Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[Sea Toby]

So your basing RNZN needs of a episode of deadlest catch, I can watch this video of an OPV in the southern ocean does not mean im going to base any conculsions on what type of capability the RCN needs for the barents sea.

HMNZS Wellington weathers a storm during sea trials in the Southern Ocean - YouTube


Your steadfast refusal to fully comprehend what the RNZN needs or requires is not helping your argument and using a episode of a TV programme has done you no favours with anyone on this thread.

CD

The Irish love their similar OPVs so much they ordered two larger simillar OPVs a decade later. From 80 meters to 90 meters in length, NZ's are 85 meters.

A bit off topic but for those of us who appreciate maritime history. This is a goose bumps story, not a tear jerker.

Recently I read a wonderful book of the clipper Cutty Sark which won the wool trade race through the roaring 40s of the South Pacific from Australia for several years running. After her failures in the China tea trade losing to her arch enemy Thermopylae, the Cutty Sark's doting owner Jock Willis dotted her with a golden gilded cutty sark wind vane, Especially sweet considering the Thermopylae had a golden gilded cock wind wane for her previous success, being the cock of the walk similar to Tottehham FC logo.

Many decades later the Duke of Edinburgh bought that wind vane at auction and gifted it to the Cutty Sark. Go to London and see her proudly wear her cutty sark today.

 

[ngatimozart]

I know that we have discussed the Endeavour replacement before and that its probably been given a good thrashing, however I was having a nosey on the RAN thread, and there is a rumour there that the RAN has asked to lease the Spanish Armanda Navantia built AOR Cantabria A15, with Spanish crew, to give it a going over to see what it's good and bad points are. If this is the case in that said ship does arrive in Australia for RAN assessment, IMHO it would make good sense to have a NZMinDef / RNZN assessment team present at the same time to do an assesment for the NZG / RNZN.

Before every one say it's to big for RNZN, the Cantabria (good name too - should paint it red and black ) is not first of class and is an upscaled Patino.

The Patino's key data is:
Crew 148
Aircrew Accommodation 19
Additional Accommodation 20
Length 170m
Beam 23m
Height 8m
Displacement 5,780t
Engines
The ship is fitted with two Navantia / Burmeister and Wein 16V40/45 diesel engines rated at 17.6MW sustained power. The engines drive a single shaft with a five-blade controllable pitch propeller supplied by Lips BV of the Netherlands.
Patino Class Auxiliary Oiler and Replenishment Ship - Naval Technology

Displacement: 17,050 tons full load
Dimensions: 175 x 23.7 x 8 meters (574 x 77.5 x 26 feet)
Propulsion: 2 diesels, 2 shafts, 21 knots
Crew: 162 + 19 transients
Aviation: aft helicopter deck with hangar for 2 helicopters
Cargo: 9,000 tons (6,800 DFM, 1,650 JP-5, parts, ordnance & food)
Radar: combined air & sea search
EW: intercept, 4 SRBOC
Armament: 1 20 mm Meroka CIWS, 2 20 mm
AOR-type ship designed in cooperation with Netherlands.
World Navies Today: Spain

Endeavours specs:
Standard Displacement: 7,300 tonnes empty
12,300 tonnes laden
Length Overall: 138 metres
Beam: 18.4 metres
Draught: 4.5m empty
7.6m laden
Speed: 14 knots
Range: 10,000 nautical miles
Complement: 50 Officers and ratings
(13 Officers, 10 Senior Ratings, 27 Junior Ratings)
Propulsion: One Mann Burmeister & Wain diesel (5,300 hp)
RNZN - Endeavour

Ok the Patino is larger than the Endeavour and the NZG is cost adverse, but considering that they want to replace the Endeavour with AOR / MRV type, then this would be worth looking at if the AOR Cantabria A15 makes the voyage to Australia. If it doesn't and the ADF / RAN decide to go to Spain to investigate it, then it would do no harm for a NZ MinDef / RNZN team to go as well. The AOR Cantabria A15 is an upscaled Patino so would be to large for RNZN needs, however a vessel of the Patino's size, or even a scaled down version, could meet the RNZN need. The crewing is very large (three times) than that of the Endeavour. With the Defence purchasing agreement between NZ and Aussie, and the political desire across both sides of the ditch for defence commonality, this is something that is worth investigating.

