|
|
Post by beagle on Dec 20, 2012 20:26:18 GMT 12
S-70B2, just have to change the roundel
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2012 22:57:14 GMT 12
DO you guys reckon the AW159 Wildcat would be considered? Te Mana, Te Kaha and Canterbury all have hangars designed to take the S-70 aye?  |
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Dec 21, 2012 11:37:06 GMT 12
The RAN have been operating their 16 x S70Bs since 1989 so they'd be pretty shagged by now. The fleet reached 40,000 flight hours in 2002. www.helis.com/database/modelorg/246/ The Wildcat should be looked at but we'd want it to take US weapons and be able to intergrate with RAN and USN data systems. Methinks cost would be a big factor. Also another that option should be looked at is the NH90 NFH for frigates and larger ships plus marinised A109s for the OPVs. Again cost would be a large factor but it would reduce rotary wing fleet to two types with two sub types in each type. |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Dec 21, 2012 13:25:02 GMT 12
There's nothing out there at a cost much below $1b, so I've been told.
I'll let you make your own minds up on the ability of the NZDF to afford that in 5-10 years time.
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Dec 21, 2012 15:49:40 GMT 12
Not sure if you can get a NFH in and in the hangar on a ANZAC frigate, def not a OPV
|
|
|
|
Post by exkiwiforces on Dec 21, 2012 17:59:53 GMT 12
The RAN conducted some testing with the Navy version of the NH 90 with one of the ANZAC's alongside at Garden Island last year after Avalon or before can't remember.
The helo landed ok, but it was only when they dragged it into hangar for the techo's to have a look and that's when things got very interesting ie you couldn't swing a rudder duck/ or a bottle rum let a lone a cat once the helo was inside the hangar so the servicing would've had to be done outside.
So the Aero Engineer told me when I based at RAAF Williams, Point Cook during his Annual Shoot. (He some stories about other RAAF/Army Flying projects involving Pilots, DMO and other Dickheads who didn't know a thing about flying or flying machines)
Further Ref would be the Navy Mag from the Navy league of Australia from last year.
|
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Dec 21, 2012 18:30:50 GMT 12
I was thinking about that because of the relative sizes, because the NH90 is around 4 tonne heavier than the MH60R. I know it wouldn't fit on an OPV and I have my doubts about the MH60R fitting on the OPV flight decks. Phil, I am very aware of the financial issues and the pollies think that they can get away with having a needed asset without paying the price. It has been suggested by an Australian colleague that NZDF is being set up by the pollies for a really big fall in that the current political attitudes by the major parties has the makings of a possible large capability loss for NZDF. I pray fervently that he is wrong but looking at the recent history.....
|
|
|
|
Post by htbrst on Dec 21, 2012 19:26:46 GMT 12
It should 'fit' as the OPV has the same hangar dimensions as an ANZAC - as does the Canterbury I think, with NH-90's having to transit the "Seasprite" hangar to get to the main helo hangar (my memorys a bit vague so I could be wrong about Canterbury) Top weight on the OPV could be an issue though - ships aren't really my thing Anyway, heres an excellent PDF document that contains blueprints of the main decks of the OPV including the flight deck and hangar. Since its a digital file it is very detailed when you zoom in complete with resident Seasprite. Feel free to get your ruler out and see how well a NH-90 fits on the flight deck for us  www.stxmarine.net/pdf/PV85-br-web.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by htbrst on Dec 21, 2012 19:35:49 GMT 12
Looking at it, nice to see on Deck 2 forward that the "Beer and Wine Store" has been allocated the same amount of space as the Laundry ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Dec 21, 2012 20:01:15 GMT 12
Looking at it, nice to see on Deck 2 forward that the "Beer and Wine Store" has been allocated the same amount of space as the Laundry ;D ;D But theres no squirt store. How can a navy survive without its daily tot? It's unnatural. ;D ;D |
|
chis73
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 87
|
Post by chis73 on Dec 21, 2012 20:26:30 GMT 12
What scope exists for rebuilding the ANZAC frigate hangars to better fit a possible NFH-90? I seem to recall reading somewhere - not much? Wasn't a hangar rebuild done to the frigate Canterbury to fit the Seasprite when it was introduced? The MRV Canterbury is also having it's hangar (doors?) reworked in the current upgrade to fit the NH-90 better.
