New Zealand Defence Force

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Indeed; is there any other package, from a single source, to cater for both needs (each seen to with v small fleets)?

"The deal will also involve the maintenance of the planes, and is potentially worth billions of dollars. Tokyo in September provided unclassified information on the P-1 maritime patrol plane and C-2 transporter"
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Clive F
Member
Posts: 176
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 12:48
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by Clive F »

Seems like a good deal for both of them NZ gets new kit at a low cost (may be a loss leader?) and Japan gets exports started.

Don't know much about the C2, how does it compare to C130/A400?

Can Donald from Tokyo help?

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

I guess one of them (if not both?) can drop life rafts as the SAR area NZ has responsibility for must be huge
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
swoop
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 03 May 2015, 21:25
Pitcairn Island

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by swoop »

Hopefully the A400 is not in contention to replace the C-130's.

3 December 2016: European aircraft maker AirBus has agreed to rapidly implement changes in its A400M military transport to produce a “tactical” version that is capable of dropping paratroopers, defending itself against heat-seeking missiles, has some lightweight armor for the cockpit and the capability to land on short airstrips. This comes after France complained that the first ones it received lacked all these features and that without these capabilities the A400M wasn’t very useful for many current combat situations. AirBus assured France that it would receive six of these “tactical” A400Ms by the end of 2016. This deadline was missed, with three A400Ms arriving by the end of 2016 and another on January 9 th 2017. The last two are to arrive in 2017.

Of these six three are new aircraft (which all arrived on time) and three would be upgraded A400Ms that France had already received. The upgrades took longer because AirBus was making a lot of modifications to existing aircraft and establishing procedures to be used on a lot more A400Ms. All these features have long been available on the American C-130, which the A400M was designed to compete with. France believed that AirBus understood the need to compete with the C-130. The engines are still a problem as they require so much maintenance that the A400Ms still suffers low readiness (for use) rates. France also wants the ability to have the A400M refuel helicopters in the air.

All this comes in the wake of AirBus being forced in mid-2016 to go public with the reasons for the shrinking demand for its A400M. AirBus executives admitted that they screwed up and explained that the main problems were with the engines it selected for the A400M. These came from an inexperienced supplier and AirBus was late in realizing how bad the problems were. At the time AirBus said there were many lesser problems, mainly with not adding features users needed if they were to replace existing C-130s and similar transports with the A400M.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7943
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by SKB »

Dog shot after it delays flights at Auckland Airport
Image

Security staff at Auckland International Airport say they tried everything they could to retrieve a sniffer dog who caused havoc this morning, before deciding to shoot it dead. The explosives detector dog, named Grizz, escaped from its handler about 4.30am, running onto the runway and evading capture for three hours.

One passenger wrote on Facebook, "Somewhere out there in the rising dawn on the runway is the dog that has eluded capture and delayed our departure by over an hour while we sit on the tarmac."

The 10-month-old bearded collie/German short-haired pointer cross was just six months away from graduating as an explosives detector dog. The Aviation Security Service (Avsec) said the young dog fled its handler while it was being loaded into the back of a unit wagon. It managed to get into the security area when a gate opened to let a truck through.

The airport staff spent about three hours trying to catch Grizz, using toys, other dogs, food and a range of handlers to try and coax the dog back to safety, Avsec said. A spokesperson said it was difficult to track the dog in the dark and when he was found, he would dart across the runway. All attempts to catch Grizz failed and police were told to shoot it as a last resort, it said.

Inspector Tracy Phillips said it was not an outcome anyone wanted. The lengthy dog-chase disrupted at least 16 flights. Avsec have not confirmed why a tranquilliser was not used. The safety of the dog and people on the ground and in the air were paramount in the decision-making, an spokesperson for the airport added. Avsec would undertake a review of the incident to try and ascertain what spooked the dog and if there were any implications for ongoing training.

User avatar
swoop
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 03 May 2015, 21:25
Pitcairn Island

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by swoop »

NZ is purchasing P-8 Poseidon aircraft (up to four in number) to replace the P-3 Orions in the maritime recon role.

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2324
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by R686 »

swoop wrote:NZ is purchasing P-8 Poseidon aircraft (up to four in number) to replace the P-3 Orions in the maritime recon role.

Has there been an announcement?


Edit

Just seen the DSCA notification, not a done deal yet, but a step in the right direction.

http://www.dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/ne ... ed-support

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3235
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by Timmymagic »

swoop wrote:Hopefully the A400 is not in contention to replace the C-130's.
Teething troubles for sure, but will be resolved in due course. What options does NZ have though? C-130J can't carry a decent load anywhere from New Zealand (not even across to Australia). KC-390 or C2? That would spell problems on cost, interoperability, parts etc. C-17 was the only other apart from A-400 that made sense and that opportunity has been missed.

User avatar
swoop
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 03 May 2015, 21:25
Pitcairn Island

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by swoop »

Timmymagic wrote:Teething troubles for sure...
Quite a few years worth, with customers going elsewhere (wisely) to avoid an aircraft until it has had all of the problems worked out properly.
NZ would be fine with C-130J's since we borrow C-17's if a whole Squadron of Army needs to be moved.

Getting rid of the Andovers was a mistake and one that still leaves a hole in capability. A reduced Herc fleet but reinforced with some Casa-235's would be a nice mix. One that would upset the bean counters and storemen but be good for Pacific work and NZ duties/training.

