New Zealand Army

[Cadredave]

I guess continual restructuring is an going reality (like in any organisation) and if elements within the organisation can take advantage of these situations, like in the case of the 16 Fd, they firstly ensure survival and then ensure greater capabilities (plus more likelyhood of deploying etc).

I guess also the current LAV and Light Inf batt's allow sustained deployment of a company within that battalion, the Combined Arms Task Group's, if understand this correctly etc?

No doubt there's pro's and con's but NZ Army seems to placed to experiment (ie supported somewhat by the Govt's) - presumably following evolving trends as per Coalition experiences in theatre etc.

Just IMO - happy to hear the truth from the experts!

Its a bit of both a lack of a real strategic direction is the first, this is what CDF is enforcing now with the NZDF, CA has now got that direction finally from CDF you will see a major change in the configuration of Army by Dec finer detail being worked out now civilianisations is step 1, step 2 we will find out by the end of next month then step 3 is the move to one base in the Manawatu in 5 - 10 years. At the end of the day the current state we are in (Army) is a result of muddled thinking due to that lack of direction from Govt, now the DWP & VM has forced change on us all.

 

[recce.k1]

1RNZIR update

Manawatu Standard features a (mainly) 1RNZIR combined arms task force exercise which "involves 413 soldiers, 29 officers and 109 vehicles in a range of missions".

Feature here with a photo slide show (click on next/previous links):
Exercises put sting in troops - manawatu-standard | Stuff.co.nz

Curious about the part (and photo) which states "engineering LAVs can practise a breach which involves them filling the hole and driving over it". What did the Army have prior to the engineering LAV for this role?

Also DomPost feature the new HMEE armoured combat excavators, being put thru a public demonstration.
Army combat tractors unveiled | Stuff.co.nz

So am left wondering whether the HMEE excavators will start accompanying the CATG's and complement the engineering LAV's for the above breach filling role on exercises and deployments? (As in, more hostile deployments or only in cases where the area is mostly secured eg thinking of the engineers in Iraq operating post-invasion in supposedly "quieter" areas)? I guess either way they will become a useful addition to the task groups now that they have been acquired (and looks like HMNZS Canterbury will be squeezed for space even further now)!

CD: any comments able to be made on the soldier's kit evolving (changes and enhancements etc)?

 

[Cadredave]

Manawatu Standard features a (mainly) 1RNZIR combined arms task force exercise which "involves 413 soldiers, 29 officers and 109 vehicles in a range of missions".

Feature here with a photo slide show (click on next/previous links):
Exercises put sting in troops - manawatu-standard | Stuff.co.nz

Curious about the part (and photo) which states "engineering LAVs can practise a breach which involves them filling the hole and driving over it". What did the Army have prior to the engineering LAV for this role?

Also DomPost feature the new HMEE armoured combat excavators, being put thru a public demonstration.
Army combat tractors unveiled | Stuff.co.nz

So am left wondering whether the HMEE excavators will start accompanying the CATG's and complement the engineering LAV's for the above breach filling role on exercises and deployments? (As in, more hostile deployments or only in cases where the area is mostly secured eg thinking of the engineers in Iraq operating post-invasion in supposedly "quieter" areas)? I guess either way they will become a useful addition to the task groups now that they have been acquired (and looks like HMNZS Canterbury will be squeezed for space even further now)!

CD: any comments able to be made on the soldier's kit evolving (changes and enhancements etc)?

Hey Reece
Everything is on hold until July when Army finds out the new restructure and organisation, alot of rumours and speculation but some things are firming up.

QAMR move back North as thirld Manouvre Unit LAV centric, 1RNZIR reroling back to Light Inf etc.

Enhancements to kit is slowly happening, the DMW (7.62 Markman wpn) will be introduced shortly, same with the HKGMG slowly but surely we are getting there.

CD

 

[RegR]

Hey Reece
Everything is on hold until July when Army finds out the new restructure and organisation, alot of rumours and speculation but some things are firming up.

QAMR move back North as thirld Manouvre Unit LAV centric, 1RNZIR reroling back to Light Inf etc.

