APDR says the diameter of CAMM is 166mm vs ESSM 254mm. I haven't been able to find anything on canister size (so around 1.53 Sea Ceptor for every ESSM). Given the reserved space for another Mk 41 launcher I can't see the no of missiles capable of been carried as a problem (the only issue is the budget)
Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Padman
- Start date
kiwi in exile
Active Member
Just quoting APDR, which stated that the change in VLS would save weight. I wonder what impact the other systems will have on weight? I'm not really familiar with the sensor systems mentioned in the article. I'm wondering if better radars mean bigger, heavier more powerful or if its a case of newer tech being smaller and lighter, like cell phones.
The upgrades detailed in the article sound good to me, good to see improved self protection systems. However, I'm still a little concerned that our naval combat force lacks offensive punch. ASuW we rely on a gun and practically non-standoff missiles, and ASW is limited by the lack of dipping sonar, sonobouys on the Sprites.
I wonder how accurate the article is. I share your concerns in lack of shipborne AShM and our limited ASW considering we are a maritime nation. Could you post a copy of the article please.
kiwi in exile
Active Member
I've tried to download the file and shrink it as much as possible but it's still to large an attachment to upload to DT.
The article is pg 62-64 of the June issue of Australian Pacific Defence Reporter.
You should be able to read the erticle online if you register (all you need to do is give an email address). Good luck
Australian Defence News | Asia Pacific Defence Reporter
kiwi in exile
Active Member
AFAIK there are no plans to remedy this in the future either. The P3's have almost finished a sensor upgrade program, we are in the process of gaining new naval helos, and the frigates are having their combat systems upgraded in the near future, but there are still quite big gaps in our combat capability across these platforms. I feel like we have missed a huge opportunity here, as I doubt there will be any significant further upgrades to these platforms before they are retired. So while on the one hand our capabilities are being greatly improved, we are still quite limited in our ability to actually Fight a war. This will say with us until 2025-30ish when we start to replace the ANZACs/P3's/Seasprites.
To me this suggests that current NZG thinking around NZDF is still having a force geared for low level conflict/peacekeeping ops.
Cool thanks for that. I have been emailed a copy of the article from another poster. I did register and I'm in. I hadn't realised I could do that. Much appreciated. There is a preceding article in the May issue as well.
kiwi in exile
Active Member
Another PR regarding the frigate upgrades:
RNZN - 16 June 2014 Anzac frigates to get maple-leaf makeover
RNZN - 16 June 2014 Anzac frigates to get maple-leaf makeover
I used to subscribe to APDR but then realised all content was available online without a subscription and that I was paying an inflated price for the hard copies that were always late and often didn't turn up at all.
kiwi in exile
Active Member
new navy today is out
http://navy.mil.nz/downloads/pdf/navy-today/nt179.pdf
has a write up on the frigate upgrade. Longer than the APDR piece.
I didn't know actor Mark Hadlow (LOTR, etc) was in the RNZN, a Lt Cdr no less. Reservist? I used to work at Chch City Council a few years ago where he was incharge of the events team. Very energetic man.
Regarding the noisy RNZAF bomb drops around Auckland, does the RNZAF have the ability to convert its stock of Mk 82 into Mk 62 Quickstrike naval mines? All it requires apparently is a new fuze. Would maybe be more useful than a slow and low drop of a Mk 82.
http://navy.mil.nz/downloads/pdf/navy-today/nt179.pdf
has a write up on the frigate upgrade. Longer than the APDR piece.
I didn't know actor Mark Hadlow (LOTR, etc) was in the RNZN, a Lt Cdr no less. Reservist? I used to work at Chch City Council a few years ago where he was incharge of the events team. Very energetic man.
Regarding the noisy RNZAF bomb drops around Auckland, does the RNZAF have the ability to convert its stock of Mk 82 into Mk 62 Quickstrike naval mines? All it requires apparently is a new fuze. Would maybe be more useful than a slow and low drop of a Mk 82.
