Royal New Zealand Air Force

[Todjaeger]

I know that the RNZAF didn't rush into bringing the NH90 into service like the Aussies appear to have attempted. The RNZAF stood up a dedicated Helicopter Induction Unit that worked with Airbus in France and at Ohakea. They used the crawl, walk, run system and it appears to have worked for them. Also they are active in the NH90 users group.

Hence my interest in seeing if the Kiwi NH90 data on availability, cost per flight hour, maintenance hours per flight hour, etc. al. is comparable to the ADF data, once adjusted for currency.

If the NZDF and ADF data sets are comparable, and similar to what the ANAO report found back in 2014, that would suggest an issue with the helicopter and the actual appropriateness of the design for service in the ADF and NZDF. If there is a significant difference in the data, then I would want to look into what was different and why, and then see if any 'improvements' could be made, depending on what those differences actually were.

 

[MrConservative]

I know that the RNZAF didn't rush into bringing the NH90 into service like the Aussies appear to have attempted. The RNZAF stood up a dedicated Helicopter Induction Unit that worked with Airbus in France and at Ohakea. They used the crawl, walk, run system and it appears to have worked for them. Also they are active in the NH90 users group.

On the other hand it should not have taken 8 years from ordering them to getting the small fleet IOC and even longer to have a viable simulator in place.

If we had ordered UH-60L's in 2006 like for like to replace the Huey we would have been far better off. Defence acquisition in the noughties was an omnishambles.

 

[ngatimozart]

On the other hand it should not have taken 8 years from ordering them to getting the small fleet IOC and even longer to have a viable simulator in place.

If we had ordered UH-60L's in 2006 like for like to replace the Huey we would have been far better off. Defence acquisition in the noughties was an omnishambles.

Dead right about defence acquisition in the noughties. Mind you they made a ginormous stuff and a couple of stuff ups in the nineties as well.

 

[Rob c]

Dead right about defence acquisition in the noughties. Mind you they made a ginormous stuff and a couple of stuff ups in the nineties as well.

Yep but I cannot remember a period were our defence ability took such a hit as the 1999 to 2008 period and with so much of the new and rebuilt equipment that was authorized during that period being only marginally fit for purpose, overly troublesome or simply a waste of money. possibly the only bright spot being the LAV's and even then I would have preferred a tracked and wheeled mix . Plus of course the reduction or total elimination of combat capabilities and with that the elimination of any deterrence ability for our long term security.

 

[CJohn]

New Zealand orders CAE simulator for P-8A instruction

CAE to Develop P-8A Operational Flight Trainer for Royal New Zealand Air Force – Asian Defence Journal

 

[ASSAIL]

This report on a RNZAF Hastings crash in Darwin was posted to a Darwin historical site today.
I can’t tell you much more about it and was unaware of the incident.

Robert Porter

 

[ngatimozart]

This report on a RNZAF Hastings crash in Darwin was posted to a Darwin historical site today.
I can’t tell you much more about it and was unaware of the incident.

Robert Porter

I've read bits about it over the years on different sites. The Hastings was regarded as the best 3 engined aircraft the RNZAF ever acquired.

 

[Rob c]

I've read bits about it over the years on different sites. The Hastings was regarded as the best 3 engined aircraft the RNZAF ever acquired.

Yes. But I was told when I was in D eng that the DC.6 actually did far more 3 engine time than than the Hastings. The Hasting engine, apart from a few minor differences was the same as that fitted to the Freighter and were very reliable on that aircraft. It needs to be noted that that the NZ Hastings on 3 engines had almost the same power as a RAF Hastings on all 4 engine, so losing one engine was only a minor inconvenience.

 

[ngatimozart]

Yes. But I was told when I was in D eng that the DC.6 actually did far more 3 engine time than than the Hastings. The Hasting engine, apart from a few minor differences was the same as that fitted to the Freighter and was very reliable on that aircraft. It needs to be noted that that the NZ Hastings on 3 engines had almost the same power as a RAF Hastings on all 4 engine, so losing one engine was only a minor inconvenience.

Were you in the mob when we had the Hastings or DC-6? Or were they before your time? Definitely well before mine.

 

[Rob c]

Were you in the mob when we had the Hastings or DC-6? Or were they before your time? Definitely well before mine.

