|
Post by phil82 on Apr 13, 2012 21:50:37 GMT 12
I have just read all the comments people have made regards the article. There are some real no hopers living here in NZ that know diddly squat about the military and military equipment There are a few posting here who have made comments the very nature of which prove they have never had any experience of the system and by their comments have no knowledge of process. There is one post here: "Buying these helicopters was a horrible mistake and the airforce knows it. They will obviously cost so much more to operate than the hueys and we only bought 8 frames. Who cares that they can carry more, we should be upsizing the airforce, not downsizing. Why didn't we replace them with american helicopters? Can they honestly say they couldn't buy 20 odd near new blackhawks, which are already operationally proven, for less than half the price? Personally I don't think they can" which hasn't got a single element of supportable fact in it. Not one, so it's based entirely on opinion, [wrong] hearsay[wrong], gossip[wrong], ill-informed comment and a personal opinion based on absolutely no knowledge whatsoever!
Who says the purchase was a mistake?
Who in the air force "knows"it? and how do you imagine you "know"?
Of course we should be upsizing the air force but that comment shows complete ignorance of of the amount of money available to Defence. There are countries all over Europe collapsing because they spent more money than they earned, are you sure you want NZ to join them? NZ is borrowing millions ever week to pay existing bills, a practice I don't indulge in because it is unsustainable!
There will NEVER be money available to all the things dreamers might want to do in Defence. Learn to live with that fact.
|
|
|
Post by richard1098 on Apr 13, 2012 22:19:44 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by Damon on Apr 13, 2012 22:28:44 GMT 12
I might be wrong but the H-60's are too costly to operate and the technology too old? Wer'nt the RAAF/ Army going to get rid of them? I guess it would be useful that both the RAAF and RNZAF operating both the same kind of helicopter, the NH-90's that is. The above highlighted post ( phil82 underlined quote) seems to convey the usual typical inuedo's common with the Joe Public's perception of the our media's baseless, factless negative reporting now found in the tabloid type news in N.Z. The RNZAF are still testing the NH-90. I wish them well.
|
|
|
Post by saratoga on Apr 13, 2012 22:36:25 GMT 12
Looks like the Auditor- general needs a bit of study time too!
|
|
|
Post by richard1098 on Apr 13, 2012 22:46:37 GMT 12
I might be wrong but the H-60's are too costly to operate and the technology too old? Wer'nt the RAAF/ Army going to get rid of them? I guess it would be useful that both the RAAF and RNZAF operating both the same kind of helicopter, the NH-90's that is. The above highlighted post ( phil82 underlined quote) seems to convey the usual typical inuedo's common with the Joe Public's perception of the our media's baseless, factless negative reporting now found in the tabloid type news in N.Z. The RNZAF are still testing the NH-90. I wish them well. Within the ADF helicopters are operated by the army and navy only. The RAAF is fixed wing only. But yes, the NH-90 were purchased to replace early model army Blackhawks and navy Seakings; the Navy's Seahawks will be replaced by updated models - MH-60Rs.
|
|
|
Post by bell407 on Apr 13, 2012 23:23:30 GMT 12
I too think we should have stayed with American equipment, most of it is proven, if not, it usually doesn't take them long to find a reason to use it and prove it, parts and customer service, from what I've heard has always been better from US manufactures, at least in the civilain World, I've often read / been told of difficulties in customer service / spare parts acquisition from European aircraft.
I think we went with the NH90's because at the time f order there was no other helicopter that met the requirements but and I seem to remember being told that because of the F-16 cancellation by the Labor government the US weren't too keen on selling us anything and Helen never had much love for the US anyway.
But who knows, I'm sure the NH90's will be a fine platform.
I know they won't fit on our C-130's, would they fit on the stretched C-130J-30's, Aussies use them now as well but of course if its a height problem and not a length issue then stretched or not they won't fit.
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Apr 13, 2012 23:51:48 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by Damon on Apr 14, 2012 8:15:43 GMT 12
Even if the NH-90 has air to air refueling capability (I am not sure) we would still be leaning on the RAAF to get the NH-90 overseas .To deploy it in the pacific island region we would need to hire an independant operator from the RNZAF to get it there. Are we losing our capability to operate independantly from other nations? Surely the ones that know must have seen how we were going to be affected by limitations of not being able to fit a support helicopter into a Herc to enable us to support our commitments in the pacific region.
|
|
|
Post by Chris F on Apr 14, 2012 10:23:31 GMT 12
Oh my very disappointing to see these comments on Stuff....It would not matter what platform we had gone for it would have been wrong in the eyes of some.It seems easy to find fault these days in almost everything and that is disappointing. We own 9 NH-90's that that is what we have to make the most of,and by all accounts it looks a worthy replacement of the Huey...although does not look or sound as rugged as the Huey! However all said and done we own it and we gotta make it work and we will...thats our way! The only thing about the NH-90 is I would like to have seen 10 purchased as operational airframes and 2 as parts units....but like others state we do not have a money tree. One thing the Auditer General says is about buying proven off the shelf....surely these comments will put an end to the thoughts of buying the ex-Aussie Seasprites as the risks are surely to great no matter what bargin price is offered. Surely a long term term solution to the Seasprite is a far better option than a short term one that could easily bit us on the bum! When Wayne Mapp was Minister of Defence he seemed to think outside the square...yet Mr Coleman the current Minister seems far more conservative....we be intersting to see how this one plays out.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Apr 14, 2012 10:42:50 GMT 12
I have a query about the Stuff article in which it says the Auditor General says the NH-90 "will not be able to fly in snowy conditions".
