NZDF General discussion thread

[Nick underscore]

The intention was October and that was still on track a month ago but a slide in the dates by 2 -3 months though annoying are actually predictable. The decision delays are partly in my view due to now being over conservative as a NZDF MoD institutional reaction to past force planning and procurement blunders. The sticky beaks at treasury and MFAT dont help either. Not starting the public consultation process until this year was not helpful. The DWP/10 had the public consultation process a year earlier. Not just a matter of months like this time. All fairly half-hearted and rushed though.

However it would be nice if Ms Quilter actually gave a reason why they could not keep the DWP release to timetable. I expect more leadership and transparency from a 400K per year official.

The golden rule from now on should be whatever MoD say just add more 6 months.

Do you also think this might also be in part to Australia's DCP & DWP release dates, as Chris mentioned? Possibly also tied to the recent AustGov political announcement regarding the 'continuous build' plan for the RAN?

Good to see you back

 

[ngatimozart]

Do you also think this might also be in part to Australia's DCP & DWP release dates, as Chris mentioned? Possibly also tied to the recent AustGov political announcement regarding the 'continuous build' plan for the RAN?

Good to see you back

The Australian DWP etc., dates have been known for a while and most likely there will have been some discussion between the Ausdefmin and NZdefmin on respective DWPs. The Australian continuous build plan most likely will not have an effect upon the NZ 2015 DWP. It would however be taken into account in the drafting of the subsequent DWP which is 2020 by memory, if the program, announced in 2009 or 2010, for a DWP every five years is adhered too.

 

[ngatimozart]

The intention was October and that was still on track a month ago but a slide in the dates by 2 -3 months though annoying are actually predictable. The decision delays are partly in my view due to now being over conservative as a NZDF MoD institutional reaction to past force planning and procurement blunders. The sticky beaks at treasury and MFAT dont help either. Not starting the public consultation process until this year was not helpful. The DWP/10 had the public consultation process a year earlier. Not just a matter of months like this time. All fairly half-hearted and rushed though.

However it would be nice if Ms Quilter actually gave a reason why they could not keep the DWP release to timetable. I expect more leadership and transparency from a 400K per year official.

The golden rule from now on should be whatever MoD say just add more 6 months.

The transparency and communications issues by the political class and the bureaucracy was one area that I commented on in my submission. The lack thereof to be precise. Yes I agree about the public submissions timing. It struck me as almost an after thought and most, if not all of the policy decisions would have crystallized prior to the public submissions being read and analysed.

 

[MrConservative]

Do you also think this might also be in part to Australia's DCP & DWP release dates, as Chris mentioned? Possibly also tied to the recent AustGov political announcement regarding the 'continuous build' plan for the RAN?

Good to see you back

That may be a possibility at least in the general sense of synergies with the Oz DWP/DCP and if so it would have been a bona fide reason to come clean about what is an actual delay - rather than being mute about the whole thing.

 

[MrConservative]

The transparency and communications issues by the political class and the bureaucracy was one area that I commented on in my submission. The lack thereof to be precise. Yes I agree about the public submissions timing. It struck me as almost an after thought and most, if not all of the policy decisions would have crystallized prior to the public submissions being read and analysed.

The culture of second guessing leading to indecisiveness is also part of it - politicians will make decisions if they are informed with facts. Also people rising to high places in the bureaucracy being parachuted into other parts of the state sector purely based on their beltway managerialist reputation. For example a long career at the Social Development ministry should not mean you should be selected as a DefSec.

 

[40 deg south]

Maybe, it's a slight change in policy with the Ministry being a bit more forthcoming with capability info now. My 1 cents worth.

I certainly hope you are right.

I commented in my submission on the need for more openness and transparency in decision-making, and would be delighted if this is a sign of progress on that front.

 

[40 deg south]

The intention was October and that was still on track a month ago but a slide in the dates by 2 -3 months though annoying are actually predictable. The decision delays are partly in my view due to now being over conservative as a NZDF MoD institutional reaction to past force planning and procurement blunders. The sticky beaks at treasury and MFAT dont help either. Not starting the public consultation process until this year was not helpful. The DWP/10 had the public consultation process a year earlier. Not just a matter of months like this time. All fairly half-hearted and rushed though.

