Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[RegR]

So we are buying 10, I wonder what's happened to the 11th?

The 11th seasprite will probably be like the 105th NZLAV which remained with the manufacturer in country as a testbed for any refinements/improvements/problem solving etc to be passed on to the rest of the fleet when sorted.

Still leaves us with enough frames to get the job done, the extra 3 will take up the pressure the current 5 was suffering from. 2 flights will be able to operate off Canterbury in a GP role more readily now as opposed to a rarity before due to fleet constraints.

 

[old faithful]

When the sprite is in GP role, how many pax can they carry, plus the crew of three?

 

[RegR]

When the sprite is in GP role, how many pax can they carry, plus the crew of three?

Up to 5 pax but thats getting cosy so all mission dependant, obviously MH60 or NH90 can carry more but thats the trade off with space and size I suppose.

 

[ngatimozart]

In order to get a basic idea of the specs I've copied this from the Kaman brochure on the SH2G:

Wide array of weapons systems
The SH-2G’s specialty is over-the-horizon operations from
small ships – Super Seasprite extends the reach of the ship’s
sensors and weapons by a factor of 10! Delivering beyond-the-
horizon reach and keeping the ship out of harm’s way – the
SH-2G is the ultimate maritime force multiplier.

On-board radar, FLIR, ESM and acoustic data processor
enable the SH-2G to independently exhibit a wide array of
surface and submarine contact data. Fully integrated weapons
allow delivery of Penguin or Maverick air-to-surface missiles,
advanced lightweight ASW torpedoes, and side suppression
arms such as the 7.62 or 12.7 mm general-purpose machine
gun. The SH-2G is designed and certified to deliver the widest
array of weapons.

The SH-2G can carry two MK-46 torpedoes; two AGM-119
Penguin or two AGM-65 Maverick air-to-surface missiles; two
MK-11 depth charges; flares for self-protection; 7.62 mm or
12.7 mm door-mounted machine guns.

Engines Twin T700-GE-401 gas turbine 1,723 shp
• Dimensions main rotor 44 ft/13.41 m
• Height 13.5 ft/4.09 m
• Length 52.5 ft/16.0 m
• Gross weight 14,200 lbs
• Useful load 5,070 lbs/2,296 kg
• Cruise 124 kts
• VNE 150 kts
• HIGE 17,600 ft/5,364.4 m
• Max rate of climb 2,070 fpm
• Service ceiling 20,400 ft/6,217.9 m
• Specific Fuel Consumption 0.464 lbs per hp/hr
• Max range 540 NM
• Endurance 5.3 hours
• Crew 1 pilot, 1 TACCO/co-pilot, 1 sonar operator (optional), up to 8 fully armed troops
• Tail rotor 8.0ft/2.43 m
• Width 11.6ft/3.53 m
• External Load 4,000 lbs/1,812 kg
• HOGE 14,600 ft/ 4,450.1 m

http://www.kaman.com/files/file/PDFs/Helicopter PDFs/Seasprite.pdf

The "no hands" autopilot system that gave the RAN a headache, either has been removed or will be removed before entry into RNZN service. In answer to questions about the integration of the maverick missile, from the Kaman material one would presume that the RNZN can use both the maverick and the penguin. I note that it is able to carry two penguin missiles, so would it be fair to presume that the RAN CofG issues were more autopilot software related, rather than the physical mass of one missile?

When the sprite is in GP role, how many pax can they carry, plus the crew of three?

According to Kaman the SH2G can carry 8 fully armed troops.[/b] Kaman Helicopters | SH-2G Super Seasprite

Unlikely. Naval helicopters are configured either for ASW or ASuW roles. The MH-60R 'Romeo' Seahawk is the only one I know of which is kitted out for both ASW and ASuW roles and is able to perform either/both during a flight. The NFH-90 may have a similar utility without requiring hardware changeout, but I am not certain.

It is an open question whether a small naval helicopter like the Seasprite would even have space available for both ASuW and ASW systems, nevermind whether anyone would pay to develop a dual-use cockpit and avionics package.
-Cheers

Todj, from what Kaman say the SH2G can do both the ASW and ASuW role - whether or not both roles on the same flight is another story.

