NZDF General discussion thread

[ngatimozart]

What is the forum’s thoughts on a NZ response to regional developments with an indigenous ground-based air defence system? Possibly even one with some terminal Ballistic Missile Defence growth paths?

Pros:
1. From an operational POV, they are a purely defensive system with no offensive capability. Likely to be more politically attractive in the NZ context accordingly. NZ maintains naval air defence capabilities already, such a system could be viewed as a land based adjunct to an existing capability rather than an out-right new capability.
2. They would restore a capability to enforce control of NZ domestic airspace.
3. As a deployable capability, would provide a highly visible (from an optics POV) contribution and an operationally useful element of NZ commitment to regional security in conjunction with allies.
4. Could provide a capability that even a modern ACF would struggle to match, with respect to possible growth path ABM capabilities.

Cons:
1. Expensive. Modern high end systems (especially those with ABM capabilities are not cheap…)
2. Less flexible than a fast jet equipped force if increased air defence capacity were to be sought.
3. May be limited in ability to cover all of NZ depending on need / depth of capability sought…

Thoughts?

It would have to be layered and yes a series of mobile units would work. A long range OTOH surveillance radar system would be required so that adds to it, but part of it could be set in the Realm islands such as one of the Cook Islands, on one of the Kermadec Islands, and on one of the mountains in the South Island for example.

 

[ngatimozart]

Forgived my ignorance, but wouldn't our western allies, particularly the USA and Australia, be leaning on NZ now more than ever due to China's latest move?

Hopefully they will be with hot irons and cattle prods.

On another note, PM Ardern just announced that New Zealand Defence Force staff are being deployed to Europe to help with the war effort in Ukraine.

Ardern deploys Defence staff to Europe

The Government will deploy defence staff to Europe to help with Ukraine war.

www.nzherald.co.nz

The official announcement from the PM and MIA DEFMIN. NZ to provide more military assistance to Ukraine | Beehive.govt.nz

Also the MIA DEFMIN announcement on his Fijian jolly: New Zealand and Fiji to strengthen areas of Defence cooperation | Beehive.govt.nz

No announcement of his meetings with AUDEFMIN Dutton.

 

[ADMk2]

It would have to be layered and yes a series of mobile units would work. A long range OTOH surveillance radar system would be required so that adds to it, but part of it could be set in the Realm islands such as one of the Cook Islands, on one of the Kermadec Islands, and on one of the mountains in the South Island for example.

Do you imagine something like TPS-77 or more like JORN?

Due to commonality with the existing fitout on your ANZAC Class frigates, I do admit that my ‘reference design’ was the Sky Sabre system, recently introduced by the British Army.

NZ also has substantial experience with Sea Giraffe AMB radars as well to draw on, so the ‘new’ bits would effectively be the fire control centres and the networking with existing / future assets into a future IAMD system...

 

[south]

What is the forum’s thoughts on a NZ response to regional developments with an indigenous ground-based air defence system? Possibly even one with some terminal Ballistic Missile Defence growth paths?

Pros:
1. From an operational POV, they are a purely defensive system with no offensive capability. Likely to be more politically attractive in the NZ context accordingly. NZ maintains naval air defence capabilities already, such a system could be viewed as a land based adjunct to an existing capability rather than an out-right new capability.
2. They would restore a capability to enforce control of NZ domestic airspace.
3. As a deployable capability, would provide a highly visible (from an optics POV) contribution and an operationally useful element of NZ commitment to regional security in conjunction with allies.
4. Could provide a capability that even a modern ACF would struggle to match, with respect to possible growth path ABM capabilities.

Cons:
1. Expensive. Modern high end systems (especially those with ABM capabilities are not cheap…)
2. Less flexible than a fast jet equipped force if increased air defence capacity were to be sought.
3. May be limited in ability to cover all of NZ depending on need / depth of capability sought…

Thoughts?

WRT pro 2: SAMs cannot really provide this capability, as they have limited/No capability to ID, but certainly no capacity to discern what is actually happening to an aircraft, and thus no capability to graduate a response. E.g has an airliner been hijacked, or is it just a radio failure? If you pull a fighter alongside they can look into the cockpit, look into the cabin, provide a contact to follow, or conduct warnings. You can’t do that with a SAM; you either shoot it down (potentially without full picture of what is occurring), or let the aeroplane go on its merry way.

 

[htbrst]

No announcement of his meetings with AUDEFMIN Dutton.

There is some comment by him in this article. I'm not sure he got the point :

Henare said he discussed with Dutton their respective defence spending.

"He certainly didn't talk about any figures or any particular compatibilities ... other than the obvious outcome is: if they're purchasing, and we're not, what does that mean in terms of how far we might be apart?”

