Wow, I find that statement very interesting, given the vast leap in capability v the trusty Herc, the fact that it comes even anywhere near the same operating costs deserves the bean counters attention and maybe a re-evaluation of a NZ funded ANZAC partnership A/C, if only we could front up with the initial outlay......maybe we could sell a few more AB jerseys?
NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
Wow, I find that statement very interesting, given the vast leap in capability v the trusty Herc, the fact that it comes even anywhere near the same operating costs deserves the bean counters attention and maybe a re-evaluation of a NZ funded ANZAC partnership A/C, if only we could front up with the initial outlay......maybe we could sell a few more AB jerseys?
treehuggingaj
New Member
Late reply I know...... but I respectfully disagree. What you say may be true for boarding an IFV or SIEV, but WRT anti piracy, Helo insertion are a lot safer and easier. Don't worry about the mast etc....that risk can be mitigated through training/ NVGs and photo recces (still a risk however). A chalk is going to be on the deck a lot quicker going down a rope than clambering up the side of a hijacked cargo ship. There is also the risk that the ladder or what ever they deploy to climb has not got a firm lock, and once half the chalk put their weight on it they plunge into the sea. Not saying that rules out a RHIB boarding altogether, each situ is different. And I am aware that in some situ there have been RHIB only boardings. Just wanted the clarify the "boots on the ground comment".
Last edited:
treehuggingaj
New Member
Hi guys,
I have enjoyed reading the Helo debate. I think the one thing that sticks out is how much trouble the NH-90 has caused! Just think how much easier it would be if Aust Army Aviation and the RNZAF got UH-60M's to replace the S-70's and UH-1H respectively. Both organisations would probably be well on their way to operational readiness, if not there already. Then that would make the S-70B and Seasprite replacement easy with a joint Romeo purchase! Australian aircrew would require little in the way of retraining, as would the Ground Crew. Soldiers would not need to re write SOP's fro Helo ops. Ships hangers are already good to go! There is a high percentage of commonality with frames. The Kiwis could have done some exchange postings on the S-70's in preparation- everyone from Pilots to Infantry (the kiwis already train on Blackhawks in Timor). Sometimes I just want to cry.
I have enjoyed reading the Helo debate. I think the one thing that sticks out is how much trouble the NH-90 has caused! Just think how much easier it would be if Aust Army Aviation and the RNZAF got UH-60M's to replace the S-70's and UH-1H respectively. Both organisations would probably be well on their way to operational readiness, if not there already. Then that would make the S-70B and Seasprite replacement easy with a joint Romeo purchase! Australian aircrew would require little in the way of retraining, as would the Ground Crew. Soldiers would not need to re write SOP's fro Helo ops. Ships hangers are already good to go! There is a high percentage of commonality with frames. The Kiwis could have done some exchange postings on the S-70's in preparation- everyone from Pilots to Infantry (the kiwis already train on Blackhawks in Timor). Sometimes I just want to cry.
Last edited:
There is more than one way of boarding from a RHIB and helos insertions are noisy. But each mission has its own parameters and not every ship has the luxury of air support. Helos make nice juicy targets for bad guys and when they are hovering during the insert phase they are vulnerable. The US lost a Chinook in Afghan to a RPG recently with a large loss of life. The modern hi-tech is fine but when the crap hits the fan and the hi-tech stuff doesn't work or is taken out then you gotta go back to the old ways. When I was in if there was a hard way of doing things the Navy always found it and if it wasn't hard enough they made it harder. You trained that way so when it as for real then you knew what you were doing if everything turned to custard.
The reason why the NZDF and the ADF have ordered NH90s are that they have capabilities that the UH60 doesn't. The RAN has got the MH60R because of the ongoing delays with the MRH90. Note the RNZAF NH90 models are the TTH90 with the first due for delivery to RNZAF Ohakea next month.
Late addition: Talking of the MRH90 Australia has instituted anther review of the type because of ongoing engineering issues and spares supply issues. http://www.flightglobal.com/article...conduct-diagnostic-review-of-army-mrh90s.html
Last edited:
treehuggingaj
New Member
Oh of course. Like I said, every situ is different. And no option is without risk. A hovering chopper is a juicy target, but so is a nice line of guys climbing a ladder. A good airborne sniper team can be good for either event! I just wished to clarify the post with regard to the speed at which boots get on the deck.
