NZDF General discussion thread

[MrConservative]

Phil Goff is a dramatic improvement from the previous Minister. He uses words like combat, deployment and operational tempo. Words that Marx Burton found loath to say. Defence has been incredibly bi-partisan over the last 20 years in New Zealand and cannot be seriously discussed without mentioning the political dimension to it. I have had contact with McCully, Carter and Mapp during their tenureships as shadow defence spokepersons. Carter was enthusiastic and pro a balanced force. McCully while being a true spin doctor and whilst shying away from specifics, tended towards a four combat ship Navy. Yet he thought that getting the Aussies to operate some F-18s from Ohakea would be the ACF panacea which was patently absurd. Mapp wants a wrap round policy package for Defence, FP and Trade and is working with McCully and Grosser to do so. Fine in the theory of policy marketing but there are no specific details. By the way Mapp will need to tread very carefully within the party if he wants to build an Auckland based policy group ( It will be a North Shore group with all the usual suspects I bet). The thing is Key and English are open to finding second level cabinet slots from centre right minor parties even if they get over the 50% mark as they want to build long term stability. As Bill English said at a Conference I attended at the weekend, MMP politics is about doing deals with people whom you dont like about things you dont like. Could it be that Winston stays on as Foreign Minister and Ron Mark (a great guy who is liked) comes in as Defence Minister in a future Cabinet? If that was put on the table in post election discussions it might throw the cat amongst the proverbial pigeons for the current Governments chances.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Woman simply have no appreciation of Defence like men do, without sounding sexist. Mind you Jenny Shipley was all for the fighters, but i guess in politics it makes a man out of a woman.! Cheers.

Try telling Maggie Thatcher that!!!

 

[Markus40]

Even Maggie will tell you its a mans world in politics. Yes she is the exception. Good on her. She had guts.

Try telling Maggie Thatcher that!!!

 

[Markus40]

Hi Tasman, The IPV unfortunatly doesnt have a great self defence option in place other than 3 x 12.75 mm machine guns, mounted forward and two either side of the funnel, along with small arms. I do agree there would seem to be a placement for a Bushmaster 25mm but this hasnt been implemented as part of the design. However i do agree that there is plenty of room on the fore deck to install a Typhoon or the Bushmaster it would seem. To me it doesnt make sense if you have a 350 Tonne Patrol Boat out at sea that it doesnt have at least some self Defence options. Cheers.

What armament is planned for the IPVs? Models seem to show a couple of MGs mounted P & S and a third mounted forward. It seems to me that there would be space to mount a 25mm gun forward of the bridge but perhaps this is not the case. Is there contingency planning for a weapons upgrade in an emergency?

Cheers

Edit Note: Just looked at the RNZN thread and notice that this is being discussed there.

 

[Stuart Mackey]

The problem with another NZSAS Squadron is that there are not enough people who meet the standard. It is a matter of population and an unwillingness by all concerned to not dilute the NZSAS capability. On the other hand there is a need to bridge a gap between 1RNZIR and the NZSAS.
Right now this is probably more of a priority to the NZDF than Macchi's back in the air or let alone the requirement for a return to an ACF. In my view a 3rd Battalion would be wonderful, but again it comes back to that bogey of manpower limits. So it would therefore alude to company sized formation which is rapidly deployable and possessed with significant combat skills. It would mean that the high level and multi-disciplinary capability of the NZSAS wont be overtasked and overstressed which is an issue.

To be honest, I dont beleive that we will see a seperate company group set up outside of RNZIR, for much the same reason I am sceptical about a third battalion, as much as I would like to see it, there is not the recruits or retention to do it. What is more probable is a company with attachments at OLOC and that OLOC rotated through the RNZIR companies.

I also believe that contemplation of a return to an ACF wont make sense until we see how the geo-political 'tea leaves' look post 2010 to 2012. Mr Mapp's views on the ACF are inconsistent. In the early 1990s he was sceptical. In the late 1990s he was one of their biggest cheerleaders. Now he is swinging the other way. Who knows what his views will be in another five years. Maybe with the Macchi's option he can hedge his bets.

Having the Macchi's up and flying give NZ the theoretical option, granted, but if the strategic situation changes for the worse I hope there is Plenty of lead time to move up a level. Planes take time to build and learn to use effectivly, which is why Nationals lack of strategic coherancy worries me.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Does New Zealand have any Tanks, APCs, or Artillery? And why did they give up all there Fighter Jets?:unknown

 

[recce.k1]

To be honest, I dont beleive that we will see a seperate company group set up outside of RNZIR, for much the same reason I am sceptical about a third battalion, as much as I would like to see it, there is not the recruits or retention to do it. What is more probable is a company with attachments at OLOC and that OLOC rotated through the RNZIR companies.
QUOTE]

Regarding recruit and retention issues, frankly I don't see why the govt couldn't have those serving in the NZDF (and perhaps the Police, possibly even the Fire Service and maybe Ambulance etc i.e. those who put their lives at risk for the common good) receive their salary tax free. It's not like the tax owed by several thousand servicemen and women will make alot of difference to the overall govt tax take etc.

