|
|
Post by smithy on Aug 27, 2010 17:01:10 GMT 12
However we are a small nation and having a modern Defence Force is not affordable. That is a complete cop out as an idea. The problem is not that it's not affordable, it's that in Wellington it has become an idea that government spending on other areas is more important. I personally think that not only is this a shame but it could down the road turn out to be a very dangerous and damaging decision that NZ has made. There is no point in being half-arsed about a nation's defence, you either maintain it at an effective level or you really may as well bin the whole lot. |
|
|
|
Post by kiwiscanfly on Aug 27, 2010 17:01:21 GMT 12
Sirbead define a modern defense fighting force!!! we can still have a fighting capability without making it expensive, arm the A109's and we have a credible weapon system and fighting capability, This means we could have a strike capability without having to introduce a new aircraft again and without spending a ridiculous amount of money, the same with the possibility of bringing back the Machis's!! That is a capable modern fighting force that would be wise spending. Please Sirbean try to justify your comments.
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Aug 27, 2010 17:49:19 GMT 12
Having a defence force capable of providing maritime patrol and transport is about all we should be and no more. So do the maritime patrol aircraft in "your" NZDF need to be armed? If so, with what and why? If you don't think they need to be armed (using your logic the world is a stable and benign place so why would they be?), why have an air force at all? Your version of maritime patrol can be done by a civilian aircraft, flown by a civilian crew. Does the NZDF need frigates, artillery, armed helicopters, mortars, machine guns and armoured vehicles in your NZDF? |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Aug 27, 2010 18:38:58 GMT 12
I always had the impression when I was in the RNZAF that the Skyhawks were part of our maritime patrol structure, working alongside the Orions, Andovers and Friendships to protect our coastlines and the EEZ. Some of you seem to think we need maritime patrol aircraft but don't need strike aircraft, but the way I see it they are one and the same, and right now the capability of the maritime patrol force has been heavily diminished with the loss of the Skyhawks, Maachis, Friendships, and Andovers form service. Bring back the capability to the Air Force.
|
|
|
|
Post by sirbean on Aug 27, 2010 19:40:25 GMT 12
I will define my view as follows.
I am against New Zealand re-entering the Air Combat field as in buying a new type of fighter jet such as F/A18's or another type.
This is a role we simply do not need to be involved in at all.
We do our part in world military operations,but lets face it in todays world it's always going to be limited.
We should concentrate our Maritime aircraft the Orions on fisheries patrol and search and rescue what they are good at.
Yes this role could be performed by a civilian aircraft and in future years most likely will be much like Australia does today.
We seem to waste money on defence and defence bosses seem to lack the balls to stand up to their Government bosses,instead siding with them in order to protect there huge 6 figure pay packets.
You people may not like the truth but face it...theres wasted money....
Can anyone tell me why we upgraded the Hercules for which this upgrade has blown out of control cost wise and is years behind when at the end of the day theaircraft will be only good for another hand full of years.......surely new aircraft three yearsago would have been a better decision.................surely you must agree with me on this.
This iswhat I am talking about spend the money where its needed...not in fighter jets and 105 LAV'S.
|
|
|
|
Post by corokid66 on Aug 27, 2010 20:07:43 GMT 12
Sir Bean
You need to define why you do not want it (an air combat capability) as opposed to just saying that you just don't want them. Why dont we need to be involved in this role at all as you say?
Why we ended up with too many LAV's and refurbishing aging aircraft is due to the platform centric thinking we take on defence per cost considerations and the blinkered - we must have - we must never have ideology that presets it.
Your we must never have an ACF again mantra is I might say indicative of the sort of blinkered thinking and geo-stratetic stasis that help to bugger up defence over the last 20 years or so.
|
|
|
|
Post by yogi on Aug 27, 2010 20:29:21 GMT 12
(this is taken from a post by corokid in the what if thread)
I checked out the Budget to see where all our money goes. Of course some of it is necessary but some of it is just pap. This spending is where our Air Combat Force has gone.
Vote Arts and Culture gets $272,862,000 of which $68,500,000 goes towards the Screen Production Incentive Fund to doll out cash to all the no talent arty farty types to make movies no one wants to or does watch. If they were any good like Peter Jackson they could do it on ability alone.
Vote Community and Volunteers gets $44,989,000 of which $22.5 million dollars is used up just to doll out 17.7 million on crap such as disarmament education, paying volunteers to learn about being a volunteer and being paid to be volunteering, as well as writing screeds of crap to justify more money to improve “our social cultural well being.”
Pacific Development Assistance will get $755,801,000 over the next 3 years 2009-2012. The budget for climate change is year is $502,744,000.
And of Course $19,860,697,000 will go to the Ministry of Social development. There is literally tens of millions that could be cut from that budget allocation alone to support an Air Combat Force. We spend more on the DPB each year than Defence after GST and the capital charge.
Of course we can afford an air combat force of 14-16 aircraft that the 2000 Quigley report said was optimal.
