New Zealand Army

[Cadredave]

Recce, is this enhanced company a stand alone unit, or are member drawn from the 2 reg battalions for training, then returned to their unit after? How does this company group work?

There is a Company in each Battalion 1R was online last year, 2/1 takes over sometime this year, they belong soly to the Battalion CO and deploy up north when required. There skill sets are no more or no less than the normal companies only trg they receive extra is fast roping and small boat drills.

EIC comes no where close to Rangers or the POE which was back in the 80s to early 90s. Ranger and POE skill sets were para, amphib (small boats), lead climbers and normal Infantry duties totally not impressed with the way Army has gone to raising this capability.

C

 

[recce.k1]

CD - do you think other skillsets might become necessary as the EIC matures (eg para)?

NM - up-to-date explanation of the different SAS squadrons and their roles in the latest Army News (page 9) and Army Orbat (pg 14).

 

[Cadredave]

CD - do you think other skillsets might become necessary as the EIC matures (eg para)?

NM - up-to-date explanation of the different SAS squadrons and their roles in the latest Army News (page 9) and Army Orbat (pg 14).

No money for para role Company worth of T10 chutes have been removed from service only enough left for boat troop.

my beef with EIC is that Army has done it on the cheap again if your going to bring in a tier 2 capability then you do it right, not this dream currently where AGS want the whole Army to be Tier 2.

 

[RegR]

If its just fast roping and small boat ops that are the only extra skillsets then surely at this stage any of the coys could support SAS if thats the case. Surely more in depth training should be on the cards. Agreed concentrate on a specific group rather than diluting to a wider base.

At least as the coys rotate through the overall skills and exposure will lift and should also help with retention in these quiet times.

On another note are these guys getting any new specialised vehicles? as I have seen a milspec looking type buggie in Bulls being towed by a NMV, would have passed it off as a keen hunter if it had not been for the gucci weapon mounts it was sporting and the swish desert tan paint job.

 

[ADMk2]

There is a Company in each Battalion 1R was online last year, 2/1 takes over sometime this year, they belong soly to the Battalion CO and deploy up north when required. There skill sets are no more or no less than the normal companies only trg they receive extra is fast roping and small boat drills.

EIC comes no where close to Rangers or the POE which was back in the 80s to early 90s. Ranger and POE skill sets were para, amphib (small boats), lead climbers and normal Infantry duties totally not impressed with the way Army has gone to raising this capability.

C

4RAR (Cdo) didn't start out too brilliantly either back in the 90's when it's role was first changed and then shortly after it's role changed to being the Commando Battalion, it was re-rolled back to into a light infantry battalion to take on it's share of Timor Ops...

Only at the conclusion of that did it actually start seriously converting to the Commando role and develop into the capability it provides today.

Perhaps the EIC might be following a similarly tortuous path, until the capability is validated in the eyes of those who make these decisions?

 

[Cadredave]

4RAR (Cdo) didn't start out too brilliantly either back in the 90's when it's role was first changed and then shortly after it's role changed to being the Commando Battalion, it was re-rolled back to into a light infantry battalion to take on it's share of Timor Ops...

Only at the conclusion of that did it actually start seriously converting to the Commando role and develop into the capability it provides today.

Perhaps the EIC might be following a similarly tortuous path, until the capability is validated in the eyes of those who make these decisions?

Well AD i hope this is the case but for the life of me i know its not going to happen, it seems to me that Army reinvents itself every twenty years but disregards the lessons from the past hence the tragic accident now being covered in the News papers:

Michael Ross Drowning: Painful Lessons, Says Minister... | Stuff.co.nz

Unless Army is going to fund this capability fully instead of the adhoc way currenly where money is being stripped from the battalions budget then ground hog day all over again.

CD

 

[steve33]

Well AD i hope this is the case but for the life of me i know its not going to happen, it seems to me that Army reinvents itself every twenty years but disregards the lessons from the past hence the tragic accident now being covered in the News papers:

Michael Ross Drowning: Painful Lessons, Says Minister... | Stuff.co.nz

Unless Army is going to fund this capability fully instead of the adhoc way currenly where money is being stripped from the battalions budget then ground hog day all over again.

CD

Hi Cadre i was wondering if you have any info you are allowed to post on line about the fire fight our guys had last year and we suffered two killed and six wounded.

I'm not looking for major info just how our guys performed in the fight did they handle themselves well.

I read an article in the paper for what that is worth and there was a report about some of the troops sent over to Afganistan there training was claimed to be poor one of the instructors over seeing things wasn't happy.