 

[ngatimozart]

Flight Global story on SH2G(NZ) Seasprite trials operating off the OPVs. In this case from Otagoin varying conditions in theHauraki Gulf and the Bay of Plenty areas. On another place I lurk I saw a photo of the Seasprite parked on helodeck with the side nets up and they have a slot in the aft net for the tail boom of seasprite to fit through. So not a lot of room. I know we've talked avout the RNZN getting Romeos but fromlooking at that photo me thinks the Romeo would fidindit on the OPVs.
PICTURES: New Zealand operates SH-2G from patrol vessel

 

[MrConservative]

I know that we have discussed the Endeavour replacement before and that its probably been given a good thrashing, however I was having a nosey on the RAN thread, and there is a rumour there that the RAN has asked to lease the Spanish Armanda Navantia built AOR Cantabria A15, with Spanish crew, to give it a going over to see what it's good and bad points are. If this is the case in that said ship does arrive in Australia for RAN assessment, IMHO it would make good sense to have a NZMinDef / RNZN assessment team present at the same time to do an assesment for the NZG / RNZN.

Before every one say it's to big for RNZN, the Cantabria (good name too - should paint it red and black ) is not first of class and is an upscaled Patino.

Ok the Patino is larger than the Endeavour and the NZG is cost adverse, but considering that they want to replace the Endeavour with AOR / MRV type, then this would be worth looking at if the AOR Cantabria A15 makes the voyage to Australia. If it doesn't and the ADF / RAN decide to go to Spain to investigate it, then it would do no harm for a NZ MinDef / RNZN team to go as well. The AOR Cantabria A15 is an upscaled Patino so would be to large for RNZN needs, however a vessel of the Patino's size, or even a scaled down version, could meet the RNZN need. The crewing is very large (three times) than that of the Endeavour. With the Defence purchasing agreement between NZ and Aussie, and the political desire across both sides of the ditch for defence commonality, this is something that is worth investigating.

Giving it a good thrash is OK Ngati at least it is going to happen unlike some other topics which get thrashed usually involving fast flying pencil thingy's with strap on whiz bang sticks.

Commonality with the RAN is of course a biggy no doubt about it. Of course we really don't know the scoping that the AusGov have done with the Success replacement. Will they want to do a local build, build offshore or go mixed - say a Korean hull and finish it off back home?

What strikes me about the Spanish vessel though is crew sizing - yikes. The night watch on the old E is pretty much single figures ... we really need to have something which will not be more than the current complement.

Incidently, I would like the guys at BMT to get out their crayons and whip me up a design concept of a Aegir 14-R or 15-R, which the buggers haven't done yet. They have the Aegir 10 and the Aegir 18-R and BMT can scale them but their is in my view a wee sweet spot which would be an interesting Endeavour replacement. Think of a baby MARS built by Daewoo and of course with lots of automation so as it could be crewed with stuff all - since warm bodies are usually a bit hard to come by in the Kiwi navy. Will be interesting to see how it would compare with what else is thrown into the mix. Probably wouldn't be outrageously pricey either nor a one off knock off as it would genetically (for want of a better word) still be a MARS.

 

[ngatimozart]

Giving it a good thrash is OK Ngati at least it is going to happen unlike some other topics which get thrashed usually involving fast flying pencil thingy's with strap on whiz bang sticks.

Commonality with the RAN is of course a biggy no doubt about it. Of course we really don't know the scoping that the AusGov have done with the Success replacement. Will they want to do a local build, build offshore or go mixed - say a Korean hull and finish it off back home?

What strikes me about the Spanish vessel though is crew sizing - yikes. The night watch on the old E is pretty much single figures ... we really need to have something which will not be more than the current complement.

Incidently, I would like the guys at BMT to get out their crayons and whip me up a design concept of a Aegir 14-R or 15-R, which the buggers haven't done yet. They have the Aegir 10 and the Aegir 18-R and BMT can scale them but their is in my view a wee sweet spot which would be an interesting Endeavour replacement. Think of a baby MARS built by Daewoo and of course with lots of automation so as it could be crewed with stuff all - since warm bodies are usually a bit hard to come by in the Kiwi navy. Will be interesting to see how it would compare with what else is thrown into the mix. Probably wouldn't be outrageously pricey either nor a one off knock off as it would genetically (for want of a better word) still be a MARS.

