Yep ten years is possible but highly unlikely. I would hope that with a lot of effort, pollical will, money and help from outside that 15 years would be more likely. While getting the capabilities in place would take at least 10 years, getting them up to a high standard would take longer. I remember watching the RSAF establish their combat capability with the help of the RAF and after ten years it was in place but still had a long way to go. Now I rate them very highly, probably the best in Asia.
NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
Just listened to the interview... I've never been a fan of hers but to be fair that was handled pretty well. Yes any specific should be for the DefMin but Mahuta has said more in this interview than the Henare has made in his tenure in the DefMin roll... time for a change! One thing you can take away from that is (1) they look to actually be listening to what the region is wanting & (2) sound like they might be prepared to follow thru.
Yes I'm going to harp on about EMAC again but this has that written all over it... if NZ could make a meaningful contribution to a regional project then we'd be talking. Call it fisheries patrol, but it requires the same systems that provide complete above-surface domain awareness... covering a multitude of sins! I thinking maybe the EMAC project may be getting reworked rather than dumped... the big spinoff it will relieve pressure on the P8 fleet.
My fingers remain crossed!
WRT the EMAC, given the changes that are happening I am going to fly a kite and ask what do you and others think about the ShinMaywa US-2 amphibious aircraft. It would be ideal in the Pacific for a variety of military and non military tasks, is a SAR aircraft, plus it can do fire fighting as well. It has the range to cover most of NZ and the engines are the same as those of the C130J. It could operate out of Whenuapai quite easily as well.Just listened to the interview... I've never been a fan of hers but to be fair that was handled pretty well. Yes any specific should be for the DefMin but Mahuta has said more in this interview than the Henare has made in his tenure in the DefMin roll... time for a change! One thing you can take away from that is (1) they look to actually be listening to what the region is wanting & (2) sound like they might be prepared to follow thru.
Yes I'm going to harp on about EMAC again but this has that written all over it... if NZ could make a meaningful contribution to a regional project then we'd be talking. Call it fisheries patrol, but it requires the same systems that provide complete above-surface domain awareness... covering a multitude of sins! I thinking maybe the EMAC project may be getting reworked rather than dumped... the big spinoff it will relieve pressure on the P8 fleet.
My fingers remain crossed!
OldTex
Well-Known Member
I think that the reported price (in 2016) of US$113 million per aircraft might very well put the nix on this aircraft. Another issue is that only 2 are able to be produced at a time by ShinMaywa.
While it can do the fire fighting water bomber role it would have to be modified (removal of 1 fuel tank, installation of water scoops, fire retardant tanks and foam mixing tanks) reduce the range from 4,600 km (SAR version) to 2,300 km (water bomber). The big advantage as a water-bomber is that it can carry 15t of water and do 8 separate drops.
But it would be very much suited to the SAR and emergency transport role within the Pacific. Perhaps Australia and NZ should fund the aircraft for use by the nations of the PIF. If the price of the US-2 is a deterrent then perhaps the CL-415EAF/DHC-515 (at CAN$36 million) with a range of 2,400 km might be more acceptable for the SAR and emergency role within the wider PIF area.
Last edited:
Thx OldTex, glad you chipped in there mate as I don't know much about the ShinMaywa US-2 to be fair!
I've become a fan of NZ sticking to gear that is in widespread use & has proven support systems in train so I'd probably say 'no' just because I'm not an adventurous sort... very few in use & how would they 'age' given NZ's propensity to flog old horses to the grave. Yes they look like an excellent SAR option but frankly I'd rather the $dosh$ was spent on something with more military utility... more P8 & C-130J-30 would be my first pick but that ain't gonna happen, 2nd pick some decent EMAC kit (ideally a fixed wing, RPA, Satellite combo).Maybe NZ could help buy into a small pool of US-2 that could be based in the SouPac for multi-national use in the primary SAR role with heavy maintenance in Oz or some similar deal... but maybe not lock the RNZAF into operating it.
