New Zealand Army

[FormerDirtDart]

Here a video of NZers in the exercise. This website also has photos if you have a look around. Theres a dawn blits FB page too.
https://www.dvidshub.net/video/422857/kiwis-hone-urban-combat-tactics-iit#.VfetNM6ifs0

The urban training facility looks impressive. Quite a different set up to our new one
NZDF Battle Training Facility | Ebert Construction
Would like to see us get a similar one here

The Camp Pendleton training facility in the video might be this one:
Combat Town_- Infantry Immersion Trainer - Bravo it's a mixture of concrete buildings and re-purposed shipping containers.


Though, it might be one of the other Combat Towns listed here
As you can see, they have a vast array of facilities at that one base

 

[Cadredave]

LTG McMaster has stated his goal for the US Stykers is to have a 50-50 mix of 30mm and Javelin turrets to increase overall lethality of the Brigades

We will more than likely follow CAN in regards to the turret, as our NZLAV are closer to them than Stryker, we will follow in regards to the hull & drive train upgrades for Stryker.

CD

 

[Cadredave]

No chance they would share their toys? Seems a shame. Would be nice if infantry and everyone else that is likely to be deployed could have regular time in a decent CQB training environment. Sending a company overseas once a year- a lot of people will miss out. I know that the army has made use of redzone christchurch and a fire service training facility in the Nth Island. Maybe Peter Jackson or James cameron could build a decent movie set here and donate to NZDF when done.

It's purpose built for Black role unfortunately so has no cross over with how we (Infantry) conduct FIBUA (I know im using a old term) we do have a facility in Waiouru that lets us conduct Combined Coy level Ops in a urban environment its basic but does the job for now.

CD

 

[40 deg south]

We have been a part of the LAV 3 group for a long time now and are very aware of what exactly US & CAN are doing to upgrade the vehicles. OC Mounted wing Combat School & Cap Branch have developed the user requirements inline with what our Allies and our own lessons learnt have taught us as well.

Nothing beats having one of your own AFV being attacked by an IED so all the techies can crawl all over it with a fine tooth comb, combat loading them way past what the manufacture recommended which strained the transmission dust getting into all those places that were meant to be sensitive etc so in short Im very sure Army has done there due diligence in regards to what Army requires for an upgrade but more importantly have identified and planned for a mid life upgrade which never happened before.

CD

Thanks for that - reassuring to hear NZ is keeping up with international developments on the LAV platform. My main concern is around timing - if the indicative case is only going to Cabinet at end 2015, I'm struggling to see it go to tender much before end 2017.

And if there is a change of government to one that includes the Greens, it is hard to see them being willing to spend money updating NZs 'tanks' (as they are generally perceived by the Green voters I know).

Wthout wishing to derail the thread into politics, it is hard to see the current government losing to anyone except a broad coalition of the left, of which the Greens would be an integral part. I think that puts a big question mark over any planned procurements post the late-2017 election, given the rarity of fourth-term goverments in NZ. Not to say there wouldn't be some equipment bought, but I suspect the purse-strings would get tighter and the time-lines longer.

 

[kiwi in exile]

We will more than likely follow CAN in regards to the turret, as our NZLAV are closer to them than Stryker, we will follow in regards to the hull & drive train upgrades for Stryker.

CD

From what I understand, upgrading from 25mm bushmaster to 30mm bushmaster is pretty easy and they share a lot of common parts. You get significantly more firepower for minimal effort. Sounds good, but not sure that we would need the extra firepower for what we do. Would need to occur in the context of Aust army and maybe RNZN changing to 30mm.

Intergrating ATGM to LAVs/LAV type vehicles will become more common i think. And is something I would really like to see in NZLAVs. The easy way is by mounting a Jav/RWS combo. This has all been discussed in recent Defence Technology Review regarding ADFs Land 400 program. There are article on pros/cons of manned/unmanned turrets. Interesting reading. There are a lot of turret options out there.

I know we are pretty happy with the javelins capabilities, and some readers are resistant to purchising unproven Euro technology, but I like the MBDA MMP missile. Offers some next gen capabilities/versatility not available in the current jav. The French have ordered 600. No idea about the cost of MMP, but the Javelin has a hefty price tag. Think the javelin is being upgraded.

 

[RegR]

We have been a part of the LAV 3 group for a long time now and are very aware of what exactly US & CAN are doing to upgrade the vehicles. OC Mounted wing Combat School & Cap Branch have developed the user requirements inline with what our Allies and our own lessons learnt have taught us as well.

