NZDF General discussion thread

[Rob c]

Are you predicting we have lost our freedom and sovereignty or stating it? If we are assuming we are losing it than what exactly is this based on and are we guessing that somehow adding a few jets, a frigate and whatever else is on the wishlist is going to somehow stop this thing that we predict could possibly happen that has not happened yet?

Not sure if you have noticed but the NZDF is in abit of strife at the moment so tbh any new funding above and beyond is going to barely pay to build up what we have (to what it recently was at the least), try to maintain it to some kind of professional standard and maybe just maybe retain it. You can quote the budget and percentages of GDP till the cows come home to produce milk but we are living in the actual reality right now and I wouldn't exactly say the country in general is humming along is it and tbh hasn't for quite awhile. To put it bluntly the country has priorities just like the NZDF does and I doubt there will be any great movements, upgrades or changes, just like the NZDF... The only reason the govt is pretending to throw money at the NZDF for the moment is literally out of sheer desperation to prevent the collapse of what little we have and not some far off notion of building up some great south pacific war machine to counter some maybe, possibly, could be theories centred on a country that has literally never left its own zip code never mind threatened our freedom and sovereignty.

Hate to burst your bubble but we would be doing extremely well to get current personnel numbers and infrastructure alone back up to full strength, capability and experience rather than adding entire squadrons, crews and capabilities and that in itself is going to require some major direct and ongoing investment to achieve, sad but true.

What I am saying is that we are putting our freedom and sovereignty at risk and at risk for our childrens and grandchildrens future by our current and past politicians policies of always cutting defence, which has lead to the current crisis and if they had not done this we would be in a far better state.
As for the budget, we are trying to have gold plated government services with a tin plated tax system. We have the lowest personnel tax rate in the OECD and the second lowest tax take overall in the OECD, and then we have tax cuts which will in the end benefit richer incomes the most. that is why we have no money for Defence , Health, education ETC. On top of that since the introduction of the Neo libratist economic policy's in the mid 1980's we have contiguously lost ground to the rest of the world. In the mid 1970's we had the 3rd highest GDP per person in the world, we are now 24th. The whole damn system needs an overall, but vested interest will not allow this.
As for my bubble, the reality is that we should never have arrived at this situation in the first place and now that we have we will need to do some very hard yards to dig our way out of it. We have been living in a fools paradise for too long and continuing as we are is to compromise our children's , grandchildrens, and in my case Great grandchildren's futures and possibly their freedom.
Were on the priority list do we put our freedom and sovereignty? The government has enough money to say they will spend $70B on roads in the coming years. As it is the defence budget is a very small amount of the governments overall spending. Again how important is our freedom and sovereignty, maybe we should just become Australia's 6th state if we are not prepared to do the hard yards.

 

[Gooey]

Thanks RegR for pointing out NZDF is struggling and underfunded. The truth is that this was entirely predictable and our hollow condition has been obvious for decades. I don't believe, however, that this means we should be happy with attempting to just stop the brain drain and to maintain a less than credible force.

As a small nation, we contribute to Alliances and we strike a balance between spending too much and shirking our national responsibilities. Since the 80s, Lange's anti-nuc & remaining in ANZUS election, I would contend that we have ignored national security and have free-loaded off Australia. The simple prove of this is as Rob c illustrated with GDP percentage before and after. Additionally, 2 old frigates and 4 new recce aircraft do not make a balanced maritime force.

Like other things, everyone is entitled to an opinion. Just like Helen Clack recently saying that China does not pose a threat to kiwi, or in the past saying that the Skyhawks were 'clapped out' or that RNZAF did not need ASW. She is of course wrong about fast air and ASW providing a credible and balanced maritime force to our Alliance obligations. If you can't see the CCP's insidious empire building then good on you. I'll have some of what your drinking.

