Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Padman
- Start date
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
A NZ perspective on the ADF Seasprite cancellation
Hmm, where to post this, the RAN thread, the Status of Kaman Seasprite thread or the RNZAF thread? I'll stick it here since the RNZN operate these RNZAF assets. There's a couple of interesting "issues" touched upon briefly (composite rotor blades and their service life, helo life expectancy and midlife update). These issues are covered in further detail in the Wings over NZ Seasprite threads, including previous speculation that because of the difficulty of obtaining critical spares could mean assessing whether the midlife upgrade time might be the time to replace them instead. Depending on the political situation at the time of course and whether NZ is successful in obtaining ex-ADF spares presumably etc.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Dominion Post 7 March 2008
Hope for Seasprite parts from axed deal
by Hank Schouten
Australia's cancellation of its $1.3 billion navy Seasprite helicopter contract could be good news for New Zeraland's fleet of five similar helicopters, says air force chief Graham Lintott.
The Australian Government cancelled its contract for 11 Seasprites because persistent software and development problems have stopped them going into service.
New Zealand's less sophisticated Seasprites - ordered from US manufacturer Kaman Aerospace at the same time for $274 million - have been relatively trouble-free and have been flying for six years.
However, they have had problems - two needed substancial repairs after mishaps - and a third was out of service for five years because it had to be used for spares.
Air Vice-Marshal Graham Lintott said he was disappointed for the the Australians who had put a lot of time and effort into a failed project.
He hoped it could make it easier for New Zealand's fleet to get spare parts.
"Their Seasprite is a very different beast from ours but there are some spares there - particularly the composite main rotor blades and some of the airframe and engine parts that we might be interested in."
Air Vice-Marshal Lintott said Australia's decision meant New Zealand was now the lead user of Seasprites fitted with composite rotor blades.
This meant rotor blades had to be sent back to the US for more frequent inspection till their anticipated service life was proven.
He said he was confident the air force would be able to keep its Seasprites flying for another 20 years but cost effectiveness would need to be monitored. At some point a midlife update would be required.
Hmm, where to post this, the RAN thread, the Status of Kaman Seasprite thread or the RNZAF thread? I'll stick it here since the RNZN operate these RNZAF assets. There's a couple of interesting "issues" touched upon briefly (composite rotor blades and their service life, helo life expectancy and midlife update). These issues are covered in further detail in the Wings over NZ Seasprite threads, including previous speculation that because of the difficulty of obtaining critical spares could mean assessing whether the midlife upgrade time might be the time to replace them instead. Depending on the political situation at the time of course and whether NZ is successful in obtaining ex-ADF spares presumably etc.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Dominion Post 7 March 2008
Hope for Seasprite parts from axed deal
by Hank Schouten
Australia's cancellation of its $1.3 billion navy Seasprite helicopter contract could be good news for New Zeraland's fleet of five similar helicopters, says air force chief Graham Lintott.
The Australian Government cancelled its contract for 11 Seasprites because persistent software and development problems have stopped them going into service.
New Zealand's less sophisticated Seasprites - ordered from US manufacturer Kaman Aerospace at the same time for $274 million - have been relatively trouble-free and have been flying for six years.
However, they have had problems - two needed substancial repairs after mishaps - and a third was out of service for five years because it had to be used for spares.
Air Vice-Marshal Graham Lintott said he was disappointed for the the Australians who had put a lot of time and effort into a failed project.
He hoped it could make it easier for New Zealand's fleet to get spare parts.
"Their Seasprite is a very different beast from ours but there are some spares there - particularly the composite main rotor blades and some of the airframe and engine parts that we might be interested in."
Air Vice-Marshal Lintott said Australia's decision meant New Zealand was now the lead user of Seasprites fitted with composite rotor blades.
This meant rotor blades had to be sent back to the US for more frequent inspection till their anticipated service life was proven.
He said he was confident the air force would be able to keep its Seasprites flying for another 20 years but cost effectiveness would need to be monitored. At some point a midlife update would be required.
Good to see the Kiwi's capitalizing on our failures
Want some upgraded Adelaide Class FFGs as well? Apparently they're not up to scratch either, but that could be the media making mountains out of molehills. Also, are there any plans for the RNZN operating the NH90 off the ANZAC class?
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Good to see the Kiwi's capitalizing on our failures
Also, are there any plans for the RNZN operating the NH90 off the ANZAC class?
Be interesting to see how the Kaman/Au.Govt. legal issues pan out. Are the ADF Seasprites still owned by Kaman? If so and if Kaman tries to onsell the Seasprites (perhaps in some down graded form) then presumably the NZDF may have difficulty obtaining the Aussie spares then?
