NZDF General discussion thread

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
Old US army Chinooks are shagged. We bought used Ds for use in Afghanistan. Upon their return the decision to sell them was thankfully made instead of upgrading. Someone elses handoffs. Price looks good until maintenance costs get silly. Same as buying a used car.

The new long range version would offer a massive increase in lift capability for internal and external HADR as well as a fit with allies on operations not to mention the ultimate SAS transport and support aircraft .

Marinized A109 in full A/LUH configuration is available and would be good for the OPVs. Again the issue of quantity arises and with a future navy with six hangars theb8 Sprites cant cover all ships at one time due to maintenance and other duties. So yes 3 or 4 Naval A109s have a place. With technolgy, could many of the manned tasks a helicopter offers a naval commander be relegated to a VTOL RPAS such as the Schiebel S100 in numbers to allow typical tasks such as ISR to be accomplished more cheaply and with little risk to high value personnel. Multiple S100s can be carried to allow round the clock aerial operations.

The initial order of the 5 A/LUH plus the simulator cost €57 million or roughly €10 million each. So now that the existing units are approaching the 10 year mark an upgrade is likely and what a perfect time to add to the fleet. Order them now so when the upgrade starts and frames are OOS the new ones will be available eliminating loss of availability. These aircraft have proven their value to the country. Three basic AW109E and 4 navalized A/LUH would likely be no more than €70 million based upon current pricing. The supply and training chains are already well established.

Tod is the Airbus H160 not the likely successor to the NH90 and its variants? First delivery is planned for 2022 ish. This should still be in production come 2030.
The H160 is in the 5-6t class the NH-90 in the 9-10t class so I would very much doubt it.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
If the NFH90 were to be an option (and I am not convinced it would be viable) then that option would need to be included in planning for the Future Frigates. The NFH90 was/is not an option for service aboard the current frigates, because the helicopter does not fit within the hangar space, in addition to the various problems integrating the different systems. The NFH90 programme has not been helped in this regard by the different customers requiring different sensor configurations, including different specific sensors.

As it is, will NH Industries still be manufacturing NFH90 helicopters towards the end of the 2020's into early 2030-ish, when production would need to start on the Kiwi Seasprite replacement? The MH-60R Romeo/Sierra line is expected to have closed by then IIRC.

NZ could find itself in the awkward position of needing to order replacement naval helicopters at a time when there are no major naval helicopter programmes running, and/or it's frigate has been designed with potentially insufficient space for what is available and viable. Remember, the frigate production will be some time in the 2030's, but the initial design work should get underway at least by 2025.
Yep, but the USN will have the Romeo replacement well underway by the time the MH-60R Romeo/Sierra line shuts down, because their early build Romeos will be up for replacement.
 

pea032

New Member
Defence Force: We need to prepare for climate change

Article in Stuff focusing on climate change which i guess isn't surprising after the white paper and doesn't say anything we already didn't know - that the NZDF is going to be stretched and unlikely to meet all of its responsibilities. also says the the Defence Capability Plan should be released early next year.... so maybe early 2020 at the current rate of things getting released when the minister said they would be.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Defence Force: We need to prepare for climate change

Article in Stuff focusing on climate change which i guess isn't surprising after the white paper and doesn't say anything we already didn't know - that the NZDF is going to be stretched and unlikely to meet all of its responsibilities. also says the the Defence Capability Plan should be released early next year.... so maybe early 2020 at the current rate of things getting released when the minister said they would be.
Yep. The Ministers speech The Climate Crisis: Defence Readiness and Responsibilities at the press conference with the Minister for Climate Change, James Shaw, (Greens co-leader) in attendance sums up what NZDF will be required to undertake with the full report going into more detail, although it's more flash rather than substance.

