If the cost of running a permanent base is uneconomical as you say for a small number of aircraft then i would have to assume that reinstating the MB339s and operating them at Ohakea, is a no brainer. Am i right.? Let us make sure we have the right information here. Ohakea does have all the support facilities in place already, and like the previous A4 skyhawk that was based there has the infrastructure that was already used and could be reinstated at a moments notice. I hardly believe for one moment that there would be a huge cost to NZ in enhancing the existing bases structure. So lets get that one out of the way. So firstly, the Hawk CAN be based here on having the structures in place already.
Secondly, there is the costs associated by means of the RAAF basing their aircraft at Ohakea. As you have mentioned. I agree with you that there would be, but we have overlooked one aspect of this argument. The stationing of the Hawk cannot go ahead without both governments approval in the project. As well, the costs. If both governments was to put in a equal share of the costs of the hawk being here IE Transfer costs, repositioning costs, running costs, pilot and maintenance personell costs etc this would be kept at a minimum and i am convinced that there wouldnt be an issue here. The tarmac maintenance personell could easily be trained quickly if we dont have them already. In fact i think we have them already.
The other possibility would be to have Woodbourne used as the maintenance base for repairs, if needed for the Hawke. Its already used for maintaining the A4s and MB339s and upgrades on other aircraft. I believe Safe Air run on contract by the Airforce do this work. The structure and know how is all here Tasman, just need someone like me and others to run with it. The whole concept is definitly possible.
The garrison town mentality for military installations despite having the attachments they have economically maybe, and especially to the size they are in Australia, may make a small "dent" in the relocation of the hawk squadron on a 3 month cycle rotation. However, its hardly going to make a dent in a large base structure within Australia. I think any person familiar with military deployments realise the inevitable aspect of military life is that they will be deployed out of the country at any notice. So sorry, i cant believe that. If it does make a difference then an arrangement could mean in the long term plan is that NZ start to buy the Hawk, by having a pay it off method thus having the aircraft available immediatly for operations, and its here in NZ that NZ can train with the Australian Hawk and MB339. Im only talking about a small squadron of around 12 aircraft.
The other subject of taking a squadron OUT of the exisiting force structure within the RAAF. I could be wrong here but i would suspect like many airforces around the world and in this case that not all the Hawks would be used in training as their primary function. Yes some would need maintenance and some on standby but to my knowledge of the 30-40 Hawks in service that not all are training RAAF pilots. This means that a SMALL number of these could be utilized and transfered to NZ where all the maintenance and opilot training and traing of the the Navy, Army and Airforce could be undertaken.
To conclude: The more i think about this option the better it gets. I think it does have validity, and benefits the Airforce structure of both NZ and Australia. Giving RAAF pilots the ability to operate with their kiwi counterparts. Also giving RAN units on exercises the ability to operate from a different region gaining experience on our geo area.
Markus I think it comes down to costs. The cost of running a permanent base for a small number of aircraft is uneconomical. The RAAF concentrates most of its Air Combat Group (ACG) at Amberley and Williamtown. Both have a large number of aircraft and extensive support facilities. The other bases with elements of the ACG are at Tindal and Pearce. Only one squadron is deployed to each of these but Pearce has significant support facilities because it is also the home of the RAAF's No 2 Flying Training School (PC9s). Pearce also provides vital support for operations of Western Australia so having the Hawks there is important to the RAN. Whilst Tindal has only 1 operational squadron it is the RAAF's frontline northern base. It also has extensive support facilities because other frontline aircraft regularly deploy there. To move a squadron out of Williamtown would be costly in terms of economics and it would also move the LIF squadron away from the Hornet OCU. To base it in NZ would make the squadron's interaction with other units of the ACG much more difficult. It's not just the cost of basing a squadron in NZ, its the fact that support personnel would be moved away from other squadrons in the ACG.
In the case of the Pearce based Hawks I think it is likely that they would remain in an emergency in order to provide support to Fleet Base West and emergency air defence for the Perth area. A squadron based in NZ could deploy to a northern base but not as quickly as if it could from SE Australia.
I am not saying that this could not be done just that I can't see sufficient benefits to justify the RAAF completely reorganising their structure.
The RAAF has chosen to base the Hawks of 76 squadron alongside the Hornets of the OCU and the 2 frontline squadrons rather than base the squadron elsewhere in Australia. For the same reason I doubt it would want to base them permanently in NZ. To base even a flight in NZ, or somewhere else in Australia for that matter, would involve more than just the aircraft and their pilots. Maintenance personnel and logistical support structures would have to be moved out of Williamtown to the probable detriment of the squadrons remaining there. Again, it could be done but, in my opinion, it would be economically and logistically difficult.
A deployment, whilst obviously requiring support, doesn't require all of the group's logistical and support structures to move with the deployed aircraft.
The only possibility that I think might be realistically feasible would be if a government to government agreement was to fund an additional flight for 76 squadron, perhaps manned fully or partly by Kiwis, as I suggested earlier. If it was funded by the NZ Government this flight could perhaps be based in NZ alongside the MB339s with aircraft rotating back to Williamtown for major maintenance.
Cheers
