Go Back   Defense Technology & Military Forum > Global Defense & Military > Geo-strategic Issues
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

ExPB14_JAS-39_Gripen.jpg

ExPB14_Mirage2000.jpg

6_EXPB14_20140729_088_3_RSAF_F16s.jpg

5_EXPB14_20140729_143_3_RSAF_F-15SGs.jpg
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence







Recent Photos - DefenceTalk Military Gallery





NZDF General discussion thread

This is a discussion on NZDF General discussion thread within the Geo-strategic Issues forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; I agree with your statements. Say New Zealand increased its spending to 2.5% and announced an equipment spending of $10 ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 8 votes, 4.25 average.
Old April 14th, 2007   #16
Junior Member
Private First Class
No Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 93
Threads:
I agree with your statements. Say New Zealand increased its spending to 2.5% and announced an equipment spending of $10 billion in 2030. (When most of the equipment will need replacements; LAVS, LOVs, MRV, OPV, IPV, MRAAW, SAM, NH90, etc. If a new policy came into place of being able to defend New Zealand from attack, what could the $10 billion be spent on, keeping in mind the weapons and vehicles that will need to be replaced.

Thanks
NZLAV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14th, 2007   #17
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
Waylander's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein
Posts: 4,642
Threads:
How should anybody know what NZ should buy in 23 years?
Waylander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2007   #18
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29
Threads:
NZ as a 'regional power'? Why? Maybe they should arm the sheep if they wanna become that.
Imagine millions of sheep 'equipt', as you spell it, with helmets and their wool dyed in camo pattern.
FSMonster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2007   #19
Junior Member
Private First Class
Jambo_100's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Devon, Great Britain
Posts: 69
Threads:
to become a reigonal power NZ would have to increase its defence budget, then make a larger airforce, navy etc. it would also have to ensure that its power projection capabilities were as good as nations like australia. NZ might find it hard to do that with a population of 4 million and such a small army.
Jambo_100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2007   #20
Ship Watcher
Brigadier General
Tasman's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 1,940
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jambo_100 View Post
to become a reigonal power NZ would have to increase its defence budget, then make a larger airforce, navy etc. it would also have to ensure that its power projection capabilities were as good as nations like australia. NZ might find it hard to do that with a population of 4 million and such a small army.
A good starting point, IMO, would be for the NZ government to follow the Australian model of a guaranteed annual increase in defence spending (in real terms after allowing for inflation) for a period of say 10 years. Australia for example can plan ahead knowing that the defence budget will increase each year by 3% in real terms so the ADF can have confidence in their forward planning. This annual increase is currently guaranteed until 2016. On top of that the government may provide supplementary funding for new capabilities that become necessary because of changing circumstances. Examples of this in Australia are the recent FA-18F and C-17 purchases. Following this model would enable the NZDF to plan ahead with confidence and begin a steady, rather than a rushed, expansion and re-equipment program.

Cheers
Tasman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2007   #21
Junior Member
Private First Class
No Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 93
Threads:
New Zealand could defend itslef from a medium-level threat if it had a decent air force combat force such as 34+36 second hand F-16's and several more frigates (total of 4-6). New Zealand is in a very isolated position so therefore they would have plenty of time to prepare for a counter attack. A moderate number of F-16's would do this. In the future if a different political party is in control and decided to change the policy of defending New Zealand against a low-level threat to a medium-level threat then New Zealand may be able to hold its own. The best they could do at the moment is set up a naval blockade and arm the orions with harpoons so they can lay hell on the invaders.
NZLAV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2007   #22
Senior Member
Brigadier General
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,649
Threads:
NZ doesn't have to be a independant fighting force, capable of individual missions and expressions of power projection. It shouldn't aim to be a small scale version of that.

Australia is by far the most powerful regional player. Once it obtains its Destroyers, LHD's, F-35's it will be able to project its power way past the limits of NZ territory.

NZ is never going to face a land attack on home soil. However deployment with Australian forces is a extremely likely situtation, and the way things are heading, there are going to be lots more of those regionally and globally.

