NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Recognize the consequences, a big ask for a pollie!
SeaplanePaul
New Member
Our thoughts and thanks are with our Defence personnel who had their Christmas leave canceled over to cover striking civilian Defence Force staff.
Last edited:
Catalina
Member
Our nation is even more broke than previously realized.
Today's Treasury's Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update detail less tax revenue, increased unemployment, higher crown expenses, deficits for at least the next 5 years and and a raft of extraordinary expenses ahead, including but not limited to the Mt Victoria tunnel, responses to severe weather events, the Manawanui sinking, abuse in state care redress payments, increased health spending on the ageing population and new cancer drugs.
Whether it be responding to disasters at home and overseas, intercepting drugs in the Pacific and Indian Oceans, enforcing sanctions against North Korea and protecting our sea lanes of communication, it is our Navy, and not our army that allows the projection of power.
Why pay for more than twice the number of soldiers than sailors? (6,584 regular and reserve army soldiers vs only 2,830 regular and reserve naval sailors.)
As a maritime island nation wouldn't we be better served by sailors rather than soldiers?
With the growing importance of the Maritime Domain, is it time to reduce the size of our Army and focus more of our limited resources on our Navy?
Today's Treasury's Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update detail less tax revenue, increased unemployment, higher crown expenses, deficits for at least the next 5 years and and a raft of extraordinary expenses ahead, including but not limited to the Mt Victoria tunnel, responses to severe weather events, the Manawanui sinking, abuse in state care redress payments, increased health spending on the ageing population and new cancer drugs.
Whether it be responding to disasters at home and overseas, intercepting drugs in the Pacific and Indian Oceans, enforcing sanctions against North Korea and protecting our sea lanes of communication, it is our Navy, and not our army that allows the projection of power.
Why pay for more than twice the number of soldiers than sailors? (6,584 regular and reserve army soldiers vs only 2,830 regular and reserve naval sailors.)
As a maritime island nation wouldn't we be better served by sailors rather than soldiers?
With the growing importance of the Maritime Domain, is it time to reduce the size of our Army and focus more of our limited resources on our Navy?
Sounds like Army increases are dead in the water but any savings made anywhere will not be spent elsewhere.... we've been softened up for serious cuts so DCP wont be worth the paper it's written on & the 2030 look NZDF will be older versions of what we have today minus a few sacrificial lambs.
kiwi in exile
Active Member
Summer 24/25 issue of line of defence is online. The editor discusses the delay in the DCP 'kicking the can down the road yet again"
Quotes Jim Rolfe of CSS:
Re the interislander replacement (non)anouncement: similar delays to the DCP. This gov't seems reluctant to commit to strategic infrastructure.
Article goes on to discuss the pros/cons of joint ANZAC force/interoperability.
Quotes Jim Rolfe of CSS:
I agree. Prior to the ballistic missile test and the ships in Vanuatu China has long represented a threat to the pacific and the rules based order we all depend on, whic we need to respond to in strategy and capability. The ships and tests haven't changed this fact. We have long known that they were capable of this level of power projection.
Re the interislander replacement (non)anouncement: similar delays to the DCP. This gov't seems reluctant to commit to strategic infrastructure.
Article goes on to discuss the pros/cons of joint ANZAC force/interoperability.
This government will not be spending anything significant on defence in the near future, they simply don't understand the dire state of the NZDF or more likely simply don't want to. The reality is that the time that a few tweeks will solve the problem are long gone, but that is the best that we will see from this government. What I have always said (apology for repeating myself again) is that the NZDF needs to , firstly be armed to defend NZ and by that I mean the air and sea approaches and then to contribute to regional defence. It does not need a long drawn out DCP carried out in the main by people with little or no military knowledge to figure out what is needed to achieve this.
The simple reality is that this government has like a lot of NZ governments gone and buried its head in the sand.
I think what is needed is a small panel of military experts, probably from overseas that are given a budget(2% GDP Min) and 2 to 3 months to come up with what is needed to A, defend NZ and any left over for regional defence and then get on with it.
This will of course not happen as it would mean that the government was committed to the out come and pollies hate to be committed to anything that is not part of their own agenda.
The simple reality is that this government has like a lot of NZ governments gone and buried its head in the sand.
I think what is needed is a small panel of military experts, probably from overseas that are given a budget(2% GDP Min) and 2 to 3 months to come up with what is needed to A, defend NZ and any left over for regional defence and then get on with it.
