NZDF - Now and the Future.

[Stuart Mackey]

Refer CA Directive issued 3 May 05 - Between now and 2010 QA to transition from a squadron to 3 subunit cavalry unit at DLOC. This directive changed the title from QA Squdaron to QAMR Mounted Rifles Regiment.

Gotta Link?

The Chief of Defence Force has agreed for Army to grow by 741 people.

linky dinky

So how many of these people will be in QAMR {how many do they currently have?}? .
What is the TOE of this 'regiment'? .

2.23
As of 28 June 2004, the Army planned to distribute the LAVs as follows:

* 12 LAVs in Waiouru for ongoing LAV crew15 training;
* 49 LAVs with the motorised 1st Battalion in Linton;
* 14 LAVs based in Linton alongside the 1st Battalion in support roles; and
* 30 LAVs with Queen Alexandra’s Squadron16, to be based in Burnham alongside the 2nd Battalion.

OAG report on LAV purchace

Honestly, untill I see 300 sworn soldiers parade with a QAMR capbadge, its just a paper game to cover for the fact that they didnt get enough LAV's to moterise two battalions.
Given that they only have a bunch of LAV's, that it begs the question of why didnt they just make QAMR part of 2/1, and have them fill that mission?. After all thats what happned to Waikato Mounted Rifles and the Scottish Squadron, for all intents and purposes.

 

[RubiconNZ]

More Vehicles

Given that they only have a bunch of LAV's, that it begs the question of why didnt they just make QAMR part of 2/1, and have them fill that mission?. After all thats what happned to Waikato Mounted Rifles and the Scottish Squadron, for all intents and purposes.

I agree for a true recce role I think, NZ should purchase either etc Pinzgauers, ie special op variants or perhaps some bushmaster kitted out for recce ops, this would provide the QAMR with a dedicated recce squadron or troop, plus perhaps 24-36 for the Territorials units as the I believe either the Waikato Rigles or the Hauraki Gulf ar the territorial recce unit, I forget which one but AFAIK they don't have any vehicles. If we are talking about LPDS which I think is a good idea, then I go back to a Mobile gun system, fire support for the Infantry and i would the give the QAMR a true multi role capability. I like the idea for 1 light one motorised batallion, as the light can also be trained for air assaultand or amphip landings exclusively without the problem of cross traing as a motorised unit would have.

 

[RubiconNZ]

NZDF Power

It would be far to expenisve to reconstitue the Air Arm, the LUH could be equipped for close air support without a problem at all.

2015

12 NHR90's
12 EC135s
8 A400m's,
4 P8-A's
6 or so Shadows or better Predators
Tactical UAVs are a must and will come in time even under Labour I think

Then in 2020 replace 757's with 3 Versions of the USAF Tanker replacement aircraft, providing airlift and air to air refueling capability

 

[Stuart Mackey]

I agree for a true recce role I think, NZ should purchase either etc Pinzgauers, ie special op variants or perhaps some bushmaster kitted out for recce ops, this would provide the QAMR with a dedicated recce squadron or troop,

If they were smart, they would have QAMR as a proper Mounted Rifles unit with a mix of armour and infantry with sub-units deployed as nessary or seconded to the infantry for deployment to add some firepower.

plus perhaps 24-36 for the Territorials units as the I believe either the Waikato Rigles or the Hauraki Gulf ar the territorial recce unit, I forget which one but AFAIK they don't have any vehicles.

Waikato Mounted Rifles form the recce element to the Huaraki Regiment. I dont think any of the territorial units have permanent equipment and are effectivly training organisations.

 

[RubiconNZ]

Out There I know...

With a obvious increase in funding hw a crazy but semi-plausable idea
New Zealand purchases a 3rd Australian big deck Amphip, the would be just under a billion I figure as the project cost should drop alittle with the third ship, the project would bring enourmous work to the NZ industry which would be struggling without the ANZAC and Protector contracts,

Capability would be outstanding=

One Infantry Batt
6 LUH gunships/recce role
10 NHR 90s
2 Seasprites

Refit MRV with 57mm gun, Sea Ram, would contain the support units and additional vehicles.

