Premiums alone would sky high haha! but yes another cost that would have to be passed onto the customer, RNZAF. I doubt the 757s are even insured and the govt just underwrites them and takes the risk on a total hull loss, something a lessor probably wouldnt be willing to take a chance on for a multi $million aircraft/investment despite the promise of 1 little old lady flyer and only on Sundays?
NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
Morning All
To replace the B757 is an interesting discussion , I will throw my two cents into the well.
MRTT – I feel its just too big (attached image) for operations in NZ and the Pacific. It would not be able to be based at WP or OH. CH or AA would be the only options to lift off at MAUW, remember we moved the P8 to OH largely for the runway , and even that is too short to enable a MAUW take off. This frame does not come standard with upper deck cargo.
KC46 – This could work, although again they would have to move to OH and even then Im sure it would not be able to MAUW Ops. She does have a cargo door and set up for this. Within a few years there will be close to 3x as many of these in service than MRTT. I get a bit tired of the “cos the RAAF has that kit , we should too. “ The B767 has operated all over the Pacific. Air NZ has previous experience.
KHI C2 – Many years ago we were able to whip the rotor head off a Huey and push it into the Herk , M113s , Landies and Scorpions drive in. Today no show , like me , the NZDF has expanded around the waist and our lack of capability has become a burden on other nations. We have to call in our 5 eyes partners to move our kit , not good, in fact just plain embarrassing. The C2 would solve this issue. It would become the preferred Antarctica frame and could be still based at WP. Its not a great “airforce one “ by looks , but Im sure with some creative pallet work we could come up with a VIP interior.
No serious option is going to be cheap , esp if we get the minimum number of 4 frames. The second order effects, depending on the frame, are going to be significant too with re basing costs. One could even say , maybe its time for a new airbase to future proof the NZDF ? Another couple of thoughts are , 1. with the decline of trade with China should we be looking at using the purchase of this aircraft (and others , like Maritime helo) to help push a free trade deal with the US. 2. Acquiring a Tanker is not a silly idea. Like the Navy with ROA our frames could be off contributing to global efforts. 3. Should conflict happen in Asia the Tanker/cargo would be a prime asset across the Pacific.
Sadly for the NZ and the NZDF , If I was to put on my “reality hat” I would think the DCP will say , do not replace the 757 , buy two more C130 and charter VIP as required.
To replace the B757 is an interesting discussion , I will throw my two cents into the well.
MRTT – I feel its just too big (attached image) for operations in NZ and the Pacific. It would not be able to be based at WP or OH. CH or AA would be the only options to lift off at MAUW, remember we moved the P8 to OH largely for the runway , and even that is too short to enable a MAUW take off. This frame does not come standard with upper deck cargo.
KC46 – This could work, although again they would have to move to OH and even then Im sure it would not be able to MAUW Ops. She does have a cargo door and set up for this. Within a few years there will be close to 3x as many of these in service than MRTT. I get a bit tired of the “cos the RAAF has that kit , we should too. “ The B767 has operated all over the Pacific. Air NZ has previous experience.
KHI C2 – Many years ago we were able to whip the rotor head off a Huey and push it into the Herk , M113s , Landies and Scorpions drive in. Today no show , like me , the NZDF has expanded around the waist and our lack of capability has become a burden on other nations. We have to call in our 5 eyes partners to move our kit , not good, in fact just plain embarrassing. The C2 would solve this issue. It would become the preferred Antarctica frame and could be still based at WP. Its not a great “airforce one “ by looks , but Im sure with some creative pallet work we could come up with a VIP interior.
No serious option is going to be cheap , esp if we get the minimum number of 4 frames. The second order effects, depending on the frame, are going to be significant too with re basing costs. One could even say , maybe its time for a new airbase to future proof the NZDF ? Another couple of thoughts are , 1. with the decline of trade with China should we be looking at using the purchase of this aircraft (and others , like Maritime helo) to help push a free trade deal with the US. 2. Acquiring a Tanker is not a silly idea. Like the Navy with ROA our frames could be off contributing to global efforts. 3. Should conflict happen in Asia the Tanker/cargo would be a prime asset across the Pacific.
Sadly for the NZ and the NZDF , If I was to put on my “reality hat” I would think the DCP will say , do not replace the 757 , buy two more C130 and charter VIP as required.
Teal, you read my mind.
Noting that the Boeings operate more missions than just pollies, but is the VIP role really core RNZAF business?
Would doubling our C-130 fleet be more militarily relevant instead, IOT concentrate training and logistics?
A four acft force of very long range communications jets instead, possibly leased?
Mostly though, its June and the DCP will be out shortly to answer these ramblings.
Noting that the Boeings operate more missions than just pollies, but is the VIP role really core RNZAF business?
Would doubling our C-130 fleet be more militarily relevant instead, IOT concentrate training and logistics?
A four acft force of very long range communications jets instead, possibly leased?
Mostly though, its June and the DCP will be out shortly to answer these ramblings.
