|
Post by skyhawkdon on Jul 13, 2006 18:43:58 GMT 12
From the TV One News tonight... oh how I would love the chance to personnally educate Mr Goff about the finest Attack jet ever built (he obviously doesn't know what a "Fighter" really is or how many countries are still operating them). tvnz.co.nz/view/page/488120/786890Mothballed fighter jets still costly Jul 13, 2006 The stalled sale of New Zealand's old Skyhawk fighter jets continues to embarrass the government, which has spent more than $1 million trying to find a buyer. Defence Minister Phil Goff hopes Winston Peters can hurry the sale along when he meets US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice in Washington next week, but the Foreign Minister won't even confirm the meeting is going ahead. Scrapping the Skyhawks was controversial, but selling them is proving near impossible. "In many countries around the world I've seen them used as memorials but not as fighter aircraft - they're too old for that," says Goff. A buyer was found nearly a year ago with the private US flight training school Tactical Air Services wanting the aircraft. But before that deal is done New Zealand needs approval from the US State Department which doesn't normally allow private companies to buy military equipment from foreign governments. "If there was an alternative purchaser then obviously we'd be looking there - that is not the case," says Goff. Sales agent Ernst and Young has been paid more than $1 million to sell the aircraft so far, and the law firm Russell McVeagh has billed the government for more than $300,000 of legal advice on the contract. National's defence spokesman Murray McCully says covering costs is fair enough but he objects to a "success fee" that has also been paid out when the sale has yet to be made. "To pay them $1.1 million for a fee on a sale that hasn't actually occurred and might not occur - someone's lost the plot," says McCully. But Goff says a commission will only be paid to Ernst & Young when the deal is finalised and he hopes Peters can assist with that when he goes to the US to meet Rice next week. "I think it may well be on the list of things he could raise with the Secretary of State and I hope if he has time he is able to do that." But Peters is refusing to say when he is going to Washington or who he is meeting there. Source: One News
|
|
|
Post by xr6turbo1 on Jul 13, 2006 18:52:12 GMT 12
I saw that article. Talk about wanting the public to believe the aricraft are good for nothing
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Jul 13, 2006 19:41:38 GMT 12
The other thing that amazes me is they still think this deal with Tactical Air Services is a happening thing!! Ernst & Young must be rubbing their hands together making all that money trying to broker a deal that never was going anywhere right from the start. All part of the continuing deception on the subject I suspect ... so how long before the order comes from Helen to start cutting them up like the Army have had to do with the M113's?
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Jul 13, 2006 19:56:18 GMT 12
Dont worry - Winston will save us!.....
(tui ad anyone?)
|
|
|
Post by phasselgren on Jul 14, 2006 0:09:12 GMT 12
From the TV One News tonight... oh how I would love the chance to personnally educate Mr Goff about the finest Attack jet ever built (he obviously doesn't know what a "Fighter" really is or how many countries are still operating them). Why not send him an open letter and inform him like Leon Harrison did (http://juni0r.orcon.net.nz/defenceletter.html). Suggest that he goes to Brazil to see the re-introduction of A-4 on carrier-opertaions. Cheers Peter
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 14, 2006 0:12:20 GMT 12
Mention Brazil has good bars and nightlife, he'll be keen.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 14, 2006 0:18:24 GMT 12
Seriously though, do send him a letter explaining all the facts about A-4K's and also post it here. We can then undersign it like a petition and once a number of names and comments are up, we can alert Goff to the thread to read.
Personally I think he's a better Defence Minister than many of his predecessors, particularly Burton who was a tosser.
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Jul 14, 2006 10:16:06 GMT 12
I'm sure Mr Goff's latest comments (and Helen's earlier "clapped out" comments) are helping no end with the sale! ;D I fired off a couple of "letters to the editors" last night. I'm off to Singapore tomorrow for 2 weeks so don't have time to write a detailed response to Mr Goff at this time (would be a waste of time anyway I reckon!). Hopefully while I'm in Singapore I'll get to the RSAF Museum at Paya Liba and get to see some of those A-4 Memorials Mr Goff mentioned. At least they are proud of their military history and have several A-4's in museums and standing proudly as gate guards, as well as being used as Instructional Airframes at various technical institutions. What a comparason to NZ where our Skyhawks are hidden away and can't go to museums or even be used by our own Air Force as Instructional Airframes. But so long as they are still here they are an embarasment to the Gov't... long may that continue!
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 14, 2006 15:04:57 GMT 12
What the RNZAF should do is take Goff up in a T-bird and really ring it out. Show him just how "clapped out" they are. It may help change his view.
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Jul 14, 2006 16:02:51 GMT 12
I watched Goff make his comments. He and the rest of that Cabinet are living proof that not everything in life has a purpose.
|
|
|
Post by xr6turbo1 on Jul 14, 2006 22:17:28 GMT 12
On Newstalk ZB one announcer spoke of the money this deal has cost the country so far and was very dissapointed by the way the government has handled it. One guy called up to talk about it and after a while I turned the radio off as no one else rang them to talk about it. From that I thought that maybe a lot of Kiwis just dont care about a strike force anymore
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 15, 2006 21:02:49 GMT 12
I fear you're right there Gavin. We have been without air protection for some years now and we're all still here, so the populace think we don't need it. If a referendum were held now, few people would vote to pay millions to have the strike wing re-established. I could guarantee that. Not unless we were attacked, and then of course it's far too late. Take a look at the thoughts on this website. Some of them are interesting. I'm not sure who has written this piece, but I like some of their ideas. afwweb.orcon.net.nz/defencesolutions.html
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Jul 16, 2006 9:07:13 GMT 12
I only partly agree here Dave; the Skyhawks were never intended to defend New Zealand, and couldn't in fact, but like standards of behaviour in society, once relaxed they can never be brought back. The stike force won't be brought back, not by this or any other government, because there is no agreed defence policy which would allow the will for that to happen. Remember, Helen was on the wharf protesting when they A4s were unloaded, and she must be thrilled to bits to have finally been in a position where she could fill a life-long dream and get rid of them. I recall also taling the leader of the Opposition to task when they trumpeted "we will restore the strike force when we become the Government". They wouldn't, couldn't, [because it had all gone] and it was pure political claptrap!
