|
|
Post by snafu on Jul 22, 2022 21:08:00 GMT 12
...BTW I've written it elsewhere on here but if you wanted to re-establish a fast jet capability, it's not as easy as coughing up the cash for the fancy new aircraft. You need the infrastructure but just as importantly, the support staff to maintain them. We lost all that knowledge back in 2001. To make the RNZAF have teeth again would be an enormous financial undertaking but just as importantly, it would require an enormous undertaking in training up and establishing the support staff and knowledge to sustain a fast jet capability. It's not impossible but it would require an immense amount of funding and also training via allies to get ourselves back up to being able to do it again. If the RAN can do it and move into nuclear engineering I don't think maintenance on F35 will be a big concern for the RNZAF, or who does the basic maintenance on the current inventory? |
|
ex
Flight Sergeant
Posts: 20
|
Post by ex on Jul 23, 2022 13:19:11 GMT 12
And the RNZAF is heading the same way for maintenance of their fleets.
The knowledge and skills for second line Maintenance now reside with contractors as the current RNZAF does not get exposure to, or the training for DLM/second line maintenance.
Also a lot of the current contractors had a long association with the ACF before and after it was disbanded. So the support staff is there, just not in uniform.
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Jul 25, 2022 19:14:02 GMT 12
Big if there.
|
|
|
|
Post by snafu on Jul 25, 2022 21:36:52 GMT 12
you have your doubts? But dont think its going to be an if but when, they are already expanding the nuclear engineering course at UNSW US Congress have passed the “The Australia-U.S. Submarine Officer Pipeline Act" to develop a nuclear submarine qualified officers as well in the RN Nuclear Propulsion training courses. So the baby steps have already started |
|
|
|
Post by machina on Jul 26, 2022 12:46:45 GMT 12
Not sure if I’ve said before but I think that probably the only way we’d manage to get that capability back is if the U.S. considers it a strategic advantage to arm/train us as things with China heat up. For that to happen though there’d need to be a seismic shift away from our so-called independent foreign policy, which will probably never happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by pepe on Jul 26, 2022 14:12:31 GMT 12
Not sure if I’ve said before but I think that probably the only way we’d manage to get that capability back is if the U.S. considers it a strategic advantage to arm/train us as things with China heat up. For that to happen though there’d need to be a seismic shift away from our so-called independent foreign policy, which will probably never happen. After observing what has been unfolding in a current European conflict, I think it much more likely (and practical) that an armed/unarmed UAV capability would be a better option moving forward. |
|
|
|
Post by machina on Jul 26, 2022 22:19:20 GMT 12
Not sure if I’ve said before but I think that probably the only way we’d manage to get that capability back is if the U.S. considers it a strategic advantage to arm/train us as things with China heat up. For that to happen though there’d need to be a seismic shift away from our so-called independent foreign policy, which will probably never happen. After observing what has been unfolding in a current European conflict, I think it much more likely (and practical) that an armed/unarmed UAV capability would be a better option moving forward. In a largely maritime environment though? |
|
|
|
Post by pepe on Jul 27, 2022 11:30:38 GMT 12
After observing what has been unfolding in a current European conflict, I think it much more likely (and practical) that an armed/unarmed UAV capability would be a better option moving forward. In a largely maritime environment though? The performance of existing reconnaissance UAV's such as the RQ4A/B Global Hawk are more than adequate for a maritime environment. www.airforce-technology.com/projects/rq4-global-hawk-uav/The armed UAV (UCAV) sector is still developing but there already new systems such as the Bayraktar Akinci which demonstrate what is on the horizon. www.airforce-technology.com/projects/bayraktar-akinci-unmanned-combat-aerial-vehicle-ucav/Payload is only 1,350kg but can carry a wide range of munitions (including air to air missiles). Control and communications via Ground stations or satellite. Endurance is up to 24 hours and range to 5,000kms. This system is the successor to the Baraktar TB2 which is currently performing with credit in Ukraine. |
|
|
|
Post by carvairkid on Oct 3, 2023 12:06:26 GMT 12
Considering the pushback the Greens did (which was totally uninformed and unfounded nonsense) on the C-130 replacement buy, I think the NZDF was lucky to get away with the P8 acquisition. Why do you think NZ First made so little fuss about the ban on future oil and gas exploration? Oil/Gas for P8s. The greens swallowed a dead rat on the P8s in exchange for NZ first not opposing the oil and gas ban.You must of forgotten the voyage of U862 from Djakarta around Australia and New Zealand in 1944/45?In any case any military action against China, or Russia would be political and economic suicide. How far will you get without an oil refinery?It is far more rational to maintain a strong trading relationship with China and Russia than sending Te Kaha to the Taiwan Straits to pick a fight with China. Considering China could flick NZ off te map with a single ICBM, hawks in NZ are living in La-la land expecting to fight China. |
|