Finally, the NZDF is there for national security. It is not there as a comfortable club for people to build their units up to 'full strength'. When the drums of war are beating, by the CCP, the the dire state of the strategic environment means that we need 4-6 modern ASW frigates and 8-12 P-8s. Anything Green being a bonus.

 

[RegR]

Thanks RegR for pointing out NZDF is struggling and underfunded. The truth is that this was entirely predictable and our hollow condition has been obvious for decades. I don't believe, however, that this means we should be happy with attempting to just stop the brain drain and to maintain a less than credible force.

As a small nation, we contribute to Alliances and we strike a balance between spending too much and shirking our national responsibilities. Since the 80s, Lange's anti-nuc & remaining in ANZUS election, I would contend that we have ignored national security and have free-loaded off Australia. The simple prove of this is as Rob c illustrated with GDP percentage before and after. Additionally, 2 old frigates and 4 new recce aircraft do not make a balanced maritime force.

Like other things, everyone is entitled to an opinion. Just like Helen Clack recently saying that China does not pose a threat to kiwi, or in the past saying that the Skyhawks were 'clapped out' or that RNZAF did not need ASW. She is of course wrong about fast air and ASW providing a credible and balanced maritime force to our Alliance obligations. If you can't see the CCP's insidious empire building then good on you. I'll have some of what your drinking.

Finally, the NZDF is there for national security. It is not there as a comfortable club for people to build their units up to 'full strength'. When the drums of war are beating, by the CCP, the the dire state of the strategic environment means that we need 4-6 modern ASW frigates and 8-12 P-8s. Anything Green being a bonus.

Ok so what countries are currently part of this empire? where does it extend and what forces, units, equipment (anything really) are involved?? I have been asking this question for years but no one can seem to answer instead talking about some kind of goals, missions, feelings and hunches...maybe I should take up drinking and jump on the bandwagon! It's alittle funny when certain countries do something it's considered strategic alliance and fostering nations yet when others do anything insidious empire building? So again, what is this all based on? (both figuratively and literally)

Are you guys suggesting NZ is somehow flush with cash and is just choosing to spend it on unnecessary issues like roads and that we don't pay enough tax so should actually be paying more tax (I can think of a couple of million kiwis at least who would currently disagree) just to fund more frigates and P8s even though we literally cannot even use the ones we currently have?? All because some other countries on the other side of the planet do? But THEN in the same breath we also do not have enough funding for things like healthcare, education, police (the list literally goes on and on)... And you say I'm the one drinking?? Striking a balance, exactly, starting with having equipment, people and infrastructure we actually use not would like to, maybe, possibly use all because, China's in China.

This may shock you but the NZDF was hollowed out even when we had 24 jets and 4 frigates, a different kind of hollow just with 24 jets and 4 frigates instead.

Also when did Australia come to NZs defence out of curiosity? Do they have some frigates or jets based here patrolling that I've somehow missed? So ironically people are suggesting we become part of Australia's empire?

And just out of interest what exactly would happen when we get these 6 frigates, 10 corvettes, 12 P8s, 30 f35s and 100 recruits? All our problems/issues/queries/freedoms/sovereignty would be solved right?? Im guessing.

Or would nothing happen...I'll ask this all again in another decade.

 

[Todjaeger]

Ok so what countries are currently part of this empire? where does it extend and what forces, units, equipment (anything really) are involved?? I have been asking this question for years but no one can seem to answer instead talking about some kind of goals, missions, feelings and hunches...maybe I should take up drinking and jump on the bandwagon! It's alittle funny when certain countries do something it's considered strategic alliance and fostering nations yet when others do anything insidious empire building? So again, what is this all based on? (both figuratively and literally)

Are you guys suggesting NZ is somehow flush with cash and is just choosing to spend it on unnecessary issues like roads and that we don't pay enough tax so should actually be paying more tax (I can think of a couple of million kiwis at least who would currently disagree) just to fund more frigates and P8s even though we literally cannot even use the ones we currently have?? All because some other countries on the other side of the planet do? But THEN in the same breath we also do not have enough funding for things like healthcare, education, police (the list literally goes on and on)... And you say I'm the one drinking?? Striking a balance, exactly, starting with having equipment, people and infrastructure we actually use not would like to, maybe, possibly use all because, China's in China.

