40 deg south
Well-Known Member
I think the paras below are the key points. So far they are just scoping out options, and considering both single fleet and two type options.
Last edited:
Royal New Zealand Air Force
- Thread starter Lucasnz
- Start date
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
Do we know if the limited number of airframes has restricted operations, or are crews/engineers still more of a constraint? My impression is that the simulator-based training has been highly successful, so could there be less need for additional airframes be less than originally expected?
I have no idea, but am surprised that RNZAF hasn't been pushing harder for more numbers if they are really constrained.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
https://twitter.com/hashtag/MobilityGuardian?src=hash&lang=en
For more info on the recent exercise that NZDF joined in the US, see this twitter feed.
For more info on the recent exercise that NZDF joined in the US, see this twitter feed.
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
I hadn't realized that the eleven T6C acquired by the RNZAF were equipped with weapons capable hardpoints. Does NZDF have observers in the US for the trials of the light attack aircraft along with reps from Australia and Canada plus others?
t68
Well-Known Member
I imagine close allies will be watching the outcome, but in Australia case deciding what to do with ARH will be our overriding factor. With the grounding of the WRH fleet it's going to be interesting to see which way this turns.
Or any rogue airliners.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
In the case of rogue airliners , perhaps Textron's Scorpion jet would be a useful alternative to state of the art fast jets.
A rogue organization airliner is far more likely than a fast jet due to the distances involved. A Scorpion would struggle to intercept a modern airliner due to the speed difference, it's slower than a modern airliner. However the Ta50 or possibly the M346 would cope ok.
Not equipped as such. Yes there are hardpoints but iirc the RNZAF Texans are not the 'PLUS' model. They would require additional airframes with MIL-STD-8591 wired hardpoints or would have to modify the current aircraft which would effect the training pipeline.
The FA-50 Block 2 coming down the KAI pipeline with DART hump, EL/M-2052 AESA, Link 16, F-414, Rafael Sky Shield, Derby, Python 5, Spike and Taurus KEPD 350-K2 it would more than cope and cope with more.
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
The $93 million dollar question and how a potential surplus from the NH90 program could be used to benefit the NZDF if it were available for use. (Unlikely as we all know, general treasury)
With only five current LUH in service a buy of five additional aircraft at $15 million a piece would eat $75 million. Three A109 Power at $6 million a piece brings the total to $93million.
In the big scheme of things this is a pittance but those five additional LUH choppers would go a long way in allowing increased aerial operations IMHO.
On another topic.
Has anyone heard of any movement on the King Air replacements? Something must be happening on this front by now.
With only five current LUH in service a buy of five additional aircraft at $15 million a piece would eat $75 million. Three A109 Power at $6 million a piece brings the total to $93million.
In the big scheme of things this is a pittance but those five additional LUH choppers would go a long way in allowing increased aerial operations IMHO.
On another topic.
Has anyone heard of any movement on the King Air replacements? Something must be happening on this front by now.
Nothing at all. Quieter than a door mouse on the King Air front. IIRC the current lease runs out end of this month.
Joe Black
Active Member
A fleet of 8 or 12 of these would be nice
8 to 12 would cover the training requirements (conversion, weapons, combat,etc) you would want some more for operational use.I think a total of between 18 and 24 would be needed to have a significant operational value.A fleet of 8 or 12 of these would be nice
We will restore New Zealand’s strike capability with a small advanced force of jet trainer and combat aircraft.
The above is policy statement from a political party that is very likely to be part of the next government. Thus it is now at least plausible for the first time in many years that consideration about this capability level is no longer remote as it has recently been considered.
danonz
Member
yes I have read the policy, but how much would they push for it is another question, there would be more apatite from national but I don't think it would get any where at all if he partners with the dark side.
And if It is not an election issues it's likely to be pushed to back if negotiations
And if It is not an election issues it's likely to be pushed to back if negotiations
IIRC 18 A-4K aircraft were required to meet the then NZG policy aims. Can't remember where I read it though. That was when we had the AerMacchis and I would presume towards the tail end of the Blunties time.
That will be interesting if their leader will really push for it. As Danonz mentions, if he goes with the dark side then I have my doubts. However I suppose we will have to wait and see in that aspect.
I would add some F-16s to the mix as well, but prefer US weapons on both platforms because of ease of availability compared to European weapons. Maybe 12 of each platform if possible.
t68
Well-Known Member
well that would be a breath of fresh air if it came to pass :fly:fly:fly
tongan_yam
New Member
I also took a look at the 'kingpins' defence policy and noted with interest the reinstatement of the ACF.
I know Mr C has mentioned the TA-50 in the past and most recently. If we're to postulate the make-up of the ACF I was thinking that the Boeing Saab T-X project could be a starter - with a flow on purchase of the JAS Grippen as our fast strike platform.
I know Mr C has mentioned the TA-50 in the past and most recently. If we're to postulate the make-up of the ACF I was thinking that the Boeing Saab T-X project could be a starter - with a flow on purchase of the JAS Grippen as our fast strike platform.