NZDF General discussion thread

[t68]

Duplicate post sorry

 

[t68]

I haven't read it all yet but so far three things stand out,

1.19 Given its strong connections with South Pacific countries, New Zealand has an enduring interest in regional stability. The South Pacific has remained relatively stable since 2010, and is unlikely to face an external military threat in the foreseeable future. However, the region continues to face a range of economic, governance, and environmental challenges. These challenges indicate that it is likely that the Defence Force will have to deploy to the region over the next ten years, for a response beyond humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.

Not sure what to really think of this maybe SCS

1.23 It is also important that the Defence Force maintains its ability to contribute
to operations further afield should the Government require it to do so. Such contributions will most likely be made as part of operations led by New Zealand’s international partners. The ability of the New Zealand Defence Force to operate effectively with others, particularly Australia, will therefore remain an important focus for New Zealand.

Cooperation on Anzac replacement?

1.27 The force structure set out in this White Paper is therefore a mix of existing and planned capabilities, and new capabilities to meet future challenges. The Defence Force will maintain a range of land and naval combat, strategic projection and logistics, intelligence and reconnaissance capabilities. These capabilities will enable the Defence Force to undertake the roles and tasks expected of it, and to continue providing credible deployment options, including combat capable forces, to the Government.

Follow the RAAF on P8 and maybe the G550?

 

[MrConservative]

Another quote from the same story which I hope takes root in the Kiwi psyche:

Ron Mark has started dribbling rubbish already. He is still claiming that the govt want to replace the C130s with (only) C17s at a cost of $3 billion. He also says that NZ doesn't need strategic airlift and that we only need tactical airlift, plus that the NH90s are no good because you can't fly them off a frigate. Gawd help us.

In the house during the general debate he questioned the lack of an Air Combat Capability, which is a legitimate beef. In fact they also should have let him into the announcement scope at 11am and not 1.30pm. But Ron ruins it with statements like he made above about no necessity for Stratlift.

National will need to bring him into the tent better in some ways as he maybe an associate minister of defence post 2017.

BTW - I just saw Paddy Gower on TV3 use the XB-47 as an example of a future drone capability and how all the current stuff will be scrapped - then switched channels to see Corrin Dann give his analysis. Muppets both.

 

[ngatimozart]

In the house during the general debate he questioned the lack of an Air Combat Capability, which is a legitimate beef. In fact they also should have let him into the announcement scope at 11am and not 1.30pm. But Ron ruins it with statements like he made above about no necessity for Stratlift.

National will need to bring him into the tent better in some ways as he maybe an associate minister of defence post 2017.

BTW - I just saw Paddy Gower on TV3 use the XB-47 as an example of a future drone capability and how all the current stuff will be scrapped - then switched channels to see Corrin Dann give his analysis. Muppets both.

I agree Mark is right about the Air Combat capability but he has that innate ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Is it arrogance or does he have an inability to learn? i am unsure. Goff was on the TVNZ news and hadn't anything good to say. I agree that Dann and Gower are muppets, but then we shouldn't really insult muppets. Still rankles me that the MSM show an OPV and call it a frigate. Suppose they refrained from calling it a nuclear powered aircraft carrier.

Going back to Goff and the MSM muppets,they were whinging about the lack of detail regarding current platform replacements in the DWP. Well it states in the DWP that this will be addressed in the 2016 Defence Capability Plan.

I haven't read it all yet but so far three things stand out,
Not sure what to really think of this maybe SCS

No,wrong geographic region. The SCS wasn't in the South Pacific the last time I looked. However one never knows with Hollywood. It was aimed specifically at the South Pacific with probabilities of NZ & Australia having to intervene in a destabilised South Pacific nation.

Cooperation on Anzac replacement?

Maybe. According to the DWP, more detail will be provided in the Defence Capability Plan which will be released later this year - well that's the plan, Stan, anyway.

Follow the RAAF on P8 and maybe the G550?

I would think that the P8 would now have to be in the frame along with the MQ4C Triton BAMS.

Prof Ayson was on TVNZ news and he said that this was the biggest capability shake up since the Vietnam war.

 

[RegR]

In the house during the general debate he questioned the lack of an Air Combat Capability, which is a legitimate beef. In fact they also should have let him into the announcement scope at 11am and not 1.30pm. But Ron ruins it with statements like he made above about no necessity for Stratlift.

