|
Post by gibbo on Mar 18, 2018 18:52:20 GMT 12
ELINT/COMINT/SIGINT capabilities are great but if you can't prosecute targets there is little value in ELINT etc. From a south pacific view maritime capacity is probably in shorter supply than ELINT etc capacity, if only because there a hell of lot of places to float a boat & very few places to radiate intel from that arn't a boat. Yes I totally agree. I'm merely trying to paint of picture of NZDF thinking in regards as to why they think the P8 is where they want to go... based, of course, on the thinking of the previous Govt. The NZDF is not about to change course in a hurry after a number of years of detailed analysis, evaluation etc. I'm not a fan of Mark's and I don't feel he's got a lot of support from either NZ First or Labour so I certainly wouldn't like to be in his shoes. Based on the new Govt's statements that they would 're-evaluate' Nationals' defence decisions we are seeing just that however if Aus are putting pressure on NZ then that will have a far more significant influence than the public will ever know, and quite likely not change the pre.ference for the P8. Meeting allies requirements is a big part of the requirements analysis. What I'd like to know is how long this supposed 'extension' is.
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Mar 18, 2018 15:48:53 GMT 12
The P8 is not the only platform that can bring us up to the modern age of Surveillance aircraft. The Saab Swordfish, the P1, A320Neo MPA and the Embraers KC390/Ec190-E2 all have ultra-modern commercial-of-the-shelf and fully NATO compatible ELINT/COMINT/SIGINT capabilities available if that option is taken, with full datalinks and mission simulation packages, and all for much less acquisition cost and lower operating costs than the P8, and with better industrial offset opportunities. The reason Ron Mark is delaying this decision is that he is not happy with the lack of reason given by the previous government of why other platforms were dismissed. He is not 're-inventing the wheel', he simply demands to know what was wrong with the other platforms that offer a much greater capability vs cost coefficient. The P8 is most certainly NOT the only platform that offers seamless integration with our allies. Interoperability comes via communications and data links, and not via the platform itself. In the P8 is not slated get those ELINT and Electronic Intelligence capabilities for another few upgrade cycles, which will be who knows how are away (because the US, Aus and UK all have those capabilities available already on other platforms), when that capability will be available immediately if we buy another platform. Yes agreed that the P8 isn't the only one that can bring us up to the modern age of Surveillance aircraft and as you say it is about the onboard systems not the platform. However that last point is the key for NZ - the previous Govt wanted NZDF wants to be an active member of the '5-eyes' therefore due to our size we cannot afford (literally) to sign-up for a system that cannot simply 'plug & play' within that network. Currently P8 is likely to be the only platform (+ systems combo) that will be in service amongst all (or most) '5-eyes' partners that is being offered to NZ and will not need expensive systems integration effort. We will never see NZ splash out another specialist platform for ELINT/COMINT/SIGINT capabilities - they are horrendously expensive and serve largely singular purposes which would be too specialised for NZ and almost impossible to push justification for thru parliament. As for the others, none of the Saab Swordfish, P1, A320Neo MPA nor the Embraer KC390 are '5-eyes' integrated as such... not to say they couldn't be eventually, but the issue is we can't afford the cost of doing that, we'd be crazy to buy something that then needs potentially 10's if not 100's of millions spent on trying to integrate... which then becomes an orphan platform + system combo, making further upgrades to systems thta much harder & costlier to manage. NZ has sensibly seen it needs to go for 'off the shelf' as much as possible so in terms of '5 eyes' the P8 is the only item available on the shelf at present, and our allies are understandably trying to steer us to that shelf. The P8 is currently also a proven capability based on significant -B737 pedigree and it's spares & support train. P1 has one happy operator but an unproven spares & support train along with being still fairly 'new' to the game - with likely un-scoped level of effort require to integrate with '5-eyes' systems. SAAB Swordfish suffers from most of the same issues (remember Swordfish is a system, not a platform ... so it may vary on the specific platform intended). A320Neo & Embraer's MPA offerings... remember NZ rightly won't even consider something not is use. I think the P1 would be the prefect MPA but I can see why the NZDF wants the P8.
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Mar 18, 2018 12:20:32 GMT 12
Yes, highly likely the 5Eyes will do some arm bending. Yes absolutely... The P1 would be a better true MPA & likely superb at doing it. However the issue is the P8 would lift the NZDF up into that 'digital' battle-space domain with all the bespoke integration with 5-eyes partners that is required to do so. The P8 will offer capabilities well beyond those of a core MPA. It seems to me that there's still a lot of thinking we are trying to replace an MPA - the P3K2 is already more than just that (after recent upgrades) and the NZDF want to lift up even further beyond those new capabilities into the true 'digital' domain. The P3 replacement project is NZ's only opportunity to get up into that space as we couldn't afford separate MPA and 'digital warfare' platforms... the P8 is the only platform that actually combines both to the degree required by allies for effective operational integration.
