Royal New Zealand Air Force

Tasman

Ship Watcher
Verified Defense Pro
I asked this question in one of the other Kiwi threads (LTDP 2006 Update) but it is probably more applicable here.

How is NZ currently training its Hercules, Orion, 757and helo pilots?

Surely at least some training in an aircraft like the MB339 would be useful to sharpen skill levels for military pilots regardless of what they end up flying operationally. It seems a big jump to go from a CT-4 Airtrainer to a Kingair B200 to a Boeing 757! A modern fast turboprop like the PC-21 would help bridge the gap but as the MB339s are available I think this is a another good reason to use at least some of them. I guess many of the current front line multi engine pilots would have experienced flying MB339s prior to them being taken out of service but as new pilots come into the service I think there would be a real advantage in providing fast jet experience with these aircraft.

Along with providing army and navy support this seems to be another logical reason to return the MB339s to service.

Cheers
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
Okay - I started this thread to gauge feedback on whether the MB-339's could be used for other than just training Army & Navy units, given that the NZ opposition defence spokesman has raised the possibility.

Thanks for the feedback - I'm still convinced they could be deployed to places like East Timor then operated for recon & light-attack etc - but I guess there isn't a dire need for this fairly limited type of capability in the region - especially given that the P-3K's will soon be capable of doing much of this tasking.

Okay so their true worth will remain as trainers for Army & Navy units. Perhaps some limited 'domestic defence' use as well - although I'm not even really sure they'd be worth the effort or cost!

Maybe National should look at maximising their training function - and perhaps 'make some money' by setting up a jet-training school open to regional or allied airforces to enable pilots to gain some serious mountain & low flying experience. What about a forward-air-control 'centre-of excellence'!?!...or am I again fishing for reasons to justify the MB-339's retention!?!
I do like the last idea, setting up a fast-jet training school. The wouldn't necessarily be operated on a business basis to make a profit, I'd settle for covering operating costs and attrition. Keep in mind though the potential contribution such a school could make.

NZ pilots could act as instructors, on a rotational basis. This would allow a number of pilots to maintain (more or less) current in a fast jet capacity. Those same pilots would also be current as flight instructors, which can help to boost their flying skills. When not engaged in flight school operations, the MB-339CB can be used as mentioned before, in joint training exercises with the Army and RNZN, or as a CAP for major events.

As a flying school, it could host student-pilots from Malaysia, Thailand, the Phillippines (sp?) etc, basically drawing on nations in the region. This could increase cooperation between NZ and the different nations, while potentially providing better fast jet instruction than is available in in the different countries in the region.

-Cheers
 

Whiskyjack

Honorary Moderator / Defense Professional / Analys
Verified Defense Pro
It would be cheaper to rig up a gun pack (maybe 20mm) as I would'nt expect any target intercepted to be manouvering too wildly, not sure they were ever properly configured for AIM-9 firing
Yes, but if you have them you may as well use them!
 

Whiskyjack

Honorary Moderator / Defense Professional / Analys
Verified Defense Pro
I do like the last idea, setting up a fast-jet training school. The wouldn't necessarily be operated on a business basis to make a profit, I'd settle for covering operating costs and attrition. Keep in mind though the potential contribution such a school could make.

NZ pilots could act as instructors, on a rotational basis. This would allow a number of pilots to maintain (more or less) current in a fast jet capacity. Those same pilots would also be current as flight instructors, which can help to boost their flying skills. When not engaged in flight school operations, the MB-339CB can be used as mentioned before, in joint training exercises with the Army and RNZN, or as a CAP for major events.

As a flying school, it could host student-pilots from Malaysia, Thailand, the Phillippines (sp?) etc, basically drawing on nations in the region. This could increase cooperation between NZ and the different nations, while potentially providing better fast jet instruction than is available in in the different countries in the region.

-Cheers
Yes re-activating the 339s and using some form of commercial option to defray the costs of operating them would defiantly be something the National Party would jump at!

Especially if it can be done in conjunction with existing security arrangements, such as the Five Power Defence Agreement.
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
Yes re-activating the 339s and using some form of commercial option to defray the costs of operating them would defiantly be something the National Party would jump at!

Especially if it can be done in conjunction with existing security arrangements, such as the Five Power Defence Agreement.
Malaysia did come to mind, given the FPDA. IIRC, there have in recent years been a few instances where RMAF aircraft have been lost. I believe (again IIRC) these losses occured during flight training. If I'm correct, then this would seem to indicate possible issues with either maintenance of training aircraft, deficiencies in the training program, or poor selection of student pilots. If NZ operated a flying school, I assume they would be able to deal with the first two possible issues. As for the third, I assume there would be some sort of agreement on what characteristics would be allowed for a student pilot.

