The risk is minimal and there will be ways of sorting that need not be discussed in the open literature or on forums like this.
Royal New Zealand Air Force
- Thread starter Lucasnz
- Start date
A Mk82 500lb bomb can do a of damage to a surface vessel. 5 Sqn have lots of practice dropping them.
Hell yeah, I wouldn't like to be under a MK82 as it hurtled down!
The only thing is free-fall bombs have severely limited 'surface' utility these days - great for sub-suface, which is what 5sqn train for, but for anything on the surface it has to be pretty-much a non-combatant or very lightly armed at most. That's simply because the P3 has to get in relatively close (& above) the target - and won't be too high as the bombs are unguided. Even a vessel with just a 20mm cannon could spray shells up to 3-4km (if the gun can traverse to enough of an upward angle) & give the P3 crew the jitters.
You certainly wouldn't take a P3 within cooee of a combatant vessel. Which again makes me ask why has there been no further talk of providing the P3K2 with self-defence flare/chaff type systems, which would be also important in it's overland role!?! Anyway I digress!
The P3K2 could be adapted to drop laser guided bombs I guess, but I suggest that would be more suited to it's overland role & again in relatively low-level conflicts. Better still would be a stand-off weapon, but can we seriously imagine the NZ Govt shelling out the $$ for that!?!
Kiwigov
Member
IIRC, there was an option in the 1980s refit for the RNZAF P-3s to have the wiring installed for Harpoon - but this was not taken up?
Would the new ISR capabilities of the P3K2 allow for the launch and guidance of Maverick missiles? Always assuming that such could be carried in the internal bay. The RNZAF/RNZN must have a reasonable stockpile of Mavericks, and the SH-2(G)s reportedly regularly undertake live launches for training.
IIRC the aircraft have been rewinged since then and the new wings didn't have wiring for external weapons installed due to costings. Saw something along these lines on a kiwi aviation forum. However, new technology is available where if hardpoints are available and not wired, the required data can be transferred to a missile via secure WiFi.
t68
Well-Known Member
If and when you guys get P8 Poseidon you will gain the capability of stand off interdiction with Harpoon and other armaments.
Defense Update
-8A Poseidon Fires Harpoon Anti-ship Missile - Defense Update:
NZG be to stingy to buy Harpoon. Mind you I wonder if the Konsberg JSM would work with the NH90, and in RAN case their Romeos. Maybe we could see if it would fit in them ex RAN SeaspritesIf and when you guys get P8 Poseidon you will gain the capability of stand off interdiction with Harpoon and other armaments.
Defense Update
Dunno if the Sea Sprites could carry it, it's a pretty big missile, not too much heavier that Penguin but dimensionally larger. Still I'd like to see that sort of capability on RAN ships and helos, I'm sure they'd be good for New Zealand too - if the government could stomach purchasing such weapons.NZG be to stingy to buy Harpoon. Mind you I wonder if the Konsberg JSM would work with the NH90, and in RAN case their Romeos. Maybe we could see if it would fit in them ex RAN Seasprites
The fact that you fellas have a weapon like Penguin on the Sea Sprites is still a pretty good helo-based capability, certainly better than ours right now.
It's better than ours right now too...
We don;t see the first of the SH2GI until late 2014 / early 2015. It's the SH2GNZ with maverick until the new Sprites go thru all the necessary intro to service so won't see a penguin fired by RNZN for a wee while yet.Ah, didn't realise yours weren't wired up for it - thanks for the info!It's better than ours right now too...
Sadly, I think it's a fair assessment to say the entire reason NZ is getting the Penguin at all is that it is all the ex-RAN Seasprites are configured to fire currently.The NZ government doesn't seem to be prepared to fork out one extra brass razoo for integrating anything else (such as Hellfire - which incidently has been done before - on USN Seasprites in the Gulf War). Bargain basement stuff again as usual.
Penguin is a pure anti-ship missile; it would be nice if there was something else available that was a little more flexible - especially as we are supposedly all about jointness & amphibious-ness nowadays. Maverick could at least be used against land targets, even though it was not as good in the anti-ship role.
Similarly, I would be quite surprised if an effort was made to integrate Penguin on the Orions.
Chis73
Penguin is a pure anti-ship missile; it would be nice if there was something else available that was a little more flexible - especially as we are supposedly all about jointness & amphibious-ness nowadays. Maverick could at least be used against land targets, even though it was not as good in the anti-ship role.
Similarly, I would be quite surprised if an effort was made to integrate Penguin on the Orions.
Chis73
In order to integrate the Penguin the Orions wings would have to be rewired and that is a very major and expensive undertaking. Maybe the Maverick can be integrated into the ex RAN sprites.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
This ADM article (2008) suggests it would be "relatively straightforward" to add in anti-ship missiles later (assuming they are already P-3 certified and with the P-3K2's mission systems etc).
I wouldn't have thought Maverick would be considered optimal nowadays (in a JATF or SE Asian context) and presumably the RNZAF is studying RAAF options for new generation stand-off weapons before they reach a decision, but hasn't a replacement for the AP-3C's Harpoon been delayed (and now that their P-8 purchase has advanced will there be a need for a replacement)?