However, back to my point; New Zealand cannot now, and never has been able to defend itself, and certainly that was not the role of the Skyhawks. That has always meant to us that collective security with our friends and allies, principally Australia., has been the only way to go.That dictates what kind of forces we need because we will always be working as part of a coalition with other countries. So compatability and the ability to at least keep up with our neghbours. No coalition will want us unless we have some capability, and that is what Helen removed.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 16, 2006 11:36:47 GMT 12
I totally agree with you Colin, I was trying to speak from the point of view of the common man in the street, who all seme to think the Skyhawks were indeed to defend NZ.
The main role I think they served was being the public face of the RNZAF to install confidence in the population. Now that they have been removed, so has that confidence. How many times, I've lost count, have i heard people scoff when i mention the RNZAF since 1999. Before then if I said I'd been in the RNZAF I got nothing but respect. The A4's were also valuable recruting tools, and they were valuable for training and very valuable for inter-service relations, not just exercising with the Aussies but with other Air Forces around the world.
The loss of the Skyhawks and Maachis meant also a huge loss to the engineering and support infrastructure, and really left the RNZAF with no grounds to save those areas because if you remove the sharp end, who can argue at saving the less prominent features of the service?
I recall in the early 1990's when National began to dis-establish the RNZAF with their policies that really started the beginning of the end. Their buzzword phrase they bandied about when closing Wigram and shifting training to Ohakea was "Bringing the tail to the teeth" - now we only have the tail, what use is that?
There is only one chance to regain a Strike Wings and re-establish the RNZAF as a credible force. I shall have to run for PM...
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Jul 16, 2006 12:12:54 GMT 12
I'll run with you......
In fact, the decisions to close Wigram, Te Rapa, and Hobsonville were made by the air force. Certainly, under pressure from reduced funding which meant the cloth had to be cut, but nevertheless a logical decison given the circumstance. We are not the only air force to have been so constrained; the RAF has closed literally dozens of bases, as have the the USAF. It's all about money, and where best to spend what you're given. Having spent a brief period at Te Rapa when I returned from ANZUK, I can tell you that I would have closed it years before the decison was made. It served no useful purpose and there was nothing there which couldn't be better located at the user units. Hobsonville was a flying boat base, and it's separation from Whenuapai was always a logistical problem which was never resolved by calling it "Base Auckland". Wigram was under pressure years before it closed due to noise and height restrictions and, again, there was nothing done there which couldn't be done equally as well on another base, which has been proven in fact. Whenuapai is grossly under-utilised as an air base, and given the "less is more " policy of saving money by consolidation, it's only a matter of time before it closes. The result will be some fairly major construction an expansion of Ohakea, and I am not one of the Luddites who think Ohakea couldn't operate as a civil freight terminal for the Manawatu region given that room for expansion at Milson is severly restricted.
Gee, but I do ramble on when I get going. I blame the Staff College...................
|
|
|
Post by steve on Jul 16, 2006 18:37:30 GMT 12
Phil82..interesting insight to base closures etc....I believe whenuapai should revert to a civil/military operation and at the same time open ohakea up for civil operations as well... Your "rambles" make good sense and fasinating for those of us who were not part of the air force establisment!
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Jul 16, 2006 18:50:33 GMT 12
Colin, some of the people I dispise the most in Christchurch are the jerks who purchased cheap land at Westlake Estate in the mid-1980s (on the south-eastern edge of Wigram), built ugly big 'mansions', and then had the hide to start whining about the noise of the Airtrainers as they flew overhead whilst practising circuits and bumps.
I think they were some of the people who probably put the most pressure on the RNZAF at Wigram.
Turds the bloody lot of them!
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 16, 2006 19:14:33 GMT 12
Yes, the same type are doing their best at Ardmore now too, Craig.
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Jul 16, 2006 22:22:07 GMT 12
The 'rambles' are the result of some years working in 'Disneyland: or DEF HQ to the unitiated! What tends to be forgotten some days is that the only reason the air force exists is to fly aircraft, but achieving that infrastructure costs more than the aim! Hence, rationalisation of assets to save money where it can be saved. If you take away the reason for being, that is flying, and the money allocated to it in term of hours per year, then there isn't a lot left. You have pay and upkeep, food, co ntracts for everything under the sun, and everyone else has an urgent need for the latest piece of gear! It's a balancing act. Then there are the demands on the overall Defence budget by the Army and Navy, the problems of which were highlighted a few years ago when Bruce Ferguson leap-frogged a number of more senior people in what amounted to a cleanout of some of the Army Officer Corps. It was all very public and distasteful. I was stunned by what I saw at Te Rapa the brief period I was there after returning from Singapore. I couldn't think of one sane reason for its existance in modern logistics. I actually said so to a visiting AOC one day, and he just winked! Fortunately I wasn't there too long.
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Jul 16, 2006 22:30:37 GMT 12
Well, of course, prior to Mangere, or Auckland International as it is now known, Whenuapai was civil/military, and in fact was Auckland International!
|
|