However it would be nice if Ms Quilter actually gave a reason why they could not keep the DWP release to timetable. I expect more leadership and transparency from a 400K per year official.

The golden rule from now on should be whatever MoD say just add more 6 months.

During my years in the public service , I've helped craft many elaborate and plausible-sounding explanations as to why a certain piece of government work isn't released on the due date. The reasons were many and varied, but the truth could almost always be explained in four words -"It isn't finished yet".

80% of the time, it was because the project time line had blown out, and work genuinely wasn't done. The remaining 20%, the promised document had been completed to 'final draft' stage but the CEO/Minister/Cabinet weren't sure they liked it's conclusions, and were trying to figure out an alternative.

Given the difficulty of completing a major strategic document within six months of public consultation ending, I'd say this is one where they were over-optimistic about the ability to deliver to the end-of-year deadline.

 

[40 deg south]

Also people rising to high places in the bureaucracy being parachuted into other parts of the state sector purely based on their beltway managerialist reputation. For example a long career at the Social Development ministry should not mean you should be selected as a DefSec.

Aaargh - don't get me started on this - it is a pet hate of mine. You end up with situations where NZ's head diplomat previously managed the Post Office, and the Ministry of Agriculture is being run by a retired army brigadier.

They may be very capable (and in the two real-life examples above, they are), but there is a wealth of sectoral and institutional knowledge they have to pick up before they can begin to make sensible decisions.

It's an indictment of the State Services Commission that organisations don't do a better job of fostering talent internally, and providing a clear pathway to the top. Instead, there has developed a crazy lottery-type system where you have to change ministries and manage stuff you know nothing about in order to be considered for promotion to CEO role. There is also pretty substantial brain drain to the private sector and overseas from the ranks of promising young officials, who don't see a clear and realistic promotion path within the public sector. It isn't the sort of issue that makes headlines, but a lack of talented public service leadership has the potential to cost the country an awful lot.

Rant over.

 

[40 deg south]

In an entirely predictable move, the NZ MoD is now considering delaying the White Paper release until next year. So any spending decisions will undoubtedly be delayed further. I suspect NZ will be waiting for the Aussie DWP to come out (which I think is also delayed)

NZ can ill afford this kind of delay (that tidal wave of deferred defence spending just keeps getting bigger. Sooner or later it's going to hit the beach).

Release Date for 2015 New Zealand White Paper Uncertain

:hitwall

Chis73
That is a pretty impressive bit of reporting from Defense News. They've picked up the single important line in a rather dull article from the Air Force's monthly internal publication, and made a story out of it. Which is more than any NZ media have managed to do.

 

[chis73]

Chis73
That is a pretty impressive bit of reporting from Defense News. They've picked up the single important line in a rather dull article from the Air Force's monthly internal publication, and made a story out of it. Which is more than any NZ media have managed to do.

40, Defense News actually has a NZ-based correspondent - Nick Lee-Frampton. He co-authored the Skyhawks book with Don Simms a few years ago. He certainly seems to be keeping his nose to the ground in searching out good stories.

Following up on my last post: Various mainstream media reports now coming out in Australia that their DWP will be delayed until at least October (see here & here)

Talks of interest: National Library & Victoria University in Wellington have been hosting some good talks on NZ Security issues this year. Here is a recent one from Terence O'Brien of the Centre for Strategic Studies. There are others under the Long Reads section from his colleagues Jim Rolfe & Robert Ayson also worth a listen.

Chis73

 

[40 deg south]

40, Defense News actually has a NZ-based correspondent - Nick Lee-Frampton. He co-authored the Skyhawks book with Don Simms a few years ago. He certainly seems to be keeping his nose to the ground in searching out good stories.

Following up on my last post: Various mainstream media reports now coming out in Australia that their DWP will be delayed until at least October (see here & here)

Talks of interest: National Library & Victoria University in Wellington have been hosting some good talks on NZ Security issues this year. Here is a recent one from Terence O'Brien of the Centre for Strategic Studies. There are others under the Long Reads section from his colleagues Jim Rolfe & Robert Ayson also worth a listen.

