|
Post by macnz on Oct 13, 2019 23:49:46 GMT 12
The used to be a reference online but blowed if I can find it now. It was part of a really great Mk-41 VLS resource that disappeared about 4 years ago. Really annoys me because it had a great illustration of what missiles went in what modules and the dimensions and number of decks penetrated. The Self defence Nodule didn't penetrate 3 decks and I think the tactical length on only penetrates two decks. The strike length module definitely penetrates 3 decks.
Was it the Thinkdefence blog?- they did several good pieces on rockets like this one: www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2015/01/rocket-renaissance/
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Oct 13, 2019 23:39:49 GMT 12
Whilst I have been arguing against the fitting of the Mk-41 Self Defence VLS to new frigates, I do think it would be feasible to fit one 8 cell module on Aotearoa and the second on Canterbury. In fact, I would go so far as saying that it should happen. That would mean added capability of 32 Sea Ceptor missiles on each ship for the ships self defence. I haven't gone into the details but Sea Ceptor is pretty radar agnostic, so they might be able to reuse the old search radars off Te Kaha and Te Mana, if it's possible to integrate the radars and just have to install new consoles etc. If not then stump up for new 3D search radars because both Aotearoa and Canterbury will be prime targets. However, I can't see a NZ govt doing such an upgrade because it would cost money, which I really don't see the logic in because it's a darn sight cheaper than losing one or both ships. I think they like playing roulette with the risk.
How about we just buy a couple of land ceptor systems and park them on Aotearoa & Canterbury. ..or better yet a couple of stealth systems - something akin to the AGAT Club-K Container Missile System The missile container concept has been talked about since back in 2013-15 so surely there must be several western versions in this asymmetric threat age. (the Russians and Chinese supposedly have developed versions) ThinkDefence did a good 'DIY' writeup on the feasibility of the concept for western forces back in 2015. Read Here: www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2015/11/a-universal-missile-and-rocket-launcher/
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Sept 16, 2019 21:17:46 GMT 12
well the original dsei article did headline: "/tanker.." so understandably misled. Looks like a pair of 40/57/76mm guns just below the bridge each behind a crane! Obviously model builder never heard of arc of fire.
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Sept 16, 2019 19:39:06 GMT 12
agree. install 8-12 VLS Seaceptors or if its simpler/more affordable, park a couple of containerized CAMM (L) missiles on the deck hidden among the rest of the containers.
Mount a 30mm Thales Goalkeeper on the Bow, with a Martlet LMM pack (similar to what RN doing with their DS30M Mark II cannons on their Type 23s)
To complete the perimeter - mount remote (Mini)Typhoon stations on the starboard & port points of the stern.
If we are recycling the Phalanx CIWS from the Te Kaha or Te Mana, stick it on the Bow paired with a SeaRAM that uses the radar and electro optical system of the Phalanx. The SeaRAM offers 11 missiles @mach 2.0+ with a range of 9km & 11kg warhead, while the Martlet LMM's range is 8km @mach 1.5 with 5-7 missiles packing 3kg warheads.
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Sept 16, 2019 0:15:06 GMT 12
I think that they have because the current A109s are wired for weaponry (fitted for but not with) and are armoured. The A109 is available in a marinised variant and able to be fitted with guns, rockets, and I think some light weight missiles. MBDA have a new light weight missile out now that apparently is quite effective, plus I am not sure but think that the Javelin ati tank guided missile (Army has it) can be launched from helicopters. It would work for us and be a good crawl, walk, run, way of learning. It also means not introducing a new platform with all the associated extra costs in training and sustainment etc. Maybe we're on to something... 2014/15: The Philippine Navy armed two of their five AW109s with weapon pods (FN RMP LC). While the Philippine Air Force (PAF) ordered eight AW109E Power as Light Attack Helicopters with rockets & 7.62mm Gatling guns. Philippine Navy armed AW109s Belgian Army A109BA Hirundo with anti tank missiles Malaysian Army Air Corps AW109LUH Watch for the RNZAF A109 @end! 1:54 (minus guns)
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Sept 15, 2019 23:00:34 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Sept 14, 2019 15:49:07 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Sept 14, 2019 14:11:14 GMT 12
Do you think the NZDF ever modeled the option & cost of kitting out a few of the A109s with machine gun pods & rockets as a means to acquiring faux ARH assets in a pinch?
