|
|
Post by caromeg on Feb 2, 2010 6:31:33 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Feb 2, 2010 18:14:37 GMT 12
Well, now there's a surprise!  It must give these people a nice warm, fuzzy feeling, knowing that by having their collective snouts well and truly wedged in the UN feed trough (whilst drinking lots of champagne and eating some very nice and expensive foreign cheese!) that you really can change the world for the 'better' - and all from the comfort of an air-conditioned office in NY. |
|
|
|
Post by yogi on Feb 5, 2010 21:26:01 GMT 12
I decided to look at this link
"http://www.disarmsecure.org/people.php"
Alternative security?! what the heck is that? hope like hell and pray to god the agressors leave you alone I suppose.
oh dear god. peace studies?
wake up lady.
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwiscanfly on Feb 23, 2010 12:55:29 GMT 12
skyhwak Don i agree with your points, they are not over the top and would be in the best intrests of NZ, the additional helo's and transports is what we need the most and in reality we would only be in effect changing the Air force in one major way and that would be adding a strike force, with your sujestions no major changes would need to made made to the infrastructure (maby some). I feel that at the moment we have some of the right capibilities but just not enough of them!!  (by the way new to the forum so any tips feel free  ) |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Feb 23, 2010 13:03:50 GMT 12
Welcome kiwiscanfly!
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwiscanfly on Feb 23, 2010 13:10:44 GMT 12
regarding the "attack helicopter" idea, I personally don't think its a bad one. I've actually thought for a while they would be a useful addition to deployments in the likes of East Timor etc. We wouldn't be talking Apaches here, more like MD530N / 630N defenders. The Leonard manning incident in ET suggested we need "in house" close air support when operating in hostile areas against "guerilla" type forces. Defenders would be ideal in my opinion as they are inexpensive, have excellent existing civilian spares and logistics chains in NZ, engineers qualified to maintain them are plentiful here, you can fit 2 in a Herk at once, and they are excellent, nimble performers, able to operate from very small areas. They can sling a variety of weaponry including a couple of miniguns which can make provide a lot of firepower on demand. They would be more practical to deploy than fixed wing aircraft, and they can be based away from the main RNZAF bases. Perhaps 3 or 4 in an operational training role at Ohakea and the rest at Burnham, Linton or Waiouru. I await my consultancy fee.... Mate I agree, Yes NZ is an island and some say that they would rather have a new frigate but when NZ troops are deployed they need some type of direct accurate air cover/attack. Im not sure if you all know but the new goverment is trying to push for more A109's and NH90's (feel free to correct me on this) and the A109 can be armed! it can have hellfires and Tow missiles as well as FN hesteral Gun and missle pods. the advantage here is that any upgrade would not suffer such as the C-130 as the A109 LUH is designed for weapons wiring and systems. This would hill a major capibility shortfall as well as allowing a already existing system to fill even more roles (more for less kind of thing) as well as being more affordable then introducing a newer system then the A109 which is new anyway. The can also be deployed on the new OPV's the Cantubery and the ANZAC frigates!!! i think this we be the best option! Comments? |
|
|
|
Post by vs on Feb 23, 2010 15:01:41 GMT 12
How about they also put money into the RNZAF Museum. They do amazing things with what they have.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Feb 23, 2010 17:18:56 GMT 12
I agree Phil. Perhaps the Ministry of Culture and Heritage could find extra cash in their budget for the museum but in no way should it be taken from the NZ Defence budget.
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwiscanfly on Feb 26, 2010 1:15:47 GMT 12
yes the RNZAF museum is a very important part of who the RNZAF is and how they became who they are and must be treated as such in all areas. However the defence white paper has some other major issues to deal with.............. C-130, P3K-2 delays as well as having to look at the long term needs and capibilities of the air force as well as the wider NZDF, I think that money would be better spent in the actual needs of the men and women on the ground as well as trying to get every cent's worth of their money (hence my last comment on the A109's) and that the museum with regards to defence spending is down on the list of need to do's at the moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Freighter5910 on Feb 26, 2010 19:45:21 GMT 12
.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Feb 26, 2010 20:23:47 GMT 12
My theory Steve is that at Ohakea they might get along perhaps 10,000 people if they're lucky at a fairly out of the way base where the weather is incredibly fickle and as has often happened the fying might be cancelled. Even on a good day it will get little publicity mileage, only the local Pamerston North press and Air Force News, and this forum.
But at Wanaka they have an almost guaranteed audience of more than 100,000 people who will be attending regardless as they have planned to be there for up to two years, and the weatehr is more stable there, and they will have global coverage through the entourage of media that attends what is now allegedly the third biggest warbird airshow in the world apparently.
So when you look at it that way it makes some sense and of course the crews also get in some mountain flying and away training, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Feb 26, 2010 20:29:44 GMT 12
Since they're so 'cash-strapped' you've got to wonder then why they cancelled the Ohakea Open Day in favour of supporting Warbirds over Wanaka as their main 'public' display. It's got to cost them a hell of a lot more in fuel and logistics alone to mount a full display in Wanaka compared to operating from their own base. Not the sort of decision you'd think a cash-strapped organisation would make. I say 'public' in inverted commas too because realistically it is not a format that is available to most the public. It's a very expensive exercise getting to Warbirds over Wanaka and the location and expense pretty much excludes people taking the whole family along. On the other hand the Open Day format is easily accessible to the majority of the public and their families. I have put this to the Air Force, but they were unable, or unwilling to explain the logic behind the decision... perhaps there isn't any... Last time I checked we aren't here for your viewing pleasure. Wanaka is an internationaly renound air show, as opposed to the Ohakea open day, which isn't even an air show, it is a base open day. As an example, '06 didn't even have flying. They are not exactly comparable. |
|
|
|
Post by Freighter5910 on Feb 26, 2010 20:53:54 GMT 12
.
