RNZAF jets sold!!
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If New Zealanders can not see the merit of an air combat wing in future regional operations, then the logic of airpower in the war on terror has been lost on them aswell
They wouldn't be the only ones...
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: back to the land of small pay and big bills
Age: 50
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I reckon the Incoming Govt..whatever form they take should purchase a dozen of those two seat hawk trainers that Aus is building under licence (I think) They have some combat capability and will keep a core of personnel ready in case we need to re-equip later..
..since they are trainers they should be reasonably priced??!!
..plus, 'cause we are mates with Aus and they want us to carry our weight and we let them win at sports etc they will probably give us a good cash deal, with extended warranty..aye cobbers?
..since they are trainers they should be reasonably priced??!!
..plus, 'cause we are mates with Aus and they want us to carry our weight and we let them win at sports etc they will probably give us a good cash deal, with extended warranty..aye cobbers?
"We will preserve the great heritage of the RNZAF. We will do that, absolutely," Tactical Air Services chairman and former US Navy fighter pilot Hoss Pearson said yesterday. "Whatever we are allowed to do to preserve the New Zealand heritage," he said.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread is becoming a commedian's dream. So much fertile material...
Without being nasty, any suggestions to help Mr Bonanza???
"We will preserve the great heritage of the RNZAF. We will do that, absolutely," Tactical Air Services chairman and former US Navy fighter pilot Hoss Pearson said yesterday. "Whatever we are allowed to do to preserve the New Zealand heritage," he said.
Last edited by Lodown; 15th Sep 2005 at 03:35.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it Ironic how patriotic the Kiwi's are yet they are the first people in the world to work for another nation without the blinking of an eyelid. Its got to the point where more Kiwi's serve the Australian Defence Force than whats left across the "dietch"!! Now I am not anti-NZ ( I have alot of great Kiwi mates), but mate they have a chip on there shoulders about Australia. Talk about biting the hand that feeds them!!!!!!!
Kiwi PPRuNer
Join Date: May 2000
Location: rockingham, western australia
Age: 42
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
now i dont agree with what clark did, howwever i will quote the great oxford union speach given by the late david lange,
"we are actually told that new zealanders cannot decide for themselves how to defend new zealand, but are obliged to adopt the methods which others use to defend themselves"
and (although it makes reference to nuclear weapons, it would also apply to most areas of defence)
" to compel an ally to accept nuclear weapons against the wishes of that ally is to take the moral position of totalitarianism which allows for no self determination and which is exactly the evil that we are suposed to be fighting against"
now david lange also made the point that for nz to accept those weapons would only proliferate the weapons race in this area, we are not puppets of the usa like australia are, we do not have terroism warnings affecting us, we maintain a small but effective defence force , helping those who cannot help themselves, now i would love to see fighter jets once again in nz colours i dont think anyone else from any other country should be in position to comment on us
"we are actually told that new zealanders cannot decide for themselves how to defend new zealand, but are obliged to adopt the methods which others use to defend themselves"
and (although it makes reference to nuclear weapons, it would also apply to most areas of defence)
" to compel an ally to accept nuclear weapons against the wishes of that ally is to take the moral position of totalitarianism which allows for no self determination and which is exactly the evil that we are suposed to be fighting against"
now david lange also made the point that for nz to accept those weapons would only proliferate the weapons race in this area, we are not puppets of the usa like australia are, we do not have terroism warnings affecting us, we maintain a small but effective defence force , helping those who cannot help themselves, now i would love to see fighter jets once again in nz colours i dont think anyone else from any other country should be in position to comment on us
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You could also make the case that the proliferation of precise standoff weapons makes the old Skyhawks redundant.
When the Americans attack, they lead with stealth technology and cruise missiles, rightly concluding that it makes more sense to attack with weapons against which there is little defense. Not sure that applies to a Skyhawk.