Enhancements to kit is slowly happening, the DMW (7.62 Markman wpn) will be introduced shortly, same with the HKGMG slowly but surely we are getting there.

CD

Hi Dave, wow interesting about QAMR and 1 Bn, going back full circle, is this all to save money or has someone figured out its not working out as planned? Surely will give the critics more ammo if the LAVs (numbers wise) are not utilised as intended and are re-roled back to battlefeild taxis ala M113s

 

[Cadredave]

Hi Dave, wow interesting about QAMR and 1 Bn, going back full circle, is this all to save money or has someone figured out its not working out as planned? Surely will give the critics more ammo if the LAVs (numbers wise) are not utilised as intended and are re-roled back to battlefeild taxis ala M113s

Hi Reg,

NZDF realigned with the DWP, thats all its is, On the drawing board currently is:

QAMR
A Sqn APC lift 1 & 2/1 RNZIR uplift when required,
B Sqn Fully CAV, Mounted & dismounts complete.

One of the Battalions will provide a Rifle Coy to support the Papakura lot, the other Rifle Coys to concentrate on Urban/Jungle & Amphid Ops. Also Army to still provide a Coy group to an Afghan type deployment when required.

At the end of the day its does come down to money, at the end of this month the first of 500 people are being made redundant to make way for these changes.

CD

 

[Lucasnz]

Hi Reg,

NZDF realigned with the DWP, thats all its is, On the drawing board currently is:

QAMR
A Sqn APC lift 1 & 2/1 RNZIR uplift when required,
B Sqn Fully CAV, Mounted & dismounts complete.

One of the Battalions will provide a Rifle Coy to support the Papakura lot, the other Rifle Coys to concentrate on Urban/Jungle & Amphid Ops. Also Army to still provide a Coy group to an Afghan type deployment when required.

At the end of the day its does come down to money, at the end of this month the first of 500 people are being made redundant to make way for these changes.

CD

Mmm. I would have thought the more common cents option will be to have a Mixed Battalion with a LAV Co and Two light Co's. I tend to agree that if the above move is correct then there is more ammo for those supporting a reduction the number of LAV's. Wonder what will happen with the TF and Artillery.

 

[Cadredave]

Mmm. I would have thought the more common cents option will be to have a Mixed Battalion with a LAV Co and Two light Co's. I tend to agree that if the above move is correct then there is more ammo for those supporting a reduction the number of LAV's. Wonder what will happen with the TF and Artillery.

LAV is safe for now it has deployed for a while yes in small numbers but at least its over there. As for a mixed Bn it dont work either your CAV or Light you cant be both the trg bill for a CAV Unit is huge & im not talking about money. Gunners are safe states it in the DWP but its the reserves im not to sure about. Options go to Cabinet at the end of July, with a decision due in August or September about the reserves.

CD

 

[MrConservative]

Thanks Dave for the update. You are a real asset around here!!!

Incidently Dave could one of the options possibly going to Cabinet for the Reserve / TF - be that in the future they focus on the current Solomons types of tasking in the Pacific as LTG's and leave the sharp end stuff for the Regulars as the new CATG's?

A Rifle Company possibly to support Papakura and another possibly heading down the urban, jungle and amphib role. They are really ringing the changes and are starting to look a very different NZ Army compared to the old structure last tinkered with a few years ago.

 

[RegR]

LAV is safe for now it has deployed for a while yes in small numbers but at least its over there. As for a mixed Bn it dont work either your CAV or Light you cant be both the trg bill for a CAV Unit is huge & im not talking about money. Gunners are safe states it in the DWP but its the reserves im not to sure about. Options go to Cabinet at the end of July, with a decision due in August or September about the reserves.

CD

CD, if 1 Bn re-roleing back to light inf and A sqn providing lift to both Bns where is B sqn pure Cav(dismounts) going to be based? Is 2/1 taking it up or is it the last 1 Bn coy? it does sound like each Bn will have a mix of capabilities ie light inf,CAV,SF spt/lead coy

On the Battalions, are they fully manned at the moment and are they going to introduce a 4th coy to each to handle the added roles? I suppose not as this would be a big financial commitment although I wonder if in the future a Bn gp deployment(like Timor 1) cropped up how would we fair, seems like a workload at the moment capability wise.