Yes an Aegir 14-R of 15-5 would be ideal or as you suggest a Daewoo build of a baby MARS. Thinking along those lines a Daewoo build of an Aegir 14-R or 15-R would be ideal, for reasons of cost and delivery on time etc. Yes we could more than likely automate a lot and I notice the crew on the MARS is 63 + 46 non crew embarked,. So the crewing of the MARS is along the lines of the current crewing numbers on Endeavour. Out of the two I think an AOR is more whats needed that the MARS because the MARS only offers 8 x 20ft TEU (container) slots which is not really a lot when you think about it, 160 tonnes dry stores. As a general rule of thumb max net weight for 20ft TEU is 20 tonne, so not a lot of ammo for example.

When I looked at the Navantia Patimno class I did notice the crewing and was wondering how much of that could be automated, especially considering the RNZNs crewing capabilities.

Mind you press ganging is still legal in NZ. AFAIK it hasn't been stricken from the law books. Keel hauling and lashing have but as of 1990 press ganging wasn't. Now all those youthes and others giving society grief .... A life on the ocean waves and they'd earn Kings shilling less tax of course. Buggery is no longer illegal at sea. Hmmmmmmmm maybe I should write to me cuzzie the pollie Winston about it.

 

[Kiwigov]

Buying more SH-2G(A)s?

Flight Global story on SH2G(NZ) Seasprite trials operating off the OPVs. In this case from Otagoin varying conditions in theHauraki Gulf and the Bay of Plenty areas. On another place I lurk I saw a photo of the Seasprite parked on helodeck with the side nets up and they have a slot in the aft net for the tail boom of seasprite to fit through. So not a lot of room. I know we've talked avout the RNZN getting Romeos but fromlooking at that photo me thinks the Romeo would fidindit on the OPVs.

I note previous posters have referred to interest by NZ Defence in buying - at presumably a very substantial discount - the 11 "rebuilt" SH-2G(A) helos following the Aussie procurement fiasco a few years ago. Interested to see that the NZDF site actually links to a very informative media article on the topic.

A key question from the Navy pov must be (if a purchase goes ahead), would the 'new' helos be able to use existing Maverick stores? Possibly tied to whether Kaman would even want to trade-in the 5 current SH-2G(NZ)s as part of any deal for the 11 SH-2G(A)s. Frankly, I'd be surprised if Kaman would want them - what would be the market for 5 used Naval helos, with older tech?

Maybe the Phillipines could be interested in generating a patrol helo capacity - linked to its ex-USCG cutters - especially given South China Sea issues. This must be highly speculative, though, given their budget issues and apparent other priorities.

So perhaps the RNZN would have to keep their current 5 SH-2G(NZ)s, and just dedicate them to the two frigates? That way deferred maintenance could be caught up on, there would be spare aircraft for this specific role, and (crucially) Maverick capacity could be retained.

The 11 SH-2G(A)s could then be allocated to the other 5 'non-combat' helo-capable ships of the RNZN. The glass cockpit would ease transition from the new A-109s, and the associated purchase of a simulator could be located at Whenuapai for the training benefit of Naval crews.

 

[ngatimozart]

Flight Global story on SH2G(NZ) Seasprite trials operating off the OPVs. In this case from Otagoin varying conditions in theHauraki Gulf and the Bay of Plenty areas. On another place I lurk I saw a photo of the Seasprite parked on helodeck with the side nets up and they have a slot in the aft net for the tail boom of seasprite to fit through. So not a lot of room. I know we've talked avout the RNZN getting Romeos but fromlooking at that photo me thinks the Romeo would fidindit on the OPVs.

I note previous posters have referred to interest by NZ Defence in buying - at presumably a very substantial discount - the 11 "rebuilt" SH-2G(A) helos following the Aussie procurement fiasco a few years ago. Interested to see that the NZDF site actually links to a very informative media article on the topic.

A key question from the Navy pov must be (if a purchase goes ahead), would the 'new' helos be able to use existing Maverick stores? Possibly tied to whether Kaman would even want to trade-in the 5 current SH-2G(NZ)s as part of any deal for the 11 SH-2G(A)s. Frankly, I'd be surprised if Kaman would want them - what would be the market for 5 used Naval helos, with older tech?