When the Americans attack, they lead with stealth technology and cruise missiles, rightly concluding that it makes more sense to attack with weapons against which there is little defense. Not sure that applies to a Skyhawk.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: South of the border
Age: 53
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about the training so vital to those members of the NZDF who deploy to hostile areas? How many of our SAS boys actually get to practice FACing? And our Navy is reduced to asking civilian companies to fly surface strike missions - one aeroplane at a time. How are the army going to practice using Rapier?
All these things, quite apart from the massive improvements in pilot training, can be achieved using a relatively inexpensive fleet of modern light jet trainers... of the sort that just got sold for no apparent reason other than blind ideology.
All these things, quite apart from the massive improvements in pilot training, can be achieved using a relatively inexpensive fleet of modern light jet trainers... of the sort that just got sold for no apparent reason other than blind ideology.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Anywhere I want
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The SAS got flown at VERY short notice to all parts of the friendly world to get FAC trained prior to this bunfight. It IS costing big $$ to train not just the SAS but front line troops on FAC.
We aren't getting Rapier either. Some other sort of missile.
The SAS in 'stan are "Tier 1" so more combat than Intel actually.
Our Orions are slowly being pushed away from allied use as they can't find Subs. And to quote the current def minister "They wern't designed to hunt submarines"!! I ask ya!
We aren't getting Rapier either. Some other sort of missile.
The SAS in 'stan are "Tier 1" so more combat than Intel actually.
Our Orions are slowly being pushed away from allied use as they can't find Subs. And to quote the current def minister "They wern't designed to hunt submarines"!! I ask ya!
Dave Martin
I fail to see the difference between selling your A4's to the Phillipinos or a military assistance programme where the A4's are presented at a token fee- sort of what we did with ex-RAN A4's in the 80's so you could maintain a semblance of an air force.
If the A4's were sold to the Phillipines, they would have been involved in offensive operations against Islamic militants in Mindanao. But that would have been OK because you made money out of the deal?
I know it's convenient to be isolationist, but Al Qaeda is no doubt aware that NZ forces were involved in the Crusader operation in Timor and New Zealand SAS soldiers are operating under American command, with borrowed airpower, conducting offensive operations in Afganistan.
I would suggest that it will be politically convenient for Al Qaeda to target New Zealand soon after/ if it strikes at Australia. Where/when New Zealand is struck will probably have origins in the Southern Phillipines.
MOR
Aren't your SAS working with RAF Harriers in Afganistan? Your Skyhawks had similar capabilities in the surface attack role.
Blowing open the airspace into Korea or Iran not a role suited for a small air force such as the RNZAF. But providing a competant air strike capability, with F16's say, useful in a myriad of roles such as regional security and possibly distant UN sanctioned operations.
I fail to see the difference between selling your A4's to the Phillipinos or a military assistance programme where the A4's are presented at a token fee- sort of what we did with ex-RAN A4's in the 80's so you could maintain a semblance of an air force.
If the A4's were sold to the Phillipines, they would have been involved in offensive operations against Islamic militants in Mindanao. But that would have been OK because you made money out of the deal?
I know it's convenient to be isolationist, but Al Qaeda is no doubt aware that NZ forces were involved in the Crusader operation in Timor and New Zealand SAS soldiers are operating under American command, with borrowed airpower, conducting offensive operations in Afganistan.
I would suggest that it will be politically convenient for Al Qaeda to target New Zealand soon after/ if it strikes at Australia. Where/when New Zealand is struck will probably have origins in the Southern Phillipines.
MOR
Aren't your SAS working with RAF Harriers in Afganistan? Your Skyhawks had similar capabilities in the surface attack role.
Blowing open the airspace into Korea or Iran not a role suited for a small air force such as the RNZAF. But providing a competant air strike capability, with F16's say, useful in a myriad of roles such as regional security and possibly distant UN sanctioned operations.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gnadenburg
You really are living on a different planet to the rest of us, aren't you?
How would you know what they would be used for? And, more to the point, how do you know that the somewhat flaky Philippine government wouldn't do what Saddam did to the US?