-Cheers
 

KH-12

Member
Yes, but if you have them you may as well use them!
Thought munitions like that would have been onsold by now as they could'nt form part of the deal to sell to a civilian training organisation. Could always strap them on the P3's and give them a self defence capability and rename them F/B-3K :) , trying to down a rouge Cessna 172 flying over an urban environment with a IR missle seems abit overkill anyway:gun

At least with the P3 you will have a radar with an Air-to Air mode to slave the AIM-9.
 

Lucasnz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #207
I do like the last idea, setting up a fast-jet training school. The wouldn't necessarily be operated on a business basis to make a profit, I'd settle for covering operating costs and attrition. Keep in mind though the potential contribution such a school could make.

NZ pilots could act as instructors, on a rotational basis....
As a flying school, it could host student-pilots from Malaysia, Thailand, the Phillippines (sp?) etc, basically drawing on nations in the region. This could increase cooperation between NZ and the different nations, while potentially providing better fast jet instruction than is available in in the different countries in the region.

-Cheers
I don't think a flying school that provides fast jet training would work, for the following reasons...
  1. Canada already has this a part of NATO - There would be greater advantages for countries to attend this given the greater access to tactics, doctrine etc
  2. The lack of access to tactics, doctrine and advanced aircraft capability would be a serious hinderance to pilots attempting to train people to operate more advanced aircraft

New Zealand use to train a lot of pilots for South East Asian Countries back in the 1970's-1980's but countries like Singapore / Malaysia are now more advanced than the NZDF and no longer send recuirts for basic flight training etc.

With the exception of the AIM 9L, virtually all the other weapons systems can be used by other aircraft in the RNZAF (Maverick on the SH-2G, 1000lb bombs on the Orion, 2.75 rockets of the UH-1H (though I've never seen this))

In the long run the only real reason for reinstating the MB339 is to progress to more advanced aircraft as they are replaced.
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
Another possibility might be to acquire an aircraft such as the PC-21. NZDF "might" be able to sell this as a basic training aircraft (RNZAF and RNZN still need fixed wing trainers to train their current pilots) but the beauty of the PC-21 is it has virtually "jet like" performance, but is clearly a "prop" driven aircraft.

It outperforms basically ANY civilian based light aircraft, is especially designed to replicate the performance of a jet, but with the lower maintenance costs of a prop driven aircraft, and can still utilise and employ a weapons package sufficient to under take basic training tasks and limited operational tasks (such as the interception of civilian aircraft and "QRF" tasks for maritime interceptions).

Countries like many in South America utilise this type of aircraft for an active counter-insurgency / anti-drug runner aircraft, not too dissimilar to the types of roles NZ "might" be able to use such an aircraft.

Singapore has already ordered this aircraft and Australia is likely to do so as well. NZ might therefore be able to "piggy back" onto one of these orders and make it cheaper again...
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
Okay, found it. The P-3K Orion does use the APS-134, not the APS-137 as used by USN P-3C Orions. Also, it's possible the mission computers used are the original types received when NZ ordered them as P-3B models, since the Sirius upgrade was never done. Was the Kestrel program when the wings were replaced? From what Magoo said, the wiring wasn't upgraded (at least into the new wings) to the MIL-STD 1760 databus, which might cause issues with integrating a new AShM onto the Orion. OTOH there should be enough air-launched Harpoons and/or other AShM like the Penguin Mk 2 available to last until NZ gets whatever replaced the P-3, whether it's the P-8 MMA or something else.

-Cheers
 

dave_kiwi

New Member
Verified Defense Pro
Mission computers were upgraded as part of Rigel -- whole TAC rail bar the acoustics position was upgraded ....

There was (and most likely still is) a unit at RNZAF Auckland called OSC (Orion Software Cell / Centre ?) dedicated to tweaking the software for the computers. ( They had / have a complete TAC Rail setup) From memory the computers used tape drives (remember this was early '80s). I suspect that some home brewed processing power has also been added to the acoustic's station .. some thing I saw alluded to on the 5 SQN Association web site at one stage.

(Not too hard really - modern laptop / pc with audio processing software .. with suitable inputs, recorded samples of various subs etc. RNZN operates a "sonar range" off Great Barrier Island which I believe has been used by the RAN at some stages. )

Kestral was indeed the wing replacement project.
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
I don't think a flying school that provides fast jet training would work, for the following reasons...
  1. Canada already has this a part of NATO - There would be greater advantages for countries to attend this given the greater access to tactics, doctrine etc
  2. The lack of access to tactics, doctrine and advanced aircraft capability would be a serious hinderance to pilots attempting to train people to operate more advanced aircraft

New Zealand use to train a lot of pilots for South East Asian Countries back in the 1970's-1980's but countries like Singapore / Malaysia are now more advanced than the NZDF and no longer send recuirts for basic flight training etc.

