Nighthawknz
New Member
I've seen them fired from the A4s and also tracked the rockets on radar... ah them were the days
NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
mexsoldier
New Member
i don't think new zeland could become a power
oceani is a continernt with about 13 countries, only 3 have considerable quantity of people and resources, australia, new guinea and NZ, could be a power a country that have less than 5 million possible soldier?, (united states has more that 40 million eople that could serve in the military)furthermore, NZ doesn't have enough money to raise its military enough to resist a military movement by australia or spain, (i don't think that countries sometime could be in war) but the strategic situation of that country could be a good thing to think.
oceani is a continernt with about 13 countries, only 3 have considerable quantity of people and resources, australia, new guinea and NZ, could be a power a country that have less than 5 million possible soldier?, (united states has more that 40 million eople that could serve in the military)furthermore, NZ doesn't have enough money to raise its military enough to resist a military movement by australia or spain, (i don't think that countries sometime could be in war) but the strategic situation of that country could be a good thing to think.
NZDF under change of Govt
Recently had a 1:1 with National's defence spokesman Wayne Mapp (boy can politicians talk!). Got a fairly good idea of what to expect under a National party defence policy.
Disclaimer: Any such policy is not yet formulated so the following is only my interpretation of our discussion...
Basically National is now fairly comfortable with what Labour has done with the NZDF - however they want to consolidate that in a few areas.
Army:
Focus is manpower & retention, with a possible view to raising a 3rd batallion, but much work to be done yet in this area. 'Light Patrol Force' looks like their buzzword (not sure I like the sound of it either!) :unknown
Navy:
Frigates - would still like to look at option for a 3rd, but appreciates this may be unlikely given manning issues etc. OPV uparming more likely (see below).
Questions the need to upgrade ANZACs versus replacing although with replacement sometime out there is serious consideration of aligning our ANZACs with RAN equivalents.
Dr Mapp shows keen interest in LCS as a replacement, not so much by virtue of their specialist (niche) capability but more on their affordabilty (no numbers discussed).
OPVs - keen to look at option of limited uparming OPV's to provide some back-up for ANZACs (esp. wants to see ability to counter FIAC with shoulder fired SSM). Don't expect to see a major uparming - but enough to provide serious Patrol capability - 57mm gun & rear facing RWS seem options as does some form of search radar (vs pure Nav radar as fitted).
Also sees the case for a 3rd OPV.
MRV - didn't discuss much & doesn't seem to be a concern for him - pity with it lack of any serious defensive capability - even against FIAC.
AirForce:
Air Combat force - sorry guys, this is definitely off the agenda!
Jet trainers (Aermacchi) - he's keen to investigate this, although it seems more as a point of difference to Labour than for it's actual value. Would be stirctly in a training role as cost must be kept down. BUT get this - he states that the Minister of Defence (Phil Goff) has actually stated to him that if the RNZAF came asking him if they could use them NOW for training, he wouldn't have a probelm with them doing so!!! So suggests it's as much a dysfunctional RNZAF/NZDF as anything that's grounded them! To be fair they've been gutted by the Govt so maybe I'm being a bit harsh!
Air Transports - he supports starting work on replacements soon - RNZAF have stated they want A400M's!
Maritime patrol - also supports looking at replacemenst for these - suspect a 'more affordable' (ie: less capable) aircraft may be favoured.
T/LUH - Strongly feels that the hgh cost of NH-90 operation will lead to a requirement for significantly more T/LUH (possibly 20) to perform more of the 'smaller' tasks where full NH-90 capacity isn't needed. No obvious opinion on arming either type beyond door mounted M-60's.
Summary:
Anything not covered wasn't discussed, and policy is yet to be refined. Looks like the NZDF will remain a 'light' force...just hope there's no NASTY surprises!
Recently had a 1:1 with National's defence spokesman Wayne Mapp (boy can politicians talk!). Got a fairly good idea of what to expect under a National party defence policy.
Disclaimer: Any such policy is not yet formulated so the following is only my interpretation of our discussion...
Basically National is now fairly comfortable with what Labour has done with the NZDF - however they want to consolidate that in a few areas.
Army:
Focus is manpower & retention, with a possible view to raising a 3rd batallion, but much work to be done yet in this area. 'Light Patrol Force' looks like their buzzword (not sure I like the sound of it either!) :unknown
Navy:
Frigates - would still like to look at option for a 3rd, but appreciates this may be unlikely given manning issues etc. OPV uparming more likely (see below).