 

[Todjaeger]

Todj, from what Kaman say the SH2G can do both the ASW and ASuW role - whether or not both roles on the same flight is another story.

Interesting. I noted that it was listed as having an acoustic processor, but did not see any listing for either a dipping sonar, or sonobuoys.

That does bring me back to the question of whether or not the helicopter needs to be reconfigured between ASuW and ASW, and if reconfiguration is required can that be done in a ship's hangar or is that more something which requires a refit.

I suppose my concern now is that with the NZDF set to get 10 Seasprites, there might be a wish to operate them for a generation or so resulting in the NZDF operating an orphan naval helicopter which does not have the capabilities of the major naval helicopters in service.

-Cheers

 

[Cadredave]

I suppose my concern now is that with the NZDF set to get 10 Seasprites, there might be a wish to operate them for a generation or so resulting in the NZDF operating an orphan naval helicopter which does not have the capabilities of the major naval helicopters in service.

To me what gets lost between the arguments of the SH2G/60R is that there are not too many helos in this class that can be operated on our fleet of ships from the ANZAC, CAN and the OPV disregarding the IPV of course, 60R can operate of the first two classes but not the OPV if im correct. If RNZN plans better hopefully our next Frigate/OPV buys will be based on a common hull with the ability to operate the same class of naval helo imo.

NZDF true to past buys has taking the path of least risk and resistance knowing full well the climate that we operate in here in NZ. Its common sense to me at least that the SH2G(I) was a prudent buy at this time, NZDF can deal with the issue of a orphan fleet during the MLU and plan on a succesor once the large capital replacements have been brought and accepted into service for everything else that has a higher priority in the next decade or two.

CD

 

[ngatimozart]

Interesting. I noted that it was listed as having an acoustic processor, but did not see any listing for either a dipping sonar, or sonobuoys.

That does bring me back to the question of whether or not the helicopter needs to be reconfigured between ASuW and ASW, and if reconfiguration is required can that be done in a ship's hangar or is that more something which requires a refit.

I suppose my concern now is that with the NZDF set to get 10 Seasprites, there might be a wish to operate them for a generation or so resulting in the NZDF operating an orphan naval helicopter which does not have the capabilities of the major naval helicopters in service.

-Cheers

I've been hunting around trying to find the specs for these helos and what its ASW fit out is if any. I thought there might've been something under the RAN SH2G(A) but nothing. I note that it was mentioned earlier that the RNZN use the frigates to find the sub and the helo to launch a weapon on it, which to me seems somewhat inefficient. Logically I would've thought that you would have sensors and weapons on both platforms. However pollies always like to complicate things in all possible ways.

 

[kiwi in exile]

I
I suppose my concern now is that with the NZDF set to get 10 Seasprites, there might be a wish to operate them for a generation or so resulting in the NZDF operating an orphan naval helicopter which does not have the capabilities of the major naval helicopters in service.

-Cheers

I agree and sadly think this is not limited to naval helos. The RFI for updating the Orions ASW systems has only just come out- long overdue. And still no mention on giving them anti-ship missiles. How can an MPA have a deterrent value if it doesn't have anti ship missiles. The orions should have been wired for missiles when we lost the ACF. Our frigates don't have anti ship missiles and the NZ gov't has only just released a RFT for updating their combat systems. Until now they have relied on 8 sea sparrows for air defence. Our allies have all moved on to ESSM's. In their current state the ANZACs are fine for fighting pirates and the S Pacific, but I wouldn't want to send them to a real war zone.

 

[King Wally]

I agree and sadly think this is not limited to naval helos. The RFI for updating the Orions ASW systems has only just come out- long overdue. And still no mention on giving them anti-ship missiles. How can an MPA have a deterrent value if it doesn't have anti ship missiles. The orions should have been wired for missiles when we lost the ACF. Our frigates don't have anti ship missiles and the NZ gov't has only just released a RFT for updating their combat systems. Until now they have relied on 8 sea sparrows for air defence. Our allies have all moved on to ESSM's. In their current state the ANZACs are fine for fighting pirates and the S Pacific, but I wouldn't want to send them to a real war zone.

