|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Apr 2, 2007 16:33:46 GMT 12
New Zealand Defence Force
Te Ope Kaatua O Aotearoa
Media Release
30 March 2007
AIR FORCE COMPLETES SUCCESSFUL PACIFIC SURVIELLANCE
A Royal New Zealand Air Force Orion has completed a successful week of Pacific surveillance monitoring the waters between Samoa and the Cook Islands for illegal fishing vessels.
The multi-agency exercise, involving New Zealand, Australia, Samoa, Cook Islands, the Forum Fisheries Agency and the United States Coast Guard aims to catch and deter people from illegal fishing in Pacific countries’ exclusive economic zones.
5 Squadron acting Commanding Officer Squadron Leader Nick Olney said the aircraft’s 12 crew had completed more than 24 hours of flying time in support of the operation.
“It was a relatively quiet operation in that all of the fishing vessels which were sighted and photographed were found to be fishing legally. What we did achieve was a visible presence which will act as a deterrent to any individuals or companies who are considering breaking the rules in the future.”
Northern Patrol is run up to 10 times per year. It is one of many Pacific surveillance and search and rescue roles P3-K Orions undertake throughout the year.
www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0703/S00414.htm
|
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Apr 2, 2007 16:34:07 GMT 12
Good to see they nailed some illegal fishing activities.
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Apr 2, 2007 17:28:44 GMT 12
There is an interesting article in the NZ Herald today on the mini arms race going on in Asia in the procurement of submarines and other high tech equipment. Indonesia wants to or is building 12 new submarines. Also on the same page a good article on China's military modernisation and future power projections. No wonder Australia is spending up large on new defence capability... meanwhile all we can do is chase illegal fishing boats around the south pacific... submarines - what are they? (I'm not having a dig at 5 Sqn here - rather the politians who think submarines are a cold war relic!)
I would attach the links but the Herald search engine is down at the moment...
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Apr 3, 2007 16:24:51 GMT 12
If it's the same article as in the sydney Morning Hearld today it's written by an Australian mob, ASPI or similar
Poorly researched andd it's conclusions are a little over the top IMHO
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Apr 3, 2007 16:37:04 GMT 12
Regarding the emphasis being on patrols for illegal fishing boats rather than foreign submarines, where's the issue. It's a balance of something that may never happen (foreign subs causing mischief in our waters) against something that is happening and needs attention (illegal fishing).
If they were spending time looking solely for submarines, what are they going to do when one is spotted? Blow it out of the water? No. We're not at war with anyone, so who cares? I'm sure tht whilst patrolling fisheries and protecting our indusrty and conservation efforts in that way, other things like subs are also taken note of at the same time. It's the asian fishing fleets that are causing more harm to NZ than any of their subs are.
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Apr 4, 2007 9:28:21 GMT 12
Good to see they nailed some illegal fishing activities. The article says they didn't find any fishing illegally ;D. Still it is a worthwhile mission for 5 sqn. ut I can't help wondering if a fleet of dedicated smaller aircraft (Dorniers or the like) or a UAV's couldn't provide a better (read more constant) service. The article says they only do this 10 times a year. That leaves a fair bit of time for illegal fishing to take place. |
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Apr 4, 2007 13:19:34 GMT 12
Regarding the emphasis being on patrols for illegal fishing boats rather than foreign submarines, where's the issue. It's a balance of something that may never happen (foreign subs causing mischief in our waters) against something that is happening and needs attention (illegal fishing). If they were spending time looking solely for submarines, what are they going to do when one is spotted? Blow it out of the water? No. We're not at war with anyone, so who cares? I'm sure that whilst patrolling fisheries and protecting our industry and conservation efforts in that way, other things like subs are also taken note of at the same time. It's the Asian fishing fleets that are causing more harm to NZ than any of their subs are. Looking for illegal fishing boats can be more efficiently done by other means - you don't see Australian Orion's routinely doing it (they have civilian contractors who do their coastal surveillance using platforms that cost a hell of a lot less an hour to operate than a P-3). Their Orion's are primarily used for military tasking, not civilian ones. That is the difference. In NZ the civilian tasking is the only reason our P-3's weren't scrapped along with the ACF in 2001. Hence most of their role is now non-military just to justify their existance. Most people don't realise how close Helen came to scrapping the Orions as well. Our Orion's have also had their ASW capability seriously degraded over many years, simply because politicians (on both sides of the house) don't think submarines are a threat to NZ's interests (they are just Cold War relics aren't they!?). The limited ASW capability 5 Sqn have today is classic case of Kiwi Ingenuity - but it has had to be done by stealth and creative accounting so certain politicians don't know we actually have a cabability. Submarines may not now, or ever be a direct threat to NZ, but the proliferation of submarines in SE Asia could be a very real threat to our INTERESTS in the future. Our INTERESTS extend well beyond our 12 mile limit (or at least they used to when we took our Defence and Foreign Policy seriously). Put simply - an Air Force exists to train for something that we all hope will never happen - to fight a war. That is one function that you can't contract out! Contract out the fisheries patrol work and let the P-3's get on with the military tasks that they were purchased for and will soon be well equipped for (after their current Avionics upgrade), including a significantly enhanced ASW capability (but don't tell Helen  . |
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Apr 4, 2007 14:36:23 GMT 12
I agree 100% Don.
The P-3 should have a robust ASW capabilty along with a decent standoff ASM and a good ESM/ECM fit, AKA the RAAF AP-3C which is one of the Best (if not the best MPA in the world at the moment).
Geeze even fitted for but not with a ASM would be an improvement.
I'm sure 5 Sqn would rather be doing military tasks not fisheries protection
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Apr 4, 2007 15:25:27 GMT 12
Hang on, since when has protecting or national and regional economic assets from illegal exploitation not been a military task? If we were landlocked and the neighbours were coming into our patch and poaching our crops and cows etc, wouldnt that be cause for military intervention? Yes ASW is needed, but I wouldnt describe fisheries protection as being a "Civilian" job.
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Apr 4, 2007 15:32:15 GMT 12
Hang on, since when has protecting or national and regional economic assets from illegal exploitation not been a military task? If we were landlocked and the neighbours were coming into our patch and poaching our crops and cows etc, wouldnt that be cause for military intervention? Yes ASW is needed, but I wouldnt describe fisheries protection as being a "Civilian" job. I'm just suggesting it would be more efficient financially for this part to be contracted out and then to have the military capability to back it up if needed... which by the way our P-3's don't currently have the capability to do anyway. Even with a stand off missile capability you can't fire a warning shot! Gosh it almost sounds like we need a few Skyhawks (aka an Air Combat Force!!  |
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Apr 5, 2007 9:56:25 GMT 12
Hang on, since when has protecting or national and regional economic assets from illegal exploitation not been a military task? If we were landlocked and the neighbours were coming into our patch and poaching our crops and cows etc, wouldnt that be cause for military intervention? Yes ASW is needed, but I wouldnt describe fisheries protection as being a "Civilian" job. I'd argue it's more a law enforcement task as oppsoed a pure military task. I don't see it as a core miliatry task, perhaps a secondary role. Like Don I just think those flying hours would be better utlised somewhere elase. Plus I also think that the NZ taxpayer would get better value for money from a dedicated coastwatch/fishery protection organisation. However the cynic in me says that is primarily what the RNZAF/RNZN is being equirpped for these days (MRH-90 excluding) |
|
. 
