Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[MrConservative]

No, simply because you said Bay has no hangar, I just said yes it has. By the way, this is another "misfortune of not precisely writing". What I meant was "a kind of Enforcer based LPD or like" by the terms of "Bay". Hanger issue was not the focus for me, bacause I of course think RNZN will optimized these design to the requirement they have (as you know, there are many Enforcer LPD with hangar). Need to carry 4 NH90 and a SeaSprite, no objection here.

For me, my mistake, my "not precise writing" causing your misunderstanding, and the status of this thread become more clear, thanks to your patiant comment. Thanks.

The Bay Class have a temporary shelter. That is not an operational hanger.
I am not here to baby sit your written expression and explain everything to you. Or reply to your questions either. I am hear to set standards and set right wrong assumptions. I am also not here to waste my time on your pedantic justifications.

As a new member you should post an introduction about yourself on the new members thread providing your background. Please do this before you post further on this or any other thread.

 

[MrConservative]

Has our OPV had the Seasprite armed while in service, does it compliment any such deployment at sea with the pengiun missile or machine gun available, if not fitted?

IIRC tests were done with a AGM-65 a few years ago with the old G model on the designated range in the Hauraki Gulf but no OPV was involved. I think that is about it. I would say that the capability development (if any) was shifted over to the new I model anyway. Cannot ever see a penguin deployed on a Sprite with an OPV anyway.

 

[Todjaeger]

IIRC tests were done with a AGM-65 a few years ago with the old G model on the designated range in the Hauraki Gulf but no OPV was involved. I think that is about it. I would say that the capability development (if any) was shifted over to the new I model anyway. Cannot ever see a penguin deployed on a Sprite with an OPV anyway.

The OPV's lack a magazine in or attached to the helicopter hangar. That means any weapons to be utilized from the Seasprites would need to be transported through the ship from the magazine to the hangar. While I imagine this could be somewhat annoying moving an M2 or MAG-58 and their ammunition, it would certainly could be done with relative ease. With a AGM-65 Maverick or Mk 46 LWT weighing in at 210+ kg, the situation is a bit different. Penguin AShM at ~370 kg would be even worse.

 

[Todjaeger]

if the rotor is intended to be armed and deploy as armed from that platform there also ammo bunkerage issues - and the armoury is a separate rating to be compliant.

ditto for fuel bunkerage

adding a permament rotor capability has a huge impact on hull design. its a non trivial exercise

Alexas could probably add some better insight into the specifics

I agree that including a helicopter and hangar, especially to support a potentially armed naval helicopter, requires due consideration and effort to include in a design. The part which I questioned from before, is the implication that including such features in a future design would automatically make those yet to be determined future designs larger than they otherwise would be.

One of the impressions I have gotten, is that for reasonable patrolling in NZ's EEZ, especially for the non-inshore patrolling, a vessel needs to be of a certain minimum size and displacement for safe and sustained patrolling. Too small a vessel and the crew is going to get tossed about as the vessel bobs about. Much like why the IPV's which were designed for patrolling within 24 n miles of the coast, are not getting as much use since the patrol distance has been increased to the 200 n mile EEZ limit.

 

[Zero Alpha]

One of the impressions I have gotten, is that for reasonable patrolling in NZ's EEZ, especially for the non-inshore patrolling, a vessel needs to be of a certain minimum size and displacement for safe and sustained patrolling. Too small a vessel and the crew is going to get tossed about as the vessel bobs about.

I think what we're really talking about in the NZ context is "A ship that isn't a frigate" but probably more than a 'typical' OPV.

Essentially the distinction between the two types is that one is designed to operate at the more dangerous end of the spectrum and the other isn't. So apart from weapons fit and sensor integration, we're still looking at a high-endurance vessel than can sustain ~18kts, embark at least one 10 tonne helicopter and operate it in SS5. Comms fit out needs to be sufficient to support not only itself, but potentially a small force ashore and the backhaul to NZ. There need to be a range of small boats (6 & 11m RHIBS, potentially the SMB), room for ~4 TEUs worth of stores and preferably a medical facility that could perform Role 2+. Room for approx 50 pers in austere conditions over and above ship's compliment and the embarked flight.

 

[donald_of_tokyo]

So sorry bothering you...

”But, I think they shall have CAPTAS-2 added, but not. It is either RNZN is not thinking much of ASW, or lack of resource, or both."

