NZDF General discussion thread

[Gibbo]

KMS HK33 Pinguin also operated in the region as well. It captured the Norwegian whaling fleet in the sub Antarctic and operated around the Auckland Islands. Plus I think it was the ship responsible for laying the Lyttelton minefield. I haven't read the book dealing with it's southern sojourn and subsequent sinking in decades.

One thing that constantly nags me , and virtually never gets any 'air time' even on this forum, is that fact that we know from both WW there were enemy aircraft & vessels over our waters... and in particular the minefields were known at the time and caused direct impact. So my gripe is... why has NZ seemingly so forgotten this basic history lesson and there seems no 'interest' in developing what I would consider a functional MCM capabilty? By that I mean a capability that is resourced to quickly respond to any attempts to blockade the fairly large number of ports we have with mines/IED. We have a reasonable number of ports spread geographically quite wide and yes this means all of each island would have to be mined before any serious economic impact was seem (ie: land transport could divert traffic to other ports within the same island is one port was mined).

The RNZN's MCM capability is improving in terms of equipment but slowly it seems and not to the scale required. Nor can I fathom why clearance divers are still seemingly considered to be the core component of RNZN's clearance work when in every other 'industry' in today's world we attempt to remove humans from the most serious risk elements of their work...ie: why aren't the RNZN moving to robotic disposal vehicles. Yes I appreciate divers are always going to be a key component of MCM activity, but once a mine / IED is identified why would we still send in a diver when a disposable vehicle could be used!?!

Modern MCM systems are becoming increasingly attainable as they no longer require dedicated 'shock resistant' vessels and rely on modular as well as robotics systems which offer a hell of a lot more flexibility. Any RNZN vessel could become a MCM platform now, but perhaps even more practical for RNZN is a team that can deploy by road within either island (via C130 if req'd) and deploy a couple of MCM teams with divers, AUV & mine/IED disposal vehicles via RHIB. Same could be done by C130 into the Sth Pac Islands.

My point being MCM is more attainable now than ever and was shown to be probably the biggest threat in NZ waters in both WW... so why isn't it given a much higher profile and priority? Is it that the RNZN has been desperately pleading to Govt to do something... or perhaps they too have forgotten the lessons as well! Crikey not even one greenie could field a valid reason for not investing in such a system.... it's be such an easy sell to NZ and could be done relatively affordably! Yet every whitepaper barely mentions the topic of MCM....why???

 

[Gooey]

You are totally missing the point in the suggestion of F35 in Kiwi colours, any consideration has to take into account how long the equipment will remain in service and how it remains relevant during that time. It is more than likely when NZGov makes a decision on a regeneration of a ACF at the same time that the RAAF is giving its recommendations to AusGov on replacement for the Rhinos and even perhaps Growler.

How about taking all this handbag swinging at each other off to PM's. Cheers MrC

Thanks t68 for articulating this.

I don't see this as Handbag swinging really, but as a good solid discussion. It is the central point about current and future NZDF CONOPS and therefore capabilities and how the country plays its part (or not) in defence of the region. This has been buried for too long as a result of the stupid decision by Clarks Government to remove ACF from RNZAF and a misguided perception since that NZ did not need or could not afford this fighting capability.

As previously mentioned, a Forward defence strategy (to illustrate, say a contribution to defending Australia) does not mean large NZ armies fighting ala 2 Div; it does mean, keeping the Enemy away from our boarders centered around maritime ops (aside from ASW and counter mine etc in home waters) because this is the best strategy for a peaceful, large area/small population. In simple terms this means a fighting Navy and Air Force.

With the ACF loss, I also see a disconnect sometimes with what is perceived by most kiwi SMEs and the professional knowledge that this air capability generated within NZDF. This has meant not only a loss of aircraft but also real fighting knowledge within NZDF (and in civil service and academia) to advise to Government. So a self generated decision in the 90's (era of benign environment) has reduced the necessary corporate knowledge to understand how important a ACF is for maritime ops today (strategic uncertainty). NZ could afford to regenerate this capability if it wished too. What I am uncertain of is if NZ has the time to do this before it is need to contribute to the defence of our sphere of influence and region.

PS. thanks for this debate! Tip top.

 

[KiwiRob]

If you check the classifications of the PLAN carriers, they are as follows:

• Type 001: Liaoning
• Type 001a: Shandong
• Type 2: CATOBAR CV being built at moment.
• Type 003: Planned CVN

That's the classification system that has been in use for years. The only commentator who I have seen label the Shandong as the Type 2 is H I Sutton. He is an expert in his field, but many other experts still call it the Type 001a.

You're wrong, that changed in 2019. Search for type 003 and you get what's under construction now at Jiangnan shipyard, with possibly a second one at Dalian.

