block I since IMV it's unlikely that the money would be spent modifying the Orions to be able to use the later SLAM, SLAM-ER or Harpoon Block II. To my understanding the wiring harness would need to be replaced with a MIL-STD 1720 databus harness out to the wings. This would require the wings be taken off to install and the wings were redone in last decade to extend service out to the 2015 timeframe. However, having said that, I think the addition of Harpoon Block I to the P-3K would add to the ability of the Orions to reach out and "touch" someone...
As for Project Protector, the way I see it, the project is broken into three separate parts, two of which increase the RNZN capability from the present level. This is namely the addition of HMNZS Canterbury, and the two upcoming OPVs. The third component, he addition of the IPVs doesn't, to my thinking, increase to overall capability since they are replacing the aging Moa patrol boats. They may be a somewhat more capable vessel in some areas, but it isn't a real increase from what's available at present, it's a maintenance of the current capability.
-Cheers
Mate, i think you need to take an early night or something, but hey you know it and i know it that Hellfire will NEVER be an option for the P3s. So why suggest it. Helicopters maybe but for a much larger asset like the P3 i think most intelligent thinking person will realise that something with range and to get a high first strike option this would have to go to the ASM like the Harpoon.
Can i comment on the Project protector and mention that i believe you are right with the IPV being a seperate component to the rest of the operations of the Canterbury for example but i will go a step further and suggest that the IPV was developed for patrol work around NZ coastline, although it can and does have a reasonably good range, however it lacks decent defensive weapons so there is no integration use for them in the pure Navys role. They do have a good integration operability with the OPVs when required so thats an advantage. This would be for fisheries patrol etc.
As to the OPV the OPV is a cross breed between Navy operations and Fisheries protection. They are in fact a major asset to NZs patrol work in our waters and has a significant range to meet that of the ANZAC and has a "escort" capability along with the ANZAC. What it does lack is a survellience radar and a better defensive weapons capability for the size of the vessel. However with the Seasprite armed with a Mav. this does put the OPVs capability in a good light.
One thing is certain no one knows what ASM the P3s will get at this point and there is no clue or hint as to which weapon right now, however it is my gut feeling it will be the Harpoon. One question i do have is, is it not plausible to suggest that the Harpoon or a Slam mer go into the Torpedo bay under the belly? What about a cross selection fit for both the Harpoon and the new Torpedo that the P3 is also looking at getting? If the so called Harpoon is fitted to the wing does this not cause more drag thus reducing the range of the P3?
I have had to head butt my point to AD that according to the LTDP that in the statement the ASM would have to be done at the time of maintenance and upgrading existing systems to enable the fit to go ahead. Cheers.
As to the OPV the OPV is a cross breed between Navy operations and Fisheries protection. They are in fact a major asset to NZs patrol work in our waters and has a significant range to meet that of the ANZAC and has a "escort" capability along with the ANZAC. What it does lack is a survellience radar and a better defensive weapons capability for the size of the vessel. However with the Seasprite armed with a Mav. this does put the OPVs capability in a good light.
One thing is certain no one knows what ASM the P3s will get at this point and there is no clue or hint as to which weapon right now, however it is my gut feeling it will be the Harpoon. One question i do have is, is it not plausible to suggest that the Harpoon or a Slam mer go into the Torpedo bay under the belly? What about a cross selection fit for both the Harpoon and the new Torpedo that the P3 is also looking at getting? If the so called Harpoon is fitted to the wing does this not cause more drag thus reducing the range of the P3?
I have had to head butt my point to AD that according to the LTDP that in the statement the ASM would have to be done at the time of maintenance and upgrading existing systems to enable the fit to go ahead. Cheers.
More supposing. Just keep "smacks in the forhead" and hopefully you will come round.
True, but they did not have the EO/IR sensor and (I presume) new maritime radar back then I suppose...
Didn't pick up the baiting at all. (Smacks self in forehead)...
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Whatever mate, you're inability to read or recall what I wrote is becoming more and more obvious, I'll bet however you CANNOT point to where I said the Hellfire should be fitted to the P-3, I suggested it could be employed by Mariner, so I'll let the point rest. Obviously it's too difficult to comprehend all these posts...
As to the Harpoon, even the Block II variant can be fired in a "standard mode" with existing command and launch equipment, if necessary and funding is available the Harpoon Advanced Weapons Control System is available which allows an asset to utilise the FULL range of capabilities of the Block II, including the land strike capability.
I believe that the Block I variant may no longer be produced anyway, meaning if Harpoon is to be acquired it's Block II or nothing...
Yeah IPV is an extremely capable advance on existing platform, but really only designed for 'light patrol' work. It's range specs etc suggest it's capable of deploying to Sth Pac. Islands but can't see this being done - it's certainly not been designated for such - that's the OPV's role.
OPV is too lightly armed to provide any meaningful 'escort' role - if a determined FIAC attack on this type came from the rear things could be very embarrasing (same goes for MRV). Agree with your suggestion it needs better radar & weapons fit (needn't be significantly more armed).
Apparently no magazine for Mav's on OPV - certainly detailed plans don't show such. Govt sticking to the 'patrol' role I'd suggest! They've designated a 'secondary counter-terrorism' role but neither Govt or RNZN has quantified what this would likely entail - probably simply embarkation of SAS!?!
Can't say what ASM P-3K will get - wouldn't surprise me to see the Govt try & sling the Maverick under them!