Another thing the US armed forces (or at least the USMC - I was speaking to an ex-USMC chap a while ago) offer recruits free University education (or whatever it is in the US - unsure if it equates to our University qualifications). Unsure if this is for officers only or all levels of staff etc. But for the NZDF, an opportunity to achieve a free Uni or polytech qualification, especially in this age of student loans etc, would surely be a great recruiting tool, especially those from rural or small town areas where employment prospects are lower etc.

 

[Stuart Mackey]

Regarding recruit and retention issues, frankly I don't see why the govt couldn't have those serving in the NZDF (and perhaps the Police, possibly even the Fire Service and maybe Ambulance etc i.e. those who put their lives at risk for the common good) receive their salary tax free. It's not like the tax owed by several thousand servicemen and women will make alot of difference to the overall govt tax take etc.

Couldnt agree more, but I think that base pay needs to go up, however. But the problem is not just pay, but that probably an issue for another thread.

Another thing the US armed forces (or at least the USMC - I was speaking to an ex-USMC chap a while ago) offer recruits free University education (or whatever it is in the US - unsure if it equates to our University qualifications). Unsure if this is for officers only or all levels of staff etc. But for the NZDF, an opportunity to achieve a free Uni or polytech qualification, especially in this age of student loans etc, would surely be a great recruiting tool, especially those from rural or small town areas where employment prospects are lower etc.

They already do that iirc. The problem is that once they have their degree they realise that the armed forces are not exactly inviting to a person who can see whats wrong with something but rank does not let them speak out. Also, the pays better on the outside esp when emloyment being so high here, unemplyment hovers between 3.5 and 3.8% and a skills shortage to boot.

 

[Stuart Mackey]

Does New Zealand have any Tanks, APCs, or Artillery? And why did they give up all there Fighter Jets?:unknown

NZ has artillery in the form of a regiments worth of Hamel 105 mm, APC is LAV3 with the 25mm cannon, but no tanks anymore.
The combat element for the Air Force was lost when the current government essentially asked why they had it, and no one could come up with a solid reason to keep it. I blame poor education and lack of historic perspective in the armed forces and populace.

 

[Markus40]

If you want to take this a step further the current government had a bloody minded attitude towards the A4s right at the beginning and were determined to eradicate any form of Air Defence that we might have once they got into government. As much as it might seem that the RNZAF were impotent on their stance with the government on this issue none within the ranks were prepared to what was going to happen when the current government decided they had to go.

Even the Quigley? report to the government shortly after Labour came to power in 1999 recommended the government retain the Air Defence Force with a smaller number of F16s to replace the A4s. But as i said the labour government appeasing the Greens with their bloody minded handling of the RNZAF decided to kill any such essential element within the service and we have the situation we have today.

 

[Stuart Mackey]

If you want to take this a step further the current government had a bloody minded attitude towards the A4s right at the beginning and were determined to eradicate any form of Air Defence that we might have once they got into government. As much as it might seem that the RNZAF were impotent on their stance with the government on this issue none within the ranks were prepared to what was going to happen when the current government decided they had to go.

Even the Quigley? report to the government shortly after Labour came to power in 1999 recommended the government retain the Air Defence Force with a smaller number of F16s to replace the A4s. But as i said the labour government appeasing the Greens with their bloody minded handling of the RNZAF decided to kill any such essential element within the service and we have the situation we have today.

Oh, I take that as a given in politics , the trouble was that their was no viable defence of the ACF and no populace, at a time of comparitive economic hardship, is going to tolerate retention/replacement of a millitary capability when its supposed greatests supporters can do little more than mumble 'but we have always had one'. Its worthy of note that the the defence brass didnt exactly fall on their swords over the matter, no "Four Colonels" over the decay of the defence forces these last twenty seven years.

Labour knew this would happen, and exploited it to the hilt.

 

[Gibbo]

Oh, I take that as a given in politics , the trouble was that their was no viable defence of the ACF and no populace, at a time of comparitive economic hardship, is going to tolerate retention/replacement of a millitary capability when its supposed greatests supporters can do little more than mumble 'but we have always had one'. Its worthy of note that the the defence brass didnt exactly fall on their swords over the matter, no "Four Colonels" over the decay of the defence forces these last twenty seven years.

Labour knew this would happen, and exploited it to the hilt.

Wasn't there some pretty serious inter-service 'manouvres' & back-stabbing going on due to the scarcity of funds!?! :nutkick I have the impression Army were making the loudest stink & were fairly 'unsupportive' of the ACF retention as they were scared s*$tless they weren't going to get their LAV's etc if funds went on the F-16s etc, etc. Hardly a coherent, consistent movement to save the ACF!...I could be wrong tho'. :unknown

If this was indeed the case - does anyone know if any of the current top-brass were among the individuals involved is such crap? That could also have a bearing on how the future of the Macchis pans-out!

..and yes Labour & Greens absolutely exploited it to their advantage!

