Kiwi A4s Finally Sold
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kiwi A4s Finally Sold
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydispl...ection=general
Mothballed Skyhawks sold to private American company
24.05.2003
10.30am - By IAN STUART
The air force's fleet of mothballed Skyhawk attack fighter bombers have been sold to a private American company.
Advanced Training Systems International Limited confirmed today it was in the final throes of a deal which will see the 17 New Zealand Skyhawks join its existing fleet of 12 Skyhawks at the Williams Gateway Airport in Mesa, Arizona.
The company refused to discuss how much it was paying for the aircraft.
ATSI is a private company which offers military flight training to the American and other air forces.
The deal could include some New Zealand pilots and engineers although the aircraft would continue to be maintained in New Zealand at Air New Zealand subsidiary, Safe Air in Blenheim which has a long history of Skyhawk maintenance.
ATSI chairman, former US Navy fighter pilot, Larry "Hoss" Pearson, told NZPA today his company was negotiating with the Royal Australian Navy for six of the Skyhawks to return to the Nowra naval base near Sydney and resume training with Australian warships.
Before they were mothballed in December, 2001, the air force's No 2 Squadron had six Skyhawks in Nowra where they were considered ideal aircraft to train with the Australian navy because they were small, fast, manoeuvrable and very difficult for a warship's defensive systems to detect.
They also trained in air to air combat with the Royal Australian Air Force.
The Nowra deal with New Zealand was believed to have cost the Australian navy $10m a year.
Mr Pearson said the Skyhawk sale was all but complete although "some issues" with the United States State Department had yet to be worked out.
He denied a rumour circulating among New Zealand aviation circles that one of those issues was the State Department's anger at comments by Prime Minister Helen Clark over the American-led invasion of Iraq.
Because of the avionics and weapons systems in the Skyhawks the State Department must approve the sale.
Mr Pearson said he was "very confident" of the sale going through.
The Skyhawks would be dismantled and packed into containers for shipping back to America, he said.
Mr Pearson said Nowra was "a real possibility. We are in discussions with them".
He said some of the Skyhawks needed work but they were generally in very good condition.
"They have been very well maintained, very well kept. The New Zealand air force and Safe Air have done an excellent job of maintaining these airplanes."
Mr Pearson said ATSI engineers had thoroughly inspected the aircraft and their pilots had flown them and they were "very happy" with the condition of the Skyhawks.
He said one of the attractions of the Skyhawks was that they were fitted with identical systems to F16 fighters which were flown extensively by the United States Air Force and many other air forces.
In 2000 former politician Derek Quigley said the Skyhawk fleet and spares had a market value of about $120m although the New Zealand Ministry of Defence later said $85m would be a good price.
Mr Pearson said he was not at liberty to discuss the cost of buying the aircraft.
However, he said ATSI was very happy it was getting good value for its money.
"We are very happy with the deal we have negotiated. Both sides are happy."
He said it was now only a question of completing the final details of the sale and no one else was in the running.
The deal included all 17 Skyhawks and a large number of spares.
Mr Pearson said it was too soon to say how many New Zealand pilots and engineers were likely to be employed by ATSI.
"Some of the (maintenance) work will stay in New Zealand with Safe Air."
New Zealand originally had 24 Skyhawks after buying 14 brand new in 1970 and 10 second hand in 1984 from the Australian navy. Seven Skyhawks have been destroyed in crashes.
Mr Pearson said Skyhawks were still being flown by several countries, including Israel, Argentina, Brazil, Indonesia and Singapore.
Mothballed Skyhawks sold to private American company
24.05.2003
10.30am - By IAN STUART
The air force's fleet of mothballed Skyhawk attack fighter bombers have been sold to a private American company.
Advanced Training Systems International Limited confirmed today it was in the final throes of a deal which will see the 17 New Zealand Skyhawks join its existing fleet of 12 Skyhawks at the Williams Gateway Airport in Mesa, Arizona.
The company refused to discuss how much it was paying for the aircraft.
ATSI is a private company which offers military flight training to the American and other air forces.
The deal could include some New Zealand pilots and engineers although the aircraft would continue to be maintained in New Zealand at Air New Zealand subsidiary, Safe Air in Blenheim which has a long history of Skyhawk maintenance.
ATSI chairman, former US Navy fighter pilot, Larry "Hoss" Pearson, told NZPA today his company was negotiating with the Royal Australian Navy for six of the Skyhawks to return to the Nowra naval base near Sydney and resume training with Australian warships.
Before they were mothballed in December, 2001, the air force's No 2 Squadron had six Skyhawks in Nowra where they were considered ideal aircraft to train with the Australian navy because they were small, fast, manoeuvrable and very difficult for a warship's defensive systems to detect.
They also trained in air to air combat with the Royal Australian Air Force.
