Royal New Zealand Air Force

[ngatimozart]

Think needs for a third or even fourth Frigate should come before the return of a ACF and a true Amphibous Warfare ship.

Canberra/JC1 are too large NZ needs and the idea of flying F35B off them are just not going to happen. Just look at the shit storm with the ADF over B's for CBR and we have a generous air combat capabilty.

In an ideal world I'd like the Singaporeans to build the JMMS based on the Endurance class, but that seems to be getting less likely as time goes on, other option which I havnt really looked at as yet is the new Italian LHD,but for NZ a pair of Rotterdam Class could also work.

Given that this is a hypothetical exercise and that if you read what I wrote regarding funding streams, one would presume that the RNZN & NZ Army would have similar upgrades if the NZG went with a higher funding stream. I have not advocated them operating off a RNZN or RAN LHD have I? I just mentioned their ability to lillypad on a LHD. If the balloon did go up then all bets are off and they would be utilised where thought best regardless of what was thought prewar. Necessity is the mother of all invention. I have only suggested the F35B because if you are going to spend a significant quantity of treasure on a platform, then for a little more per platform, you can acquire an exponential increase in capability with less 5th generation platforms than you would have with more 4+ generation platforms for the same total expenditure. Like I said earlier, its about future proofing and force multipliers and in this case getting the best bang for buck. However it depends totally upon the level of funding the NZG would be willing to commit overall.

 

[ngatimozart]

We actually would not need our own advanced trainer if the T-50A is selected for the US. Contract into the Joint Jet Pilot Training Program out of Sheppard Air Force Base in Texas.

Would the USAF be willing to do that? At the moment they are having issues training enough of their own pilots and are facing what may prove to be a significant pilot shortage. Apparently the airlines have been recruiting pilots from the USAF quicker than they can be replaced - ye olde story, but the USAF pilot retention rate has apparently dropped as the airlines recruitment has been expanding. There has been talk of cutting back the foreign training program places in order to train more USAF pilots.

 

[ngatimozart]

Looks like a very good package.The reason I would go down this road is that we would need an advanced trainer to start the ball rolling and the more basic (cheaper) TA 50 would cover this without going to another aircraft type. They would also fit into the supporting the Assies as they have always said that they are short on ground support aircraft. The possibility of moving on to larger and more capable platforms should wait until we have the ability and experience to use them effectively.

Ground support or CAS is no longer about being low and slow with aircraft like the much vaunted A10 Warthog unable to survive on a modern high intensity battlefield due to MANPADS, SAM, fighters etc. Today CAS can be done by almost any platform from the F15, 16 & 18 up to and including the B52H through the use of Precision Guided Munitions (PGMs). Even the venerable C130 gets involved with a 105mm gun and Gatling guns, however that is in an uncontested environment. When the Aussies get their helo gunships sorted out, along with their fast jet capabilities, they'll have their ground support problems sorted. Therefore regardless of the fast jet platform we acquire as long as we use PGMs then we are CAS capable.

 

[ADMk2]

We actually would not need our own advanced trainer if the T-50A is selected for the US. Contract into the Joint Jet Pilot Training Program out of Sheppard Air Force Base in Texas.

Particularly if an in-service US type were to be chosen...

RAAF does not maintain an Operational Conversion Unit for our Super Hornet pilots and ACO's as it was deemed unaffordable for such (relatively) small numbers of aircrew.

Instead we run them directly through the USN training system, so it may very well be possible to go from a type such as T-6C / PC-21 to a frontline fighter, via USN / USAF flight training...

Putting NZ aircrew through the USN training system would have to considerably speed up any re-establishment of a fast jet capability in NZ service as well, I would have thought...

 

[ngatimozart]

If the money is made available the F35B as you suggest would definitely compliment all the work done to date to create a JATF. In order to facilitate their deployment how big of an LHD do you suggest? Canberra size? The idea is sound but $1 billion plus single line item will be a huge mouthful for the government to swallow.

Would a Korean Dokdo class at 199 m and 14000 tons be an appropriate ship to accommodate a small flight of F35B's some helo's? At a wiki quoted price of just shy of US$300 million one could be had for half that of a Canberra. This then begs the question of escorts? With only two frigates currently more would be required to ensure a credible escort of the LHD. For all of this more $$$$$ will be needed.

It is the right direction and it will be interesting times in the coming years because I too hold to the idea that the world is going to #%<> and in a hurry. For whatever reason things do not look good and its only going to take a single spark to create the firestorm that awaits us. Lets hope cooler heads prevail.

