RNZAF Recruitment
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Age: 84
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was another, more complete, thread on RNZAF Recruitment from the RAF; indeed a number of the successful applicants are already here, including two Sqn Ldrs in Air Staff!
For those thinking of coming out here, the quality of life is great. Outside in the local community its an excellent, family oriented environment with lovely people.
The RNZAF itself, whilst a small force in world terms, will certainly pull its weight when the re-equipment programme is completed. For example NZ 6 P-3K2,UK 12 Nimrod MRA4. Apart from that the RNZAF actually value its people with communication up and down the chain. Makes a nice difference and certainly supplies motivation and dare I say adds to morale.
The RNZAF itself, whilst a small force in world terms, will certainly pull its weight when the re-equipment programme is completed. For example NZ 6 P-3K2,UK 12 Nimrod MRA4. Apart from that the RNZAF actually value its people with communication up and down the chain. Makes a nice difference and certainly supplies motivation and dare I say adds to morale.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Crossing Charlie
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RECRUITMENT
This is a very heart warming change from the gloomy threads and posts in the very recent past when A-4s were being sold, the rest of the fleet were drawing OAP and the whole RNZAF seemed to be down sizing to flying club status. Not helped by all acounts to a government not commited to defence?
What has happened to bring about a metamorphosis?
What has happened to bring about a metamorphosis?
Low Ball,
To me, the government has correctly identified the priorities for the NZDF and, more importantly, put in the money to fund it. So within the RNZAF we have the P-3K2 with the capability of the MRA4 plus a bit (no airframe changes so less risk) extended life plus new avionics for the C-130 (now a cross between the UK J&K), new avionics and cargo capability for the 757's plus the NH-90's new buy configured for NZ but no funny bits giving major cost creep.
These are only the RNZAF improvements, both the Navy and Army have updates to their core capabilties going on.
Professionally, what more can you ask for. Plus, as I indicated before, your input is valued.
Being here is a no brainer for pure job satisfaction.
Cheers
To me, the government has correctly identified the priorities for the NZDF and, more importantly, put in the money to fund it. So within the RNZAF we have the P-3K2 with the capability of the MRA4 plus a bit (no airframe changes so less risk) extended life plus new avionics for the C-130 (now a cross between the UK J&K), new avionics and cargo capability for the 757's plus the NH-90's new buy configured for NZ but no funny bits giving major cost creep.
These are only the RNZAF improvements, both the Navy and Army have updates to their core capabilties going on.
Professionally, what more can you ask for. Plus, as I indicated before, your input is valued.
Being here is a no brainer for pure job satisfaction.
Cheers
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Age: 84
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Low Ball, I was there the day of the disbandment of three squadrons, with all the accompanying infrastructure that that implies, and I was there when the very last fly-past by a guy now flying Hawks for the RAAF came within feet of where I was standing, and yes, it hurt.
But, and it's a huge but,[if it's not too trite to mention!], Kiwis, and the RNZAF, have always fought above their weight, and they have the temperament to get out the 'number eight wire' handbook when it all turns to custard! The loss of the strike force was quickly put into a dark recess somewhere, and new emphasis was applied to what we had and could improve on. That's a people process folks, and there are always good people around in a tight organisation. Plus some additional funding from a very embarrassed government! When you're hot, you're hot!
NLH has it right. If anyone can, a Kiwi can! Ask Ed Hillary!
But, and it's a huge but,[if it's not too trite to mention!], Kiwis, and the RNZAF, have always fought above their weight, and they have the temperament to get out the 'number eight wire' handbook when it all turns to custard! The loss of the strike force was quickly put into a dark recess somewhere, and new emphasis was applied to what we had and could improve on. That's a people process folks, and there are always good people around in a tight organisation. Plus some additional funding from a very embarrassed government! When you're hot, you're hot!
NLH has it right. If anyone can, a Kiwi can! Ask Ed Hillary!
Last edited by Samuel; 15th Feb 2006 at 08:30.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: north of the wall
Age: 62
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone know how many people the RNZAF are looking for? Will the recent changes to immigration law, i.e. 5 years residency before you can get citizenship have any effect on contract length?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Age: 84
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eventually,up to 160, although I suspect they have already been selected in the interview process.
I reckon it's a take-over myself! Welcome guys, it's a neat life-style.
I reckon it's a take-over myself! Welcome guys, it's a neat life-style.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Age: 84
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To my knowledge, no specific number has been mentioned, so any guess is just that, a guess. If the current 14 Iroquois are the benchmark, then a figure somewhat less than that might be about right. The final decision will also depend on the associated project to replace existing training helicopters with something allowing progression to both the NH 90 and the Seasprite.
Not enough $$$ ...
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
how many NH-90's are they getting, ive heard as low as 8, seems a pittifull amount for nz, they should really get upwards of 20
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chamonix
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good luck if your considering the move.
The people in the RNZAF are great; a fact I truly appreciated after leaving it for another Air Force. Being the permanent poor cousin/ underdog gives the RNZAF a huge amount of mongrel reflected in their performance against better paid and equipped outfits.
That's my story and I am sticking to it.
Samuel, the Pilot you refer to is now a Hornet Driver (poor guy)
The people in the RNZAF are great; a fact I truly appreciated after leaving it for another Air Force. Being the permanent poor cousin/ underdog gives the RNZAF a huge amount of mongrel reflected in their performance against better paid and equipped outfits.
That's my story and I am sticking to it.