Nothing beats having one of your own AFV being attacked by an IED so all the techies can crawl all over it with a fine tooth comb, combat loading them way past what the manufacture recommended which strained the transmission dust getting into all those places that were meant to be sensitive etc so in short Im very sure Army has done there due diligence in regards to what Army requires for an upgrade but more importantly have identified and planned for a mid life upgrade which never happened before.

Yes understand we have/will share info, tactics, lessons from other LAV users, would be silly not to, pretty sure we may still even have a developmental hull still at GD Can to help implement improvements more seamlessly along with one in Trentham as a test bed.

 

[40 deg south]

For a Land force who has refocused back in the Pacific exercising with India & Indonesia isn't going to happen any time soon, Those countries are not part of ABCA or follow NATO SOP,s or Doctrine which standardizes the rest of us they are not compatible in any way shape or form.

CD
That depends how you define 'the Pacific'!

I certainly agree that the bulk of future exercises will take place with existing partners, with the US assuming an ever-greater role. Nevertheless, the geopolitical scene is changing fast, and I wouldn't be at all surprised to see some unfamiliar uniforms attending future NZ-based exercises, or NZ exercising in some unexpected places.

Just in the past few months, we have seen:
- NZ Navy conduct formal visit to India
- Orion on exercises out of South Korea, them moving on to Japan for more of same
- CDF visiting Vietnam to meet counterparts
- Peoples Liberation Army engineers currently working with NZDF on rebuilding infrastructure in the outer Cook Islands.

Think about that last one - how plausible would it have sounded a decade ago? Like the man said, the times they are a'changin'.

 

[kiwi in exile]

CD
That depends how you define 'the Pacific'!

I certainly agree that the bulk of future exercises will take place with existing partners, with the US assuming an ever-greater role. Nevertheless, the geopolitical scene is changing fast, and I wouldn't be at all surprised to see some unfamiliar uniforms attending future NZ-based exercises, or NZ exercising in some unexpected places.

Just in the past few months, we have seen:
- NZ Navy conduct formal visit to India
- Orion on exercises out of South Korea, them moving on to Japan for more of same
- CDF visiting Vietnam to meet counterparts
- Peoples Liberation Army engineers currently working with NZDF on rebuilding infrastructure in the outer Cook Islands.

Think about that last one - how plausible would it have sounded a decade ago? Like the man said, the times they are a'changin'.

I agree. Our relationships are not going to stay fixed, especially in a changing neighbourhood. We will evolve with the times. Our friends new friends will become our new friends. many of the above listed nations, and the US and Australia, are focused on the 'containment' (for lack of a better term) of China. We all share this common interest and should therefore get used to working together. Policing the shipping lanes of the Pacific, and disaster relief will require us all to work together. Imagine if TSHTF and we said we cannot work with you because we dont share the same doctrine. Especially as these nationisn start to build capabilities in these areas.

 

[Cadredave]

CD
That depends how you define 'the Pacific'!
I certainly agree that the bulk of future exercises will take place with existing partners, with the US assuming an ever-greater role. Nevertheless, the geopolitical scene is changing fast, and I wouldn't be at all surprised to see some unfamiliar uniforms attending future NZ-based exercises, or NZ exercising in some unexpected places.

Well whats your definition of the Pacific I see us operating with Japan before the other countries like India & Indonesia who dont have a toe hold in the Pacific the last time I looked. To be frank you must be living under a rock as those strange uniforms are already in this country and have been in this country for at least 5+ years either as individuals or small groups on English language courses. Why am I confident Indonesia will not be a part of that mix as partners on exercise in either NZ or the Pacific?
1998 the agreement to let Indonesia exercise here as a friendly country was revoked due to the ongoing troubles in East Timor, no political party since has invited Indonesia back into this country and is unlikely to ever offer it again due to the latest trouble spot to involve them ie West Papua.

Just in the past few months, we have seen:
- NZ Navy conduct formal visit to India
- Orion on exercises out of South Korea, them moving on to Japan for more of same
- CDF visiting Vietnam to meet counterparts
- Peoples Liberation Army engineers currently working with NZDF on rebuilding infrastructure in the outer Cook Islands.

All you have shown are nothing more than good old fashioned Military diplomacy tied hand in hand with MFAT bar the South Korea exercise that's due to our reinforced ties with the USA.

So the PLA deployed a small engineer party to assist in Cook Islands in a non-tactical MFAT led good will deployment, that’s a massive big jump to we will be exercising with them at the Operational & tactical level, here are some more reasons why we won’t deploy to Indonesia or India on a massive land based exercise;

1. Logistics to support the Company Battle group will require the whole of 1 Brigade to support & RNZN and RNZAF to get us there.
2. We don’t have a Visiting Forces agreements in place with those countries and are unlikely to ever need one.
3. Again I go back to CA clear cut intent SW Pacific reorientation with our Allies and neighbours.