There goes your wastage sirbean.
I think it would be beneficial for you to read the entire what if thread, i'll post on it so it comes back to the front of the postings, process the information there then get back to us.
Furthermore, how do you figure the world is stable? You simply have to pick up a paper to see that it is actually extremely volatile.
Like has already been said china is gearing up in a major way hence Australias reactive defence force upgrading and expansion.
Nobody is expecting new zealand to buy 100 f-35's or a batch of attack helicopters but we do need a small effective acf to support our allies and/or our own troops in the event of a major, more local conflict, it has been said before, Its like an insurance policy you dont cancel it because you dont think you are going to need it or havent used it before.
And I am not a war monger merely a realist looking at current and likely future international goings-on.
|
|
|
|
Post by smithy on Aug 27, 2010 21:08:21 GMT 12
I will define my view as follows. I am against New Zealand re-entering the Air Combat field as in buying a new type of fighter jet such as F/A18's or another type. This is a role we simply do not need to be involved in at all. Saying that shows how little you understand about modern warfare. Military commanders started to appreciate the importance of air superiority for the successful direction of military operations around 1916/1917. And because of the progress of technology this importance has only grown. A fast jet capability means not only being able to direct powerful support for your ground and sea forces in possible overseas deployments but it means that a nation can project power in a very rapid space of time over its own airspace and territorial waters. Something which you would think an island nation with a huge area of sovereign waters would wish to do. It is quite frankly absurd, embarrassing and downright pathetic that a supposedly first world nation of over 4 million people does not have a air strike capability of at least 3 squadrons. |
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Aug 27, 2010 21:22:29 GMT 12
sirbean you have made some relevant comments about wasteful defence spending but let's be clear, those decisions were made by the people who hold the purse strings despite alternative cases no doubt being made by those 'in the know' in the Defence Force. Our Defence bosses have to make a case as best they can, unlike Education and Health sectors Defence cannot threaten industrial action to get their way/force their political master's hand. They make the best case possible and because the political leadership in this country over the past 10-20 years have the nous of a retarded rabbit with regards to defence matters these stupid cost based as opposed to needs based decisions get made. The only decent decisions in relation to the RNZAF in that period (in my unqualified opinion) recently has been the rotary wing replacement. Abandoning a strike capability and choosing yet another Herk 'upgrade' fpr example as well as the infamous LAVs purchase have been amongst the poorer decisions to put it mildly.
|
|
|
|
Post by sirbean on Aug 28, 2010 7:54:25 GMT 12
The reason why I dont beleive we need an Air Combat Force is that we had one and a capable one back when the first Gulf war was on and it was not needed then nor was it need in Kosovo nor East Timor.Yet we played a role in all three conflicts and did our part.
I am simply saying put the money towards what we do contribute and do well things like the SAS,Air Transport (newHercules) backed up by perhaps C-27J.
As I said leave Air Combat to the big boys an area that even the United States has "YES" cut back on in a big way.
One only needs to look at their F-22 Raptor only 187 ordered and that number was tried to be cut down several times.
Air Combat is changing fast to the domain of unmanned multi-capable aircraft and as I have said the USN will have on its carrier decks in 2018 a smaller version of the B-2 Spirit this will be unmanned and capable of multi-missions.
New Zealand is capable and should play its part in world affairs but stick to some basic tasks rarther than try to be a jack of all trades.
And as for the budget and other money waste,I can tell you and you need to take the blindfolds off here people that we dont provide good health care as there are plenty of elderly going without basic surgery needs instead they get put on the endless waiting list.....as "YES" our leaders wait for them to die...yes this is fact and it happens here in this country.
And there is a large amount of children in this country who go to school with clothes that dont fit and no warm clothes in the winter,no shoes and a lot with no lunch either....this is just not South Auckland its everywhere.
There are elderly who freeze in their own homes because they cannot afford power over the winter months..............there are good working families who cant afford to take their kids to the doctors in the weekend because of the costs involved.
New Zealand has big issues to sort out well ahead of major defence capital.
At the end of the day everyone blames one another instead of standing up for those who need a hand.