A Canberra Class would be far to large for the RNZN. The Cabinet would have a collective apoplexy and coronary over the cost. Possibly something around the 14 - 18K tonne class and preferably built in a Korean yard along with frigates and OCVs / OPCs. Lilly-padding would be the operative word with a flight of 6+1 spare F35B and helos. Again it all comes down to political will and money. Usually the pollies don't have both until either just before or when the balloon goes up which is always to late.

Hopefully cooler heads will prevail on the international seen but I do not have much faith in that because I see us been pushed inexorably closer to war and I don't see anyone who has the ability or mana to prevent it. I also would watch the China Russia relationship because I can see those two becoming closer, not as life long friends, but as allies in a time of mutual advantage and need with China being the senior partner. Russia needs Chinese treasure and China needs Russian weapons and technology. As they see it they have a mutual enemy - the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

 

[Rob c]

Ground support or CAS is no longer about being low and slow with aircraft like the much vaunted A10 Warthog unable to survive on a modern high intensity battlefield due to MANPADS, SAM, fighters etc. Today CAS can be done by almost any platform from the F15, 16 & 18 up to and including the B52H through the use of Precision Guided Munitions (PGMs). Even the venerable C130 gets involved with a 105mm gun and Gatling guns, however that is in an uncontested environment. When the Aussies get their helo gunships sorted out, along with their fast jet capabilities, they'll have their ground support problems sorted. Therefore regardless of the fast jet platform we acquire as long as we use PGMs then we are CAS capable.

I think the problem was for the Aussies that they needed to commit to many of their fast jet to area control to have enough left over for CAS This was because of the huge area they needed to control.( That's the way I understood it)

 

[Rob c]

Particularly if an in-service US type were to be chosen...

RAAF does not maintain an Operational Conversion Unit for our Super Hornet pilots and ACO's as it was deemed unaffordable for such (relatively) small numbers of aircrew.

Instead we run them directly through the USN training system, so it may very well be possible to go from a type such as T-6C / PC-21 to a frontline fighter, via USN / USAF flight training...

Putting NZ aircrew through the USN training system would have to considerably speed up any re-establishment of a fast jet capability in NZ service as well, I would have thought...

Operational conversion is a different animal to advanced training. The RAAF pilots sent to the USN would have already had their advanced training on the Hawk's

 

[Sam W]

I think the problem was for the Assies that they needed to commit to many of their fast jet to area control to have enough left over for CAS This was because of the huge area they needed to control.( That's the way I understood it)

Speaking of area control. I am certainly in the camp that a ACF should be a higher priority than a fourth frigate. The complete lack of ability to engage hostile aircraft in our airspace is a major issue in the event of an escalation in the global situation. Do we expect the USAF to station aircraft here when we need them because we were too cheap to have any sort of anti air capacity - not even man pads!

I think that once the cost of the F-35 comes down we should acquire a small quantity of the A variant, they should be permanently stationed in NZ with the ability to conduct anti-shipping and interception missions.

I think that F-35B would be appropriate for an expeditionary force, however I believe this should be separate from F-35A's for defending NZ airspace.

 

[MrConservative]

Operational conversion is a different animal to advanced training. The RAAF pilots sent to the USN would have already had their advanced training on the Hawk's

AD is very aware of that. His and my point is that when dealing with such low through-put numbers it is far more economical, faster and likely more effective in output quality to contract into the US JJTP.

 

[ngatimozart]

Speaking of area control. I am certainly in the camp that a ACF should be a higher priority than a fourth frigate. The complete lack of ability to engage hostile aircraft in our airspace is a major issue in the event of an escalation in the global situation. Do we expect the USAF to station aircraft here when we need them because we were too cheap to have any sort of anti air capacity - not even man pads!

I would not expect to have US or any other allied or coalition aircraft stationed here for our defence because we were / are too stingy to acquire the capability to defend ourselves. Why should they have to expend treasure, blood and lives for a nation not willing to help itself in the first instance?

I think that once the cost of the F-35 comes down we should acquire a small quantity of the A variant, they should be permanently stationed in NZ with the ability to conduct anti-shipping and interception missions.

I think that F-35B would be appropriate for an expeditionary force, however I believe this should be separate from F-35A's for defending NZ airspace.

If, as the hypothetical conversation says, that half the F35B force is away then the other half is theoretically back in NZ. There would be extra costs involved in operating the two different types, therefore it would be cost effective to operate just the single type, much like the UK is.

