Combat service support. I believe they provide things like logistics and transport.
New Zealand Army
- Thread starter Whiskyjack
- Start date
-
- Tags
- army artilery gunner new zealand sas
Thanks for the reply.
Really disappointing to see how depleted our rifle companies are we have brought a lot of good equipment i though it would attract people
I could be wrong, but I don't think it's the attracting the people that's the problem, but more the lack of funding to pay for them would be closer to the mark.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Does the NZG do much in the way of recruiting ads in the Media,? It’s fairly common here in Oz, see ads all the time for careers in the ADF on TV.
They don't have the funding to man a 3x rifle company battalion they use to be able to have they cut funding,?
Funding has been cut across the board from about 2010 with that years budget and cost cutting exercises.
Defence Force struggling to find a buyer for 30 unwanted armoured vehicles
Very interesting article appearing on STUFF this morning regarding the disposal of 20 unwanted and unloved LAVIII vehicle's. Suggesting that the Army has quietly increased the number for disposal to 30. The article suggests it will be a struggle to sell them as no one wants 20 year old vehicles..
The video in the article is a very interesting watch as well.
Very interesting article appearing on STUFF this morning regarding the disposal of 20 unwanted and unloved LAVIII vehicle's. Suggesting that the Army has quietly increased the number for disposal to 30. The article suggests it will be a struggle to sell them as no one wants 20 year old vehicles..
The video in the article is a very interesting watch as well.
t68
Well-Known Member
interesting bit of information from the article on the Battle of Baghak and the gun elevation being only 30°, I had a quick squiz on the ADF's Boxer CRVs it has -15° to +45° I wonder if this would have sufficed in the situation
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Perhaps GD Canada should acquire them for remanufacture to replace the ones Saudi Arabia lost in Yemen although junior might object to supplying them to Saudi Arabia. He may actually have a point, the Saudis owe money on previous deliveries. The LAV 6 upgrade is an improvement but new kit in this competitive market is impressive in comparison.
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
Twenty years old but virtually new. Selling them is short sighted. They should be given an MLU and turned into specialist support vehicles. Ambulances, mortar carriers and infantry section carriers all without the 25 mm turret. I have posited this before and was scolded for suggesting no CONOPS for mobile mortar. A look at the French purchase of 120mm mortar carriers shows other countries value the capability.
In a low intensity SP operation these would be useful and more than a match to the existing armament of irregulars. Recycle and create a valuable resource. But if its a process to simply cut costs then it doesnt matter about capability. I am sure these are far more capable than the AVGPs sold by Canada to Uruguay and Chile.
In a low intensity SP operation these would be useful and more than a match to the existing armament of irregulars. Recycle and create a valuable resource. But if its a process to simply cut costs then it doesnt matter about capability. I am sure these are far more capable than the AVGPs sold by Canada to Uruguay and Chile.
So they are essentially back to the fleet of 72 LAV's that the DA97 recommended all along and could have saved ourselves circa the further $186m CapEx spend, which would have paid for second look at the F-16 deal following the 2000 Quigley Reviews recommendation of renegotiating for 14-16 Ohakea based aircraft alongside 11 Macchi's in the LIFT role. I am certain that over the following 20 years elements of 75 Sqd would have ended up being deployed fairly frequently and proven their worth.
And I don't want to be disrespectful here but having an indigenous air support element in A/Stan and an element of utility rotary for combat evac would have been of assistance to Kiwi land forces in situations like Baghak and Anaconda.
Except that NZ’s utility rotary wing is almost too small to deploy or accept any combat loss. IMHO, any rotary wing deployment will be very time limited, which means it’s attractiveness to coalition partners is also limited. But I do think that an A330MRTT acquisition by NZDF will be a useful coalition asset in high demand that also helps maximise time on station of NZ’s 4 P-8As. Once their utility is demonstrated, I hope this fleet can eventually grow to 5.
At present, given the attitude of the NZ government, I have given up hope that NZDF will return to operating strike aircraft any time soon. I can only hope that the country will stay the course on its announced defence plans, limited as they are. I continue to hope that the NZDF will eventually become a 3 frigate navy, to enable escort of troop-lift ships, like HMNZS Canterbury and the proposed Enhanced Sealift Vessel (with a well dock), into relevant deployment locations to support the army.
Last edited:
While I agree with you about this, my personal thoughts are that in the NZ situation an air combat element's biggest impact is that it provides a great deterrent effect ( probability more than any other defence function) and that is what makes it a most the most useful of abilities to have. I am a great believer of the JFK quote " The best defence dollars you will ever spend are those you never have to use" when he was talking about deterrence. In other words if our defence force is adequate enough to deter aggression against us then the main part of the job has been done. However had D.Q!,'s recommendation been carried out it would have put use in a good position to expand the air combat numbers had we needed too, which is something we would need an excessive amount of time to achieve now.