This remark in the Stuff story is quite pertinent and illustrates a 2 decade old NZ policy failing:

"
[Jose]Sousa-Santos puts the emphasis on capability. "We don't really have the right toys, the right kit to respond in the same way as Australia and the US. "We don't have landing craft, our amphibious capability is almost non-existent, our last helicopter purchase was a little short-sighted. We are very focused on peacekeeping, and still very much a ground-based Defence Force." "
It could be argued that NZDF has been a ground based defence force since WW2 despite NZ being an island maritime nation. A classic exemplar of sea blindness.

This development may be why the Hercules replacement announcement has been delayed, yet again. :rolleyes: The Defence Capability Plan is due early next year so we will see what that will have to say. I think that they may also look at something like:
  • increase in amphibious capability,
  • increase in airborne & spaceborne maritime surveillance capability,
  • 1 possibly 2 ships along the lines of the RCN Harry de Woolf Class AOPV (VARD-7-100-AOPV) as SOPV,
  • increased numbers in and more capable OPVs (Protector OPVs are VARD-7-85-OPV),
  • increased numbers in FAMC tactical and strategic platforms and increased budget for the FAMC,
  • possible addition of rotary wing capability to FAMC,
  • possible 3rd FFH/G due to the increased security concerns.
This could possibly mean an increase in funding for NZDF as well, both CAPEX (Capital Expenditure) and OPEX (Operational Expenditure) because the increased demands on NZDF will require a significant increase in VOTE: NZDF and this will be politically acceptable across the board. Even the Greens will be supportive of it because it is environment related. The left wing loonies won't have any traction about it and if some of the pollies try to derail it they will be accused as being climate change deniers or something worst for not wanting to help Pacific Islanders in times of need.

Hehe, this is a plan so cunning you could pin a tail on it and call it a weasel.
 

t68

Well-Known Member
Yep. The Ministers speech The Climate Crisis: Defence Readiness and Responsibilities at the press conference with the Minister for Climate Change, James Shaw, (Greens co-leader) in attendance sums up what NZDF will be required to undertake with the full report going into more detail, although it's more flash rather than substance.

This remark in the Stuff story is quite pertinent and illustrates a 2 decade old NZ policy failing:

"
[Jose]Sousa-Santos puts the emphasis on capability. "We don't really have the right toys, the right kit to respond in the same way as Australia and the US. "We don't have landing craft, our amphibious capability is almost non-existent, our last helicopter purchase was a little short-sighted. We are very focused on peacekeeping, and still very much a ground-based Defence Force." "
It could be argued that NZDF has been a ground based defence force since WW2 despite NZ being an island maritime nation. A classic exemplar of sea blindness.

This development may be why the Hercules replacement announcement has been delayed, yet again. :rolleyes: The Defence Capability Plan is due early next year so we will see what that will have to say. I think that they may also look at something like:
  • increase in amphibious capability,
  • increase in airborne & spaceborne maritime surveillance capability,
  • 1 possibly 2 ships along the lines of the RCN Harry de Woolf Class AOPV (VARD-7-100-AOPV) as SOPV,
  • increased numbers in and more capable OPVs (Protector OPVs are VARD-7-85-OPV),
  • increased numbers in FAMC tactical and strategic platforms and increased budget for the FAMC,
  • possible addition of rotary wing capability to FAMC,
  • possible 3rd FFH/G due to the increased security concerns.
This could possibly mean an increase in funding for NZDF as well, both CAPEX (Capital Expenditure) and OPEX (Operational Expenditure) because the increased demands on NZDF will require a significant increase in VOTE: NZDF and this will be politically acceptable across the board. Even the Greens will be supportive of it because it is environment related. The left wing loonies won't have any traction about it and if some of the pollies try to derail it they will be accused as being climate change deniers or something worst for not wanting to help Pacific Islanders in times of need.

