Royal New Zealand Air Force

recce.k1

Well-Known Member
@Mr C, interesting possibility that C-2.

I see it has a a payload of 26-30 metric tons and a range of 3500 nm, meaning it could easily transport a LAVIII direct to Australia.

I wonder if the NZDF & MoD are actively considering it?

Perhaps the question (to be asked is), is it (or can it be) fitted with modern electronic counter-measures, so crucial now for military air-lifters flying into contested areas even A-Stan etc?

(Just wondering whether the JASDF has ECM fitted due to their mostly homeland self-defence role etc).

There was a recent DT thread on the C-2 too:
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/air-force-aviation/kawasaki-c-2-400-alternatives-10199/

I guess the problem the National Govt has inherited is, the C-130H SLEP was meant to defer the long term replacement of the H for another 10 years. But if the SLEP doesn't work out then a replacement is required ASAP (creating an issue with general equipment replacement priorities). The Govt is now saying the C-130H SLEP should be "completed" by year end. We'll just have to wait that one out to see if this proves true. As said earlier IMO best the Govt look at an initial order anyway/regardless of eg 3x C-130J (or perhaps now the 2x C-2) , as the RNZAF previously said they were 3 airframes short (eg they need 8 Hercs to fulfill their taskings) even if the C-130H SLEP is successful, the RNZAF will alway have one H short due to the last 3 being upgraded one-at-a-time for the next 3 or so years etc. And then still not have enough for contingencies. I wonder if this issue is part of the Defence Whitepaper release delay?

In terms of numbers of the eventual C130H replacement, whatever they may be, 4 might not be enough. NZ seems to need to deploy 2-3 C130H simulataneously when there's trouble/emergencies (eg Timor, Tonga etc), with obviously 1 or 2 in maintenance (and/or 1 on standby for local contingencies). Perhaps we could get away with at least 4 CN-235/295's but we might need at least 5-6 C-130J/C-2 types etc.

At least the C-2 is relatively cheap (although possibly minus ECM costs to be added), the thing is, it's been reported that the NZ Govt need to get more on the Japanese Govt's radar. Seeing the NZDF don't actively exercise in Japanese waters in any major way (just good-will visits and pass-ex's etc), perhaps a C-2 purchase might be the key?
 

Gibbo

Well-Known Member
You can say that again!

But seriously there's some good stuff in there.

Regarding the 2nd link, the Herc breakdown resulting in next week's trip to the Pacific being cancelled has meant the Island leaders have been spared listening to this oddity of a European to them called the Greens foreign affairs and defence spokesperson (and putting up with his renditions of kumbayah my Lord when the kava comes out at night)! (Surely they can substitute with video conference links until a trip can be rescheduled later)?

Regarding the 3rd link, Lieutenant Colonel Todd Hart did a superb job explaining to those reporters with short memories that breakdowns are quite common but there were backup contingencies etc (granted razor thin though due to numbers/upgrade delays .... perhaps those reporters could think a little bit more and ask the pollies why the RNZAF has had its airlift fleet chopped in previous times and why is it taking so long to rectify that)?!
Actually in my book the measure of Mapp as DefMin will be determined largely by how he deals with the sorry state of our Air Transport fleet. Purchase of twin-turbos is good (of the publicised options CN235 preferred in my book) but the replacement of the Herks will be the one to watch. It's a disgrace at the moment & is seriously tarnishing our reputation - so if he doesn't deal with it effectively - then he will be consigned to my 'same as all the rest' list! :dunce

He's certainly made noises about needing to look at their future - so I think we'll see something. I think we'll eventually see a B757, C130J, CN235 or Q300 mix, but the key to me is 7 C130J - although I'd be thankful for a 6th right now! I don't think less then 5 is advisable even with an equivalent sized twin-turbo fleet, given known workloads & the long-term timeframes. I also think the C130J-30 (stretched) is the model we should get.

Yeah I'm open to other types but I just think the C130J is the easiest 'sell' to the NZ public with ADF commonality, proven lineage, etc etc....