This may shock you but the NZDF was hollowed out even when we had 24 jets and 4 frigates, a different kind of hollow just with 24 jets and 4 frigates instead.

Also when did Australia come to NZs defence out of curiosity? Do they have some frigates or jets based here patrolling that I've somehow missed? So ironically people are suggesting we become part of Australia's empire?

And just out of interest what exactly would happen when we get these 6 frigates, 10 corvettes, 12 P8s, 30 f35s and 100 recruits? All our problems/issues/queries/freedoms/sovereignty would be solved right?? Im guessing.

Or would nothing happen...I'll ask this all again in another decade.

TBH much of the quoted post seems to exhibit what @ngatimozart has referred to as 'sea blindness', unfortunately this does seem to be a recurring issue with Kiwi defence discussions.

It is a reality that in past conflicts NZ interests, trade, citizens and vessels have been negatively impacted. At times trade has been restricted or cut, as well as having citizens killed and vessels lost. This has happened both within NZ's home waters as well as across the globe. IIRC there might still be some sea mines in or near Lyttleton left by Axis forces during WWII.

If one were to look both global and NZ international trade, major SLOC's through which much of NZ's trade passes through transits strategically important chokepoints. In the run up to open conflict, various powers are likely going to attempt to exert greater control over as many of these strategic points as they possibly can. If/when open conflict erupts, those powers which can might very well attempt to seize control of these same chokepoints, even if nations' whose territories are being seized for control might try to remain uninvolved. Like it or not, if a shooting war were to start between major regional powers or any of the Great Powers that have a presence in the Indo-Pacific, then NZ will be negatively impacted.

One of the things the NZDF should be able to bring to gov't in the event of conflicts impacting NZ, would be to provide gov't with more options in terms of response. These options might be exercised within NZ or NZ waters, but could also happen well away from NZ and/or whilst acting in concert with allied and friendly nations to NZ. If one looks at the military and naval histories of major world conflicts like either World Wars, these conflicts were fought across large areas of the globe by forces allied together and acting in concert, not in isolation.

These are just some of the reasons why the NZDF needs to be a capable force, both to directly serve NZ's gov't and interests, but also so that the NZDF can operate alongside friends and allies to achieve common goals.

I am not going to drone on about the current state of the NZDF or Vote Defence budgeting, as I believe others are already well aware of my thoughts and opinions on that. I will therefore just point out that historically NZ has allocated a larger 'slice' of the budgetary pie to Vote Defence than has been getting done for the last ~30 years or so. Additionally, it does appear that during much of that time and quite possibly continuing into today, the way the budgeting for Vote Defence was recorded as such that it made the apparent Vote Defence budget look larger than it actually was, in real terms. This in turn does suggest it might be possible for Vote Defence to once again get a larger 'slice' of budgetary funding.

 

[RegR]

TBH much of the quoted post seems to exhibit what @ngatimozart has referred to as 'sea blindness', unfortunately this does seem to be a recurring issue with Kiwi defence discussions.

It is a reality that in past conflicts NZ interests, trade, citizens and vessels have been negatively impacted. At times trade has been restricted or cut, as well as having citizens killed and vessels lost. This has happened both within NZ's home waters as well as across the globe. IIRC there might still be some sea mines in or near Lyttleton left by Axis forces during WWII.

If one were to look both global and NZ international trade, major SLOC's through which much of NZ's trade passes through transits strategically important chokepoints. In the run up to open conflict, various powers are likely going to attempt to exert greater control over as many of these strategic points as they possibly can. If/when open conflict erupts, those powers which can might very well attempt to seize control of these same chokepoints, even if nations' whose territories are being seized for control might try to remain uninvolved. Like it or not, if a shooting war were to start between major regional powers or any of the Great Powers that have a presence in the Indo-Pacific, then NZ will be negatively impacted.