Good morning All
I have always liked this aircraft, and felt it would be a great low end compliment to the high end P8. If extra range tanks could be installed somewhere within the frame be even better. The US2 could be the regions SAR (air / sea rescue of old) , possibly rotating a flight based out of a central Pacific Island, like Samoa. I know they are not cheap, but a great capability for finding and rescuing lost fishes in a tinny out of Kiribati, HADR or looking to our greater EEZ. Lots of fresh water lakes for training with NZ. Id base at Taupo, but Im not biased
I would not want to mix this up with the EMAC though. As mentioned before, I would like something in the order of an E7 for EMAC domain surveillance. Im not a great fan of drones for a small force like NZ, just because they do not carry pers does not mean the pers do not exist, they sit behind desks in a shed, not in a fuse. You are not saving skilled pers by having drones.
As per Gibbo, any increase in RNZAF capability could be more effective and efficient via an expansion of P-8 and C-130J numbers so that they provide real strength in our region and not just the minimum fleet possible. Perhaps added to this would be LRASM etc for 5 Sqn and AAR capability (to refuel both suitably equipped helo's and RAAF acft) for 40 Sqn. I'd even suggest ditching the 757 replacement in total IOT concentrate, meaningfully, on these types.
Likewise, ditching the Euro-trash MR-90s for new built UH-60Ms and immediately increase RNZN ASW capability with SH-60Rs. If I were looking at some operational capability increases in short order, these may provide solid building blocks to spend on immediately. I'd like to include FA-50 for use as jet trainers, to reintroduce this familiarity to RNZAF.
Depending on the NZG urgency for a crash program of NZDF increased capability, in the medium term could come decent numbers of KC-30A and a new ACF.
Like Teal, for RNZAF EMAC I have some doubt about using UAS for maritime recce when a decent number (eg. 10) of medium acft with sensors may provide more operational flexibility than penny-packets of expensive/vulnerable/single mission UAS. As an aside, E-7A as a dedicated AWACS type could be too much grunt for EMAC but commercial recce satellites would be very worthwhile looking at. That would be an interesting trade-off study covering these options, to write and read. Although, possibly the answer could be provided on the back of a fag-paper in very short time given the necessary resources to implement.
Likewise, ditching the Euro-trash MR-90s for new built UH-60Ms and immediately increase RNZN ASW capability with SH-60Rs. If I were looking at some operational capability increases in short order, these may provide solid building blocks to spend on immediately. I'd like to include FA-50 for use as jet trainers, to reintroduce this familiarity to RNZAF.
Depending on the NZG urgency for a crash program of NZDF increased capability, in the medium term could come decent numbers of KC-30A and a new ACF.
Like Teal, for RNZAF EMAC I have some doubt about using UAS for maritime recce when a decent number (eg. 10) of medium acft with sensors may provide more operational flexibility than penny-packets of expensive/vulnerable/single mission UAS. As an aside, E-7A as a dedicated AWACS type could be too much grunt for EMAC but commercial recce satellites would be very worthwhile looking at. That would be an interesting trade-off study covering these options, to write and read. Although, possibly the answer could be provided on the back of a fag-paper in very short time given the necessary resources to implement.
Actually it maybe something that Japan could help with a well along with NZ, AU, US & France. Japan as part of its Foreign Development Program and the rest as part of the South Pacific Fisheries Surveillance Group or whatever its called.Thx OldTex, glad you chipped in there mate as I don't know much about the ShinMaywa US-2 to be fair!
Maybe NZ could help buy into a small pool of US-2 that could be based in the SouPac for multi-national use in the primary SAR role with heavy maintenance in Oz or some similar deal... but maybe not lock the RNZAF into operating it.