This will of course not happen as it would mean that the government was committed to the out come and pollies hate to be committed to anything that is not part of their own agenda.
The current NZ government will not be spending/funding on any significant item(s) for the NZDF for a number of years I am guessing around 2029/2030, as it is now being reported that the country is in a reccession! something that most people had already worked out!!
NZ pollies have so little military knowledge it's not funny!! they think that what we have at present will be fine for the next 10/15/20 years and we have plenty of time to order new equipment etc. But now with the following example... the rail ferry's being cancelled by the current govt overseas shipbuilders will be wary of any order placed being cancelled!! and will charge more costing this country more which will result in less equipment purchased!! with the ultimate result being a lack of numbers of major equipment being procured!! with the end result being an ineffective NZDF!
The DCP will be a complete waste of time with "lip service" being paid with regard to rebuilding the NZDF as the next government that is voted into power at the next election will do yet another "review" followed by delay after delay resulting in more time wasting!!!
Which in reality we have now a defence force that can't project any force!! let alone defend NZ
The recent show from China's show of power projection has long been known of by the Governments from NZ it's that they have chosen to ignore the threat China represents!! are will continue doing so... as spending on defence doesn't result in "votes"
It would now take the chinese to "take" the Cook islands to get the idiots in government to actually do anything!!!
NZ pollies have so little military knowledge it's not funny!! they think that what we have at present will be fine for the next 10/15/20 years and we have plenty of time to order new equipment etc. But now with the following example... the rail ferry's being cancelled by the current govt overseas shipbuilders will be wary of any order placed being cancelled!! and will charge more costing this country more which will result in less equipment purchased!! with the ultimate result being a lack of numbers of major equipment being procured!! with the end result being an ineffective NZDF!
The DCP will be a complete waste of time with "lip service" being paid with regard to rebuilding the NZDF as the next government that is voted into power at the next election will do yet another "review" followed by delay after delay resulting in more time wasting!!!
Which in reality we have now a defence force that can't project any force!! let alone defend NZ
The recent show from China's show of power projection has long been known of by the Governments from NZ it's that they have chosen to ignore the threat China represents!! are will continue doing so... as spending on defence doesn't result in "votes"
It would now take the chinese to "take" the Cook islands to get the idiots in government to actually do anything!!!
I don't really want to pile on ... but I will - the farce that is National's defence policy continues:
757 replacement tender issued 19 Dec 2024
I used to think that no one could be worse as DefMin than Peeni Henare or Jonathan Coleman, but I think you've done it Judith. Truly inept (just my opinion). Her first sentence at the first FADT select committee last year, something to the effect of "this will only take 15min right?" pretty much sums up her effort. So disappointed in this government.
757 replacement tender issued 19 Dec 2024
Apparently we are now suddenly (as in today) fast-tracking the 757 replacement - with, get this, unmodified Boeing 737 Max8 or Airbus 321s. WTF! So, seemingly no cargo capability conversion, nowhere near enough range (imho). How does this meet any NZDF requirement? And of course, where is the money going to come from given the latest fiscal update? Why not just lease such aircraft? We should in my opinion, be buying at least 3 Kawasaki C-2s to do this role properly, but that ain't gonna happen. The important sentence is the second to last one - "the tender process does not commit the Crown to any expenditure". This is to me just another time-wasting exercise, the appearance of doing something. I fully expect, much like the maritime helicopter RFI last year, that absolutely nothing will happen.
I used to think that no one could be worse as DefMin than Peeni Henare or Jonathan Coleman, but I think you've done it Judith. Truly inept (just my opinion). Her first sentence at the first FADT select committee last year, something to the effect of "this will only take 15min right?" pretty much sums up her effort. So disappointed in this government.
kiwi in exile
Active Member
It would be heartening if there was some constructive noise coming from labour or peters.
Yep pretty piss-poor strategic thinking by the current Govt... DCP might end-up being a 'Defence Cuts Policy' paper at ths rate! LOL Dunedites are already fuming about their hospital so imagine they'd be livid at a fast-track VIP aircraft purchase. There's 3 potential issues with the vague tender request ....(1) no combi-capability mentioned (2) they need 3 but that is extremely unlikely (3) doesn't discount purchase of thrashed 2nd hand frames.
To be fair the fast track only gets it in-front of cabinet quicker ....actually I'm surprised the B757 hasn't already been dumped without replacement to meet bigger $$$ savings being asked for.