NZ should target specific areas where Australia could definately need assistance, expertise.

RNZAF - Forget fighter jets. A few competent trainers would be fine, maybe they could be armed if required. Helicopters and lifters are valuable. Maybe a few Spartan lifters would be in order, suiting NZ maybe better than the C-130's. These would intergrate well with Australian forces. C-17's? Over kill!

RNZN - A third frigate. That would assure that one frigate is avalible at anyone time. More patrol boats? Something that I think NZ could concider is a submarine if they had the money, or alteast a co crewed NZ/Aus boat..
StingrayOZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2007   #23
Junior Member
Private First Class
No Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 93
Threads:
In the situation of a super power conflict between...say USA and China. I think the New Zealand land forces and navy would be a formidable force to fight beside the Americans, British and Australians.
What could New Zealand do in order to protect itself from a medium force (amphibious vessels with STOVL aircraft, frigates, etc)?
NZLAV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2007   #24
Senior Member
Brigadier General
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,649
Threads:
NZ forces are naturally going to get deployed usually where Australian forces are. They train a great deal together, share a great deal of common interests and generally get along (HAHA). So what areas could Australia do with assistance.

I think a submarine or two would be a huge benifit to RNZN. To defend itself from a far more superior navy. It also can project power, do recon/surveliance, and the crewing requirements are quite low. Australia is actually short on submarines (and crew). Submarines can also operate independantly if NZ ever required it.

It would add another level to the navy that it doesn't have. Another one or two submarines to Australias 6 would hugely increase the capablilities of all of them. Enabling more patrols and missions. Subs can also deploy special forces, again something NZ could offer to any multinational force.

It can also assist in protecting NZ shipping, which is something I doubt Australia would be able to do during war time.

Australia is most likely going to retire some of its Adelaide Frigates and Fremantle patrol boats. Many of these are still operational and are being retired more due to crewing concerns. Picking up one or two of these would bolster NZ's forces.

While I would love to see NZ add a Destroyer to its capabilities I can't see it happening. It would make a fantastic flagship vessel. Australia will be really hard pushed to make do with three destroyers to escort its LHD's, so there would be a need for it. Again, power projection, protecting shipping etc.

I think NZ could take its pick of what it wanted. However I don't think NZ has the political will to significantly upgrade its defence capabilities, but then again I'm not living there.
StingrayOZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2007   #25
Ship Watcher
Brigadier General
Tasman's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 1,940
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by StingrayOZ View Post
NZ forces are naturally going to get deployed usually where Australian forces are. They train a great deal together, share a great deal of common interests and generally get along (HAHA). So what areas could Australia do with assistance.

I think a submarine or two would be a huge benifit to RNZN. To defend itself from a far more superior navy. It also can project power, do recon/surveliance, and the crewing requirements are quite low. Australia is actually short on submarines (and crew). Submarines can also operate independantly if NZ ever required it.

It would add another level to the navy that it doesn't have. Another one or two submarines to Australias 6 would hugely increase the capablilities of all of them. Enabling more patrols and missions. Subs can also deploy special forces, again something NZ could offer to any multinational force.

It can also assist in protecting NZ shipping, which is something I doubt Australia would be able to do during war time.

Australia is most likely going to retire some of its Adelaide Frigates and Fremantle patrol boats. Many of these are still operational and are being retired more due to crewing concerns. Picking up one or two of these would bolster NZ's forces.

While I would love to see NZ add a Destroyer to its capabilities I can't see it happening. It would make a fantastic flagship vessel. Australia will be really hard pushed to make do with three destroyers to escort its LHD's, so there would be a need for it. Again, power projection, protecting shipping etc.

I think NZ could take its pick of what it wanted. However I don't think NZ has the political will to significantly upgrade its defence capabilities, but then again I'm not living there.
The idea of a submarine arm is certainly interesting and would be a new adventure for New Zealand. The RAN has made no secret of its desire for eight submarines but is struggling to man the six it has. Perhaps a first step in this direction would be for NZ to help man a couple of RAN subs. This would help Australia and develop expertise that would enable the follow on to the Collins class to consist of six RAN and 2 RNZN boats with common maintenance and training arrangements.

