New Zealand Defence Force
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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"
"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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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?
Don't know much about the C2, how does it compare to C130/A400?
Can Donald from Tokyo help?
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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.
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.
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
Dog shot after it delays flights at Auckland Airport
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.
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.
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
NZ is purchasing P-8 Poseidon aircraft (up to four in number) to replace the P-3 Orions in the maritime recon role.
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3235
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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.swoop wrote:Hopefully the A400 is not in contention to replace the C-130's.
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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.Timmymagic wrote:Teething troubles for sure...
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.
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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/
http://www.defence.govt.nz/what-we-do/d ... icles-sov/
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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).Timmymagic wrote:only other apart from A-400 that made sense and that opportunity has been missed.
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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.
"
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3235
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
I'm actually surprised Bangladesh got in there on the 2 x C-130J's let go recently ahead of the Kiwis.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).
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4640
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
me to except the RAF aren't releasing the model or numbers then RNZAF need of the J yet Or what is available is shaggedTimmymagic wrote:
I'm actually surprised Bangladesh got in there on the 2 x C-130J's let go recently ahead of the Kiwis.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
More so than these?marktigger wrote:Or what is available is shagged
[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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4640
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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?ArmChairCivvy wrote:More so than these?marktigger wrote:Or what is available is shagged
[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"
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
marktigger wrote: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?ArmChairCivvy wrote:More so than these?marktigger wrote:Or what is available is shagged
[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"
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
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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!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
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
McMurdoArmChairCivvy wrote:does NZ have an Antarctica base; that would make it four!
http://www.airforce.mil.nz/about-us/new ... 003907.htm
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
Yep, do like four supply flights http://www.airforce.mil.nz/nr/rdonlyres ... 003907.jpg in oneSmokey wrote: McMurdo
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4640
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3235
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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...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
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3235
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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.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
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
Marshalls is certified to do that, so may be not yet, but they might still leave the country with a new wing boxTimmymagic wrote:Presumably the one released to Bangladesh had not had their wing box done?
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: New Zealand Defence Force
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.Timmymagic wrote: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.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
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.