Royal New Zealand Air Force

south

Well-Known Member
Never mind that you would have thought much of the spend could have come from the vaunted regional development fund being in the regions and all, but realistically the spend would not gain them any votes in the Rangitīkei electorate.

I always though Napier could be a good commercial/military hub based with the airport at the northern end of the city with few and far between populations between there and the low flying areas toward Waiouru - coupled with the port to embark things to ships and still quite close to Ohakea/Linton. Maybe New Plymouth could work too but the weather is better on the East coast :)
It’s a shame for NZ. A SQN of Strike Eagles is not an insignificant amount of people and infrastructure - read spending - in the local area. Not to mention the mutually beneficial training and engagement opportunities.

For the Strike Eagle low flying areas being close is borderline immaterial - if it’s a couple of hundred Nm away it doesn’t really matter for a couple of reasons. 1) it’s got the gas to get there and back and 2) low flying isn’t really the doctrine most air arms employ any more.

The RSAF were undoubtedly more interested in the potential access to large pieces of airspace with limited commercial air traffic constraints closer to home than Continental US.

As to a much earlier point about mixing fast air and slow air - the RAAF have done it for years (RAAF Williamtown; dual use, and RAAF Pearce Prop and jet training). There are ways to make it viable.
 
Air NZ has ordered $2.7 Billion worth of Dreamliners yet the Defence force can’t get a penny? WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
With all due respect Air NZ is a publicly listed company (albeit with a 52% NZ Government shareholding). I assume it will raise capital for the proposed purchase through normal commercial methods (as it has previously).

I don't quite see how this ties in with Defence spending? (or a lack thereof...).
 

Calculus

Well-Known Member
With all due respect Air NZ is a publicly listed company (albeit with a 52% NZ Government shareholding). I assume it will raise capital for the proposed purchase through normal commercial methods (as it has previously).

I don't quite see how this ties in with Defence spending? (or a lack thereof...).
Me neither. Completely unrelated.
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
With all due respect Air NZ is a publicly listed company (albeit with a 52% NZ Government shareholding). I assume it will raise capital for the proposed purchase through normal commercial methods (as it has previously).

I don't quite see how this ties in with Defence spending? (or a lack thereof...).
Maybe the NZG is going to divert 2 to the RNZAF to replace the 757s:D
 

Donnzy

Member
just a few of the notible points from an article released today on stuff regarding the Herc replacements.

MoD may be bypassing Tender process for procurement of replacement aircraft for C130H

in the budget leak today 1.3B for defense acquisition (not including money already put aside for Herc replacement)

KC390 & C130J listed as contenders in the article,
Mark Mitchell from National (prev Def Min) listed KC390, C130J and C2 as potentials.


Fancy new planes for the defence force - but will a $2.5b decision be put to tender?
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
MoD may be bypassing Tender process for procurement of replacement aircraft for C130H

in the budget leak today 1.3B for defense acquisition (not including money already put aside for Herc replacement)

KC390 & C130J listed as contenders in the article,
Mark Mitchell from National (prev Def Min) listed KC390, C130J and C2 as potentials.

Fancy new planes for the defence force - but will a $2.5b decision be put to tender?
If the C-130J Super Hercules is selected, a sole sourcing decision by NZDF to replace its five Hercules, makes perfect sense - this aircraft is so specialised, there is only one product worth buying. It's very capable, proven in combat and there is an option to install the Sabir system (see:U.S. Government Provides New SABIR System to Enhance Philippine Air Force Capabilities | U.S. Embassy in the Philippines) or the Hercules Airborne Weapons Kit (Upgraded Hellfire armed Hercules completes testing), especially given the *limited* P-8 procurement (as replacement for the six P-3K2s), and very different from the other two choices (which implies trade-offs, eg. ice crystal icing hazards).

To get to New Zealand in 2011, two RSAF C-130s flew 8,400km from Paya Lebar to Christchurch and stayed for quite a few ferry flights - demonstrating "inter-operability" with NZDF in the aftermath of the earthquake. Not sure about the nonsense favoring the KC390 in the article and so what if "the KC-390 can technically fly from Christchurch to Antarctica and back again in a single day" (which relies on reader ignorance to stomach). IMHO in comparison to the Japanese C-2, the KC390 is not a mature product (or entered operational service), unless it is for procurement in 2025 and beyond. The first three KC390 production aircraft are currently on the final assembly line at Gaviao Peixoto, with the second due for delivery later in 2019, and the third, fourth, and fifth in 2020.

The Japan Air Self-Defense Force’s Kawasaki C-2, and described as an outside potential in the article, is a long range, high speed Mach 0.8+ military transport aircraft that entered operational service in June 2016, with ongoing deliveries for Japan Air Self-Defense Force (with plans to acquire 40); and in November 2017 a C-2 deployed to Djibouti in Africa for the first time. The C-2 has a maximum payload of 37,600 kg (whilst taking off from a 2,300 m runway). Powered by a pair of General Electric CF6-80C2K turbofan engines, the C-2’s fuselage is larger than that of the Hercules or the stretch Super Hercules. Its vast internal cargo deck is designed to carry armoured vehicles and it is furnished with an automated loading and unloading system. Due to its ability to fly higher and faster than the C-130K Super Hercules (and even the jet powered C-17A Globemaster), the C-2 has the ability to fly international air-routes at normal cruising altitude (whereas the C-130H of the RSAF is often assigned to lower altitude by air-traffic control). And there are ongoing efforts by the Japanese to sell the C-2 to New Zealand and the United Arab Emirates.