Could not agree more, those Orions really should be fast tracked for Anti-ship missiles. The ANZAC's too in my opinion. If your going to abandon your Air Combat Force you really need to invest elsewhere to provide some form of compensation.

 

[RegR]

According to Kaman the SH2G can carry 8 fully armed troops.[/b] Kaman Helicopters | SH-2G Super Seasprite

I've seen the cabin of a sprite and I would be surprised if you could get 8 extra pers alone let alone 8 "fully armed" troops in the cabin along with the crewman and naval fitout. Maybe fully armed these days means a pistol and your ID card? Would a huey even be able to hold 8 pax with weapons, webbing and packs?

Also why is it going to take so long to get them in country if they are just sitting in storage? We are not building them from the ground up and are not learning an entirely different aircraft so should just be a matter of regeneration and transition. Understand we may be taking out the Aus specific mods that caused all the hassle (would have thought they did that already) but still seems like a lengthy process for something we pretty much already have. Typical NZ introduction timelines I suppose, I would say taking your time means getting it right but sadly we know this to not always be true in NZDF projects.

 

[Todjaeger]

To me what gets lost between the arguments of the SH2G/60R is that there are not too many helos in this class that can be operated on our fleet of ships from the ANZAC, CAN and the OPV disregarding the IPV of course, 60R can operate of the first two classes but not the OPV if im correct. If RNZN plans better hopefully our next Frigate/OPV buys will be based on a common hull with the ability to operate the same class of naval helo imo.

NZDF true to past buys has taking the path of least risk and resistance knowing full well the climate that we operate in here in NZ. Its common sense to me at least that the SH2G(I) was a prudent buy at this time, NZDF can deal with the issue of a orphan fleet during the MLU and plan on a succesor once the large capital replacements have been brought and accepted into service for everything else that has a higher priority in the next decade or two.

CD

Using something like a Seasprite aboard one of the OPV's is IMO overkill, unless one of the main drivers is pilot training and maintaining proficiency in landing aboard ships at sea.

Apart from using a MAG-58 or M-2, a Seasprite embarked on an OPV is essentially unarmed due to the limited weapons aboard and the lack of a hangar armoury. AFAIK the OPV's also lack much of the shipboard electronics that naval vessels customarily have, so the Seasprite could not even datalink to send/receive with the OPV. Basically the chin radome and FLIR could be used for EEZ and SAR work, with positioning radioed to the 'mother' ship, and the rescue winch could be used to haul people off vessels or out of the water.

The other part of the concern was that now there will be 10 in inventory, I can foresee the NZDF being obligated to operate the Seasprite for 20+ years, which means the new Seasprites might not get targeted for replacement until the 2035 timeframe, or possibly even later. As time marches on, the Seasprite is going to be less and less capable when compared with other in service naval helicopters. Further, due to the design age and limited numbers in service, it is going to become more difficult and expensive to keep them 'current'. As an example of that, I would not be particularly surprised if in the future a version of either the NSM or JSM was adapted for use from NFH-90 and/or MH-60R naval helicopters, particularly since those weapons are in the same weight class as the Penguin AShM. However, the future user base for those helicopter designs is considerably larger so the potential integration costs can be spread out to a much greater degree. This means a higher potential programme risk for the NZDF, which in turn means a lower chance for the attempt to even be made.

As time goes on, a RNZN vessel with embarked Seasprite will have less to offer as part of a coalition taskforce. I worry that at some point down the track, Gov't will end up directing the RNZN to deploy assets somewhere that the assets themselves are realistically not up to the task. Much like the recent RNZN FFH deployment to Korea. As long as things do not become 'hot' the FFH is okay, but if things do become 'hot' then 8 Sea Sparrow SAM's, old Mk 46 LWT's with a hull-mounted sonar and a 5" gun and CIWS are likely to be insufficient should something hostile cross the FFH's bow.

-Cheers

 

[STURM]

As time goes on, a RNZN vessel with embarked Seasprite will have less to offer as part of a coalition taskforce.

In your opinion, would a newer Super Lynx fitted with Sea Skuas, torps and a data link be able to offer more?