Questions the need to upgrade ANZACs versus replacing although with replacement sometime out there is serious consideration of aligning our ANZACs with RAN equivalents.
Dr Mapp shows keen interest in LCS as a replacement, not so much by virtue of their specialist (niche) capability but more on their affordabilty (no numbers discussed).
OPVs - keen to look at option of limited uparming OPV's to provide some back-up for ANZACs (esp. wants to see ability to counter FIAC with shoulder fired SSM). Don't expect to see a major uparming - but enough to provide serious Patrol capability - 57mm gun & rear facing RWS seem options as does some form of search radar (vs pure Nav radar as fitted).
Also sees the case for a 3rd OPV.
MRV - didn't discuss much & doesn't seem to be a concern for him - pity with it lack of any serious defensive capability - even against FIAC.
AirForce:
Air Combat force - sorry guys, this is definitely off the agenda!
Jet trainers (Aermacchi) - he's keen to investigate this, although it seems more as a point of difference to Labour than for it's actual value. Would be stirctly in a training role as cost must be kept down. BUT get this - he states that the Minister of Defence (Phil Goff) has actually stated to him that if the RNZAF came asking him if they could use them NOW for training, he wouldn't have a probelm with them doing so!!! So suggests it's as much a dysfunctional RNZAF/NZDF as anything that's grounded them! To be fair they've been gutted by the Govt so maybe I'm being a bit harsh!
Air Transports - he supports starting work on replacements soon - RNZAF have stated they want A400M's!
Maritime patrol - also supports looking at replacemenst for these - suspect a 'more affordable' (ie: less capable) aircraft may be favoured.
T/LUH - Strongly feels that the hgh cost of NH-90 operation will lead to a requirement for significantly more T/LUH (possibly 20) to perform more of the 'smaller' tasks where full NH-90 capacity isn't needed. No obvious opinion on arming either type beyond door mounted M-60's.
Summary:
Anything not covered wasn't discussed, and policy is yet to be refined. Looks like the NZDF will remain a 'light' force...just hope there's no NASTY surprises!
NZ will always be a light force. Theres nothing wrong with that.
I think really a new frigate would be the "big" upgrade. A 3rd Bat would be nice, and help secure numbers in general. As a light force it may mean unlikely deployment, but thats okay, retention and a large pool to work with are important.
There is an opening for NZ to pick up now Australia is getting its two carriers and its 3 or 4 Imperial Star destroyers. Particularly around the southern most oceans and Antartic claims.
I hope both sides continue with a strong relationship with Australia. NZ still is an important partner for Australia.
I think really a new frigate would be the "big" upgrade. A 3rd Bat would be nice, and help secure numbers in general. As a light force it may mean unlikely deployment, but thats okay, retention and a large pool to work with are important.
There is an opening for NZ to pick up now Australia is getting its two carriers and its 3 or 4 Imperial Star destroyers. Particularly around the southern most oceans and Antartic claims.
I hope both sides continue with a strong relationship with Australia. NZ still is an important partner for Australia.
Am finding it hard to get some reliable info on the RAN's intentions as far as these 2 "carriers" are concerned. Is the project going to go ahead and if so, when will the ships be operational? Also, has the original plan of embarking modified JSFs with STOL capabilities been modified to a slightly less ambitious project or does the goverment hope to continue in this direction?
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I take it nothing more specific on what a "Light Patrol Force" would be? From what I would consider a such a force to be for most armies, NZ already qualifies. I'm not sure there is room to make a force much lighter without having it suffer heavy casualities if it becomes engaged.
Does Dr. Mapp think it advisable to leave the Anzac frigates with their current fitout until a scheduled replacement? Or is he thinking more of an accelerated replacement with a different design vessel? To be honest, neither idea seems particularly palatable, unless the RNZN was offered a more capable vessel at pricing that would be a "steal". I would expect that the early Anzac frigates (RAN & RNZN) would still have 10 - 15 years of useful life left in their design. Such a timeframe would suggest starting a selection process for the Anzac replacement, but that would (should?) run concurrently with upgrades to the Anzacs themselves. As a fringe benefit of upgrading the Anzacs, it can help determine what capabilities to include on future classes.
Unless the LCS program turns out much differently than I expect, I don't see that being a good vessel for the RNZN. Given the geographic location of NZ and the surrounding waters, IMV requires the RNZN to have largely a bluewater navy. The high sea states encountered in the Southern Ocean would seem to preclude the LCS, especially if it proves true in being limited to operating in Sea State 5 or less. Not to mention what the cost for the LCS would be, US$300 mil each, with mission modules extra.