Chis73

Thanks Chis 73

I hadn't read the fine print or I would have picked up that DEfence News have a local stringer..

Appreciate the links to the talks - surprising how hard it is to get public information on defence-related matters in NZ.

 

[40 deg south]

What's New [Ministry of Defence NZ]

NZ Defence Ministry has done a bulk update of procurement projects on the 'What's New' page of the website.

Key points include:

All 10 Seasprites accepted, with eight delivered and final two due next month. Seasprite simulator installed and undergoing acceptance testing.

All MAN vehicles delivered and 194 accepted. Discussions ongoing with MAN on Recovery Vehicle options.

Government approved replacment of Pingauer Special Operations Vehicles in June, and MOD is working through procurement options.

Tender to re-equip the P-3K2 Orions with underwater surveillance equipment closed in June and evaluations underway.

 

[kiwi in exile]

Good to see that MinDef is looking into recovery vehicle options.
Interesting to note that MinDef website states that they are looking at "replacing the New Zealand Defence Force’s existing Pinzgauer Special Operations Vehicles with four different types of vehicles to better enable the Special Operations Force to meet operational requirements." Supacat and Bushmaster have allready been suggested on Defence Technology Review. Wonder if they are thinking of 4x4 and 6x6 supacats (seems silly when there is the convertable Supacat Extenda. Maybe one of the four is a the ATV that Prince Harry was shown driving.

Side note: Aust SOF supacats are going to get Protector dual RWS.

 

[40 deg south]

Good to see that MinDef is looking into recovery vehicle options.
Interesting to note that MinDef website states that they are looking at "replacing the New Zealand Defence Force’s existing Pinzgauer Special Operations Vehicles with four different types of vehicles to better enable the Special Operations Force to meet operational requirements." Supacat and Bushmaster have allready been suggested on Defence Technology Review. Wonder if they are thinking of 4x4 and 6x6 supacats (seems silly when there is the convertable Supacat Extenda. Maybe one of the four is a the ATV that Prince Harry was shown driving.

Side note: Aust SOF supacats are going to get Protector dual RWS.

kia

I only skimmed through the update, but had interpreted it as meaning Defence had short-listed four candidates to replace the Pinzgauer, but hadn't made a final selection. Your interpretation better fits the actual wording, so is probably correct.

It does mean we will be looking at four tiny micro-fleets - each comprising just a handful of vehicles. Not great for ongoing costs. It might reinforce the benefits of picking the same vehicle(s) that a neighbour who carries a good stock of parts is using.

 

[Cadredave]

kia

I only skimmed through the update, but had interpreted it as meaning Defence had short-listed four candidates to replace the Pinzgauer, but hadn't made a final selection. Your interpretation better fits the actual wording, so is probably correct.

It does mean we will be looking at four tiny micro-fleets - each comprising just a handful of vehicles. Not great for ongoing costs. It might reinforce the benefits of picking the same vehicle(s) that a neighbour who carries a good stock of parts is using.

You need to understand the two very different requirements or roles in NZSAS,

Green & black roles.

Green could very easily be a mixture of Supacat 4x4/6x6 + Motorbike for LRR & Bushmaster for the Urban role as conducted in Kabul.

Black role might be a replacement for the Nissan Pathfinders so all four micro fleets in my opinion seems more than likely in this case.

CD

 

[RegR]

You need to understand the two very different requirements or roles in NZSAS,

Green & black roles.

Green could very easily be a mixture of Supacat 4x4/6x6 + Motorbike for LRR & Bushmaster for the Urban role as conducted in Kabul.

Black role might be a replacement for the Nissan Pathfinders so all four micro fleets in my opinion seems more than likely in this case.

CD

The black role vehicles do not usually make the headlines in these types of reports as they are usually just COTS types (nissan patrols, ford transits, hino trucks etc) with nothing overly special added bar role specific. They are also such small fleets in the scheme of things their costings don't usually warrant mention (along with their end user unit obviously) and are just replaced on a rolling cycle as they meet replacement criteria as per the CL fleet (non mil spec).

