NZDF - Now and the Future.

[Markus40]

Remember the war in Vietnam was a war against communism. So the combined forces of NZ, Australia and the USA was against China and North Vietnam, thus prolonging the war. They were fighting in territory that was virtually unknown and terrain in parts was extremely hard to get through.

However, you cant compare the Vietnam war with a war in Fiji if that at all happened. For the NZ soldiers on a small island this is going to take far less time to overcome. Im not in a position like Helen Clark to make a desision to go to war with Fiji if the obligation of doing so ever came up, but given the hypothetical argument based on a fictional scenario, i have no doubt about NZs ability to complete this job.

Going to war always has its risks and those risks need to be weighed up with the most likely outcome and doing it with the less damage sustained. With the matter of underestimating a small potential enemy like the fiji military, i guess we would need to leave this to the military planners for such an operation and to the politicians. I personally dont think we have a similar situation like the US has in Iraq, because our military does think about making correct desisions. MOSTLY.

With the self protection devices that are now being installed on the c130s with the current upgrade i shouldnt be worried about being shot down. Remember we would capture the Airport first and secure it . IE putting a 10 mile perimeter around it with NZ soldiers. Remember we have our LAVS from the MRV and most likely another vessel if needed like the Spirit of Freedom that could be contracted by the military to send more equipment and hardware to the region. I have no doubt that the Fijian military will put up a fight at some point, but i think personally that due to the rapid advancement of our troops using our NH90s and LAVS we can do this job fairly quickly.

Well since we are in a theoretical discussion I suppose we need to discuss WHY NZ feels the need to impose it's will in such a manner, as well as if the military DID take over and this compelled NZ to act, would this make them LESS ready to fight?

You seem overly impressed with NZ's technical ability compared to that of the Fijian military to me, Markus. Underestimating a potential enemy is a sure way of tactical failure.

Given that it is theoretical, it is easy for me to state (AND no less accuarate) that it is just as likely that the Fijian militay WOULD put up a strong fight, would overrun the dozens of troops NZ could deploy before the MRV arrived.

How strong would NZ's convictions be if a RNZAF Herc were shot down by small arms fire on it's final approach, thus losing 20% of it's total tactrans capability, because it's intial lodgement on Fijian soil was as limited as it can be due to NZ's "fiscally minded" Government???

As to the 81mm mortar comment, you seemed to miss the point. The pro-NZDF group talk about NZ's "overwhelming" force including 81mm mortars and conveniently overlook that Fiji is equipped with same.

I realise NZ has some more advanced weapons including 105mm howitzers and Javelin ATGW's, but you are simply overlooking that fiji possesses well trained and reasonably well equipped light infantry forces. Without your LAV's you don't possess a massive technical advantage over the Fijian military, simply AN advantage.

One which can be negated in any number of ways. Look at the Vietnam war. The USA, Australia and NZ held a massive technical advantage there. Didn't do them much good though against a well trained and reasonably well equipped light infantry force operating assymetrically on their own turf did it?

 

[Aussie Digger]

Remember the war in Vietnam was a war against communism. So the combined forces of NZ, Australia and the USA was against China and North Vietnam, thus prolonging the war. They were fighting in territory that was virtually unknown and terrain in parts was extremely hard to get through.

However, you cant compare the Vietnam war with a war in Fiji if that at all happened. For the NZ soldiers on a small island this is going to take far less time to overcome. Im not in a position like Helen Clark to make a desision to go to war with Fiji if the obligation of doing so ever came up, but given the hypothetical argument based on a fictional scenario, i have no doubt about NZs ability to complete this job.

Going to war always has its risks and those risks need to be weighed up with the most likely outcome and doing it with the less damage sustained. With the matter of underestimating a small potential enemy like the fiji military, i guess we would need to leave this to the military planners for such an operation and to the politicians. I personally dont think we have a similar situation like the US has in Iraq, because our military does think about making correct desisions. MOSTLY.

With the self protection devices that are now being installed on the c130s with the current upgrade i shouldnt be worried about being shot down. Remember we would capture the Airport first and secure it . IE putting a 10 mile perimeter around it with NZ soldiers. Remember we have our LAVS from the MRV and most likely another vessel if needed like the Spirit of Freedom that could be contracted by the military to send more equipment and hardware to the region. I have no doubt that the Fijian military will put up a fight at some point, but i think personally that due to the rapid advancement of our troops using our NH90s and LAVS we can do this job fairly quickly.