Think about that last one - how plausible would it have sounded a decade ago? Like the man said, the times they are a'changin'.

Before you start lecturing me on they are a”changin what makes you think that its something new? PLA or Vietnamese uniforms in NZ so they assist us the US and other Pac countries to build toilets. If we dont have the same TTP's, SOP's language, Logistical systems or even communications equipment then how do you see us even getting over the start line it will be akin to the tower of babel.

We were meant to be operating off the same NATO playbook in Afghanistan and that was a classic FUBAR if ever I saw one so please just slow down, China with HADR or PR exercises yes happening already in very limited capacity, full on Operational Exercises not going to happen

Major "OPSEC" issues everywhere you look.

 

[Cadredave]

I agree. Our relationships are not going to stay fixed, especially in a changing neighbourhood. We will evolve with the times. Our friends new friends will become our new friends. many of the above listed nations, and the US and Australia, are focused on the 'containment' (for lack of a better term) of China. We all share this common interest and should therefore get used to working together. Policing the shipping lanes of the Pacific, and disaster relief will require us all to work together. Imagine if TSHTF and we said we cannot work with you because we dont share the same doctrine. Especially as these nationisn start to build capabilities in these areas.

And what does policing the shipping lanes have to do with deploying a Land Based component of NZDF on an Operational Exercise in the Pacific or here in NZ. Doctrine aint keeping us apart its the practical application of that doctrine that always will, example LF ex how the hell do Chinese FOO call in FS with radio gear that's not compatible with us or vice versa? or how the hell do we get spare parts for our weapons, vehicles and a whole host of other logistical issues that no one here evers takes into consideration must we then strip Trentham every time we deploy to these countries that dont follow NATO doctrine TTP, SoP or equipment you know those little things that help different Armies to work more effectively together.

Big difference carrying out Military diplomacy to exercising in an Operational Level exercise, Cooks is an MFAT lead development project using NZDF skills and ability to deploy. Tasman Sabre is a whole different kettle of fish that seems to be missed by all here. Dont use RNZN or RNZAF deployments as proof NZ Army can seamlessly slot into a Country like China, India, or Indonesia overnight and be up to speed the next day conducting complex tactical operations at Platoon, Company or even Battalion level because you know its comes back to little thing called doctrine that an inconvenient nuisance.

 

[kiwi in exile]

And what does policing the shipping lanes have to do with deploying a Land Based component of NZDF on an Operational Exercise in the Pacific or here in NZ

Nothing. I never specified land based deployment. I was meaning international military co-operation.

Before 9/11 you could make exactly the same points you are making about the Afghan national army. You might even argue that NZDF has no interest in central asia and we would never deploy there because our land forces are optimised for S Pacific deployments and we lack the right equipment for the job. Ditto the current deployment to Iraq.

Dont use RNZN or RNZAF deployments as proof NZ Army can seamlessly slot into a Country like China, India, or Indonesia overnight

Im not.

RIMPAC
Anti piracy operations
search for MH17
I'm sure there are others
Again, Im not referring to army here. You're right, a lot of it is PR and diplomacy. But compared to where we were 10-15 years ago this is significant. It all starts with diplomacy and PR. Our re-engagement with the US probably started out in a similar way (someone will correct me here if Im wrong). I simply think it's a little misguided to rule out increasing engagement and co-operation with new partners, army, navy AF, whatever as a long term trend. Not tommorow. I don't have an insiders knowledge of doctrine TTP, SoP's etc. But surely these evolve and can be rewritten. Surely the have to be when we gain new technologies/capabilities (Canterbury for example). We don't still engage in trench warfare afterall. Future allies can evolve their doctrine etc too.

 

[Kiwigov]

Interesting news on Home Page [Ministry of Defence NZ] - updated information on Army acquisitions. I know the SOF vehicles have already been discussed, but not (afaik) the apparent wholesale shift in rifles from the bullpup Steyr AUG to the (conventional) Lewis Machine Tool version(s) from the USA.

Apparently the Lewis weapons are very high quality - their website indicates significantly higher per-unit prices than that for Steyr, so clearly NZ Army has gone for the 'best and proven available' option. Lewis also make a range of SOF weapons, so presumably increased compatibility there.

Also interesting that the AuSteyr proposal was not chosen - so much for rifle interoperability between NZ and Aust?

 

[40 deg south]

Interesting news on Home Page [Ministry of Defence NZ] - updated information on Army acquisitions. I know the SOF vehicles have already been discussed, but not (afaik) the apparent wholesale shift in rifles from the bullpup Steyr AUG to the (conventional) Lewis Machine Tool version(s) from the USA.