Re the transfer of Fremantles and Adelaides I believe the former are worn out but there should be enough life left in the modernised FFGs that might enable one to be transferred when the AWDs join the RAN.

Re the last comment I think we need to be optimistic as the premise of this thread is that a new government wants to improve NZ's status as a regional power.

Cheers
________________
Learn from the past. Prepare for the future
Tasman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2007   #26
Senior Member
Brigadier General
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,649
Threads:
Well certainly setting up a submarine arm would be something Australia would definately be able to assist with.

Perhaps start up a NZ crew for a collins, which can be rotated onto the subs, or intergrate NZ personel into the collins crews and form a NZ crew from that.

I suppose key issues would be the $500 million for each sub if collins prices are anything to go by. Then there would be some issues to be cleared regarding US technologies and New Zealand. However, it would be a execellent opportunity for NZ to patch up some A**US damage and perhaps forge a closer relationship.

But I think NZ operating subs would be the most benifical for NZ, Australia and the region. Many nearby nations have a frigate to spare for a mission, or a destroyer can be arrange from UK or US. But submarines, more so blue water capable are extremely rare, with nuclear boats from US and UK extremely busy with normal patrols, a few in the region operating subs, even fewer with trained crews, with collins like capabilities.

With a new class of submarines being constructed in ~2020 now would be a excellent opportunity to start a program so details can be sorted and crews trained and see if the program has worth.

It would be fantastic to see 8 highly capable submarined working in the region, making the entire venture more affordable and more effective.
StingrayOZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2007   #27
Junior Member
Private First Class
No Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 63
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tasman View Post
The idea of a submarine arm is certainly interesting and would be a new adventure for New Zealand. The RAN has made no secret of its desire for eight submarines but is struggling to man the six it has. Perhaps a first step in this direction would be for NZ to help man a couple of RAN subs. This would help Australia and develop expertise that would enable the follow on to the Collins class to consist of six RAN and 2 RNZN boats with common maintenance and training arrangements.

Re the transfer of Fremantles and Adelaides I believe the former are worn out but there should be enough life left in the modernised FFGs that might enable one to be transferred when the AWDs join the RAN.

Re the last comment I think we need to be optimistic as the premise of this thread is that a new government wants to improve NZ's status as a regional power.

Cheers
I really do not see how New Zealand can find the budget to operate, 2 half a billion US Dollar submarines, even at between 2 to 2.5 per cent of GDP for defense, New Zealand only has a defense budget of 2 to 2.5 billion dollars for 2005, at one billion US Dollars, that will take up half of New Zealand's budget for that year just to purchase those 2 submarines, assuming a defense budget equivalent to 2 per cent of GDP, even at 2 per cent of GDP, or a 2 billion dollar defense budget for 2005, New Zealand does not have the budget to operate a squadron of Block 52+ F-16s like the one Greece or Singapore has, so it has to make do with a combination of MB-339s and Block 52+ F-16s, and at 2.5 per cent of GDP, or 2.5 billion dollars for 2005, it just has the budget to operate a squadron of them, so given this situation with regards to funding, I really do not think operating 2 top of the line SSKs such as the Collins or U-214s for New Zealand will be a likely option, and 2 to 2.5 per cent of GDP for defense under a National government already verges on being unrealistically optimistic, since New Zealand's defense budget as of now is only 1 per cent of GDP, New Zealand's ability to be a regional power ultimately is limited by its population of only 4 million.
ren0312 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2007   #28
Super Moderator
Captain
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 654
Threads:
Interesting thread. Here's the way I see it. The primary role of the any defence force is the defence of the nation it serves. I don't think the NZDF has that focus. From a NZ perspective the types of threats facing NZ are
  • all low level
  • and with the exception of terrorism are all martime based
.
That means NZ needs a capable navy and maritime air strike capability (P-3's with ASM etc). I don't think a Falklands size force threating NZ is viable, but there maybe something between the low level threat (two of three ships / subs laying mines, threating shipping etc) and a Falklands sized force that could be an issue. Ideally NZ's focus should be on meeting the low level threats and dealing with regional problems.