National will need to bring him into the tent better in some ways as he maybe an associate minister of defence post 2017.

BTW - I just saw Paddy Gower on TV3 use the XB-47 as an example of a future drone capability and how all the current stuff will be scrapped - then switched channels to see Corrin Dann give his analysis. Muppets both.

I get the feeling he honestly does mean well, which is good to keep challenging, but then ruins it with his lack of insight and common (even for ex mil) knowledge of todays defence force and it's context.

A few statements such as buying C17s (he should know we missed that window), operating NH90s off frigates (just like how we used the hueys off them...), basing a Bn in Waiouru (not sure he fully appreciates it's not just about the soldiers), turning Waiouru into a reserve (what does he think Tekapo does exactly?) led me to believe whilst he maybe ex military it just goes to show that unless you make an effort to understand what the other corps, units and services actually do and piece the together in the puzzle of overall capability then you can start making non-sensical claims that joe public will just swallow up as gospel, especially someone in his position. A dangerous proposition when you are trying to sell a $20bn idea with the least confusion and max reasoning, especially in NZ with all our safety nets, green grass and sheep.

Whilst he still knows alot more than most and even states more will be needed ideally it's just the little things letting him down and if he has these veiws of the military then imagine what the rest of parliament thinks nevermind joe public, no wonder defence always has a battle on their hands and is just the child in the corner paid no mind.

Media never helps as usual as they are not much better, saw the news and they were saying our old frigates needed replacement to patrol our fisheries down south.......at least the hercs and orions have age to save them, always an easier selling point in terms of reporting as less technical and in depth in the broader context.

 

[RegR]

I haven't read it all yet but so far three things stand out,



Not sure what to really think of this maybe SCS



Cooperation on Anzac replacement?



Follow the RAAF on P8 and maybe the G550?

1. Bougainville, Timor Leste, Solomans...........West Papua? Nothing new here.

2. Good example is the training mission in Iraq. Combined exs, common TTPs, joint training, exchanges etc all add to, strengthen and solidify this. Does not nesscessarily need to be equipment centric. Perhaps Aus is needing more than we are wanting or vice versa in terms of ANZACII for our requirements (and budget) and I think our seperate upgrade paths have proven we do not in fact need the same equipment for certain types of kit to still be interaoperable.

3. Could be something as simple or as complex as adding UAVs to the mix or regaining a lost capability such as ASW, VLAAD etc. Think we already know the main priorities already TBH and if it has'nt already been mooted then I doubt we will see anything vastly out of left feild.

I guess we could read between the lines until the jets come home but all pretty generic lines either confirming replacement of/and re-affirming current to me, nothing outstanding. Once we start getting away from throw away phrases with visions and directions and get into nuts and bolts types, numbers and options then I really start to take note as then we go from costings to costs and projects actually start to gain traction vs theoretical.

 

[40 deg south]

I'll post a few DWP-related links below for general information.

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/news/national/future-of-nz-defence-outlined-in-white-paper/

A surprisingly good summary from Newstalk ZB.

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/imps-news/ice-patrol-littoral-support-nzdf/

Shepherd Media has a good concise write-up focusing on maritime issues.

New Zealand confirms plans to acquire third OPV with ice-strengthened features | IHS Jane's 360

Janes are proud that they were the first to report interest in a third OPV.

NZ White Paper outlines NZD20 billion spending plan | IHS Jane's 360

They also have an update on the White Paper, mostly behind the paywall.

Shortcomings in Defence White Paper | Scoop News
Phil Goff doesn't start out well, claiming the DWP is eight months overdue instead of six. His points about lack of specifics and insufficient attention to personnel issues are not totally unreasonable, but he doesn't even attempt to present an alternative strategy.

Defence Spending obscene opening for more wars | Scoop News
Just to round things off, 'Peace Action Wellington' do not approve of the DWP. I'm sure Gerry will be devastated by that!

UPDATE
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/305946/$20bn-on-defence-but-is-it-enough
This just in - comments from a couple of academics. Surprisingly, both have sensible thoughts.Even more interestingly, ACT's sole MP is supportive, and Phil Goff said 'it would be hard to know if it (the $20 billion) would be enough', which is a shift from the reflexive anti-military mindset previously held by many in Labour.