Wouldn't the RAN S-70 Seahawks be just as much an orphan avionics-wise (if not more so) than our current SH-2G(NZ)? I agree the airframes are probably shagged too.
My gut feeling is even the Seasprite (or hypothetical Wildcat or Panther) might prove challenging to operate from the OPVs due to the smallish flight deck (ie. flight operations probably no problem in the tropics, but how often could you fly in Southern Ocean conditions?). It will interesting to see what comes out of the operating limit flight trials. Look at all the problems the Irish had operating the Dauphin from the Eithne OPV (similar in size to our OPVs) - they just gave up on it.
Wildcat is having it's own teething problems ...well, it is British after all. It seems to be keeping to schedule & budget though. Issues noted so far: the army variant will be introduced supporting just a cabin machine gun (ie. no missiles); the option (already designed) of wet pylons for external fuel tanks hasn't been funded; the Sea Skua missile replacement (an Anglo-French joint project) seems to have stalled; and somehow AW have managed to use 95% new parts & still make it look exactly like a Lynx. Best wait for the Mk1a or until it's been in service a year or two.
Chis73
|
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Dec 22, 2012 14:35:03 GMT 12
The Wildcat is actually shorter in height and length and it's main rotor diameter smaller than the Seasprite by about 0.5m so it would fit better on OPV flight deck. But being pommy yes better to wait. Also we'd need it to take US weapons and be able to data integrate with RAN and USN without any dramas.
|
|
|
|
Post by vs on Dec 22, 2012 15:14:14 GMT 12
I think they should cut their losses and buy an off the shelf helicopter like the Lynx or Seahawk. Buying someone else's cast offs just seems like a silly idea...how hard is it going to be to run the fleet when we are the only operators of that Mk and probably soon the only operator or the airframe!
|
|
|
|
Post by exkiwiforces on Jan 11, 2013 17:28:14 GMT 12
Defence News did a interview with Jonathan Coleman dated Nov19 with Nick Lee-Frampton doing the interview.
A couple of questions were raised about the Seasprites.
Is acquiring more Kaman SH-2 G Seasprites inevitable?
"We are definitely are going to have to upgrade because we do need more helicopters. We are in negotiation with Kaman at the moment around the Seasprite package, which Australia ultimately rejected. We could do with more than we have got at the moment."
In the next six months?
"I would expect the negotiations with Kaman to be concluded sooner rather than later. But it's not a done deal."
Rest of the interview talks about JATF, Defence Costs, Manning problems and Cyber attack etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Jan 11, 2013 17:44:17 GMT 12
From what I understand the aircraft have been refurbished & are basically zero timed, but even with 11 they are an orphan and Kaman doesn't have a good rep with NZ for customer service & support. If NZG intend flying say nine, then you have two aircraft for spares, but I just wonder what problems that are going to be inherited from the RANs over ambitious plans. We do know can't safely use the Penguin missile like the RAN intended too, but what about the cockpit arrangements? I am just concerned that NZDF will be told by NZG that they have to take these aircraft whether they are suitable and safe to operate or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by exkiwiforces on Jan 12, 2013 0:32:45 GMT 12
My understanding the Seasprites do work once you rip out the Flight Management System that RAN put in, don't armed it with the penguin missile and go back to a 3 man crew. It would work as advertise as it does in RNZAF/RNZN service.
The after sale service sounds a bit of a worry to me, but Safe Air should be able to handle it if the MOD does it job?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 12, 2013 10:48:44 GMT 12
Why does the Navy need more helicopters than it currently has when half their new ships are apparently mothballed?