With the exception of the AIM 9L, virtually all the other weapons systems can be used by other aircraft in the RNZAF (Maverick on the SH-2G, 1000lb bombs on the Orion, 2.75 rockets of the UH-1H (though I've never seen this))

In the long run the only real reason for reinstating the MB339 is to progress to more advanced aircraft as they are replaced.
In considering the idea of NZ operating the MB-339CB, I've started to collect information on both NFTC (NATO Flying Training in Canada) and flight training generally.

In Canada, flight training appears to generally cover four phases, of these, phases II through IV are part of the NFTC program. Initial pilot instruction looks to be undertaken by Bombardier (Phase I) under contract with Canada. Participating countries are responsible for the equivalent to Phase I training prior to entry to NFTC.

Phase IIA Basic Flying Training is conducted on one of the 24 Raytheon CT-156 Harvard II turboprop trainer, aka T-6 Texan II. The course runs for 6.5-8months depending on time of year and flight conditions and includes 94 flying hours and 36 simulator hours, as well as over 220 hours of debriefings. After the completion of Phas IIA, student pilots who pass will progress to one of three areas, these are Phase IIB Jet, Phase III Multi-engine, or Phase III Rotary wing. The later two, Multi-engine and Rotary wing are both not part of the NFTC program.

Phase IIB Jet is a prep course for pilots who will operate fighter aircraft. It is also conducted on the Raytheon CT-156 Harvard II turboprop trainer, and the course covers 46 flying hours and 4 simulator hours, as well as ~67 hours of debriefing. Successful completion of Phase IIB allows the graduate to progress to Phase III.

Phase III Advanced Flying Training uses the BAE Systems Hawk 115 (CT-155 Hawk), with either 12 or 22 inventory (have conflicting numbers on this). The course runs 5-6 months depending on the time of year, covering 71 flying hours, 31 simulator hours and 200 hours of debriefing. Successful graduation allows progression to Phase IV.

Phase IV Flight Lead-In Training uses the BAE Systems Hawk 115 to provide basic knowledge needed to progress through any OCU and minimize the time needed to become a combat-ready pilot. It runs for 4 months, covering 49 flying hours, 18 simulator hours and 183 hours of debriefing. After completion of this phase, the pilots would move to their respective nations' OCU training for the different fighter aircraft.

Current participants are:
  • The Royal Danish Air Force (RDAF) which sends 6 pilots through Phase II each year. Five of which will progress to Phases IIB, III, and IV. If the 6th student passes they are entered into Phase III for either Multi-engine or Rotary wing.
  • The Royal Air Force (RAF) sends 20 pilots through Hawk 115 conversion training each year, followed by Phase IV training.
  • The Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) sends 6 pilots through Phases III and IV each year, with Phase IV being extended.
  • The Italian Air Force (IAF) sends 3 student pilots through Phase II, and depending on success rate, onto Phases IIB, III and IV.
  • The Hungarian Air Force (HuAF) send 7 pilots to Phase II training each year, with 5 then going onto Phases IIB, III and IV. The remaining 2 are sent to Phase III Rotary wing training.

Having gone through that, it appears that the NFTC program provides 140 hours flight time in a turboprop, and 120 hours in a fast jet/lead-in fighter. There is also 40 and 49 hours of sim time respectively. Also, from the program description
http://www.nftc.net/nftc/en/flash/nftc.jsp
the intent is to provide student pilots with flight experience and prepare potential fighter pilots for operations where situational awareness, etc is key. It doesn't seem to provide actual air combat training, or act as an OCU.

If the primary intent is to accumulate flight experience, I could see NZ being able to provide just such training environment. Granted, the RNZAF might need to increase their number of CT-4E Airtrainers, and possibly add in an intermediate turboprop trainer (like the Pilatus PC-9/A or PC-21) but it I believe is possible. Also, if conducted along the lines of the NFTC, the fees collected in training foreign pilots can be used to offset the training for NZ pilots and operations. One question that would need an answer is, how many student pilots could be trained to an equivalent level as the NFTC provides, using the 17 MB-339CBs, and how long would it take.