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Feb 26, 2010 21:14:59 GMT 12
I said we are not here for your viewing pleasure.
I would hazard a guess that the cost vs benefit of attending the Wanaka event may have had something to do with it being supported. I think you will find it was not a case of chosing one or the other.
That, and not having to disrupt the operation of an entire base for a day (to set up), and operate the same base, in its entirety, for an additional day for the event itself. Also remember AK units would still have to come to OH as well. A fair amount of dosh gets spent by unit's preparing displays, not to mention all the time that's spent doing that, and not supporting operational outputs.
Since you don't seem to have a dollar figure for either event, your condemnation of Air's decision not to run an open day at Ohakea seems based more on you being personally inconvenienced than it does on any concrete facts. The whole starting point for your outrage is an assumption you've made on the costs involved. And you know what an assumption is the mother of.
|
|
|
|
Post by Freighter5910 on Feb 26, 2010 21:29:27 GMT 12
.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Feb 26, 2010 21:54:54 GMT 12
There's no need for that sort of attitude I was not trying to adopt any sort of attitude, I was simply offering a theory. Sorry if it seems to have offended you. Actually the case is they are spending money on one event rather than two. They always have an Ohakea Open Day on even years like 2010 and also always attend Wanaka on those same even years. This year to save money they have dropped one of the two usual events. Simple. I didn't say that Ohakea was out of the way compared to Wanaka. I said it was 'fairly out of the way', full stop. Both places are remote from most of the country's population mass. You're much more likely to get people travelling from Auckland, Hamilton, Christchurch, Dunedin etc and possibly even Wellington to the Wanaka air show than you are to an open day at Ohakea, despite the remoteness of Wanaka, because it has much more on offer. But Wanaka aside, the fact remains that Ohakea is a long way from most of the country's population. It's not next to a large city like Whenuapai to Auckland, Rongotai to Wellington or Wigram and Harewood to Christchurch in terms of populace nextdoor. That's all I meant. People may forget that to drive from Auckland to Ohakea is about 8 hours - who would do that on the off-chance the rain and wind might stop for a day so some planes could fly? Maybe you could fly into Palmerston North from say Auckland, Hamilton or Christchurch, etc but flying into rural airports like that can be as expensive as flying to the equally rural Wanaka or Queenstown, in fact I'd bet the latter two have more flights inwards on airshow day too. I don't agree at all that Ohakea is easily accessible to the public. Perhaps if you live in Palmerston North, Bulls or Fielding, that's about it though. It's even a fair old way from Wellington, Wanganui and Hastings/Napier. The diehard fans will make such a trip without thinking but the general public won't. As Phil says a lot of budget is spent tying up an entire base in preparation for an Open Day when they could be doing the real work of the RNZAF. However simply attending an away airshow with a small crew and a few aircraft is not going to be much more money and manhours, it's probably a lot less. I know from my time in the RNZAF how many extra jobs get thrown everybody's way in preparng for an open day, it takes up lots of time and energy to get all the displays ready right across a base to please the visiting public. Every section is expected to participate in that preparation - ven the support trades like Medics, Admin, etc as they all have their own displays to create and man - whilst also carry out their normal duties. Also a flying programme has to be created and worked up, etc. then on the actual day hundreds of Air Force personnel are tied up parking cars, manning stands, acting as security, talking to the public, looking after veterans, and also running the base and the flying actiivities in the normal way. The budget for an open day on a base the size of Ohakea would surely be immense. And having the added bonus that someone else has done all the planning and organising thoughout the past year or so to stage the airshow at Wanaka and you have to merely turn up and perform would also be an added bonus to the RNZAF, wouldn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Feb 26, 2010 21:56:25 GMT 12
PS - your post above mine was not there when I began composing my response, sorry mate. I can see what you were saying but I think there's much more to consider.
|
|
|
|
Post by caromeg on Feb 26, 2010 22:34:25 GMT 12
Guys we are getting off topic.
If we are going to go down that line -you might no attendance at all soon - not so rediculous as it sounds - been done before.
The review cant be too far off and it will be realy interesting to see it results.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Feb 26, 2010 23:08:17 GMT 12
You're right, the RNZAF began major cutbacks in 1972 and between 1975 and 1981 there was virtually no airshow attendances due to cutbacks in funding and the oil crisis. Let's hope that never happens again.
|
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Feb 28, 2010 10:38:09 GMT 12
You're right, the RNZAF began major cutbacks in 1972 and between 1975 and 1981 there was virtually no airshow attendances due to cutbacks in funding and the oil crisis. Let's hope that never happens again. Hear, hear!!! It's important that the RNZAF is in the public eye as the cutbacks have certainly reduced the profile of the Air Force somewhat to more of a Government Airline, a shadow of its former self. Whatever the outcome of the White Paper I think that for the past 40 years Defence and the Air Force in particular, have provided the NZ taxpayer with excellent bang for buck, unlike many other government services. |
|
(by the way new to the forum so any tips feel free 
)
