NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
The Washington and Wellington Declarations though not binding have to be abided to in good faith.
The NZ Government are going to find that their economic holy grail - a free trade relationship with the US - will not get traction with Republican control of the Senate, Congress and White House. It maybe that way for quite some time.
The best thing that could happen to the NZDF is that Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions is the next US SecDef. He really has got in for governments that do not pull their strategic weight with respect to defence spending.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
He would be a good pick but most qualified is not a priority for many of the advisors in Trump's inner circle.
A report from Gordon Arthur at Shephard's on the recently released Capability Plan.
https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/defence-notes/nz-outlines-capability-investment/
Agree with other posters on the continued vagueness. Not as vague as the DWP but still up there on the wishy-washy-ometer. Not much additional equipment in there to fill current serious and plainly obvious capability gaps. Seems difficult to see how continued 1% of GDP can even buy what's listed (rather than what's really needed) and be credible. Some of it seems hopelessly optimistic (such as the 36-month battalion deployment).
Happy at least they have allowed for mid-life modernisation of most things (eg. OPVs & Canterury, most electronicky bits & pieces). That's better than the Bolger govt did.
Have to wonder what impact the earthquake repair bills will have on this plan.
Surprises (well,some that aren't surprising as well):
- Replacement landing craft for the Canterbury.
- now all 4 IPVs to be retired from service
- $50m-to-$100m to support / update Seasprites.
- 60mm mortars. Not sure it means we are actually going to field mortar teams in the infantry companies. Would be nice though.
- Army expected to expand - doesn't say to what extent (a 3rd infantry battalion?).
- no additional helos (or marinisation of the NH90s).
On Kaikoura:
Short videos of the Canadian Sea King, and the Australian & US Seahawks arriving at Kaikoura on the NZDF Twitter page (link). Army are now moving in (update: no they're not).
OT: interesting debate in Parliament last night on the new Maritime Transport bill. Some refreshing views from the minor parties (Genter did particularly well). Transcript here.
https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/defence-notes/nz-outlines-capability-investment/
Agree with other posters on the continued vagueness. Not as vague as the DWP but still up there on the wishy-washy-ometer. Not much additional equipment in there to fill current serious and plainly obvious capability gaps. Seems difficult to see how continued 1% of GDP can even buy what's listed (rather than what's really needed) and be credible. Some of it seems hopelessly optimistic (such as the 36-month battalion deployment).
Happy at least they have allowed for mid-life modernisation of most things (eg. OPVs & Canterury, most electronicky bits & pieces). That's better than the Bolger govt did.
Have to wonder what impact the earthquake repair bills will have on this plan.
Surprises (well,some that aren't surprising as well):
- Replacement landing craft for the Canterbury.
- now all 4 IPVs to be retired from service
- $50m-to-$100m to support / update Seasprites.
- 60mm mortars. Not sure it means we are actually going to field mortar teams in the infantry companies. Would be nice though.
- Army expected to expand - doesn't say to what extent (a 3rd infantry battalion?).
- no additional helos (or marinisation of the NH90s).
On Kaikoura:
Short videos of the Canadian Sea King, and the Australian & US Seahawks arriving at Kaikoura on the NZDF Twitter page (link). Army are now moving in (update: no they're not).
OT: interesting debate in Parliament last night on the new Maritime Transport bill. Some refreshing views from the minor parties (Genter did particularly well). Transcript here.
Sessions is most definitely in the Trump inner circle though and along with Senator Cotton said to be the prime picks for SecDef.
I have an expectation that out of the 5 Eyes community, NZ and Canada will have the a little more pressure put upon them than for example Australia in terms of stepping up with respect to Defence capability.
Trump will talk to Shinzo Abe in the next few days which will be very interesting. Abe will welcome more Defence spending on the Japanese side, and a subtle green light to do so from Trump will be a political gift horse. Abe is a cautious nationalist at heart and this has resonated within Jimento (LDP) voters, but so has their outreach to 'peer' nations. He has a narrative to inform Trump, who as candidate probably was not aware of what Japan has been doing with defence posture in the Western Pacific and modernisation since the Koizumi era. Much of Trumps early campaign rhetoric sounded like the early 1980's "Sledgehammer a Datsun" days.
Thus with respect to NZ the covert pressure to increase it's defence spend will be applied not just from the US and to a lesser degree Australia (though that may change if Turnbull is replaced as PM), but also come from Singapore, Japan and Korea. There is likely to be a TTPA 'lite' emerging over the next few months from Singapore and Japan, whom are keen to court NZ and Australia. Part of which will be the strategic hedge against Chinese economic influence and trade competition (China is pushing to lead its own Pan Asia-Pacific trade bloc which is a big problem for the US and a huge problem for Japan & Korea whom like Indonesia, Thailand and Malaysia may wish to re-engage), which involves a well resourced and capable defence umbrella that mirrors the trade cooperation. Increased defence spending may likely become New Zealand's price for admission.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
A few more points that caught my eye in the Capability Plan.