Fingers crossed!!!!:pope
 
Last edited:

RegR

Well-Known Member
Actually in my book the measure of Mapp as DefMin will be determined largely by how he deals with the sorry state of our Air Transport fleet. Purchase of twin-turbos is good (of the publicised options CN235 preferred in my book) but the replacement of the Herks will be the one to watch. It's a disgrace at the moment & is seriously tarnishing our reputation - so if he doesn't deal with it effectively - then he will be consigned to my 'same as all the rest' list! :dunce

He's certainly made noises about needing to look at their future - so I think we'll see something. I think we'll eventually see a B757, C130J, CN235 or Q300 mix, but the key to me is 7 C130J - although I'd be thankful for a 6th right now! I don't think less then 5 is advisable even with an equivalent sized twin-turbo fleet, given known workloads & the long-term timeframes. I also think the C130J-30 (stretched) is the model we should get.

Yeah I'm open to other types but I just think the C130J is the easiest 'sell' to the NZ public with ADF commonality, proven lineage, etc etc....

Fingers crossed!!!!:pope
Somehow I doubt we would get more herc platforms than the 5 we have at the moment as the cn-235 would be the gap filler. The best we could hope for would be 5 C130j-30s as the extra space along with the extra reliability will somewhat make up for the stated 8 Hs needed.
5 J-30s + the 235s along with the boeings would still be alot better then what we currently have maybe not numbers wise but definately tasking and availability wise. Failing that I would like to see the government halt the SLEP, maybe some less minor mods for the remaing Hs and put the money towards a few new build hercs now and replace the rest in a more timelined fashion, so maybe a fleet of 2-3 C130J-30s, 2 SLEP Hs and 3 basic Hs now(gives the 8 needed) and then replace the basic Hs with a J later and then the SLEP Hs with another sometime after that. somewhat alleviates the initial cost and spreads it over a period of years if the bulk buy is considered too great.
 
Last edited:

Kiwikid

New Member
Sure be nice to back the young democracy in the Ukraine with an order for the Antonov An-70 with a Western engineered cockpit. These aircraft have a hold capacity which dwarfs the C-130J and can swallow the next generation of Army helicopters or LACVs whole.

It will fly 5000nm from any decent runway and 2,100nm from a dirt strip with a 20,000kg payload at respectable speeds.
 

Sea Toby

New Member
Sure be nice to back the young democracy in the Ukraine with an order for the Antonov An-70 with a Western engineered cockpit. These aircraft have a hold capacity which dwarfs the C-130J and can swallow the next generation of Army helicopters or LACVs whole.

It will fly 5000nm from any decent runway and 2,100nm from a dirt strip with a 20,000kg payload at respectable speeds.
The New Zealand Air Force is having enough difficulty keeping their old Hercules up in the air with several nearby sources for spare parts... Unfortunately, there are no nearby sources for spare parts with Antonov An-70s...

Its why NZ will most likely buy new Herucles in the future to replace their old Hercules...
 

Kiwikid

New Member
The New Zealand Air Force is having enough difficulty keeping their old Hercules up in the air with several nearby sources for spare parts... Unfortunately, there are no nearby sources for spare parts with Antonov An-70s...

Its why NZ will most likely buy new Herucles in the future to replace their old Hercules...
These Antonov An-70 aircraft would be entirely new build aircraft for a third the cost of a less capable C-130J and probably half the cost of current upgrades to the elderly C-130s.

With those sort of savings you could buy enough spares with the same financial outlay to purchase two complete sets of spares per airframe.

The Ukraine is now a west leaning democracy. Half the world's commercial heavy lift fleet is now dominated by the Antonov 124. What is wrong with thinking outside the box?
 

Cadredave

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
These Antonov An-70 aircraft would be entirely new build aircraft for a third the cost of a less capable C-130J and probably half the cost of current upgrades to the elderly C-130s.

With those sort of savings you could buy enough spares with the same financial outlay to purchase two complete sets of spares per airframe.