The Shandong was commissioned into the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy on December 17, 2019, in Sanya on the island province of Hainan. Prior to being commissioned, the Shandong underwent nine sea trials over the course of 18 months. By comparison, the Liaoning, completed 10 sea trials in 13 months before being commissioned in September 2012. During construction and sea trials, the Shandong was known as the Type 001A; however, the December 2019 commissioning ceremony indicated that it is officially designated the Type 002.

What do we know so far about China's second aircraft carrier? | ChinaPower Project

Five years after commissioning its first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, China is now primed to launch its second carrier – the Type 001A.

chinapower.csis.org

 

[ngatimozart]

You're wrong, that changed in 2019. Search for type 003 and you get what's under construction now at Jiangnan shipyard, with possibly a second one at Dalian.

What do we know so far about China's second aircraft carrier? | ChinaPower Project

Five years after commissioning its first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, China is now primed to launch its second carrier – the Type 001A.

chinapower.csis.org

Thank you. I missed that and I stand corrected. The possible CV build at Dalian does sound like a second Type 003 because the it is thought that the Type 004 CVN project has been put on hold for budget reasons.

 

[ngatimozart]

Thanks t68 for articulating this.

I don't see this as Handbag swinging really, but as a good solid discussion. It is the central point about current and future NZDF CONOPS and therefore capabilities and how the country plays its part (or not) in defence of the region. This has been buried for too long as a result of the stupid decision by Clarks Government to remove ACF from RNZAF and a misguided perception since that NZ did not need or could not afford this fighting capability.

As previously mentioned, a Forward defence strategy (to illustrate, say a contribution to defending Australia) does not mean large NZ armies fighting ala 2 Div; it does mean, keeping the Enemy away from our boarders centered around maritime ops (aside from ASW and counter mine etc in home waters) because this is the best strategy for a peaceful, large area/small population. In simple terms this means a fighting Navy and Air Force.

With the ACF loss, I also see a disconnect sometimes with what is perceived by most kiwi SMEs and the professional knowledge that this air capability generated within NZDF. This has meant not only a loss of aircraft but also real fighting knowledge within NZDF (and in civil service and academia) to advise to Government. So a self generated decision in the 90's (era of benign environment) has reduced the necessary corporate knowledge to understand how important a ACF is for maritime ops today (strategic uncertainty). NZ could afford to regenerate this capability if it wished too. What I am uncertain of is if NZ has the time to do this before it is need to contribute to the defence of our sphere of influence and region.

PS. thanks for this debate! Tip top.

We have I think 10 years, and we can regenerate an ACF within that time, just, with some help from our FVEY partners training and doctrine wise. Yes we certainly can afford to acquire an ACF and fund it's LCC. We definitely require a fully capable fighting air force and navy, but also a fully capable fighting army because boots on the ground are what hold the ground in the end. However the army's equipment and personnel can't swim or fly.

 

[old faithful]

So.... it seems that this debate is “we can afford an ACF, most people on this site would love to see an ACF reformed”
Do I think NZ will re raise an ACF in the next 10 years. Negative.

 

[t68]

So.... it seems that this debate is “we can afford an ACF, most people on this site would love to see an ACF reformed”
Do I think NZ will re raise an ACF in the next 10 years. Negative.

I concur, while I think the Kiwis can afford a more broad and equipped defence I just can’t see those in power having the balls to actually fund a more self reliant DF.


I think the debate should be parked untill someone make it official and a report made for Government

 

[KiwiRob]

I concur, while I think the Kiwis can afford a more broad and equipped defence I just can’t see those in power having the balls to actually fund a more self reliant DF.


I think the debate should be parked untill someone make it official and a report made for Government

There's a massive gulf between what we can financially afford and what any govt in NZ can politically afford. The NZ public is generally uninterested in Defense, both main political parties aren't really interested in defense either, I'm sure this point will be argued by some people, but lets face it, National was in power for most of the years after Helen canned the ACF, they did nothing to reinstate it, it's not a subject any major party is going to hang its hat on.

 

[MrConservative]

So.... it seems that this debate is “we can afford an ACF, most people on this site would love to see an ACF reformed”
Do I think NZ will re raise an ACF in the next 10 years. Negative.

Quite a lot of policy traction is started through debate in public forums like this. Such discussion raises topical awareness that gets people thinking more deeply on those matters.