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Mar 4, 2018 11:54:37 GMT 12
you'd think a lot more would be joining up if they knew that. Am assuming this new ship will have a slightly bigger crew than Endeavour did. Endeavour complement = 50 (apparently had 57 on board for final home-coming to New Plymouth) Aotearoa complemnt = 64 core crew + 11 'flight' crew if chopper embarked + 1 VIP + 8 'mission team' + 14 trainees. So 64 but could have up to 98 on board.
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Mar 4, 2018 11:54:13 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Mar 3, 2018 9:59:30 GMT 12
Hey all. I thought you might be interested in this article I wrote for KiwiFlyer Magazine comparing the Saab Swordfish and Boeing P8 offers for the NZDF's Future Air Surveillance Capability (FASC) requirement. It is edited down from 4000 words here, so if you are interested in more detail (mostly just specs and deeper description) let me know. Over the four days of the trade only days of the Singapore Airshow 2018 I had the privilege of talking in-depth to all the manufacturers with a bid in for our FASC requirement, as well as current RAAF and USN P8 crews, and many people from across the industry with MPA/ASW experience, including ex- RAF Nimrod pilots, ex- RAAF P3 aircrew, ex and current US Coast Guard aircrew, many of whom had no commercial interest in the competition. The Saab people were especially forthcoming, hence why I concentrate here on comparing their aircraft with the P8, which is to many the frontrunner in the competition. I ran all the specifications past the Boeing people, but they contradicted what the RAAF and USN aircrews told me. While the article is obviously fawning for the Saab offer, I promise there was no remuneration by them for me. I know it looks like I was bought! The RAAF aircrew were especially taken with the Bombardier G6000, who had just been for a tour through it when I spoke to them... I would have liked to have done a comparison that included the other contenders, especially the Kawasaki P1, which was universally admired by everybody, but I didn't have the space available to do it justice... All of them have their ups and downs, but Embraers KC-390 + E190-E2 combi was pretty interesting. It might have come down to a close race between the Swordfish and the P1 if I had done so, but the huge industrial offset Saab can offer through the aircraft's life would have trumped it there. Anyway, I just thought it might be relevant to your discussion here... I hope the link works! drive.google.com/file/d/1atNpyeuTw3roNlObfnimjHfD-UwtIWSh/view?usp=sharingIt's a damned fine looking option, but I can't see any obvious evidence online of anyone that has the Global 6000 & Swordfish combo in use... are there any? I am a firm believer that NZ shouldn't buy anything other than proven platforms and that means the specific airframe + systems combination. If this combo isn't in use it is unlikely (unfortunately) to be considered by NZDF / MinDef.
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Mar 2, 2018 16:47:47 GMT 12
[There is no appetite in the NZ voting public for increasing defense expenditure. Any increase in military spending in wildly unpopular - the public perception is we are a long way from anywhere and are shielded by powerful allies. When you consider there is no conceivable credible scenario for the use of an air combat wing in defense of our home islands and nothing an air combat wing could do overseas that couldn't be done by a better equipped ally, then the case for spending a quarter of your budget on what would be noisy show ponies at Ohakea evaporates. I love aviation and fast jets, but the logic around the disbanding of the combat air wing was correct. I think you are simply wrong. It is a quite easy sell but no one wants to do it as that would kill all their Chinese donations & might scare people. One day soon the world is going to wake up to the fact that the US simply can't pay back its Treasury securities & will stop buying rather rapidly. This will also kill the PRC's economy & its cheaper of them to have a war than to appease its own people. Nothing there is particularly radical or unexpected but is however typically unspoken. As for powerful allies protecting us observing to the public that not being independent means wee have to bend over and put up with things like the Ozzies transportation of criminals to NZ (Maybe Auckland airport needs a sign that says "welcome to Australias own botany bay") and the fact that they currently treat in NZ citizens in Oz like 3rd world labour. It can be sold to the public but there are better toughs about. There are also other issues impacting defence how defence is viewed such as having some of the most lax voter rules in the world which means may votes don't actually have much invested in NZ (all those students visas, temporary work visa get to vote which is by world standards exceptional), the NZDFs distain of the public and their civilian governance plus a general failure to actually engage with the public in anyway other than dog and pony shows. We still maintain an army in a country surrounded by 1000's of miles of water so clearly there is a substantial spend on illogical capacities. Fast jets are useless for NZ as they simply don't have the range / payload required to achieve the best results long range standoff strike however is critical i.e converted airliners in the class of maritime optimized B52s. I wish people would grasp the fact that the value in our defence assets is not simply what they can do based in NZ - presumably based on an assumption their only combat role is to stop an invasion. We have significant regional and, to a lesser degree, global responsibilities which can, and have in the last 20 years, seen the NZDF deploy force components offshore. In these sceanrios we do add value and thats' particularly where our Army comes in. Fast jets won't happen now but they did provide a good back-up for regional partners and deploying to the likes of Oz & S.E.Asia is where their real worth could be realised. So fast jets would be far from useless & our Army is a major asset, and the importance of the RNZN needs no explaining. I get your inference though that we could be setting better priorities.