Satellites are great but you have to have really good resolution with them. You can detect a surface target with radar, but you have to get a visual on it in order to identify it. If the target is covered by cloud then you're out of luck and IR only goes so far because cloud is picked up on IR and the other heat in the atmosphere as well depending upon the band being used. Finally satellites fly known orbital paths and can be disabled / destroyed by enemies, or solar storms. However if the NZG used its brains
it would have CubeSats built and ready to go for such eventualities, or even launch its own CubeSats with such capabilities. The E7A is not a maritime surveillance platform and wasn't designed for that. It's an airspace surveillance and command capability and we'd have real trouble trying to justify an E7A acquisition to any Cabinet even if we had fast jet strike aircraft.Good morning All
I have always liked this aircraft, and felt it would be a great low end compliment to the high end P8. If extra range tanks could be installed somewhere within the frame be even better. The US2 could be the regions SAR (air / sea rescue of old) , possibly rotating a flight based out of a central Pacific Island, like Samoa. I know they are not cheap, but a great capability for finding and rescuing lost fishes in a tinny out of Kiribati, HADR or looking to our greater EEZ. Lots of fresh water lakes for training with NZ. Id base at Taupo, but Im not biased
I would not want to mix this up with the EMAC though. As mentioned before, I would like something in the order of an E7 for EMAC domain surveillance. Im not a great fan of drones for a small force like NZ, just because they do not carry pers does not mean the pers do not exist, they sit behind desks in a shed, not in a fuse. You are not saving skilled pers by having drones.
You've been living to long in Aussie and believing all their propaganda that the ADF never makes procure balls ups. Most of the MRH90 and Tiger ARH problems that they have been having are self inflicted. FFS who orders aircraft and never bothers to order spares. They rushed the MRH into assembly at Brisbane well before they should have and the major problems were solved. It cost them significantly extra to have the aircraft assembled in Brisbane, rather than if they were fully built in France like ours were. It's because of their insistence upon defence procurement being an Aussie make work program.
The Blackhawk didn't meet the requirements of the end client - NZ Army. That's why it wasn't selected. The NH90 did because the army can lift a complete section in full combat gear and all their equipment in one aircraft. They can't do that with the Blackhawk. It means that they can insert a company sized group in on lift into a smaller LZ which they wouldn't have been able to do with Blackhawks. The Aussies are buying Blackhawks now which are basically 1970s technology with some fancy bits; mutton dressed up as lamb. They'll be locked into those for another 30 years.
Meanwhile in 10 - 15 years time the US will be fielding a completely new generation of rotary wing aircraft and we will be looking at replacing our NH90 fleet. We will be in a prime spot of acquiring a completely new generation of aircraft that will see us right for the next 30 years, just like we were with the Iroquois. Meanwhile the Aussies will be flying ancient technology.
The Australian army are currently looking at replacing their old LCM-8 landing craft with something bigger.
I wonder if such a craft would have a place in NZ.
Whatever is selected will be able to conduct independent operations around the coast and and transits open ocean water to regional islands.
These are still pretty basic craft and not that expensive.
Relatively small, they are good for small scale military logistics and HADR.
Maybe a good one for NZ to tie in with the ADF.
Cheers S
I wonder if such a craft would have a place in NZ.
Whatever is selected will be able to conduct independent operations around the coast and and transits open ocean water to regional islands.
These are still pretty basic craft and not that expensive.
Relatively small, they are good for small scale military logistics and HADR.
Maybe a good one for NZ to tie in with the ADF.
Cheers S
They are 50 or more years old, although admittedly they have had a number of life extensions, and are pretty well clapped out. They are not capable of ocean transits and have to be transported to the scene of the action. They were fine around northern Australia and in estuarine environments, but not nearly so good in the southern Tasman. In my view, they would be a very poor acquisition for NZ.
The RNZAF have been quite keen to state their continued satisfaction with the NH90 and have the highest availability with the type in the world. Why wood they want to ditch them when they have them doing exactly what they want? Just because some others are having problems that we are not.
Nga
“Satellites are great but you have to have really good resolution with them.”
The highly capable commercial, SIGINT and SAR radar satellite services available today are extraordinary. These provide a huge degree of area search, which together with multiple optical/IR options providing area patterns of life, are significant force multipliers for fisheries or military surveillance. Ala Ukraine today.
The large number of commercial optical services means that Satellite threat predictions are now, in daylight, almost continuous. Hence strange looking acft being sighted in Area51.
Operating your own cubesats has some bragging rights and the odd advantages, but why would you in the fight for NZ defence resources? After all, it’s the service you want not the hassle of deploying, operating and maintaining the things. Commercial services with bigger LEO systems are far more capable and constantly evolving. High class work can be presumably provided by USSF.