I wasn't dismissing the NZ military. I have a great respect for them. I was attempting to address the attitude some have displayed here that NZ can do "anything" within it's limits within the South Pacific, as if the other side wouldn't even have a say in it.

Also, do you honestly think the MRV would land before the C-130's were deployed?

In my mind simultaneously landings would need to be made. The MRV on your "smal island" and C-130's with specwarries, infantry and grunts to make a tactical lodgement at an airfield. These would then need to be rapidly re-inforced through additional C-130 and B-757 flights as they might have to fight to secure the airport for extended periods.

Remember even a single well-handled rifle company could make life extremely difficult for any NZ forces attempting to secure a LZ. Supported by mortar and direct fire (sustained) 7.62mm machine guns (which Fiji has) would make company level attacks a VERY difficult thing for NZ defenders to face. Particularly the 250 troops the MRV could deploy.

Of that 250, you are probably only looking at a single rifle company and possibly an additional platoon , plus special forces, engineers, sigs, possibly some artillery personnel, plus the support personnel for your helo's.

It's not a big force by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Markus40]

The MRV can be deployed with fire protection from the frigates and an OPV. Yes, once a LZ has been established around port and airport facilities once the 250 troops have secured it, the C130s, and 757s could be called in with the 400 more troops relatively quickly to reinforce the 250 troops in place in defensive positions.

Pacifica has Roll/Roll vessels with facilities and can send over more vehicles and equipment if needed, once port facilities are established, or can have at least 2 more of this type of vessels in the area to off load more troops as part of the "assault" with supplies once the Port has been established. Plus more Helos.

I wasn't dismissing the NZ military. I have a great respect for them. I was attempting to address the attitude some have displayed here that NZ can do "anything" within it's limits within the South Pacific, as if the other side wouldn't even have a say in it.

Also, do you honestly think the MRV would land before the C-130's were deployed?

In my mind simultaneously landings would need to be made. The MRV on your "smal island" and C-130's with specwarries, infantry and grunts to make a tactical lodgement at an airfield. These would then need to be rapidly re-inforced through additional C-130 and B-757 flights as they might have to fight to secure the airport for extended periods.

Remember even a single well-handled rifle company could make life extremely difficult for any NZ forces attempting to secure a LZ. Supported by mortar and direct fire (sustained) 7.62mm machine guns (which Fiji has) would make company level attacks a VERY difficult thing for NZ defenders to face. Particularly the 250 troops the MRV could deploy.

Of that 250, you are probably only looking at a single rifle company and possibly an additional platoon , plus special forces, engineers, sigs, possibly some artillery personnel, plus the support personnel for your helo's.

It's not a big force by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Whiskyjack]

MARKUS40

Im sorry but i dont support your argument on this. NZ can conduct an extended operation using the Hawkes to Fiji by equiping at least 2 C130s with a air refueling function. This could have been done with the recent upgrading of the C130s if there was more forsight. Arming the P3 with mavericks or harpoons is a lost cause as well and what can P3s do to look after our troops in the field with 3-4 AGMs? As i have posted before its way better to have a forward officer to call in fast attack aircraft that can take out targets with rockets and guided munitions than firing off an $150000 harpoon on one target. I think most people would see sense in that.

Mate 2 x C-130s equipped with AAR will get you nowhere. Unless NZ can buy 5-6 A330s or the like there is no way that fast movers will be in a position to provide CAS out into the pacific. Even then it would require more like 30 fast movers to be able to maintain a decent sortie rate.

 

[Whiskyjack]

The MRV can be deployed with fire protection from the frigates and an OPV. Yes, once a LZ has been established around port and airport facilities once the 250 troops have secured it, the C130s, and 757s could be called in with the 400 more troops relatively quickly to reinforce the 250 troops in place in defensive positions.

Pacifica has Roll/Roll vessels with facilities and can send over more vehicles and equipment if needed, once port facilities are established, or can have at least 2 more of this type of vessels in the area to off load more troops as part of the "assault" with supplies once the Port has been established. Plus more Helos.

