Not necessarily. The San Giorgio class was designed with a ramp arrangement that allows vehicles to move from the well deck, to the hangar deck, to the flight deck so there is the possibility of giving up the forward helo spot and storing vehicles and cargo on the flight deck.I do not feel that this is an adequate replacement for Canterbury as it lacks the increase in size compared to what is likely desired. Yes it can carry more people but it lacks the cargo needs. The well dock is great. But what loss of space comes from the carriage of helicopters.
Must be a different article than that I read...I just went and read the article and indeed the author is proposing a radical concept that would see three such vessels as the Algerian LPD along with the SOPV, and the tanker. Interesting but I cant see the OPV role being handled by such large vessels with high personnel and operating costs.
Totally agree... I seriously doubt that it is a serious option for replacing the ANZAC's.There's a bit more to an effective surface combatant than weapons fit ... speed, endurance, survivability, range, radar cross-section, hull shape for stealth etc. I really doubt up gunning a LPD or similar could be a serious option, they're designed from the keel up for very different roles.
I disagree.Totally agree... I seriously doubt that it is a serious option for replacing the ANZAC's.
One needs to keep in mind though that some of the features suggested above would require compromising other desired or needed capabilities. One also runs a very real risk in trying to fit too many divergent and/or conflicting capabilities into a single hull. One could end up with a vessel which provides a broad range of poor capabilities, without really being able to fulfill any real requirements.I disagree.
I think the future will be driven by the shape and requirements of rotary wing, fixed and underwater drones. Something that looks like but may vary alot internally to an lpd will facilitate this alot.
Well deck for usv launch and recovery. Large flight deck for several concurrent launch, recovery, refuel/rearm cycles.
Conventionally shaped warships cannot offer this. Being able to keep an overwhelming and immediate response to submarine attack well in advance of the actual warship and whatever its escorting i think should be the desired result.
It is a capable vessel but I don't think they are looking for an OPV with only 4000nm range or without a hangar. There has been a view that the Protectors were even on the small side and should have been closer to 100m than 85m.On a seperate note from the future frigate replacement discussion, would the Arafura Class be a potential fit for NZ's OPV requirements?
How does modularity work for a fleet of two to four frigates? It seems to be a recipe for FFBNW to me and while weapons may be modular the sensor kit is not always so easy due the fact it needs to integrate with the ships combat systems and need to be located so they are optimal for their function. Remember the ANZAC was designed around the modular concept. The growth in top weight and power demands absorbed the vessels growth margin very quickly and it was not possible to fit the ASMD sensors in modular form.This article by ex NZ Navy officer Andrew Watts discusses emerging technological and doctrinal opportunities that offer a much wider and potentially affordable range of naval capability choice for the RNZN.
Modularity and the Shape of New Zealand’s Next Naval Fleet - Defsec
Emerging naval doctrine supports the idea of a future navy based on modularity, writes maritime capability specialist Andrew Watts.defsec.net.nz
I see that they are working with Hamilton Jet though. Everyone had a chance to put in their tender through GETS. At 12.5m it seems that a new product is being developed from the Sentinel range.NZ places order for high-speed craft | Shephard
New Zealand has ordered three high-speed boats for MCM and reconnaissance tasks.www.shephardmedia.com
RNZN has bought some plastic boats - haven't seen this mentioned on here yet. Assume there will be some disgruntled local manufacturers at the choice of an Australian product, given this is well within the size range of some New Zealand producers.
HDPE Boats manufactured by PFG PFG - The Sentinel
The Sentinel range offers a fully-customisable integrated maritime system, enhancing mission capability for defence and security organisations. Manufactured in Australia from HDPE high density polyethylene for enhanced durability, stability and performance.pfg-group.com.au
Something from this range.
With three or four frigates it's definitely out of the question for the reasons that you give. However if a minimum of six hulls were acquired then it might be feasible if worked right. The problem with Stanflex is that it is a bespoke footprint so there's no real interoperability with it. It can't be containerised and transported easily, nor can it be utilised on non Stanflex fitted ships.How does modularity work for a fleet of two to four frigates? It seems to be a recipe for FFBNW to me and while weapons may be modular the sensor kit is not always so easy due the fact it needs to integrate with the ships combat systems and need to be located so they are optimal for their function. Remember the ANZAC was designed around the modular concept. The growth in top weight and power demands absorbed the vessels growth margin very quickly and it was not possible to fit the ASMD sensors in modular form.
Modular does work well in larger fleets where a number of roles can be done on one hull. The LCS is a modular ship ... (but it has not worked too well as can be seen) and the new MCM and Hydrographic ships may be modular too.
Looking at major fleet unit, a lot of folk look at the STAN Flex system as a way forward ..... but you still need the modules .... and enough of them. All well and good swapping them around during peace time ... but what happens in time of war when you need that capability. if you have four ships and say two of each module who gets what? If you lose a ship you may lose a capability completely.
Not to mention that a vessel's role may change mid-deployment due to changing circumstances.Looking at major fleet unit, a lot of folk look at the STAN Flex system as a way forward ..... but you still need the modules .... and enough of them. All well and good swapping them around during peace time ... but what happens in time of war when you need that capability. if you have four ships and say two of each module who gets what? If you lose a ship you may lose a capability completely.
Ok then can I ask which role you expect to have in a NATO conflict? Or the 3-4 frigates would be also needed for other situations outside a simmetric conflict where Australia and other allies dont intervene?Designing your fleet for economies during peacetime is a misguided policy.
How or why would the RNZN be involved in a NATO conflict? NZ is not a NATO member, and is pretty much on the opposite side of the planet from the North Atlantic...Ok then can I ask which role you expect to have in a NATO conflict? Or the 3-4 frigates would be also needed for other situations outside a simmetric conflict where Australia and other allies dont intervene?