I see that the Wildcat Initial Release To Service is February 2012 DSEi: Lynx Wildcat aces operating trials Considering that the A109s are relatively cheap (according to NZ PM Key) wouldn't it be a natural transition from initial training on the A109 to the Wildcat for operational training and type rating.
treehuggingaj
New Member
Yep, delays that would be non- existent had they stay Sikorsky! What capabilities are you referring to? From where I come from in the ADF, without saying more than is released, all I have seen is a lack of capabilities compared to S-70, let alone Mike models.
treehuggingaj
New Member
Thanks for the link, mate. I think that list of problems should be a lot longer! I wont be surprised if the program gets canned. But another part of me suspect too much money has gone into it
However, back to the NZDF, I can also see NZ getting them working fine. They got Seasprite up where Australia failed. Albeit with less Gucci stuff than Australia was going to have. It will be interesting to see how the TTH90 programs goes!
Last edited:
Thanks for the link, mate. I think that list of problems should be a lot longer! I wont be surprised if the program gets canned. But another part of me suspect too much money has gone into it
However, back to the NZDF, I can also see NZ getting them working fine. They got Seasprite up where Australia failed. Albeit with less Gucci stuff than Australia was going to have. It will be interesting to see how the TTH90 programs goes!
Yep we bought an extra aircraft to cannabalise as spares (same with A109s) to get around spare parts issues. Hard lesson learned from Seasprites that are now presenting a big problem. Kaman are proving not to be the most forthcoming, so now the decision has to be made about the future of the Seasprite in NZ service.
Referring to your earlier post IIRC the NH90TTH has a greater lifting capacity and troop carrying capability than that offered by the MH60 series. Much the same reason why I presume the ADF purchased the NH90MRH. Methinks the ADF has had issues in recent years with some purchases which have cost it a fortune and I wonder if it has to do with how they are done and maybe unrealistic expectations. Example being the Seasprites, especially integration of electronics. It is hard to say. NZDF certainly has its own issues with purchases but more to do with lack of money, political will and to much interference from Treasury and other non defence departments.
Agreed, and there are a few around that also see your points, the NH90 will still be a very beneficial platform with some added bonuses(lift, ramp etc) once all the bugs are ironed out and infrastructre, training and SOPs are in place, but yes the operatinonal timeline is and will be a major headache that would have transitioned alot easier with new build 60s
new 60s were never really an option, it was nh90 or s-92. and out of those choices im glad we went nh90. but in saying that they are both quite large so i wonder if much thought was given at the time as to whether there would be a need for somthing to fit between that and what was chosen to replace the sioux, which is the situation we are in now
If you have been following the RNZAF thread and this one you will aware that the Bell 47G Sioux in RNZAF service is being replaced by the Augusta A109. IIRC 6 aircraft have been bought in the first tranche with 1 being cannibalised for spares. Our illustrious leader the PM has decided that because they are so cheap a further 3 will be bought, this being the 2nd tranche. AFAIK 1 aircraft is definitely flying at Ohakea. The aircraft are armoured and armed with the MAG58 7.62mm machine gun on a door mounting and also has a winch. Besides basic rotary wing training they will operate in other roles including some that the UH1H Iroquois have done. The A109 offers far greater versatility over the Sioux and is also a twin engined gas turbine.
Around eight years ago dimensional mock-ups were made up at OH of the leading MUH’s around at the time. This followed Cabinets green light for the Huey replacement. The RNZAF supported by the Army, worked closely together to evaluate a range of capability issues and undertook detailed reality checking during this process - the Army being the key client of course. This was a project that the CDF at the time had a particular interest in (he coming from a rotary background). One of the considerations during the selection of the MUH was the complementary awareness of the T/LUH options. The NH90 – AW109 are a solution package and were thought of in that sense not just as a single generic solution. They may have had separate tending processes but underneath that, there were considerable capability dovetailing and synergies that lead to the acquisition.
Something more for the NZDF planners. Antarctic oil sets up cold war - news - the-press | Stuff.co.nz Short synopsis South Korea is building an Antarctic Base in the Weddell Sea about 350km from Scott Base / McMurdo. No place for a runway so they are shipping everything in via Lyttelton.
In 2048 the Antarctic Treaty expires. The treaty forbids commercial exploitation on minerals including oil, nation sovereignty over any part of the continent and surrounding waters and demilitarises the continent. It has been suggested the Ross sea and the Weddell Sea hold oil reserves as large as Saudi Arabia. Other nations are starting to position themselves for when the current treaty expires. NZ has a historical claim over the Ross Sea called the Ross Dependency which was put into abeyance in 1959 when the Antarctic Treaty was signed. NZs claim has not been formally withdrawn by NZ. The economic benefits of the oil and minerals to NZ would be very high even after costs of extraction were taken out.