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Sept 14, 2019 13:53:04 GMT 12
I concur Senob, license the design from OMT and get HHI yards to fabricate would be cheaper and way more predictable than being subjugated to an Oz (Hunter) or UK (type 31e) productio & scheduling.
Hopefully the lifecycle cost & benefits case associated with this design might convince Treasury to secure the build to 2027-29 rather than sweat it out to 2035!
Does anyone know if Indonesia signed the deal to buy their 2 Iver Huitfeldts? I read the design was lead contender in their frigate competition in March but nothing reported since? There was a delivery target of 2025-26.
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Sept 13, 2019 14:54:21 GMT 12
Thxs Senob, agree no NZ govt(s) will spend the necessary money or capital to setup a MEU force equivalent to effectively contest an amphibious mission.
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Sept 12, 2019 21:47:05 GMT 12
Yes - I agree with your assumption & observations. What I wonder about with this amphibious capability ambition is the medium/long term infrastructure investment that will require NZDF to pursue in order to effect a contestable marine force : -Purchase of Amphibious Combat Vehicles i.e. BAE ACV 1.1 or AAV? -Purchase of Amphibious Connector i.e. CNIM LCAT -Purchase of auxillary vehicles like AVLBs - Armoured vehicle-launched bridges, High-Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) launchers i.e. Land Ceptor, -Purchase of heavy lift helicopters i.e. CH-47s or MV-22s -Purchase of attack helicopters i.e. Tiger, A129, AH-1z, AH-64 Apache? I would welcome all of these future purchases but not sure NZ public's appetite would countenance the outlay this entails to provide a credible amphibious asset Someone might find this recent article of interest regarding capital ship procurement - the rationale behind it is insightful. www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29608/marine-bosss-audacious-plan-to-transform-the-corps-by-giving-up-big-amphibious-ships".. threat to amphibious assault ships from ASCMs has gotten much more capable, prevalent, and dispersed. The recent emergence of even more complex Anti Access Area Denial (A2AD) weapons is an even more difficult challenge to handle [...] what will happen is that the Marine Corps will shift from putting a single relatively large organization, like a MEU, on a few big expensive amphibious assault ships, to dispersing a larger number of smaller units on more numerous, less expensive ships, and even potentially existing supply and logistics vessels. "
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Sept 12, 2019 20:56:21 GMT 12
UK just announced Arrowhead 140 winner for Type 31e produuction. Provided the programme survives Brexit, then Arrowhead maybe a worthy candidate as a frigate replacement for NZ (more so than the Type 26?) ...certainly maybe more affordable. The 2nd gen. (FFX) Incheon-class frigate may also prove to be a strong contender given the experience NZ has with HHI yards producing vessels for us, I summise. But hey Cabinet & NZDF will have a whole decade (+3-4 elections) to procastinate over the competition and its contenders. I just hope someone sees the logistical wisdom in rebuilding to a 3 (or better yet back to 4) Frigate fleet for replacement. www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-49670332
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Sept 9, 2019 22:24:08 GMT 12
Landing Helicopter Dock
- ST Endurance 170 LHD
- San Giorgio class.
- Damen Enforcer 18000 LHD
- Ōsumi-class tank landing ship
- Dokdo-class amphibious assault ship
- Mistral-class amphibious assault ship
- Spanish ship Juan Carlos I/Canberra Class amphibious assault ship
LPD/LSD/LSL
- Makassar/Tarlac-class landing platform dock
- Albion-class landing platform dock
- Damen Enforcer 13000 LPD (Below ships based off the Enforcer design)
- HNLMS Rotterdam.