In the meantime the airfield is under sporadic mortar file and sniper harassment. To get the extra 400 troops in by air will be far to risky IMHO, and not a risk that the NZDF would be willing to take.

The issue I have, and look at some of my previous posts on NZDF force structure, is that MRV is not an amphibious ship it is more a logistics ship. It is not meant for lodgement operations. In the hypothetical discussion going on the main issue that the NZDF is going to face is that it essentially has the army equipped (and on track for an increase in numbers), with some deficiencies admittedly. It does not have anyway of deploying into the South Pacific in any meaningful way. So at the risk of repeating myself the NZDF needs to invest in 2 LPDs similar to the 14,000-16,000 ton Enforcer class.

IMO the the NZDF would need to bring elements that the Fijian military could not hope to match, ISTAR, fire power and probably the most important mobility.

 

[KH-12]

Not sure why we would want to invade Fiji anyway , its not like it has any strategic interest to us, and it is a sovereign nation (OK to protect the holiday resorts ). Question re: the MRV configuration how do you get the LAV's onto the landing craft ?

Any more news on the NH90 deal getting canned, very coincidental that this rumour comes at the same time that Augusta Westland are about to publically launch the AW149 at Farnborough, could it be that the NH90 was too much helicopter for the RNZAF.

Does NZ have any real paratroop capability (apart from the SAS) ?

 

[Whiskyjack]

Not sure why we would want to invade Fiji anyway , its not like it has any strategic interest to us, and it is a sovereign nation (OK to protect the holiday resorts ). Question re: the MRV configuration how do you get the LAV's onto the landing craft ?

Any more news on the NH90 deal getting canned, very coincidental that this rumour comes at the same time that Augusta Westland are about to publically launch the AW149 at Farnborough, could it be that the NH90 was too much helicopter for the RNZAF.

Does NZ have any real paratroop capability (apart from the SAS) ?

I would take the Fiji scenario as a worst case operation to restore order due to ethnic violence, or to secure a port/airport to evacuate foreign nationals, a worst case scenario if you like.

The reason I use Fiji, is because IMO it is a worst case scenario, but it has a recent history of instability and represents issues and conflicts that afflict the South Pacific at the moment.

The LAV would role off the back into the landing craft, I believe there are points that the LCM can lock into. Alternitively thay can be lifted by crane into an LCM

 

[Lucasnz]

Not sure why we would want to invade Fiji anyway , its not like it has any strategic interest to us, and it is a sovereign nation (OK to protect the holiday resorts ). Question re: the MRV configuration how do you get the LAV's onto the landing craft ?

Any more news on the NH90 deal getting canned, very coincidental that this rumour comes at the same time that Augusta Westland are about to publically launch the AW149 at Farnborough, could it be that the NH90 was too much helicopter for the RNZAF.

Does NZ have any real paratroop capability (apart from the SAS) ?

The LAV's are loaded onto the landing craft via the stern ramp, which has a locking mechanism to keep the MRV and the Landing craft aligned. They can also use the 60 tonne crane to load equipment into the landing craft.

The Press at http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3726509a11,00.html was reporting this morning that the NH-90 project would get approval at this weeks cabinet meeting. It also quoted the EC-135 and A109 as replacement for the Sioux. The numbers being talked about are 5, but 7 to 8 was considered the more likley figure

 

[Whiskyjack]

The Press at http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3726509a11,00.html was reporting this morning that the NH-90 project would get approval at this weeks cabinet meeting. It also quoted the EC-135 and A109 as replacement for the Sioux. The numbers being talked about are 5, but 7 to 8 was considered the more likley figure

July it is then! Will be good to get another decision through the public arena and clear the way for the ANZAC upgrade to be announced in the next 2 years (he say optimistically).

 

[Lucasnz]

July it is then! Will be good to get another decision through the public arena and clear the way for the ANZAC upgrade to be announced in the next 2 years (he say optimistically).

I suspect the A-109 maybe the preferred option, given its wheeled under carriage and proven use by the USCG in a maritime environment may allow for deployment on the MRV, in lieu of NH90.

 

[KH-12]

I suspect the A-109 maybe the preferred option, given its wheeled under carriage and proven use by the USCG in a maritime environment may allow for deployment on the MRV, in lieu of NH90.