The Nowra deal with New Zealand was believed to have cost the Australian navy $10m a year.
Mr Pearson said the Skyhawk sale was all but complete although "some issues" with the United States State Department had yet to be worked out.
He denied a rumour circulating among New Zealand aviation circles that one of those issues was the State Department's anger at comments by Prime Minister Helen Clark over the American-led invasion of Iraq.
Because of the avionics and weapons systems in the Skyhawks the State Department must approve the sale.
Mr Pearson said he was "very confident" of the sale going through.
The Skyhawks would be dismantled and packed into containers for shipping back to America, he said.
Mr Pearson said Nowra was "a real possibility. We are in discussions with them".
He said some of the Skyhawks needed work but they were generally in very good condition.
"They have been very well maintained, very well kept. The New Zealand air force and Safe Air have done an excellent job of maintaining these airplanes."
Mr Pearson said ATSI engineers had thoroughly inspected the aircraft and their pilots had flown them and they were "very happy" with the condition of the Skyhawks.
He said one of the attractions of the Skyhawks was that they were fitted with identical systems to F16 fighters which were flown extensively by the United States Air Force and many other air forces.
In 2000 former politician Derek Quigley said the Skyhawk fleet and spares had a market value of about $120m although the New Zealand Ministry of Defence later said $85m would be a good price.
Mr Pearson said he was not at liberty to discuss the cost of buying the aircraft.
However, he said ATSI was very happy it was getting good value for its money.
"We are very happy with the deal we have negotiated. Both sides are happy."
He said it was now only a question of completing the final details of the sale and no one else was in the running.
The deal included all 17 Skyhawks and a large number of spares.
Mr Pearson said it was too soon to say how many New Zealand pilots and engineers were likely to be employed by ATSI.
"Some of the (maintenance) work will stay in New Zealand with Safe Air."
New Zealand originally had 24 Skyhawks after buying 14 brand new in 1970 and 10 second hand in 1984 from the Australian navy. Seven Skyhawks have been destroyed in crashes.
Mr Pearson said Skyhawks were still being flown by several countries, including Israel, Argentina, Brazil, Indonesia and Singapore.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: South of the border
Age: 53
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://xtramsn.co.nz/news/0,,3762-2397079,00.html
The usual diplomatic 'it's not sold until the bottom line is signed' caveat is being trotted out. Here's the text:
The sale of the nation's mothballed fleet of Skyhawks is by no means a done deal, as some reports have suggested.
Some media outlets have suggested the 17 attack fighter bombers have been sold to an American company - Advanced Training Systems International.
But despite that, sales consultants Ernst and Young say ATSI is just one of a select group of three.
The company says the American company is extremely interested but is unsure if the organisation will close.
Ernst and Young says there has been no regulatory sign-off.
That is now out of the hands of the Government and up to ATSI.
The consultants are continuing to explore options in Europe and Asia for both the Skyhawks and Aermacchi aircraft.
Bulletin supplied by IRN Limited Copyright 2001 IRN Limited. All copyright in this bulletin remains the property of IRN Limited.
The usual diplomatic 'it's not sold until the bottom line is signed' caveat is being trotted out. Here's the text:
The sale of the nation's mothballed fleet of Skyhawks is by no means a done deal, as some reports have suggested.
Some media outlets have suggested the 17 attack fighter bombers have been sold to an American company - Advanced Training Systems International.
But despite that, sales consultants Ernst and Young say ATSI is just one of a select group of three.
The company says the American company is extremely interested but is unsure if the organisation will close.
Ernst and Young says there has been no regulatory sign-off.
That is now out of the hands of the Government and up to ATSI.
The consultants are continuing to explore options in Europe and Asia for both the Skyhawks and Aermacchi aircraft.
Bulletin supplied by IRN Limited Copyright 2001 IRN Limited. All copyright in this bulletin remains the property of IRN Limited.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This just arrived.
thanks HectorusRex
the defence minister is now saying they haven't been sold.....
@parliament.govt.nz
This probably means that they have been given away, rather than been sold
thanks HectorusRex
the defence minister is now saying they haven't been sold.....
@parliament.govt.nz
This probably means that they have been given away, rather than been sold
Free Man, Not a Number
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Well here of course.
Age: 58
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I recently met Gerry "Spud" Gallop who is one of the senior partners of ATIS. He was giving a presentation on how the rules that were implemented at the US Navy "Top Gun school" translate into todays maangement ethics.
Surely it's better to have those air frames flying than sitting their slowly rotting away?
Surely it's better to have those air frames flying than sitting their slowly rotting away?
Lupus Domesticus
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NZ
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutely it's better that they're flying.
The bad bit is that we now don't have them or anything to replace them.
Lucky the world is such a safe and peaceful place just now, as it has always been, and we don't have to worry about anyone from big overpolluted, overpopulated Asian nations harbouring desires on our clean green empty country and it's vast untapped resources.