Yes more C130 and 1 x leased VIP transport would be more 'militarily relevant' although I doubt the Govt will want to spend up much on too many additional C130 (if any at all). I'd like to see 8-10 C130 but now that the DCP won't be punlished until closer to Oct/Nov I suspect the Govt is tinkering with it to dampen down expectations of a $$$ spend-up. To be fair tho the B757 provide 40Sqn with significantly more capability than the constant VIP moniker would imply and 1 x C130J-30 does not replace a B757 on a 1:1 ratio... when either is actually operable!
kiwi in exile
Active Member
More stalling, less commitment.
kiwi in exile
Active Member
defmin Collins on TVNZ Q and A
Realistic about issues faced by nZDF and NZ geostrategically.
Not giving anything away re upcomming DCP or Aukus pillar II
She sounds pro-drones but not neccesarily combat drones
Realistic about issues faced by nZDF and NZ geostrategically.
Not giving anything away re upcomming DCP or Aukus pillar II
She sounds pro-drones but not neccesarily combat drones
kiwi in exile
Active Member
NZ herald video 'could NZ defend itself" provocative title.
I would suggest 'no'.
Nice loook at the new drones
Vector
I would suggest 'no'.
Nice loook at the new drones
Vector
Can NZ defend itself now the answer is no. Could it defend in itself in the future, yes it could as we have a 2000 km+moat around us which means if we have the ability to cover both the air and sea approaches to NZ with reasonable quality weapon systems we can defend ourselves. It would take a while to achieve this, one to two decades, but it is achievable.
Last edited:
Defence Force cuts: ‘We’re already operating on the smell of an oily rag’
No pay rises for NZDF staff amid budget crisis.
www.nzherald.co.nz
Sadly , this is just the start , reminds me of the 2011 "imping" saga where the NZDF were ordered to make cuts and the only trigger they could pull was personnel. We all know how awesome that was for all concerned.
kiwi in exile
Active Member
More here Rnz
Sure talk a big game at the NATO summit, 2% GDP etc then have your colleagues announce this at home while you are on holiday.
You are not going to be able to meet your policy obligations or your promises to your new intl friends with a hiring freeze. Yea we want to boost defence capability and spending then say they need to make cuts because of a funding defect. Hypocrites
Ditto police, st john, healthworkers
Sure talk a big game at the NATO summit, 2% GDP etc then have your colleagues announce this at home while you are on holiday.
You are not going to be able to meet your policy obligations or your promises to your new intl friends with a hiring freeze. Yea we want to boost defence capability and spending then say they need to make cuts because of a funding defect. Hypocrites
Ditto police, st john, healthworkers
Last edited:
Hawkeye69
Member
Seriously sad state of affairs, PM talked big in US but clearly no intent on following through, one now has to ask is NZDF overall worth saving from here? Or has it got to the point of no return, I feel the overall investment required now is beyond anything the NZ economy could support when you take into account the competing budgets with the likes of health, infrastructure, housing, welfare, education and the likes of.
Exactly ...after Luxon's big-noting to NATO etc, and Collins stating a month or 2 back that NZDF won't need to find $aving$ they go & shit on them like this ...what a friggin omni-shambles! Not that this surprises me TBH but what a bunch of complete tossers! If they're doing this in order to meet a $30 milllion shortfall (probabaly less cost to the taxpayer than the salary increases the pollies just gave themselves!) then how on earth can they then justify billions in new equipment...go figure! I dare say the new DCP might be pared back to a new box of ballpoint pens per year!
Does it have to be a ‘new’ box of pens? I’m sure the Oz Treasury beancounters can set their Kiwi cousins up with a few contacts in the used pen market. Also, what’s all this about running on the smell of an oily rag? RAN stokers were directed to recycle the oil in our rags years ago!
Hawkeye69
Member
Will not help with retention issues
For NZ to meet its commitments to the Paris Accord, plastic pens will not be ordered , HB pencils are on order from China
Catalina
Member
If the world is 'increasingly dangerous' as the politicians are stating, why are NZ politicians reducing defence spending?
In the list of NZ government spending priorities, what position is defence spending?
What can the NZDF do to generate income to offset some of its costs?
In the list of NZ government spending priorities, what position is defence spending?
What can the NZDF do to generate income to offset some of its costs?
Last edited:
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The answers to your questions are dependent on which countries’ pollies you are referring to. As to geopolitical concerns, it depends on where a country is located. For years, many European countries minimized defence expenditures. Putin changed that. Clearly Japan, SKorea and other nearby nations are alarmed by China. Then you have nations like Canada and NZ that have pollies who want to rely on geography and powerful neighbours to do the heavy defence lifting.
In general pollies prioritize spending on what will get them elected. Defence doesn’t win votes albeit this may be changing.
National defence is a service and has no ability to offset costs without degrading capability.
In general pollies prioritize spending on what will get them elected. Defence doesn’t win votes albeit this may be changing.
National defence is a service and has no ability to offset costs without degrading capability.
Catalina
Member
Thanks John, questions updated to clarify NZ context.