NZDF General discussion thread

Gryphinator

Active Member
I assume all the politics talk on the NZ thread means we can discuss the Australian election and its defence implications here instead?
 

Simon Ewing Jarvie

Active Member
View attachment 49078

The image is a graphic I have done in Google Earth. The circles are centred on Honoraria, the capital of the Solomon Islands. The red circle is the estimated combat radius of the Xian H-6K as stated by Military Today as being 3,500 km. The black circle is the maximum estimated range of air to ground missiles that can be launched from the H-6K extending it's range out to 5,000 km. It has been reported that the CJ-10 ALCM has a range of 2,000 km and is capable of being armed with either a nuclear or conventional warhead. The aircraft is operated by both the PLAAF and PLANAF. The H-6N is the AAR variant of the H-6 with a much longer range than the H-6K, it can also carry heavier weapons than the H-6K. A H-6B reconnaissance aircraft, a HD-6 electronic warfare aircraft. It is fitted with solid nose and canoe fairing with electronic countermeasures equipment, and a HY-6 (also referred H-6U) aerial refuelling tanker. The PLANAF also operate the Shaanxi Y-8X MPA which has a range of 5,600 km and an endurance of 10 hours.

Then there is the ubiquitous PRC fishing fleet that pillages the ocean of just about every living thing. They impact the whole ocean food chain from the benthic life through to the largest life forms in the ocean because they hollow out the food chain in the middle, the fish and the life forms on the sea floor. This causes a collapse in the local food chain leaving countries to go hungry because local fishers are left with very little, if any, fish stocks China’s Monster Fishing Fleet Makes Other Countries Go Hungry (foreignpolicy.com). They are also going dark by switching their AIS off which is against international maritime law China's 'dark' fishing fleets are plundering the world's oceans - ABC News.

The PRC fishing fleet has a military dimension because the fishermen when not employed to fish are part of the Peoples Armed Forces Maritime Militia and are used to monitor, bully, ram etc., non PRC fishing and law enforcement vessels when encountered. They also interfere with Freedom Of Navigation exercises, gather acoustic, signals and imagery intelligence The Strategic Significance, of the Chinese Fishing Fleet (army.mil).

It is already causing concern in the South Pacific with the Kingdom of Tonga voicing concerns Chinese fishing fleet poses threat to Pacific island economies | Indo-Pacific Defense Forum (ipdefenseforum.com) and this is what we will be facing, not just ourselves but on behalf of Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, and the NZ Realm territories. If / when the CCP / PRC deploy coast guard vessels to protect their fishing fleet then there will be trouble because those vessels are PLAN frigates without the vast majority of the weapons systems. There will also be the deployment of PLAN fleet units to the Solomon Islands on a regular basis including ISR capable vessels and shore capabilities.

If the PLA get established there in any sufficient force, they will be difficult to remove. The battles on Guadalcanal, the rest of the Solomon Islands, and surrounding region, during WW2 testify to that. Rabaul on New Britain was only liberated after the Japanese surrender in August 1945. In 1941 NZ government started to panic about June - July when the Japanese started looking south, and panicked when the Japanese attacked Hong Kong, Philippines and Pearl Harbour. They really panicked when Singapore fell and the Japanese took the Solomon Islands. They weren't prepared for a Pacific war. In 1938 / 1939 they weren't prepared for any war. I think history maybe repeating itself.

Returning to my graphic above, Auckland is inside the redline and I believe Hamilton maybe on the line of close to it. The rest of NZ is well within air launched missile range as are all of the major Australian cities. If the H-6K are refuelled in the air, then the missile coverage is even larger. A surveillance and / or EW aircraft with A2A refuelling would be able to cover the whole of the country, especially if it was unopposed. Therefore it is my conclusion that if the PLA deploy long range aerial assets to the Solomon Islands, this will be the first time in NZ history that a potential adversary will have the capability to deploy land based combat aircraft over NZ, projecting hard power against NZ sovereignty, security, defence, and interests.
This is a new and very useful view of the China - SI base proposal. We can certainly expect that if the proposal goes ahead, several other counters on the board will also move. While subsurface logistics and ISR consequential developments are obvious, the one that I would like to see modelled sooner rather than later is the likely launching or repositioning of Chinese satellites to provide overwatch of the area shown in the graphic.
 

Gooey

Well-Known Member
Within other security classifications, you will get slightly different answers but due to the volume of commercial and military satellite options for CCP ISR, the answer during daylight (ie. Earth Observation cameras) is '24/7' within most areas on earth. That's now, without adding to existing constellations which is happening continuously.

Even the traditional black art areas of RF intercept ISR (SIGINT) and radar ISR (SAR) are available now for a civilian contract with, presumably, CCP military equivalent. Thus adding to the other CCP night and bad-weather capabilities-OTHR, HF SIGINT, large UAS, etc.

FYI, as far as I understand, most satellites will not be repositioned due to the fuel inefficiency of doing this. It really eats into their life/fuel cycle. Most of the satellite's (very) minor adjustments are due to normal orbital corrections from drag induced by several natural factors. Note, interesting (and contradicting what I just wrote) the US has just released the mission capabilities for a Russian GEO-based ISR satellite whose orbital characteristics change significantly over time IOT closely observes other, western, GEO satelites.