One of the things the NZDF should be able to bring to gov't in the event of conflicts impacting NZ, would be to provide gov't with more options in terms of response. These options might be exercised within NZ or NZ waters, but could also happen well away from NZ and/or whilst acting in concert with allied and friendly nations to NZ. If one looks at the military and naval histories of major world conflicts like either World Wars, these conflicts were fought across large areas of the globe by forces allied together and acting in concert, not in isolation.

These are just some of the reasons why the NZDF needs to be a capable force, both to directly serve NZ's gov't and interests, but also so that the NZDF can operate alongside friends and allies to achieve common goals.

I am not going to drone on about the current state of the NZDF or Vote Defence budgeting, as I believe others are already well aware of my thoughts and opinions on that. I will therefore just point out that historically NZ has allocated a larger 'slice' of the budgetary pie to Vote Defence than has been getting done for the last ~30 years or so. Additionally, it does appear that during much of that time and quite possibly continuing into today, the way the budgeting for Vote Defence was recorded as such that it made the apparent Vote Defence budget look larger than it actually was, in real terms. This in turn does suggest it might be possible for Vote Defence to once again get a larger 'slice' of budgetary funding.

Yes I understand what happened in WWII but what I am asking is WRT China itself as everyone (EVERYONE) keeps pointing out they are by all accounts going to invade/war/MDK NZ. The war in Ukraine is affecting NZ in some kind of way, or as we are led to believe anyway, in terms of rising costs for fuel and certain other comodoties etc but then what is a squadron of jets, more frigates etc etc etc going to do about it? bar us invading Russia of course.

China does not have to block any SLOC, they ARE our SLOC! The bulk of our trade comes from China so in actuality they would not be blocking any ships from reaching NZ, they are their ships, they literally just need to stop sending them. What I am saying is China can cripple us in many other ways before any military action and jets and frigates are not going to do squat about it other than chew up funding, literally, yet that seems to be peoples bug that we dont have jets and frigates and this is the whole part that really irks. Yes jets and frigates and tanks and bombs are cool and all but I really get the feeling everyone just wants them, just because with no direct cause, effect and end use.... and then we like to focus on China going on some kind of world rampage, when they can literally just purchase a 1 way ticket, come here and buy NZ and again, whats a jet going to do? As for SLOCs (such as the houthi saga), we have frigates so why do we need more? and we wouldn't send jets anyway, so why do we need jets then?

In all honesty I'm not worried about China going to war with NZ I'm more worried about the US going to war with China (there is a difference) and as I have mentioned this will be what draws us into any war (as per normal) and which will create these issues you speak of for NZ, regardless of if we have jets or not unless.....wait, are we invading China?

Bar WW3 I just can't see us needing all these but then I'm sceptical as to who would be kicking that all off anyway and so if the US wants us to have jets then they can just give us some from the boneyard just like they do with other strategically placed countries around the world so guess even they feel we are just not that strategic enough?

 

[Rob c]

so why do we need jets then?

It is very simple, a modest number of strike aircraft makes it very difficult to threaten NZ due to the act that we are outside of the combat radius of land based strike aircraft. this mean we can dominate both air and sea approach's to NZ if we have strike aircraft with modern missile systems. The aircraft them selves only need to be competent. The other factor is strike aircraft take the weapon system were ever they go, so reducing the numbers required. The next factor is that in the event of combat you put the least number of lives at risk.
The problem is that it would take between 10 and 20 years to fully regain this capability, so starting now we would be looking at 2040s before we had a truly competent ability.
O as an after thought, I was part of 75 squadron in the mid 80's, and what we achieved in exercises, especially against the US was top draw.