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Jan 10, 2018 14:13:33 GMT 12
Chalk another up for the crashed Dauntless - a great display. I figure the more that list it here the more notice they might take!
If the Vincent/Vildebeest isn't going to progress much further then include that too & make that an 'engineering' themed display.
From memory there's more preserved vehicles - I'd to see more use of them. The one I'd really like to see would be the Catalina & the (boat) tender W88... but that really would be a stretch given the state of the Cat.
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Nov 5, 2017 12:27:22 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Oct 30, 2017 19:03:37 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Oct 26, 2017 22:21:58 GMT 12
I can't say I rate the guy too highly, however from a Govt policy perspective I think it might be a little early to be hitting the panic button! In today's NZ Herald there's a piece about our relationship with Oz and Defence gets a mention... at least they appear to realise the Defence relationship is an important component of the overall relationship. www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11936749 The key bit for this forum is the closing paragraphs: NZ First's coalition agreement with Labour includes an agreement to "re-examine the Defence procurement programme within the context of the 2016 Defence Capability Plan budget".
New Defence Minister Ron Mark said today that his party had been concerned about the type of expenditure and agreements entered into under the previous Government.
"We will run a ruler over that, stay within the allocation that exists, but seek to get better quality decisions...I really want to see where they are up to."
Ok so the interpretation of what is meant by 'the allocation that exists' is unknown, but for the likes of the FAMC & FASC projects are almost too big & well publicised to simply downgrade so I don't think they'll change too dramatically - I'm not saying they won't make some stupid choices, but given NZ First's fairly constructive Defence statements before the election I wouldn't expect them to now do a 180, even allowing for coalition agreements! Thye have stated they thought National was gold-plating the NZDF, well actually we know they were simply trying to keep them relevant, and NZF is giving themselves the wriggle room to allow agreement with National's decisions where it suits!
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Oct 24, 2017 21:14:47 GMT 12
Tonight's interview with WP didn't sound optimistic Care to elaborate?
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Oct 13, 2017 21:29:10 GMT 12
Hi, Doing a blatant plug for a new book my cousin and I am about to release Our great-Uncle 2nd Lt. Jack Stanley Pryce was one of 3 brothers from Invercargill who enlisted in the first few months of WW1. He served for almost 4 full years and in that time he fought at Chunuk Bair; Instructed at Sling; fought at Passchendaele; and was in the thick of the spring offensive as well as the following final push by the allies. He wrote literally dozens of letters home to his mother & sister - and they all still exist. These have been transcribed and the book is based around them, giving an incredible evolving story of 'Jacks Journey' through WW1. The military context has been added along with details of the post-war period. His war ended in 1918 as did everyone else's but Jack's story amazingly has a significant modern twist that could still yet end in a quite unique outcome... I'm not going to say more but I'm going to point you to this site who have kindly agreed to take us on board! www.fairdinkumbooks.com/...Gibbo Now printed and FairDinkum books will be getting their stock in a couple of days...so almost there! Listen out for RadioNZ interview (National Programme - 'Standing Room Only') Labour weekend! FairDinkum now have their books and will be at the Auckland Museum's Military Heritage Day this Sunday (15th Oct) with copies of this book amongst others: www.eventfinda.co.nz/2017/military-heritage-day/auckland/parnell
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Oct 11, 2017 17:02:38 GMT 12
Hi, Doing a blatant plug for a new book my cousin and I am about to release Our great-Uncle 2nd Lt. Jack Stanley Pryce was one of 3 brothers from Invercargill who enlisted in the first few months of WW1. He served for almost 4 full years and in that time he fought at Chunuk Bair; Instructed at Sling; fought at Passchendaele; and was in the thick of the spring offensive as well as the following final push by the allies. He wrote literally dozens of letters home to his mother & sister - and they all still exist. These have been transcribed and the book is based around them, giving an incredible evolving story of 'Jacks Journey' through WW1. The military context has been added along with details of the post-war period. His war ended in 1918 as did everyone else's but Jack's story amazingly has a significant modern twist that could still yet end in a quite unique outcome... I'm not going to say more but I'm going to point you to this site who have kindly agreed to take us on board! www.fairdinkumbooks.com/...Gibbo Now printed and FairDinkum books will be getting their stock in a couple of days...so almost there! Listen out for RadioNZ interview (National Programme - 'Standing Room Only') Labour weekend!