Navy
2 x Upgraded ANZAC's
3 x Corvettes
2 x OPV's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aussie Digger
An upgrade project to equip NZ's "OPV" craft with the weapon, sensor and combat systems necessary to perform a limited combat role. They were designed to operate 76mm guns and other weapons, but on the basis of cost and political ideology this was decided against. A medium calibre gun (57-76mm) with "SMART" munitions, CIWS/SAM system and an appropriate combat system and sensor suite should be the minimum level of capability these craft operate, IMHO and could provide a useful "Tier 2" combat capability for RNZN, in addition to their patrol functions...
I agree there is room for a 76mm with which the OPV could provide a limited surface combat capability but there is no space for CIWS / Tetral or a limited ASW capability. In addition if you look at the plans on the net, there is no magazine for Maverick, Torpedos or weapons that could provide a ship based helicopter CAS capability. Let the OPV's chase fishing boats and buy corvettes instead.

4 x IPV's (upgraded to 25mm for possible regional deployment)
3 x MCM (Replacing the Diving Tender etc)
1 x Tanker
1 x MRV (Actually I'd like two)
1 x Survery

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stingray
I think a submarine or two would be a huge benifit to RNZN. To defend itself from a far more superior navy. It also can project power, do recon/surveliance, and the crewing requirements are quite low. Australia is actually short on submarines (and crew). Submarines can also operate independantly if NZ ever required it.
NZ rejected that idea in the early 80's due to there lack of flexbility (i.e. Disaster relief etc). Until NZ has an reasonable size surface fleet I'm don't think any government could justify buying Submarines.

Army
Quote:
Originally Posted by NZLAV
34 x 105 mm L118 Light Gun
Actually its more like 20

The army's got a lot of good equipment, just not enough, so I'd be looking to increase as a key area of focus
  • Javelin (By international standards were very light on Anti Tank)
  • Artillery (Say to 155mm - 3 regular and 2 reserve 6 gun battery)
  • Mistral

In addition I'd be looking to stand up a Regular Force Group trained and equiped to operate off the MRV.

AirForce
A lot of upgrades and modernisation going on at the moment that will see a more capable airforce is some ways. However I would
  • Follow the Quigley report and reduce to number of MB339 to about 9-12 and acqurie around 18 second hand combat aircraft. The Combat aircraft provide a deployable force, while the MB339 provide a low level capability.
  • Upgrade the ASW processors on the P3
  • Acquire a moderate number of ASM
  • Increase the number of LUH currently been tendered for to ensure a light attack heli capability

The NZDF has much of what it needs but for NZ's own security and to ensure it can continue to operate effectively in the region it needs an expensive tweak.
Lucasnz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2007   #29
Ship Watcher
Brigadier General
Tasman's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 1,940
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ren0312 View Post
I really do not see how New Zealand can find the budget to operate, 2 half a billion US Dollar submarines, even at between 2 to 2.5 per cent of GDP for defense, New Zealand only has a defense budget of 2 to 2.5 billion dollars for 2005, at one billion US Dollars, that will take up half of New Zealand's budget for that year just to purchase those 2 submarines, assuming a defense budget equivalent to 2 per cent of GDP, even at 2 per cent of GDP, or a 2 billion dollar defense budget for 2005, New Zealand does not have the budget to operate a squadron of Block 52+ F-16s like the one Greece or Singapore has, so it has to make do with a combination of MB-339s and Block 52+ F-16s, and at 2.5 per cent of GDP, or 2.5 billion dollars for 2005, it just has the budget to operate a squadron of them, so given this situation with regards to funding, I really do not think operating 2 top of the line SSKs such as the Collins or U-214s for New Zealand will be a likely option, and 2 to 2.5 per cent of GDP for defense under a National government already verges on being unrealistically optimistic, since New Zealand's defense budget as of now is only 1 per cent of GDP, New Zealand's ability to be a regional power ultimately is limited by its population of only 4 million.
I think a 150% budget increase (which 2.5% GDP would involve) would enable the navy to move from 2 to 5 major units (say 3 frigates and 2 submarines). However, whilst the arrangement suggested above would be valuable for regional power projection, in company with Australia, I would agree that it may not be the best way to tie up additional funding. If the NZDF did have such a funding windfall it would be just one option that could be considered.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucasnz View Post
Interesting thread. Here's the way I see it. The primary role of the any defence force is the defence of the nation it serves. I don't think the NZDF has that focus. From a NZ perspective the types of threats facing NZ are
  • all low level
  • and with the exception of terrorism are all martime based
.
That means NZ needs a capable navy and maritime air strike capability (P-3's with ASM etc). I don't think a Falklands size force threating NZ is viable, but there maybe something between the low level threat (two of three ships / subs laying mines, threating shipping etc) and a Falklands sized force that could be an issue. Ideally NZ's focus should be on meeting the low level threats and dealing with regional problems.