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Aug 28, 2010 8:21:08 GMT 12
Mr Bean's "examples"of where the ACF wasn't need, his criticism of NZDF senior officers for not going on strike or staging a coup to get their way and his understanding of the recent NZDF project fiasco's are the final straw for me  Every one of his posts has shown his total lack of knowledge on this subject. I'm not going to waste any more of my time with him. Mr Bean - you are entitled to your opinion (because we live in a democracy - which has been paid for in the blood of thousands of our forbears), but I think your time would be better spent elsewhere - may I suggest a Labour/Green/left wing/socialist blog somewhere! |
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Aug 28, 2010 8:36:01 GMT 12
Mr Bean - you are entitled to your opinion (because we live in a democracy - which has been paid for in the blood of thousands of our forbears), but I think your time would be better spent elsewhere - may I suggest a Labour/Green/left wing/socialist blog somewhere! Quite right Don!! I think a reminder to all posters that they should stick to the topic of the thread, also read the forum rules which strictly forbid politics entering any discussion/debate. The bottom line is that the White Paper needs to outline our Defence Force requirements for the future and the pollys are dragging the chain. It's funny though that Health, Welfare and Education always get a bigger slice of the cake and are always saying they need more/ don't have enough. Yet Defence has been cut to the bone and continues to provide good bang for buck (aside from the silly decisions mentioned by myself earlier in this thread) so the solution must be for the military to take over the running of these three areas!!?? lol ;D |
|
|
|
Post by sirbean on Aug 28, 2010 8:37:07 GMT 12
Skyhawkdon...please tell me then why your so loved air combat force has never been involved in these conflicts and if you are so cocky why did not we perform this role in Korea or Vietnam...come on big boy?  ?? Take your blindfolds off there far more important areas to spend money on. Your still grumpy you got laid off! |
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Aug 28, 2010 8:41:28 GMT 12
sirbean you are not adding anything to this thread which is about the Defence Review Document, not the Air Combat Force and its demise. You obviously have an axe to grind, this forum is not the place to grind it.
|
|
|
|
Post by sirbean on Aug 28, 2010 9:00:58 GMT 12
I dont ave an axe to grind thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldnavy on Aug 28, 2010 9:16:14 GMT 12
As an interested foreigner, I went quiet on this forum and thread because I was stirring things too much and offending too many people with my aggression. More recent sensible debate made me think things were changing for the better in the Kiwi national psyche...and then someone called sirbean pitched up! You can tell things are probing new depths when some self professed REMF ("RE" stands for "rear echelon" and MF stands for whatever you want it to) opens a personal attack on Skyhawkdon!! The same Skyhawkdon who has been the most measured and calm protagonist for the NZ military in particular, and your country in general over the years. A man most countries would honour and be proud to call "a hero". Good luck team! Be certain sirbean will be amongst the first REMFs complaining about lack of preparedness when things change just a little and NZ is caught with their pants down...  |
|
|
|
Post by sirbean on Aug 28, 2010 9:36:25 GMT 12
Well oldnavy....like skyhawkdon show some proof please its that simple.
|
|
|
|
Post by yogi on Aug 28, 2010 10:40:50 GMT 12
some proof of what?
Try reading the posts, assimilating that information and forming an argument to counter because at the moment you really are making yourself look like a bit of chump.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldnavy on Aug 28, 2010 10:47:13 GMT 12
sirbean, I have made my point aplenty on this forum. You are the proof!
Do you have a car or a house? If so, do you have insurance? Most sensibe people have insurance. Not because they want a crash or a house fire, just because if you don't have it and an accident happens you lose everything.
A defence force is insurance. What you currently advocate is not a defence force, it is a government owned commercial airline. By this advocacy you are prepared to lose everything if something bad/unforeseen happens. Fine. Good luck with that, I hope it works for you.
It's that simple and it's not my problem. Please don't let me disturb your highly educated, free medical, big pensioned life. At the rate NZ is bleeding people to Bondi, you'll be ours soon anyway.
skyhawkdon, don't lose heart. a) you know I am not serious, b) you know I am really an NZDF protagonist and c) you have dealt with REMFs before. They don't last long because they are back in the rear doing what it is that REMFs do.
|
|
|
|
Post by sirbean on Aug 28, 2010 11:33:03 GMT 12
Like it or lump it New Zealands future defence force will be more of a coastguard and the general public will not care.The leaders in Wellington are well on track to this and it will not be reversed in any shape or form.
Face it...our Orions do fisheries patrol and search and rescue this is a role that can and trust me will be performed by either a civilian Q300 type or a similar type operated by the NZDF in the future this will be a huge cost saving.
The Hercules should have been replaced and its another half arsed idea to upgrade them at their age....this is proving to be a disaster this upgrade.
The Hercules have served this country and the taxpayer so well and a replacement would not have stirred a ripple in mainstream New Zealand.
As the the Helicopter fleet the NH90 and 109's are a great move just a little short on numbers but I beleive this is been closely looked at.
My argument on here is with Air Combat Aircraft to which we have been without for nearly 10 years with no adverse affect.
When we had an Air Combat Force there was plenty of events that they could and were capable of performing in yet they did not and this dates from Korea till the disbandement.
I have asked a simpl,e question why they were not used...were they offered?
Lets face it what we had and numbers wise was like comparing a small ant on an elephants arse compared to what other countries operate...we are not one of the big boys never have nor will be.
I say lets concentrate on what we do well search and rescue and fisheries patrol,transport and the SAS.
The cold war is over...manned combat aircraft are on there final stint,itsa new world get with it.
|
|
Every one of his posts has shown his total lack of knowledge on this subject. I'm not going to waste any more of my time with him. 
??