Last edited:
Lt Cdr Hadlow was / is RNZNVR as far as I am aware. He was at Pegasus, the Reserve Division in Christchurch. He is a dwarf in the Hobbit movies. The P3s drop the Mk82s to practice their depth charge dropping skills. Can't remember the Mk of depth charge used. The Aucklanders are always whinging about something and some of the comments are quite pithy. They went into a big panic when they had a 2.9 magnitude earthquake last year. We are still laughing about it in Christchurch
Cheers for that I do like that conceptual image of Te Mana she looks fit for purpose and less cluttered top side I do hope they actually come out very close to that concept well done RNZN.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
In terms of the less cluttered topside (eg with the second mast structure largely removed) and with the knowledge that the ANZAC class is considered to be "top heavy" (generally speaking), does this mean the RNZN ANZAC's will become less top heavy and have a greater margin of stablity?
Certainly if one contrasts and looks at the RAN ASMD (and prior Harpoon) upgrades (thanks Assail) their ANZAC's appear to have much greater top weight nowadays?
I wonder if that also means that fitting additional capabilities in the future could be possible (such as anti-ship missiles)? If so would that be in a similar manner to the RAN ANZAC's with Harpoon canisters? Or as the Mk 41 VLS is apparently being removed could a strike length Mk 41 VLS be fitted in the future (in addition to the CAMM system) as there was meant to be two such spaces for such?
I wouldn't rule out a future anti-ship missile upgrade (Defence seem to be favouring staged upgrades, which politically and budget wise is somewhat "wiser" despite the time factors involved*), as according to the recent Defence Capability Plan the idea seems to be the NZDF acquire "enhanced combat capability" in the 2015-2020 timeframe (eg post the standing up of the JATF etc). I guess the 2015 DWP and no doubt follow-up 2016(?) DCP will be when something like this would be signalled?
(* Thinking about the political debate of the all encompassing P-3K Project Sirius upgrade that was cancelled by a change of Govt 1999. I feel the NZDF has been wise to stagger the recent P-3K2 upgrades eg surface/overland ISR upgrades, next underwater ISR upgrades, then stand-off weapon upgrades. Alas although not ideal that's the political reality in NZ especially with Opposition party's playing "politics" with defence funding and capability upgrades etc. The RNZN ANZAC's similarly have had/having staged upgrades).
To be honest reece I don't know since it's only a concept at this stage anything is possible but going off that image it does seem to indicate that a lot of weight could be removed and it does fit in with defence now gradually working in upgrades over a timed period and adding more capability instead of going for the gold platted option straight off.
I do see from the article that Link 22 will be added at a later date most probably once the ships come back in for a further planned docking period but good to see it already being planned for now.
CD
Two observations.
They are going from a lattice mast to a solid one and without knowing the mass of the equipment in that structure or the weight of the strucute itself it is not possible to assess the weight impact of the structural change. It may be less, the same or heavier.
The rendering shows the quarter deck remaining open. There is a considerable increase in bouyant volume with improvement in transverse stability thanks to this mechanism.
Correct Alexa hence why I said that I didn't know the specifics and it was only a concept drawing, but I do hope it does bode well for the top weight issues and is tied in with the phase one PSU which also included the partially platted quarter deck. Here's hoping it goes well during the phase two FSU.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Typical US publication, they don't even know Canada is in NATO. This is how Canada can ignore national defence commitments, the US public doesn't know jack$hit. BTW, like most Euro members, Canada was below the NATO recommendation of 2% GDP in 2013 at 1.5%.
Yes The upgraded Aus ANZACs are going for full enclosure to aid buoyancy whereas our ones enclosed half (also enlarging gym and ships laundry in the process), interesting as to why both navies have done this their way and what benefits/disadvantages are with both designs.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Just want to point out a couple of things. First this is a Kiwi thread, which means discussion of Canadian, NATO and/or Euro defence budgets is getting a bit OT. The other thing is the article was specifically referencing NATO & non-NATO European defence budgets. While Canada is indeed a NATO member, Canada is not in Europe which is why it would have been left off the list.
-Cheers
I cut Canada from the list since it's not part of Europe.
CAN in Pearl
Short item of Canterbury arrival in Pearl Harbour.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqbRxelxOPg&list=UUXo4WugjobSnTIs9WnDE3qA&index=1
unlike One News calling CAN a frigate.
Short item of Canterbury arrival in Pearl Harbour.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqbRxelxOPg&list=UUXo4WugjobSnTIs9WnDE3qA&index=1
unlike One News calling CAN a frigate.