A
Aussie Digger
Guest
I included the Territorial Battalions in that estimate earlier. I thought that there were actually "4" Territorial Battalions on paper, though all 4 were significantly under-strength...
NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Update on RNZAF Skyhawk and Aermacchi sale
From the New Zealand Herald online 14 May (NZPA).
Despite the spin, personally I hope the sale stays stalled pending a change in Govt next year
The Skyhawks and Aermacchi's are still flown occassionally to ensure they are in working condition and for potential buyers to view (although I may stand to be corrected, I think the A4's stopped flying a year or two back once the sale was announced in 2005. The Aermacchi's still fly I believe).
Article starts:
The United States is still blocking the sale of the Air Force's former fighter jets, though the reason has nothing to do with New Zealand's policies, says Defence Minister Phil Goff.
An American company wants to buy the 17 Skyhawks and 17 Aermacchi jets for $155 million, but the deal cannot be finalised without US Government approval because the planes were originally bought from that country.
Mr Goff met US Defence Secretary Robert Gates and Under-Secretary of Defence Eric Edelman at the Pentagon as well as Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill. He was told "internal difficulties" were holding up the approval.
"The US acknowledged the problem of approving the transfer lies on internal difficulties on their side and not with New Zealand. They have undertaken to come back to me on whether these difficulties can be resolved soon or whether we need to look at alternatives."
Mr Goff said he could not disclose what the difficulties were.
"It's an inhouse thing and not something they want to discuss readily with others."
He said the US officials appreciated New Zealand's position and had said they would come back to him with a reply.
"They want to check on how they can move forward and whether it will happen quickly or if it might be a number of years, in which case we need to think about our options."
He said selling the aircraft to another country might not be straightforward, given the limited market for the jets, and would require US approval. The Skyhawks were shelved when the Government axed the Air Force's combat wing in 2001.
Mr Goff updated Mr Gates and National Security Council adviser Stephen Hadley on his recent visit to Afghanistan.
"New Zealand's contribution alongside the American forces there was warmly welcomed and we were thanked for the contribution we were making. I think it is widely regarded the provincial reconstruction team we have there is a model for other international forces."
He also discussed world security and the nuclear weapons situation for Iran and North Korea.
"The common ground since September 11, the impact that had on the world's security, has made it a lot of sense to work together on common interests, and examples of that joint approach include Afghanistan and against terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction."
Mr Goff also held trade talks in Washington before leaving for London and then Paris for OECD and trade talks.
- NZPA
From the New Zealand Herald online 14 May (NZPA).
Despite the spin, personally I hope the sale stays stalled pending a change in Govt next year
The Skyhawks and Aermacchi's are still flown occassionally to ensure they are in working condition and for potential buyers to view (although I may stand to be corrected, I think the A4's stopped flying a year or two back once the sale was announced in 2005. The Aermacchi's still fly I believe).Article starts:
The United States is still blocking the sale of the Air Force's former fighter jets, though the reason has nothing to do with New Zealand's policies, says Defence Minister Phil Goff.
An American company wants to buy the 17 Skyhawks and 17 Aermacchi jets for $155 million, but the deal cannot be finalised without US Government approval because the planes were originally bought from that country.
Mr Goff met US Defence Secretary Robert Gates and Under-Secretary of Defence Eric Edelman at the Pentagon as well as Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill. He was told "internal difficulties" were holding up the approval.
"The US acknowledged the problem of approving the transfer lies on internal difficulties on their side and not with New Zealand. They have undertaken to come back to me on whether these difficulties can be resolved soon or whether we need to look at alternatives."
Mr Goff said he could not disclose what the difficulties were.
"It's an inhouse thing and not something they want to discuss readily with others."
He said the US officials appreciated New Zealand's position and had said they would come back to him with a reply.
"They want to check on how they can move forward and whether it will happen quickly or if it might be a number of years, in which case we need to think about our options."
He said selling the aircraft to another country might not be straightforward, given the limited market for the jets, and would require US approval. The Skyhawks were shelved when the Government axed the Air Force's combat wing in 2001.
Mr Goff updated Mr Gates and National Security Council adviser Stephen Hadley on his recent visit to Afghanistan.
"New Zealand's contribution alongside the American forces there was warmly welcomed and we were thanked for the contribution we were making. I think it is widely regarded the provincial reconstruction team we have there is a model for other international forces."