Maybe the Phillipines could be interested in generating a patrol helo capacity - linked to its ex-USCG cutters - especially given South China Sea issues. This must be highly speculative, though, given their budget issues and apparent other priorities.

So perhaps the RNZN would have to keep their current 5 SH-2G(NZ)s, and just dedicate them to the two frigates? That way deferred maintenance could be caught up on, there would be spare aircraft for this specific role, and (crucially) Maverick capacity could be retained.

The 11 SH-2G(A)s could then be allocated to the other 5 'non-combat' helo-capable ships of the RNZN. The glass cockpit would ease transition from the new A-109s, and the associated purchase of a simulator could be located at Whenuapai for the training benefit of Naval crews.

IMHO it would be better for th NZG to buy the 11 SH2G(I) lock stock and barrel, spares everything. Use two of the helos for cannibalisation. With The SH2G(NZ) scratch the two with the most problems and cannibalise them to keep the other three flying. That way have operational 12 aircraft and they have more uses than just flying off flight decks. With 12 operational aircraft we can have four that are fully operational any given time, four in deep maintenace and the other four in minor maintenance and training and if need be made operational quickly.

Mount a couple of forward firing M2.50 cal MGs and with a couple Zuni rocket pods either side would be lethal mix. Keep the MAG58 pintle gun both port & starboard. Maybe investigate a Hellfire option. That would give us a form of indigenous light CAS for little extra cost if you exclude the Hellfire option.

The RAN tried to use the Penguin on them which is heavier than the Maverick and it created COG problems especially as the missile was carried on only one side. I am sure that Maverick capability is one of the boxes that will have to be ticked by the assessment team.

 

[Lucasnz]

Mind you press ganging is still legal in NZ. AFAIK it hasn't been stricken from the law books. Keel hauling and lashing have but as of 1990 press ganging wasn't. Now all those youthes and others giving society grief .... A life on the ocean waves and they'd earn Kings shilling less tax of course. Buggery is no longer illegal at sea. Hmmmmmmmm maybe I should write to me cuzzie the pollie Winston about it.

No its not true . I always thought keel hauling fell out of favour. Nothing like watching someone walk the plank (after a quick mess deck court).

The RAN tried to use the Penguin on them which is heavier than the Maverick and it created COG problems especially as the missile was carried on only one side. I am sure that Maverick capability is one of the boxes that will have to be ticked by the assessment team.

With the the focus of the littoral I wonder if NZ should start looking at the Future Anti-Surface Guided Weapon (FASGW) given the greater stand off range for use in conjuction with the Maverick or the Hellfire/Maverick replacement. The current Maverick inventory must be coming up to the end of its shelf life.

 

[ngatimozart]

No its not true . I always thought keel hauling fell out of favour. Nothing like watching someone walk the plank (after a quick mess deck court).

Was told by Chief stocker, who would've known in 1990 that Press ganging was still on books in NZ because when they bought laws etc across from pomland that cam along with the usual naval law and civilian criminal laws. At various stages in 20th Century the NZ laws were changed and old laws that were no ,llonger relevant taken off statute books but for some reason press ganging stayed. Walking plank was pirate thing and no such thing as court on quarterdeck for it. Yes I agree keel hauling should still be on the statutes.

With the the focus of the littoral I wonder if NZ should start looking at the Future Anti-Surface Guided Weapon (FASGW) given the greater stand off range for use in conjuction with the Maverick or the Hellfire/Maverick replacement. The current Maverick inventory must be coming up to the end of its shelf life.

They may do but it comes down to money. I suppose if our Mavericks do go past their use by date we can alwys fly over the target and drop the Mavericks on top of it and hope it goes Bang :sniper

 

[Lucasnz]

Was told by Chief stocker, who would've known in 1990 that Press ganging was still on books in NZ because when they bought laws etc across from pomland that cam along with the usual naval law and civilian criminal laws. At various stages in 20th Century the NZ laws were changed and old laws that were no ,llonger relevant taken off statute books but for some reason press ganging stayed. Walking plank was pirate thing and no such thing as court on quarterdeck for it. Yes I agree keel hauling should still be on the statutes.