P48
The traditional 'drive em till they drop' philosophy seems to be on its way out. With regard to Special Operations, the first batch of specialist vehicles is due in 2018, with a second tranch of vehicles planned for 2027. Similarly, there will be new RHIBs in 2017 and 2026.
Nice to see some forward planning here.
P50
Sounds like the Seasprites, plus Penguin/torpedoes, can be deployed aboard OPVs, Canterbury and MSC. Magazines, anyone?
P52
New hangers will be required for the FAMC aircraft, could be at either Whenuapai or Ohakea. Report notes that
The list of 'equipment expected to undergo disposal' includes surplus LAVs and Pinzgauer vehicles
P74-77
Section on funding, re-stating the 1% spend level.
P82
P48
The traditional 'drive em till they drop' philosophy seems to be on its way out. With regard to Special Operations, the first batch of specialist vehicles is due in 2018, with a second tranch of vehicles planned for 2027. Similarly, there will be new RHIBs in 2017 and 2026.
Nice to see some forward planning here.
P50
Sounds like the Seasprites, plus Penguin/torpedoes, can be deployed aboard OPVs, Canterbury and MSC. Magazines, anyone?
P52
New hangers will be required for the FAMC aircraft, could be at either Whenuapai or Ohakea. Report notes that
P58
The list of 'equipment expected to undergo disposal' includes surplus LAVs and Pinzgauer vehicles
P74-77
Section on funding, re-stating the 1% spend level.
I'm picking this is where the 1% will be quietly led out the back and humanely disposed of.
P82
Greetings to the P-8 and C-130J!
Agree on C-130J for FAMC tactical - largely based on a desire not to buy something 'too new' (sensible approach). P8 I hope but still nervous we'll do a C17 & decide too late). Just to clarify, I'm saying I think MinDef will go with C130J for the above reasons, I'm not expressing a preference!
The DCP is certainly an anti-climax, could've easily been built into the DWP. It certainly doesn't help trying to read between the lines when at top of Pg29 they mention the FAMC strategic for Antartic ops, then at bottom of Pg51 it's a FAMC tactical role. :jump
Last edited:
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Sessions has been picked for A-G. I think confirmation for SecDef would be easier given his past.
An update on the military aircraft and ship movements involved in the Kaikoura Earthquake HADR Operation.
Yes I caught that over the weekend. He was the Alabama AG in the past.
General James Mattis is also being talked about as SecDef. Though in the Senate hearings the Dems will no doubt bring up the Col. Joe Dowdy incident with respect to Mattis, amongst a number of other matters. Gen Petraeus is another being talked about as it seems Trump wants a retired 4 star. With Flynn as the National Security Advisor the firebrands are to the fore.
Ron Mark giving his 2 cents worth.
Ron Mark: What Culverden tells us about missing defence priorities | Stuff.co.nz
Makes some good points however there are some suggestions which hit and miss.
His continuing dislike of the C-17's from what I have heard from other MP's stems from his reluctance to admit that he was too quick to attack the government 18 months ago for political point scoring reasons without working through issues surrounding the FAMC.
He does talk about an "enhanced aviation capable Landing Helicopter Dock." I would make the suggestion that if he does want that kind of capability then a 'short range utility transport' solution should in fact be rotary solution rather than a small-medium sized fixed wing solution.
Thus if we are going to introduce another platform type as Mr Mark suggests, that type needs to bridge the lack of utility rotary lift gap through to our current medium tactical transport capability. From the NH90 through to the C-130H the gap is a large/heavy lift rotary and a short range/S2M twin. Is there a short range utility transport aircraft solution that can also land on a future LHD (good proposal Mr Mark) and in places where by runways, even short grass airstrips are not available, as well as been capable of being airlifted by a A400M/C-17 type platform, granted with rear rotor assembly dismantled?
If we go down the path of a better Sealift/Amphibious platform then it does make sense.
Ron Mark: What Culverden tells us about missing defence priorities | Stuff.co.nz
Makes some good points however there are some suggestions which hit and miss.
His continuing dislike of the C-17's from what I have heard from other MP's stems from his reluctance to admit that he was too quick to attack the government 18 months ago for political point scoring reasons without working through issues surrounding the FAMC.
He does talk about an "enhanced aviation capable Landing Helicopter Dock." I would make the suggestion that if he does want that kind of capability then a 'short range utility transport' solution should in fact be rotary solution rather than a small-medium sized fixed wing solution.
Thus if we are going to introduce another platform type as Mr Mark suggests, that type needs to bridge the lack of utility rotary lift gap through to our current medium tactical transport capability. From the NH90 through to the C-130H the gap is a large/heavy lift rotary and a short range/S2M twin. Is there a short range utility transport aircraft solution that can also land on a future LHD (good proposal Mr Mark) and in places where by runways, even short grass airstrips are not available, as well as been capable of being airlifted by a A400M/C-17 type platform, granted with rear rotor assembly dismantled?
If we go down the path of a better Sealift/Amphibious platform then it does make sense.
tongan_yam
New Member
Boeing Osprey CV-22B
As there has been discussion about the CH46, I wonder if the Boeing Osprey CV-22B could enter the mix? Given that its a feature of the USMC has flown off various Navies LHD.