Australia has substantially increased defence spending, with Dutton announcing on Thursday that $875 million would be pumped into military bases across the country.

The Government has signalled a different direction ahead of the Budget in May, with Henare suggesting previously planned acquisitions of military hardware would be delayed to instead focus on improving the defence estate and “regenerating” a Defence Force withered by the pandemic.

Defence Minister 'caught off guard' by Solomon Islands-China security agreement

 

[south]

If a foothold on a Pacific island is established by China, this may be a trigger that forces NZ to re-establish an ACF (and all of the assorted enablers). If this brought H-6/H-20 etc to within range of NZ (even if AAR is required) then how much of the NZ populace would be happy with a photograph of said bomber sitting 12.1NM off the NZ coastline without an escorting RNZAF fighter?

 

[John Fedup]

If a foothold on a Pacific island is established by China, this may be a trigger that forces NZ to re-establish an ACF (and all of the assorted enablers). If this brought H-6/H-20 etc to within range of NZ (even if AAR is required) then how much of the NZ populace would be happy with a photograph of said bomber sitting 12.1NM off the NZ coastline without an escorting RNZAF fighter?

If reports are true about junior finally giving the F-35 the nod, might be some Hornets available, single owner and dual owner.

 

[recce.k1]

Stewart Woodman, Professor at the Australian Defence Force Academy at the University of New South Wales, had been a significant critic of what he considered a moribund approach to defence planning outlined in SONZD 97.
He commented: ‘What utility would they really have had for the NZDF? F-16s would look funny sitting at the end of a runway in the Solomons.
https://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p22051/pdf/book.pdf (pg104).

Thought I'd throw that into the mix, an old quote from a Professor at the Australian Defence Force Academy UNSW! I wonder if he still holds that view?

RNZAF P-3 Orions regularly operate out of the Solomon Islands to this day. If the RNZAF still had an ACF I would suggest they would also be occassional visitors, as they were in other parts of the South West Pacific!

 

[Stuart M]

No announcement of his meetings with AUDEFMIN Dutton.

Standing and no coffee, huh?

 

[Stuart M]

@Shanesworld & @Stuart M I will write more about this anon., but having a potentially hostile forces aside your SLOC & ALOC and not doing anything about it is not conducive to good governance. That's an existential treat to the nation's economic wellbeing for a start, and a potential threat to the nation's sovereignty.

Indeed, its no good at all and China has form on knowing exactly how to threaten a nations sovereignty and undermine good governance .. so to that end I think that if they get the Solomon base they will make sure that base has capacity to support the ability to threaten AU/NZ and will use it .. they have to.. or why bother with the agreement?

Look forward to your thoughts on it.

 

[Stuart M]

What is the forum’s thoughts on a NZ response to regional developments with an indigenous ground-based air defence system? Possibly even one with some terminal Ballistic Missile Defence growth paths?

Pros:
1. From an operational POV, they are a purely defensive system with no offensive capability. Likely to be more politically attractive in the NZ context accordingly. NZ maintains naval air defence capabilities already, such a system could be viewed as a land based adjunct to an existing capability rather than an out-right new capability.
2. They would restore a capability to enforce control of NZ domestic airspace.
3. As a deployable capability, would provide a highly visible (from an optics POV) contribution and an operationally useful element of NZ commitment to regional security in conjunction with allies.
4. Could provide a capability that even a modern ACF would struggle to match, with respect to possible growth path ABM capabilities.

Cons:
1. Expensive. Modern high end systems (especially those with ABM capabilities are not cheap…)
2. Less flexible than a fast jet equipped force if increased air defence capacity were to be sought.
3. May be limited in ability to cover all of NZ depending on need / depth of capability sought…

Thoughts?

I think NZ should.

If China is setting up shop in the South Pacific I would think that air launched ballistic missiles or generic cruise missiles will be the threat given the range, so a layered system with with ABM (Arrow 3?) at the top and a decent long range SAM system are the go.
I understand that Arrow has, or will have, an anti-satellite capability, which is something NZ should have to degrade effective targeting.

I don't think such a system should be either or with regards to a restored ACF, I think both are needed.

 

[ADMk2]

WRT pro 2: SAMs cannot really provide this capability, as they have limited/No capability to ID, but certainly no capacity to discern what is actually happening to an aircraft, and thus no capability to graduate a response. E.g has an airliner been hijacked, or is it just a radio failure? If you pull a fighter alongside they can look into the cockpit, look into the cabin, provide a contact to follow, or conduct warnings. You can’t do that with a SAM; you either shoot it down (potentially without full picture of what is occurring), or let the aeroplane go on its merry way.

I get that in a civilian environment sense, but we are considering an environment where a responsible Government interested in reasonable measures to protect it’s own airspace, rather than one in which an ideological driven government is in power, which having the benefit of a benign strategic environment has deliberately emasculated it’s own defence force for no other reason than to suit it’s preferred ideology.