Question: couldn't Kaman and the ADF "dumb down" the Seasprites to overcome some of the software/integration issues and get them flying? I'm reading on the Aussie threads on the lack of rotary assets in the RAN, at least a dumbed down Seasprite is better than nothing, at least until the NFH90 or whatever is chosen the relace the Seahawks. (I guess Sikorsky must have given the Au. Govt a good proposal recently to allow the elimination of the Seasprite)!
Not sure, I think they are actually RAN owned, so then it would be the ADFs job to get rid of them (or just give them back to Kaman)
They could if they wanted, but it seems the Gov. and the RAN have had enough of them. The new Gov. seems to have completely binned the Sea Sprite. There's already been over a billion dollars spent on them and the ADF just wants to be rid of them.
The next Defence White Paper is apparantly going to examine the future options of the Fleet Air Arm, which probably means more NH-90s being ordered, which won't be operational until 2010, but thats only two years away, so the RAN will make do with their current choppers for another couple of years. A dumbed-down Sea Sprite would be a stop-gap aircraft, and their not entirely popular in Australia at the moment (Super Hornet
)This article was in the Claymore (HMNZS Otago Association), by the CO of Otago. here
OTAGO, the Navy’s first Offshore Patrol Vessel (OPV) has recently undergone Contractor Sea Acceptance Trials (CSAT’s) during the period 04-17 Feb 08. The trials were conducted in Port Phillip Bay (Melbourne) and the Bass Strait
with the ship typically day-running out of Western Port. The trials period
was quite an exhilarating time for those members of the Ship’s Company whom were afforded the opportunity to sea-ride in the ship. A range of trials were conducted that were distinctly separated into two main areas: Platform and Mission Systems. By far the most challenging was the setting to work
and trialling of the Platform systems which essentially encompasses
the Main Propulsion Plant and the Auxiliary Machinery. The RNZN’s new OPV is a very capable platform and the following brief characteristics are provided in support of this statement: Range: 6000 Nm (plus). Speed: 22 knots (plus) – sustained in Sea State 4/5. Typical of RNZN core values, those members of the Ship’s Company who were directly involved in the CSAT’s acquitted themselves with a solid performance. The technical staff were closely involved
as Subject Matter Experts, and in doing so gained valuable hands-on time with the various systems. The age old adage that “you can’t teach experience” clearly prevailed. Catering during the CSAT’s was provided by the
Ship’s staff and having sampled their wares during the period at sea, I am now more conscious of watching my weight during my appointment as the Captain! The Navigating Officer and I quickly formed a robust working relationship
with the Contractor’s Merchant Captain and his bridge staff, and this effort led to the both of us “driving the ship” from day two of the trials. For the Operators amongst you, I can avidly state that the OPV is a very manoeuvrable platform in terms of speed and turning ability. The sea trials were conducted in a variety of weather conditions which served to illustrate to me that the OPV has very good sea-keeping qualities – an essential
attribute when one considers the temperament of the waters surrounding New Zealand and our assigned environs. The Main Propulsion Plant, whilst perceivably complex in nature is actually quite simple to manage and operate. If current ethos prevails, the RNZN is now entering an operating environment
whereby Unmanned Machinery Spaces (UMS) may well become the norm and as a consequence, the bridge staff will require an up-skilling of their technical knowledge in order to safely operate the plant – generation “WHY” has their
chance to prevail. Quite simply; main engine and change from single engine to dual engine mode at the press of a few buttons the overriding caveat
demands intricate knowledge of the propulsion plant.
So, we entered a new era with the ANZAC Class Frigates, and we’re now entering another era with the OPV’s as introduced via Project Protector.
Many cultural challenges lay before the modern and versatile Navy.
A pitch from me as the commissioning Captain of this First of Class vessel: give me a moment (or maybe several) to “get my feet on deck” and
then I’ll happily invite onboard those interested parties within
the Association for a good look around the new namesake OTAGO. She’s a fine vessel, and I’m immensely proud of the unique position that I hold.
By Lieutenant Commander
John W. Butcher, MNZM,
RNZN.