Can't find for now if its airlift capability in either the A400/C17 however it does have a ferry range that would put it on any of our Pacific neighbors (1,940 nmi) baring Tokelau and Tuvalu.
Added bonus is that it can sling a M777 underwing (yes once we acquire then) something that the NH90 can't.
As there has been discussion about the CH46, I wonder if the Boeing Osprey CV-22B could enter the mix? Given that its a feature of the USMC has flown off various Navies LHD.
Can't find for now if its airlift capability in either the A400/C17 however it does have a ferry range that would put it on any of our Pacific neighbors (1,940 nmi) baring Tokelau and Tuvalu.
Added bonus is that it can sling a M777 underwing (yes once we acquire then) something that the NH90 can't.
I believe that the CH46 Sea Knight is out of production so I think you mean the CH47 Chinook aka Chook. Whilst the MV22 Osprey ticks a lot of boxes it is an expensive beastie to own and operate at NZ$98 million flyaway cost. It does fold down almost like a transformer. A new CH47F Chook is NZ$41 million flyaway and if we wanted to acquire used US Army ones, the Greeks recently acquired some ex US Army CH47Ds for NZ$20.5 million flyaway per aircraft. For comparison a new marinised NH90 is NZ$57.5 million or NZ$42.6 million for the TTH, both costs being the flyaway costs.
I've been following the comments with interest and I've noted that most of the comments have been positive regarding funding for defence. Granted a very small sample but the usual haters have been absent from the discussion as well.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
Sunday: Daily update on Wellington's quake affected and damaged buildings | Stuff.co.nz
Update from a few days ago.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
New Zealand Considers 2030 With $14B Defense Capability Plan
Nick Lee-Frampton at Defense News gives a brief summary of the Capability Plan. No particular angle or conclusions.
Nick Lee-Frampton at Defense News gives a brief summary of the Capability Plan. No particular angle or conclusions.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBzQNo_8qIo
NZDF Youtube channel has a batch of Kaikoura-related videos posted.
RNZN has plenty of footage of grey vessels floating around Auckland harbour.
NZDF Youtube channel has a batch of Kaikoura-related videos posted.
RNZN has plenty of footage of grey vessels floating around Auckland harbour.
Well that's a bit of a shock. As of Monday 12th December 2016 NZ will have a new Prime Minister, with the present one, John Key, resigning as the PM next Monday. He's decided to go out whilst he's on top and is the only NZ PM since WW2 to leave the office without losing an election or being deposed by his own mob. So a Cabinet reshuffle. Wonder of we'll keep Big Gerry as Minister. Whilst I don't like him personally I do think that as Minister, he has done a reasonably good job, grand even when you consider that he got $20 billion out of the Cabinet. I do like his attitude towards Treasury as well. 
Last edited:
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
It certainly is the biggest political bombshell for a long time on this side of the Tasman.Well that's a bit of a shock. As of Monday 12th December 2016 NZ will have a new Prime Minister, with the present one, John Key, resigning as the PM next Monday. He's decided to go out whilst he's on top and is the only NZ PM since WW2 to leave the office without losing an election or being deposed by his own mob. So a Cabinet reshuffle. Wonder of we'll keep Big Gerry as Minister. Whilst I don't like him personally I do think that as Minister, he has done a reasonably good job, grand even when you consider that he got $20 billion out of the Cabinet. I do like his attitude towards Treasury as well.
I'd been gradually coming to believe the polls saying the current National government would get a rare forth term, carrying them through to late 2020. That would have meant a steady-as-she-goes approach to Defence. Not perfect by a long way, but certainly better than some of the alternatives.
That would have safely got us through:
- ordering southern OPV
- ordering Littoral Operations vessel
- completion of ANZAC upgrade
- ordering tactical component of C-130 replacement
- (probably) ordering strategic component of C-130 replacement
- (probably/possibly) ordering P-3C replacement
- ordering upgrade/replacement of LAVIII fleet.
- ordering next stage of Strategic Bearer comms programme
- beginning the long-overdue property upgrade programme
And probably a few other projects that don't spring to mind. The first two naval orders might be squeezed in before the the next election in late 2017, and the ANZAC upgrade is fully contracted. Most of the others will be dependent on the next government.
The question is whether Key's replacement will be able to command the levels of party support Key did, without his huge personal popularity. I'd welcome any comments from Mr C, who I seem to recall has some links into the Nats.
I think a lot will depend on who is the next PM and it could well be big Gerry, who knows? Whatever happens I don't see it as being bad for NZD, though it could be only nuetralWell that's a bit of a shock. As of Monday 12th December 2016 NZ will have a new Prime Minister, with the present one, John Key, resigning as the PM next Monday. He's decided to go out whilst he's on top and is the only NZ PM since WW2 to leave the office without losing an election or being deposed by his own mob. So a Cabinet reshuffle. Wonder of we'll keep Big Gerry as Minister. Whilst I don't like him personally I do think that as Minister, he has done a reasonably good job, grand even when you consider that he got $20 billion out of the Cabinet. I do like his attitude towards Treasury as well.