Yeah hopefully overtime they will release more i am certainly interested it looked intense.
New Zealand Army
- Thread starter Whiskyjack
- Start date
-
- Tags
- army artilery gunner new zealand sas
I can't give you answers to all your questions by i know they have replaced the
5.56mm minimi which was used at section level we called it the C9 with a 7.62mm version which will also be used at section level.
Cadre could you tell me how a modern NZ infantry Battalion is set up.
I know in WW2 they had the Headquarters company which was the biggest in the battalion made up of different platoons,transport platoons,Bren carrier platoon,Pioneer platoon,mortar platoon,signals platoon,anti aircraft platoon.
Then they had four rifle companies which each had 125 men at full strength and total strength at full establishment was around 750-780.
How are things set up now.?
kiwi in exile
Active Member
Heres a summary from the NZ herald:
12 minutes of hell, Aug 4, 2012
12.27pm: Three New Zealand vehicle patrols and one dismounted patrol come under fire from insurgents in rugged, mountainous country near Baghak village in the Shikari Valley, northeast Bamiyan, while assisting Afghan forces.
An explosion is heard, and some of the NZ vehicle patrols are shot at by insurgents with AK-47s and hunting rifles, who are on the high ground. A commanding officer is immediately wounded, and picked up by two soldiers, one of them Lance Corporal Rory Malone, and moved to the back of a Humvee.
Lance Corporal Malone gets out of the vehicle and is shot and killed by insurgent gunfire. Another NZ soldier rushes to assist him, and is shot and wounded. He takes cover under a Humvee, without telling other soldiers.
12.29pm: The Humvees begin to move out of the area, still unaware of the soldier under one of them, and leave him exposed on the road and in the line of enemy fire.
Another NZ patrol of LAVs arrives in the area where NZ troops are being fired at, and returns fire. Lance Corporal Pralli Durrer is shot in the chest, but is saved by his body armour. He then realises that his machine-gun ammunition is on fire, and while attempting to deal with it is shot again, fatally.
12.30pm: Another NZ patrol arrives on the scene and sees the wounded soldier lying exposed on the road. After failing to reach him by radio, a second soldier runs to drag him to safety. The second soldier is shot and wounded. A third soldier is also wounded by shrapnel from insurgent fire.
12.33pm: A NZ vehicle patrol mistakenly identifies the dismounted patrol as insurgents and fires at it. A ceasefire is called, but two New Zealand soldiers in the dismounted patrol have been injured by the friendly fire.
12:39pm: The firefight ceases. In 12 minutes, NZ has suffered eight casualties, two of them critical and two of them fatal.
Film gives glimpse of deadly chaos - National - NZ Herald News
Hi Steve,
Just beware that was the only camera spread thru out that contact so you only see the contact thru a very limited perspective, as for the rest about the OC I cant and wont comment on what he did right or wrong.
W Coy will be brought up to full strength in 2014 - 15 time period, V Coy began this year with the command element posted to Waiouru to march in new recruits who will remain with there Coy and Platoon command elements right thru to Infantry Corp trg followed by an over seas exercise some time at the end of the year.
Infantry sections now carry the 7.62mm LSW C9 as the section main firepower.
MAG58 is now held at Coy HQ for the SFMG role, Support Company holds the CO DFSW point and area weapons eg .50 Cal MG as the point and the HK GMG 40mm as the area weapon.
Mortars belong to RNZA who have formed a hybrid battey of 81mm mortars and 105mm Lt guns.
We have just received back from Afghanistan our 60mm Lt mortars which hopefully will be issued to the Infantry Battalions once approval is given to acquire the rest of the CES like the bipod and C2 sight that was not brought during the original UOR.
hope this helps CD
Hi Cadre
I understand you can't comment on the OC i only mentioned in my previous post because i didn't agree with the people who were critical of him calling him too aggressive for attempting to secure the high ground controlling the high ground gives you so much control over the battle area.
Yes, it was very helpful thank you.