Yes, nice of us to help you out, wasn't it... but, so what? Al Qaeda have only one aim, to inflict maximum damage on the US and it's allies. They have limited resources and a strike in NZ would be a waste of them. They would far rather hit juicy US or Euro targets. Even if they were to target us (and I'd be more worried about the Maori party getting a seat in Parliament), they still have to get into the country undetected... which is relatively hard in NZ when using the normal methods.
What do you base that on? It is far more likely that any strike would originate in the previously mentioned countries north of Oz.
Yeah, Skyhawks hover really well...
You really are living on a different planet to the rest of us, aren't you?
If the A4's were sold to the Phillipines, they would have been involved in offensive operations against Islamic militants in Mindanao. But that would have been OK because you made money out of the deal?
Al Qaeda is no doubt aware that NZ forces were involved in the Crusader operation in Timor
Where/when New Zealand is struck will probably have origins in the Southern Phillipines.
Your Skyhawks had similar capabilities in the surface attack role.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gnadenburg,
Hate to say it, but I think you could probably trust your NZ neighbours (lacking in any resistance or insurgency) to use A4s a little more ethically than the Philippines. That to me makes a world of difference.
While they may well be involved in operations against militants, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a bit of mission creep likely to evolve over the years. While Indo and Phil are different kettles of fish, they share a volitility and potential for NZ supplied hardware to end up employed for not-so-pleasant purposes. Not something NZ can afford to get involved with.
As for isolationism: Al Quaida and the present rise in Islamicism could have been contained many decades ago with a less self-centred approach to foreign policy. It's not an issue of adopting greater military partnerships with Australia, which in turn ties us to the US. There is a whole spectrum if Islamicist thought; while OBL might condemn us crusaders for invading Timor, the majority of "pissed off Islam" is much more focussed on the actions of the US, UK, Aus and Italy's current involvement in Iraq.
Far from being isolationist, a few steps back from Australia right now is a rather unsubtle way of saying we don't approve of what you or your dearest American ally is currently doing. The end result is we are safer, a clear signal is sent of dissent with US foreign policy and our standing is improved.
This isn't to say that NZ is no longer involved. We play our part in Afghanistan and elsewhere, and to a small extent Iraq. OBL can certainly label us an enemy, but we don't foolishly incur the wrath of those that otherwise have no beef with us.
Hate to say it, but I think you could probably trust your NZ neighbours (lacking in any resistance or insurgency) to use A4s a little more ethically than the Philippines. That to me makes a world of difference.
While they may well be involved in operations against militants, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a bit of mission creep likely to evolve over the years. While Indo and Phil are different kettles of fish, they share a volitility and potential for NZ supplied hardware to end up employed for not-so-pleasant purposes. Not something NZ can afford to get involved with.
As for isolationism: Al Quaida and the present rise in Islamicism could have been contained many decades ago with a less self-centred approach to foreign policy. It's not an issue of adopting greater military partnerships with Australia, which in turn ties us to the US. There is a whole spectrum if Islamicist thought; while OBL might condemn us crusaders for invading Timor, the majority of "pissed off Islam" is much more focussed on the actions of the US, UK, Aus and Italy's current involvement in Iraq.
Far from being isolationist, a few steps back from Australia right now is a rather unsubtle way of saying we don't approve of what you or your dearest American ally is currently doing. The end result is we are safer, a clear signal is sent of dissent with US foreign policy and our standing is improved.
This isn't to say that NZ is no longer involved. We play our part in Afghanistan and elsewhere, and to a small extent Iraq. OBL can certainly label us an enemy, but we don't foolishly incur the wrath of those that otherwise have no beef with us.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The sad thing about OBL and Al Qaeda is that everybody, even other Muslims, are the enemy. I see they declared war on the Shi'ites in Iraq today... their own people, ethnically. The simple fact is that fundamentalist Islam hates everybody, and wants to kill everybody, but themselves.
Please note the qualifier "fundamentalist" above.
Please note the qualifier "fundamentalist" above.