Both, at the early part of my career. never flew in either but got shown through both before they disappeared including the Hastings bomb aimer position between the pilots seats. Both the Hastings and the freighter could be fitted with bomb racks, but these were meant to be for dropping supply pods or SAR gear. But if you got desperate they could take the standard POM 1000lb bomb I was told,

 

[ngatimozart]

Both, at the early part of my career. never flew in either but got shown through both before they disappeared including the Hastings bomb aimer position between the pilots seats. Both the Hastings and the freighter could be fitted with bomb racks, but these were meant to be for dropping supply pods or SAR gear. But if you got desperate they could take the standard POM 1000lb bomb I was told,

Gawd things would have to be desperate if you were going to use a Frightner as a bomber. Even Biggles in his trusty Sopwith Camel could shoot it down.

Did you spot the B-52 today that appeared at the Wings Over Wairarapa? It may have passed your way on its return flight.

 

[At lakes]

Gawd things would have to be desperate if you were going to use a Frightner as a bomber.

https://flic.kr/p/T9wAgq
Note the Bomb Racks under the wings, picture taken in 1957. In 1970 the Ops Officer at Ohakea, Sqn Ldr Amodeo an AEO, told me they talked about testing them out one year at Waiouru. Then they decided it was too dangerous to use bombs and they talked about dropping a SAR package. It was finally decided to take the side door off the aircraft and drop it from there. He did add if the co-pilot dropped an egg out of the cockpit window whilst the grunts were pushing the load out of the side door the egg would curl around the fuselage and hit at least one of them standing in the open door. Whether that is true or not I don't know the good Sqn Ldr was known for some good stories.

the photo was taken from (Media=flickr)T9wAgg/MEDIA) it printed the photo but didn,t print the link

 

[Rob c]

Gawd things would have to be desperate if you were going to use a Frightner as a bomber. Even Biggles in his trusty Sopwith Camel could shoot it down.

Did you spot the B-52 today that appeared at the Wings Over Wairarapa? It may have passed your way on its return flight.

Na, probably past to high if it came our way, but as we get a few aircraft this way I tend not to take much notice, unless it is low or has a large piston engine. Part deaf anyway a legacy of my early career when ear defenders were few and far between, so we never had any on the range and there were about 4 pars for the whole sqn when I was on Vampires so if you were not quick enough you just had to grin and bear it and that's if they were not leaking the fluid out of the pads down your neck. No foam pads in those days.

 

[ngatimozart]

Na, probably past to high if it came our way, but as we get a few aircraft this way I tend not to take much notice, unless it is low or has a large piston engine. Part deaf anyway a legacy of my early career when ear defenders were few and far between, so we never had any on the range and there were about 4 pars for the whole sqn when I was on Vampires so if you were not quick enough you just had to grin and bear it and that's if they were not leaking the fluid out of the pads down your neck. No foam pads in those days.

Ear defenders were for pussies anyway, as we used to say in the days of our illspent youth I heard a story that the Pakistanis lost a Frightner trying to do aerobatics in it. Can't understand why meself. Flew in them from Wigram to Woodbourne and vice versa a few times and it was always a long slow trip into a head wind. Sometimes we used to think we might have to get out and push to make them go faster.

 

[Rob c]

Ear defenders were for pussies anyway, as we used to say in the days of our illspent youth I heard a story that the Pakistanis lost a Frightner trying to do aerobatics in it. Can't understand why meself. Flew in them from Wigram to Woodbourne and vice versa a few times and it was always a long slow trip into a head wind. Sometimes we used to think we might have to get out and push to make them go faster.

Have you ever tried it on a rainy day in winter? I did a couple of times including from Dunedin to Ohakea which took for ever. For the uninitiated the Freighter did not fly above the weather but straight through it and they leaked badly around the wing to fuselage joint and with air blast assistance through the front doors as well, so you got the benefits of being dripped on and sprayed from the font door at the same time all at freezing temps as the heating system seldom worked. The heating problem was finally solved just before they were retired by taking hot air from behind the oil coolers, something that had been suggested by a fitter years before but was not acted on for many years as it had not been put forward by a qualified officer. Them were the days.

 

[ngatimozart]

Yep, that's why I always wore my greatcoat or raincoat. Learnt that lesson real quick. The guys that bought the Freighters back from Singapore in 1977 had a long slow trip. Sure glad it wasn't me..

 

[ngatimozart]

The Cabinet papers on the C-130J-J30 have been released.