 

[Rob c]

AD is very aware of that. His and my point is that when dealing with such low through-put numbers it is far more economical, faster and likely more effective in output quality to contract into the US JJTP.

From an economical point of view this could very well be the case when weighed purely against training cost's, But the other side of the coin is that if you used an aircraft like the TA 50 for the advanced training it also adds to your combat force and for a small air force such as ours the ability to quickly and economically enlarge your combat ability in a crisis could outway the additional training costs.

 

[MrConservative]

Would the USAF be willing to do that? At the moment they are having issues training enough of their own pilots and are facing what may prove to be a significant pilot shortage. Apparently the airlines have been recruiting pilots from the USAF quicker than they can be replaced - ye olde story, but the USAF pilot retention rate has apparently dropped as the airlines recruitment has been expanding. There has been talk of cutting back the foreign training program places in order to train more USAF pilots.

Sheppard AFB runs the JJPTP for both NATO and US forces and is not going anywhere. The chatter is just that - chatter and all part of flexing the Hill appropriations budgets and political program posturing. The foreign pilot dimension pays its own way and has direct economic benefits into Texas as there is a considerable amount of private stakeholder interest in supporting the contracts.

 

[MrConservative]

From an economical point of view this could very well be the case when weighed purely against training cost's, But the other side of the coin is that if you used an aircraft like the TA 50 for the advanced training it also adds to your combat force and for a small air force such as ours the ability to quickly and economically enlarge your combat ability in a crisis could outway the additional training costs.

The other side of the coin reflects a distant possibility versus a strong probability. If you are talking about quickly developing a capability it makes all that a moot point as developing our own NZ side AJPT program, an OCU and a deployable squadron to OLOC standards would be a far lengthier process (think a further 5 years minimum) than a turnkey Stateside training program.

 

[Rob c]

The other side of the coin reflects a distant possibility versus a strong probability. If you are talking about quickly developing a capability it makes all that a moot point as developing our own NZ side AJPT program, an OCU and a deployable squadron to OLOC standards would be a far lengthier process (think a further 5 years minimum) than a turnkey Stateside training program.

Yes it is only a possibility, hopefully not needed, but that is what the main purpose of defence is all about, unpleasant possibilities. Obviously any overseas help would be very welcome if not a necessity. the time to form a deployable sqn without it's senior pilots being from an oversea's air force has been calculated by the air force as being 15 years

 

[t68]

Given that this is a hypothetical exercise and that if you read what I wrote regarding funding streams, one would presume that the RNZN & NZ Army would have similar upgrades if the NZG went with a higher funding stream.

As been said over the years on the forum hypothetical's should also have a level of realism attached it, with a number of people being cut off at the knee's for venturing to far off with the fairy's.

Besides *being on the verge of world war when has NZ*ever increased the capability of all three service at the same time and not at the detriment of another?

*I have not advocated them operating off a RNZN or RAN LHD have I? I just mentioned their ability to lillypad on a LHD.*

You have moved into the realm of CONOPS, lilypad operations require training, therefore that will be one of the requirements for F35B as defined by characteristics of the aircraft and end user's perspective.If part of the requirements are operations from austere airfield it does not necessarily mean that F35B would have to be bought. CTOL aircraft can also operate from austere airfields.Austere airfields are not just dirt and grass where matting has to be placed down.

Also aircraft numbers have a bearing on force planning which ultimately effect CONOPS. Any increase in the budget will work in parallel with force planning which also drive CONOPS,*no sense budgeting for X amount of a more expensive aircraft which effects the number of aircraft procured at the expense of force planning all for the sake of being able to do something which is not part of your CONOPS.

 

[ngatimozart]

As been said over the years on the forum hypothetical's should also have a level of realism attached it, with a number of people being cut off at the knee's for venturing to far off with the fairy's.

Besides *being on the verge of world war when has NZ*ever increased the capability of all three service at the same time and not at the detriment of another?

World War 2 and I never said that it was at the detriment of another. The RNZAF, NZ Army and the NZ Division of the RN expanded very quickly. When the Pacific War started the RNZAF, RNZN and NZ Army expanded exponentially again. The RNZAF had 7 combat sqns in the UK and a similar number in the Pacific. The RNZN went from one cruiser to two which would've been 3, except the Neptune was sunk in the Med when it hit a mine. It also operated ships in the Solomons with the USN. The NZ Army had the 2nd NZ Division in Egypt, UK, North Africa and Italy with the British and Allied Armies and the 3rd NZ Division in the Solomons with the US Army.