So overall, the orbits of CCP satellites would probably not change significantly as a result of the Solomons b/ they already have significant and constant coverage
 

Stuart M

Well-Known Member
“This deployment is in response to a direct ask by the UK, which identified that New Zealand could play a tangible role in supporting what has become an enormous logistical task,” Peeni Henare said."

So the US and UK drew straws on who gets to ask NZ then?

No doubt it has been put to NZGov that there needs to be a quid pro quo for NATO support on helping out with the CCP's wee game in the South Pacific.
I doubt Labour will like it, but this might prove a salutatory lesson on the need for membership of stable alliances.
 

kiwipatriot69

Active Member
“This deployment is in response to a direct ask by the UK, which identified that New Zealand could play a tangible role in supporting what has become an enormous logistical task,” Peeni Henare said."

So the US and UK drew straws on who gets to ask NZ then?

No doubt it has been put to NZGov that there needs to be a quid pro quo for NATO support on helping out with the CCP's wee game in the South Pacific.
I doubt Labour will like it, but this might prove a salutatory lesson on the need for membership of stable alliances.
And I noticed they also mentioned a 20 personell team to be sent for maintenance and repair siting the advanced age of the Hercules. Good.

The state of our armed forces doing these roles needs to be emphasized.Also the need to replace them.I wonder if giving them 20- 30 those lavs were trying to sell off would be a good idea?
 

Shanesworld

Well-Known Member
And I noticed they also mentioned a 20 personell team to be sent for maintenance and repair siting the advanced age of the Hercules. Good.

The state of our armed forces doing these roles needs to be emphasized.Also the need to replace them.I wonder if giving them 20- 30 those lavs were trying to sell off would be a good idea?
Theyve already been sold. Being refurbed now. We need them for the years ahead. Selling them is a bad idea.
 

Stuart M

Well-Known Member
Theyve already been sold. Being refurbed now. We need them for the years ahead. Selling them is a bad idea.
Bad is an understatement. There was enormous debate on the purchase of the things, as well as wheels vs tracks, but for some reason that I still do not comprehend the numbers bought was always considered to be far too much.
I never comprehend this because it was if there was no idea that an army needs attrition reserves, and I believe the fighting in Ukraine shows this but, so many NZ commentators are still arguing like the NZ army and it's gear is invincible so why have reserves?
 

Shanesworld

Well-Known Member
when did that happen? Could you give us a link?
They have ??? linky link
Sorry mate, just the rumour mill.

@Shanesworld

You need to be careful in announcing a rumour in a manner that appears to be fact. I have no issue with you indicating there is a rumour that it is a done deal but ....

"Theyve already been sold. Being refurbed now. We need them for the years ahead. Selling them is a bad idea"

certainly does not present this as a rumour. For the sake of consistency please consider this a polite warning.

alexsa.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
... removed double post ????... some how
You been on the squirt again :D Don't know how you managed that whatever it is that you did. Sure that you weren't an RP or a soup jockey? :D I have deleted it as per your request.
Sorry mate, just the rumour mill.
If it's the rumour mill, especially a joe room rumour mill, it's not worth posting here. Joe room rumours are started and spread by evil sods with eviler senses of humour and sarcasm levels that are in excess of megadeth. I have heard some crackers during my time in the NZDF.
 

Rob c

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Luxon and Seymour are advocating 2 percent defence spending on rnz this morning. Maybe it will become an election issue. Also talk about having to back up our words with actions. Labour is big on words, light on delivery across many area's
I did some thinking ,( I know, that could be dangerous at my age) on this announcement by Luxton and Seymour, who are both money and vote centered pollies, and came to the conclusion that maybe their party polling had detected a rise in support for increased defence spending, as I would doubt they would move in this direction if there was no advantage in it for them. The budget may be a good indicator if the government is seeing this too, as Robertson was indicating a cut of 4$Bin capital to the $20B long term capital to cover covid 19 costs. It will be interesting to see what happens.
 

Gibbo

Well-Known Member
I did some thinking ,( I know, that could be dangerous at my age) on this announcement by Luxton and Seymour, who are both money and vote centered pollies, and came to the conclusion that maybe their party polling had detected a rise in support for increased defence spending, as I would doubt they would move in this direction if there was no advantage in it for them. The budget may be a good indicator if the government is seeing this too, as Robertson was indicating a cut of 4$Bin capital to the $20B long term capital to cover covid 19 costs. It will be interesting to see what happens.
Not that I know how these things work but would the budget actually indicate much about the $4Bn in planned 'shavings' as surely that is future planned spending stretching out way beyond the scope of this years budget? I'd assume the budget mainly reflect projects underway or about to get underway in the next 12 months? I think the $4Bn will be reflected more in MinDef planning documentation. Yes major projects have a lead time eg: the SOPV which is already had money spend on RFI etc but would the budget normally get to the detail of listing projects funded / delayed etc? Certainly we can expect no more than a couple of lines in the MSM summary of the budget if most years are anything to go by. On the flip-side if there was a noticeable increase in budget for Defence we would likely see discussion around that in the MSM but I think the Govt has already nailed it's white flag to the pole with regard to what to expect in the budget for defence!
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Out of curiosity, how much of the original 20 Billion defence budget has been allocated, spent?
I would have to go and do some sums and check records, but off the top of my head, it is the Aotearoa, P-8A and C-130J acquisitions. There are some others such as part of the army network enablement project, and the armoured Pinzgauer replacement project.
 
Top