Finally, NZ Army asked for a Company air lift capability. Did they say Give me Euro trash wokkas? Nope. Can we do this with 2-3 deployable machines? No. Could we do this with higher numbers of smaller Blackhawks, which also has higher survivability, weapons options, and compatibility with SF and maritime? Yep. Has NZ stuffed up procurement … perhaps … binning F-16s must be up there, Charles Upon, 50+year old aeroplanes, Project Protection et al, 2 frigates and their upgrade, I’m assuming there are a few better examples, although to be fair the NZDF rifle is pretty good success story. Is the next better thing coming in 10-15 years? Maybe, but then again like C-130J perhaps these new and upgraded UH-60M acft offer better operational capability now.
I am very glad the 3 Sqn boys and girls like their cabs.
“Satellites are great but you have to have really good resolution with them.”
The highly capable commercial, SIGINT and SAR radar satellite services available today are extraordinary. These provide a huge degree of area search, which together with multiple optical/IR options providing area patterns of life, are significant force multipliers for fisheries or military surveillance. Ala Ukraine today.
The large number of commercial optical services means that Satellite threat predictions are now, in daylight, almost continuous. Hence strange looking acft being sighted in Area51.
Operating your own cubesats has some bragging rights and the odd advantages, but why would you in the fight for NZ defence resources? After all, it’s the service you want not the hassle of deploying, operating and maintaining the things. Commercial services with bigger LEO systems are far more capable and constantly evolving. High class work can be presumably provided by USSF.
Finally, NZ Army asked for a Company air lift capability. Did they say Give me Euro trash wokkas? Nope. Can we do this with 2-3 deployable machines? No. Could we do this with higher numbers of smaller Blackhawks, which also has higher survivability, weapons options, and compatibility with SF and maritime? Yep. Has NZ stuffed up procurement … perhaps … binning F-16s must be up there, Charles Upon, 50+year old aeroplanes, Project Protection et al, 2 frigates and their upgrade, I’m assuming there are a few better examples, although to be fair the NZDF rifle is pretty good success story. Is the next better thing coming in 10-15 years? Maybe, but then again like C-130J perhaps these new and upgraded UH-60M acft offer better operational capability now.
I am very glad the 3 Sqn boys and girls like their cabs.
Last edited:
The Department of Conservation put up a post saying the same a few days ago. It must make for the most expensive firewood in the country
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
As the E-7 has been mentioned, suspect if there is interest by Defence then rather than simply maritime surveillance (covered by the P-8) nor purely AWACS, it could be that they are also interested in the aircraft's other capabilities such as long-range air & maritime detection and tracking, signals and electronics intelligence gathering, and potentially as a communication relay for long-range UAV's in the future. All of which could potentially come in handy if or when for example the CCP extends its presence into the Pacific.
In a well worth reading article as this author writes (advocating for the E-7 for the USN):
blog.usni.org
This can be done day and night, in all (or most) weather conditions, has long range and endurance (which could be extended with in-flight refueling) and for NZ can forward deploy to many of the airfields scattered across the Pacific to provide coverage (assuming it is tracking CCP assets of interest - which could also include unmanned long range airborne assets launched from vessels etc) or the wider Indo-Pacific as a contribution to coalition missions.
A recent UK Defence Journal article on the E-7 outlined some of its capabilities, which from a NZ/Pacific maritime domain situational awareness perspective appears to be just as applicable:
ukdefencejournal.org.uk
Is the P-8 and E-7 complimentary? UK advocates suggest that it is for their situation, so perhaps for us (in our context - away from the busy European/Atlantic theatre) it could also be too as it means having practical/deployable interoperability with the ADF eg safeguarding their northern boundaries and providing support to our ASEAN partners (and Guam), as well as our Pacific areas of responsibility.
rusi.org
Now of course NZG may not see all this as a priority and it may not happen (and not trying to "fantasy fleet" things) but simply providing some food for thought for any discussions. But if it were to happen, airframe and cost wise we are possibly looking at no more than three aircraft, so theoretically it is affordable as well as having maintenance and some support commonality advantages with the P-8's. And if the future sees a (long term) ACF restoration (or Growler or similar type fast air EW platform) or simply the DCP proposed long range maritime UAV's acquired then a potential E-7 investment will see worthwhile multiplier effects.