 

[RegR]

It is very simple, a modest number of strike aircraft makes it very difficult to threaten NZ due to the act that we are outside of the combat radius of land based strike aircraft. this mean we can dominate both air and sea approach's to NZ if we have strike aircraft with modern missile systems. The aircraft them selves only need to be competent. The other factor is strike aircraft take the weapon system were ever they go, so reducing the numbers required. The next factor is that in the event of combat you put the least number of lives at risk.
The problem is that it would take between 10 and 20 years to fully regain this capability, so starting now we would be looking at 2040s before we had a truly competent ability.

But we have not had jets in 20 years, in fact we didn't even have frigates for 2 years in that time during a period when effectively the world was otherwise distracted. Some would say an almost perfect time to "threaten" NZ, yet absolutely no one did, nothing, zero, zilch....is this mysterious force waiting until we do somehow aqquire an ACF, more frigates, tanks, submarines, space lasers so its more even??

I don't need the speel on what jets do in general I'm more interested in what they will do for NZ in reality.

 

[Hawkeye69]

NZ has a lot of issues facing it and all needing lots of extra funding. Defence investments are not vote winners no matter what’s happening around the World. New Zealanders in general today are very much pacifists, we like our independent foreign policy and I cannot see things changing.
We have 3x major natural disasters due within next 50 years and the NZDF needs to be equipped and funded to deal with natural disasters both at home and within the Pacific and low level peacekeeping and fisheries patrol.
We as a Country have not had an ACF for 24 years now and we had no frigate coverage for 2 years and currently have 3 naval ships tied up because we cannot fully crew them.
The Defence review due out in June will be interesting but is their political appetite for doing anything, time will tell but I would not get too excited.

 

[Rob c]

But we have not had jets in 20 years, in fact we didn't even have frigates for 2 years in that time during a period when effectively the world was otherwise distracted. Some would say an almost perfect time to "threaten" NZ, yet absolutely no one did, nothing, zero, zilch....is this mysterious force waiting until we do somehow aqquire an ACF, more frigates, tanks, submarines, space lasers so its more even??

I don't need the speel on what jets do in general I'm more interested in what they will do for NZ in reality.

As for what they do read the post!
As for the rest of your post, read pervious posts
And as for nothing happening yet, just good luck Our future is unknown as has been pointed out, again read previous post going well back.
As for more ability in defence, if we don't start we will never finish. sme things are better late than never and as I have harp on about we are blind to the future
As for the speel on jets, you were the one that asked the question (why do we need jets), Illogical to then say you don't want the information.

 

[Xthenaki]

With the new DCP hopefully coming over the horizon next month it will be interesting to see what will be seen as the most urgent priority to be funded first up. The GOD have already committed to increased pay and retention incentives in the May 30th 2024 budget but any major spending will await the recommendations of the DCP. What is the most needed requirement for replacement or acquisition. Some items that come to mind are munitions LRASM's and 105mm artillery shells. Replacement helos for the Navy and additions for the Air force. MRTT330's would be a start. On another topic with legislation coming into effect regarding control of gangs in NZ I cannot see the Police handling this problem by themselves without the back up of the NZDF especially if things turn pear shaped. So the GOD will require more funds in this area if needed.

DEAR MINISTER, MILITARY FAMILIES NEED YOUR HELP - A compelling read on NEWSROOM by author Erin Speedy.
This article gives an indepth inform on hardships facing our defence force personal and their immediate families over a long period of time (the decline) and an urgent and passionate plea to the defence minister for immediate relief. It is hard to believe that it has come to this.

 

[RegR]

As for what they do read the post!
As for the rest of your post, read pervious posts
And as for nothing happening yet, just good luck Our future is unknown as has been pointed out, again read previous post going well back.
As for more ability in defence, if we don't start we will never finish. sme things are better late than never and as I have harp on about we are blind to the future
As for the speel on jets, you were the one that asked the question (why do we need jets), Illogical to then say you don't want the information.

Oh yes, I read these posts, a decade ago, and they were the same ones the decade before that, and the decade before that.... just I think the Russians might have been ze bad guys then...at least we're changing it up abit I guess?