I guess for the purposes of the gucci SOV vehicle replacement project they may have lumped them in this time as part of the wider scope/funding or perhaps even a new specific capability vehicle all together gleaned from lessons learnt, battle lab, enhancement, deficency etc, either way everyone loves new gear in the toolbox.

I can definately see the supacats and bushies as new options and as you say the other 2 could be just replacements for existing vehicle types already in service.

 

[Cadredave]

The black role vehicles do not usually make the headlines in these types of reports as they are usually just COTS types (Nissan patrols, ford transits, hino trucks etc) with nothing overly special added bar role specific.

I think what we may be seeing is a fundamental shift in what type of vehicles they could be looking at ie two very different roles getting two very different deployable vehicles to use in overseas deployments. Internal NZ black role Nissans etc are not going to change what I’m eluding to is the deployed black role TG ie last deployment to Kabul to train and assist the Afghan CT unit they need something that will resist IED, RPG/SA attack etc.

So supacats & Bushmaster for green roles etc & something totally different for black, im not saying this will happen but to me seems the most logical.

They are also such small fleets in the scheme of things their costings don't usually warrant mention (along with their end user unit obviously) and are just replaced on a rolling cycle as they meet replacement criteria as per the CL fleet (non mil spec).

Fundamentally IMO a shift in how the roles are utilised has occurred and they could very well deploy both skill sets at the same time ie DA & CT ops which could mean they need something that is in use with our Allies ie 22SAS or SASR.

I guess for the purposes of the gucci SOV vehicle replacement project they may have lumped them in this time as part of the wider scope/funding or perhaps even a new specific capability vehicle all together gleaned from lessons learnt, battle lab, enhancement, deficiency etc., either way everyone loves new gear in the toolbox.

I think that’s a fair assessment could very well be that they are looking at more role specific vehicles to cover an overseas deployment to assist another CT training and assist team as well as the DA roles. One thing ive learnt is that our SAS don’t do battle labs to the extent that the Conventional Army does, they already know what they want, all there lessons learnt are focused on interoperability with our neighbours and deficiencies identified in a 10 year conflict which included traditional LRR & Urban CT Ops in Kabul..
At the end of the day logistics will dictate what vehicles they get whether it's green or black because both roles will be deploying in the future and that ability to seamlessly fit into a larger unit logistics just makes the deployment easier to support.

What we might also see is a closing of the tier’s and the type of vehicles that they use to support their current ops it could very well shape the Pinz replacement purchase which is coming up in the future.

 

[RegR]

I think what we may be seeing is a fundamental shift in what type of vehicles they could be looking at ie two very different roles getting two very different deployable vehicles to use in overseas deployments. Internal NZ black role Nissans etc are not going to change what I’m eluding to is the deployed black role TG ie last deployment to Kabul to train and assist the Afghan CT unit they need something that will resist IED, RPG/SA attack etc.

So supacats & Bushmaster for green roles etc & something totally different for black, im not saying this will happen but to me seems the most logical.


Fundamentally IMO a shift in how the roles are utilised has occurred and they could very well deploy both skill sets at the same time ie DA & CT ops which could mean they need something that is in use with our Allies ie 22SAS or SASR.


I think that’s a fair assessment could very well be that they are looking at more role specific vehicles to cover an overseas deployment to assist another CT training and assist team as well as the DA roles. One thing ive learnt is that our SAS don’t do battle labs to the extent that the Conventional Army does, they already know what they want, all there lessons learnt are focused on interoperability with our neighbours and deficiencies identified in a 10 year conflict which included traditional LRR & Urban CT Ops in Kabul..
At the end of the day logistics will dictate what vehicles they get whether it's green or black because both roles will be deploying in the future and that ability to seamlessly fit into a larger unit logistics just makes the deployment easier to support.

What we might also see is a closing of the tier’s and the type of vehicles that they use to support their current ops it could very well shape the Pinz replacement purchase which is coming up in the future.

I really think the armoured pinz need to go sooner rather than later so there could be a lead in option from SAS for an eventual replacement (I cannot see them using them other than their current SOV which is being replaced anyway). They are IMO not suitable for ops bar an ET type low level mission and even then pushing it if it went south, we need something that is near the top spec wise to cover the majority of possible scenarios not mid-bottom, ie Afghan-ET not ET to Waiouru.