He also discussed world security and the nuclear weapons situation for Iran and North Korea.
"The common ground since September 11, the impact that had on the world's security, has made it a lot of sense to work together on common interests, and examples of that joint approach include Afghanistan and against terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction."
Mr Goff also held trade talks in Washington before leaving for London and then Paris for OECD and trade talks.
- NZPA
Jason, you daft bugger, you start almost every thread with a list of NZ's military assetts, followed by a comment of how wonderful we are or similar. But you forgot the 34 pairs of steel capped boots for the specops or the the 22 sets of groin protectors. Or our secret weapon, filling all senior governmental positions in the country with feminist women backed by male apologist who will attack any invaders with realms of forms demanding empowerment of their junior ranks, and an army of bureaucrats to descend on them to check that their op manuals are living breathing documents and their orders show due diligence of the rights of maori, women, children, muslims, rastafarians, lesbian, gay and transgender folk etc. This will bog down the invaders to the point they'll throw up their hands and leave a beaten foe.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Yes I believe there are US avionics in the MB-339's (that was one reason the govt gave to our local media a few years back when they were being questioned on the holdup). I suspect though the hold up is political, the disestablishment of our air combat wing was apparently not taken well by our allies at the time, suprise suprise, as the aircraft formed part of our wider regional security commitments (defence of Aust, FPDA etc). And yes if the media release doesn't make alot of sense, some of our politicians are expert in the art of spin, including our affable defence minister!
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I would also imagine that, since it is supposed to be a US company buying the equipment, the US would have some reservations about having that much military hardware (of that type) in private hands potentially within US borders. As I recall, there are also import restrictions when people or companies wish to bring mil hardware into the US.
-Cheers
Yes i agree this stalled purchase doesnt make alot of sense. Despite private companies in the US having to go through certain protocols on Military Aircraft ownership it still doesnt explain why there are a large number of private companies in the US who own older military aircraft and display and perform them at air shows etc. These aircraft having come from different parts of the world.
I do think this matter is political red tape, and it does have a lot to do with our military posture coming at a time where NZ has upgraded much of its military infantory. No private buyer is dumb when it comes to purchasing military aircraft and would know the boundaries of military purchases and would not have found it self stalled in the the process unless there was some governmental intervention. I am not convinced with NZs 20 odd A4s this would have stopped or prevented the sale considering our long standing friendship with the US on FMS.
I agree also that the media comments given by Phil Goff dont give us anything about the full intention of the sale and in fact leave the reader in a more confused state than was other wise known. I can also see that the dissbandenment did piss our allies to a deeper extent than would otherwise be shown and this maybe be a reaction and political desision to it. Not to mention the cancellation of the F16 purchase.
I do think this matter is political red tape, and it does have a lot to do with our military posture coming at a time where NZ has upgraded much of its military infantory. No private buyer is dumb when it comes to purchasing military aircraft and would know the boundaries of military purchases and would not have found it self stalled in the the process unless there was some governmental intervention. I am not convinced with NZs 20 odd A4s this would have stopped or prevented the sale considering our long standing friendship with the US on FMS.
I agree also that the media comments given by Phil Goff dont give us anything about the full intention of the sale and in fact leave the reader in a more confused state than was other wise known. I can also see that the dissbandenment did piss our allies to a deeper extent than would otherwise be shown and this maybe be a reaction and political desision to it. Not to mention the cancellation of the F16 purchase.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Regarding the companies or groups (usually groups) that own & operate older military aircraft in the US, as stated this are usually part of air museums or for flying/airshow demonstrations. Also, these are usually only one or two aircraft of any given type. IIRC the company wishing to purchase the MB-339s and Skyhawks are looking for start or offer pilot training on military aircraft. As such, I would expect they would need to retain much of their military capability. I expect that much of the military capability of the old military aircraft in private hands has been deliberately removed or faded into the realms of obsolete. Going from memory, I think at one point the question was raised if it was legal for a private citizen to import a Scud and launcher. As I remember it, the answer was "yes" but the it had to be disarmed and both Scud and launcher rendered permanently inoperable in terms of missile launches or detonations.
Another way to think of it. How comfortable would the NZ government feel if an NZ company purchased the aircraft with the intent to train fast jet/combat pilots, in NZ?
Incidentally, if the NZ gov't wouldn't have a problem with that, and it could get US & Italian approval, and the concern was able to at least break even, I think that would be a great solution to the dilemma.