The Ukraine is now a west leaning democracy. Half the world's commercial heavy lift fleet is now dominated by the Antonov 124. What is wrong with thinking outside the box?
True it is a thirld of the cost but what is flying into war zones now C130J they are proven, what is also proven is the logistical back up of spare parts, what you dont see on the internet is the pricing to spt that aircraft over its life time, we are to small a country to have large amounts of spare parts lying about gathering dust, if our C130H break down in Aussie, US Canada or the UK we are able to use spare parts from them & then replace that item from our order & like wise for them. The RNZAF is not going to buy an orphan system that is incompatible with other ABCA or NATO countries we will go with what our closet allie has.
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
True it is a thirld of the cost but what is flying into war zones now C130J they are proven, what is also proven is the logistical back up of spare parts, what you dont see on the internet is the pricing to spt that aircraft over its life time, we are to small a country to have large amounts of spare parts lying about gathering dust, if our C130H break down in Aussie, US Canada or the UK we are able to use spare parts from them & then replace that item from our order & like wise for them. The RNZAF is not going to buy an orphan system that is incompatible with other ABCA or NATO countries we will go with what our closet allie has.
Indeed, as Cadredave said, the issue with military acquisitions is not 'just' the initial purchase cost. There is also the operational and through-life/support costs.

In the case of the RNZAF operating the An-70, any, every and all support and replacement items would either need to be stocked by the NZDF and have a system in place to transport replacement parts to deployments when/as needed. The other alternative is to order replacement items when/as needed from the Ukraine. And hope that they can be had or delivered in a reasonable amount of time. This is one area where an economy of scale is very useful.

Additionally, there is the potential for QC issues with Antonov (and other Ukraine & Russian aircraft) which could mean that the flight hours would not match what a C-130J could provide. Now if the An-70 reached a distribution level that saw it in widespread use by NATO countries (i.e. in place of the A400M) then the RNZAF might be well-served by ordering it. Until that time though, it would probably be wiser to stick with Western aircraft.

-Cheers
 

Lucasnz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Update on Skyhawk Sale

This was posted on Stuff today

The future of the mothballed air combat wing could be decided within a month as crunch time looms for the American buyers to come up with $151 million.

The Cabinet is expected to consider a paper on the 17 Skyhawks and 17 Aermacchi trainers in the next two to four weeks as concerns rise that Arizona firm Tactical Air Services has not found the funds nearly a year after getting final clearance to import the planes. Options are likely to include setting a deadline for TAS to find the money or canning the sale and finding another buyer. Selling the more valuable Aermacchis separately and keeping the Skyhawks for engineer training or selling the parts will also be considered.

A last resort would be to fully decommission the Skyhawks and give them to aviation museums and RSAs. That would mean no financial return to the Government, but would preserve an important part of New Zealand's military history and is seen as preferable to scrapping them.

The Cabinet discussions will be held as a key milestone for TAS to find the money draws near. A United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives import permit expires on September 22, and while the licence can be extended, the date is starting to be seen as make-or-break time for TAS.

Associate Defence Minister Heather Roy, who has responsibility for the future of the decommissioned air combat wing, has also made clear she wants the future of the planes settled well before the next election, preferably by the end of this year. She said through a spokesman yesterday she was still hopeful the TAS sale would proceed.

"While selling the Skyhawks to TAS still remains the preferred option, I acknowledge that the time is drawing near when a decision will have to be made."

TAS chief executive "Hoss" Pearson could not be contacted, but said in May he was confident he could find the money. The bill for storing the Skyhawks since their decommissioning in 2001 is well over $12m, and it is estimated it will cost at least another $20m to get them serviceable if the TAS sale proceeds.
Excellent 8 years chasing a sale that may not happen. I wonder if we should make the members of the former Labour govt pay the $12m back to Treasury, given their incomptence in handling the whole process. I hope the sale does fall over and the Macchis come back into service, even if in reduced numbers.
 

