Yep a fine looking vessel. Now I'm in no way a sea-dog so am completely naive on such things as vessel dynamics but to me she seems to be pitching fairly deep in that swell compared to the other vessel... although maybe she's sheltering the other vessel from the swell direction? One of the selling points about her bow was she'd be more gentle to vessels coming in for RAS but she's definitely pushing a reasonable 'splash' away from her, much more it seems than the other vessel... is it just that's she's running faster than she would in an actual RAS? Happy to have an expert put me in my place!
Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter Padman
- Start date
Yep a fine looking vessel. Now I'm in no way a sea-dog so am completely naive on such things as vessel dynamics but to me she seems to be pitching fairly deep in that swell compared to the other vessel... although maybe she's sheltering the other vessel from the swell direction? One of the selling points about her bow was she'd be more gentle to vessels coming in for RAS but she's definitely pushing a reasonable 'splash' away from her, much more it seems than the other vessel... is it just that's she's running faster than she would in an actual RAS? Happy to have an expert put me in my place!
Sorry for the one liner, but here is some more Youtube porn from Naval News, you guys across the ditch must be chaffing at the bit to see her arrive !
Great looking piece of kit and seems to have been a very successful program ! BZ
Great looking piece of kit and seems to have been a very successful program ! BZ
Nighthawk.NZ
Well-Known Member
My guess the frigate is riding the wavelength being 107m and 2,600tons... whereas HMNZS Aotearoa nearly (but not quite) 70m longer at 171 and 20,000tons heavier is just pushing through the wave...
if that makes sense...
I'd say she's doing a normal kind of RAS speed, around 16 knots or so, and her bow wave looks pretty well standard for that sort of speed. The nature of a hull travelling through the ocean is to generate areas of high and low pressure along its length. While the pressure profiles of each vessel when by herself are pretty constant at various speed (it does depend a bit on wave direction and height relative to the ship) when two are RASing the patterns interact, in sometimes unpredictable and occasionally unfortunate ways. Effectively, each pair of ship classes, if they do it often enough, find the relative position that is most comfortable for station keeping and the approaching ship aims to end up there at the end of the approach. With ship classes that don't operate together often, or when new classes are introduced, it can get a bit exciting the first few times it is done; so one normally starts with the distance between the ships greater than normal to allow time to take corrective action.
Yes that does sound logical - if she's sititng at 20000 tons plus then she will no doubt push thru swells... wonder what she'll look like in those huge southern ocean swells, with massive breakers.... hope like hell she proves up to it! She's apparently only due to do 1 trip to McMurdo every 2 years so she'll spend most of her career doing what Endeavour did & where Endeavour did it...only bigger & better!
Yep, from memory that's exactly what she was designed to do so as to not waste power climbing up the swell,I think that's the way I remember it being stated.
Even catches out the best of us ! When I was on the Hobart in the early 90's we were doing a RAS with Success in the EAXA and as we were breaking away we got a little close and got sucked in, our rear Stbd Quarter collided with Success doing some minor damage to both ships, was a bit of a tense situation to say the least
Cheers
There’s no excuse for that incident which is caused by either using too much rudder early or failing to take incremental steps in speed and easing away from the tanker. It’s caused by the suction areas around the bow of the tanker and stern of the destroyer compounding.Even catches out the best of us ! When I was on the Hobart in the early 90's we were doing a RAS with Success in the EAXA and as we were breaking away we got a little close and got sucked in, our rear Stbd Quarter collided with Success doing some minor damage to both ships, was a bit of a tense situation to say the least
Cheers
I would have thought RAS/UNREP approaches/departures are part of every COs pre joining ship handling training.
Nighthawk.NZ
Well-Known Member
isn't that what the EnviroShip Bow is all about?
It was a night RAS, can't remember the exact sequence of events and why it was not picked up but it was too much rudder too soon on the breakaway and the stern got sucked in.
I was actually asleep in 163 mess where the ship was hit a few bunks down !! never seen so many evacuate the mess without touching the steps on the ladders
Never fun being woken up by a loud bang and crash and the collision alarm sounding !!Cheers
Correct, you know Bill ? very good man indeed, his father was a bit of a legend as well.
Have not heard anything of Bill for some time, hope he is well ? One of my mates stays in touch with him from time to time as well
Cheers
Heard from him at Christmas; all seemed to be well - still living in Canberra and playing golf, etc. Apart from being friends, we were HODs in the same ship at one point; and then I was his CoS in his last posting in uniform - that was interesting.... Hobart was Bill's third, or maybe fourth, command? - Just checked third, LCH, FFG, DDG.
Served with Ming the Merciless as well although as I was a Mid and he a RADM, we weren't close!
Served with Ming the Merciless as well although as I was a Mid and he a RADM, we weren't close!
Last edited:
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
Hope I have mastered the link.
Te Kaha moving from Seaspan wharfside to the graving dock for planned work on the hull. Another step closer, but still massively beyond the initial time-line.
Still do not understand why they did not tie into the ASMD ? was there specific reasons why ? apart from stupidity and politics ?
Cost. Spend less money if possible.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I suspect that at least some of the decision makers and/or RNZN leadership really wanted the Mk 15 Phalanx CIWS retained, which IIRC would not have been possible if the RIM-7 Sea Sparrow was replaced with quad-packed ESSM.
I believe there were also some trade offs in terms of range, sea keeping, and deck height above the waterline which might also have been issues. These were things which had to be managed (and ballast added IIRC) in order to deal with the topweight growth in the RAN ANZAC-class frigates due to the margin limits and extra kit being installed.