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/news/national/criticism-of-defence-white-paper-dismissed-as-unfounded/
Dr Lance Beath at Vic Uni dismisses Labour's criticism of the DWP.

 

[40 deg south]

I get the feeling he honestly does mean well, which is good to keep challenging, but then ruins it with his lack of insight and common (even for ex mil) knowledge of todays defence force and it's context.

With all due respect to Mr Mark, whom I have never met, the evidence over many years suggests his presence in Parliament is depriving a village somewhere of its idiot.

Given the weakness of the two major parties on defence-related matters, you, me and pretty much everyone else who posts here could put together a more hard-hitting critique of the DWP. But nope, our Ron can't help but sound like he wants to drag NZDF back to the 1970s.

Update
Almost 24 hours after the event, NZ First gets a press release out. Nothing in it changes my opinion expressed above. To be fair, the 'back-to-the-70s' vibe is absent.

http://www.newshub.co.nz/politics/nz-first-more-than-20b-needed-for-sci-fi-warfare-2016060908

 

[kiwipatriot69]

Would 20 billion be enough to include an extra frigate to the needed replacements, and possibly a lead in to a restored ACF, or is this just wishful thinking on my behalf?

 

[t68]

Would 20 billion be enough to include an extra frigate to the needed replacements, and possibly a lead in to a restored ACF, or is this just wishful thinking on my behalf?

Not sure on the third frigate but no on the ACF depending on the level of capability you desire

 

[blackhawknz]

Hey just my 5 cent worth. Just flicked though the review. Found it very vague as to what the replacement would be for P3/C130/B757/Frigate. Thought review would have establish best platforms / options and costs instead just slap a $20 Billion Figure on it.

What really???, X-47, lol gezzzz are we going to buy a used Nimitz to launch these off too. Even think the M-4 Triton is over kill for NZ, we'd be best ask our mates in AU if we can there feet under some arrangement if we need them, Best swap the 6 P-3 for 4 P-8, we'd be better invest UAV funds into 4-5 Predator/Hermes 900 with a Marine Surveillance for Navy/AF free up P3/P8s, Ground Surveillance pods for Army new capability kill two birds with one stone.

As for the C130H think it logical to replace with C130J has Hot Production Line Cost are settled. No Engine/Air frame, many allied users. Replace with a one to one replacement. I love to say purchase the A400, but it has too many issues at the moment with engines and now now air frame. mean when you see France (Purchased), Germany (Talks) Partners Builder Main Buyers of the A400 purchasing the C130J cause of the issues delays it is a bit of a warning to stay away.

Not saying down the line can not purchase A400 once issue are sussed but then you may have second hand USAF C-17 maybe available.

Could be good option for the Navy.
defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/174507/damen-unveils-new-range-of-naval-multi_role-auxiliary-vessels.html]Damen Announces New Range of Naval Multi-Role Auxiliary Vessels[/url]

Please take care when posting here. I spent about 10 minutes fixing basic errors. Still could not make out all of it.

 

[kiwipatriot69]

Was thinking similar to what was offered prior to scrapping, a few squadrons of F16, onlyto the latest configuration, doesnt have to be generation 5 stealth fighters. Maybe even a few more NH90. As for airlift, im placing my bets on A400m. Seeing govt gives them C130 another five years or so, surely long enough for Airbus to sort those issues?

Hercules too small to lift much of the equipment we have now, and lacks the range speed, lift of A400. Hopefully we could join a joint build with Oz on the frigates, and go for three and possibly a fourth, at mates rates.

Is P8, Triton UAV overkill really, given the size of our maritime domain, shouldnt we be replacing them P3 one for one at least, if we really want to place and emphasis on maritime surveilance as the white paper states, do it properly with equipment similar to our closest allies.

 

[MrConservative]

What really???, X-47, lol gezzzz are we going to buy a used Nimitz to launch these off too. Even think the M-4 Triton is over kill for NZ, we'd be best ask our mates in AU if we can there feet under some arrangement if we need them, Best swap the 6 P-3 for 4 P-8, we'd be better invest UAV funds into 4-5 Predator/Hermes 900 with a Marine Surveillance for Navy/AF free up P3/P8s, Ground Surveillance pods for Army new capability kill two birds with one stone.

