A letter to the editor from Maurice McGreal

[kiwithrottlejockey]

I noticed this letter to the editor was published in yesterday's Dominion Post newspaper. I seem to recall seeing several letters from Maurice McGreal published over the years, although usually they have been about the inadequacy of the ends of Wellington Airport's runway. This is the first time I have seen a letter from him about defence matters. He must be getting on in age now, considering he was a Catalina and Sunderland pilot in WWII, then flew with TEAL from the end of the Empire 'Boats era until the Lockheed L.188 Electras before moving to the Department of Civil Aviation.



Air force structure most appropriate

Letters to the Editor - The Dominion Post | Monday, 17 January 2011

IN MID-1976, my boss, the director of civil aviation, asked me to prepare a paper for him to deliver to the heads of the Defence Forces on the role of the RNZAF.

The result was in line with the current defence scenario.

The Quigley paper in 1999 outlined this structure and the result is today's most effective air arm of our Defence Force.

Alas for the "Biggles boys", there are no costly toys to play with. But New Zealand has an effective and efficient defence structure that is well equipped to support the needs of a stable lifestyle in this remote small nation.

MAURICE McGREAL
Auckland City

www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/4547472/Letter-Air-force-structure-most-appropriate

[nige]

I read that letter yesterday, I'm glad you posted it. No disrespect meant to M McG but I don't understand his letter:

*Why CAD would be advising Defence on the role of the RNZAF?? (EG Would RNZAF be advising the Minister of Transport on the CAD/CAA)?

* What result did the CAD write at the time, that is in line with current Def scenario? (What's different today compared to back then - no ACF, no Andover medium transports, no jet transport (727/757), less airbases, less personnel despite operational tempo today being as great as the time of the Vietnam war when the RNZAF manpower was thousands more....is this what he means)?

* Aha no biggles boys, so he was against the ACF? But then he says NZ has an effective and efficient defence structure? (Really, because first of all, the RNZAF is under equipped in helos, air transport - we need at least 50% more NH90's, A109's and C130's, and the Orions are still not fully upgraded eg ASW/stand off weaponry, and the RNZAF doesn't have airlift that can carry the Army LAV's to OZ). Then he says they are needed to support a stable lifestyle etc (Really, without an ACF contribution to stability in SE Asia).

Not only was the letter not easy to understand (imagine joe public with no aviation interest trying to understand) but I don't agree with his assessment of the current RNZAF - it's head in the sands stuff ...

[hawkeye]

I found this letter quite contemptuous of the NZDF and RNZAF. I think CAD and CAF have their respective MOUs etc for operational matters but that would be about it. It would be good politik for the RNZAF to simply talk to another Govt Dept on key capability purchases etc - ie I'm sure CAA would like to know if the RNZAF where going to operate F-15's for example. But capability papaers from CAA? I dont think so. If they were doing that even back then, then surely questions would need to be asked about miss appropriating of tax payers money. ie I'm sure Police dont advise Govt on Arts?
Think the danger of this is that it sends subliminal message that staus quo is ok.

[Dave Homewood]

What does MOU mean?

[phil]

Memorandum Of Understanding.

[Dave Homewood]

Thanks.

[machpants]

I think you are all being to polite, the man is talking out of his rectum. And says nothing, just I was right in '76 and all is good with the RNZAF. No facts no point.

In 79, my mate, school friend, asked me my opinion of who would win out of superman and the NZ SAS.

The result was in line with the current situation.

My answer is line with current SAS Ops in the Stan and was correct in the application of Kryptonite to the Taliban as NZs best offensive weapon

Alas for anyone with a brain cell this makes no sense.

It is a pointless post saying I was right, you were wrong and, just to put some salt in the wound, those of you that have served and fought for their country in the various air arms are just children who want the latest toys rather than professionals and role models.

EDIT: and he must have been a failed fighter pilot 'cos of the Biggles chip on his shoulder