Yes. This is what I said. "ADD a TASS", because I knew they have a hull sonar. I said "not thinking MUCH of ASW", and never said "thinking NOTHING of ASW" as you translated. No, never. (Or does this two sentence have the same meanings? If so, I'm sorry for it. I am not a native English speaker). At least in RN threads on other sites, ship without any kind of Low Frequency Active Passive TASS is regarded as "not thinking much of ASW". Because I came from that world, I used that word.

"Lack of resourse" is yes just an assumption. As you said, it was apparent (actually lack of will to allocate resources) around 2000s in NZ; no Kariwara TASS on FFs, banning the 3rd frigate and all ~20 A4s. I think you say the situation has changed recently, I totally agree you kow much much better than me. I hope good trend goes on.

As a new member you should post an introduction about yourself on the new members thread providing your background. Please do this before you post further on this or any other thread.

Thanks. I did it. (I didn't know it, may missed some instructions when I registered here.)

You can bann me, it is your privilege. Every blog./thread needs such "control", I understand. But if you are doing so, I just hope you do it my mistake = too much speculations, e.g. Xover (I will totally agree). But if it is based on misunderstanding/bad English = TASS issues, I will be a bit sad.

Have a good day.

 

[Todjaeger]

I think what we're really talking about in the NZ context is "A ship that isn't a frigate" but probably more than a 'typical' OPV.

Essentially the distinction between the two types is that one is designed to operate at the more dangerous end of the spectrum and the other isn't. So apart from weapons fit and sensor integration, we're still looking at a high-endurance vessel than can sustain ~18kts, embark at least one 10 tonne helicopter and operate it in SS5. Comms fit out needs to be sufficient to support not only itself, but potentially a small force ashore and the backhaul to NZ. There need to be a range of small boats (6 & 11m RHIBS, potentially the SMB), room for ~4 TEUs worth of stores and preferably a medical facility that could perform Role 2+. Room for approx 50 pers in austere conditions over and above ship's compliment and the embarked flight.

Actually I have something else in mind.

What I have in mind is basically three different classes of vessels.

The first class would be a 'high' end replacement for the current FFH's. Something with high endurance at 18 kts, a 5"/127 mm gun, air defence missiles (more than just VSHRAAD at least), LWT, able to support 2 armed helicopters and/or UAV's, and able to be fitted with AShM, ASROC, etc. A vessel capable of independent operations in threatened/hostile environments, as well as able to provide a useful contribution to coalition task forces in the same type environments.

Below that would be two classes of vessel which are similar in terms of overall capabilities, but they would be designed for different operational areas.

The second would be an OPV-like vessel, able to provide patrolling in basically all NZ's EEZ areas except for near/around Antarctica, as well as meeting patrol obligations for S. Pacific islands.

The third would be a vessel designed for patrolling the far Southern Ocean and Antarctic regions, which would mean ice strengthening, and possibly an increase in LOA and beam to improve sea keeping.

One thing which I think would be sensible for the RNZN to adopt, would be a system of modular packages to provide air defence, ASuW, ASW, MCM, pollution control and other capabilities which different vessels might require depending on deployment. I would imagine that most of the first class of vessel's weapons would be permanent mountings, but there could be room for modules to add or increase capabilities. For the second two classes of vessel, I would expect that the modules a vessel would deploy with would depend on the expected requirements of a specific deployment.

The issues as I see them, are the problem of what modular system the RNZN should go with, and how much this would increase the complexity of the base vessel. A basic OPV is not all the expensive when compared to a fitted out frigate or destroyer. Adding in advanced comms and sensor suites, as well as a combat data system could significantly increase the cost. However, lacking such systems could also mean that any modular systems might be unusable.

 

[Lucasnz]

I think what we're really talking about in the NZ context is "A ship that isn't a frigate" but probably more than a 'typical' OPV.

Essentially the distinction between the two types is that one is designed to operate at the more dangerous end of the spectrum and the other isn't. So apart from weapons fit and sensor integration, we're still looking at a high-endurance vessel than can sustain ~18kts, embark at least one 10 tonne helicopter and operate it in SS5. Comms fit out needs to be sufficient to support not only itself, but potentially a small force ashore and the backhaul to NZ. There need to be a range of small boats (6 & 11m RHIBS, potentially the SMB), room for ~4 TEUs worth of stores and preferably a medical facility that could perform Role 2+. Room for approx 50 pers in austere conditions over and above ship's compliment and the embarked flight.