In a well worth reading article as this author writes (advocating for the E-7 for the USN):
The Navy Should Acquire the E-7A Wedgetail for Daily Use
In the December 2021 issue of Proceedings magazine, retired Captain Robert C. Rubel mentioned ways to increase Navy’s presence overseas with a strained fleet and a “Ship Count” that remains ambiguous in the future due to budget constraints. With issues of aging shipyard infrastructure and missed...
blog.usni.org
This can be done day and night, in all (or most) weather conditions, has long range and endurance (which could be extended with in-flight refueling) and for NZ can forward deploy to many of the airfields scattered across the Pacific to provide coverage (assuming it is tracking CCP assets of interest - which could also include unmanned long range airborne assets launched from vessels etc) or the wider Indo-Pacific as a contribution to coalition missions.
A recent UK Defence Journal article on the E-7 outlined some of its capabilities, which from a NZ/Pacific maritime domain situational awareness perspective appears to be just as applicable:
In terms of the effectiveness of the MESA radar, for NZDF use covering a wide area of mainly ocean and some land or remote/uninhabited islands (where vessels of interest could be sheltering/hiding/operating from):
Because range is a plus for us operating in our wider region (with little to no other friendly assets or land based primary radar systems to assist):
A guide to the E-7 Wedgetail
The E-7 provides some of the most advanced capabilities in the world.
ukdefencejournal.org.uk
Is the P-8 and E-7 complimentary? UK advocates suggest that it is for their situation, so perhaps for us (in our context - away from the busy European/Atlantic theatre) it could also be too as it means having practical/deployable interoperability with the ADF eg safeguarding their northern boundaries and providing support to our ASEAN partners (and Guam), as well as our Pacific areas of responsibility.
Why the RAF Should Continue to Prioritise the P-8 Poseidon and E-7 Wedgetail
The two ISTAR types are expensive but remain some of the most operationally relevant and flexible capabilities in the equipment plan, with a vital role to play in support of the RAF and the wider joint force in both high-intensity warfighting and ongoing low-intensity mission sets.
rusi.org
Now of course NZG may not see all this as a priority and it may not happen (and not trying to "fantasy fleet" things) but simply providing some food for thought for any discussions. But if it were to happen, airframe and cost wise we are possibly looking at no more than three aircraft, so theoretically it is affordable as well as having maintenance and some support commonality advantages with the P-8's. And if the future sees a (long term) ACF restoration (or Growler or similar type fast air EW platform) or simply the DCP proposed long range maritime UAV's acquired then a potential E-7 investment will see worthwhile multiplier effects.
Last edited:
Thanks Recce.k1
You have put all that was floating around in my pea sized brain (wife's description) so well.
The E7 is so much more than AWACS, the massive ELINT capability of this frame, and the unpredictable nature of its operation would be a major headache to the CCP fishing fleets and their Military (and other nations of course). Satellites have a role to play, but if you want a small sense of covert surveillance and collection you cant go past the E7, let alone powering up the radar and sweeping the horizon. The fact you could purchase low hour/cycle second hand airframe to modify would make this potentially a quicker cheaper alternative to acquire.
The surveillance of the NZ EEZ and areas of administration should have a layered approach. Its in the region of 10% of the planets surface. No one airframe can cover this. Like an upside-down weeding cake , contracted satellite's at the top, E7 below doing the ELINT and mass surveillance covering the hole in Sats, P8s covering the mid section throughout and Q300s at the bottom doing off the coast to 200Nm.
Just my random thoughts , time to put the jug on.
You have put all that was floating around in my pea sized brain (wife's description) so well.