What is interesting is that an Australian has written a report suggesting that the current NZG may wish for the NZ Ross Dependency Claim to disappear because of cost, which would be extremely stupid even for our pollies. Secondly, same report suggest that NZG needs a $500 million ship rugged enough to fly NZs flag around the Ice. Thirdly, the report notes the NZs Antarctic Program has a high military input. Fourthly, the report notes that long history of cooperative effort between NZ and Australia and that a "joint operation on Antarctic surveillance and unmanned capabilities" be advantageous to both nations.
I'm going to see if I can get a copy of the report because this will have a major impact upon NZDF especially if mining does start in or around the Ice and nations abbrogate the current Treaty and unilaterally start staking claims.
In 2048 the Antarctic Treaty expires. The treaty forbids commercial exploitation on minerals including oil, nation sovereignty over any part of the continent and surrounding waters and demilitarises the continent. It has been suggested the Ross sea and the Weddell Sea hold oil reserves as large as Saudi Arabia. Other nations are starting to position themselves for when the current treaty expires. NZ has a historical claim over the Ross Sea called the Ross Dependency which was put into abeyance in 1959 when the Antarctic Treaty was signed. NZs claim has not been formally withdrawn by NZ. The economic benefits of the oil and minerals to NZ would be very high even after costs of extraction were taken out.
What is interesting is that an Australian has written a report suggesting that the current NZG may wish for the NZ Ross Dependency Claim to disappear because of cost, which would be extremely stupid even for our pollies. Secondly, same report suggest that NZG needs a $500 million ship rugged enough to fly NZs flag around the Ice. Thirdly, the report notes the NZs Antarctic Program has a high military input. Fourthly, the report notes that long history of cooperative effort between NZ and Australia and that a "joint operation on Antarctic surveillance and unmanned capabilities" be advantageous to both nations.
I'm going to see if I can get a copy of the report because this will have a major impact upon NZDF especially if mining does start in or around the Ice and nations abbrogate the current Treaty and unilaterally start staking claims.
This will be the second SK base and the new one will be built close to the current Italian and German stations. It got approval from the AC last year and conforms to all environmental protocols. I tend to take Lowry reports with a grain of salt.
Ah he sounds like a certain kiwi historian who denies Maori cannabilism when we know it happened. I do think he has a point that though and IMHO NZ will need to increase its presence in the Great Southern Ocean, The Southern Basin and the Ross Sea in order to protect current and future NZ interests. Maybe a 3rd or even 4th OPV could be called for especially if they were ice strengthened. Also it has been suggested that a very large oil field lies to the south off Puysuger Point at the bottom SW corner of the South Island extending south and south west. Just more things that have to be taken into account.
anything with better capabilities then the current huey was an option just depended on what amount of options could be gained in whatever platform which would balance out, but if we spend the next 10 years constantly working out problems(both known and new, now and in the future) and does not perform as stated then have we really gained anything for a few more seats and a heavier lift versus something that has already been through this process and years down the track is working to its potential?
I agree with you about the void in between in terms of A109 too small to cover certain jobs whilst the NH90 would be overkill and too expensive to use. I can see certain jobs either being cut or given to civilian contractors(ie police tasks), something in the range of B212-lynx-AW139 would be more suitable but again cannot see us going above and beyond unless something could be worked in with the navy upgrade/replacement (if they go with this size range) and aqquired at the same time .
I have always felt that there is a need for a cheap to own and operate civilian lo-spec helicopter within the RNZAF fleet to undertake the dogsbody unglamorous tasks even with the arrival of the Mako and the 90 fleet. Recce and I mulled it over on this thread a few years ago. Rightly something appropriately rugged that slots in between the 90 and the Mako’s sizewise – a sort of flying hilux ute of NZDF was the idea.
The 212 does look the pick of the bunch and very good examples between 10-15 years old can be picked up on the international market for around $NZ3m an airframe or half a dozen of them for the price of a single Mako LUH. The 212 as a known quantity in NZ skies comes with the added benefit that support can be outsourced to any number of local firms.
There was chatter about using the locally built PAC750 for this rough and ready role about a year or so ago but never really went much further than a couple of manufacturer PR sheets.