Actually I now wonder if Australia is perhaps to wedded to ESSM. Its not an ideal weapon for a small ship like the Anzacs. I wonder if NZ would have had a change in mind if we had included CAMM into ASMD.
Going into the future it is likely that NZ will continue to use CAMM and platforms that are probably more suited to CAMM.
I do think for a two ship "fleet" not jumping on the ASMD, which was a considerable upgrade, was the lesser choice. It would have been faster, cheaper and generally/arguably better outcomes. But NZ still has their priorities. Giving up your gun layer CIWS and quading down on ESSM would have seemed scary over kill for budget shy NZ, but also in layered capability. How likely is NZ to fire missiles verse how likely are they to fire CIWS? CAMM is not without its charms.
As an Australian, its easy to say run it into the ASMD and be happy, but that doesn't mean ASMD would be a popular decision back in NZ. You have those who complain its an Australian conspiracy to milk more money and further reduction to vassal state status (which of course its not). Those who complain NZ shouldn't be upgrading anything and disband the military, let alone building a NZ battleship to go on Australian conquests. Combined with those complaining that it doesn't give enough capability for the reduction in CIWS and other features. You once you put offside the vegan care-bares, the rabid nationalists and any kiwi who doesn't trust Australia (isn't that all of them?), you have a pretty small support base for that decision.
looking back at the PR from the decision italics mine...
New Zealand's ANZAC Frigates Getting Combat Upgrades - Defense Industry Daily
NZ ANZACs(click to view full) It's time to modernize New Zealand's only serious combat ships. New Zealand bought 2 ANZAC frigates in the 1990s, as a cooperative venture with Australia using the MEKO 100 German design. F77 Te Kaha was commissioned in 1996, and F111 Te Mana was commissioned in…
www.defenseindustrydaily.com
Getting nations to agree on specifications for multinational ships is hard. Europe provides a near endless lists of attempts and failures. Also Canada's failure, probably puts Australia back into perspective as a defense supplier. Canada and its companies basically sold NZ on it being like a cheaper more efficient Australia. It was implied it was basically the same upgrade the Halifax frigates got. So a sure thing. A better fit. Cheaper. Wink. And you don't have to rely on those crafty devilishly handsome Australians.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
But why would Australia and the RAN have included Sea Ceptor as part of the AMCAP or ASMD upgrades, especially in place of the ESSM? The RAN first test fired an ESSM back in 2003 from HMAS Warramunga using a CEA illuminator and if memory serves, all the RAN ANZAC-class frigates from HMAS Warramunga onwards were launched with the ability to fire ESSM as opposed to the RIM-7 Sea Sparrow. The ESSM had been in RAN service for over a decade prior to the RNZN selecting Sea Ceptor for their upgrade, and ESSM had also been in RAN service for ~a decade by the time the CAMM completed trials...Actually I now wonder if Australia is perhaps to wedded to ESSM. Its not an ideal weapon for a small ship like the Anzacs. I wonder if NZ would have had a change in mind if we had included CAMM into ASMD.
Going into the future it is likely that NZ will continue to use CAMM and platforms that are probably more suited to CAMM.
I do think for a two ship "fleet" not jumping on the ASMD, which was a considerable upgrade, was the lesser choice. It would have been faster, cheaper and generally/arguably better outcomes. But NZ still has their priorities. Giving up your gun layer CIWS and quading down on ESSM would have seemed scary over kill for budget shy NZ, but also in layered capability. How likely is NZ to fire missiles verse how likely are they to fire CIWS? CAMM is not without its charms.
As an Australian, its easy to say run it into the ASMD and be happy, but that doesn't mean ASMD would be a popular decision back in NZ. You have those who complain its an Australian conspiracy to milk more money and further reduction to vassal state status (which of course its not). Those who complain NZ shouldn't be upgrading anything and disband the military, let alone building a NZ battleship to go on Australian conquests. Combined with those complaining that it doesn't give enough capability for the reduction in CIWS and other features. You once you put offside the vegan care-bares, the rabid nationalists and any kiwi who doesn't trust Australia (isn't that all of them?), you have a pretty small support base for that decision.
looking back at the PR from the decision italics mine...
New Zealand's ANZAC Frigates Getting Combat Upgrades - Defense Industry Daily
NZ ANZACs(click to view full) It's time to modernize New Zealand's only serious combat ships. New Zealand bought 2 ANZAC frigates in the 1990s, as a cooperative venture with Australia using the MEKO 100 German design. F77 Te Kaha was commissioned in 1996, and F111 Te Mana was commissioned in…www.defenseindustrydaily.com
Getting nations to agree on specifications for multinational ships is hard. Europe provides a near endless lists of attempts and failures. Also Canada's failure, probably puts Australia back into perspective as a defense supplier. Canada and its companies basically sold NZ on it being like a cheaper more efficient Australia. It was implied it was basically the same upgrade the Halifax frigates got. So a sure thing. A better fit. Cheaper. Wink. And you don't have to rely on those crafty devilishly handsome Australians.
Shanesworld
Well-Known Member
That's a pretty solid point. But we are the customer.
What about replacing phalanx with millennium. Lighter system, longer range, not us supplied(for the green party) but less rounds. Would clawing back 3 ton have helped?
What about replacing phalanx with millennium. Lighter system, longer range, not us supplied(for the green party) but less rounds. Would clawing back 3 ton have helped?