The E7 is so much more than AWACS, the massive ELINT capability of this frame, and the unpredictable nature of its operation would be a major headache to the CCP fishing fleets and their Military (and other nations of course). Satellites have a role to play, but if you want a small sense of covert surveillance and collection you cant go past the E7, let alone powering up the radar and sweeping the horizon. The fact you could purchase low hour/cycle second hand airframe to modify would make this potentially a quicker cheaper alternative to acquire.
The surveillance of the NZ EEZ and areas of administration should have a layered approach. Its in the region of 10% of the planets surface. No one airframe can cover this. Like an upside-down weeding cake , contracted satellite's at the top, E7 below doing the ELINT and mass surveillance covering the hole in Sats, P8s covering the mid section throughout and Q300s at the bottom doing off the coast to 200Nm.
Just my random thoughts , time to put the jug on.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
I think he meant buying into the new Land 8710 Craft, not buying the old LCM-8.
Thanks Spoz
Yep LCM-8 small, old, inadequate and destined for the scrap heap.
What I was actually suggesting was the new replacement craft not the old LCM-8. ( Poorly worded on my behalf )
Three contenders.
Contractors Team Up for Australian Landing Craft Requirement - Naval News
The competition for Australia’s new Independent Littoral Maneuver Vessel (ILMV) known as Land 8710 Phase 1A heated up during INDO PACIFIC 2022, with several competitors showcasing their designs and concepts to replace the Army’s ancient fleet of LCM-8s.
www.navalnews.com
While I would of preferred something much bigger, these are all significantly larger and more capable than the old LCM-8.
One of the contenders the Oboe 1 from Serco and Civmec is close in size to the ADF's old LCH.
As a maritime nation it has always puzzled me as to why new Zealand did not have more maritime logistic lift.
HMNZN ships Canterbury, Aotearoa, and Manawanui all offer some level of logistics, but realistically are limited by their various designs.
Canterbury best fills the role with her attached landing craft and lane meters but she is a compromised platform without a well dock.
Suggest a small number of landing craft able to conduct independent operations around the coast and to NZ's Island Neighbors would be a welcome and missing addition to the fleet.
Not big dollars for both the craft or crew.
Cheers S
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
There is a plan for a project for LSTs up to 2000t to follow the Land 8710 LCMs. The problem with Landing Craft is, the bigger they are the less places they can get into. The ability to deploy up remote River systems with Vehicles up to Bushmasters in size in Northern Australia and nearby islands is an important capability. There are a lot of places a LCM can go that a LST can't. While the contenders can all carry a larger load then the LCM-8 can, improvements in Range, Endurance, open water performance and crew habitability will be of greater importance.Thanks Spoz
Yep LCM-8 small, old, inadequate and destined for the scrap heap.
What I was actually suggesting was the new replacement craft not the old LCM-8. ( Poorly worded on my behalf )
Three contenders.
Contractors Team Up for Australian Landing Craft Requirement - Naval News
The competition for Australia’s new Independent Littoral Maneuver Vessel (ILMV) known as Land 8710 Phase 1A heated up during INDO PACIFIC 2022, with several competitors showcasing their designs and concepts to replace the Army’s ancient fleet of LCM-8s.
While I would of preferred something much bigger, these are all significantly larger and more capable than the old LCM-8.
One of the contenders the Oboe 1 from Serco and Civmec is close in size to the ADF's old LCH.
As a maritime nation it has always puzzled me as to why new Zealand did not have more maritime logistic lift.
HMNZN ships Canterbury, Aotearoa, and Manawanui all offer some level of logistics, but realistically are limited by their various designs.
Canterbury best fills the role with her attached landing craft and lane meters but she is a compromised platform without a well dock.
Suggest a small number of landing craft able to conduct independent operations around the coast and to NZ's Island Neighbors would be a welcome and missing addition to the fleet.
Not big dollars for both the craft or crew.
Cheers S
Mindful its the NZ thread.
Agree there is a follow on project for a much larger vessel which again would be a good fit for NZ.
I guess its about dollars for a defence shy government.
A smaller and cheaper craft may have more appeal.
I have come around to the benefits of a smaller independent craft able to both navigate rivers and yet also be capable of long coastal and some limited open ocean capability.
It's all about compromise.
Anyway still a handy package by all accounts.