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Sept 22, 2017 17:14:44 GMT 12
Hi, Doing a blatant plug for a new book my cousin and I am about to release Our great-Uncle 2nd Lt. Jack Stanley Pryce was one of 3 brothers from Invercargill who enlisted in the first few months of WW1. He served for almost 4 full years and in that time he fought at Chunuk Bair; Instructed at Sling; fought at Passchendaele; and was in the thick of the spring offensive as well as the following final push by the allies. He wrote literally dozens of letters home to his mother & sister - and they all still exist. These have been transcribed and the book is based around them, giving an incredible evolving story of 'Jacks Journey' through WW1. The military context has been added along with details of the post-war period. His war ended in 1918 as did everyone else's but Jack's story amazingly has a significant modern twist that could still yet end in a quite unique outcome... I'm not going to say more but I'm going to point you to this site who have kindly agreed to take us on board! www.fairdinkumbooks.com/...Gibbo
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Jul 12, 2017 18:51:19 GMT 12
I'm not sure the RNZAF would want to touch Italian technology again. Hmmm, one doc says it an Austrian company, the other doc suggests Spain... all based on the work of a couple of Italian brothers... guess that's Eurozone for you!
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Jul 2, 2017 11:44:27 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Jun 2, 2017 13:55:38 GMT 12
Lockheed Martin still lists the Sea Hercules as being in development. How easy is it to drop a liferaft out of a P8 to a sinking yachtie? www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/c130/c-130j-variants/sc-130j.htmlSea Hercules might be low and slow like a P3, that enables the finding of Pac Island missing boaties with no epirbs. Able to fly off shorter Pac Island runways with sub-standard surfaces when doing post cyclone assessments. tinyurl.com/y88cthsp (Sea Herc 4 page brochure listed with mad) Hercules are used for hurricane research so there should be the knowledge and capability to design and make a sea hercules to fly in very turbulent Pacific Ocean conditions. NZ might get on the back of the Australian Triton marine patrol drone order (potentially base the NZ drone operators with an Australian east coast drone base for flight ops over the NZ marine patrol area, reducing stand alone drone service/ logistics). The Triton has a 30 hour flight time. The P8 is designed to link with the Triton drone so potentially sea herc will link with the triton drone to reduce flight time to targets for low level identification/ verification/ potential neutralisation. With a sea herc less likely to require any NZ runway upgrades and potentially have a few parts etc in common with a super Herc c130j transport to reduce personnel training costs.(if the old hercs are replaced with Super hercs) If NZ buys the P8s and they don't work out can they be converted to other roles? (High value cargo) I do wonder how Sth.Pac. tasking will go with a P8 if there's no suitable runways... I guess they'll just have to do shorter sorties to allow t/o with a lighter fuel load. Triton... well that's an unknown quantity until NZDF show any real desire to commit to drone technology - whereas many militaries, including all our significant defence partners, have already embraced them! NZDF will be well aware of any potential 'runway length' issues of each platform type so I think it's safe to assume they will have it sorted. There has I believe been a high level acknowledgement that new a/c purchases will require new 'infrastructure investment' - not just hangars etc. I presume you have your tongue in your cheek when you wonder if the P8 could be re-roled it they 'don't work out'!?!
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on May 2, 2017 19:52:43 GMT 12
Is this the spot You've got it pretty much got it on the head! If you move the pin just a smidge back along the yellow line toward WP so that it's on the right-hand side of the road (old SH16) that's the paddock it came to rest in. The a/c pretty much followed the yellow line, impacting mostly on it's underside after initially hitting a hedgerow in the area that's seen above under development (light coloured patch). It started breaking up as it went through what is still a rising paddock (again following the yellow line) leaving a wreckage trail. It came to a rest just to the right of, and below, the two houses visible immediately just above & to the right of the pin head. Where those two houses are is pretty much where the Sinton farm house was. Any guidance as to how to add that map, I could mark it & post it but I just can't work it out.
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on May 2, 2017 17:07:29 GMT 12
I'd been led to believe the crash site was on the farm literally across the road from the end of the runway. Is that not the case then? No, it's about 2.6km from the south end of the main runway. I can confirm the location as the accident record had an excellent selection of photos both ground & airborne that give a clear view of nearby houses, the road, contours of the paddock etc & guess what, with the lack of any development on the site till now, those houses, road & contours all still exist exactly as per the photos. There was also a view from the crash site back towards the hangars at WP. I took a bunch of notes from photos etc to enable me to pinpoint the site then visted the site when back home to confirm what I saw and everything matched perfectly. With the development happening now those reference points will permanetly disappear.
|
|