For operations South of Stewart Island NIWA suggests a mean significant all year wave height of 3.50 metres placing it in Beaufort Scale Sea State 6 from a 45 year model hindcast. This has significant implications for the size of ship that NZ requires for operations in the Southern Ocean. The Holland Class is designed for operations fight deck ops upto SS5 for which they required a length >100 metres, with board beam. It is interesting to note that the new RN OPV while fitted with a flight deck and being slightly larger than the Protector OPV have no hangar. This is replicated, in the slightly smaller Knud Rasmussen. I would suggest based on the overseas vessels and the sea state that you will never see a current OPV carry a helicopter into the Southern Ocean.

A significantly larger vessel in terms of capability an able to operate as a FF (either with or without modular systems) is required for operations south of Stewart Island, as noted by others. On the concept of modularity I would add a hint of caution as I pointed out in my submission to the Defence Review:

I believe the modular approach offers a number of fiscal advantages in that it reduces the overall capital costs associated with large number of major surface combatants fulfilling dedicated roles versus a ship required to carry out a wide range of roles. The fiscal disadvantage is that the number of modules must be sufficient to meet both immediate and future needs, thereby incurring potentially unnecessary costs if the number and balance of modules is not correct. There is also the issue that too many modules may have an impact on operational effectiveness due to the need to train personnel in the operation of each type of module.

One of the arguments in favour of separating out the OPV and FF role was that the modules / roles and training needs could be more clearly defined. For example in relation to the 3 vessel OPV a mix in a fleet of 12:

Modularity for two ships would consist of: - Environmental Protection x 3 - Survey x 1 - Signals Intelligence x 1 - Mine Countermeasures x 3

What I forgot to mention is that each ship could carry one to three modules at any one time, and that a reserve is allowed for in the MCM / Environmental Protection area for maintenance, training etc. The survey provides a degree of redundancy for other units in refit etc. I am not adverse to modularity - I see significant benefits - if the concept is approached correctly.

 

[kiwipatriot69]

For operations South of Stewart Island NIWA suggests a mean significant all year wave height of 3.50 metres placing it in Beaufort Scale Sea State 6 from a 45 year model hindcast. This has significant implications for the size of ship that NZ requires for operations in the Southern Ocean. The Holland Class is designed for operations fight deck ops upto SS5 for which they required a length >100 metres, with board beam. It is interesting to note that the new RN OPV while fitted with a flight deck and being slightly larger than the Protector OPV have no hangar. This is replicated, in the slightly smaller Knud Rasmussen. I would suggest based on the overseas vessels and the sea state that you will never see a current OPV carry a helicopter into the Southern Ocean.

A significantly larger vessel in terms of capability an able to operate as a FF (either with or without modular systems) is required for operations south of Stewart Island, as noted by others. On the concept of modularity I would add a hint of caution as I pointed out in my submission to the Defence Review:



One of the arguments in favour of separating out the OPV and FF role was that the modules / roles and training needs could be more clearly defined. For example in relation to the 3 vessel OPV a mix in a fleet of 12:



What I forgot to mention is that each ship could carry one to three modules at any one time, and that a reserve is allowed for in the MCM / Environmental Protection area for maintenance, training etc. The survey provides a degree of redundancy for other units in refit etc. I am not adverse to modularity - I see significant benefits - if the concept is approached correctly.

So would you see , based other ships who mentioned that dont have full helicopter facilities on their OPV, that having a hanger is surplus for us, not really needed, and money best spent on say modules,drones or survivability?

 

[kiwipatriot69]

So it would seem. Pity the OPV cant use the Seasprites as additional defence then, should they ever need too. A penguin missile would have what, five times the range of the 25mm naval gun and a lot more punch.

 

[Todjaeger]

So would you see , based other ships who mentioned that dont have full helicopter facilities on their OPV, that having a hanger is surplus for us, not really needed, and money best spent on say modules,drones or survivability?

It depends on the area and circumstances. Most OPV's whilst conducting offshore patrolling, do so within range of land-based aircraft.

Given the size of the area NZ has a patrol responsibility, many areas are not really within range of land-based aircraft except for long-ranged aircraft like the P-3K2, or the land areas do not have aircraft based on them.

One area I could see helicopters being used, would be to support Scott Base via vertrep and/or personnel airlifted. Not necessarily a common type of operate, but something which could be valuable if needed. Especially if there is additional issues regarding the Antarctic Treaty in the future, or demands to exploit Antarctic resources.