However that attitude has existed in a strategic environment where they perceived any threat to their territorial integrity as being so low they could afford this lax approach.

They are now potentially faced with Chinese naval and perhaps air forces which do include long ranged missile capabilities, being based even if temporarily within direct strike range of many Chinese capabilities.

I perceive (rightly or wrongly) that the ACF (as it was called when it existed so I’ll keep using it for simplicity’s sake) represents everything they abhor about military capability and even a threat of Chinese aircraft flying along their territorial limits may not be enough to change this bias.

A purely defensive modern surface to air missile system however provides an ‘out’ to the argument that they are doing nothing against such a threat, at most likely a cheaper cost in acquisition, sustainment and manpower compared to a full strength fighter squadron, or greater.

Organisationally too, I would imagine it be much more straight-forward to establish a SAM battery or two, along with an appropriate IAMD and air surveillance system, than it would be the same system and a LIFT and a fighter capability amd all that goes with that…

 

[JohnJT]

NZ needs eyes first, teeth second.

The first thing NZ should do is follow through on the DCP's requirement for satellite surveillance (like unseen labs maritime product) and long endurance unmanned systems (like sea guardian). Persistent ISR is crucial to NZ's ability to know what the threat is and where it is. This is also a valuable capability to have within an alliance and would be seen by NZ's allies as a significant contribution. And unlike fighter jets and ABM systems, this isn't pie in the sky, it's part of the DCP.

 

[Stuart M]

NZ needs eyes first, teeth second.

The first thing NZ should do is follow through on the DCP's requirement for satellite surveillance (like unseen labs maritime product) and long endurance unmanned systems (like sea guardian). Persistent ISR is crucial to NZ's ability to know what the threat is and where it is. This is also a valuable capability to have within an alliance and would be seen by NZ's allies as a significant contribution. And unlike fighter jets and ABM systems, this isn't pie in the sky, it's part of the DCP.

Dunno about others, but I did not mention satellite surveillance etc as I know there is already official interest in it and its obviously the enabler that makes the teeth bite.
Given this, imo there is room to discuss how NZ might exploit the information such assets might generate, which is pertinent as NZ has precious little to exploit with. Moreover, if NZ is soon to be well within range of a hostile states cruise/ air launched ballistic missiles, warships as well as grey warfare assets, those "pie in the sky" items might not be theoretical for much longer, but needed with some urgency.

A good example of the stunts the CCP might pull are these.

South China Sea dispute: Huge Chinese 'fishing fleet' alarms Philippines - BBC News

The Philippines has called on China to withdraw more than 200 ships it accuses of encroaching upon its territorial waters in the South China Sea.
Defence Minister Delfin Lorenzana said the Chinese ships were violating the Philippines' maritime rights.
The Philippines says the fishing boats do not appear to be fishing and are crewed by China's maritime militia.
----------

And this
----------------------
Chinese fishing armada plundered waters around Galápagos, data shows | Galápagos Islands | The Guardian

Using a mapping tool devised by NGO Global Fishing Watch in partnership with Google and the environmental watchdog SkyTruth, Oceana documented Chinese vessels apparently disabling their public tracking devices, thus providing conflicting vessel identification information. The new evidence supports claims made by the Ecuadorean government last month. The report also found some vessels engaging in potentially suspect transshipment practices, all of which can facilitate illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing.


China is ranked as the world’s worst nation in a 2019 IUU fishing index. Its fleet, by far the largest in the world, is regularly implicated in overfishing, targeting of endangered shark species, illegal intrusion of jurisdiction, false licensing and catch documentation, and forced labour.
---------------

Yes we need the surveillance kit, a need that seems to have been realised, but we need other more forceful assets otherwise we are still helpless, just well informed about how helpless we are.

 

[Gracie1234]

I agree we need to get on with expanding our surveillance capability as we know there is a need now, while we are working up these new capabilities then we can look at the teeth.

 

[ngatimozart]

Do you imagine something like TPS-77 or more like JORN?

Due to commonality with the existing fitout on your ANZAC Class frigates, I do admit that my ‘reference design’ was the Sky Sabre system, recently introduced by the British Army.

NZ also has substantial experience with Sea Giraffe AMB radars as well to draw on, so the ‘new’ bits would effectively be the fire control centres and the networking with existing / future assets into a future IAMD system...

TPS-77 is good from the mobile aspect and I have been thinking of JORN for quite a long time, especially if a NZ component of it was plugged into the Australian system. In fact I think that the two systems would be complimentary because JORN has the longer range.

Definitely Sky Sabre. I have it on my list of future acquisitions for NZ Army GBAD.