Even for Singapore's ten C-130s, I would not question a future decision for sole sourcing of the C-130J, when the time is right (if that is the case). In our case, Singapore had to use of its Hercules (on top of its *limited* Fokker 50 MPAs) for search and locate for a missing aircraft like the search for AirAsia Flight 8501. In the search and locate operations for the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370, in the South China Sea and Malacca Straits, Singapore committed a total of 10 aircraft, which included C-130s, Chinooks, Fokker 50 MPAs, and a Super Puma.
 
Last edited:
just a few of the notible points from an article released today on stuff regarding the Herc replacements.

MoD may be bypassing Tender process for procurement of replacement aircraft for C130H

in the budget leak today 1.3B for defense acquisition (not including money already put aside for Herc replacement)

KC390 & C130J listed as contenders in the article,
Mark Mitchell from National (prev Def Min) listed KC390, C130J and C2 as potentials.


Fancy new planes for the defence force - but will a $2.5b decision be put to tender?

For god’s sake....can someone tell National to shut the hell up and let Labour spend the cash on Defence please (and before anyone ASSumes...I sit right on the political spectrum). This is the one bloody time they should put the political point scoring aside and let the money be spent before someone shits the bed in treasury and closes the purse strings.....!

Interesting that the A400M Atlas is not mentioned at all....but that could be just an oversight by a political reporter with no f-ing idea.....

I’m still hoping for the C2 and C130J combo myself.....if they didn’t go the A400M route (looking less and less likely now).
 

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
For god’s sake....can someone tell National to shut the hell up and let Labour spend the cash on Defence please (and before anyone ASSumes...I sit right on the political spectrum). This is the one bloody time they should put the political point scoring aside and let the money be spent before someone shits the bed in treasury and closes the purse strings.....
I certainly let a couple of MP mates know exactly what I thought via a text this morning. But Simple Simon who maybe intellectually smart is NOT politically smart nor is Bennett, CoS Jamie Grey or Boris McClay had done the damage.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I certainly let a couple of MP mates know exactly what I thought via a text this morning. But Simple Simon who maybe intellectually smart is NOT politically smart nor is Bennett, CoS Jamie Grey or Boris McClay had done the damage.
Yep has certainly done the damage and they just don't get it that trade and defence are a symbiotic relationship. Simple Simon and his leadership team are too fixated on the trade at all costs with China mantra at the expense of NZ defence and security. His crack about tanks vs teachers plays right into the hands of the those who are anti US, anti defence and anti frigates. To them its mana from heaven.
 

milliGal

Member
Article by onenews about how its getting harder for the air force to source parts for herc and orion and are looking for a new vendor. Hopefully bit of public pressure will make them look into it more,

Cost concern for Defence Force over ageing air fleet
I was wondering why the NZDF went to the media with a story like this. With the emergence of the budget leak, it seems it was likely at the direction of the Government to soften up the public for the billions they will be spending on new aircraft.

just a few of the notible points from an article released today on stuff regarding the Herc replacements.

MoD may be bypassing Tender process for procurement of replacement aircraft for C130H

in the budget leak today 1.3B for defense acquisition (not including money already put aside for Herc replacement)

KC390 & C130J listed as contenders in the article,
Mark Mitchell from National (prev Def Min) listed KC390, C130J and C2 as potentials.


Fancy new planes for the defence force - but will a $2.5b decision be put to tender?
It is interesting they don't mention the A400M. They quote former defence minister Mark Mitchell when they list the options being considered so that seems to suggest it has not been left out by mistake. I would have thought the aircrafts short and rough runway capability, along with its superior payload, range and speed over the C130J (and its ability to carry an NH90) would have made it a serious contender. Airbus also have an existing logistical footprint in NZ with their purchase of Safe Air, so they are well placed for after sales support.

On a side note, the article also mentions cock-ups relating to the NH90 acquisition. It is not the first time I have seen comments to this effect, but from what I have seen the NH90 was clearly the leading contender. Is anyone able to shed some light on why this acquisition was considered such a mistake?
 

Donnzy

Member
NH90 is more about their flight costs/operational issues i believe.

In April 2015, Defence Minister Gerry Brownlee questioned the inability of the NH90 fleet to contribute to relief efforts in the aftermath of Cyclone Pam, revealing that the fleet may be refitted with an automated blade and tail folding system to better enable ship borne deployments in the future.
Gerry Brownlee: NH90 helicopters purchase 'interesting'

and then there were the Engine issues last year that left the fleet grounded.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
On a side note, the article also mentions cock-ups relating to the NH90 acquisition. It is not the first time I have seen comments to this effect, but from what I have seen the NH90 was clearly the leading contender. Is anyone able to shed some light on why this acquisition was considered such a mistake?
The NH90 had bad press because of the continual delays in delivery of capability by the manufacturer. It was bought off the plans and that always creates problems for on time delivery at the prices promised. The cousins across the ditch whinging about it continuously didn't help matters much either, especially as they tended to rush into it. However it is shaping up to be a very good platform.