Navy
2 x Upgraded ANZAC's
3 x Corvettes
2 x OPV's

I agree there is room for a 76mm with which the OPV could provide a limited surface combat capability but there is no space for CIWS / Tetral or a limited ASW capability. In addition if you look at the plans on the net, there is no magazine for Maverick, Torpedos or weapons that could provide a ship based helicopter CAS capability. Let the OPV's chase fishing boats and buy corvettes instead.

4 x IPV's (upgraded to 25mm for possible regional deployment)
3 x MCM (Replacing the Diving Tender etc)
1 x Tanker
1 x MRV (Actually I'd like two)
1 x Survery


NZ rejected that idea in the early 80's due to there lack of flexbility (i.e. Disaster relief etc). Until NZ has an reasonable size surface fleet I'm don't think any government could justify buying Submarines.

Army


Actually its more like 20

The army's got a lot of good equipment, just not enough, so I'd be looking to increase as a key area of focus
  • Javelin (By international standards were very light on Anti Tank)
  • Artillery (Say to 155mm - 3 regular and 2 reserve 6 gun battery)
  • Mistral

In addition I'd be looking to stand up a Regular Force Group trained and equiped to operate off the MRV.

AirForce
A lot of upgrades and modernisation going on at the moment that will see a more capable airforce is some ways. However I would
  • Follow the Quigley report and reduce to number of MB339 to about 9-12 and acqurie around 18 second hand combat aircraft. The Combat aircraft provide a deployable force, while the MB339 provide a low level capability.
  • Upgrade the ASW processors on the P3
  • Acquire a moderate number of ASM
  • Increase the number of LUH currently been tendered for to ensure a light attack heli capability

The NZDF has much of what it needs but for NZ's own security and to ensure it can continue to operate effectively in the region it needs an expensive tweak.
I think you have made some excellent points in this post Lucasnz. What you propose would provide modest but sensible improvements to the army and would restore the air force to something like its strength a decade ago.

Your proposals for the navy have merit. You are probably right re the submarines. The addition of three corvettes would certainly provide teeth to the navy's firepower but my personal preference would be for at least one and preferably two frigates as I believe they could contribute more to power projection. NZ has operated 4 frigates in the past and I can't see why it could not do so in the future, especially given the fact that personnel requirements on modern frigates are much lower than they were in the past.

Cheers
________________
Learn from the past. Prepare for the future
Tasman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2007   #30
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
Waylander's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein
Posts: 4,642
Threads:
If NZ would really go for subs I think collins (Or subs of similar size) are not the way to go. Smaller subs (like produced by several european yards) would help with the problem of manning and procuring these subs due to a smaller crew and smaller price.

They would not be that blue water capable like the collins but should be able to operate within a significant range from Australian bases and are for sure a big factor for a possible defense of NZ.
Waylander is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:02 PM.