Hehe, this is a plan so cunning you could pin a tail on it and call it a weasel.
Well if you can do all that and get it past the greens all good, just make sure you camouflage the things that go bang with pot plants and they will be happy
 

Rob c

Active Member
Well if you can do all that and get it past the greens all good, just make sure you camouflage the things that go bang with pot plants and they will be happy
If some of Ngati's list gained traction there would be a good chance of support from the opposition and the greens would be irrelevant as they were in their call to de-weaponise the P 8's. personally when it comes to defence, just use the pot plants to drop on some pollies heads, to knock some sense into them.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
If some of Ngati's list gained traction there would be a good chance of support from the opposition and the greens would be irrelevant as they were in their call to de-weaponise the P 8's. personally when it comes to defence, just use the pot plants to drop on some pollies heads, to knock some sense into them.
@Rob c you cannot do that. It is both illegal and immoral. Think about the physical, mental and emotional damage that you will inflict upon the plants who inhabit said pots. What have they done to deserve such a hideous fate?
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Well if you can do all that and get it past the greens all good, just make sure you camouflage the things that go bang with pot plants and they will be happy
The Greens would be irrelevant anyway in the Cabinet decision on this. They would have their views heard, but their Cabinet ministers are bound by Cabinet rules to support any Cabinet decision once it's been made, so if Cabinet decide to increase VOTE: NZDF etc., well said Green ministers have to swallow that dead rat.
If some of Ngati's list gained traction there would be a good chance of support from the opposition and the greens would be irrelevant as they were in their call to de-weaponise the P 8's. personally when it comes to defence, just use the pot plants to drop on some pollies heads, to knock some sense into them.
As I alluded to in my post above, the fact that a Greens Minister was present at the announcement may have just ripped the rug out from underneath the left wing anti defence protesters and other left wing types, because this may just pull in a lot of left wing support for NZDF through its new mission, which will be politically and more importantly ideologically acceptable to them. Could be interesting times ahead on the left wing anti defence protester front, because the way I see it is if they continue on their present course, they risk sailing into dangerous waters, because it could leave them open to accusations of being climate change deniers, closet racists and other sorts of impolite names that left wingers like calling heretics.
 

Rob c

Active Member
@Rob c you cannot do that. It is both illegal and immoral. Think about the physical, mental and emotional damage that you will inflict upon the plants who inhabit said pots. What have they done to deserve such a hideous fate?
Oops I clean forgot about the plants, You will have to excuse me, I was having a senior moment.
 

Rob c

Active Member
The Greens would be irrelevant anyway in the Cabinet decision on this. They would have their views heard, but their Cabinet ministers are bound by Cabinet rules to support any Cabinet decision once it's been made, so if Cabinet decide to increase VOTE: NZDF etc., well said Green ministers have to swallow that dead rat.
I thought that the Greens ministers were outside cabinet or has that changed?
 

Gibbo

Active Member
Yep. The Ministers speech The Climate Crisis: Defence Readiness and Responsibilities at the press conference with the Minister for Climate Change, James Shaw, (Greens co-leader) in attendance sums up what NZDF will be required to undertake with the full report going into more detail, although it's more flash rather than substance.

This remark in the Stuff story is quite pertinent and illustrates a 2 decade old NZ policy failing:

"
[Jose]Sousa-Santos puts the emphasis on capability. "We don't really have the right toys, the right kit to respond in the same way as Australia and the US. "We don't have landing craft, our amphibious capability is almost non-existent, our last helicopter purchase was a little short-sighted. We are very focused on peacekeeping, and still very much a ground-based Defence Force." "
It could be argued that NZDF has been a ground based defence force since WW2 despite NZ being an island maritime nation. A classic exemplar of sea blindness.

This development may be why the Hercules replacement announcement has been delayed, yet again. :rolleyes: The Defence Capability Plan is due early next year so we will see what that will have to say. I think that they may also look at something like:
  • increase in amphibious capability,
  • increase in airborne & spaceborne maritime surveillance capability,
  • 1 possibly 2 ships along the lines of the RCN Harry de Woolf Class AOPV (VARD-7-100-AOPV) as SOPV,
  • increased numbers in and more capable OPVs (Protector OPVs are VARD-7-85-OPV),
  • increased numbers in FAMC tactical and strategic platforms and increased budget for the FAMC,
  • possible addition of rotary wing capability to FAMC,
  • possible 3rd FFH/G due to the increased security concerns.
This could possibly mean an increase in funding for NZDF as well, both CAPEX (Capital Expenditure) and OPEX (Operational Expenditure) because the increased demands on NZDF will require a significant increase in VOTE: NZDF and this will be politically acceptable across the board. Even the Greens will be supportive of it because it is environment related. The left wing loonies won't have any traction about it and if some of the pollies try to derail it they will be accused as being climate change deniers or something worst for not wanting to help Pacific Islanders in times of need.