Interesting summary of naval law, though I never thought keel hauling was actual law. We did make a stoker walk the plank on the Waikato after a kangaroo court for been sick in his pit, even got the photos somewhere.

As for missiles, I agree the cashflows pretty poor right now but the force multiplier missiles offer can't be ignored if NZ is serious about the Amphib Task Force.

 

[ngatimozart]

Interesting summary of naval law, though I never thought keel hauling was actual law. We did make a stoker walk the plank on the Waikato after a kangaroo court for been sick in his pit, even got the photos somewhere.

Stokers being stokers, no class. Our trick was hang em from the Hiab crane using the helo strop and let rip with a fire hose if need be. Usually the standard fine of a 2 and a 4 applied in the JRs. Have photos of the boys water skiing behind an IPC in the Marlborough Sounds. Much fun.

 

[aussienscale]

Would they be better off in the long run buying into the RAN's MH-60R buy ?

 

[RegR]

Would they be better off in the long run buying into the RAN's MH-60R buy ?

It probably all just comes down to cost, the number of sprites v Romeos that could be purchased for the same price will be hard to beat considering kaman just wants a buyer.

Then again govt could be just buying time until replacement frigate time and then buy new build helos to match although this will come in a period where alot of big ticket items such as C130/P3K/tanker etc all will require attention and therefore could be too much for our economy to handle depending on its health.

 

[recce.k1]

IMO aussienscale's right - it makes sense to be fully interoperable with the ADF especially in the maritime and joint task force environment that is being stood up by NZDF to work alongside ADF and the US by 2015.

(But as we bemoan defence expenditure here is a tad light and the bean counters and pollies sometimes (but not always eg NH-90) sign off on purchases that provide most-of but not all-off the capabilities that NZDF really want. Eg MB339's at 80% capability of the preferred Hawk at the time - seems odd to me that 20% of a capability can be dismissed by the stroke of a pen And what a dud the MB339's have turned out to be, at least if NZDF were allowed to buy Hawks in the first place they might still be flying today as an advanced trainer)!

However the SH-2G(I)'s haven't been bought - Defence has been green-lighted by Govt to officially assess them, we'll have to see what will eventuate.

IMO it will be interesting, the SH-2G(I) will give the NZDF a glass cockpit, spare airframes for maintenance rotations and better on board systems than the SH-2G(NZ).

Perhaps also NZDF has had a much stonger (and longer) relationship with Kaman than the ADF eg NZDF leased SH-2F's in the 90's in an interim capacity prior to the SH-2G's so perhaps this explains why NZDF are more willing to work in with Kaman re the SH-2G(I)'s etc (I'm curious as to why the ADF didn't also do something similar i.e. lease SH-2F's at the same time to give the RAN experience with the type)?

 

[aussienscale]

It certainly is a catch 22 I can see the attractivness of the S2 buy, but it has several issues. One of the biggest is staring down the barrell of an orphan fleet, Kaman can make all the promises in the world regarding support, but once they have flogged them off ? So in the long run this could be an expensive option.

Could it also be a possible route to the loss of a capability in the future ? with no real dedicated upgrade path etc, IMO, a Romeo buy would make a bit more sence backing off the RAN buy with the associated spin off's. But the ultimate of course is the dollars available ? Spend less now and probably bucket loads more later ? Yep that sounds like a good Government decision to make right there :

 

[recce.k1]

Spend less now and probably bucket loads more later ? Yep that sounds like a good Government decision to make right there :

Agree, I was rereading a Defence report the other day, which reminded me Defence stated they could fund all capex out to 2020 via depreciation and internal savings but from 2020 onwards they would require capital injections to replace the big ticket items Reg mentioned.

Let's hope NZG don't now add a possible SH-2G(I) helo replacement into that post 2020 mix! Alternatively they'd be foolish to expect the SH-2G(I) to last another 20-30 years (2015-2035/2045) - do they really think Kaman could support such an orphan fleet out that long?

Yes, catch 22, Romeos would be ideal, although SH-2G(I)'s could work out ok if only an interim (<10 year) solution assuming they can then fund its replacement mid 2020's (but even this must have associated risk as NZG would have to fund further on-board system upgrades to remain compatible with the ADF Romeos). Would love to be on the project team assessing all this!