The soft skinned version do their job and fullfill their roles however the armoured versions have been called coffins by the brits I assume for very good reason and they switched to the panther, a type I think could serve as an armoured SAS CT platform both here and overseas or at least a benchmark, as a few types around such as Aus hawkei and US JLTV. This could then have follow on applications to the rest of army (A/pinz replacement) as I hope any bushmaster aqquisition does.

So the 4 types could even be supacat, bushmaster, panther(type) and the polaris buggy that army has been trialling. This would actually give them quite a range of vehicles in different classes to suit varying roles and differing enviroments/requirements, options all around.

 

[kiwi in exile]

So the 4 types could even be supacat, bushmaster, panther(type) and the polaris buggy that army has been trialling. This would actually give them quite a range of vehicles in different classes to suit varying roles and differing enviroments/requirements, options all around.

This was the kind of mix I was thinking of. I'm a fan of the Panther, but given the emphasis on interoperability with our allies that people always highlight, something similar, but different may be a better choice. The US army and marines have recently selected a JLTV: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oshkosh_L-ATV
Looks a bit "American" maybe.

the fact that when the SAS were in Kabul we sent them NZLAVs for support shows that need to review our options here.

 

[ngatimozart]

NZ-AU Ministers re-affirm Defence relations

The NZ and AU Defence Ministers held their annual meeting in Wellington today. The NZ DEFMIN following is the release form that meeting.

Gerry Brownlee 18 SEPTEMBER, 2015

Ministers re-affirm Defence relations

Defence Minister Gerry Brownlee and his Australian counterpart the Hon Kevin Andrews MP met in Auckland today for the annual Australia-New Zealand Defence Ministers’ Meeting.

“It has been my great pleasure to host Kevin Andrews today,” Mr Brownlee says.

“In this centenary of the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps fighting side-by-side on the battlefield at Gallipoli, the defence relationship remains as important as ever.

“Through its size, location and strategic reach, Australia contributes significantly to New Zealand’s security.”

Mr Andrews noted the long history of collaboration between Australia and New Zealand.

“The relationship has continued from the First World War to recent operations in Timor-Leste, the Solomon Islands and today in Afghanistan, in the Multinational Force and Observers mission in the Sinai, and in the Building Partner Capacity mission in Iraq,” Mr Andrews says.

“Given the current challenging international environment, we are firm in our agreement that the joint Australian and New Zealand contributions to the Building Partner Capacity mission in Iraq are critical for restoring Iraqi military capability and supporting longer term stability in Iraq.

“We highly value New Zealand’s partnership on the BPC mission and we will continue to work closely as we review our respective contributions and mission milestones.”

Minister Andrews welcomed New Zealand’s participation in Exercise Talisman Sabre in July 2015. Minister Brownlee also welcomed upcoming Australian participation in Exercise Southern Katipo in October-November this year.

Minister Brownlee and Minister Andrews shared perspectives on security issues in the Asia-Pacific region, noting joint efforts alongside other regional partners to support the people of Vanuatu following Tropical Cyclone Pam in March showed the close cooperation and seamless integration between our Defence Forces.

Ministers reiterated the defence partnership between our two countries was important for promoting regional security.

“We have shared interests in a more comprehensive and coordinated approach to maritime security in the Pacific, working in close partnership with Pacific Island Countries,” Mr Brownlee says.

Australia and New Zealand intend to complete Defence White Papers in the coming months. This will enable the two countries to explore opportunities to enhance interoperability and to further align strategic and policy approaches to shared global and regional security issues.

During their talks Ministers affirmed the importance and mutual benefit of a close defence partnership. Both countries remain committed to the relationship and look forward to further opportunities to deepen the already close cooperation between our two Defence Forces.
http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/ministers-re-affirm-defence-relations

There is nothing really new in this release. The only comment I can really make about it apart from it being purely flannel, is that this will probably be Kevin Andrews last meeting in NZ as Australian Defence Minister.