OTAGO, the Navy’s first Offshore Patrol Vessel (OPV) has recently undergone Contractor Sea Acceptance Trials (CSAT’s) during the period 04-17 Feb 08. The trials were conducted in Port Phillip Bay (Melbourne) and the Bass Strait
with the ship typically day-running out of Western Port. The trials period
was quite an exhilarating time for those members of the Ship’s Company whom were afforded the opportunity to sea-ride in the ship. A range of trials were conducted that were distinctly separated into two main areas: Platform and Mission Systems. By far the most challenging was the setting to work
and trialling of the Platform systems which essentially encompasses
the Main Propulsion Plant and the Auxiliary Machinery. The RNZN’s new OPV is a very capable platform and the following brief characteristics are provided in support of this statement: Range: 6000 Nm (plus). Speed: 22 knots (plus) – sustained in Sea State 4/5. Typical of RNZN core values, those members of the Ship’s Company who were directly involved in the CSAT’s acquitted themselves with a solid performance. The technical staff were closely involved
as Subject Matter Experts, and in doing so gained valuable hands-on time with the various systems. The age old adage that “you can’t teach experience” clearly prevailed. Catering during the CSAT’s was provided by the
Ship’s staff and having sampled their wares during the period at sea, I am now more conscious of watching my weight during my appointment as the Captain! The Navigating Officer and I quickly formed a robust working relationship
with the Contractor’s Merchant Captain and his bridge staff, and this effort led to the both of us “driving the ship” from day two of the trials. For the Operators amongst you, I can avidly state that the OPV is a very manoeuvrable platform in terms of speed and turning ability. The sea trials were conducted in a variety of weather conditions which served to illustrate to me that the OPV has very good sea-keeping qualities – an essential
attribute when one considers the temperament of the waters surrounding New Zealand and our assigned environs. The Main Propulsion Plant, whilst perceivably complex in nature is actually quite simple to manage and operate. If current ethos prevails, the RNZN is now entering an operating environment
whereby Unmanned Machinery Spaces (UMS) may well become the norm and as a consequence, the bridge staff will require an up-skilling of their technical knowledge in order to safely operate the plant – generation “WHY” has their
chance to prevail. Quite simply; main engine and change from single engine to dual engine mode at the press of a few buttons the overriding caveat
demands intricate knowledge of the propulsion plant.
So, we entered a new era with the ANZAC Class Frigates, and we’re now entering another era with the OPV’s as introduced via Project Protector.
Many cultural challenges lay before the modern and versatile Navy.
A pitch from me as the commissioning Captain of this First of Class vessel: give me a moment (or maybe several) to “get my feet on deck” and
then I’ll happily invite onboard those interested parties within
the Association for a good look around the new namesake OTAGO. She’s a fine vessel, and I’m immensely proud of the unique position that I hold.
By Lieutenant Commander
John W. Butcher, MNZM,
RNZN.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I believe the Seasprite could be "dumbed down" but the question would then become, would it be worthwhile? IMO it would likely not be, given that it would take both time and money to design, modiy and then test the Seasprites anew. Even if a 'proven' design like the SH-G(NZ) Seasprite design was selected, a fair bit of money and money would be needed given the differences in cockpit layout and avionics between the ADF Seasprites and other variants.
Given a potentially looming issue with helicopter support for the RAN, there are other avenues which likely could provide coverage faster, particularly when compared to overall capability.
-Cheers
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
They can't fly in Australia because their airworthiness has been pulled. "dumbing them down" would not make any difference.
In anycase, the main reason they are being cancelled is because they do not meet RAN's requirements for a modern shipboard helicopter and this has nothing to do with ITAS but the airframe size. Put simply, "it's too small".
It's the size it is because it was meant to go on OPV's (not full size Frigates such as the ANZAC's) which were subsequently cancelled. RAN and Government elected to continue with this design, for god knows what reason, rather than select a new helicopter.
There are a number of parts which I imagine would be of interest to RNZN, but the most obvious are the rotors.
I imagine that if RAN is stuck with the airframes, then most of the major parts could be recovered and sold. Things like the engines, radar, sensors and EW kit are not likely to be unattractive options...
Perhaps this sale can fund the integration of the Penguin ASM onto the Seahawks, to give RAN some of the capability it was seeking from the Seasprogs?
Stuart Mackey
New Member
All a question of spare parts, Kaman has been less than able in their delivery of required items. Perhaps Australia can help out on that score?
I do wonder, as a result of the inability to get spares (and perhaps cost to benefit issues?), if the NZ SH2G's will be retained past their mid life refit or something else will be purchased?
The NZ SH2G's tend to have on going issues. I am currently serving on HMNZS Canterbury and on our last deployment to Australia for an exercise with the RAN and French Navy, our Helo wanst able to join us at sea as 'another' failure in the hydrolic system in the aircraft force it into an emergency landing. This type of situation is not an islolated event, at times ship's crews almost have expect not to embark a helo whilst heading out on exercise.