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
It seems hopes of a LM T-50 deal with Singapore bringing fast jets to NZ have been dashed, and along with them any hope of a piggyback deal to get NZ F/A-50 capability on the ultra cheap. Source: Singapore chooses Italy's M-346 Trainer Jet - Defense News

Oh well, it was a nice thought. It leaves only the rumours of a reactivation of the mothballed Aermacchi. Uncle Sam might still throw us a bone.:rolleyes:
Well its official. Radio NZ reports that the Singapore pilot training contract is going to France and not Ohakea as hoped.

Still the headache over the disposal of the A-4's and the MB-339CB's continues.
 

Bonza

Super Moderator
Staff member
Well its official. Radio NZ reports that the Singapore pilot training contract is going to France and not Ohakea as hoped.

Still the headache over the disposal of the A-4's and the MB-339CB's continues.
I really hope your Gov. can get that situation sorted soon. All this business of Navy and Air Force not having the equipment to do the job is very frustrating from an Australian perspective and I imagine doubly so for those members who live in NZ. I'm not familiar with the political/media climate over there, but it sounds like it's almost impossible to convince anyone the military is worth spending decent money on. So here's to y'all getting a higher priority on your Air Force gear (and with any luck, 3-4 frigates when the time comes).
 

dave_kiwi

New Member
Verified Defense Pro
Well its official. Radio NZ reports that the Singapore pilot training contract is going to France and not Ohakea as hoped.

Still the headache over the disposal of the A-4's and the MB-339CB's continues.
Not really surprised, given that the current lease the Singaporean's have with the French hasn't yet expired, plus they have a hell of a lot of infrastructure in place. The new aircraft would replace, I assume, the A-4Ss currently used for training.

Anyway, the White Paper is supposed to be released in September, which in means in theory it's only a couple of days away - hahaha - so hopefully there is some reasonable new in that.
 

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
Not really surprised, given that the current lease the Singaporean's have with the French hasn't yet expired, plus they have a hell of a lot of infrastructure in place. The new aircraft would replace, I assume, the A-4Ss currently used for training.

Anyway, the White Paper is supposed to be released in September, which in means in theory it's only a couple of days away - hahaha - so hopefully there is some reasonable new in that.
Actually Dave it has been put back another month. The DWPis now due in October. I wonder if that has something to do with Heather Roys sacking or that her keenness to get commercialisation from defence assets has gone up in smoke due to the cornerstone deal which could have launched it, the RSAF arrangement now not on.
 

Gibbo

Well-Known Member
Aw109 #6

Had a quick read of NZ Wings magazine at bookshop today ;)

RNZAF AW109 order now comprises 6 complete aircraft - HOWEVER - like the NH90 order the last airframe will be part of the spares package and will only ever be an attrition airframe. If fact #6 will be the first to arrive (via B747 freighter) - but I can't remember what the date was! :p:
 
Last edited:

dadof2

New Member
Skyhawk sale has fallen through,they will be sraped or sold to museums government is still making it's mind up.I think they will get rid of them quickly,they have spent 34 million dollars to keeping them in storage,it is getting embarrassing for them.Defence minister said on news tonight the Macchi's are newer and will be easier to sell on there own.Thats the nail in the coffin for any chance of seeing jets in the sky again.The national government have no interest in a combat wing as i have always though,there track record for investing in the armed forces is very poor.The defence white paper next month will be mainly about cost savings and only replacing worn out gear that is on it's last legs.We were supposed to see one NH90 in March this year,have not heard a thing about it.One positive i was talking to a air force guy he said the A109's were arriving ahead of time.Should see one before the year is out.
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
Can someone better qualified than I am explain why a turbo-prop CAS aircraft such as the Super Tucano or the Texan II, has not been investigated for use in the RNZAF? It seems very cost effective.

Military technology: Air power on the cheap | The Economist
Because the lack of fixed wing airpower in NZ is nothing to do with resources and everything to do with political ideology. A fixed wing combat capability is well within NZ's resources, but some there think that taking the Ostrich approach to real world issues is the best way to deal with things...
 
Top