I didn't ask what jets do in theory I asked what NZ would do with jets in reality and just saying they prevent anyone threatening our "freedom and sovereignty" doesn't quite fly (pun intended) considering no one has then or since (kinda the whole point), and so if anything is only further cementing the reasons behind their axing in the first place not doubting it.

NZ isn't just going to commit $billions to a specialist niche capability on a theory/feeling/hunch without at least some kind of credible fact based evidence and some notional "threat" to our "freedom and sovereignty" is sadly not it. It makes for a nifty catchphrase but not so much for any kind of actual reasoning without at least some form of causation relevant to NZ, not Ukraine, not Taiwan, but NZ.

 

[Gracie1234]

I do not believe anyone is going to invade NZ any time soon.
But I do believe that we need to part of a group of countries that make the cost of bad international behaviour too expensive. That means we need to have a combat capability that adds with others that makes China believe that they can not win easily and that the cost will be too high. In short deterrence is what the objective should be. No one wants a war as that would be a disaster.
The main risk for NZ is not an invasion fleet that will land in Auckland, but an invasion fleet of fishing vessels or mining vessels that steal our resources. If we do not have the capability to defend our resources we will wake up with them gone. This is what is happening in the South China Sea and starting to happen in the Pacific. Fishing fleets are there robbing them and they are not able to stop it.
We should also remember that the Antarctic Treaty expires soon. What will happen then? Our claim doubles land mass. Do we just give that up?
The other risk is if we do not stand strong China will essentially determine our foreign policy i.e. do what we say or you will lose trade. They already influence it like all big countries do to small ones.
This is why large corporations are looking to change the trade balance with China and why we are focusing so much more on India and SE Asia, these will be our strategic counterweights. This will reduce the impact if something goes pear-shaped not eliminate it.
As for the power balance we not totally weak. NZ is the largest international dairy trader, no country can just replace us. If China stopped by buying our milk products where would they buy them from? If they took it from another country we would just direct our supply there. It is a finite product. I am not saying we would not feel it economically but it would not be the end of the world..
I am very interested to see what investment in the DCP looks like. I am guessing more high-tech solutions than Destroyers and a Strike Wing. I would say more duel use technologies as are mentioned in AUKUS Pillar 2. Investment in these will help towards fixing our productivity problem.

 

[Rob c]

NZ isn't just going to commit $billions to a specialist niche capability on a theory/feeling/hunch without at least some kind of credible fact based evidence and some notional "threat" to our "freedom and sovereignty" is sadly not it. It makes for a nifty catchphrase but not so much for any kind of actual reasoning without at least some form of causation relevant to NZ, not Ukraine, not Taiwan, but NZ.

The reality is that if you wait for a credible fact based evidence of a threat, you will be at least a decade to late to do anything about it and possibly more than that. The people that would wish you harm, don't send invitations and are more likely to try to catch you unawares as per Pearl Harbour.
Our freedom and sovereignty is not a nifty catchphrase as you put it , but is the very way we live and govern ourselves and enjoy our way of life, it is the core of our democracy.
The reason that countries form Armed Forces is to protect their sovereignty and the fact that when not doing this they have many other tasks is normal, but this should not be used as an excuse to forget the primary task which is the case for a significant portion of the NZ population due to the political rhetoric of various pollies and other groups groups.

I didn't ask what jets do in theory I asked what NZ would do with jets in reality and just saying they prevent anyone threatening our "freedom and sovereignty" doesn't quite fly (pun intended) considering no one has then or since (kinda the whole point), and so if anything is only further cementing the reasons behind their axing in the first place not doubting it.

This is getting totally illogical, as the reality is the same as the theory.
You do not seem to grasp that the future is completely unknown to us mortals and requiring evidence as to what threat is going to happen in the future is simply guesswork and often wrong. The real reason HC got rid of strike wing was emotive as she was anti them from and protested them in 1970 and had publicly said years prior to 2000 that if given the chance she would scrap them. The mid Nineties Wineray set up by the government had said they were essential for defence and the inquiry by Quigly set up by HC her+self said that it was affordably in a slightly reduce form, HC ignored all this.