As for upgrading the OPV, I think it a good idea, though I'm somewhat dubious at including shoulder-fired SSM's for an anti-FAC role. Does anyone have an idea what shoulder-fired missile would have sufficient range, guidance and warhead to be useful in such a role? Replacing the 25mm Bushmaster with a 57mm cannon looks like a good prospect, as does inclusion of search radars. I have reservations about getting a third OPV, I would rather the RNZN get a vessel with a real offensive and defensive capability, though it is likely to be better than not having it at all.
Regarding the RNZAF, would need to see more of what develops. For MPA, perhaps following Australia's lead (a la Coastwatch) would be a good move I think. Replacing the aging C-130H's with newer aircraft with better sortie availabilities would seem wise. I have concerns about selecting the A400M as a replacement though. These are largerly due to the fact that an existing prototype doesn't exist yet, nevermind having the aircraft in production. Assuming the A400M does enter production, and does live up to expectations in terms of payload, range, availability, etc how long would it be before a A400M would enter RNZAF service, if the order were placed this year? That is one of my other concerns, that any replacement transports the RNZAF might need might not be available until after the need for replacement became critical. For some possible methods of bypassing or delaying this, would the RNZAF consider leasing C-130Js with an option to buy? Or perhaps lease C-130s from the RAAF? The RAAF I believe is keen to replace the C-130H with C-130J, so the RNZAF might be able to get C-130Hs to extend their existing fleet. Much depends of course on at what time the RNZAF feels the Hercules needs to be replaced, and how the A400M program does in terms of costs and scheduling.AirForce:
Air Combat force - sorry guys, this is definitely off the agenda!
Jet trainers (Aermacchi) - he's keen to investigate this, although it seems more as a point of difference to Labour than for it's actual value. Would be stirctly in a training role as cost must be kept down. BUT get this - he states that the Minister of Defence (Phil Goff) has actually stated to him that if the RNZAF came asking him if they could use them NOW for training, he wouldn't have a probelm with them doing so!!! So suggests it's as much a dysfunctional RNZAF/NZDF as anything that's grounded them! To be fair they've been gutted by the Govt so maybe I'm being a bit harsh!
Air Transports - he supports starting work on replacements soon - RNZAF have stated they want A400M's!
Maritime patrol - also supports looking at replacemenst for these - suspect a 'more affordable' (ie: less capable) aircraft may be favoured.
T/LUH - Strongly feels that the hgh cost of NH-90 operation will lead to a requirement for significantly more T/LUH (possibly 20) to perform more of the 'smaller' tasks where full NH-90 capacity isn't needed. No obvious opinion on arming either type beyond door mounted M-60's.
-Cheers
I would prefer to see the RNZAF purchase some C-27J's to supplement the C130's after all they are being significantly upgraded and will be good for the next 10 years or so , by then the A400M situation should be more clear. I am sure there are many tasks where a smaller aircraft would suffice freeing up the C130s for the bigger jobs (and the 757's will be able to play a bigger role in strategic airlift post modification). May even make sense to base C-27Js in forward areas of operation for periods of time as per the UH-1H deployments in recent times. And at least we would have another aircraft that could do aerobatics at airshows
RubiconNZ
The Wanderer
The 226 million spent on the the C130H's wil apparently keep them viable for active service till I believe around 2020-25 thats allows plenty of time for the A-400 to be put through its paces, even allowing a 2015 order with a 2018/19 delivery going by current aircraft delivery standards. So either government will have to look at the replacements "soon" anyway.
20 LUH would certainly be a good step especially if at least half were with ground support weapons.
The Maritime Patrol is a concern the RNZAF must upgrade in this sense if continuing to shun combat force 4 P-8's and four Coastwatch type planes would be something I would be looking to see in service.
Oh and awesome work Gibbo with the interview cheers for the thread.
20 LUH would certainly be a good step especially if at least half were with ground support weapons.
The Maritime Patrol is a concern the RNZAF must upgrade in this sense if continuing to shun combat force 4 P-8's and four Coastwatch type planes would be something I would be looking to see in service.
Oh and awesome work Gibbo with the interview cheers for the thread.
Agreed - good job Gibbo!
Without an air combat force I think that the P-8 makes a lot of sense. It would at least provide a reasonable long range anti shipping strike force in addition to its primary surveillance role.
Good to see consideration to retention of the MB-339s. Even if used for training only in normal peacetime operations it would not take a lot to equip them for light strike duties in an emergency.