This was suggested by C.L. before he was elected PM and he said that he would use commercial if he was elected. I think his ego got the better of him and he likes to fly in his "own aircraft" so the possibility of this waste of money project succeeding is good unless it gets negative traction in the public domain.
Some further details on the 757 replacement (my emphasis) from Australian Defence Magazine (link, possibly paywalled):
Question: Could a standard 737 Max 8 or Airbus 321 LR/XLR even make it to Antarctica? It's a substantially smaller aircraft than the 757. The 757 is known to struggle (ie. it has a point-of-no-return). The low-slung engines (a FOD magnet?) and poor take-off performance (long runway length required) on the 737 may also present issues.
I know the military loves their Three-Letter-Acronyms: how about "LVP" for this project. Either "Luxon Vanity Project" or "Lowest Value Plane" - take your pick.
So, just two aircraft, but new builds. Either direct purchase or lease (with option-to-buy). The second half of 2027 delivery date hardly suggests there is any great urgency. How often does the NZDF require a passenger plane? This seems to prioritise the VIP mission - which is not a core NZDF requirement. In which case, NZDF shouldn't be paying for this.
Question: Could a standard 737 Max 8 or Airbus 321 LR/XLR even make it to Antarctica? It's a substantially smaller aircraft than the 757. The 757 is known to struggle (ie. it has a point-of-no-return). The low-slung engines (a FOD magnet?) and poor take-off performance (long runway length required) on the 737 may also present issues.
I know the military loves their Three-Letter-Acronyms: how about "LVP" for this project. Either "Luxon Vanity Project" or "Lowest Value Plane" - take your pick.
Gracie1234
Well-Known Member
This might just be the start. The overall range is longer, and the load capacity is similar to the what we have now. I wonder if they get sent for conversion post-purchase. Providers are available.
See here: https://www.precisionaircraft.com/a321-200pcf-freighter/
See here: https://www.precisionaircraft.com/a321-200pcf-freighter/
Yes on paper the A321LR has a similar range & underfloor baggage / cargo capacity to the B757-200 so on those points I'd tend to plump for that option. The RNZAF would miss the combi option for sure. I wonder if there's any limitations on either type option landing & taking-off from most Sth Pacific states main airports!?!
Quite often actually. Every ex and mission requires pax (as in people) but bulk freight, vehicles etc not as much (especially for an ex) as generally if you are sending say, vehicles then usually its more than just 2-3 so they would be sent by other means anyway (charter, ship). To put into perspective in my time I actually travelled just as much if not more via the 2 727/757 than the 5 C130 and even a couple of those were just due to unavailability/breakdown of the pax jet vs cargo plane. In general NZ mainly sends troops only with personal kit to exs and rotates personnel only on longer established missions so then the 757s are actually the more practical go to transport of choice for many tasks. It's nice to go to Antarctica in a pax jet but not actually a requirement imo as that is a role that does have more of a regular freight/pax mix role that is generally based around smaller numbers rotating in and out (for just NZ anyway).
I think the 757 project was always going to be a tricky one as there is literally no direct 757 type replacement on offer with options either being smaller (737, 321 etc) or larger (767, 787 etc) so compromises on range, size, cost, combi etc etc were always considerations to take into account. Much like airlines replacing their 757 fleets in terms of range and capacity to fill the niche market RNZAF now also finds itself in a similar situation to fill a niche role. For example some have suggested the A330 but end of the day it is still a larger more expensive aircraft (albeit optioned) with those implications to consider and for me is akin to replacing the C130 with C17 in NZ use ie can definately do the job and some but generally overkill and at cost which we still find now with just the C130 and 757 combination on certain tasks. Like any NZ capability it's all about trying to find the right balance for the most missions as unlike the bigger countries we often only have a single type of equipment that has to fill a wide range of roles so options are already somewhat limited/compromised/wasted depending on task. If they can option a combi version with rated floor and cargo door then it would definately be better so perhaps RNZAF could be the lead user for the type with either Boeing or airbus. Interestingly texel air have a couple of 737-700 combis and to my knowledge were lead for the type and so far the only user.
kiwi in exile
Active Member
Labour's leftward turn on foreign policy
Freed from the restraints of government, the Labour Party is making a left turn on some of the pressing foreign policy issues of the day - an understandable pivot but one that is already drawing a sharp contrast with its actions in power
newsroom.co.nz