I had no idea there were plans to replace the DPM - Defence rolls out new camouflage look - National News | TVNZ
I have seen a highly critical posting of the OC on an ex NZDF facebook page and as of yet haven't decided how to respond to it. The person is ex NZDF but I don't think they have ever been shot at. I find such critcisms "offensive" as the basic thesis of a defence force is aggression and in this case said person nor I were present, nor are we in possession of the full facts so we can't make a valid opinion. As to the soldier who was present, disagreed with the OCs actions and left the service afterwards. I respect that soldier has a right to their opinion, but I was taught to obey all legal and orders. I mightn't agreed with them and that but I obeyed them.
Addition: Article in NZ Herald with soldier who disagreed with Court Of Inquiry findings. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10890834
Last edited:
A very concerning article indeed, seems like a lack of communication and identification between multiple patrols (kiwi and Afghan) in a confuseing and obviously hectic sitiuation leading to some unfortunate actions. Maybe a classic too many cheifs scenario with no clear overall OIC but as you say Ngati there are many sides to a story and we were not present so I too will not pass judgement.
Something that did irk me, if correct, is the not identifying targets statement. With all the training and aids at our disposal I find it somewhat disappointing that this would happen. I know there is the fog of war, adrenalin, confusion, pressure, worry etc and blue on blue does happen in the heat of battle but it seemed alittle prevelant here, once can(should'nt but can) be put down to a mistake but anymore means somethings wrong somewhere and failing.
Lessons learned and hopefully never repeated. RIP
That was the way i was looking at it as well a military that doesn't have aggression
won't be winning to many battles and when you are in a situation when you know there are bad guys around you secure the high ground because it gives who ever has it the advantage.
I read the article the NZ soldier Peter Page was scathing made it sound like a complete debacle.
Sadly i don't think we are ever really going to know.
I will make one simple comment about "Offensive" action in the context of this action:
What the news papers and other have totally missed is one simple explanation the PRT ROE were very restrictive in when and how you could use lethal force therefore they (PRT) could not go around Afghan and fire into the hills with what the yanks used to call recon by fire.
The PRT ROE operated totally different to the NZSAS ROE in Kabul, NZSAS were kinetic we the PRT were not if we had been based down south then yes we would be looking for a fight and patrolling with aggression the PRT was operating in a true COIN environment of hearts and minds led by MFAT.
I don't mean offensive in the terms of a military advance, but in that I found the criticisms offensive. Vagaries of the english language. But thank you for explaining the PRT ROE.
I went on face book and read what that guy was saying and man he has made some pretty bold statements about the CO and he has made them on a public forum be should really watch his step there is such a thing as defamation.
He should show his face in public and provide evidence to back up his allegations or keep quiet.
Hi Cadre i don't want to offend you but i have to ask you honestly how are things in the NZ army as far as training goes.
The reason i ask is because there was a report a few months back that came out with a NZ soldier who was training soldiers for Afganistan claiming soldiers were being sent to Afganistan with poor preperation but he was the only one who claimed this.
Then we have this soldier Peter Page coming out with his account of the firefight which is scathing of pretty much everything but to balance it out no one else in the actions sems to concur with his version.
Then there was the incident with the soldier drowing after his life jacket didn't work and he couldn't be rescued because of problems with the boats.
As i said i don't want to offend you but i am not in the army so don't know what is going on apart from what i read in the papers and you have to treat anything you read in the papers with caution.
Without wanting to answer for Cadredave, I just though I'd add that war is really, really, really bloody difficult. It is, quite literally, the most difficult endeavor known to mankind. It always amazes me that people are surprised when it doesn't go perfectly.
I don't expect things to go perfectly but when you read reports that people are claiming soldiers are being sent to warzones without the proper training that is a concern.
It is also a concern when a NZ soldier drowns in training because his life jacket didn't wor and he stayed on the surface for a minute fighting for his life but none of his fellow soldiers could even get close enough to rescue him because they were having problems handling the boats.
Questions need to be asked when things like this happen.
kiwi in exile
Active Member
In the report about the pre-deployment training "highlighted the aggressive stance of one senior officer with a tactical role" and mentions failure to adhere to ROE, and lack of situational awareness, amongst other things.
Training for army fighters blasted - National - NZ Herald News
This echos Peter Pages story. Im just wondering, was it the same officer in charge on both occassions?
As for the drowning, from what I have read in the media, as a civilian, that should never have happened. Too many things went wrong that shouldn't have.