You have moved into the realm of CONOPS, lilypad operations require training, therefore that will be one of the requirements for F35B as defined by characteristics of the aircraft and end user's perspective.If part of the requirements are operations from austere airfield it does not necessarily mean that F35B would have to be bought. CTOL aircraft can also operate from austere airfields.Austere airfields are not just dirt and grass where matting has to be placed down.

Also aircraft numbers have a bearing on force planning which ultimately effect CONOPS. Any increase in the budget will work in parallel with force planning which also drive CONOPS,*no sense budgeting for X amount of a more expensive aircraft which effects the number of aircraft procured at the expense of force planning all for the sake of being able to do something which is not part of your CONOPS.

The premise is that the pollies get a humongous fright because of the deteriorating geopolitical situation. Hence there would be a change in CONOPS because of the change in the situation. When the brown smelly stuff hits the quickly rotating cooling device a lot of things would change; not overnight but change they would and reasonably quickly to meet an evolving situation. If, as I suggested the F35B training, was done by the USN & USMC then they would already have the deck experience. CONOPS are not writ large on granite tablets; they do need to have the ability to be flexible or you may end up with mechanised murder like on the Western Front in WW1 and / or you could lose the war. If we end up fighting the Chinese and / or the Russians we will be fighting foes who don't fight our way and who have different cultures and mind sets, especially the Chinese. The Vietnamese might've given the PLA a bloody nose back in the late 1970's, but the PLA today is totally different qualitatively, technologically and doctrinally to what it was then. Nowadays it is a formidable foe and to treat it as anything less would be extremely unwise.

What I'm looking at is possibilities and not discounting them because of current peacetime policy where the feeling amongst the pollies and the general population is that things aren't benign but not serious either. Personally I don't subscribe to that view, but I am looking at when things go rotten big time and how things that are normal now will be set aside. A recent example in NZ terms would be the NZG response to the Christchurch earthquakes, where they mobilised services, introduced regulations, found $15 - 20 billion in a hurry and enacted various pieces of legislation quite quickly to help with the rescue and recovery.

 

[ADMk2]

Operational conversion is a different animal to advanced training. The RAAF pilots sent to the USN would have already had their advanced training on the Hawk's

It is yes, but my point was merely that not all military flight training needs to be conducted in-country and I used an example of where that very thing is currently done, to justify that comment.

There are other military pilot training systems that NZ could join if necessary, that would reduce costs and help to speed up the re-introduction of fast jet capability within RNZAF.

 

[ADMk2]

From an economical point of view this could very well be the case when weighed purely against training cost's, But the other side of the coin is that if you used an aircraft like the TA 50 for the advanced training it also adds to your combat force and for a small air force such as ours the ability to quickly and economically enlarge your combat ability in a crisis could outway the additional training costs.

It also requires funds that have to be taken away from the fast jet capability, additional infrastructure that is needed for the additional types and so on.

If NZ needs an air combat capability for a 'global war' type scenario I would argue it would be far better off joining the Canadian NATO Pilot Training Scheme or similar, get it's fast jet suitable pilots trained up and converted onto a viable frontline type and concentrate on developing a credible frontline capability, than splitting it's available resources on an AJT that has some ability to pull 'double duty' AND a necessarily more limited frontline capability...

 

[MrConservative]

Yes it is only a possibility, hopefully not needed, but that is what the main purpose of defence is all about, unpleasant possibilities. Obviously any overseas help would be very welcome if not a necessity. The time to form a deployable sqn without it's senior pilots being from an oversea's air force has been calculated by the air force as being 15 years

A range of timeframes to reestablish an Air Combat Capability have been suggested over the years ranging from 8 years to 15 years, but also those timeframes vary with respect to the eventual size of the ACF. Indeed to get back to a 1990's era ACW of nearly 40 aircraft would definitely be the wrong side of a decade. However, by contracting into an overseas AJPT & OCU training pipeline the timeframe would be truncated.

 

[MrConservative]

It also requires funds that have to be taken away from the fast jet capability, additional infrastructure that is needed for the additional types and so on.

If NZ needs an air combat capability for a 'global war' type scenario I would argue it would be far better off joining the Canadian NATO Pilot Training Scheme or similar, get it's fast jet suitable pilots trained up and converted onto a viable frontline type and concentrate on developing a credible frontline capability, than splitting it's available resources on an AJT that has some ability to pull 'double duty' AND a necessarily more limited frontline capability...

Yep. The Canadian NATO Pilot Training Scheme would also be a good fit.