 

[chis73]

With respect to a future Seasprite purchase, I think it's a good idea to look back at how NZDF operated it's Westland Wasps.

We operated the Wasp for 32 years, utilising a total of 18 airframes. For the latter half of it's life it was a "legacy platform" for the RNZN (in the sense that it was retired by the parent operator) -the RN started to retire the type in 1982 (it was completely out of service by 1988). In addition to NZ - Malaysia, Indonesia & Brazil operated the type after it was retired from british service.

Initially we had 2 Wasps, bought new in 1966, with another new one purchased in 1971. These operated from 2 Leander class frigates and the survey vessel Monowai. One Wasp was written off in 1973 (another damaged in 1977 and repaired, then crashed & written off in 1993). We operated a loaner from Westland (ex-RN) twice in the 70's, and eventually bought it in late 1979 (it was written off in 1992). So, during this period we had 2-3 Wasps operational, with pretty much the same number of ships, & no spares.

We bought 4 recently retired ex-RN Wasps (of similar vintage as our new ones) in 1982-83 (as well as acquiring two more Leander frigates to operate from), plus 10 airframes as spares from 1985 to 1989. One of the spares was repaired and introduced into service in 1994 (as a replacement for the Wasps lost in 1992-93). From 1988, we also had Endeavour capable of operating a Wasp, bringing the number of platforms up to 6. After 1995 the number of helo-capable ships began to decrease - Southland retired in 1995, Monowai in 1997, & Waikato 1998. The Wasp was retired from RNZN service in 1998, replaced by the interim leased SH-2Fs.

So, from 1982-1993 we had 7 operational Wasps & 6 helo-capable ships, reducing to 6 Wasps from 1994. The key though, was the 10 attrition airframes. Granted, not all of the Wasps or all of the vessels would be available at any one time (probably 50-75% a more likely figure). The Wasp was a pretty simple design (as far as any helicopter can be) - single engine, no complex avionics or weapon systems. As a piece of military equipment it was completely obsolete. None of the operators got more than 16 years service from the Wasp after it was retired by the RN.

Now contrast this with the SH-2G Seasprite in RNZN service. It was a legacy platform from day one (in service RNZN 2001, retired from US Reserves at the same time). We are the only new-build operator. We currently have 5 helo-capable ships (maybe 7 in a few years), 5 Seasprites, and no spares. So pretty much, we're back in the same situation as the early 80's.

If we buy the ex-RAN Seasprites, I think it would be best to keep the current Seasprites as attrition spares. That's just considering them as an interim purchase. I can't see where support for the Seasprite will come from in 10 years time. I think we've missed the boat by 10 years (ie. we are 10 years out of step compared to where we were with the Wasps when they were retired by the RN).

Additionally, NZDF is today a smaller organisation under much tighter budgetary restraint than in the 1970s & 80s.

Chis73

 

[recce.k1]

With Govt DWP stating the Seasprites are to be upgraded or replaced around 2015, perhaps Defence could argue (using the Wasp as a precedent) that any additional Seasprites are an interim "upgrade" ... and replacements will need to be sought prior to the ANZAC Frigate replacement in the early 2020's (early 2020's to allow for 2-3 years to reach IOC and then active service etc)

 

[Zhaow]

I highly doubt the SH-2G Super Seasprite's would be kicking around after 2020. Their is no manufacturing base and tooling left at their Kaman Factory in Bloomfield, Ct. Their best bet is go with either the Eurocopter's NHIndustries NH90, AgustaWestland AW101 or Sikorsky's MH-60R Seahawk or the CH-148 Cyclone

 

[ngatimozart]

The SH2G(I) Seasprites are zero timed being sold "refurbished as new aircraft" so theoretically they have 15+ years operational life in them (25 if in NZ service). If you have a look back at the NZG releases on this particular assessment they are talking about a long term acquisition i.e., 15+ years if, and only if, all of the boxes are ticked. If there are a goodly stock of spares and three aircraft are bought for use as attritional airframes then we can deal with any issues Kamans lack of service and an orphan fleet may raise. Also it must be remembered most of the RANs issues with the SH2G(A) were of their own making.