Apparently the Lewis weapons are very high quality - their website indicates significantly higher per-unit prices than that for Steyr, so clearly NZ Army has gone for the 'best and proven available' option. Lewis also make a range of SOF weapons, so presumably increased compatibility there.

Also interesting that the AuSteyr proposal was not chosen - so much for rifle interoperability between NZ and Aust?

Kiwigov
Scroll back to about page 65 of this thread, and you will see the discussion on the new weapon.

Rheinmetall MAN Military Vehicles delivers first flatracks to New Zealand Army under MHOV contract | Australian Defence News & Articles | Asia Pacific Defence Reporter

APDR reports a batch of 'flat-tracks' being delivered to NZ as part of the MAN truck contract.

The Aussie manufacturer is here.
SBI delivers custom flatracks to NZ Defence Force | Sea Box International

 

[Zero Alpha]

Also interesting that the AuSteyr proposal was not chosen - so much for rifle interoperability between NZ and Aust?

No, it's not. It wasn't offered for consideration. Thales is operating at capacity for the Australian order and wasn't interested in increasing capacity to deliver to NZ. Simple commercial decision.

 

[40 deg south]

Network Enabled Army [Ministry of Defence NZ]

Latest post on the MinDef's acquisition page is about the Network Enabled Army. It includes a link to a pdf explaining what the NEA actually is, which is useful to someone as uninformed as me.

 

[40 deg south]

NZDF - NZDF to Get New Glock Pistols

NZDF to Get New Glock Pistols
The new generation Glock 17 pistol

25 November 2015

New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) military personnel are to be issued with new generation Glock 17 pistols to replace the Sig Sauer pistols currently in use.

The new pistols will be introduced into service across the Navy, Army, and Air Force in the second half of 2016.

Lieutenant Colonel (LTCOL) Dean Paul of the Land Capability Delivery Branch said the Sig Sauer P226 pistols were introduced into service in 1992 and were due to be replaced.

“Ensuring we remain a force equipped to succeed means supplying our people with fit-for-purpose personal protection weapons. This is part of our 2020 strategy for enhanced combat capability and we are pleased to be rolling out the new pistols next year,’’ LTCOL Paul said.

Australian company NIOA Nominees Pty Ltd has been awarded the $1.8 million contract to supply the NZDF with about 1,900 of the new pistols. The contract includes the pistols, ancillaries, and through-life support.

ENDS

 

[Zero Alpha]

NZDF - NZDF to Get New Glock Pistols

Same model as NZ Police.

 

[shanes_world_05]

Same model as NZ Police.

Probably stupid question but Gen4? And I heard that some were getting G19's, any truth to that? Hoped we would get more than 1800. Ah well save that money for more Jave.

 

[kiwi in exile]

Probably stupid question but Gen4? And I heard that some were getting G19's, any truth to that? Hoped we would get more than 1800. Ah well save that money for more Jave.

I had read (usubstatntiated) rumours that we were getting these. From what I have read Glocks have an excellent rep for safety, reliability and ease of operation.
As for 9mm, there are critiques of the rounds stopping power, similar to 5.56. However, as its the standard across the 'alliance' and gives large mag capacities it makes sense.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qmxduj0qu7Q
Highlights from the latest Southern Katipo vid:
*training with AKs and RPGs
*Mag58s with ACOGS (6X, different from the 4x model on the steyers)
*Fast roping from the NH90s onto mountainous terain
*Bushmasters in NZ, (hopefully our decision makers are getting a close look at what they can do)

Enjoy the clip

 

[40 deg south]

Probably stupid question but Gen4? And I heard that some were getting G19's, any truth to that? Hoped we would get more than 1800. Ah well save that money for more Jave.

shane

I know nothing about firearms, so I'm more interested in the process of this purchase. Compare it to the Steyr replacement; no call for tenders, no shortlist, no trials phase.

Given the UK introduced what appears to be the same pistol a couple of years ago, I assume NZ looked at their testing process and thought 'Yep, that'll do'. Seems sensible to me, given the total spend is under $2 million.

Also, this decision is about 25 years after the introduction of the SIG. Are they worn out from use, as it would be most unlike the NZ government to replace something that wasn't completely knackered.

I've attached a few links below. The Bloomberg one is the most interesting, as it names some of the competitors in the UK trials.

The final link states that Australia is still using the aging Browning, and calls for an upgrade.

Glock 17 - British Army Website

Browning gets the bullet! Army replaces trusty pistol with Glock handgun after 50 years | Daily Mail Online

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HXjI_fJ71k

U.K. Army Get NYPD Pistol as Glock Bests Browning - Bloomberg Business

Why the ADF handgun is an ethics issue