Dave Martin
Your argument is the frustrating thing about contemporary New Zealanders- your as fickle and as grandstanding as the French!
You were happy to sell the A4's to the Phillipines in exchange for F16's, but now, it would be morally unethical?
I concur Iraq is disasterous policy. However, I have taken issue with the fact that New Zealanders continue to run down their defence fundamentals in a region that is a powder keg for terrorism.
The southern Phillipines is becoming significant- Jehmaih Islamiah and Abu Sayyaf are being tied up by Al Qaeda. It is not just tribal insurgency, but a breeding ground for sophisticated Islamic terrorism. Indonesian,Thai & Malaysian nationals are being trained in the Phillipines before filtering back to their respective battlegrounds.
I would be very surprised not to see some sort of eventual, counter-insurgency involvement of NZ & Australian forces in the Phillipines - in whatever form.
MOR
How frightfully rude; but I must confirm I'm not from Planet New Zealand!
First quote/ counter-quote: it is fair to asume ex-Kiwi A4's would have been involved in recent interdiction operations against Muslim fighters in Mindanao if the F16 deal had gone through. Why? Because the Phillipine AF has nothing suitably operational other than turbo-props! The statement reference your A4's being a threat to the US absurd militarily and hypocritical considering you were going to sell them to th Phillpots anyway!
Second quote/ counter-quote: I would suggest your head in the sand or up your a$$ naivety makes you frightfully more vulnerable! Al Qaeda makes continous mention of East Timor. New Zealanders are in Afganistan. Al Qaeda will finance attacks on NZ when politically suitable.
Third quote/ counter-quote: Indonesian terrorist, Phillipino trained! Read a newspaper.
Fourth quote/ counter quote- You underestimate the ability of your former air combat wing, to deliver a mission similarily to what your SAS is occassionally directing in Afganistan. When bombing the Taliban it would be a brave pilot to hover by the way!
The bludging Kiwis deliver little more than a police force defence capability. Kudos to the 700 New Zealanders a week who come to Australia to shirk their bludging title!
Your argument is the frustrating thing about contemporary New Zealanders- your as fickle and as grandstanding as the French!
You were happy to sell the A4's to the Phillipines in exchange for F16's, but now, it would be morally unethical?
I concur Iraq is disasterous policy. However, I have taken issue with the fact that New Zealanders continue to run down their defence fundamentals in a region that is a powder keg for terrorism.
The southern Phillipines is becoming significant- Jehmaih Islamiah and Abu Sayyaf are being tied up by Al Qaeda. It is not just tribal insurgency, but a breeding ground for sophisticated Islamic terrorism. Indonesian,Thai & Malaysian nationals are being trained in the Phillipines before filtering back to their respective battlegrounds.
I would be very surprised not to see some sort of eventual, counter-insurgency involvement of NZ & Australian forces in the Phillipines - in whatever form.
MOR
How frightfully rude; but I must confirm I'm not from Planet New Zealand!
First quote/ counter-quote: it is fair to asume ex-Kiwi A4's would have been involved in recent interdiction operations against Muslim fighters in Mindanao if the F16 deal had gone through. Why? Because the Phillipine AF has nothing suitably operational other than turbo-props! The statement reference your A4's being a threat to the US absurd militarily and hypocritical considering you were going to sell them to th Phillpots anyway!
Second quote/ counter-quote: I would suggest your head in the sand or up your a$$ naivety makes you frightfully more vulnerable! Al Qaeda makes continous mention of East Timor. New Zealanders are in Afganistan. Al Qaeda will finance attacks on NZ when politically suitable.
Third quote/ counter-quote: Indonesian terrorist, Phillipino trained! Read a newspaper.
Fourth quote/ counter quote- You underestimate the ability of your former air combat wing, to deliver a mission similarily to what your SAS is occassionally directing in Afganistan. When bombing the Taliban it would be a brave pilot to hover by the way!
The bludging Kiwis deliver little more than a police force defence capability. Kudos to the 700 New Zealanders a week who come to Australia to shirk their bludging title!