Perhaps cost sharing arrangment with Aus as they would have additional lift, oo the possibilties

However more realistically perhaps a seecond version of the Tobruk role replacement, I know the Tobruk will be replaced by one of the LHD's but its role replacement ship is scheduled for about 2017 if I recall correctly.

 

[RubiconNZ]

If they were smart, they would have QAMR as a proper Mounted Rifles unit with a mix of armour and infantry with sub-units deployed as nessary or seconded to the infantry for deployment to add some firepower.

Waikato Mounted Rifles form the recce element to the Huaraki Regiment. I dont think any of the territorial units have permanent equipment and are effectivly training organisations.

I completely agree, a well rounded, light armoured force.

Oh thats right about the WMR, cheers, I believe for capability boost equipment should be issued, im not saying LAV's but the cheaper vehicles just make sense.

 

[Rocco_NZ]

Gotta Link?

So how many of these people will be in QAMR {how many do they currently have?}? .
What is the TOE of this 'regiment'? .

It's changed again Stuart
---------------------
Question: By quantity and variant, to what units, depots and schools the
NZLAV vehicles assigned to?

Portfolio: Defence

Minister: Hon Phil Goff

Date Lodged:24/04/2006

Answer Text: New Zealand purchased 105 Light Armoured Vehicles in three
variants: Infantry Mobility, Recovery and Field Engineer Vehicles.
Distribution by unit and variant is:1 Battalion Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment has 45 Infantry Mobility
Vehicles and one Recovery Vehicle.16 Field Regiment has three Infantry Mobility Vehicles.

2 Engineer Regiment has one Infantry Mobility Vehicle and five Field
Engineer Vehicles.The Transitional Training Team has 20 Infantry Mobility Vehicles and one
Field Engineer Vehicle.The Armoured Fighting Vehicle Workshop has one Recovery Vehicle.

The Trades Training School has three Infantry Mobility Vehicles and one
Field Engineer Vehicle.Queen Alexandra’s Mounted Rifles has 22 Infantry Mobility Vehicles and one
Recovery Vehicle.The Centre for Surface Transportation Technologies, Ottawa, Canada, has
one Infantry Mobility Vehicle on loan.

Attachment: None

Date Received:04/05/2006

 

[NZLAV]

New Zealand has a nice force. The army is great, the navy is good(an extra frigate would be nice, but the airforce can do better. I still think some well armed Super Tucanos will make it so much more effective.

 

[Big-E]

New Zealand has a nice force. The army is great, the navy is good(an extra frigate would be nice, but the airforce can do better. I still think some well armed Super Tucanos will make it so much more effective.

What good are Super Tucanos if you have no aircraft to transition them to, unless you plan on using them in combat. I could reinstall the .50 cals in the P-51 I race and take out Super Tucanos.:lol3

 

[Sea Toby]

While I supported the lease of the F-16s, I could swallow their loss better if this government or another at least acquired some Tiger helicopters for the close air support mission. Since the cream puff F-16s are history, and the Skyhawks have been discarded, New Zealand's ability for close air support is gone too. Hopefully, the NH-90s will receive some sort of land attack missile and/or rockets to fill this role in the future.

 

[Whiskyjack]

While I supported the lease of the F-16s, I could swallow their loss better if this government or another at least acquired some Tiger helicopters for the close air support mission. Since the cream puff F-16s are history, and the Skyhawks have been discarded, New Zealand's ability for close air support is gone too. Hopefully, the NH-90s will receive some sort of land attack missile and/or rockets to fill this role in the future.

According to the latest Asia Pacific Defence reporter the ADF will have spent AUS$1.149b on the Tiger programme by the end of this year with operational capability in 2008, that's around NZ$60m each with more to spend! I would be happy if the LUH could be fitted with rocket & gun pods.

 

[Sea Toby]

At $60 million each I will agree. I noticed Greece ordered new F-16s Block 52s costing over $66 million American each, total program cost. Those 28 cream puff F-16s Block 15s look better and better every day. $128 million in New Zealand for a ten year lease, when the lease could be continued or bought for $128 million. While they may have not been the latest and best, they would have done well close air support and maritime strike. New Zealand could have had the lot for less than $10 million New Zealand each, in other words for around $5 million American. And think, Pakistan paid $30 million American for them each.