Hehe, this is a plan so cunning you could pin a tail on it and call it a weasel.

There's no doubt the NZDF are lacking in many areas and the article certainly does put some light into key areas of short-fall, but to be honest Ngati, IMHO you might be reading too much into this. It's just a gut-feel but you know as well as I do a leopard never really changes its spots and Greens will use this as a lever to dumb down combat capabilities using the mantra that climate change is our real concern and that is the area were we should spend the $$$ and not on combat capability.

The Greens have long gunned (excuse the pun) for the Frigates and would push for OPV replacements saying we could get more for the same $$$ (which on paper is true and therefore hard to refute in our 'click bait' fake news world of todays media). Any further amphib capability would, like the Canterbury, be most likely built to cope only with very low threat levels. I could see they'd be ok with a slightly larger FAMC fleet.

This actually makes me damned nervous because when the Greens start getting in behind Defence and are focusing on Climate Change (as they do HADR) they will have an agenda and it's nit one most of us on this forum would tend to support.

There's 2 other things I read into this - (1) the fairly obvious realisation that climate change was always going to be a big focus for Greens so no surprises they're all over this, and (2) Labour probably has twigged that NZ First is unlikely going to be enough to get them back into power in 2 years so the Greens are about to become far more important to Labour and we'll start to hear more from the Greens.

The other thing I'd say too is the Stuff article has good points made from 'experts' (altho I'm always wary of Stuff's definition of such) but the fact is just how much influence is their views really going to have on policy, and even more telling will it convince Govt to open their wallet.

It might simply be that the DCP is taking longer than anticipated, but it could also be that the Greens & NZF are pulling in opposite directions and Jacinda is having a wee issue with her two support partners.

Dunno Ngati... I hope to god you're right, I just don;t feel it tho.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
There's no doubt the NZDF are lacking in many areas and the article certainly does put some light into key areas of short-fall, but to be honest Ngati, IMHO you might be reading too much into this. ....

Dunno Ngati... I hope to god you're right, I just don;t feel it tho.
Nice post. Well thought out and structured.

LOVERLY BOY.jpg

This is a BZ (well done) for a good quality post and does not imply that I agree or disagree with the contents.
 

Gibbo

Active Member
Nice post. Well thought out and structured.

View attachment 46368

This is a BZ (well done) for a good quality post and does not imply that I agree or disagree with the contents.
Crikey it's taken me this long to get back to the forum... nice surprise to see your comment, thank you very much Sir! The quality of the post was possibly proportional to the quantity of Montieth's Original consumed at the time - ie: 1, still creative at that volume, after 2 it starts to slide, after 4 I'm anybody's!. :D
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
US warning to New Zealand on China

Interesting coments from the US assistant defence secretary. I hope the message about China is sinking in. We need to spend more on defence, better equipment, more personnel and greater capability. We need our air combat force back, we need four frigates, we need true amphibious forces, we need improved air mobility.
Preaching to the choir you are on here. But the pollies and the rest of NZ, well that's a different kettle of fish.
 

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
Preaching to the choir you are on here. But the pollies and the rest of NZ, well that's a different kettle of fish.
Kiwipolitico

Paul Buchannan has a good piece on Chinese influence in NZ politics and the Anne-Marie Brady concerns. He is bang on about the MFAT trade bias. This is a real blindspot for the National Party in that they put trade above National Security and the China trade - security issue in particular. Slowly the penny is dropping for them and the further distance they have from the misguided influencers of the previous Key-English administration (Mapp and McCully) the better.
 
Top