In the NZ case the acquisition was stuffed up because a minimum of 10 flyable aircraft were recommended to the GOTD (govt of the day) by the Ministry of Defence, RNZAF and expert team. However the GOTD (Clark Labour govt) in their infinite wisdom only approved eight plus one CKD as spares, which means that we are two short. Also they were to stingy to buy an IR imaging system that is stock standard with the aircraft and marinise them because of cost, even though they knew that the aircraft would deploy to sea. However, wonder of wonders, they did authorise the replacement of the stock standard winches with a top of the line model.

On top of that, at the time of the acquisition process a group on mid level Army officers (Majors and Lt Cols) were running an unauthorised counter acquisition program favouring the Blackhawk and were lobbying senior bureaucrats and pollies to have the Blackhawk selected. These officers were from same group who lobbied Helen Clark and senior Labour Party pollies and advisers to have the F-16 deal scrapped and the ACF subsequently scrapped. Basically they committed treason and they are very lucky that they haven't been charged with it. They also had been spreading quite a a lot of bad press about the NH90, you know half truths, mis-truths etc., to all and sundry. I think that about covers it all.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
NH90 is more about their flight costs/operational issues i believe.

In April 2015, Defence Minister Gerry Brownlee questioned the inability of the NH90 fleet to contribute to relief efforts in the aftermath of Cyclone Pam, revealing that the fleet may be refitted with an automated blade and tail folding system to better enable ship borne deployments in the future.
Gerry Brownlee: NH90 helicopters purchase 'interesting'

and then there were the Engine issues last year that left the fleet grounded.
See my reply below about lack of marinising.

The NH90 is a new platform and like any new aircraft it has problems. This is an expected issue for a new type, although the in the case of Euros military aviation, their quality of service leaves a lot to be desired. One just has to look at the difference in the quality of after sales and spares service between Airbus Commercial Aircraft and Airbus Defence. The difference in quality is immense.
 

milliGal

Member
Thanks for the replies @Donnzy and @ngatimozart. So the issues are mainly around skimping on numbers/options rather than type selection. I note that Ron Mark was one of the more critical voices in regards to lack of marinisation/folding rotors etc, so perhaps there will be some money in this budget towards retrofits. If the stuff article is to be believed then the FAMC was already allocated and the $1.3B could be for something else entirely.

I am quite shocked to hear that the F-16 deal and the ACF were scrapped on the back of lobbying from within the NZDF. The lack of fighter jets was the primary reason I decided against pursuing a career in the RNZAF. Treasonous indeed!
 

Novascotiaboy

Active Member
My comment regarding Air NZ earlier I believe does have a defence relationship. At 53% ownership by the NZ government they must have a say for their investment. It may not be thw PM that makes the call but someone very senior in Govt gets to have input.

The aircraft being replaced are 14 years old. Yet the RNZAF struggles to replace 50 year old aircraft. The public who travel the world via Air NZ wouldnt be too pleased traveling on 707s and DC9s but they say nothing about their servicemen and women flying 50 year old aircraft.

If the recent leak of budget information is correct then it looks like there will be movement finally on needed defence acquisitions.

Given their value to the national well being there should be no backlash except from the vocal minority.

Lets see what budget day actually brings.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Thanks for the replies @Donnzy and @ngatimozart. So the issues are mainly around skimping on numbers/options rather than type selection. I note that Ron Mark was one of the more critical voices in regards to lack of marinisation/folding rotors etc, so perhaps there will be some money in this budget towards retrofits. If the stuff article is to be believed then the FAMC was already allocated and the $1.3B could be for something else entirely.

I am quite shocked to hear that the F-16 deal and the ACF were scrapped on the back of lobbying from within the NZDF. The lack of fighter jets was the primary reason I decided against pursuing a career in the RNZAF. Treasonous indeed!
The lobbying by those army officers wasn't the reason the F-16s and ACF were cancelled, but it reinforced the decision. To put it into context, they were after funding to replace the clapped out M113 APCs with no protection that were supposed to take their troops into combat. It was a direct consequence of the 26% reduction of funding and resourcing of NZDF since 1991. A divide and conquer, so to speak. The Clark lead Labour party had campaigned during the 1998 election on canning the F-16 deal, plus Clark, Goff and co had been anti Skyhawk from the time they were publicly announced as being chosen to replace the Canberras and Vampires back in the late 1960s. There is a photo floating around of Clark protesting at the wharf at Auckland when the Skyhawks were being offloaded from the USS Ranger.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Update on the C-130 replacement. According to a reply a OIA request the DEFMIN will submit a paper to Cabinet for consideration in June. They also reckon that they can safely operate the current Hercules until the mid 2020s without creating a capability gap or safety risk.
 
Top