The question then becomes, if such a flying school were established in NZ, who would be trained. The ADF seems able to meet their training needs, though perhaps a few additional slots for pilots wouldn't go amiss. With Singapore participating in NFTC, I would assume that the local flight training programs aren't sufficient to meet the need for pilots in the RSAF, so perhaps a few slots could be filled by Singapore, but more information would be good.
Does anyone have information on the RMAF pilot training program? I'd be interested to see how many pilots the RMAF graduates, how long the program runs, and what the accumulated flight time is per pilot.

Possible candidate countries for flight training would be countries that operate small numbers of both fast jets and trainers, particularly if the country conducts it's own flight training program.

I'm interested to hear what people think.

-Cheers
 

Gibbo

Well-Known Member
In considering the idea of NZ operating the MB-339CB, I've started to collect information on both NFTC (NATO Flying Training in Canada) and flight training generally.

In Canada, flight training appears to generally cover four phases, of these, phases II through IV are part of the NFTC program. Initial pilot instruction looks to be undertaken by Bombardier (Phase I) under contract with Canada. Participating countries are responsible for the equivalent to Phase I training prior to entry to NFTC.

Phase IIA Basic Flying Training is conducted on one of the 24 Raytheon CT-156 Harvard II turboprop trainer, aka T-6 Texan II. The course runs for 6.5-8months depending on time of year and flight conditions and includes 94 flying hours and 36 simulator hours, as well as over 220 hours of debriefings. After the completion of Phas IIA, student pilots who pass will progress to one of three areas, these are Phase IIB Jet, Phase III Multi-engine, or Phase III Rotary wing. The later two, Multi-engine and Rotary wing are both not part of the NFTC program.

Phase IIB Jet is a prep course for pilots who will operate fighter aircraft. It is also conducted on the Raytheon CT-156 Harvard II turboprop trainer, and the course covers 46 flying hours and 4 simulator hours, as well as ~67 hours of debriefing. Successful completion of Phase IIB allows the graduate to progress to Phase III.

Phase III Advanced Flying Training uses the BAE Systems Hawk 115 (CT-155 Hawk), with either 12 or 22 inventory (have conflicting numbers on this). The course runs 5-6 months depending on the time of year, covering 71 flying hours, 31 simulator hours and 200 hours of debriefing. Successful graduation allows progression to Phase IV.

Phase IV Flight Lead-In Training uses the BAE Systems Hawk 115 to provide basic knowledge needed to progress through any OCU and minimize the time needed to become a combat-ready pilot. It runs for 4 months, covering 49 flying hours, 18 simulator hours and 183 hours of debriefing. After completion of this phase, the pilots would move to their respective nations' OCU training for the different fighter aircraft.

Current participants are:
  • The Royal Danish Air Force (RDAF) which sends 6 pilots through Phase II each year. Five of which will progress to Phases IIB, III, and IV. If the 6th student passes they are entered into Phase III for either Multi-engine or Rotary wing.
  • The Royal Air Force (RAF) sends 20 pilots through Hawk 115 conversion training each year, followed by Phase IV training.
  • The Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) sends 6 pilots through Phases III and IV each year, with Phase IV being extended.
  • The Italian Air Force (IAF) sends 3 student pilots through Phase II, and depending on success rate, onto Phases IIB, III and IV.
  • The Hungarian Air Force (HuAF) send 7 pilots to Phase II training each year, with 5 then going onto Phases IIB, III and IV. The remaining 2 are sent to Phase III Rotary wing training.

Having gone through that, it appears that the NFTC program provides 140 hours flight time in a turboprop, and 120 hours in a fast jet/lead-in fighter. There is also 40 and 49 hours of sim time respectively. Also, from the program description
http://www.nftc.net/nftc/en/flash/nftc.jsp
the intent is to provide student pilots with flight experience and prepare potential fighter pilots for operations where situational awareness, etc is key. It doesn't seem to provide actual air combat training, or act as an OCU.

If the primary intent is to accumulate flight experience, I could see NZ being able to provide just such training environment. Granted, the RNZAF might need to increase their number of CT-4E Airtrainers, and possibly add in an intermediate turboprop trainer (like the Pilatus PC-9/A or PC-21) but it I believe is possible. Also, if conducted along the lines of the NFTC, the fees collected in training foreign pilots can be used to offset the training for NZ pilots and operations. One question that would need an answer is, how many student pilots could be trained to an equivalent level as the NFTC provides, using the 17 MB-339CBs, and how long would it take.