Does Coleman mean more, or does he mean replacements??
|
|
chis73
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 87
|
Post by chis73 on Jan 12, 2013 15:00:19 GMT 12
OK, I'm sure this has been answered before but I'll have a go...
When the Seasprites were purchased we had 3 frigates (Te Kaha, Te Mana, & Canterbury). Endeavour, which could operate the smaller Wasp, stopped operating a helicopter. I don't recall any plan to operate helicopters from the Charles Upham*. So we bought 4 Seasprites, and exercised an option on a 5th a year or so later. One got smashed up within a few years and took ages to get repaired (it had to be returned to Kaman iirc).
NZDF have been trying to have 3 of 5 Seaprites available at all times - but have been deferring depot-level maintenance in order to acheive this, exacerbating corrosion issues. In 2011 this caught up with them and only 1 Seasprite was available at one point.
Currently we have only 2 frigates, plus the MRV Canterbury (which can't use the NH90s at sea, so probably 1 Seasprite required there). But, in addition, we now also have 2 OPVs designed to operate a helicopter, plus the upcoming Endeavour replacement (which should operate 1 or more helicopters if the Navy gets it's way), and perhaps the future Littoral warfare support vessel (also due 2018-ish) may use a helicopter (as Monowai did when it did survey work). Project Protector should have also purchased additional helicopters - but it didn't.
So all up, probably 6-7 helicopter-capable vessels in the near future, but only 5 naval helicopters currently. Conclusion: we need more helicopters. That doesn't mean that they have to all be Seasprites though. Could be navalised A109s (without search radar they will be limited even for OPV work), or navalised NH90s (for Canterbury & Endeavour replacement at least). Or something else entirely (Wildcat, Seahawk, Panther) - but no money for this option it seems.
You're right -in the short term, the Seasprite problem should lessen soon. The frigates will be going into an extensive refit period, so only 1 available for the next couple of years - sometimes maybe none? - and Canterbury is also out of action currently. The parts problem has eased temporarily as Kaman has made the stock of spares for the RAN Seasprites available.
I think Coleman means both: more AND replacements. Whether we would keep the current Seasprites for spares is an open question (it would be sensible though).
Chis73
* oops! I was completely wrong there. There were plans to add at least a helicopter deck, but the conversion work of course never happened. Plans were never finalised on whether there would be an embarked helicopter though. By the time the interim SH-2Fs entered service, the Upham was leased out delivering oranges in the Med, and sold off around the time the SH-2Gs arrived.
|
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Jan 12, 2013 16:04:44 GMT 12
At the moment the RNZN has six plus flight decks. IIRC the Canterbury flight deck can operate three, or is it four, Seasprites simultaneously, I think two NH90s simultaneously and one CH47 Chook. However it'd be very rare for the RNZN to be operating all of its Seasprites (nine if it gets the ex-RAN ones) operationally at once. But having three operational naval helos at any one time is the ideal situation given the number of RNZN flight decks. Given that it would be operating one frigate, most likely one OPV and either Canterbury and / or JSS at most times, thats three flight decks. Now they don't always need to go out with a helo embarked but you have to work and plan for when they do. The standard military logistics and equipment (including manpower) doctrine is that for every piece of equipment such as aircraft ships, guns infantry you have three. One fully operational, the second in minor maintenance and training, and the third in major or deep maintenace.
Now we haven't been able to meet the RNZN flight deck operational requirements because never had enough helos to do it properly, so shortcuts had to be taken for operational requirements. Hence one fleet of clapped out Seasprites. What missed out was the required maintenance, which was usually done when the aircraft went majorly u/s. The second reason has been already mentioned i.e, the lack of spares and manufacturer service.
|
|
|
|
Post by vs on Jan 12, 2013 16:15:35 GMT 12
I think they need to look long term....but something off the shelf that we are not going to be the only operators of in 5 years. Stop wasting our time with rubbish that others did not want.
Do it once, do it right and let the guys have what they need for the standards they require and that we want from them.
|
|