Cheers S
As the E-7 has been mentioned, suspect if there is interest by Defence then rather than simply maritime surveillance (covered by the P-8) nor purely AWACS, it could be that they are also interested in the aircraft's other capabilities such as long-range air & maritime detection and tracking, signals and electronics intelligence gathering, and potentially as a communication relay for long-range UAV's in the future. All of which could potentially come in handy if or when for example the CCP extends its presence into the Pacific.
In a well worth reading article as this author writes (advocating for the E-7 for the USN):
The Navy Should Acquire the E-7A Wedgetail for Daily Use
In the December 2021 issue of Proceedings magazine, retired Captain Robert C. Rubel mentioned ways to increase Navy’s presence overseas with a strained fleet and a “Ship Count” that remains ambiguous in the future due to budget constraints. With issues of aging shipyard infrastructure and missed...
This can be done day and night, in all (or most) weather conditions, has long range and endurance (which could be extended with in-flight refueling) and for NZ can forward deploy to many of the airfields scattered across the Pacific to provide coverage (assuming it is tracking CCP assets of interest - which could also include unmanned long range airborne assets launched from vessels etc) or the wider Indo-Pacific as a contribution to coalition missions.
A recent UK Defence Journal article on the E-7 outlined some of its capabilities, which from a NZ/Pacific maritime domain situational awareness perspective appears to be just as applicable:
In terms of the effectiveness of the MESA radar, for NZDF use covering a wide area of mainly ocean and some land or remote/uninhabited islands (where vessels of interest could be sheltering/hiding/operating from):
Because range is a plus for us operating in our wider region (with little to no other friendly assets or land based primary radar systems to assist):
A guide to the E-7 Wedgetail
The E-7 provides some of the most advanced capabilities in the world.
Is the P-8 and E-7 complimentary? UK advocates suggest that it is for their situation, so perhaps for us (in our context - away from the busy European/Atlantic theatre) it could also be too as it means having practical/deployable interoperability with the ADF eg safeguarding their northern boundaries and providing support to our ASEAN partners (and Guam), as well as our Pacific areas of responsibility.
Why the RAF Should Continue to Prioritise the P-8 Poseidon and E-7 Wedgetail
The two ISTAR types are expensive but remain some of the most operationally relevant and flexible capabilities in the equipment plan, with a vital role to play in support of the RAF and the wider joint force in both high-intensity warfighting and ongoing low-intensity mission sets.
Now of course NZG may not see all this as a priority and it may not happen (and not trying to "fantasy fleet" things) but simply providing some food for thought for any discussions. But if it were to happen, airframe and cost wise we are possibly looking at no more than three aircraft, so theoretically it is affordable as well as having maintenance and some support commonality advantages with the P-8's. And if the future sees a (long term) ACF restoration (or Growler or similar type fast air EW platform) or simply the DCP proposed long range maritime UAV's acquired then a potential E-7 investment will see worthwhile multiplier effects.
I am very well aware of the capabilities of the E7A and have been following it for years. If I was the Minister of Defence and had Treasury based at Waiouru in hooches during the dead of winter, it would be on my shopping list, but I am not so Treasury is pretty safe in Wellington.
We don't have an unlimited money pot and at present to bring NZDF up to a credible 21st century defence force with a maritime focus, we are looking at $55 billion in acquisitions alone. That's spread over a 15 year period and would mean an extra $3.6 billion in defence expenditure per annum on top of the $6 billion that 2% GDP would give us. Would the pollies and country be willing to fund such expenditure? That $3.6 billion is about what NZDF gets now per annum, so even if the NZG took it out of the $6 billion that would leave $2.4 billion for operational expenditure and NZDF couldn't survive on that. We have far greater need of other capabilities than the E7A. You know more and replacement frigates, LPD / LHDs, more P-8As & C130Js, UAVs, more rotary wing, Seasprite replacements, upgrade Army capabilities, GBAD, Army SHORAD, RNZAF ACF, Naval Patrol Force upgrade and strengthening, and so. So any E7A acquisition is a long way down the list of priorities and at the moment about the same priority as RNZN SSBNs.