 

[Cadredave]

Hi Cadre i was wondering if you have any info you are allowed to post on line about the fire fight our guys had last year and we suffered two killed and six wounded.

I'm not looking for major info just how our guys performed in the fight did they handle themselves well.

I read an article in the paper for what that is worth and there was a report about some of the troops sent over to Afganistan there training was claimed to be poor one of the instructors over seeing things wasn't happy.

Sorry Steve the firefight is still off limits on public forums, what you read in the papers was only one aspect and was a beat up by our so called Defence Jornos.

CD

 

[ngatimozart]

Sorry Steve the firefight is still off limits on public forums, what you read in the papers was only one aspect and was a beat up by our so called Defence Jornos.

CD

Yes the claytons defence journos have no compunction about letting truth get in teh way of a story. If they don't know they invent an odn't even bother to do some basic research. I know here we don't like wikipedia as a source but at least it can does know the difference between a tank and an APC or a frigate and an Inshore Patrol Vessel. There was a real good editorial in a recent Pacific Wings about the quality and bias regarding NZ journalism around aviation and defence matters. Quite scathing.

 

[recce.k1]

I read an article in the paper for what that is worth and there was a report about some of the troops sent over to Afganistan there training was claimed to be poor one of the instructors over seeing things wasn't happy.

From what I recall the NZ Herald somehow got a copy of a confidential report, then proceded to selectively report on the negative findings (only), provided no context (eg no context to the instructors comments) and basically didn't report on the positive aspects of the report.

Of course the report is still confidential so the public only has the NZH version of events to go by.

Yet another MSM defence beat-up.

NM: I haven't read the Pacific Wings piece but judging by comments elsewhere it appears that the same lame stream media journo who has done some appalling aviation reporting (that PW is lamenting) is the same guy who did the one sided piece on the pre-deployment training!

 

[ngatimozart]

From what I recall the NZ Herald somehow got a copy of a confidential report, then proceded to selectively report on the negative findings (only), provided no context (eg no context to the instructors comments) and basically didn't report on the positive aspects of the report.

Of course the report is still confidential so the public only has the NZH version of events to go by.

Yet another MSM defence beat-up.

NM: I haven't read the Pacific Wings piece but judging by comments elsewhere it appears that the same lame stream media journo who has done some appalling aviation reporting (that PW is lamenting) is the same guy who did the one sided piece on the pre-deployment training!

If this works right I've attached a pdf file of the editorial. http://img.defencetalk.com/forums/imagize/attach/pdf.gif

Edit yes it does. It is really worth the read and I think it applys to the media in general both here in NZ and elsewhere.

 

[steve33]

Sorry Steve the firefight is still off limits on public forums, what you read in the papers was only one aspect and was a beat up by our so called Defence Jornos.

CD

Thats okay thanks for the reply.

Nice to see we have the 7.62mm belt fed machine guns at section level deployed now should give our guys plenty of firepower.

Will there be one for each section so 3 for a platoon.?

 

[steve33]

From what I recall the NZ Herald somehow got a copy of a confidential report, then proceded to selectively report on the negative findings (only), provided no context (eg no context to the instructors comments) and basically didn't report on the positive aspects of the report.

Of course the report is still confidential so the public only has the NZH version of events to go by.

Yet another MSM defence beat-up.

NM: I haven't read the Pacific Wings piece but judging by comments elsewhere it appears that the same lame stream media journo who has done some appalling aviation reporting (that PW is lamenting) is the same guy who did the one sided piece on the pre-deployment training!

It has to be said no amount of training would have saved the three Kiwi service personnal when their Humvee was hit by the IED.

The fire fight that happened earlier where our people we ambushed and we suffered two killed 6 wounded about the only thing that could have prevent that was an unmanned drone flying ahead of our people and spotting the ambush.

I think when you consider how long we were in Afganistan we did pretty well to come out with the casulties we did.

IED have proved a problem for all militaries and as far as the ambush went soldiers have been getting ambushed since soldiers have been going to war sometimes you get to dish it out and sometimes you are on the recieving end.

You have to treat everything you read in the paper with suspicion so it is good to be able to come on here and get better info.

 

[steve33]

Well AD i hope this is the case but for the life of me i know its not going to happen, it seems to me that Army reinvents itself every twenty years but disregards the lessons from the past hence the tragic accident now being covered in the News papers:

Michael Ross Drowning: Painful Lessons, Says Minister... | Stuff.co.nz

Unless Army is going to fund this capability fully instead of the adhoc way currenly where money is being stripped from the battalions budget then ground hog day all over again.