I guess if we did we could always rely on the UN (laughter)
Or our Allies (more laughter)
Shaken my head so much at the stupidity of it all that I'm away to the chiropractor.....
The bad bit is that we now don't have them or anything to replace them.
Lucky the world is such a safe and peaceful place just now, as it has always been, and we don't have to worry about anyone from big overpolluted, overpopulated Asian nations harbouring desires on our clean green empty country and it's vast untapped resources.
I guess if we did we could always rely on the UN (laughter)
Or our Allies (more laughter)
Shaken my head so much at the stupidity of it all that I'm away to the chiropractor.....
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Nomadic
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
anyone heard of rumours of the Nowra Contract?? [for FJ pilots]
Surely it must be in a reasonable US$ to attract those US types frokm America. Or if it is in $Aus, - and therefore not enough to seduce US or other foreign types there - ; are there sufficient Kiwi / Aus FJ types who would [& can] get out of RAAF to do the job?
Ex DD, how long is your and your buddies ROSO?
Do you think this company will pay well?
.
Surely it must be in a reasonable US$ to attract those US types frokm America. Or if it is in $Aus, - and therefore not enough to seduce US or other foreign types there - ; are there sufficient Kiwi / Aus FJ types who would [& can] get out of RAAF to do the job?
Ex DD, how long is your and your buddies ROSO?
Do you think this company will pay well?
.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Hello Kitty City
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NZ a State of Chaos
The skyhawks were not a credible defence..- however, the F16s (upgraded), may well have been.
Anyway, all that the global community ask is that NZ plays its part and, in that respect, anything would have been better than the current state of affairs ie: NOTHING
The sheep shaggers could have got away with not supporting Gulf War II if it wasnt for the muppet PM publicly bagging GWB. Nice one H! The result.......
NZ is being written out of a free trade agreement with the USA...at a time the NZ dollar is at record highs (making exports hopeless)...OOPS!
Oh well we shall add the lastest 'foot-n-mouth' quotes to "Helens Greatest Hits"..along with my personal favourite:
"We do not need an Air Attack Force as the world, an South Pacific in particular, are safe and stable" - within 6 months of this wise and learned comment we had:
1. 11/9 (9/11 for you Amercians)
2. 2 coups in Fiji
3. Peacekeepers in the Solomon Is.
4. Bougainville
5. East Timor and
6. Aceh (topical again)
Adding insult to injury her 'bonkers' comment about SARs killing more people than the 1917/18 flu pandemic (oops, got than one wrong too!) has, in part, resulted in record loses for the NZ tourism industry.
Why oh why do the NZ public put up with such an inane leader? Someone staple her in the mouth shut please!
On the plus side I see they Waitangi tribunal has ruled that the Maoris are indeed entitled to $$$ from off shore oil and natural gas (as it is a 'resource'). I assume that prior to European settlement these resources were used prolifically by the locals to power their cars and bbq's? Watch out folks, Helen will soon they'll be taxing the air that you breath - after all it too is a resource!
Anyway, all that the global community ask is that NZ plays its part and, in that respect, anything would have been better than the current state of affairs ie: NOTHING
The sheep shaggers could have got away with not supporting Gulf War II if it wasnt for the muppet PM publicly bagging GWB. Nice one H! The result.......
NZ is being written out of a free trade agreement with the USA...at a time the NZ dollar is at record highs (making exports hopeless)...OOPS!
Oh well we shall add the lastest 'foot-n-mouth' quotes to "Helens Greatest Hits"..along with my personal favourite:
"We do not need an Air Attack Force as the world, an South Pacific in particular, are safe and stable" - within 6 months of this wise and learned comment we had:
1. 11/9 (9/11 for you Amercians)
2. 2 coups in Fiji
3. Peacekeepers in the Solomon Is.
4. Bougainville
5. East Timor and
6. Aceh (topical again)
Adding insult to injury her 'bonkers' comment about SARs killing more people than the 1917/18 flu pandemic (oops, got than one wrong too!) has, in part, resulted in record loses for the NZ tourism industry.
Why oh why do the NZ public put up with such an inane leader? Someone staple her in the mouth shut please!
On the plus side I see they Waitangi tribunal has ruled that the Maoris are indeed entitled to $$$ from off shore oil and natural gas (as it is a 'resource'). I assume that prior to European settlement these resources were used prolifically by the locals to power their cars and bbq's? Watch out folks, Helen will soon they'll be taxing the air that you breath - after all it too is a resource!
Last edited by jungly; 25th May 2003 at 17:04.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It amuses (read: peeves me severely) me that all the articles say that "pilots and engineers are included in the deal". Where the hell are they getting these pilots and maintainers from?? Perhaps the NZ government does actually think of their military personnel as just depreciating assets that can be on-sold at their whim.