Last edited:
Indeed. Currently the rotary fleet is too small and even in the days when we flew 15 Huey's we were still around 5 short of what would have been an optimal amount according to a RNZAF old timer I chatted to over the Christmas break who noted there was never enough airframes to go around for everybody who wanted them which included the Army, the police and other departments.
Maybe if they call the third frigate HMNZS Wellness there’s a good chance of it becoming reality.
Sorry for the one liner, couldn’t help myself after listening to you know who.
YES, when I was at D. Eng in Def HQ in the late 70's it was an ARMY requirement that we have 20 Huey's and they made a formal request for this to happen, but Piggy was more interested in his own personal transport and would only buy the B727's as they were more important to his ego.
I don't think it would have mattered how much money was saved dear Helen would have found some excuse to torpedo strike wing even if it was sponsored by some other means. Her complete rejection of the Quigley report shows this even though she commissioned the report in the first place and I think expected it to back her, which surprised her when it did not. Also there was her constant referral to the defence committees interim report which said replace or get rid of the Skyhawks, when the final report had already been published which had changed to replace the Hawks with a limited number of high end aircraft such as the latest F16C.
Im a little confused by the LAV numbers, theres the 30 for sale and the minute in the Stuff article talks of the remaining 71 so wheres the other 4? Im guessing one from Afghanistan might have been written off and maybe the other 3 from other incidents? or did the SAS never give back their 3?
It was always Uncle Heluns plan to get rid of them and their replacements come what may. I am sure she was a compulsive obsessive about it. She was on the wharf along with Goff and others, protesting against them when they arrived aboard the USS Okinawa in May 1970. There is a photo somewhere of them protesting on the wharf, but no one can find it now, and Don Sims searched everywhere for a copy of it, but to no avail, when he wrote his book on the Skyhawks.
EDIT: Corrected date and the ship that the Skyhawks arrived on.
Last edited:
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Some interesting developments for the Army ...
DefMin quoted as saying:
" the Australian built Bushmaster Protected Mobility Vehicle, already in service in small numbers with the NZSAS, had been identified as the preferred replacement for the Pinzgauer". “Its tried, it’s proven, it’s tested, it’s battle hardened and it’s easily supported. “It gives us commonality, compatibility [and] inter operability with our Five Eyes partners.”
More on the potential LAVIII sale:
"In January, Stuff revealed the Army had quietly increased the number of NZ Light Armoured Vehicles (NZLAVs) for sale from 20 to 30. That increase was an attempt to make the fleet more attractive to buyers, according to a minute from a senior officer obtained under the Official Information Act".
More on the LAVIII gun elevation issue:
"But they were not a success in Afghanistan, as shown during the Battle of Baghak in Shikari Valley, Bamyan in 2012, he said. “I know that valley quite well, the guns only went up to 30 degrees. That valley had cliffs of 2000 feet (609 metres). “The LAVs in the Battle of Baghak couldn't shoot high enough in the valley to shoot at the Taliban.”
Will this be addressed during the forthcoming LAVIII upgrade or replacement project? I see the likes of the LANCE RC turret system has a "superelevation mode" of 60 degrees.
www.stuff.co.nz
DefMin quoted as saying:
" the Australian built Bushmaster Protected Mobility Vehicle, already in service in small numbers with the NZSAS, had been identified as the preferred replacement for the Pinzgauer". “Its tried, it’s proven, it’s tested, it’s battle hardened and it’s easily supported. “It gives us commonality, compatibility [and] inter operability with our Five Eyes partners.”
More on the potential LAVIII sale:
"In January, Stuff revealed the Army had quietly increased the number of NZ Light Armoured Vehicles (NZLAVs) for sale from 20 to 30. That increase was an attempt to make the fleet more attractive to buyers, according to a minute from a senior officer obtained under the Official Information Act".
More on the LAVIII gun elevation issue:
"But they were not a success in Afghanistan, as shown during the Battle of Baghak in Shikari Valley, Bamyan in 2012, he said. “I know that valley quite well, the guns only went up to 30 degrees. That valley had cliffs of 2000 feet (609 metres). “The LAVs in the Battle of Baghak couldn't shoot high enough in the valley to shoot at the Taliban.”
Will this be addressed during the forthcoming LAVIII upgrade or replacement project? I see the likes of the LANCE RC turret system has a "superelevation mode" of 60 degrees.
Stuff
www.stuff.co.nz