- Bay Class LSD / HMAS Choules
- Galicia-class landing platform dock
thumbs up nighthawke for your list. Maybe the FLSS (Future Littoral Strike Ship) might also be contender for the Sealift equation? Right scale with our current force infrastructure, more affordable as opp. to full on LHD,LPD,LSD, design certified & compliant with shipping rules, serves military and Humanitarian Disaster Relief sealift needs, complementary military asset for allies, command ISR/hospital ship to boot. Just no well dock ... but NZDF doesn't have a marine contingent right?, our amphibious assets are; SAS A,B D & E squadrons which this design concept caters for, so how critical is a well dock? I'd be happy if we forgo pursuing a LHD or LPD for a FLSS - if there were enough millions to be saved that could go towards equipping 2x MV-22s or CH47Fs as part of each ships' assets for airlift (MTOW: 23,000kg | 22,000kg) The FLSS concept has the adoption in the USN and attention of the Royal Navy. www.savetheroyalnavy.org/a-closer-look-at-the-littoral-strike-ship-concept/www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4058/check-out-this-picture-of-the-pentagons-shadowy-new-special-operations-mothershipThe MV Ocean Trader specs: Draft 5.6 m Length 193 m Beam 26.0 m Displacement 20,980 t Complement 50 crew, 159 special forces Speed 20 kn (37 km/h) Range: 8000 nm Note: The RN FLSS crew requirement is; 35 crew, up to 400 additional passengers, 28 days -10000 nm, 21 kn
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Jun 27, 2019 13:49:08 GMT 12
The badly-needed Fat Albert replacement for the Blue Angels are ex-RAF airframes. This suggests that there aren't spare US airframes, or at least not a couple that the USAF was prepared to release to the USN. I think the fat Alert replacement being ex RAF was because the short J model is produced as often as the -30 and RAF wanted to downsize their fleet now they have the A-400M.. Happy to be corrected. "Scheduled for delivery in spring 2020, the $29.7 million contract was awarded to the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence (UK MOD) for a divested C-130J Super Hercules. Cost savings associated with acquisition of the used aircraft and other airworthiness requirements is approximately $50 million less than the cost of a new aircraft [. ..] The Marines don't take a hit by having to give up one of their prized KC-130Js, while at the same time the Blues get an upgrade and the Navy doesn't have to shell out roughly $75 million for a brand new airframe. On top of all that, America's closest ally gets to unload an airframe it no longer wants." Read More Here: www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/28671/the-navy-has-bought-the-blue-angels-an-ex-royal-air-force-c-130j-to-replace-fat-albertIf Ron Marks wants to save some money on a preferred C130J 'tactical' airlift solution, then at approx. $NZD 44m per airframe they could buy 6 for less than $300m from UK, buy a simulator from Lockheed and still spend less than half the budget provision plus get them spun up earlier. That would leave the air force $600m freed up towards; P-8s, Network or 'strategic' airlift ambitions. Given UK Govt Brexit fiasco and MOD looming shortfalls for their F35 and Sub projects, NZ would be in a strong negotiation position. If we are going to spend $1+ billion dollars I dont think buying a 60 year old design at new prices is a prudent investment no matter how venerable the product. Max payload for C130J (19t) and C130J-30 (20t) introduced 1999, cruise 348 knots. Compare to: Boeing jv'd with Embraer to produce KC390 payload 26t intro. 2019, cruise 470kn) Kawasaki produces the C-2 payload 26-37t intro.2016, cruise 480 kn, and Airbus produces the A400m - payload 37t intro.2013, cruise 422kn
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Dec 21, 2018 17:36:39 GMT 12
Not until it is a proven design, NZ can never be a launch customer for new model platforms. The only new stuff we jump onto is social engineering and that will ultimately be the demise of NZ as a nation. Well technically you were the launch customer for the H model True and only the second export operator of the Kaman SH-2G Super Seasprite.
Just what is the criteria used for "a proven design" or relegates the design to be still deemed developmental anyway?
Compare to the other 2 contemporary Strategic airlifters the West has produced:
>Boeing produced 230 C-17s, introducing the lastest version after build #71 in 2000. Production started 1991, but first export delivery (UK) was not until 2001. Operators: US, UK, Australia, India, Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Canada, Nato
>LM produced 130 C-5s. Production started in the 70s, ended in the 80s. Refurbishing 79 with modernised avionics and engines occurred between 2003-2012. 52 eventually converted into the C-5M. No Exports. Operator: US
Airbus is building their 100th A400 (174 on order). Production started 2011. Now delivered and operating with; France, Germany, Malaysia, UK, Spain, Indonesia and Turkey. Belgium, Luxembourg, and South Korea join as operators in 2019/20. The RAF have 22 of their planned fleet of 25 in service. France logged 10,000 flying hours this year with their nascent fleet of 14, that will eventually number 50. Malaysia has 4 in service since 2015. Indonesia has 2 in service, with 3 more to be delivered.
If and when NZ decides to order, there will be at least 10 air forces (3 in our region) operating the A400 for a decade. Pretty sure the A400 will warrant being considered "a proven design" contender by then.