 

[recce.k1]

Hi CD, like Reg I'm unclear too about this B Sqn (LAV), are you in a position to elaborate (or best we wait until the official announcement etc)?

Otherwise everything else makes sense, although to be sure is it:

*QAMR - recce role with LAV's again (didn't they lose them for the armoured Pinz for a while)?
*1 & 2/1 RNZIR will have some LAV's for APC functions (provided by "A" Sqn as an entity)?
*New "B" Sqn CAV entity.

So if both 1 & 2/1 RNZIR are back to light inf, would this new LAV B Sqn be quite a large entity i.e. large enough to be able to sustain itself/rotations when sent on a deployment?

(Unless the answer is, QAMR take all the LAV's and it is from them that the A & B Sqn's are derived - and sustained).

* * * * * * * * *
Incidentally for people here, NZ Army news features an article on the upgraded LAV survivability programme for those that went to A'Stan recently
http://www.army.mil.nz/downloads/pdf/army-news/armynews420.pdf (page 10)

 

[Cadredave]

Hi CD, like Reg I'm unclear too about this B Sqn (LAV), are you in a position to elaborate (or best we wait until the official announcement etc)?

Otherwise everything else makes sense, although to be sure is it:

*QAMR - recce role with LAV's again (didn't they lose them for the armoured Pinz for a while)?
*1 & 2/1 RNZIR will have some LAV's for APC functions (provided by "A" Sqn as an entity)?
*New "B" Sqn CAV entity.

So if both 1 & 2/1 RNZIR are back to light inf, would this new LAV B Sqn be quite a large entity i.e. large enough to be able to sustain itself/rotations when sent on a deployment?

(Unless the answer is, QAMR take all the LAV's and it is from them that the A & B Sqn's are derived - and sustained).

* * * * * * * * *
Incidentally for people here, NZ Army news features an article on the upgraded LAV survivability programme for those that went to A'Stan recently
http://www.army.mil.nz/downloads/pdf/army-news/armynews420.pdf (page 10)

At this stage QAMR are taking over all NZLAV, from what I understand is that if a LAV gp (B Sqn) is deployed then A Sqn will provide the crews with dismounts coming from the Lt Bn's etc. This is currently occuring now with Afghanistan, Two Cav Coys are or have deployed with the thirld roation being made up of QA & 2/1 I think the big difference is with 3 Units the rotation & trg cycle can be managed better than what is occuring now.

There are other major changes coming in regards to the force structure, hand in hand with the reroling is that 2 & 3 LFG HQ will merge to make a single brigade HQ with the majority of Units based in the North Island. VFM & DWP have forced Army to look at itself critically I belive in a long time. My perspective is this and Im not alone we have become a Army that was held to ransome by beauracracy and compliance we lost touch of what our core rational is "Operations" both kinetic & non kenitic. CDF & CA have made it clear to all change or face Irrelavance these changes have always been in the pipeline but individual commanders were to busy building there own empires IMHO.

Anyway from a riflemans point of view I cant wait for these changes to take effect I now have three units in which I can go and apply my trade craft two light & one mounted (B Sqn) the possibilities are endless.

As for the reserves I think there time has come the mighty dollar argument has caught up with them, TF have no outputs in which to train too like there RF counterparts they have resisted change for over twenty years and there arguments dont stack anymore since the VFM. They will survive in some form alas only in those areas we cant afford to train people too like Doctors/ Nurses spec jobs only.

CD

 

[Lucasnz]

At this stage QAMR are taking over all NZLAV, from what I understand is that if a LAV gp (B Sqn) is deployed then A Sqn will provide the crews with dismounts coming from the Lt Bn's etc. This is currently occuring now with Afghanistan, Two Cav Coys are or have deployed with the thirld roation being made up of QA & 2/1 I think the big difference is with 3 Units the rotation & trg cycle can be managed better than what is occuring now.

