Re: P3 RNZAF
The same. However there are bigger issues over the arming of the P3 than your hang up over SAMS and fighters in Fiji. I think this whole scenerio has been taken out of context. I would like for you to see the following as a bigger picture for the future of bringing back our air combat force. I would welcome an open mind and logical answer from others who may share this.
Markus40]My colleague has put together a scenario and some questions in this area and i want to answer them as best i can but i would welcome your input as well. Let me know what you think.
What do you see as threatening it in the South Pacific?
Marcus40 Answer: This question is one that leads to other aspects of the P3s operations and current abilities and the geo political nature both now and for the future in other parts of the world. Not just whats threatening it in the South Pacific if a low level war broke out there. First our government use this aircraft for patrol duties working along side Australia with its limited role as our systems are currently on this aircraft are not as up to date as the Australians. So firstly because there are no upgrades militarily we have put this aircraft at risk
The next thing is to load a P3 with Harpoons restricts its range and loitre abilitys dramatically. Its manueverability is effected and operating speed. Especially if the weopons are deployed on the aircraft externally. If the aircraft had inflight refueling then that might be fine. I would suggest that this would not be the case because of the age of the aircraft being very old.
The other major reason why its crazy to load such expensive weopons onto a P3 is that the Navy and Army will require more agile and dog fighting skills from our own to kill assets for the Army in the field and a harpoon alone doesnt cut it.
The P3 is not a multi tasking wepon system that can fire a mixture of weopons for the protection of the navy and Airforce and of course our Army. A P3 cannot protect a C-130 if called upon it to do so.
The P3 is a Survellience aircraft that can have a secondary offensive maritime role working alongside a Air combat force. The only problem is we dont have a air combat force and this alone means that the Australians will have to look after them with their F-18s.
To cap it off with this question to have 6 orions in our armery for the size and remoteness of our geo location is laughable and remember that not all 6 can be deployed at once to hit targets BVR.
What do you see the NZDF doing in the South Pacific? Who is going to threaten a P3 etc?
Markus40 Answer: In future years its likely that NZ will have a greater role in this region and working alongside its allies and the enemy will get smarter and have better weopons. They will be able to afford them too.
The question is not whos going to threaten a P3 but rather the threat will lie within the P3s ability to carry out the operations currently without its offensive upgrades and operations with our allies.
The other thing is that its most likely as well that a Harpoon armed P3 is better kept for Intel and survellience and have a number of Air to ground aircraft operated by the RNZAF doing the mix of jobs that its capable of doing for our Army and Navy. Thats why im in favour of bringing back the Air Combat force as its fast and can get the job done faster. If our boys in the Army call for a air strike on a position then i think the commander on the ground would have to be drunk to call up 2 harpoon equiped P3s.!
Also remember that the C-130 is used as a tactical transport and would be much more likely to be in danger than a P3.
Markus40 Answer: The P3 and C-130 are 2 big "birds" and both are in danger of being lost in a low level war. I disagree with this comment vehemently.
To my mind intervention into a island state, where recon and precision strike of targets may be needed is the likely scenario, but please let me know what you see as a threat.
Markus40 Answer: Sounds like the author of this comment has come full cirle on himself and suggested a precision strike into a island state. Thats why my argument for a Air Combat force with the ability of its mix of weponary to do this job for our boys who need it on the ground and on the sea, quickly, fast and accuratley.
Let me know what your answers are. I look forward to your comments.[/quote]
Whiskyjack said:
Guys lets not get hung up on the P3 here. We can agree to disagree.
The issue I am having is that in the South Pacific there is no threat of fighteres or long range sam systems being deployed by any of the Island nations that can threaten an aircraft at range. The problems NZ faces is deploying troops to a potentially hostile environment, such as ET and the Solomons. More lift, better logistics and more troops to carry out the role. Together with an ISTAR ability to keep an eye on things.