Of course, this government chose not to spend the operational funds on Skyhawks, saving $700 million New Zealand over 10 years, why would they spend $248 million New Zealand on cream puffs? Oh, well, its spilled milk now.

Yes, maybe the new NH-90s will receive some rockets for close air support.

 

[Whiskyjack]

Yes, maybe the new NH-90s will receive some rockets for close air support.

Hopefully the LUH, will be capable of the fire support recon role. we will have to wait and see.

 

[mug]

Couldn't the whole idea of some sort of helo-based CAS be incorporated into the LUH instead of the NH90?

One of the options that I've seen mentioned is the EC135/635 which looks quite a useful little multi-role platform.

 

[KH-12]

I would imagine the EC635 is the front runner for the LUH purchase and I would imagine Eurocopter would put together a pretty attractive joint NH90 / EC635 package, looks like they can be configured quite nicely for a light attack role but whether that option features in the planning is debatable, nothing I have read would lend any support to arming them. I think they are being aimed purely as a training / utility asset. On the plus side they should be able to fulfull many of the functions that the UH-1H fleet currently undertakes such as SAR (probably some SAS support also), not sure you would want to take an expensive NH-90 up into the Southern Alps

 

[Markus40]

The Super Tucanos would be good for NZ in a trainer role leading up to a small air combat force which is all still possible in the long run. They can also be fitted to a ground attack role as well should our forces require them in the field. Im of the opinion that the F-16 as good an aircraft as it is, is not suited to the NZ maritime environment and thats why i believe the AV-8B or F-18 would make a major contribution to our defense efforts to our international obligations and as well as the projected future Defense requirements in this region for our own protection.

What good are Super Tucanos if you have no aircraft to transition them to, unless you plan on using them in combat. I could reinstall the .50 cals in the P-51 I race and take out Super Tucanos.:lol3

 

[Markus40]

Why couldnt we use the NH-90 for this role? It has the ability for external tanks and .50 machine gun support. I guess it still could be possible for the government to convert them to carry the Maverick as well. Besides the EC135 would be too big for all the roles that the NZ Defense force would expect of it.

Couldn't the whole idea of some sort of helo-based CAS be incorporated into the LUH instead of the NH90?

One of the options that I've seen mentioned is the EC135/635 which looks quite a useful little multi-role platform.

 

[Big-E]

The Super Tucanos would be good for NZ in a trainer role leading up to a small air combat force which is all still possible in the long run.

Not during this administration.

 

[Whiskyjack]

Why couldnt we use the NH-90 for this role? It has the ability for external tanks and .50 machine gun support. I guess it still could be possible for the government to convert them to carry the Maverick as well. Besides the EC135 would be too big for all the roles that the NZ Defense force would expect of it.

I am sure that the NH90 would use machine guns on each side for suppression, but it is the wrong helo to be used for fire suppression:

• It is to big, and not as agile at low level
• NZDF will only have 8 (or even less if you saw the news last night)
• Who will be carrying the troops while it is used in the fire suppression role?
• Military version of EC135 (EC635), is designed to carry the weapons.
• Fits EC635s mission and is compatible with recon role.

 

[Markus40]

I would have to differ on your points of issue regarding the EC135. First the EC135 is too big and not as agile at low level. The NH90 in the same way.

No i didnt see the news on the NH90 -I will update this, however if it was the same number of EC135s then it would be the same argument.

8 is a restricted number and how would the EC135 be used in fire suppresion role while ferrying troops.? Like the NH90.?

Sure the military version is designed to carry the weopons but the NH90 would be able to operate doing the same role. Maybe with some modifications.

Recon roles can be carried out by the NH90 quite easily thus wont need the EC135s as an alternative.

I am sure that the NH90 would use machine guns on each side for suppression, but it is the wrong helo to be used for fire suppression:

• It is to big, and not as agile at low level
• NZDF will only have 8 (or even less if you saw the news last night)
• Who will be carrying the troops while it is used in the fire suppression role?
• Military version of EC135 (EC635), is designed to carry the weapons.
• Fits EC635s mission and is compatible with recon role.