Only Paddy Gower mentioned the X-47 as a way to sensationalise the DWP launch.

How on earth can you on one hand think that Triton is overkill for NZ in the next breathe talk about Hermes 900 and Predator and then bespoke the design with extra capability pods and re-role between conops and theatres.

"Think' is all very well but thinking through a concept is far better.

 

[ngatimozart]

Would 20 billion be enough to include an extra frigate to the needed replacements, and possibly a lead in to a restored ACF, or is this just wishful thinking on my behalf?

Short answer, I think probably if one is using open source costings and does some tweaking of the capabilities. There would be no change left though for the piggy bank. The real question though would there be ongoing support for such acquisitions through extra personnel and operational funding?

ADDITION: I will put up a list later with funding links as a guide to what I mean. It will be for illustrative purposes only.

 

[Gracie1234]

John Key in his interview said that costs for the NZDF would rise including operational support for the new capabilities and additional funds would need to be found.

 

[ngatimozart]

What $20 billion may acquire

This is a theoretical list of acquisitions for illustrative purposes only the costings have been worked out in a spreadsheet and based upon open sourced material where available. This builds upon current NZDF capability sets. Sources are provided where possible.

• RNZAF
• 5 x Augusta Westland AW109 LUH: $66,706,196
• 5 x Beechcraft B350ER: $126,000,593
• 5 x Beechcraft B350ER MSA ISR: $222,353,988 (base price + guesstimate equip cost)
• 6 x Beechcraft T6C Texan II: $61,369,701
• 3 x Boeing C17A (ex USAF): $667,061,963 less guesstimate 2nd hand cost
• 3 x Boeing CH47F Chinook: $132,567,447
• 3 x Boeing KC40 (based on combination of B737-800 BCF & ERX): $713,725,170 and KC46 price difference
• 5 x Lockheed KC130J: $498,814,112
• 2 x NHI NH90 Helicopter (NFH -Support): $120,749,710
• 3 x Northrop Grump MQ4C Triton BAMS: $546,941,891
• LM F16 Block 25 REGENUPGRADE Package: $1,111,769,938
• Total RNZAF Acquisitions: $4,268,060,709
• .
• RNZN
• 1 x MSC: $250,000,000 (NZDF LTDP}
• 3 x FFG/H: $2,487,974,789 unit price guesstimated @ €500 million to allow for mods.
• 1 x LHD ~ 15,000 tonnes: $441,743,255 yes I know - only source I could find.
• 1 x LWSC: $150,000,000 Guesstimate
• NHI NH90 Helicopter (NFH -Support): $120,749,710
• 4 x OPV: $1,107,978,106 OPVs of similar capabilities but around 3000 tonne mark.
• 12 x Sikorsky MH60R: $773,987,548
• Total RNZN Acquistions: $5,082,433,408
• .
• NZ Army
• 12 x 8x8 Self Propelled Howitzer 105mm: $96,000,000 Guesstimate
• 12 x 8x8 Self Propelled Anti Aircraft Artillery 35mm Millenium gun & Mistral: $102,000,000 Guesstimate
• 12 x Bell AH1 Viper: $551,437,889
• Total Army Acquisitions: $749,437,889
• .
• Estimated spares, maintenance, manuals, simulators etc., @ 100% unit cost: $9,238,162,068
• Total Estimated Present Value Acquisition Cost: $19,588,094,073
• .
• Annual Present Value Funding Requirements 15 Years: $1,305,872,938
• Exchange rates valid: 25/5/2016
• NZ$1.00 = US$0.6746
• NZ$1.00 = €0.6029

All costs are in NZ$. I haven't bothered to round up / down after converting to NZ$ because that would magnify already existing errors.

 

[MrConservative]

John Key in his interview said that costs for the NZDF would rise including operational support for the new capabilities and additional funds would need to be found.

Yes that is correct. The extra operational finding from 2026-2031 has not been factored in the $20B dollar boost. There is around $11B to be spent over the next decade with around $4B in further operational spending from current baselines. Only the direct capital investments in the following 5 year period have been factored and not the further additional operating baselines.