There are other major changes coming in regards to the force structure, hand in hand with the reroling is that 2 & 3 LFG HQ will merge to make a single brigade HQ with the majority of Units based in the North Island. VFM & DWP have forced Army to look at itself critically I belive in a long time. My perspective is this and Im not alone we have become a Army that was held to ransome by beauracracy and compliance we lost touch of what our core rational is "Operations" both kinetic & non kenitic. CDF & CA have made it clear to all change or face Irrelavance these changes have always been in the pipeline but individual commanders were to busy building there own empires IMHO.

Anyway from a riflemans point of view I cant wait for these changes to take effect I now have three units in which I can go and apply my trade craft two light & one mounted (B Sqn) the possibilities are endless.

As for the reserves I think there time has come the mighty dollar argument has caught up with them, TF have no outputs in which to train too like there RF counterparts they have resisted change for over twenty years and there arguments dont stack anymore since the VFM. They will survive in some form alas only in those areas we cant afford to train people too like Doctors/ Nurses spec jobs only.

CD

Thanks for the info. I think the move to a single HQ is justified, though from a stragetic prespective of two islands two commands could be justified. Comments about the TF are a bit concerning, when all they really need is a rationalisation into two units from 6 thats more operationally focused.

 

[Cadredave]

Thanks for the info. I think the move to a single HQ is justified, though from a stragetic prespective of two islands two commands could be justified. Comments about the TF are a bit concerning, when all they really need is a rationalisation into two units from 6 thats more operationally focused.

Lucaz
Im hearing you about the Reserves but heres the argument that VFM are using, if you remove the following three from the NZDF you will save $76 mil they are

1. The Reserves,
2. The Boeings 757, and
3. DTA (Defence Technology Agency).

These are some of the options being put forward to Cabinet to decide in Jul / Aug, I dont fancy being the senior leadership of NZDF at the moment to preserve current capability something has to be sacrificed and im glad I dont have to make these choices.

CD

 

[ngatimozart]

Lucaz
Im hearing you about the Reserves but heres the argument that VFM are using, if you remove the following three from the NZDF you will save $76 mil they are

1. The Reserves,
2. The Boeings 757, and
3. DTA (Defence Technology Agency).

These are some of the options being put forward to Cabinet to decide in Jul / Aug, I dont fancy being the senior leadership of NZDF at the moment to preserve current capability something has to be sacrificed and im glad I dont have to make these choices.

CD

I too am glad I don't that decision but I am against removing the DTA because it would then remove an science / technology development and research skills that NZDF needs as much as it needs, in the case of this forum, riflemen. The DTA gives us a foothold in science and technology cooperation with the likes of Australia & UK without which we would have the potential to lose a lot of capability.

I am aware that some people are disparaging of the 757s but at present we can't afford to lose the airlift capability given that we are in the process of the C130H upgrades which take one aircraft out completely. That leaves us 4; take 1 out for routine downtime you have 3 left. Out of those 3; 1 has just been upgraded so it hopefully will be free of breakdowns but the other 2 - well they have been known to breakdown at inopportune times? If something were to replace the 757s then ok, but I think this is shortsightedness, seemingly short term profits against long term gains. The same thought processes about selling some of the NZLAVs.

Reserves. I agree there has to be a shake up but we still need to have reserves across the 3 services. To have no reserves will leave us up s*** creek, naked in a razor wire canoe without any paddles.

I think that the $76 million could be saved by getting rid of as much of the bureaucracy as possible. I am not totally sure but NZDF and the Ministry of Defence are still 2 separate entities with separate bureaucracies. IMHO money could be saved by recombining them back into one entity plus putting all the intelligence organisations in the MoD as well.

 

[MrConservative]

I too am glad I don't that decision but I am against removing the DTA because it would then remove an science / technology development and research skills that NZDF needs as much as it needs, in the case of this forum, riflemen. The DTA gives us a foothold in science and technology cooperation with the likes of Australia & UK without which we would have the potential to lose a lot of capability.