As long as things do not become 'hot' the FFH is okay, but if things do become 'hot' then 8 Sea Sparrow SAM's, old Mk 46 LWT's with a hull-mounted sonar and a 5" gun and CIWS are likely to be insufficient should something hostile cross the FFH's bow.

-Cheers

I get your point but really depends on how 'hot' it gets doesn't it? Against a few FACs, a single frigate [or corvette] or a single shoe fired missile, the FFH could hold its own [on paper], but against a combined surface and air attack by multiple platforms, it couldn't - but then most vessels apart from a Tico, Kongo, Daring, Kirov, Arleigh or a KDX 5 woudn't be able to either. Apart from the sensors and weapons fit, situational awareness would also play a major part here.

 

[RegR]

Using something like a Seasprite aboard one of the OPV's is IMO overkill, unless one of the main drivers is pilot training and maintaining proficiency in landing aboard ships at sea.

Apart from using a MAG-58 or M-2, a Seasprite embarked on an OPV is essentially unarmed due to the limited weapons aboard and the lack of a hangar armoury. AFAIK the OPV's also lack much of the shipboard electronics that naval vessels customarily have, so the Seasprite could not even datalink to send/receive with the OPV. Basically the chin radome and FLIR could be used for EEZ and SAR work, with positioning radioed to the 'mother' ship, and the rescue winch could be used to haul people off vessels or out of the water.

-Cheers

I think some on here still confuse the role of the 2 OPV's with the role of say an ANZAC or again the MRV, and therefore consider any embarked air asset to cover all roles as well. Why would we send a lightly armed OPV into a situation that would require the onboard helicopter to fire a ship killing missile? Again this is why we have the frigates(and therefore the missile loading facilities). A MAG-58 would suffice for any OPV level threat, if that, any missile would just be a bonus and overkill at the same time. Anything more intense in nature then call up a FFH and all its associated offensive/defensive support capabilities both shipbourne and helo specific.

Underslung loads onto a DOC island, paific island liasion, ship-to-ship transfers or maritime rescue do not require any armament at all but a helo is still a very useful quantifier. The same arguments could be used for Canterbury to a degree however CY does not have magazines and yet will primarily embark seasprites, why? because they are naval helicopters. Just because a sprite can be armed does not automatically mean it will, differing roles utilising a common platform.

To avoid confusion we could embark a A109/NH90 onto the OPV/MRV, and we can, but at the end of the day the seasprites are NZs dedicated fit-for-purpose marinised helo complete with naval pilots and therefore are the type of choice for any RNZN ship, combatent or not.

 

[Todjaeger]

In your opinion, would a newer Super Lynx fitted with Sea Skuas, torps and a data link be able to offer more?

In a word, yes. My concern is not so much was the Seasprites will be capable of on entry into NZDF service, but what the situation will be in a decade or more. The Seasprite appears to have comparable capabilities to a Super Lynx, but as missiles reach their end of service lives, and/or newer and more capable missiles, torpedoes, etc enter service... The new kit will require upgrading and integration and if NZ is the only country doing it for the Seasprite platform there is the real risk that it may not get done.

I get your point but really depends on how 'hot' it gets doesn't it? Against a few FACs, a single frigate [or corvette] or a single shoe fired missile, the FFH could hold its own [on paper], but against a combined surface and air attack by multiple platforms, it couldn't - but then most vessels apart from a Tico, Kongo, Daring, Kirov, Arleigh or a KDX 5 woudn't be able to either. Apart from the sensors and weapons fit, situational awareness would also play a major part here.

True, but a RAN ANZAC-class FFH which has undergone the ESSM upgrade can carry and fire 4x the number of an improved SAM. While I would not expect a non-Area Air Defence vessel to fare well on its own vs. a saturation AShM attack, it should at least have some self-defence capability. Only having 8 SAM's gives very limited tolerance for risk.

-Cheers

 

[Todjaeger]

I think some on here still confuse the role of the 2 OPV's with the role of say an ANZAC or again the MRV, and therefore consider any embarked air asset to cover all roles as well. Why would we send a lightly armed OPV into a situation that would require the onboard helicopter to fire a ship killing missile? Again this is why we have the frigates(and therefore the missile loading facilities). A MAG-58 would suffice for any OPV level threat, if that, any missile would just be a bonus and overkill at the same time. Anything more intense in nature then call up a FFH and all its associated offensive/defensive support capabilities both shipbourne and helo specific.