Should'nt listen to rumours then

The A109 would be sweet very corporate I would imagine that Helen would approve , great top speed of 168Kts as well. The USCG uses the HH-65A Dauphin (rather than the A109) don't they ?

I know that the UK SAS uses some A109's (captured in Falklands)

Do you think they are not to keen to mark the deck of the MRV with skids ?

How do you get the NH90 's up to the MRV deck for launching from the hold , is there a deck elevator ?

 

[Lucasnz]

Should'nt listen to rumours then

The A109 would be sweet very corporate I would imagine that Helen would approve , great top speed of 168Kts as well.

Do you think they are not to keen to mark the deck of the MRV with skids ?

How do you get the NH90 's up to the MRV deck for launching from the hold , is there a deck elevator ?

There is a hangar forward of the flight deck which allows for storage of 4 NH90 plus a Sea Sprite. I understand that there are no lifts for moving major (LAV's etc) equipment between the two decks.

 

[KH-12]

There is a hangar forward of the flight deck which allows for storage of 4 NH90 plus a Sea Sprite. I understand that there are no lifts for moving major (LAV's etc) equipment between the two decks.

That must be one very large hangar, just have to make sure you put the Seasprite in last , would want to be very careful stacking the aircraft in there , would be a very expensive exercise if 4 NH90' s decided to rattle around in a heavy sea state, I assume there must be the facility to chain them down etc. I had always assumed that the flight deck level Hangar was only for the Seasprite.

 

[Lucasnz]

That must be one very large hangar, just have to make sure you put the Seasprite in last , would want to be very careful stacking the aircraft in there , would be a very expensive exercise if 4 NH90' s decided to rattle around in a heavy sea state, I assume there must be the facility to chain them down etc. I had always assumed that the flight deck level Hangar was only for the Seasprite.

No the hangar extends quite a way into the superstructure. The NH90 are stored 2 abreast and lashed down with the usual chains and strops.

 

[KH-12]

No the hangar extends quite a way into the superstructure. The NH90 are stored 2 abreast and lashed down with the usual chains and strops.

Enough room for a couple of JSF at a later date ?

 

[Whiskyjack]

Enough room for a couple of JSF at a later date ?

Sorry dude, I am reasonably sure you are being funny....but just in case someone else isn't so sure , there is no way a JSF could be flown off a MRV. Although I guess in an emergency a b model JSF could land..

 

[KH-12]

Sorry dude, I am reasonably sure you are being funny....but just in case someone else isn't so sure , there is no way a JSF could be flown off a MRV. Although I guess in an emergency a b model JSF could land..

No I think you could take off (F-35B) with no weapons and enough fuel for about 10mins flying , just enough to deploy to Nadi Airport

(VTO was at least demonstrated in the technology demonstrator, albeit not overly practical for a combat mission)

 

[Whiskyjack]

No I think you could take off (F-35B) with no weapons and enough fuel for about 10mins flying , just enough to deploy to Nadi Airport

(VTO was at least demonstrated in the technology demonstrator, albeit not overly practical for a combat mission)

So once you have captured the airport, you deploy 2 F35bs with no logistic train....? In the meantime no choppers as their space was taken up with the 2 F35s?

 

[KH-12]

So once you have captured the airport, you deploy 2 F35bs with no logistic train....? In the meantime no choppers as their space was taken up with the 2 F35s?

Might need a 2nd MRV for the Helos to haul some fuel and weapons for the JSF (actually I'm not sure the wings would fit through the Hangar entrance anyway looks a tad tight), could transport them on the deck and hope you don't strike any tropical cyclones on the way (bit like the case where our A4's nearly got thrown off the carrier on the the trip to NZ).

 

[Whiskyjack]

Actually I am wondering if Australia/NZ should not concider some form of 'barebase' on a Pacific Island to the north. Basically a runway with basic facilities, maybe a basic breakwater port to allow ships to unload fuel and supplies.

Somewhere that can be used for P3 operations if needed, or for ANZAC forces to forward deploy into the Pacific for an operation, including Peace Enforcement and Disaster Relief e.t.c....?

Would need to find a suitable spot.

Similar to the concept used in the north of Australia. Comments?