Samuel, the Pilot you refer to is now a Hornet Driver (poor guy)
Kiwi PPRuNer
Join Date: May 2000
Location: rockingham, western australia
Age: 42
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well our 40yr old+ "h"'s do a pretty good job,
i might add to wishtobeflyings post,
i believe aussie are getting 12 for there special forces, they allready have considerable numbers of blackhawks, we need 3 or 4 minimum for army support, 2 for search and rescue, that would only leave 2 for overseas deployment and maintenance
i might add to wishtobeflyings post,
i believe aussie are getting 12 for there special forces, they allready have considerable numbers of blackhawks, we need 3 or 4 minimum for army support, 2 for search and rescue, that would only leave 2 for overseas deployment and maintenance
C'mon Kiwi C'mon C'mon eh?
Glad to see the loss of a pointless strike force (discuss) hasn't effed it up for the truck and wokkas. Sad though the loss of pointy things seemed, the redistribution of wealth to the real front line might be taken on board over here in Pomgonia (Compare and contrast).
Glad to see the loss of a pointless strike force (discuss) hasn't effed it up for the truck and wokkas. Sad though the loss of pointy things seemed, the redistribution of wealth to the real front line might be taken on board over here in Pomgonia (Compare and contrast).
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Age: 84
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah! The hoary old devil's advocate!
OK, I'll give you rein
The disbandment of the air combat force has been justified, rather oddly, on the grounds espoused by Helengrad that it hadn't been used since 'Confrontation'. [She, of course, was one of the student protesters who objected to the purchase in the first place!]. If combat is what is meant by being used, then we didn't use a battalion for a generation until East Timor, but no-one has suggested that was an argument for abolishing infantry battalions.
The point about insurance policies is that we hope they will never have to be used in practice, though, our air combat force was used daily in New Zealand and Australia and regularly in Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand. In Australia, where one squadron was based, we helped with training for both the Australian army and navy. Twice every year our aircraft flew to Singapore or Malaysia to take part in regular exercises under the Five Power Defence Arrangements. They were one of the most visible pledges of our concern with ASEAN's security.We are now virtually invisible!
The disbandment was more about internal bickering than factual defence policy, and that was proved when a complete generation of army senior management was removed from the picture, and a new, air force as it happened, Chief of Defence Staff appointed to sort things out, which he has done admirably. Another aspect advanced by Helen was the patently weak argument that we couldn't afford to either maintain the then current strike force, or the proposed leased F16. New Zealand is not a poor country, and we can afford whatever we choose and arguments against this are really not financial but saying we don't need defence full stop!The cost of the contract for leased F16s was NZ$30M a year for ten years in 1999, and amounted to less than one day's spending on social welfare!
We not only lost the squadrons, but all the expertise, the infrastructure, and the people, to the benefit of the UK and Australia. So the loss was not "pointless". As for redistribution to the 'real front line', the vehicles bought for the NZ Army are of dubious value! They can only go offshore by ship, they are vulnerable, cannot be airlifted [well, not in a Herc!], and they didn't cope too well with tree-stumps in the Aussie outback. So what the hell is their role? Toys for the boys on the 'real front line'?
The squadrons have gone, they won't be back, and we've moved on. One good thing in the news of late was that the VC awarded to Sgt James Ward, and held by 75 Sqn since it was given by the family for safe-keeping [ the one on display for all those years was a replica; the real thing being in a bank vault!], was recently returned to the family, and accepted by a great nephew of Sgt Ward.
OK, I'll give you rein
The disbandment of the air combat force has been justified, rather oddly, on the grounds espoused by Helengrad that it hadn't been used since 'Confrontation'. [She, of course, was one of the student protesters who objected to the purchase in the first place!]. If combat is what is meant by being used, then we didn't use a battalion for a generation until East Timor, but no-one has suggested that was an argument for abolishing infantry battalions.
The point about insurance policies is that we hope they will never have to be used in practice, though, our air combat force was used daily in New Zealand and Australia and regularly in Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand. In Australia, where one squadron was based, we helped with training for both the Australian army and navy. Twice every year our aircraft flew to Singapore or Malaysia to take part in regular exercises under the Five Power Defence Arrangements. They were one of the most visible pledges of our concern with ASEAN's security.We are now virtually invisible!
The disbandment was more about internal bickering than factual defence policy, and that was proved when a complete generation of army senior management was removed from the picture, and a new, air force as it happened, Chief of Defence Staff appointed to sort things out, which he has done admirably. Another aspect advanced by Helen was the patently weak argument that we couldn't afford to either maintain the then current strike force, or the proposed leased F16. New Zealand is not a poor country, and we can afford whatever we choose and arguments against this are really not financial but saying we don't need defence full stop!The cost of the contract for leased F16s was NZ$30M a year for ten years in 1999, and amounted to less than one day's spending on social welfare!
We not only lost the squadrons, but all the expertise, the infrastructure, and the people, to the benefit of the UK and Australia. So the loss was not "pointless". As for redistribution to the 'real front line', the vehicles bought for the NZ Army are of dubious value! They can only go offshore by ship, they are vulnerable, cannot be airlifted [well, not in a Herc!], and they didn't cope too well with tree-stumps in the Aussie outback. So what the hell is their role? Toys for the boys on the 'real front line'?
The squadrons have gone, they won't be back, and we've moved on. One good thing in the news of late was that the VC awarded to Sgt James Ward, and held by 75 Sqn since it was given by the family for safe-keeping [ the one on display for all those years was a replica; the real thing being in a bank vault!], was recently returned to the family, and accepted by a great nephew of Sgt Ward.