With Govt DWP stating the Seasprites are to be upgraded or replaced around 2015, perhaps Defence could argue (using the Wasp as a precedent) that any additional Seasprites are an interim "upgrade" ... and replacements will need to be sought prior to the ANZAC Frigate replacement in the early 2020's (early 2020's to allow for 2-3 years to reach IOC and then active service etc)

If the current assessment tums into an acquisition then the DWP statement is met because the Seasprites will have been upgraded and replaced. The NZG would be at pains not to buy a helo replacement at the same time as an ANZAC replacement. This is also around the time of the P3K2 replacement with P8. So if they can get 15 - 18 years service out of the SH2G(I)s then a helo replacement will occur not long after the ANZAC replacement. When you think about it $150 million for 11 zero timed as new helos, spares, simulator etc., is a bargin and they will be going into this with eyes wide open.

With respect to a future Seasprite purchase, I think it's a good idea to look back at how NZDF operated it's Westland Wasps.

We operated the Wasp for 32 years, utilising a total of 18 airframes. For the latter half of it's life it was a "legacy platform" for the RNZN (in the sense that it was retired by the parent operator) -the RN started to retire the type in 1982 (it was completely out of service by 1988). In addition to NZ - Malaysia, Indonesia & Brazil operated the type after it was retired from british service.

Now contrast this with the SH-2G Seasprite in RNZN service. It was a legacy platform from day one (in service RNZN 2001, retired from US Reserves at the same time). We are the only new-build operator. We currently have 5 helo-capable ships (maybe 7 in a few years), 5 Seasprites, and no spares. So pretty much, we're back in the same situation as the early 80's.

If we buy the ex-RAN Seasprites, I think it would be best to keep the current Seasprites as attrition spares. That's just considering them as an interim purchase. I can't see where support for the Seasprite will come from in 10 years time. I think we've missed the boat by 10 years (ie. we are 10 years out of step compared to where we were with the Wasps when they were retired by the RN).

Additionally, NZDF is today a smaller organisation under much tighter budgetary restraint than in the 1970s & 80s.

Chis73

I can see your point very well Chris but in this case we are looking at zero timed as new aircraft. The assessors and the NZG (pollies & bean counters) will be very aware of the problems we have had with our current Seasprites. However they are not always known for their good decision making. It maybe that a deal is done for as much of the Kaman support systems etc., being acquired & bought to NZ to such as Safe Air at Woodbourne. What has not been publicly stated is the size of the spares package that comes with the SH2G(I).

It certainly is a catch 22 I can see the attractivness of the S2 buy, but it has several issues. One of the biggest is staring down the barrell of an orphan fleet, Kaman can make all the promises in the world regarding support, but once they have flogged them off ? So in the long run this could be an expensive option.

Could it also be a possible route to the loss of a capability in the future ? with no real dedicated upgrade path etc, IMO, a Romeo buy would make a bit more sence backing off the RAN buy with the associated spin off's. But the ultimate of course is the dollars available ? Spend less now and probably bucket loads more later ? Yep that sounds like a good Government decision to make right there :

No it's not a route to loss of capability because the ones that went down that track are gone. It is as you say cost and the Romeo is just not an option at the moment.

I highly doubt the SH-2G Super Seasprite's would be kicking around after 2020. Their is no manufacturing base and tooling left at their Kaman Factory in Bloomfield, Ct. Their best bet is go with either the Eurocopter's NHIndustries NH90, AgustaWestland AW101 or Sikorsky's MH-60R Seahawk or the CH-148 Cyclone

The NFH90 is not an option even though we fly the NH90TTH just because of cost. The AW101 was discounted when the UH1H replacement was being sourced because of unsuitability and we have flight decks which are too small to take it and the CH148. The CH148 would also be discounted because of price.

There is something else to be taken into account. If we bought an interim helo now any replacement would occur in the 2020 - 2025 time frame when we have major platform replacements underway. Secondly, if we acquire these SH2G(I)s they are a known quantity and Kaman has a history with us. So if the NZG go into this deal then they will have assessed all risks and will have mitigations in place. Thirdly, these aircraft will have a similar lifetime to the new RAN Romeos so both navies will be looking at helo replacements at the same time. Fourthly, the Seasprites still use US and / or NATO weapons so unless we get real creative we will be compatible with both the RAN and the USN.