What helicopters are able to fly in snowy conditions? Can the Iroquois fly when it's snowing? It sounds very dangerous to attempt flying in snow for so many reasons.
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Apr 14, 2012 10:53:57 GMT 12
Yes Dave, that article is in the Dompost this morning [Saturday] and I think needs to viewed with a degree of skepticism bearing in mind it is written by an Auditor and over a year ago. The same report claims "the engine" singular!
|
|
|
Post by raymond on Apr 14, 2012 12:00:18 GMT 12
Can the Iroquois fly when it's snowing? It sounds very dangerous to attempt flying in snow for so many reasons. Been in the back of one flying out of Dip Flat when it was snowing...though not too hard! We were able to see the sides of the valley but there was not too much room to move around. Re the intakes on the iro we fitted a new system which was full of swirl tubes that was able to get rid of most contaminates in the air, even reduced the need to do daily compressor washes because we were near the sea I recall.
|
|
|
Post by fyl on Apr 14, 2012 15:34:11 GMT 12
There was quite a good vid of a couple of hueys flying at Dip Flat during the winter, and they're definitely flying in snow... see if i can find it... .. .. .. .. .. Ta Dah!! www.flightpathtv.com/page54/files/page54-1004-pop.htmlAnyone seen any on the Flightpath Tv episodes?? Think they were on one of the Sky channels....sniff...sniff...we don't have Sky..
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Apr 14, 2012 17:21:50 GMT 12
I have just read all the comments people have made regards the article. There are some real no hopers living here in NZ that know diddly squat about the military and military equipment I'll second that! There is a place for genuine factual criticism where such is due and those doing the criticizing know what they're talking about, but there are too many shooting their mouths off on the basis of hearsay and who, from the comments made, clearly don't know what they're talking about. When I was trying to find out what, if anything the RAF were sending to the 75th Airshow, I was in contact with a man who, though not a Kiwi, served in the RNZAF and then went to the RAF some years ago and ended up a very senior officer. While he couldn't [or maybe wouldn't!] confirm if the RAF could send anything given the state of the play over there, he did comment that, and I quote:"in the higher echelons of the RAF the RNZAF is now and always has been highly regarded for its ability to do it right!".
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Apr 14, 2012 20:21:18 GMT 12
well, never saw those images before and so yes they have been carried in a C17. I am just wondering if certification was needed and they did some trials first and was granted permission from NHI. I take it with the European users that have not got great distances to travel like us have never thought that this would be a problem for them.
|
|
|
Post by richard1098 on Apr 15, 2012 1:00:17 GMT 12
well, never saw those images before and so yes they have been carried in a C17. I am just wondering if certification was needed and they did some trials first and was granted permission from NHI. I take it with the European users that have not got great distances to travel like us have never thought that this would be a problem for them. Its and Aus army NH-90 being transported by an Aus air force C-17; can't see why NHI's permission would be required. The RAAF would have undertaken all the required load validation tests prior to their first flight.
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Apr 15, 2012 11:01:25 GMT 12
I have just read all the comments people have made regards the article. There are some real no hopers living here in NZ that know diddly squat about the military and military equipment I'll second that! There is a place for genuine factual criticism where such is due and those doing the criticizing know what they're talking about, but there are too many shooting their mouths off on the basis of hearsay and who, from the comments made, clearly don't know what they're talking about. You only have to read the comments page at the bottom of any story in the online papers these days to see the nutbags out in force I doubt anyone who actually has the power to make decisions takes these comments seriously.. (these refers to this story as I'm aware politicians are driven by the daily news cycle on issues that they believe are vote worthy , defence isn't)
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Apr 15, 2012 11:10:23 GMT 12
Actually we in NZ are pretty good...comparatively...!
The UK took years to remedy kit deficiencies in Afghanistan. They are also building two new aircraft carriers for which they have no aircraft...and won't have for some years after entering service. They will however carry a very good band around the world.
They also have no dedicated Maritime patrol aircraft, the Nimrod having been axed [literally!] but are "seeding" crews around the world to maintain the skills for an aircraft yet to be ordered but which will need to be in service in three years time. It will be in the shape of a flying pig...
If you ever get to Russel Offices in Canberra just don't mention Seasprites, or submarines.....
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Apr 15, 2012 12:36:47 GMT 12
And the NH-90 can't carry a LAV - so that's another reason they're no bloody good - and things are even worse, especially if they can't carry a LAV in snowy conditions! ;D
|
|
|
Post by saratoga on Apr 15, 2012 12:42:13 GMT 12
And the NH-90 can't carry a LAV - so that's another reason they're no bloody good - and things are even worse, especially if they can't carry a LAV in snowy conditions! ;D Surely there'd be no need to carry a LAV as they can only operate from formed roads anyway!
|
|