Underslung loads onto a DOC island, paific island liasion, ship-to-ship transfers or maritime rescue do not require any armament at all but a helo is still a very useful quantifier. The same arguments could be used for Canterbury to a degree however CY does not have magazines and yet will primarily embark seasprites, why? because they are naval helicopters. Just because a sprite can be armed does not automatically mean it will, differing roles utilising a common platform.

To avoid confusion we could embark a A109/NH90 onto the OPV/MRV, and we can, but at the end of the day the seasprites are NZs dedicated fit-for-purpose marinised helo complete with naval pilots and therefore are the type of choice for any RNZN ship, combatent or not.

My concern about embarking the Seasprites on the OPV's is that a dedicated naval helicopter is not a cheap piece of kit to operate, yet so many of the capabilities will not/cannot be used. Take the Seasprite radar which IIRC should be a Telephonics APS-143. The Seasprite could use that to detect a contact and then radar the contact position to the OPV, but AFAIK there is no way for the OPV to receive datalinked info. Same goes for any EO system aboard a Seasprite. In short, much of the SA the Seasprite can have/gather cannot be relayed to an OPV.

With those sorts of limitations, I would rather something like a marinized Power 109 with a rescue winch and perhaps some basic radar and EO sensors be employed.

That and due consideration must be given for any future vessels or replacements for the OPV's to allow more flexibility in terms of operations.

-Cheers

 

[ADMk2]

My concern about embarking the Seasprites on the OPV's is that a dedicated naval helicopter is not a cheap piece of kit to operate, yet so many of the capabilities will not/cannot be used. Take the Seasprite radar which IIRC should be a Telephonics APS-143. The Seasprite could use that to detect a contact and then radar the contact position to the OPV, but AFAIK there is no way for the OPV to receive datalinked info. Same goes for any EO system aboard a Seasprite. In short, much of the SA the Seasprite can have/gather cannot be relayed to an OPV.

With those sorts of limitations, I would rather something like a marinized Power 109 with a rescue winch and perhaps some basic radar and EO sensors be employed.

That and due consideration must be given for any future vessels or replacements for the OPV's to allow more flexibility in terms of operations.

-Cheers

How difficult would adding ROVER to a SeaSprite be? NZ already operates Tactical ROVER systems.

It wouldn't be as great as a full LINK 16 VMF installation, but it would be a simple way to get EO/IR targetting quality data back to the OPV...

 

[RegR]

My concern about embarking the Seasprites on the OPV's is that a dedicated naval helicopter is not a cheap piece of kit to operate, yet so many of the capabilities will not/cannot be used. Take the Seasprite radar which IIRC should be a Telephonics APS-143. The Seasprite could use that to detect a contact and then radar the contact position to the OPV, but AFAIK there is no way for the OPV to receive datalinked info. Same goes for any EO system aboard a Seasprite. In short, much of the SA the Seasprite can have/gather cannot be relayed to an OPV.

With those sorts of limitations, I would rather something like a marinized Power 109 with a rescue winch and perhaps some basic radar and EO sensors be employed.

That and due consideration must be given for any future vessels or replacements for the OPV's to allow more flexibility in terms of operations.

-Cheers

Totally agree with you on seasprite operating costs and limited intergration of ship-helo systems OPV wise but I suppose it is still better to have extra numbers of the higher tier platform and not use them fully rather then being left short (as was the case before) on numbers when needed. A sprite can be dummed down but alot harder to up-spec a A109 if required. The added costs are a trade off between purpose built and made to fit and when we are talking such a small fleet with a wide range of envisaged tasks, better to go with purpose built and numbers IMO.

I think some of the reason we went with the sprites (apart from the obvious favourable purchase cost) is actually due to the OPVs. The limitations on deck space/weight/operations would have precluded alot of other types even though they would have better taken us into the future, but to be usable from all RNZN deck equipped ships required compromise.