Defence Tactical Future Air Mobility Capability 2019 Decision

Defence Tactical Future Air Mobility Capability 2020 Decision

 

[MrConservative]

The Cabinet papers on the C-130J-J30 have been released.

Defence Tactical Future Air Mobility Capability 2019 Decision

Defence Tactical Future Air Mobility Capability 2020 Decision

Interesting reading and as we all predicted the ability of the C-130J-30 to dovetail synergies into the Enhanced Maritime Awareness Capability project was clearly a key consideration in the business case. In the 2020 document at clause 38 it is a redacted table comparing the CapEx costs of between 4-7 C-130's.

One ponders if they are reflecting on a further couple of suitably equipped C-130J's as a partial solution to EMAC with the other partial solution remitted into the King Air replacement platform. That seems more coherent than the complexity and cost of introducing a new light tactical solution type viz C295W or C-27J. That may mean a RPAS system like Sea Guardian won't be considered in EMAC but on the NZDF wish list for Long Range Maritime Surveillance capability next decade. (Though a smaller shorter range solution maybe in the mix nevertheless)

Just for EMAC context on that matter I have edited in the GETS capability overview:

The Enhanced Maritime Awareness Capability (EMAC) project is seeking a Capability which contributes to the Community (environmental wellbeing and resilience) and Nation (safe and resilient, including on its borders and approaches – secure air, sea and electronic lines of communication and secure access to space based systems). The direction from Government is that the EMAC will be shaped to share the P-8A burden for civilian tasks.

The EMAC is not a typical Defence procurement project as the user requirements are driven solely by government agencies other than Defence. This community has a broad spectrum of diverse requirements which are being distilled to a common set to allow the project to investigate solutions to a manageable scope. The project team will also be considering the operating and sustainment aspects of various capability systems, as the investment logic will encompass the whole of life implications. As the environment in which we are developing the EMAC is characterised by its large area, and a diverse range of risks and threats about which the agencies need to maintain awareness across the domain, the final capability is likely to involve a mix of capability elements (platforms) creating a layered solution.

The project team has already engaged with a number of suppliers to gain an understanding of the market’s technical capabilities and ability to supply solutions that meet the agencies requirements including (in no particular order) – data distribution / data fusion, commercial satellite coverage, piloted aircraft, Remotely Piloted Air Systems (RPAS) of varying sizes.

Support, operating and ownership models of the capability elements are not finalised at the moment, with the project team open to a range of acquisition options including Government Owned/Contractor Operated, Surveillance As a Service or Government Owned/Government Operated.

 

[ngatimozart]

NZDF have issued a RFI for the disposal of the RNZAF P-3K2 Orion aircraft.

"The New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) will shortly be withdrawing its fleet of six Lockheed P-3K2 Orion aircraft from service.​

The NZDF intends to offer five aircraft from the fleet plus support inventory for tender. One air-frame is intended to be retained as an exhibit at the Air Force Museum of NZ.​

​

This Request For Information (RFI) seeks industry feedback on which elements of the P-3K2 fleet and support inventory have market interest for sale. This information will be used to assist configure formal tender document(s) at a later date."​

https://www.gets.govt.nz//NZDF/ExternalTenderDetails.htm?id=241166661

 

[Gibbo]

NZDF have issued a RFI for the disposal of the RNZAF P-3K2 Orion aircraft.

"The New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) will shortly be withdrawing its fleet of six Lockheed P-3K2 Orion aircraft from service.​

The NZDF intends to offer five aircraft from the fleet plus support inventory for tender. One air-frame is intended to be retained as an exhibit at the Air Force Museum of NZ.​

​

This Request For Information (RFI) seeks industry feedback on which elements of the P-3K2 fleet and support inventory have market interest for sale. This information will be used to assist configure formal tender document(s) at a later date."​

https://www.gets.govt.nz//NZDF/ExternalTenderDetails.htm?id=241166661

Hmmm, intriguing that here we are in 2021 & the P8 only start arriving next year with full operational capability likely to be some significant time later... yet the tender says "...will shortly be withdrawing..." So what do we read into this? Will they do like the RAF did with Nimrod or RNZN did with their tanker...withdraw the fleet & operate without capability for a period? Find that hard to belive with SAR obligations or will 40sqn get that task for a while!?! I suppose the tender details will have a more specific timeframe provided....food for thought anyways.