-Cheers
Sounds like the ultimate in capitalism - NZ could even allow them to be armed and they would have a privatised airforce!
It would be a bit ironic though for this to be done by a socialist government? Cheers
There are already US private firms providing training in the USA with military aircraft.
e.g.
http://www.atsifightertraining.com/instructors.html
http://www.tads-usa.com/aircraft.html
One of those bought a couple of MiG-29s a few months ago.
All the general approvals (for the firm to operate the type, etc) would have to be in place before it could even start negotiating for the aircraft. I can't believe that's the problem. I'm pretty sure it must be political.
You are absolutely right.!! This government cant stand anything that goes fast in the sky and under National if there was a private company that did train combat pilots in a particular role using either good imported aircraft or even the MB339s would be onto a good thing. This would provide a good spin off for our own defence much like a strike force as part of the Warbirds based in Wanaka.
However this would probably fly in the face of the current government who was hell bent on destroying our combat wing long before they came to power in 1999.
However this would probably fly in the face of the current government who was hell bent on destroying our combat wing long before they came to power in 1999.
Fantastic idea and isnt as stupid as it sounds. But we are hampered by a ideological government that is narrowminded when it comes to fighter and air combat forces.
Sounds like the ultimate in capitalism - NZ could even allow them to be armed and they would have a privatised airforce!
Cheers
You better believe it. It smells of political manuevering and i personally believe the US government is against the deal . Period.
How does one have a fighter wing, without having a fighter wing. easy, one invites Singapore to use Whenuapai as a base for some of it's squadrons of fighters. Because of it's small size many of Singapores fighters are located overseas, leasing bases from foreign governments so that they can have enough airspace to practice in. Why not here. Their army brings it's hardware here to use our open spaces for firing practice and exercises
I can't see the government even remotely entertaining this idea, not to mention the uproar from the Whenuapai locals who would have a scene at the prospect of F16's in full AB operating on their backdoor :mad2
The concept is a bad idea, and it doesnt do anything for NZ Defence to be honest. I remember the locals around Harewood when i used to live in Christchurch complaining about the C141s opening up full throttle in the middle of night.
Stuart Mackey
New Member
There are six territorial 'unit's, all of which are under strength. Canterbury regiment, or whatever the fashionable term is these days, numbers around 290 odd soldiers. None of these 'battalions' has their own equipment. The only mention of a 3/1 btn RNIR is found on the likes of Wikipedia, allthough I suspect the concept of useing them this way is utilised, allthough with what equipment heaven alone knows.
Strength of the 6 TF "regiments" as at1/1/2006 was 1,917 personel,divide by 6 is 319 per unit so they are at least 50% under strength.Probably more as they cover support,medical.logistics capabilities etc so it may be as low as 30%.The government keeps the TF just ticking over to pad out the regular force (4,363). Equipment is basic infantry through to Mortars.Only the Auckland TF unit has Artillery support incorporating a 6 gun battery battery . Anti tank is limited to the disposable m72 launcher unless a few of the 42 (not many is it ) carl gustav's have trickled down.
Recent new gear eg 24 Javelin launchers only covers the regular Force.Again showing a low level investment in TF capabilities.
At a pinch, a light Brigade could be formed with the 2 Regular Battalions plus1 TF Battalion (drawing from the 6 TF Units) requiring all hands on deck for rotation and likely needing to recall service people recently left (800 pa) plus recruitment (if a popular cause). Army hold's 11,495 Styers (parliament Question answer 3995) 841 C9's.(Q4000) this would suggest a Division under emergency conditions could be formed until local industry geared up to supply the necessary.
NZ Division
Caught up with ex RNIR Officer,his view Low intensity, get everyone trained,Facilities set up, lead times etc set up for a Division looking at 1-2 years. High intensity 2-3.It could be all over rover by then. So it looks like a light Brigade (2 Lav111, 1 trucked BN plus supporting Signals,Engineers ,light Artillery etc) would be all we could do in the early stages ,first year at least.
Caught up with ex RNIR Officer,his view Low intensity, get everyone trained,Facilities set up, lead times etc set up for a Division looking at 1-2 years. High intensity 2-3.It could be all over rover by then. So it looks like a light Brigade (2 Lav111, 1 trucked BN plus supporting Signals,Engineers ,light Artillery etc) would be all we could do in the early stages ,first year at least.