 

[recce.k1]

Oh, I take that as a given in politics , the trouble was that their was no viable defence of the ACF and no populace, at a time of comparitive economic hardship, is going to tolerate retention/replacement of a millitary capability when its supposed greatests supporters can do little more than mumble 'but we have always had one'. Its worthy of note that the the defence brass didnt exactly fall on their swords over the matter, no "Four Colonels" over the decay of the defence forces these last twenty seven years.

Labour knew this would happen, and exploited it to the hilt.

Perhaps if the then Chief of Air Force and his Deputy resigned, it may or may not have any had any final bearing on the Govt's decision, but the public perception of the Govt's "bad" handling of the issue could have been exploited by the opposition. Ditto if the Chief of Defence Staff resigned (although can't recall if it was AM Adamson or Gen Dodson now - at least if it was Adamson it might have been given some weight). Anyway that's history now and it's easy for me to suggest this from the comfort of my armchair.

Labour was in coalition with the Alliance at the time. They took a similar view to the Greens on defence and even went so far as to say that NZ should not be restore relations with the French (in the Pacific) and that we should pull out of defence obligations with the Malaysians and Singaporians etc. Whether they had much influence I cannot say but as noted before the Alliance Leader was the Deputy PM at the time.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

NZ has artillery in the form of a regiments worth of Hamel 105 mm, APC is LAV3 with the 25mm cannon, but no tanks anymore.
The combat element for the Air Force was lost when the current government essentially asked why they had it, and no one could come up with a solid reason to keep it. I blame poor education and lack of historic perspective in the armed forces and populace.

Thanks for the info.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Does anyone know the main service rifle and other small arms of the NZ army. I do know the army and navy have SAMs to defend against enemy arcraft.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Does anyone know the main service rifle and other small arms of the NZ army. I do know the army and navy have SAMs to defend against enemy arcraft.

The NZDF use the Steyr AUG as their main service rifle.

They use the Minimi light machine gun as their primary light support weapon, the MAG-58 7.62mm GPMG and 12.7mm machine guns as heavier fire support.

Have no idea about NZDF pistols, but they also use 40mm grenade launcher attachments for their Steyr rifles, 66mm LAW rockets, the Carl Gustav 84mm anti-armour weapon and the Javelin anti-armour weapon system.

The NZ Army operates the Mistral SAM system and the NZ Navy operates the NATO Sea Sparrow SAM system on it's ANZAC class frigates.

None of this information is especially difficult to find in the NZ threads or even Google if searching threads seems too difficult...

 

[MrConservative]

Do any of the good folk here have an opinion on the sacking this week of Dr Paul Buchanan from Auckland University? Paul for those who aren't familiar with him has been a leading analyst in International Security Relations in the Auckland University Politics Department for over 10 years. Though I didn't always agree with his appreciations in every case, I held the utmost respect for his views and the deep level of research and consideration he put forward. In recent years we have also lost the valuable contributions of Dr David Dickens and Dr Jim Rolfe as well. I'm personally becoming concerned about the growing loss of independent defence and security analysis expertise in New Zealand to the point that soon there will be few left to adequately critique Government and Opposition Defence and Foreign Affairs Policy as well as offer up alternative policy proposals.

 

[KiwiRob]

Regarding recruit and retention issues, frankly I don't see why the govt couldn't have those serving in the NZDF (and perhaps the Police, possibly even the Fire Service and maybe Ambulance etc i.e. those who put their lives at risk for the common good) receive their salary tax free. It's not like the tax owed by several thousand servicemen and women will make alot of difference to the overall govt tax take etc.

What are you nuts if you gave these people a tax free income then every other public servant would also want a tax free income, where would you draw the line. These guys already get an excellent government super scheme, 6 weeks annual leave, free healthcare, unlimited sick leave and now you want to give them a tax free salary.

 

[KiwiRob]

NZ has artillery in the form of a regiments worth of Hamel 105 mm, APC is LAV3 with the 25mm cannon, but no tanks anymore.
The combat element for the Air Force was lost when the current government essentially asked why they had it, and no one could come up with a solid reason to keep it. I blame poor education and lack of historic perspective in the armed forces and populace.

It was a sad day for those involved when the air combat force was disbanded but in the cold hard light of day it was never used in anger, probably never would be, what really was the point in having it. What the government should have done was look into some form of arrangement with the Australians, maybe a NZ squadron within the RAAF.

 

[KiwiRob]

Do any of the good folk here have an opinion on the sacking this week of Dr Paul Buchanan from Auckland University? Paul for those who aren't familiar with him has been a leading analyst in International Security Relations in the Auckland University Politics Department for over 10 years. Though I didn't always agree with his appreciations in every case, I held the utmost respect for his views and the deep level of research and consideration he put forward. In recent years we have also lost the valuable contributions of Dr David Dickens and Dr Jim Rolfe as well. I'm personally becoming concerned about the growing loss of independent defence and security analysis expertise in New Zealand to the point that soon there will be few left to adequately critique Government and Opposition Defence and Foreign Affairs Policy as well as offer up alternative policy proposals.

Crazy considering the quality of the student involved, she never managed to pass anything and the work was of pretty poor quality and overdue, I'll bet the farm on it that the employment court will have a field day, will overturn the dismissal and give him a nice payout to boot.