I would have rather seen MH60R/S (on the back of RAN order) or possibly even NFH90 (for commonality) for the major units and marinise the future 3 A109s for OPV use but can also see the benefits of an enlarged seasprite fleet to cover all, training/transition/single naval type/availability etc. The price tag of a completely new fleet (x3+) could have possibly killed off another capability somewhere else as well.

I guess its hard to find the perfect soloution but we got them now so look to the future and hopefully it can only get brighter.

 

[Todjaeger]

How difficult would adding ROVER to a SeaSprite be? NZ already operates Tactical ROVER systems.

It wouldn't be as great as a full LINK 16 VMF installation, but it would be a simple way to get EO/IR targetting quality data back to the OPV...

Honestly not sure. My understanding though is that while the Seasprites have the systems for datalinks (Link 11 at least, if not also Link 16) but that the OPV's themselves lack the needed systems to send/receive datalinks.

Totally agree with you on seasprite operating costs and limited intergration of ship-helo systems OPV wise but I suppose it is still better to have extra numbers of the higher tier platform and not use them fully rather then being left short (as was the case before) on numbers when needed. A sprite can be dummed down but alot harder to up-spec a A109 if required. The added costs are a trade off between purpose built and made to fit and when we are talking such a small fleet with a wide range of envisaged tasks, better to go with purpose built and numbers IMO.

I think some of the reason we went with the sprites (apart from the obvious favourable purchase cost) is actually due to the OPVs. The limitations on deck space/weight/operations would have precluded alot of other types even though they would have better taken us into the future, but to be usable from all RNZN deck equipped ships required compromise.

I would have rather seen MH60R/S (on the back of RAN order) or possibly even NFH90 (for commonality) for the major units and marinise the future 3 A109s for OPV use but can also see the benefits of an enlarged seasprite fleet to cover all, training/transition/single naval type/availability etc. The price tag of a completely new fleet (x3+) could have possibly killed off another capability somewhere else as well.

I guess its hard to find the perfect soloution but we got them now so look to the future and hopefully it can only get brighter.

In some respects, what I would prefer would be for Seasprites to be embarked on the FFH's, with the remaining Seasprites from the current buy undergoing maintenance, training and being used as heli-borne SAR/MPA to augment the Orions in and around NZ. Then if/when an OPV needs helicopter support, they operate a Power 109.

While I do want to look towards a brighter future, I remain pessimistically concerns that the bright light I see is an oncoming train...

-Cheers

 

[RegR]

Honestly not sure. My understanding though is that while the Seasprites have the systems for datalinks (Link 11 at least, if not also Link 16) but that the OPV's themselves lack the needed systems to send/receive datalinks.



In some respects, what I would prefer would be for Seasprites to be embarked on the FFH's, with the remaining Seasprites from the current buy undergoing maintenance, training and being used as heli-borne SAR/MPA to augment the Orions in and around NZ. Then if/when an OPV needs helicopter support, they operate a Power 109.

While I do want to look towards a brighter future, I remain pessimistically concerns that the bright light I see is an oncoming train...

-Cheers

Yes maybe marinise the 3 planned extras as a precaution regardless, can only provide options at the end of the day for the OPVs and even the MRV. Navy pilots would still be current as they all train on the A109s initially anyway. Maybe cost for a possible rather then a probable(actually definite) is a factor in holding back as surely at the least naval A109s would require marinisation, beefed up landing gear and a deck hook if they were a more permanent fixture on navy ships.

Sometimes the future of the NZDF does look like its going to be a train wreck, especially in its current form with morale, equipment and funding issues creeping into the picture.

 

[Dewey]

SSTD a higher priority

really depends on how 'hot' it gets doesn't it?

The most danger to HMNZS Te Mana off N. Korea is a replay of the Cheonan trap. Queued up by allied ASW assets an NZ Seasprite could potentially drop a depth charge on the midget sub or shoot Maverick/Penguin at the sub tender while the FFH remains at stand off range. Te Mana will be staying as far as possible out of the known range of N. Korea's acoustic homing CHT-02D torpedo, so it can't chase subs with its hull mounted sonar. The Anzac's really need fitting with something equivalent to Sea Sentor, sort of underwater chaff as fitted to the RN's bombers and T45's.