RAAF Stand-off Missiles – Fire and Forget? | Australian Defence News & Articles | Asia Pacific Defence Reporter
Last edited:
Kiwigov
Member
The additional utility of the P3K2 re the joint force was why I was interested in its possible integration with Maverick, as an off-the-shelf (literally from RNZAF stores) solution to applying a PGM to priority ground targets in a permissive environment.
I know it wouldn't fit with the usual peacekeeping policy, but in a peace-making scenario it would surely be very useful to have a long-endurance asset available to identify, target and deliver a PGM. Useful deterrence for the opposition to know that, too.
Clearly Harpoon and Penguin can't be applied in that environment, and are - afaik - a good deal more costly per round in any case.
A little off topic but talking of P3K2, I see the RAAF is to get 8 x P8's for Aus$4B - including support etc etc. That's $500m per aircraft. Add inflation between now & when RNZAF looks at a P3K2 replacement, and I hate to think of what they might then cost. Remember too that NZ$ is almost 1:1 with Aus$.
Whilst I would settle for nothing less than the P8 personally, I can imagine the RNZAF will have one hell of a s**t-fight trying to get $$$ approval for even 2 of these
I know we all accept a 2-tier MPA fleet is best going forward, but wow that's a lot of $$$. Trouble is the P8 is (currently) the right aircraft for the job & would probably be in service for 40-50 years so actually makes a lot of sense, esp. with the B737 platform likely to remain in production for a long time yet.
Last edited:
Well the Aussies have bought in before the aircraft has reached full rate of production so that will be a factor on current pricing. Plus you have to look at what else is included in that package. Things like spares simulators etc. So $500 million per aircraft is clearly incorrect. I think that you'll find that once the aircraft has reached full rate of production and other orders are received that the unit price will drop. Finally the P8 is far more than just a MPA. It is a Multi Mission Aircraft that does ISR as well as MPA and quite probably something else that may not be known publicly. There is nothing else that comes close to the P8MMA and the NZG know that.A little off topic but talking of P3K2, I see the RAAF is to get 8 x P8's for Aus$4B - including support etc etc. That's $500m per aircraft. Add inflation between now & when RNZAF looks at a P3K2 replacement, and I hate to think of what they might then cost. Remember too that NZ$ is almost 1:1 with Aus$.
Whilst I would settle for nothing less than the P8 personally, I can imagine the RNZAF will have one hell of a s**t-fight trying to get $$$ approval for even 2 of these
I know we all accept a 2-tier MPA fleet is best going forward, but wow that's a lot of $$$. Trouble is the P8 is (currently) the right aircraft for the job & would probably be in service for 40-50 years so actually makes a lot of sense, esp. with the B737 platform likely to remain in production for a long time yet.
Yep totally agree that's not actually $500M per airframe, yes that's just the indicative average but it does show the sort of price range we can expect. Yes there will be quite a support overhead component in that pricing - quite possibly in the range of 50%, but we too will incur such costs. Although granted, as you say - by the time we look to get the P8 it should be a mature platform that is under 'mass' production as the world's various P3 fleets finally get replaced. No doubt many countries will opt for a 2-tier fleet with twin-turbo prop MPA's as well, which is pretty well guaranteed in NZ's case I'd say.
I only hope the Govt of the day do realise that a full mil-spec MPA is an absolute requirement - but the key to selling the P8 will be ensuring the NZDF as whole work closely with the MinDef to define a exceptionally well prepared, comprehensive needs analysis.
You & I know the P8 is the only (manned) platform currently available that will enable us to actually patrol our EEZ, but if the project team approach it assuming Govt will agree, they'll fail!
Anyway, I saw (single) P3's over Auckland twice tonight, one was a nice long sweeping pass in front of the gym where I had a ring-side seat on the x-trainer. That HAS to be a good omen!!! :fly
Last edited:
What about the Japanese Kawasaki P-1?
There is a debate in some circles why they are even attempting to pursue their own tier 1 platform - this as well as the C-2. Domestic industrial reasons with a touch of vanity project trumping capability and NatSec. I am quite the Japanophile and a resident here, but those two projects don't inspire much confidence in me as an actual Taxpayer. Even less in the NZ context.
Australia does calculate its acquisition costs differently to NZ, however the P8 will not be cheap and the price tag will make eyeballs dropout. At the end of the day to acquire 4 P-8's and small basic patrol platform based on the B350ER is still going to be essentially a $2 Billion project.A little off topic but talking of P3K2, I see the RAAF is to get 8 x P8's for Aus$4B - including support etc etc. That's $500m per aircraft. Add inflation between now & when RNZAF looks at a P3K2 replacement, and I hate to think of what they might then cost. Remember too that NZ$ is almost 1:1 with Aus$.
Whilst I would settle for nothing less than the P8 personally, I can imagine the RNZAF will have one hell of a s**t-fight trying to get $$$ approval for even 2 of these
I know we all accept a 2-tier MPA fleet is best going forward, but wow that's a lot of $$$. Trouble is the P8 is (currently) the right aircraft for the job & would probably be in service for 40-50 years so actually makes a lot of sense, esp. with the B737 platform likely to remain in production for a long time yet.
The political dimension is clear - on one side of the house you will likely get the above or similar capability or close to it. On the other side of the house you will get only a second tier platform and certainly not a tier 1 replacement for the P3K2. That assumption is of course based on current political discourse and defence posture, which in my view is unlikely to change within the next decade when the big decision will finally be made.