 

[MrConservative]

I think the debate should be parked untill someone make it official and a report made for Government

Actually at the end of the day you don't decide that. The way I look at it is - this is a New Zealand related defence thread on a wider Defence forum. Some form of additional air combat capability in some way shape or form is an issue that Kiwi's interested in matters of defence seemingly would like to discuss further. Including some within the RNZAF community;

The question for the RNZAF is, are we configured and prepared for ‘all eventualities’? For instance, should the international climate continue to deteriorate, should we consider obtaining an air combat capability? To even stand up a basic level of capability in this role would probably take around six years, and you can add another ten years to build up an experienced cadre of combat pilots. The dilemma for democratic leaders is perhaps facing the choice between defending their nations, and preserving their wealth and way of life. International norms are changing as we move from a unipolar to a bipolar world, and strategic relationships quickly evolve into a straight choice between the poles. The world’s political centre of gravity is shifting. So, are we in the midst of a warning time? Well, given that conflict has been central throughout history, and that is unlikely to change, the answer is, probably. And how much time do we have to prepare…only time will tell. The Warning Time - RNZAF Air Power Development Centre Bulletin - Tematataua, Issue 32, May 2019

We also had our last Defence Minister publicly raise the issue. There have been other references in Tematataua over the last three years noting it as a present capability gap. Therefore it is very much of worth discussing as a future policy consideration just as much previous policy mistakes or successes, or present policy settings and plans. Non New Zealander's may feel differently on the topic, have different opinions, however the freedom of New Zealanders to express their opinions on a matter to New Zealanders on the topic, in this a public forum shall not be censored. Or in the modern parlance - cancelled!

Yes. For many years Kiwi's didn't really care about Defence matters because there was nothing much to really care about, that has been slowly changing and has been building momentum. I would like to think that their has been knowledge gleaned from what people have posted here - spread further into more general blogs, forums and MSM comments pages when defence issues have become newsworthy. In fact I know it does happen.

There are plenty of other threads out there that you are free to contribute to. If this one is not of interest or relevant to you - you don't have to comment at the time and can move on to another.

 

[CJohn]

The 2020 Briefing to incoming Defence Minister Henare.

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2020-12/Defence.pdf

 

[ngatimozart]

The 2020 Briefing to incoming Defence Minister Henare.

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2020-12/Defence.pdf

I think that it has been posted before. I believe that the briefing for the incoming Foreign Minister should be read as well. It doesn't hurt to see how MFAT view the world.

https://www.mfat.govt.nz/assets/About-us-Corporate/MFAT-corporate-publications/Briefings-to-incoming-Ministers/Briefing-for-incoming-Minister-of-Foreign-Affairs-2020.pdf

 

[MrConservative]

Note that the world's 3rd largest economy Japan, the strongest and wealthiest liberal democracy in Asia only gets mentioned 3 times in this Memo to the Minister. Once when Quad is mentioned, then a footnote about Quad, then a mention regarding how Japan has ended Scientific Whaling in the Southern Ocean.

New Zealand urgently need to revitalise this relationship as we move into a post Covid 19 world!

 

[ngatimozart]

Note that the world's 3rd largest economy Japan, the strongest and wealthiest liberal democracy in Asia only gets mentioned 3 times in this Memo to the Minister. Once when Quad is mentioned, then a footnote about Quad, then a mention regarding how Japan has ended Scientific Whaling in the Southern Ocean.

New Zealand urgently need to revitalise this relationship as we move into a post Covid 19 world!

It does indeed. I am getting the sense that the denizens within MFAT have become somewhat myopic blinded by the $$$ of trade deals and dumb to all other aspects of diplomacy and foreign affairs.

With Biden now POTUS, we will see a positive change in how conducts its business, and Biden will work with friendly nations in the Asia Pacific to deal with the PRC. I believe that the NZG will be called on to contribute more to regional security, and we know that Biden does like our country. So I expect pressure from Washington to be put on Wellington to up its defence game. Given the PRC actions within the region and against Australia, I believe that the NZG has no real choice but to comply. Mind you whether they choose to or not is a completely different story.

 

[MrConservative]

With Biden now POTUS, we will see a positive change in how conducts its business, and Biden will work with friendly nations in the Asia Pacific to deal with the PRC. I believe that the NZG will be called on to contribute more to regional security, and we know that Biden does like our country. So I expect pressure from Washington to be put on Wellington to up its defence game. Given the PRC actions within the region and against Australia, I believe that the NZG has no real choice but to comply. Mind you whether they choose to or not is a completely different story.

Shipley worked well with Clinton, as did Key with Obama and I suspect Joe Biden will also work well in a kindly old Uncle way with young Jacinderella. New Zealand governments do tend to do well in terms of relationships with the moderate wing of the Democrats and Republicans. McCain was very friendly to NZ for example.

I agree that it will be easier under this administration to boost defence than under Trump. However I would like to see the NZ-Japan relationship get a whole lot closer in all areas including trade, the environment, defence, intelligence, technology and education particularly that NZ is been held up as the western country which has done the best to get to grips with Covid. Lots of positive press amongst the Japanese consumers at present, reinforcing their view of New Zealand as a friendly, safe and sophisticated country with lots of fluffy cute "kawaii sheeps" ..... sagoi desu ne!