 

[Rob c]

The main risk for NZ is not an invasion fleet that will land in Auckland, but an invasion fleet of fishing vessels or mining vessels that steal our resources.

If they enter our economic zone a strike force can deal with that as they did in the late 1970's when an other countries fishing boat entered and would not stop for a naval patrol vessel, it was stopped by a Skyhawk, which for your info 2 were airborne within 20 min of receiving the order, fully armed.
Also I would dispute your main risk, more likely risk yes, but hardly a risk to our democracy.

 

[RegR]

The reality is that if you wait for a credible fact based evidence of a threat, you will be at least a decade to late to do anything about it and possibly more than that. The people that would wish you harm, don't send invitations and are more likely to try to catch you unawares as per Pearl Harbour.
Our freedom and sovereignty is not a nifty catchphrase as you put it , but is the very way we live and govern ourselves and enjoy our way of life, it is the core of our democracy.
The reason that countries form Armed Forces is to protect their sovereignty and the fact that when not doing this they have many other tasks is normal, but this should not be used as an excuse to forget the primary task which is the case for a significant portion of the NZ population due to the political rhetoric of various pollies and other groups groups.

This is getting totally illogical, as the reality is the same as the theory.
You do not seem to grasp that the future is completely unknown to us mortals and requiring evidence as to what threat is going to happen in the future is simply guesswork and often wrong. The real reason HC got rid of strike wing was emotive as she was anti them from and protested them in 1970 and had publicly said years prior to 2000 that if given the chance she would scrap them. The mid Nineties Wineray set up by the government had said they were essential for defence and the inquiry by Quigly set up by HC her+self said that it was affordably in a slightly reduce form, HC ignored all this.

Oh, so "they" (whoever they are) catch us unawares? Well that's easy because the air force shuts down every weekend and all our jets are stored in a single hanger at OH unless you are suggesting we spend even more funding providing round the clock manning or even worse flights. Well then there goes that $billions investment with as Ukraine has shown something as cheap and simple as a drone strike.

They got rid of the jets because we never used them operationally and let's be honest never would have because no govt (none) would ever commit them to any combat. We never used them then, since or now for anything other than exercises, airshows and flag flying which is all well and good but a pricey endeavour for again, what actual gains? So we have literally just discussed how the NZDF was/is woefully underfunded by the govt and you are now quoting them saying it could be affordable in a slightly reduced form. I've read that report as well but money spent is still money spent no different if it's $200m or $100m from already limited funding. 10% of F all is still F all that needs to be shared around the services, it just now means there's less of F all. Something you do not seem to grasp and as has been shown is still not sorted even today, 20+ YEARS LATER! Not sure how you somehow think we would be in any better shape funding even a reduced ACF all these years but if you think now is bad it would only be worse as how could it not be!! If the DF is currently a shell it would be scrap now as it would have had even less funding all these years paying for the freedom jets which ironically don't run on sovereignty and dreams as some obviously would like to think.

 

[Whiplash34]

Can anyone with access to The NZ Herald Premium give us the run down from this article…?

New NZ Navy helicopters: Three contenders emerge as defence lobbying ramps up

Airbus has thrown its hat in the ring and is offering the maritime version of the NH-90s.

www.nzherald.co.nz

 

[Rob c]

They got rid of the jets because we never used them operationally and let's be honest never would have because no govt (none) would ever commit them to any combat. We never used them then, since or now for anything other than exercises, airshows and flag flying which is all well and good but a pricey endeavour for again, what actual gains?

