Robsta, I posted yesterday a media release in the RAN thread, and it definately mentioned the discussion of the Amphibs, it also mentioned a Joint Rapid Reaction Force ? Have you heard anything about that one ?
Joint Defence Ministers press conference was planned for 1300 today in Beehive Theatrette. Heres TVNZ report of Press Conference Closer NZ-Australia defence ties pledged | POLITICS News
AFAIK there was no major release regarding these issues before today, though some around here who read up more on the Parliamentary docs might be more aware of any developments. I imagine there were a whole lot of feasibility studies going on.
Thanks for the link you beat me to it. Exciting stuff mentioned.
My speculation is this will be training with the the Deployable JFHQ, this would I assume create the opportunity for a Ready Platoon to be attached to RRF, I also would presume with the growth slated for the NZ Army they might grow this to a Company force, all guestimation by me though. Though as a joint force and due to the size of the Canterbury this could be company sized task group able to onto the Canterbury, with some airlift capability included.
I imagine this would also mean a Logistical and Engineering detachments rather than purely infantry.
Nice, I am sure the RNZN will be happy to take funds from the ADF to ensure a higher availability of the Canterbury. If anybody needed any reassurance the ship can't be so bad after all. Some might say well suited to Pacific operations.
Perhaps in Politician speak, don't get to excited about an ANZAC unit as we do not want to spend money on it.
I was having a quick look on the Courier-Mail (Brisbane) web site for a press release (before I found the TVNZ one) and I see an Independent MP calling for defence cuts to help cover the A$1.8 Billion cost of disaster relief. Be interesting to see if that idea gets traction. He said they could save $110 million by cutting one F35 JSF. "Consider defence cut for floods bill - Oakeshott" http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s-bill-oakeshott/story-e6freonf-1226003606246
Tyranny of distance, what protects NZ most its isolation also has lulled NZ into a sense of security, Australia has always had enemies to the north since WW2 it has/had a defined threat. Not to mention NZ has a very strong environmentalist social conscious movement which traditionally is quite defence spending adverse.
Well said
IMO Oakenshott runs lets his mouth do the thinking, so it does not suprise me he is foolish enough to bring that up, in the middle of the QLD disasters recovery the ADF has been the driving force behind it all 4000 personnel are assisting up north as we speak, 1000 plus assisted in the South Qld clean up.
I wish our political parties had such an agreement. Then things might be better for NZDF. Ah I suppose dreams are free.
It is a shame most political debate of defense seems to be bag out the previous Governments acquisition decisions and management. Instead of focusing on positives, they focus on the things that went wrong rather than right giving the impression that nothing goes right in defence procurement.
another note NZ would only need a basic form of air defence as the only likely aircraft to intrude into our airspace would be recon, or transport aircraft or helicopters from ships. If combat aircraft where involve it would mean there was a large aircraft carrier was pressent and we would not expect to cope with that. the main functions would be marintime attack and ground force support. these aircraft would not be involve in patrolling. this would be left to dedicated patrol aircraft and satellites. I would also note that G.B. got only hours warning of the invasion of the Faulkland Islands even though they have a far more sophistigated inteligents services than us. When it comes to modern conflict will not even tell you that you are an enemy let alone make any formal declarations, any designs on us will be kept as secret as possible for as long as possible. We need to acept that we cannot see into the future and anytime we do and get it right it is simply good luck or you have a high level of satistical probibility on your side. It is not reliable.
I take it that this post is in reply to a previous one of mine. Use of the quote icon in the future will be helpful when posting.
The fact that the 'tyranny of distance' does indeed cut two ways, yet most people seem to not realise/ignore that fact, is one of the issues I have with how many people approach NZ defence.
The Falklands was a different situation with an enemy who only had 400 nautical miles to cover. But in the end the poms invaded and won. NZ is a very hard place to defend with one of the longest coastlines in the world. However we do have the advantage of the tyranny of distance in that the closet land mass is what 1500 nautical miles so at least 3 days sail for a fleet. the presence of hostile combat aircraft in NZ skies would not necessarily mean an aircraft carrier in proximity. For example the USAF could fly a B52 from the continental US to NZ and back without landing using air to air refueling. the PLA(AF) do have a long range aircraft that they could stage a similar distance although they would have more difficulty doing it due to lack of tankers.
AB's will do a number later in the year ....... as long as they don't come up against the French on the wayThe fact that the 'tyranny of distance' does indeed cut two ways, yet most people seem to not realise/ignore that fact, is one of the issues I have with how many people approach NZ defence.
NZ is potentially vulnerable to events which are not even directed at it, but could still become 'collateral damage'.
As for the hostile sub off the East Coast, I would not worry too much about that. Unless the AB's really do a number on Australia, then all bets are off...
On a more serious note, while such an event is not likely, given the projected expansion of sub forces operating in the S. Pacific and ASEAN regions, it is certainly NOT impossible. Which is part of the reason why I have had some concern on the viability of the NZDF in ASW ops. While the P-3K Orions, as well as the Anzac FFH's have some ability to perform ASW, they are likely to run into a number of difficulties. The first, and potentially most major issue is the NZDF stock of LWT's. IIRC the NZDF has a stock of either Mk-44 or Mk-46 LWT's, which according to the LTDP were going to start, or perhaps completely expire in 2008. I took issue with that when I came across it, since according to the LTDP, the torpedoes where expected to be replaced in 2015. While I do not know for certain, and perhaps a current/ex-Navy servicemen could comment, my understanding of what it meant when a munition expired, was that in this case, the torpedoe could be launched/dropped, and then it might operate normally, or it might not, or perhaps even be a dud. That is something which IMO needs to be rectified ASAP. While the frigates and MPA have issues due to sensor and electronic fitout, which could make detection of modern diesel-electric subs problematical, that does not matter much if the aircraft of frigate cannot engage a hostile contact which is detected because the munitions are too old to function as required.
-Cheers