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Dec 19, 2018 0:05:34 GMT 12
Thinking they are having a good hard look at what is going to happen, which stated in the media reports that more and more pacific nations are going to be hit with climate change, weather disasters etc so we are going to need to respond more. Depending on what they are thinking, they might just look at swapping the H's for J's in the very near future, and look at the A400 for strategic next decade.
Agree Beagle. Guess it will be a case of what's available and by when.
- C-130J standard are more readily available because the C130J-30s are becoming more popular. i.e. RAF have been steadily disposing of their fleet of C130J 'shorts' since 2016.*
- meanwhile Spain has 27 A400Ms ordered but has decided 13 are surplus to their needs, so the Spanish defense authorities have got approval from Airbus to sell the surplus products/slots to other countries.** They are swapping 4-6 A400s to South Korea as part of buying 34 KT-1 basic trainer aircraft and 20 more T-50 trainer jets. Airbus should also have some capacity with Germany having ordered 60 A400Ms but renegotiated their order to 53 recently.
A nice scenario, would be; (1) MOD budget under urgency 4x C-130Js in B2019-B2021, getting them fast-tracked for delivery in 2021 or early 2022. Maybe source from the RAF? unless NZ willing to pay LM a premium to pinch production slots in 2021. Also assuming training certification for; pilots, load masters, and maintainers can be expedited within 18 months and similarly Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency approve the transaction in 2020
(2) start negotiating an order with Spain for 3x A400s for delivery between 2024-2026, plus maybe 1 option order with Airbus in 2030. 2020-2024 will allow training to take place and infrastructure to be built over 4 years, while the initial capital acquisition of the airlifters can be spread across budget years 2022-2026. The best part no DSCA needed! Once NZDF confident supply chain established and airlifters are FOC (2028) then RNZAF can pitch to exercise option order in 2030 - hopefully for a next gen version.
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Dec 18, 2018 17:47:49 GMT 12
Dec 11 2018 Stuart Andrew, Parlimentary Under Secretary of State for Defence Procurement, released following written statement : On 10 December 2018 the MOD awarded three contracts for the Competitive Design Phase. The contracts have been awarded to consortia led by BAE Systems, Babcock and Atlas Elektronik UK and are valued at up to £5 million each.
The Competitive Design Phase is the first stage of the design process which will allow suppliers to demonstrate how they can deliver the Royal Navy’s threshold capability by the target date and within budget. These contracts will fund industry to prepare detailed proposals for the design and build of the five Type 31e Frigates.
Concurrent with the award of the Competitive Design Phase contracts, the MOD has issued to each consortium an Invitation to Negotiate for the single Design and Build contract that we intend to place by the end of 2019. Conducting the Competitive Design Phase in parallel with the Design and Build contract negotiations will allow the award of the Design and Build contract earlier than would be normally be the case in a major procurement.
It remains our intention to seek a firm price contract for five ships, less an amount of Government Furnished Equipment, for £1.25 Billion, giving an average price of £250 million per ship. We want the first ship in 2023, with all five ships delivered by the end of 2028. The Government remains committed to a surface fleet of at least 19 frigates and destroyers.[...]
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Dec 18, 2018 14:14:39 GMT 12
Before reading on: this is REAL Looney tunes territory. READ this in the Australian Fin Review 4 days ago, just as Australia announced SPA and name of first future sub and class - HMAS Attack
"Republican House of Representatives member Michael Conaway, who represents a district in the ship-building state of Texas and sits on the Armed Services and Intelligence committees, has launched a resolution calling on the US Department of Defense and Navy to work with "five-eyes" partners Australia, Canada, the UK, and New Zealand on an "international joint-build, cost-sharing program".
Despite the French deal, as well as likely resistance to nuclear propulsion in New Zealand and Canada, Mr Conaway is urging the US government to sign within the next three years an agreement with Canberra and other close allies to spur the next-generation submarine program. Mr Conaway warns "new innovative ideas must be pursued" to offset the estimated $US5.5 billion ($7.6 billion) unit cost of so-called SSNs, or nuclear-powered fast attack submarines."