CD

It would be great if the army did a deal with the aussie army where our army personnal can go to Aussie and do their commando course.

 

[40 deg south]

Artillery news

Selex ES sees export success in UAE, New Zealand, Poland: €11.5M for artillery pointing systems

08 May 2013

Boosting its drive for growth in export markets, Selex ES, a Finmeccanica company, has recently seen its LINAPS artillery pointing technology selected by a number of international customers in contracts totalling more than €11.5 Million. The contracts include;

An award from the New Zealand Defence Force to supply complete LINAPS systems for their L119 Light Gun fleet.
The core of the LINAPS system, the FIN3110 Inertial Navigation Unit, has also been selected for the Jobaria Defense Systems Multiple Cradle Launcher (MCL) system deployed by the United Arab Emirates. Each Jobaria platform will be equipped with five FIN3110 units, one in the cab to assist with navigation and fire control and a unit for each of the Jobaria’s four missile cradles to allow each launcher to aim independently.
Selex ES has also been selected by the Polish Army to equip a number of its 155mm AHS Krab howitzers with the FIN3110 system.

Forum not liking the links, but easily found on google

 

[40 deg south]

NZ buys artillery aiming system

Selex ES sees export success in UAE, New Zealand, Poland: €11.5M for artillery pointing systems

08 May 2013

Boosting its drive for growth in export markets, Selex ES, a Finmeccanica company, has recently seen its LINAPS artillery pointing technology selected by a number of international customers in contracts totalling more than €11.5 Million. The contracts include;

An award from the New Zealand Defence Force to supply complete LINAPS systems for their L119 Light Gun fleet.
The core of the LINAPS system, the FIN3110 Inertial Navigation Unit, has also been selected for the Jobaria Defense Systems Multiple Cradle Launcher (MCL) system deployed by the United Arab Emirates. Each Jobaria platform will be equipped with five FIN3110 units, one in the cab to assist with navigation and fire control and a unit for each of the Jobaria’s four missile cradles to allow each launcher to aim independently.
Selex ES has also been selected by the Polish Army to equip a number of its 155mm AHS Krab howitzers with the FIN3110 system.

LINAPS is a battle proven, gun-mounted navigation, pointing and weapon management system. It enables rapid and accurate artillery deployment in all weather conditions, day and night. The system is currently in active use in Afghanistan with the UK Royal Artillery and is in-service with Canada, Malaysia and Thailand. The FIN3110 Inertial Navigation Unit is the core of the LINAPS system and is based on the same ring laser-gyro technology. It provides a continuous and accurate navigation solution for platform crews. The FIN3110 has been installed on all of the British Army's AS-90 artillery systems and has been chosen for most UAE artillery systems including the G6 howitzer and upgraded M109L47.

As a new user I can't post the link, but google is your friend.

 

[htbrst]

New Trucks

I'm more of an aeroplane person so I don't have any analysis to add, but I note it has been announced that the Army is spending $135 million dollars on new trucks to replace the Unimogs:

New trucks for Defence Force | Scoop News

Pictures and video of the trucks and defence minister can be found here: https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B7vQbrw5SJ02Y2VCU004dnEwSEE&usp=sharing

 

[ngatimozart]

I'm more of an aeroplane person so I don't have any analysis to add, but I note it has been announced that the Army is spending $135 million dollars on new trucks to replace the Unimogs:

New trucks for Defence Force | Scoop News

Pictures and video of the trucks and defence minister can be found here: https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B7vQbrw5SJ02Y2VCU004dnEwSEE&usp=sharing

I think that they are trucks that the ADF are looking or have got. Am not sure on that. But good idea getting in on the pommy production line.

 

[RubiconNZ]

I think that they are trucks that the ADF are looking or have got. Am not sure on that. But good idea getting in on the pommy production line.

Great news and that is the kind of smart acquisition move that I can get behind. Though thinking about it now it should not of been a suprise to me with the Rheinmetall providing the bridging capability prime mover also in conjunction with the British Army.

 

[RegR]

I think that they are trucks that the ADF are looking or have got. Am not sure on that. But good idea getting in on the pommy production line.

Yip Aus settled on these a few months ago (and currently have a couple in Astan) so was really a no brainer we would get them especially as we had just got some to carry the gap crossing capability awhile ago.

The Mercedes brand has served us well since the early 80s and will continue to into the future via the actros HETs but looks like MAN will be the new 'boss'. Would'nt mind a mog or two in the back yard once they start the selling process.