There is some comment by him in this article. I'm not sure he got the point :

Defence Minister 'caught off guard' by Solomon Islands-China security agreement

He didn't get the point at all and if Aussie intelligence were all over the Solomon Islands - PRC deal, then NZ would have been too. The MIA DEFMIN was surprised because he isn't doing his job. The equipment funding being delayed is again him not doing his job. Being DEFMIN is a job not a hobby, even more so when he requested it.

Thought I'd throw that into the mix, an old quote from a Professor at the Australian Defence Force Academy UNSW! I wonder if he still holds that view?

RNZAF P-3 Orions regularly operate out of the Solomon Islands to this day. If the RNZAF still had an ACF I would suggest they would also be occassional visitors, as they were in other parts of the South West Pacific!

That link goes back to Peter Greeners "Timing is Everything" final page on the F-16 deal. Can't see the quote that you are talking about.

NZ needs eyes first, teeth second.

The first thing NZ should do is follow through on the DCP's requirement for satellite surveillance (like unseen labs maritime product) and long endurance unmanned systems (like sea guardian). Persistent ISR is crucial to NZ's ability to know what the threat is and where it is. This is also a valuable capability to have within an alliance and would be seen by NZ's allies as a significant contribution. And unlike fighter jets and ABM systems, this isn't pie in the sky, it's part of the DCP.

Yes we do need eyes, but we also need some form of deterrence as well, be it SAM or LIFT or both to keep uninvited interlopers out of our airspace.

@Stuart M WRT the PRC fishing fleet, yes they will be a problem in the future and one that shouldn't be ignored. We will require more OPVs to deal with them and they probably have to have strengthen hulls because PRC FV SOP when caught illegally fishing is for the FV escort ships to ram the enforcement vessel.

Just to put into context NZ's maritime area of interest in the South Pacific.



It's a file image I have and I can't remember where I thieved it from. This is the SAR (SSR) regions and as well as the NZ one we also have an interest in the Fiji, Solomon Islands and Nauru areas. As you can see its quite a large area.

 

[Nighthawk.NZ]

Pheeeew that was close... stand down... and gubberments can put heads back in the sand...
"And Putin said he wasn't gonna attack Ukraine"

Can you hear the sting of my sarcasm...

Why would you keep it a secret from you own people...

Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare hits back at concern about China deal, claims no plans for Chinese military base

 

[Stuart M]

@Stuart M WRT the PRC fishing fleet, yes they will be a problem in the future and one that shouldn't be ignored. We will require more OPVs to deal with them and they probably have to have strengthen hulls because PRC FV SOP when caught illegally fishing is for the FV escort ships to ram the enforcement vessel.

Just to put into context NZ's maritime area of interest in the South Pacific.

View attachment 49060

It's a file image I have and I can't remember where I thieved it from. This is the SAR (SSR) regions and as well as the NZ one we also have an interest in the Fiji, Solomon Islands and Nauru areas. As you can see its quite a large area.

Yep, its huge area, more OPVs (& better ones at that) and P8's needed.

As far as maps go, I think this one is useful on how 'small' NZ is. and puts into perspective the EEZ size.

Stuff

www.stuff.co.nz

 

[Stuart M]

Pheeeew that was close... stand down... and gubberments can put heads back in the sand...
"And Putin said he wasn't gonna attack Ukraine"

Can you hear the sting of my sarcasm...

Why would you keep it a secret from you own people...

Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare hits back at concern about China deal, claims no plans for Chinese military base

"We are not pressured in any way by our new friends and there is no intention whatsoever to ask China to build a military base in the Solomon Islands," he said."

Indeed not.. they will just enlarge and improve whats already there and use that.

 

[Rob c]

Thought I'd throw that into the mix, an old quote from a Professor at the Australian Defence Force Academy UNSW! I wonder if he still holds that view?

RNZAF P-3 Orions regularly operate out of the Solomon Islands to this day. If the RNZAF still had an ACF I would suggest they would also be occassional visitors, as they were in other parts of the South West Pacific!

The problem we have with our defence force is that the primary role of any defence force is to defend that countries sovereignty and in the case of a democracy,the freedom of it's people, as is happening in Ukraine right now. However a lot of people and just about all pollies get tied up with what it does in peace time and not for what is needed when the defence force is required for it's primary role. It is a good use of resources to make use of your defence force for other roles when they are not needed for their primary role, but we should never lose sight of what the primary role is. In reality if we had got the F16's, whether they visited the pacific islands is irrelevant to their primary role. It is however a diplomatic role that the government of the day may have considered important. If we get too tied up with the defence forces peace time role as has happened in NZ, We have wound up with a defence force that is unable to respond to any significant threat to our sovereignty. In other words, successive governments have dropped the ball.