Cheers
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Regarding the C-130H's in inventory (5 IIRC) I was under the impression that due to aircraft age and a number of other related issues, there was only a limited availability for sorties. Something on the order of 1-2 available at any one time out of five aircraft, and they would sometimes need to cancel a sortie due to issues with the aircraft.
Has the life-extension work done (or in progress) addressed this? Or is it limited in scope to ensuring that when a Hercules sorties it does so safely? If there are still the operational availability issues then I would think the RNZAF would need some form of interim or augmented air transport force while a debate continues on getting the A400M.
-Cheers
Has the life-extension work done (or in progress) addressed this? Or is it limited in scope to ensuring that when a Hercules sorties it does so safely? If there are still the operational availability issues then I would think the RNZAF would need some form of interim or augmented air transport force while a debate continues on getting the A400M.
-Cheers
kiwifighter300
New Member
The first C130 is in the process of being upgraded, leaving 4 available for tasking. The first is not due back until next year I think (was sent for upgrade last year). The upgrade is comprehensive (structural, engines, glass flightdeck) and that is my the approx 2 years for the first a/c. I herd that they will be the best non-J model herks after the upgrade (but that could be company hype). The company doing the upgrade is SPAR aerospace. Still can't post links
And yes the non-upgraded birds breakdown a lot.
C-27J is interesting in that we had 5 andovers (ex RAF) that did a lot of short range lifting including work in the pacific Islands (Cooks?). These and the 3 Cessna Golden Eagles trainers were replaced with only 5 Beech King air 200s
And yes the non-upgraded birds breakdown a lot.
C-27J is interesting in that we had 5 andovers (ex RAF) that did a lot of short range lifting including work in the pacific Islands (Cooks?). These and the 3 Cessna Golden Eagles trainers were replaced with only 5 Beech King air 200s
The RAN has chosen 2 x LHD's and awarded the Contracts based on the Spanish Design.
F-35B's were never part of their scheduled requirement and owe more to urban rumour than actual fact. All Australian F-35's will be to the USAF F-35A Standard.
With regards to other comments above, the NZ Army currently uses French MISTRAL missiles for GBAD low-level SAM's and what has been unofficially discussed is to procure a number of SADRAL (6-missile) or SIMBAD (two-missile) ship-based developments & systems that use the same missile as MISTRAL. This "may" be an economic way of getting good/great SAM and other missile capability.
Whether a 57mm Bofors cannon could fit the front mount of an OPV I'm not too sure about, but more importantly the effect on sea-keeping and where one stores other than immediately-ready ammo "may" be of more concern.
Certainly an OPV with 1x57mm, 1 or 2x25mm RCWS and possibly a further 2x.50cal RCWS plus SADRAL on the Hangar would be a potent Littoral warfare vessel with decent Escort capability IF ever necesssary.
Regards,
BUG
I was'nt sure whether the C-130 upgrade included any engine changes other than a complete rewiring etc.
I believe that the OPV's were actually designed to take a gun in the 57mm-76mm calibre and that funding was behind the fitting of the 25mm, would be nice to move the 25mm onto the IPV's if the OPV's are upgunned.
The C-27J would be an ideal aircraft in the same mould as the Andovers which by all accounts were quite a versatile aircraft while in RNZAF service, and would achieve commonality with both the US and Australia.
I believe that the OPV's were actually designed to take a gun in the 57mm-76mm calibre and that funding was behind the fitting of the 25mm, would be nice to move the 25mm onto the IPV's if the OPV's are upgunned.
The C-27J would be an ideal aircraft in the same mould as the Andovers which by all accounts were quite a versatile aircraft while in RNZAF service, and would achieve commonality with both the US and Australia.
TENIX's 80 metre design shows a 76/62mm OtoMelara cannon on board so it is safe to assume that the 85 metre RNZN OPV could handle the same (or the 57mm Bofors)
Thanks for that Gibbo, it nice to know National is slowly heading towards some firm ideas on defence.
If Deployments are to continue then a 3rd Battalion is a must. The Army has been heading that way for a while with QAMR becoming a third manouvre unit. The aim was to move to a second calvary battalion. Whether thats still the case. If a 3rd Battalion did come to pass there would have to be a increase in weapons like Javelin etc. I'd like to see the terroritorals restructured into a more cohesive formation.
I don't think manning a 3rd ANZAC will be an issue when you think the navy operated 21 ships in the 1980's with much larger crews. While I like the idea of a 3rd OPV, upgrades to the existing fleet would should take precedence at this stage, followed by a 3rd frigate.