Seasprite Australian Spares
March 22, 2008 The Australian
THE Government has surrendered ownership of its $1billion fleet of Seasprite helicopters in a deal in which it could recoup as little as $40million of the money previously thrown at the aircraft.
Under an agreement with the helicopter's manufacturers that brings to an end one of Australia's most embarrassing military purchases, the aircraft now face being broken up for spare parts and sold to Poland, Egypt and New Zealand. The Seasprite program was axed earlier this month following a range of problems with the helicopters' weapons system and air-data computer, meant to give Australia an aerial anti-submarine capacity.
The nine helicopters that have been delivered to date - two short of the 11 agreed when the contract was signed in 1997 - will be returned to the US manufacturer, Kaman Aerospace Corporation.
Senior officials from the Defence Materiel Organisation were flying back to Australia yesterday after agreeing that Kaman would then be able to sell these aircraft, the first casualties of a review of $23billion of under-performing defence contracts.
The commonwealth will receive a sliding-scale percentage of any profits from the resale, with a guaranteed minimum of $39.5million, payable in instalments by 2013. Defence will also keep possession of about $30million worth of spare parts for its current Sea Hawk and Black Hawk helicopter fleets.
Kaman chairman and chief executive Neal Keating said the company would waive about $33million owed by Australia in exchange for the nine helicopters and related equipment, which it expected would exceed this figure in value.
"We appreciate the Australian Government's willingness to work with us," Mr Keating said in a statement.
"We are also pleased to have the opportunity to sell these highly capable aircraft to another customer."
DMO chief executive Stephen Gumley told a Senate inquiry last year that he would expect the aircraft to be broken down into spare parts and sold. Poland, Egypt and New Zealand all have serving Kaman Seasprite fleets.
The potential return on this sale"would be small", Dr Gumley said, and far less than the $950million spent on the helicopters so far, afigure that ballooned from the $660million agreed under the original contract.
Even if the complete aircraft were sold, sources familiar with the negotiations said Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon may have talked down their value in his public criticism of the program, which was agreed by the Howard government.
After the decision to scrap the Seasprite, seven years after the fleet was due to be operational, Mr Fitzgibbon described using the aircraft as "like taking a 2008 Commodore to the 2018 Bathurst 1000".
Australia Defence Association executive director Neil James said the Government had been forced into a weak negotiating position after years of grappling with the aircraft's various technical problems.
The Seasprites have never flown operationally during this time and, with the Navy's Sea King helicopter squadron repeatedly grounded with maintenance problems, the Sea Hawk helicopter fleet has been forced to fill the gap.
Cheers Norm
March 22 news report in "The Australian" newspaper states that the current spares inventory $A30m will be used for the Sea hawk and Black Hawk helicopter Fleet, so that's not heading our way!. The 9 helicopters delivered will be returned to Kaman Aerospace corporation and are expected to be used for spare parts for Polish,Egyptain and NZ fleets.Australia will get a sliding percentage of any profits with a guaranteed minimum of $A39.5m.
March 22, 2008 The Australian
THE Government has surrendered ownership of its $1billion fleet of Seasprite helicopters in a deal in which it could recoup as little as $40million of the money previously thrown at the aircraft.
Under an agreement with the helicopter's manufacturers that brings to an end one of Australia's most embarrassing military purchases, the aircraft now face being broken up for spare parts and sold to Poland, Egypt and New Zealand. The Seasprite program was axed earlier this month following a range of problems with the helicopters' weapons system and air-data computer, meant to give Australia an aerial anti-submarine capacity.
The nine helicopters that have been delivered to date - two short of the 11 agreed when the contract was signed in 1997 - will be returned to the US manufacturer, Kaman Aerospace Corporation.
Senior officials from the Defence Materiel Organisation were flying back to Australia yesterday after agreeing that Kaman would then be able to sell these aircraft, the first casualties of a review of $23billion of under-performing defence contracts.
The commonwealth will receive a sliding-scale percentage of any profits from the resale, with a guaranteed minimum of $39.5million, payable in instalments by 2013. Defence will also keep possession of about $30million worth of spare parts for its current Sea Hawk and Black Hawk helicopter fleets.
Kaman chairman and chief executive Neal Keating said the company would waive about $33million owed by Australia in exchange for the nine helicopters and related equipment, which it expected would exceed this figure in value.
"We appreciate the Australian Government's willingness to work with us," Mr Keating said in a statement.
"We are also pleased to have the opportunity to sell these highly capable aircraft to another customer."
DMO chief executive Stephen Gumley told a Senate inquiry last year that he would expect the aircraft to be broken down into spare parts and sold. Poland, Egypt and New Zealand all have serving Kaman Seasprite fleets.