Comment:
...so the US/GOP want to sell the world another F35-isque program? Who wouldn't want a joint common SSN(X) sub?
re: NZ
Think someone better school Mr Conway on our; Navy, defense budget, public histrionics for expensive warships and nuclear propulsion. But hey maybe in 2050 instead of a $1.5 billion LHD, maybe NZ will see the sense in a $8 billion SSN (empty) as our flagship.
re: Canada not only no infrastructure supporting nuclear propulsion, there's Canada's procurement process, and post-NAFTA animus to contend with.
re: UK There's a £7bn shortfall in the MOD budget for the next 10 years that is likely to grow to £14.8bn following BREXIT. There's also 4 SSBNs+Trident still to be funded in the Dreadnought programme and a Carrier Strike Group to man-up but besides that sure the Brits will see the wisdom in participating.
re: Australia
Aside from having no infrastructure supporting nuclear propulsion, probably SEA 1000 will still be embroiled in roll-out and the RAN will be welcoming a plan B by 2040. After all, the 6 Collins class started in the early 80s, were completed by 2003 and then took another 10 years to iron out the fleet serviceability issues to reach FOC in 2016.
There's already a MLEP under consideration for the Collins and lobbying to design research further*
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Dec 12, 2018 18:09:32 GMT 12
General Vessel Profile Comparison (preliminary - finalised Type 31e designs submission in 2019)
Design
| First Build
| Displacement
| Length
| Beam
| Draught
| Top Speed
| Range @cruise
| Complement
| Flight Deck hangar
| Propulsion
| MEKO 200-ANZAC | 1993 | 3,600 tonnes
| 118m | 14.8m | 6.2m | 27 knots | 6,000nmi (11,000km) @18 kn | 178 Crew (25 officers, 153 ratings), 10 aircrew | SH-2G(I) | 2x CODOG, 1x Electric Total=29.0MW
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| TYPE 31e
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| TBA (Meko A-200)
| 2020 (2001)
| 3,700 tonnes
| 121 m
| 16.34m
| 5.95 m
| 28 knots
| 8,000nmi (15,000 km) @16kn
| 152 Full Complement
| AW101
| 2x CODAG, 1x Electric Total=25.9MW
| Leander (Khareef class) | 2020 (2009)
| 3,677 tonnes
| 117m | 14.6m | 4.5m | 28 knots | 7,600nmi (14,075 km) @16kn
| 120 Full Complement | AW101 | 2x MTU Diesel Total = 9.1MW
| Arrowhead (Iver Huitfedlt)
| 2020 (2008)
| 5,700 tonnes
| 138.7m
| 19.8m
| 4.8m
| 28+ knots
| 9,300nmi (17,200 km) @18kn
| <100 crew, 160 Full complement
| AW101
| 4x CODAD Total =32.8MW
|
Note:
Cost £250 million = NZD$456-469m (2018)
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Dec 12, 2018 16:30:15 GMT 12
Yesterday, three shipbuilding teams have been shortlisted as preferred designers for the Type 31e: (1) BAE Systems for the Leander based on the Khareef class design
(2) Babcock for the Arrowhead based on the Iver Huitfeldt class design
(3) Atlas Elektronik UK* based on the MEKO A-200 SAN design
Each have been awarded £5 million to further develop their plans for the new Type 31e frigate, with the winner of the contract to be decided by the end of 2019. Five new Type 31e frigates are to be built, with the first ship to be delivered to the Royal Navy by 2023. The contract specifies the unit cost is to be no more than £250 million**, worth a total of £1.25 billion.
The program objectives include; (1) modernising the Royal Navy fleet to 19 by the mid 2030s, (2) optimised for exporting to overseas customers, and (3) boosting innovation, skills, jobs and productivity across the UK.
** The Type 26 design has already secured a large order with the Australian Navy and is the front-runner for the Royal Canadian Navy’s future needs too. However the MOD recognised early on, that not all navies have the need for a ‘high end’ frigate purposed for ASW or guided missile prosecution like the; Type 26, F125, FREMM, F100, and FTI BELH@RRA designs represent. The Type 31e is to represent a credible platform for smaller navies looking for a light general purpose patrol frigate that can meet their all round workload for protection, patrol, and interdiction (ASW, AAW, ASUW, NGFS) in a small fleet (3-4). The MOD forecasts navies like New Zealand and other nations in the next 10 years will be in the market for an affordable combatant platform to fulfill their fleet obsolescence. The UK want a market share.
So this thread asks whether the Type 31e design is a credible contender to pitch to RNZN for the 2030s?
|
|