The Air Force. I agree the P-8 is the best option, but maybe NZ needs to drop back to 5 aircraft, as it had in 1980 and acquire 3 MPA for EEZ. 20 LUH I thinks abit over the top 14 would be enough for Training / Ops in NZ / OPV operation. The MB-339 must be goer - I see no reason why they couldn't be used of Close Air Support / Maritime Strike with miminal cost. Using them soley for training is a waste of resource and capability.
If Deployments are to continue then a 3rd Battalion is a must. The Army has been heading that way for a while with QAMR becoming a third manouvre unit. The aim was to move to a second calvary battalion. Whether thats still the case. If a 3rd Battalion did come to pass there would have to be a increase in weapons like Javelin etc. I'd like to see the terroritorals restructured into a more cohesive formation.
I don't think manning a 3rd ANZAC will be an issue when you think the navy operated 21 ships in the 1980's with much larger crews. While I like the idea of a 3rd OPV, upgrades to the existing fleet would should take precedence at this stage, followed by a 3rd frigate.
The Air Force. I agree the P-8 is the best option, but maybe NZ needs to drop back to 5 aircraft, as it had in 1980 and acquire 3 MPA for EEZ. 20 LUH I thinks abit over the top 14 would be enough for Training / Ops in NZ / OPV operation. The MB-339 must be goer - I see no reason why they couldn't be used of Close Air Support / Maritime Strike with miminal cost. Using them soley for training is a waste of resource and capability.
If y'all want to look at the deck and internal arrangements of the OPV look at this presentation...........
http://www.sname.org/sections/pacific_northwest/images/SNAME PNW - NZ OPV Presentation.pdf
http://www.sname.org/sections/pacific_northwest/images/SNAME PNW - NZ OPV Presentation.pdf
The F-35B are urban legend. However, Australia is buying F-35's, has plenty of money allocated to buying them, has signed up for a LHD that is completely capable and designed to operate a number of F-35B's. Australia has a compelling reason to aquire them....
Its not a done deal, but entirely possible.
Most likely a Darth Vader would be required to keep all the different services from killing each other.
Has NZ expressed any interest in the C27J?
Its not a done deal, but entirely possible.
Most likely a Darth Vader would be required to keep all the different services from killing each other.
Has NZ expressed any interest in the C27J?
kiwifighter300
New Member
Not that I'm aware of. It would be nice to replace capacity rather than just retire without replacement (as with the Andovers, just to correct earlier post 3 King Airs were leased to replace Cessnas in training and liaison, later 2 more were added. No true replacement of Andovers)
cheers
Very interesting about what you say about the Defence minister and the the MB339!
Getting the MB339 up and running should be an option that the RNZAF should grab with both hands and Id say a few Skyhawk pilots would re-inlist to be a part of that.
Up-sizing all branches of the forces is a must but the issue of personal is a serious one,the goverment needs to make the forces more attractive to people,how I dont know.
While I dont like Labour and I loath the goverment for trashing the Combat wing they have done more for the forces than what national did.
For me,other than the issue of the combat wing is the issue of Helicopters,we are getting 8 NH-90s to replace 14 or so UH-1Hs which while I understand are bigger,more powerful,lift more etc I reckon this will be an area in which we will not have enough machines to go round.
The role of the NH-90 will expand to include operations with the Navy which the Huey doesnt really do,so when you take into account that all 3 services plus certain civvie agencies will want the NH-90 and the usual 2 at the lest in various stages of mantenence,8 aint going to be enough.
Maybe keep the Huey going?
Getting the MB339 up and running should be an option that the RNZAF should grab with both hands and Id say a few Skyhawk pilots would re-inlist to be a part of that.
Up-sizing all branches of the forces is a must but the issue of personal is a serious one,the goverment needs to make the forces more attractive to people,how I dont know.
While I dont like Labour and I loath the goverment for trashing the Combat wing they have done more for the forces than what national did.
For me,other than the issue of the combat wing is the issue of Helicopters,we are getting 8 NH-90s to replace 14 or so UH-1Hs which while I understand are bigger,more powerful,lift more etc I reckon this will be an area in which we will not have enough machines to go round.
The role of the NH-90 will expand to include operations with the Navy which the Huey doesnt really do,so when you take into account that all 3 services plus certain civvie agencies will want the NH-90 and the usual 2 at the lest in various stages of mantenence,8 aint going to be enough.
Maybe keep the Huey going?