 

[RegR]

So it would seem. Pity the OPV cant use the Seasprites as additional defence then, should they ever need too. A penguin missile would have what, five times the range of the 25mm naval gun and a lot more punch.

I think if we need to use a penguin equipped seasprite then chances are the OPV is in the wrong place. We seem to be losing track of the OPVs core role and adding a bit of GST to it's CV again when it is obviously not equipped (nor is supposed to be) for 'that' role. Helos have non-pure combat roles as well, I would hazard a mag 58 would be the go to complimentry weapon for an OPV sprite in comparison to it's host (if and when required), anything more then we ideally should have sent an ANZAC otherwise someone has grossly over reached.

Remember it's not all war and gloom out there and helos have other uses beneficial to naval operations as do OPVs, especially in NZs context.

 

[Todjaeger]

I think if we need to use a penguin equipped seasprite then chances are the OPV is in the wrong place. We seem to be losing track of the OPVs core role and adding a bit of GST to it's CV again when it is obviously not equipped (nor is supposed to be) for 'that' role. Helos have non-pure combat roles as well, I would hazard a mag 58 would be the go to complimentry weapon for an OPV sprite in comparison to it's host (if and when required), anything more then we ideally should have sent an ANZAC otherwise someone has grossly over reached.

Remember it's not all war and gloom out there and helos have other uses beneficial to naval operations as do OPVs, especially in NZs context.

One of the significant potential capabilities of a naval helicopter is the volume search an airborne radar can conduct. Not knowing the comms and datalink capabilities of the OPV's not sure if they would be able to make full use, but the radar horizon of a helicopter is significantly greater than a ship's mast-mounted radar. This of course means that greater areas can be covered for patrolling, as well as for SAR and other applications.

As for a Seasprite engaging something with a Penguin AShM... Honestly I do not see that scenario having a good outcome, regardless of which platform the Seasprite is operating from. A vessel large enough to warrant an AShM, likely will also be able to engage the Seasprite prior to it getting within launch range of the Penguin AShM.

Other uses for a ship's helicopter is for things like VERTREP, and as a ship to ship, or ship to shore connector for personnel and under slung cargo. This is what I was alluding to with the reference to Scott Base.

Future OPV classes, if they might get deployed into areas where they could come into conflict with other vessels (anti-piracy patrols, hostile fishing vessels, etc.) where might require the use of force, should be able to deploy an armed naval helicopter in such circumstances.

 

[RegR]

One of the significant potential capabilities of a naval helicopter is the volume search an airborne radar can conduct. Not knowing the comms and datalink capabilities of the OPV's not sure if they would be able to make full use, but the radar horizon of a helicopter is significantly greater than a ship's mast-mounted radar. This of course means that greater areas can be covered for patrolling, as well as for SAR and other applications.

As for a Seasprite engaging something with a Penguin AShM... Honestly I do not see that scenario having a good outcome, regardless of which platform the Seasprite is operating from. A vessel large enough to warrant an AShM, likely will also be able to engage the Seasprite prior to it getting within launch range of the Penguin AShM.

Other uses for a ship's helicopter is for things like VERTREP, and as a ship to ship, or ship to shore connector for personnel and under slung cargo. This is what I was alluding to with the reference to Scott Base.

Future OPV classes, if they might get deployed into areas where they could come into conflict with other vessels (anti-piracy patrols, hostile fishing vessels, etc.) where might require the use of force, should be able to deploy an armed naval helicopter in such circumstances.

Exactly, extension of an OPVs reach (ours especially), logistic spt, overwatch, SAR, organic transport etc, these are more the roles I see our OPV sprite flight fullfilling vs missile launch options and the like and as I mentioned aerial gunnery (mag) at the most (and for good reason) in terms of offensive capabilty in conjunction. Perhaps the Otagos replacements or even possibly the touted 3rd OPV could bridge the combative devide more between OPV and FFH but our current vessels are not at that level or even envisaged to do so unless we again change stance and upgrade capabilities to suit. Combat and constabulary are peas and corn, similar yet vastly different and each with its area of expertise, wiser IMO not to mix the two.

 

[ngatimozart]

Exactly, extension of an OPVs reach (ours especially), logistic spt, overwatch, SAR, organic transport etc, these are more the roles I see our OPV sprite flight fullfilling vs missile launch options and the like and as I mentioned aerial gunnery (mag) at the most (and for good reason) in terms of offensive capabilty in conjunction. Perhaps the Otagos replacements or even possibly the touted 3rd OPV could bridge the combative devide more between OPV and FFH but our current vessels are not at that level or even envisaged to do so unless we again change stance and upgrade capabilities to suit. Combat and constabulary are peas and corn, similar yet vastly different and each with its area of expertise, wiser IMO not to mix the two.

