Just a quickie when did we rename them, when I was at school they were called either the Maori Wars or Land Wars?
Royal New Zealand Air Force
- Thread starter Lucasnz
- Start date
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #7,642
It was been debated in the early 1990's at the academic level.
Accepting that operationally RNZAF Base Auckland usage is constrained in peace time; at a strategic level is RNZAF Base Auckland a must, given the size of Auckland, proximity to the SAS and Commando squadrons (given the alternative deployment out of Aucland Int'l) etc. I would maintain that the base is of strategic importance. Interested in other people thoughts.
Kiwigov
Member
I think a range of other considerations other than Defence come into play here. First up - competition to the Auckland Airport monopoly, (if) a government ever permitted domestic flights to/from Whenuapai to serve the rapidly growing North Shore population (precedent is RNZAF Woodbourne/Blenheim airport).
Second - high demand for new housing on a large stock of Crown land, following the very successful conversion of RNZAF Hobsonville. Of these two, I would say housing would be the higher political imperative.
In terms of Defence operations, the SAS base at Papakura is a looong drive south from Whenuapai, would leasing helo space at Ardmore be a more practical option, or expanding a hangar at Papakura?
Other need is for facilities for the Seasprites. By their nature these do not require extensive runway facilities, so lending support to the 'conversion to housing' scenario.
More pertinently, Government has signalled an eventual move out by the recent decision to locate the P-8 Poseidon squadron at Ohakea. All too easy to imagine a similar move for the replacement Hercules (whenever that is announced).
Finally, I can't recall if there are important air bases located within the city limits of any other major international cities? (though I appreciate am flattering Auckland more than a bit to include in such a list)
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
The 2009 plan to consolodate all air force flight operations at Ohakea makes sense to me ten years on. The problem of employment for partners must surely be overcome thru the reduction in housing costs.
Taking into consideration the total number of fixed wing aircraft in the fleet totals 28 and rotary totals 21 I am sure the base could handle this with new investment.
With the entire air force located here with a few exceptions for air movements groups at CHCH and AUK there should be serious finacial savings had by having everything in one spot.
Taking into consideration the total number of fixed wing aircraft in the fleet totals 28 and rotary totals 21 I am sure the base could handle this with new investment.
With the entire air force located here with a few exceptions for air movements groups at CHCH and AUK there should be serious finacial savings had by having everything in one spot.
I don't accept that a RNZAF, or RNZN base for that matter, are strategic necessities in Auckland. In fact I think that Auckland is turning into a liability for to them and their future. There are no strategic reasons why Whenuapai and Devenport along with Papakura Military Camp, cannot be relocated to Whangarei. The monies realised from the sales of all three estates would almost cover the costs of such a move. Devenport alone would almost realise as much as the other two combined, if they all went on to the open market.
However the RNZAF base and 1NZSFR base would have to be placed quite a way inland from Marsden Point because of sea level rise. The ground elevation around Marsden Point is in the order of 2 - 3 m AMSL and that elevation extends a reasonable ways inland. The RNZN base would also have to find an alternative location, probably on the northern side of the harbour around the Whangarei Heads.
Another option is, as others have suggested, moving 40 SQN to Ohakea, have an AIRMOV DET at AKL INT, move 6 SQN to Papakura Military Camp.
I would suggest moving 1NZSFR to Waiouru, Linton or Burnham. 6 SQN could go to Ardmore airfield if space for facilities could be found. It'd be far cheaper than locating at AKL INT and there is a significant aviation industry already present on the airfield, including rotary wing, fixed wing operators, and warbirds restoration specialists. I would also suggest moving the abinito flying training from Ohakea to Woodbourne. Abinito flying training has been done at Woodbourne in the past, during WW2 from memory, which would concentrate most training at Woodbourne, freeing up Ohakea for advanced training and operational capabilities.
There are large air bases within built up suburban areas inside the metropolitan limits of Tokyo and Nagoya in Japan. Komaki in Nagoya is a Joint - Military-Civil Airport that shares the runway with the city's Domestic Airport.
Privately held Ardmore Airport Ltd own Ardmore. Like Whenuapei there has been talk for a number of years that the airport may end up as housing. The solution really is for the NZDF to have a facility at AIA when the 2nd runway goes ahead next decade.
The NZSAS regiment will stay at Rennie Lines. There were discussions 20 years ago when they left Hobbie to shift them outside of Auckland but for opsec reasons aligned with their growing black role they necessitated staying within Auckland.
Kiwigov
Member
My original post was unclear, I did not mean the SAS could (or should) move from Papakura; I was just wondering whether leasing space at Ardmore for NH-90 and A-109 access by the SAS could be closer and more cost-effective than maintaining the whole Whenuapai airbase. I think it's likely that Whenuapai will suffer salami-slicing in coming years, as that runway is just too tempting for KiwiBuild (or similar). The Seasprites would still be best placed there for access to Devonport.