So the the real meat is what new capital purchases can be considered, acquired and supported that have been earmarked from the DWP from 2016-2016. Frigate choices are moot because as the minister has mentioned in interviews over the last 24 hours - the frigate replacement is at the end of the cycle (2029) and new replacement concepts likely to be used are not with us. Remember though that WoL costs are also being drawn from the operational requirement as well as the capital acquisition. The way in which we purchased the T-6C's and Seaprites as a package is the new model.

 

[StingrayOZ]

1. Bougainville, Timor Leste, Solomans...........West Papua? Nothing new here.

PNG proper. Plenty of concern right there. Given police shot 8 students yesterday. Not really a one off incident. Tension is building.. How would NZ feel about a joint peace keeping mission if things get worse.

Australia is looking at a Type 26 design, something complimentary like a Type 31 would mean significant commonality. Australia and NZ could then operate a combined fleet much like what is planned for the Royal Navy.

IMO it would be worth stretching to full sized ships. Even with reduced loadouts and weapons. Operational costs are likely to be much the same as the existing Anzacs.

 

[MrConservative]

This is a theoretical list of acquisitions for illustrative purposes only the costings have been worked out in a spreadsheet and based upon open sourced material where available. This builds upon current NZDF capability sets. Sources are provided where possible.

• RNZAF
• 5 x Augusta Westland AW109 LUH: $66,706,196
• 5 x Beechcraft B350ER: $126,000,593
• 5 x Beechcraft B350ER MSA ISR: $222,353,988 (base price + guesstimate equip cost)
• 6 x Beechcraft T6C Texan II: $61,369,701
• 3 x Boeing C17A (ex USAF): $667,061,963 less guesstimate 2nd hand cost
• 3 x Boeing CH47F Chinook: $132,567,447
• 3 x Boeing KC40 (based on combination of B737-800 BCF & ERX): $713,725,170 and KC46 price difference
• 5 x Lockheed KC130J: $498,814,112
• 2 x NHI NH90 Helicopter (NFH -Support): $120,749,710
• 3 x Northrop Grump MQ4C Triton BAMS: $546,941,891
• LM F16 Block 25 REGENUPGRADE Package: $1,111,769,938
• Total RNZAF Acquisitions: $4,268,060,709
• .
• RNZN
• 1 x MSC: $250,000,000 (NZDF LTDP}
• 3 x FFG/H: $2,487,974,789 unit price guesstimated @ €500 million to allow for mods.
• 1 x LHD ~ 15,000 tonnes: $441,743,255 yes I know - only source I could find.
• 1 x LWSC: $150,000,000 Guesstimate
• NHI NH90 Helicopter (NFH -Support): $120,749,710
• 4 x OPV: $1,107,978,106 OPVs of similar capabilities but around 3000 tonne mark.
• 12 x Sikorsky MH60R: $773,987,548
• Total RNZN Acquistions: $5,082,433,408
• .
• NZ Army
• 12 x 8x8 Self Propelled Howitzer 105mm: $96,000,000 Guesstimate
• 12 x 8x8 Self Propelled Anti Aircraft Artillery 35mm Millenium gun & Mistral: $102,000,000 Guesstimate
• 12 x Bell AH1 Viper: $551,437,889
• Total Army Acquisitions: $749,437,889
• .
• Estimated spares, maintenance, manuals, simulators etc., @ 100% unit cost: $9,238,162,068
• Total Estimated Present Value Acquisition Cost: $19,588,094,073
• .
• Annual Present Value Funding Requirements 15 Years: $1,305,872,938
• Exchange rates valid: 25/5/2016
• NZ$1.00 = US$0.6746
• NZ$1.00 = €0.6029

All costs are in NZ$. I haven't bothered to round up / down after converting to NZ$ because that would magnify already existing errors.

You will have to trim around $4B from that NG unless it is aspirational. The DWP funding increase includes the increased OpEx until 2026 and CapEx until 2031. Only $5B of CapEx funding is projected between 2026 to 2031 following the $11B over the first 10 years to 2026.

 

[ngatimozart]

You will have to trim around $4B from that NG unless it is aspirational. The DWP funding increase includes the increased OpEx until 2026 and CapEx until 2031. Only $5B of CapEx funding is projected between 2026 to 2031 following the $11B over the first 10 years to 2026.

Bugger. I shall have to rethink it then. Tot time.