I read somewhere a while back that the RN replaced all its helo mounted 7.62mm cal MGs with 50 cals because the 50 has a longer reach, more hitting power and keeps the helo out of 7.62mm rifle and MG range. Something we maybe should look at. I know that the Battle Lab was looking at the FN M3M 12.7mm back in 2014.

I would NOT want to go anywhere near a shooting war in a Protector Class OPV. There is no protection and no defensive armament, let alone any offensive armament. On the Moa Class IPC we used to say that we could attack the enemy as long as they were on our port quarter, within 1500 yards and could do no more than 12 knots :rotfl

 

[kiwipatriot69]

One of the significant potential capabilities of a naval helicopter is the volume search an airborne radar can conduct. Not knowing the comms and datalink capabilities of the OPV's not sure if they would be able to make full use, but the radar horizon of a helicopter is significantly greater than a ship's mast-mounted radar. This of course means that greater areas can be covered for patrolling, as well as for SAR and other applications.

As for a Seasprite engaging something with a Penguin AShM... Honestly I do not see that scenario having a good outcome, regardless of which platform the Seasprite is operating from. A vessel large enough to warrant an AShM, likely will also be able to engage the Seasprite prior to it getting within launch range of the Penguin AShM.

Other uses for a ship's helicopter is for things like VERTREP, and as a ship to ship, or ship to shore connector for personnel and under slung cargo. This is what I was alluding to with the reference to Scott Base.

Future OPV classes, if they might get deployed into areas where they could come into conflict with other vessels (anti-piracy patrols, hostile fishing vessels, etc.) where might require the use of force, should be able to deploy an armed naval helicopter in such circumstances.

Thanks tod, actually anti piracy was just the reason i suggested the potential for an armed role for our Seasprites, should say frigates be unavailable for whatever reason,and an OPV be substituted, or is this out of its league?As id imagine somali pirates wouldnt posses overmatch capability from what footage the media is showing.

I am aware of those helo's other roles from following its HADR missions in Fiji, and last years defence exersizes. Also, seeing you mentioned scott base, has a sprite ever deployed to Antarctica, or is it too not suited for the role, due to conditions?

 

[RegR]

I read somewhere a while back that the RN replaced all its helo mounted 7.62mm cal MGs with 50 cals because the 50 has a longer reach, more hitting power and keeps the helo out of 7.62mm rifle and MG range. Something we maybe should look at. I know that the Battle Lab was looking at the FN M3M 12.7mm back in 2014.

I would NOT want to go anywhere near a shooting war in a Protector Class OPV. There is no protection and no defensive armament, let alone any offensive armament. On the Moa Class IPC we used to say that we could attack the enemy as long as they were on our port quarter, within 1500 yards and could do no more than 12 knots :rotfl

Agreed a 50 does do alot better at making new friends from afar with it's bigger stick qualities (dependant on what our potential friends have of course). Always wondered what determines the best mounted calibre for a GP helo, hitting power? rate if fire? weight? amount of ammo etc. I too would assume bigger the better but I guess they must have their reasoning. I especially like the mini-guns the chooks mount. Too large/overkill for us? Is there such a thing in this instance??

Yes not a like shooting match anyway, for certain (limited) situations yes but way too risky vs a competent advesary in it's current form but I guess they know its limitations and its employment context and knowing our govt will definately keep them out of harms way (as much as possible anyway). Ah yes speed at sea, or lack of, a quality in its own right I'm sure.

 

[Todjaeger]

Thanks tod, actually anti piracy was just the reason i suggested the potential for an armed role for our Seasprites, should say frigates be unavailable for whatever reason,and an OPV be substituted, or is this out of its league?As id imagine somali pirates wouldnt posses overmatch capability from what footage the media is showing.

I am aware of those helo's other roles from following its HADR missions in Fiji, and last years defence exersizes. Also, seeing you mentioned scott base, has a sprite ever deployed to Antarctica, or is it too not suited for the role, due to conditions?