I was based at Hobby in the early 1980s and the NZSAS weren't based there then. The Army unit based at Hobby was the Air Logistics Support Unit (or whatever it was called), who worked with 1 (Andover), 3 (Iroquois, Sioux & Wasp) & 40 (C-130 & B727) SQNs building and dispatching pallet loads for tactical drops. The NZSAS were well established at Papakura. However they were known to frequent Hobby and WP on various occasions for various purposes.
The NZSAS Group circa 1994 moved its HQ later to Hobbie after you were there, but did retain a CT training and range presence at the then almost abandoned Papakura camp. Hobbie was always a temporary home for them as the GOTD did not know where to put them long term. In the end the best place was back at Papakura (Rennie Lines) which the Group leadership had been pressing for all along.
Airbus is still having problems with it's renegotiation of the revised contract with programs launch nations. This has been ongoing with deadlines repeatedly passed without any agreement. It has delivered one aircraft during the first quarter and so far delivered two in April. This means that in a NZ context, any A400M acquisition is still quite a risky proposition.
Airbus still wrestling with A400M contract revision
Airbus still wrestling with A400M contract revision
Photo of RNZAF NH90 and Aussie Army MRH90 in the Solomon Islands during the recent ADF lead Solomon Islands election support mission.
NZDF support mission in Solomon Islands a success
NZDF support mission in Solomon Islands a success
milliGal
Member
Greetings everyone. I've followed the discussions here with interest over the last 6 months and thought I'd finally make an account and contribute to the conversation.
The latest bulletin from the RNZAF's Air Power Development Centre is quite interesting, and has a bit of a different tone to the usual. In the last paragraph they discuss whether it is time to re-establish an air combat capability. While hardly an official statement of intent, it is the first time I have seen a statement to this effect in a NZDF document so I wonder if it represents a shift in thinking within the organisation. It will be interesting to see whether the long awaited capability review has anything to say on the subject.
The latest bulletin from the RNZAF's Air Power Development Centre is quite interesting, and has a bit of a different tone to the usual. In the last paragraph they discuss whether it is time to re-establish an air combat capability. While hardly an official statement of intent, it is the first time I have seen a statement to this effect in a NZDF document so I wonder if it represents a shift in thinking within the organisation. It will be interesting to see whether the long awaited capability review has anything to say on the subject.
I've been skulking through some of the Freedom of Information requests on the fyi.org.nz site. It seems that as of October last year the intention was to release a RFI for the Air Surveillance Complementary Capability as a "priority" by the end of last year (see p8 here) Its now May, and still no sign!
Given that the Defence Capability Review plan has now missed its second intended release date & it seems no proposal has been submitted yet to Cabinet for the Hercules replacement - is the NZ MOD in a state of complete paralysis at present? Anyone else feel like there is something rotten in the state of Denmark (and it ain't the salted fish). Guess the Who said it best nearly 50 years ago - "meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Won't get fooled again." Can't even release a RFI? Jesus.
Given that the Defence Capability Review plan has now missed its second intended release date & it seems no proposal has been submitted yet to Cabinet for the Hercules replacement - is the NZ MOD in a state of complete paralysis at present? Anyone else feel like there is something rotten in the state of Denmark (and it ain't the salted fish). Guess the Who said it best nearly 50 years ago - "meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Won't get fooled again." Can't even release a RFI? Jesus.
Welcome to the forum @milliGal A really nice post that and does raise interesting points not just about an ACF but about the overall NZ attitude towards the ongoing geostrategic and geopolitical situation. If you have access* (to the journal) I have a reference for you and others that places the APDC article into context of the wider world:
Copley Gregory R: 2019, Strategic Self-Defeatism, Defense & Foreign Affairs Strategic Policy, Vol. 47 Issue 2, p. 4-6, 3 pp.
Ignoring his pro Trump bias, he does have a valid point regarding the "blindness" that political elites and media have towards threats other than Russia and moving on from Cold War 1. In NZ this blindness towards threats is very real, with a false belief in the defence that the moat that surrounds us gives us.
* I gained access online through my local library.
ADDITION: Copley article referenced in APDC bulletin.
Copley, Gregory R. Defense & Foreign Affairs Strategic Policy; Alexandria Vol. 47, Iss. 1, (2019): 2.
Last edited:
Just went and had a look and they haven't even submitted a proposal to Cabinet for the Herc replacement. Bloody hell. This has been ongoing since what, 2009 - 2010 so that's 10 years and 5 Ministers of Defence. What more do they need to know - how many times the aircraft designers take a crap?
The pollies seem to forget that for a moat to be of any use you have to be able to defend it or anyone who wants to can simply cross it without impediment or delay.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
The other part of the issue with relying upon a moat as a defensive barrier, is that without a means to interdict the moat, it instead becomes route of approach instead of a barrier.
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
A P3 has been sent north from Whenupai to search for two small open boats that have failed to return from fishing trips. Would it not make more sense to forward base assets in the region to quickly respond to events such as this instead of travelling almost 5000 km just to get to the search area?
Pacific.scoop.co.nz » NZDF joins search for two missing Kiribati vessels
Pacific.scoop.co.nz » NZDF joins search for two missing Kiribati vessels