The potential return on this sale"would be small", Dr Gumley said, and far less than the $950million spent on the helicopters so far, afigure that ballooned from the $660million agreed under the original contract.
Even if the complete aircraft were sold, sources familiar with the negotiations said Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon may have talked down their value in his public criticism of the program, which was agreed by the Howard government.
After the decision to scrap the Seasprite, seven years after the fleet was due to be operational, Mr Fitzgibbon described using the aircraft as "like taking a 2008 Commodore to the 2018 Bathurst 1000".
Australia Defence Association executive director Neil James said the Government had been forced into a weak negotiating position after years of grappling with the aircraft's various technical problems.
The Seasprites have never flown operationally during this time and, with the Navy's Sea King helicopter squadron repeatedly grounded with maintenance problems, the Sea Hawk helicopter fleet has been forced to fill the gap.
Cheers Norm
If you don't mind me (& no doubt a few others!) asking - are you guys happy with her? How's she been on the recent exercise - is she up to the task? I guess the current 'issues' & upcoming review must be a bit of a downer but it'd be great to hear from the horses mouth just how she's performing.
I agree and wish to back up Gibbo. We can find wonderful reviews of any cruise ship in the world, but its much more difficult to read reviews of naval ships. Simple things such as how are her accommodations for her naval sailors and for the army's grunts? Are all of her systems working like they should, the lifts, the landing craft, the cranes, the guns? Is she another CHUCK UP or not?
It appears you are not happy campers with your SeaSprite. Obviously, we also know about the RHIBs alcove and the effort to correct that design error. Anything else?
It appears you are not happy campers with your SeaSprite. Obviously, we also know about the RHIBs alcove and the effort to correct that design error. Anything else?
6 Month Delay for remaining Protector Vessels
The Otago Daily Times reported today that the delivery of the remaining vessels is behind by six months. Otago completed sea trials, which identified an issue with one of the engines. All vessels are having there insulation redone. There was some talk about changing the layout on the brigde as well.
The ODT website is www.odt.co.nz, however the electronic edition to access the article on page 2 is a pay to view.
On the issue of Canterbury - I'd be more interested to hear what upgrades are planned - i.e are surplus SURBOC from the Leanders going to be fitted etc.
The Otago Daily Times reported today that the delivery of the remaining vessels is behind by six months. Otago completed sea trials, which identified an issue with one of the engines. All vessels are having there insulation redone. There was some talk about changing the layout on the brigde as well.
The ODT website is www.odt.co.nz, however the electronic edition to access the article on page 2 is a pay to view.
On the issue of Canterbury - I'd be more interested to hear what upgrades are planned - i.e are surplus SURBOC from the Leanders going to be fitted etc.
I spoke with the then NZ Maritime Commander, Commordore Leonard, in late 1996; as I recall he had been a naval aviator on Wasps. His comment was that noone had ever asked him whether he would prefer Lynx or Seasprite - I guess why bother asking the professional operational head who has expertise in the area when it was entirely political? The answer was yes, Seasprite won because Australia was getting it, the press release by then Minister of Defence Paul East on 11 March 1997 referred to the 2 types but specifically addressed the commonality, quoting from it "There are obvious advantages in buying a helicopter that can operate with units of the Australian Navy. As well, we get access to spares and common maintenance facilities". New Zealanders will understand my next remark - "Tui"!
Incidentally, SH2G uses T700. NH90 can, but I understand that we are getting the standard RTM322 on our 8 (well, 9, but one is being stripped for spares). So we end up with 2 engine types as well, meanwhile Australia will likely consolidated on NH90 in its various land and sea based forms. Anyone for reengining the SH2G? I dont imagine that the Otago and Wellington OPV's flightdecks will be big enough to handle NFH90; arent they sized for SH2G? So we are well stuck with them as one of only 3 operators.
Incidentally, SH2G uses T700. NH90 can, but I understand that we are getting the standard RTM322 on our 8 (well, 9, but one is being stripped for spares). So we end up with 2 engine types as well, meanwhile Australia will likely consolidated on NH90 in its various land and sea based forms. Anyone for reengining the SH2G? I dont imagine that the Otago and Wellington OPV's flightdecks will be big enough to handle NFH90; arent they sized for SH2G? So we are well stuck with them as one of only 3 operators.
We could get some additional (navalised) A109's to operate off the OPV's, rather than operating an expensive type like the Sprites or NH90, the additional capability of the more expensive types is not really needed for the OPV role (with the possible exception of load capacity) however I am sure that with the lower operating costs of the A109 you could afford to make additional sorties.