IMO (so take that for what is it worth...) the OPV's are not suited for anti-piracy operations, even off Somalia. Whilst the 25 mm Bushmaster should be more accurate and have greater reach than anything the pirates have, it has distinctly limited fire arcs. Anything approaching from behind the vessel could only be met with small arms fire, which might actually mean one of the pirate skiffs could bring more firepower to bear on an OPV, than an OPV could return fire with. From my POV, for something like anti-piracy ops, one wants overmatch, not essentially near peer level capabilities. The lack of a magazine in the hangar also means that no weapons for an embarked helicopter except small arms. A Penguins AShM would be overkill for one of the skiffs, a Hellfire would be sufficient. For one of the 'motherships' a Penguin might be needed, since the 25 mm Bushmaster would not be sufficient to sink such a vessel if needed.

As for a Seasprite deploying to support Scott Base, I am not aware of that ever having happened, and I suspect it has not yet. No idea whether the conditions there would permit a Seasprite to operate there, I suspect at present though the major issue would be getting a vessel close enough to Scott Base, with a mild enough sea state to permit helicopter operations. A properly laden Canterbury with her ice strengthening might be able to. I had more in mind future Southern Ocean operations with some sort of large, frigate-sized, ice-strengthened patrol vessel which might be able to approach Ross Island and/or McMurdo Sound close enough to get some shelter.

 

[t68]

Looking to the future if NZ went to third OPV having it designed from the outset to accomadate an armed recon helicopter will give goverment options.

Sooner or later goverment is going to have to replace the current Protector fleet under future force 35, but under the stratigic rational is by 2020 there should be an enhanced combat capabilty.

2020

The Defence Force will have enhanced its land combat capability through the Network Enabled Army Programme, mobility projects and weapons upgrades. Maritime capability will be enhanced through frigate systems upgrades and enhanced littoral warfare support capabilities.

NZDF - Future35 - Our Strategy to 2035

Increasing the combat capabilty of the possabile future OPV whilst not a true OCV will have the option of an heavier armed helicopter that can be multi role to carry out diffrent tasking as required to cover littoral or overland missions, which could be armed accordingly.

The helicopter can carry externally: 2.75in or 81mm rocket pods with seven or 12 tubes; a rocket machine gun pod (RMP) with three 70mm rockets and a 12.7mm machine gun with 200 rounds; machine gun pods with a 12.7mm machine gun with 250 rounds of ammunition.

A109M Light Multipurpose Helicopter - Army Technology

Using the A109 as a starting point an additional buy could give what amounts to an ARH light, A measured increase in capabilty from the Mag 58 hang out the door to ASW/ASuW capable SeaSprite. which hopefully one future force 35 is developed you will also increase you holdings of NH-90, Also using the larger OPV as a guide for replacing HMNZS Otago & HMNZS Wellington.

2035

By 2035 we will be operating new amphibious, air transport and surveillance, and improved C4ISR capabilities, . We will have a generational change in our Total Defence Workforce approach and its focus on integration

the A109M would also be a lead in to a CY replacement which hopefully would be something of an enlarged San Giorgio-class,I just feel its a natural evolution for JATF if it wants a task force that can work independently or as part of a larger coalition operation

 

[Todjaeger]

Using the A109 as a starting point an additional buy could give what amounts to an ARH light, A measured increase in capabilty from the Mag 58 hang out the door to ASW/ASuW capable SeaSprite. which hopefully one future force 35 is developed you will also increase you holdings of NH-90, Also using the larger OPV as a guide for replacing HMNZS Otago & HMNZS Wellington.




the A109M would also be a lead in to a CY replacement which hopefully would be something of an enlarged San Giorgio-class,I just feel its a natural evolution for JATF if it wants a task force that can work independently or as part of a larger coalition operation

Honestly I see little point or value in going down an armed A109 route for a naval vessel, when there are already naval helicopters in service which can be armed. The issue is not the availability of appropriate helicopters, the issue is that apart from the frigates, the hangars lack a magazine which then limits the helicopters to carrying small arms. The potential sensor coverage of a Seaspite should be significantly greater than an A109, unless one is developed into a naval helicopter, which would just be re-inventing the wheel, err... naval helicopter.

The one armament change I would prefer for the Seasprites would be for them to also be armed or fitted to launch Hellfires, either in addition to the Penguin, or in place of it. The USN has found that MH-60R 'Romeos' armed with Hellfires is likely to be of greater utility dealing with smallcraft than a single, much larger AShM like the Penguin.

As for the call for a third OPV, much would depend on what the targeted in-service date is, as well as the out of service dates for the current OPV's, as well as whether not on the RNZN opts to go for a split fleet of major combatants, OPV's, and Southern Ocean/Antarctic vessels or not.