I am aware that some people are disparaging of the 757s but at present we can't afford to lose the airlift capability given that we are in the process of the C130H upgrades which take one aircraft out completely. That leaves us 4; take 1 out for routine downtime you have 3 left. Out of those 3; 1 has just been upgraded so it hopefully will be free of breakdowns but the other 2 - well they have been known to breakdown at inopportune times? If something were to replace the 757s then ok, but I think this is shortsightedness, seemingly short term profits against long term gains. The same thought processes about selling some of the NZLAVs.

Reserves. I agree there has to be a shake up but we still need to have reserves across the 3 services. To have no reserves will leave us up s*** creek, naked in a razor wire canoe without any paddles.

I think that the $76 million could be saved by getting rid of as much of the bureaucracy as possible. I am not totally sure but NZDF and the Ministry of Defence are still 2 separate entities with separate bureaucracies. IMHO money could be saved by recombining them back into one entity plus putting all the intelligence organisations in the MoD as well.

The B757 will stay until the C-130H's go for the very reason you outlined. I generally think the consensus was that the B757 was a poor choice in the context of C-130J offer back in 2002. Then again that was at a time when leadership, policy and acquisition was at an all-time low.

Though I agree that synergies would be better if the NZDF and MoD were streamlined. The intell community must be separate from defence and remain under civilian control for two reasons: 1) Perception and oversight in the political sense and 2) their customers are substantially non-defence sector government agencies dealing with matters though NatSec related are outside of the military context.

 

[Lucasnz]

Reserves. I agree there has to be a shake up but we still need to have reserves across the 3 services. To have no reserves will leave us up s*** creek, naked in a razor wire canoe without any paddles.

I think that the $76 million could be saved by getting rid of as much of the bureaucracy as possible. I am not totally sure but NZDF and the Ministry of Defence are still 2 separate entities with separate bureaucracies. IMHO money could be saved by recombining them back into one entity plus putting all the intelligence organisations in the MoD as well.

If you get rid of the reserves in there current form then the only option is for the Regular Force Reserve to take establish an active component, similar to the RNZAF and their TF force, which solely uses ex regulars except for the band (if I remember rightly). I think the US use this system in addition to the National Guard (Some one might be able to confirm this). However I doubt it will be as sucessful given the size difference.

I've always be opposed to a separate NZDF and MOD. NZ needs one Department of Defence with CDF as its head. We should follow South Africa's lead and get rid of the Sec of Defence. I'd like to see the NZ Intell organised into one organisation, but at this stage I have issues with it been within Defence, given some of the survellience powers etc vs issues with the Bill of Rights.

The B757 will stay until the C-130H's go for the very reason you outlined. I generally think the consensus was that the B757 was a poor choice in the context of C-130J offer back in 2002. Then again that was at a time when leadership, policy and acquisition was at an all-time low.

Replacing with the C130J early would be a better option combined with a dry lease for the 737 for VIP Work (RNZAF Colours). Phase out the B757 first then the oldest upgraded Herc. It would be 3-5 years before the first came online.

I like the comment on the leadership at the time.

 

[Cadredave]

I too am glad I don't that decision but I am against removing the DTA because it would then remove an science / technology development and research skills that NZDF needs as much as it needs, in the case of this forum, riflemen. The DTA gives us a foothold in science and technology cooperation with the likes of Australia & UK without which we would have the potential to lose a lot of capability.

I am aware that some people are disparaging of the 757s but at present we can't afford to lose the airlift capability given that we are in the process of the C130H upgrades which take one aircraft out completely. That leaves us 4; take 1 out for routine downtime you have 3 left. Out of those 3; 1 has just been upgraded so it hopefully will be free of breakdowns but the other 2 - well they have been known to breakdown at inopportune times? If something were to replace the 757s then ok, but I think this is shortsightedness, seemingly short term profits against long term gains. The same thought processes about selling some of the NZLAVs.

Reserves. I agree there has to be a shake up but we still need to have reserves across the 3 services. To have no reserves will leave us up s*** creek, naked in a razor wire canoe without any paddles.

I think that the $76 million could be saved by getting rid of as much of the bureaucracy as possible. I am not totally sure but NZDF and the Ministry of Defence are still 2 separate entities with separate bureaucracies. IMHO money could be saved by recombining them back into one entity plus putting all the intelligence organisations in the MoD as well.