Maybe the problem is that the PM feels threatened by large 'phallic' shaped things!Unfortunately the LTDP does not explicitly suggest ANYWHERE that there are plans for the ANZAC frigates to get an ASM - there is no such project. One can't assume it's part of any ANZAC upgrade projects. Yes they're needed but RNZN need to convince the Govt (wonder if they've ever bothered trying!).
How difficult would it be to equip the OPV to fully support operations by an armed Seasprite? The inability to support Maverick missiles seems like a huge oversight.
Cheers
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I'm aware that an AShM for the Anzac is no guarantee... To be honest, given the current deployments and RNZN Anzac capabilities, it isn't even the first thing I have on my list for NZ Anzac upgrades... First on the list is new lightweight torps. Apparently the shelf-life for the current torps runs out next year, with the current plan (tentatively) purchasing replacements ~2015 or so. Basically that would give the RNZN a 7-8 year timespan where they would rely on expired torps for all NZDF use... Not something I'm very comfy with. After that, then I would like to see ESSM and quadpacks fitted to the Anzacs. After that, then I would like to see some sort of AShM fitted.
As for the Harpoon for the P-3K... I don't know about firing a Block II in standard mode, don't know enough about the missile to know if that is possible with the current databus or not. Magoo, any imput? As for the Block I, I believe AD you're correct that production has ceased, but I also think there are a large number of them available in various inventories. Some could probably be purchased out of the existing stocks of current Harpoon users. Another possible route would be (assuming the databus is compatible) to fit the Kongsberg NSM to the P-3K. This would offer nice potential tie-ins for adaptation for the Anzac to get an AShM, as well as possible use from NFH-90s, if the NZDF decides to order more at somepoint to augment/replace the SH-2G(NZ) Seasprites. Particularly if the RAN adopts an NFH-90 type as a Seahawk/Seasprite replacement.
-Cheers
Last edited:
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
True the only indication seems to be under the ANZAC self defence upgrade section of the LTDP with it's "links to other capabilities - anti-ship missiles". Perhaps NZDF consider an ASM as part of the vessels self defence capability?
The Block II can be fired in legacy mode, indeed that is how they would be fired from Australian AP-3C's and Adelaide Class FFG's which are not receiving the Harpoon Block II AHWCS....
The NSM/JSM could be an option, but as I outlined earlier will probably occur additional integration costs. No doubt NZDF will study these issues at length if it does get Government approval to proceed with the project. A purchase of more than 1 variant of missile seems doubtful in the extreme to me, given the overall level of doubt about the project anyway...
As to whether any Country would be willing to sell Harpoon missiles to NZ out of existing inventory I'm not sure, but it hardly seems a sustainable long term acquisition plan...
Hi Tasman, I think Gibbo is referring to the IPV not the OPV. We all know the OPV does have some significant capabilities within the Navy, but i would agree that it is lightly self defended which is a shame and is drastically lacking a survellience radar. OPV i mean.
You were the one who suggested the Hellfire . Not me. To whatever platform was completely beside the point, it has no relevance to the subject whatsoever. It seems you have a bad case of amnesia because if you remember it was you that suggested it was the Mav. that i was argueing about being fitted to the P3 when i hadnt even mentioned it. Give me a break.
FYI, the USN uses Hellfire in the maritime strike role from their Seahawks in the same manner RNZAF employ AGM-65 Maverick from your Seasprites, which you have argued SHOULD be employed from the P-3K's. Talk about contradicting yourself...
FYI, the USN uses Hellfire in the maritime strike role from their Seahawks in the same manner RNZAF employ AGM-65 Maverick from your Seasprites, which you have argued SHOULD be employed from the P-3K's. Talk about contradicting yourself...
Maybe no guarentee BUT when the government right out in detail the plans for improvements to our NZDFs by means of a public documnet such as the LTDP then there has to be some credibility with it. There has never been a time span stated for these acquisitions and upgrades but with election year looming and the credibility of the government in focus i doubt that too much will change on the basis to whether they will be implemented or not.
The government has made statements on defence procurements in the past and has delivered on all of them so far, and more , so i really dont see why there should be any reason to question its validity regarding its intention. Cheers.
The government has made statements on defence procurements in the past and has delivered on all of them so far, and more , so i really dont see why there should be any reason to question its validity regarding its intention. Cheers.
True the only indication seems to be under the ANZAC self defence upgrade section of the LTDP with it's "links to other capabilities - anti-ship missiles". Perhaps NZDF consider an ASM as part of the vessels self defence capability?
The Block II can be fired in legacy mode, indeed that is how they would be fired from Australian AP-3C's and Adelaide Class FFG's which are not receiving the Harpoon Block II AHWCS....
The NSM/JSM could be an option, but as I outlined earlier will probably occur additional integration costs. No doubt NZDF will study these issues at length if it does get Government approval to proceed with the project. A purchase of more than 1 variant of missile seems doubtful in the extreme to me, given the overall level of doubt about the project anyway...
As to whether any Country would be willing to sell Harpoon missiles to NZ out of existing inventory I'm not sure, but it hardly seems a sustainable long term acquisition plan...
Maybe no guarentee BUT when the government right out in detail the plans for improvements to our NZDFs by means of a public documnet such as the LTDP then there has to be some credibility with it. There has never been a time span stated for these acquisitions and upgrades but with election year looming and the credibility of the government in focus i doubt that too much will change on the basis to whether they will be implemented or not.
The government has made statements on defence procurements in the past and has delivered on all of them so far, and more , so i really dont see why there should be any reason to question its validity regarding its intention. Cheers.
The government has made statements on defence procurements in the past and has delivered on all of them so far, and more , so i really dont see why there should be any reason to question its validity regarding its intention. Cheers.