First of all while the A4s were not used in combat, both of the preceding types, the Canberra's and the vampires were. The point you ignore is that without them we are unable to even defend our selves even Great barrier Island would be a stretch currently. You also seem fixated on use not being able to defend our selves as you seem to think that this all monopoly and we have get out of jail free card. What has happened in the past does not decree what will happen in the future. The strike wing provided a good deterrent and our only realistic defence,
As I pointed out before your statement that "They got rid of the jets because we never used them operationally" is incorrect as there were official studies that said keep them, It was all due to Helen Clarks emotive agenda.
We seem to be debating on two different plains, I ask why is the Defence force called the DEFENCE FORCE, Is it not because it is meant to defend NZ if that is not so maybe we need to call it something else. As you don't seem to think we don't defend our selves Then lets just have a government services department, with a coast guard, an air logistical unit and a small emergency armed police unit unit.
If the Defence force is meant to defend , then how are they meant to do this?

 

[RegR]

Can anyone with access to The NZ Herald Premium give us the run down from this article…?

New NZ Navy helicopters: Three contenders emerge as defence lobbying ramps up

Airbus has thrown its hat in the ring and is offering the maritime version of the NH-90s.

www.nzherald.co.nz

Paywalls are a pain! So far it looks as though it's the wildcat, NFH and Romeo. This will be an interesting watch but guessing the wildcat, hoping the Romeo but outside chance with the NFH. Guess it will come down to the sales pitch as all have their pros and cons in wide arcs.

 

[RegR]

First of all while the A4s were not used in combat, both of the preceding types, the Canberra's and the vampires were. The point you ignore is that without them we are unable to even defend our selves even Great barrier Island would be a stretch currently. You also seem fixated on use not being able to defend our selves as you seem to think that this all monopoly and we have get out of jail free card. What has happened in the past does not decree what will happen in the future. The strike wing provided a good deterrent and our only realistic defence,
As I pointed out before your statement that "They got rid of the jets because we never used them operationally" is incorrect as there were official studies that said keep them, It was all due to Helen Clarks emotive agenda.
We seem to be debating on two different plains, I ask why is the Defence force called the DEFENCE FORCE, Is it not because it is meant to defend NZ if that is not so maybe we need to call it something else. As you don't seem to think we don't defend our selves Then lets just have a government services department, with a coast guard, an air logistical unit and a small emergency armed police unit unit.
If the Defence force is meant to defend , then how are they meant to do this?

And there's that word, were, as in past tense, as in in the past. Times have changed yes, obviously some think otherwise though still thinking defence can only come from a jet? And still, the question remains, defence from what????? Of course people said keep them, that's the whole point of any study is to show both sides of the coin, pros and cons, benefits for and against, it doesn't mean it's then binding as that's not really how expert advice works, hint, it's in the wording, advice.

I'm not ignoring any point unless you know something about NZ having been/being invaded that I must have somehow missed? I'm going off actual fact, we did not use the jets and we have not needed the jets since axing them, it's not rocket science, nothing even remotely close to NZ being threatened has literally happened in a lifetime! We havnt had this detterant you speak of for over 2 decades so perhaps no one got the memo and still believe we have some vintage skyhawks or vanilla F16s so they are still dettered from invading by mistake? Or, maybe NZs just not high on the invasion list it would seem so we are not actually dettering, anything or anyone? The way you are talking is as if there has been a spate of invasions around the place and any country without jets has been snapped up, by someone (we're still figuring that one out) and we are about to be next! Guess I missed that one also.

Ukraine has jets, hasn't dettered Russia. It's as if Russia doesn't even care right? Guess they don't follow the invasion rulebook either, badass.

It is a government services department, thats how they get to call the shots, literally. Call it want you want if it makes you feel better, it still doesn't make a squadron of jets in NZ any more viable, likely or warranted.

 

[Hawkeye69]

Paywalls are a pain! So far it looks as though it's the wildcat, NFH and Romeo. This will be an interesting watch but guessing the wildcat, hoping the Romeo but outside chance with the NFH. Guess it will come down to the sales pitch as all have their pros and cons in wide arcs.