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2324
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by R686 »

an interesting pickup on another forum in regards to NZ SOV replacement vehicles. apparently they are also getting some ex ADF Bushmaster Protected Mobility Vehicles since they cant buy new as the line is now closed, haven't heard this before wonder why the hush hush

http://www.defence.govt.nz/what-we-do/d ... icles-sov/

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Timmymagic wrote:only other apart from A-400 that made sense and that opportunity has been missed.
They should be reading TD's back-dated issues and buy A-400Ms for both transport and Maritime Surveillance cum SAR roles. Convertible between the two (or at least from the latter to the former role).
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

The dangers of using a previous announcement as a template:
"
Special operations vehicles (SOV)

Replaces the New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) Steyr rifle with a new individual weapon." :)

I was surprised at the sum (28m of theirs) until I read further and it covers new Supacats and used (roomier) Bushmasters.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3235
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by Timmymagic »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:They should be reading TD's back-dated issues and buy A-400Ms for both transport and Maritime Surveillance cum SAR roles. Convertible between the two (or at least from the latter to the former role).
I'm actually surprised Bangladesh got in there on the 2 x C-130J's let go recently ahead of the Kiwis.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by marktigger »

Timmymagic wrote:
I'm actually surprised Bangladesh got in there on the 2 x C-130J's let go recently ahead of the Kiwis.
me to except the RAF aren't releasing the model or numbers then RNZAF need of the J yet Or what is available is shagged

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

marktigger wrote:Or what is available is shagged
More so than these?
[in 2015] "the first of our fleet of five has reached this milestone [of 50 years in service]

The five C-130Hs were recently upgraded under the NZ$255m (A$247m) Hercules Life Extension Program which saw the replacement of various mechanical, structural and avionics components designed to extend the fleet for another decade"
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by marktigger »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
marktigger wrote:Or what is available is shagged
More so than these?
[in 2015] "the first of our fleet of five has reached this milestone [of 50 years in service]

The five C-130Hs were recently upgraded under the NZ$255m (A$247m) Hercules Life Extension Program which saw the replacement of various mechanical, structural and avionics components designed to extend the fleet for another decade"
how many years were our's supporting Iraq and Afghan ops? operating from rough fields does tend to take it out of airframes and they may be in better condition the the H's but will they have the service life the RNZAF wants?

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2324
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by R686 »

marktigger wrote:
ArmChairCivvy wrote:
marktigger wrote:Or what is available is shagged
More so than these?
[in 2015] "the first of our fleet of five has reached this milestone [of 50 years in service]

The five C-130Hs were recently upgraded under the NZ$255m (A$247m) Hercules Life Extension Program which saw the replacement of various mechanical, structural and avionics components designed to extend the fleet for another decade"
how many years were our's supporting Iraq and Afghan ops? operating from rough fields does tend to take it out of airframes and they may be in better condition the the H's but will they have the service life the RNZAF wants?

If they didn't take the opportunity to take ex RAAF H's and rebuild them I doubt they will take your J's


I really think the only solution for NZ is A400M, but can they get them in their desired timeframe is another problem all together

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

R686 wrote:they didn't take the opportunity to take ex RAAF H's and rebuild them I doubt they will take your J's
I agree with that and the conclusion. I wasn't joking when I said that one type (fleet) could do three functions... hmmm, does NZ have an Antarctica base; that would make it four!
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Smokey
Member
Posts: 272
Joined: 18 Feb 2017, 13:33
Cyprus

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by Smokey »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:does NZ have an Antarctica base; that would make it four!
McMurdo

http://www.airforce.mil.nz/about-us/new ... 003907.htm

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Smokey wrote: McMurdo
Yep, do like four supply flights http://www.airforce.mil.nz/nr/rdonlyres ... 003907.jpg in one
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by marktigger »

be interesting seein P8's do that, A400's probably could

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3235
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by Timmymagic »

marktigger wrote:me to except the RAF aren't releasing the model or numbers then RNZAF need of the J yet Or what is available is shagged
Presumably the one released to Bangladesh had not had their wing box done? Mind you our definition of shagged and the RNZAF definition of shagged are completely different. We could probably do a good deal with them on the K's, for the RNZAF Herc fleet they're practically just run in...

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3235
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by Timmymagic »

R686 wrote:I really think the only solution for NZ is A400M, but can they get them in their desired timeframe is another problem all together
When you look at cargo carried and range the A-400 or C-17 were the only sensible answers. The smart move would have been a shared C-17 and C-130 fleet with Australia. There is the KC-390 and C-2 now, but I suspect the user base, cost and lack of interoperability will do for that.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Timmymagic wrote:Presumably the one released to Bangladesh had not had their wing box done?
Marshalls is certified to do that, so may be not yet, but they might still leave the country with a new wing box
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2324
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: New Zealand Defence Force

Post by R686 »

Timmymagic wrote:
R686 wrote:I really think the only solution for NZ is A400M, but can they get them in their desired timeframe is another problem all together
When you look at cargo carried and range the A-400 or C-17 were the only sensible answers. The smart move would have been a shared C-17 and C-130 fleet with Australia. There is the KC-390 and C-2 now, but I suspect the user base, cost and lack of interoperability will do for that.
Yes there was interest in C17 when the white tails were available, I think the bean counters got sticker shock. A C130-30J C17 combo would have been ideal then all they would have to worry about was VIP which they could have leased so no large upfront costs on that.

I don't see KC390 getting up or the Japanese offering, if anything C130-30J would have the inside running on price and avalibilty A400 to me is the no brained as its a tactical and stratgic lifter all in one.

It the old saying in NZ context requirement, tactical loads over strategic distance.

Post Reply