 

[Xthenaki]

Politically I would like to see our Government looking to increase trading relationships with non communist countries.

With defence - the change to the Biden administration will be watched with great interest and less anxiety hopefully. US relations with China, Nth Korea and Russia all with bases in the Pacific are our biggest security threats. US relations with India (should strengthen - VPres. Harris) and maybe setting up a new upgraded and expanded SEATO to those countries interested in forming a new alliance. NATO is in full swing on the Western front and we need more solidarity within our Eastern (Pacific)area. Yes and this means a larger contribution to defence from NZ.

 

[ngatimozart]

Politically I would like to see our Government looking to increase trading relationships with non communist countries.

With defence - the change to the Biden administration will be watched with great interest and less anxiety hopefully. US relations with China, Nth Korea and Russia all with bases in the Pacific are our biggest security threats. US relations with India (should strengthen - VPres. Harris) and maybe setting up a new upgraded and expanded SEATO to those countries interested in forming a new alliance. NATO is in full swing on the Western front and we need more solidarity within our Eastern (Pacific)area. Yes and this means a larger contribution to defence from NZ.

SEATO is long dead and extinct, much like the Haast Eagle and the moa. I am unsure about US relations with India.

A Biden Administration is far stronger on the human rights front than the previous administration was, so Modi's actions against the Kashmiris and his Hindu nationalism policies will not sit well with the current administration.

North Korea is no real threat to NZ per se because at present it doesn't and AFAIK doesn't have anything capable of reaching us. However, it is in violation of various UNSC resolutions and as such we do have a responsibility to help enforce them. Finally we are also part of the UN Force that fought the Korean War and are part of the Armistice agreement, so we do have skin in the game.

Russia is not a clear and present danger, but it is very capable of making mischief. It's Pacific Fleet SSBN patrols are now including Antarctic waters because they now have the ability to launch ICBM over the South Pole* to North American targets.

Our main threat that does present a clear and present danger is the PRC, for reasons already stated on here. This is where the NZG does need to pull both its finger out and its head out of the sand. On the defence capability front it's been already said on here what's required. However on the diplomatic front we have to form significantly closer and stronger defence relationships with Japan, Singapore and possibly South Korea.

We don't have to worry about European defence because that's no longer our problem. The Middle East is slightly different because we obtain our oil from there, however to be brutally honest, we shouldn't be overly concerned which group or sect of locals is top dog there, as long as we can do business with them.

*EDIT Add reference:
Russian submarines heading to NZ waters

 

[KiwiRob]

Politically I would like to see our Government looking to increase trading relationships with non communist countries.

With defence - the change to the Biden administration will be watched with great interest and less anxiety hopefully. US relations with China, Nth Korea and Russia all with bases in the Pacific are our biggest security threats. US relations with India (should strengthen - VPres. Harris) and maybe setting up a new upgraded and expanded SEATO to those countries interested in forming a new alliance. NATO is in full swing on the Western front and we need more solidarity within our Eastern (Pacific)area. Yes and this means a larger contribution to defence from NZ.

How are North Korea and Russia a security threat for New Zealand?

 

[Xthenaki]

North Korea is indirectly a threat to us if we decide to build frigates in Sth Korea given the period of time taken for the build and the volitile relationship between both Koreas. We trade with both Sth Korea and Japan and have supported maritime operations from the latter supporting UN resolutions on embargos to and from Nth Korea. With a large submarine force and Kim Il Yung they could support the PLC very easily.

Russia on the other hand is strategically placed when a base is completed at Port Sudan to operate out of the Red sea and inti the Indian Ocean which both Australia and NZ. I think would be weary of. Russia has reasonable relations with the PLC.

 

[ngatimozart]

How are North Korea and Russia a security threat for New Zealand?

Russia is a security threat to NZ and has been since 1946. We have had problems with Russian subs operating in NZ waters in the past along with Russian espionage in NZ, especially during Cold War 1.0. There is no reason to suspect that the situation has changed now that Putin has a really firm grip on power. Putin after all is KGB and once KGB always KGB and a leopard never really changes its spots. We have had reports of foreign subs illegally operating in NZ waters and the only nation that really had the capacity to do that 7 years ago was Russia. The PLAN now has the capacity and the wherewithal. The trawler mentioned in the article was most likely PLAN. Our friends would ask permission to transit our waters or let it be known on the quiet.

Subs 'sneaking in' - New Zealand News - NZ Herald

Foreign submarines are reported to be secretly entering New Zealand waters, a defence analyst says.

www.nzherald.co.nz

Stuff

www.stuff.co.nz

EDIT Add 2nd source.