Lets start with the TF, as a rifleman of some experience I can accurately state that I can train a civilian from basic to the Infantry battalion faster than it would for a TF soldier and they would be prepared for kinetic operations, this cant be said of the TF who were sent to the Solomons. TF do provide capable individuals but at $21Mil a year to provide individuals dont cut it anymore its more cost effective to bring them thru RF basic, corp trg & then into the Battalions as you can see this is Army centric only dont know enough about the other services to offer an opinion.

The Boeings are a great piece of kit unfortunately they are restricted in where they can fly into when supporting operations lets take Astan, Auck to Dubai to drop off paks and cargo and thats as far as they can go. They are restricted from flying into Astan as they dont have the (MAWS), flight deck armour and BAE Systems North America (Tracor) AN/ALE-47 countermeasures dispensing system. Only the C130H flys direct from Dubai to Bamyan because they have this equipment this restriction only applies to Military aircraft entering ISAF control now FEDX a civilian firm are not bound by this restriction and flys direct into Kabul and this is the real reason Govt has questioned the Boeings, why upgrade our 757 when we could charter FEDX or possibly get a better aircraft in the near future.

The bureaucracy is already shedding the fol ranks from the Army with Navy and Air going thru the same process;

10 Cols
15 Lt Cols
65 WO1
24 WO2 and
numerous people who's trades no longer exisit or will cease to exsist like admin, engr plumbers/sparkies/carpenters just to name a few. And this is for this year only & I can tell you it wont come close to $5mil same happening in the other two services. $76m is only part of the $350m we have to save within the next 3 years there are some huge projects that have to be funded from within NZDF budget,

ANZAC upgrade,
B vehicle Logistics upgrade,
Replacement Tanker etc

and no extra money for the next 5 - 10 years sentimentality has taken a back seat to cold harsh fiscal reality.

Now im not justifying it as my rank bracket is on the line too, at least we have learnt from our previous mistakes where interservice rivalries led to NZDF losing a valuable capability ACF. Something has to give & I keep saying it either we dictate the changes or government will and you know who the biggest loser :smash will be if government dictates our changes!!.

CD

 

[Lucasnz]

Lets start with the TF, as a rifleman of some experience I can accurately state that I can train a civilian from basic to the Infantry battalion faster than it would for a TF soldier and they would be prepared for kinetic operations, this cant be said of the TF who were sent to the Solomons. TF do provide capable individuals but at $21Mil a year to provide individuals dont cut it anymore its more cost effective to bring them thru RF basic, corp trg & then into the Battalions as you can see this is Army centric only dont know enough about the other services to offer an opinion.

In your view how long would take to train a civilian as a rifleman at short notice?

Now im not justifying it as my rank bracket is on the line too, at least we have learnt from our previous mistakes where interservice rivalries led to NZDF losing a valuable capability ACF. Something has to give & I keep saying it either we dictate the changes or government will and you know who the biggest loser :smash will be if government dictates our changes!!.

Regretfully you're correct. At least Defence has been given the flexibility to make the decisions.

 

[t68]

In your view how long would take to train a civilian as a rifleman at short notice?

Well for the ADF in the 60’s national service was for a period of 2 years full time plus three years part time, NASHO's were sent to Vietnam, so I would assume 11 months intensive training,365 days overseas then spent another 4weeks prior to discharge from the regular army to the reserve.

Here is personal account of Mr. Bruce Wilson and his time as a NASHO as a driver in 85 transport troop in 69-70,

Vietnam War Diary | Wilson Family News & Travel

I would imagine if a scheme were to be put in place today it would be of a similar nature to the 60’s if the NASHO were only to do the basic light infantry or non technical trades.

 

[Cadredave]

In your view how long would take to train a civilian as a rifleman at short notice?



Regretfully you're correct. At least Defence has been given the flexibility to make the decisions.

It takes 6 months to train a rifleman for the complete range of tasks that government requires both kinetic & non kenetic ops, it took 6 months to train a TF Platoon for the Solomons bringing them together from the different TF Battalion groups (3/6, 5/7, and 2/4) to conduct non kenetic ops only.

CD