The question then becomes, if such a flying school were established in NZ, who would be trained. The ADF seems able to meet their training needs, though perhaps a few additional slots for pilots wouldn't go amiss. With Singapore participating in NFTC, I would assume that the local flight training programs aren't sufficient to meet the need for pilots in the RSAF, so perhaps a few slots could be filled by Singapore, but more information would be good.
Does anyone have information on the RMAF pilot training program? I'd be interested to see how many pilots the RMAF graduates, how long the program runs, and what the accumulated flight time is per pilot.

Possible candidate countries for flight training would be countries that operate small numbers of both fast jets and trainers, particularly if the country conducts it's own flight training program.

I'm interested to hear what people think.

-Cheers

Yes some merit in these ideas - but for now it's a case of 'learn to walk before you try to run'. The RNZAF is no capable of providing an internationally competitive jet-training facility in the short-term. First thing is to re-instate the MB-339's (by no means a certainty even under a National Govt).

Then it would require a good 5 years or more of local operations before they were at a level that would allow them to start tendering for o/seas participants (hiring experinced jet instructors could bring this fwd a bit I guess).

The jet-trainer school is a longer-term sceanrio - I think for now there's enough hurdles to getting the MB-339's back in service. I also tend to agree that there's little benefit to the RAAF in basing a/c in NZ - unless it's financially rewarding, in which case we should buy our own.
 

F-15 Eagle

New Member
Royal New Zealand Air Force Discussions and Updates

Mod edit: There are already a number of RNZAF threads outlining it's force structure and discussing possible options at length.

There is no need to start a new one. Especially a pointless one.

Thread's closed.

AD.


Thread is re-opened to serve as general discussion thread for the RNZAF.
-Preceptor
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Magoo

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
In 2001 the RNZAF decided to retire all of its 14 A-4 Skyhawks and 14 MB-339 strike aircraft. They also cancelled the purshes of 28 F-16 Fighting Falcons. Leaving 14 UH-1 which will be replaced by 8 NH-90 helicopters, 5 C-130 transports, 6 P-3 Orion aircraft which they no longer have any anti-ship or anti-submarine cabability, 5 SH-2 seasprite navel helicopters, 13 CT-4 trainers, 3 Breech King Air trainers and 5 Bell 47 helicopters. The only Jet powered aircraft in the RNZAF is 2 757 transports. The RNZAF no longer has any strike capability and now performs only Transport, SAR, and Mairntime Patrol.
So, what's your point?
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
As per Magoos comment. All you have done is list their Orbat. What is the question you're asking?

Please read the Guidelines before posting another thread.
 

rjmaz1

New Member
New Zealand having fighter jets would be like Australia having a stretegic long range bombing fleet.

Both aren't required as a threat doesn't exist and the money can be better spent elsewhere.

The top brass in any military want the biggest, fastest and most expensive weapons available. Quality over quantity is usually taken too far. If some countries had their way the entire military may consist of an F-22 a B-2 and an aircraft carrier :p:

The politicians provide some scope in terms buying value for money equipment so at least we have someone holding the leesh.

You cant let the military act like a child in a candy store.

New Zealand and Australia are both spot on in terms of their recent military procurement. In my opinion of course.
 

F-15 Eagle

New Member
New Zealand having fighter jets would be like Australia having a stretegic long range bombing fleet.

Both aren't required as a threat doesn't exist and the money can be better spent elsewhere.

The top brass in any military want the biggest, fastest and most expensive weapons available. Quality over quantity is usually taken too far. If some countries had their way the entire military may consist of an F-22 a B-2 and an aircraft carrier :p:

The politicians provide some scope in terms buying value for money equipment so at least we have someone holding the leesh.

You cant let the military act like a child in a candy store.

New Zealand and Australia are both spot on in terms of their recent military procurement. In my opinion of course.
What about the threat from China?:shudder
 

Magoo

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
New Zealand having fighter jets would be like Australia having a stretegic long range bombing fleet.
Says he who was advocating the RAAF get B-1Bs to replace the F-111C! :eek:nfloorl:

rjmaz said:
The top brass in any military want the biggest, fastest and most expensive weapons available. Quality over quantity is usually taken too far. If some countries had their way the entire military may consist of an F-22 a B-2 and an aircraft carrier :p:
And how many "top brass" do you know RJ??? I can tell you now that is NOT the case - they want what they can cause the most effect with, and the desired effect is laid out by the government.

Geesh...:rolleyes: :unknown :p:

Magoo
 

NZDF FAN

New Member
RNZAF- What will become of the Iroqouis?

In a few years the Royal New Zealand Air Force will be recieving the eight NH90s it has ordered (plus one for parts). This is supposedly going to completely replace the current fleet of UH-1H Iroqouis. What will become of these now obsolete aircraft? :confused:
 
Top