There is only 1 current A4 pilot in the RNZAF - a friend who is on a reserve contract to fly for 1 week a month.
Whoever actually buys the A4s, is getting them for a third of their value, so why not chuck in a few pilots as well. So what are they going to do? Demand that all of the lads return from their new jobs around the world, so that Helen can sweeten the deal a bit. We wouldn't want to have any say in our futures anyway.
Ha ha & b*gger off.
Just before we left, it was amazing how quickly the books were re-written to say that in spite of enlisting on a 20 year contract, it actually didn't mean anything, so no we weren't entitled to redundancy.
(Although the RNZAF did release us from our ROSO)
There is only 1 current A4 pilot in the RNZAF - a friend who is on a reserve contract to fly for 1 week a month.
Whoever actually buys the A4s, is getting them for a third of their value, so why not chuck in a few pilots as well. So what are they going to do? Demand that all of the lads return from their new jobs around the world, so that Helen can sweeten the deal a bit. We wouldn't want to have any say in our futures anyway.
Ha ha & b*gger off.
Just before we left, it was amazing how quickly the books were re-written to say that in spite of enlisting on a 20 year contract, it actually didn't mean anything, so no we weren't entitled to redundancy.
(Although the RNZAF did release us from our ROSO)
Lupus Domesticus
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NZ
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jungly, thank you for your support of the most stupid assesment of the RNZAF strike wing to be promoted by the lefties and the peaceniks.
If the A4s were not a credible defence, how come they beat everyone on exercise for thirty-odd years?
This includes the RAF, RAAF, USAF, USN, RAN, RN, and the Singaporeans and Malaysians.
Our last exercise with the RAAF saw five Kahu A4s take out eight RAAF Hornets without loss to themselves.
Our last exercise with the Yanks saw the Skyhawks sink the US Navy 16 times, again without reciprocated loss.
The most recent exercise with the RN prompted the commander of the British flotilla to describe the A4s and P3s of the RNZAF as having provided the "most effective and credible threat" he had ever encountered in exercises, including those against the Americans and NATO allies.
The Pentagon consistently rated them as being able to defeat "any non-US force in south-east Asia."
This is fact, not regurgitated pinko government bull****. It's a matter of public and military record. Look it up.
The rest of your post I agree with wholeheartedly. It is irritating at best, however, to have the primary argument of fools and liars supported in a forum such as this by someone who should know better.
Upgraded to -C and -D capability the F-16s would have provided a better all-round air defence capability for New Zealand, but still would not have given the level of anti-ship strike capability that the A4s did, which is primarily what NZ needs them for.
If the A4s were not a credible defence, how come they beat everyone on exercise for thirty-odd years?
This includes the RAF, RAAF, USAF, USN, RAN, RN, and the Singaporeans and Malaysians.
Our last exercise with the RAAF saw five Kahu A4s take out eight RAAF Hornets without loss to themselves.
Our last exercise with the Yanks saw the Skyhawks sink the US Navy 16 times, again without reciprocated loss.
The most recent exercise with the RN prompted the commander of the British flotilla to describe the A4s and P3s of the RNZAF as having provided the "most effective and credible threat" he had ever encountered in exercises, including those against the Americans and NATO allies.
The Pentagon consistently rated them as being able to defeat "any non-US force in south-east Asia."
This is fact, not regurgitated pinko government bull****. It's a matter of public and military record. Look it up.
The rest of your post I agree with wholeheartedly. It is irritating at best, however, to have the primary argument of fools and liars supported in a forum such as this by someone who should know better.
Upgraded to -C and -D capability the F-16s would have provided a better all-round air defence capability for New Zealand, but still would not have given the level of anti-ship strike capability that the A4s did, which is primarily what NZ needs them for.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Hello Kitty City
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crossed-Wires!
Agreed, the numbers over the years have been exceptional....but I think the reputation (credibility) belongs to the aircrew not the Douglas itself.
In all roles the RNZAF has long had to 'invent' and adapt tactics to plug the holes left because of poor equipment. The kiwi A4 punched well above its weight at the hands off flexible, adaptable young drivers.
The Douglas was fine aircraft to which many have emotional attachments but it was the aircrew that made it 'potent'.
Im sure the kiwi ingenuity (deveolped over several rum-bos) would have turned the F16 into a fine anti shipping weapon too....and as a bonus you get an NVG compatible multi role aircraft. (What night tactical capability did the A4 have? [not even sure it had a weekend capability?
])
The wicked witch at the helm axed the AAF as a role, the concept of self defence and ultimately self determination...not the A4. In so doing she has deprived the NZDF of some of its most capable lateral thinkers, deft hands and made NZ, in several respects, the 'dole-bludger' of the Sth Pacific and beyond.
In all roles the RNZAF has long had to 'invent' and adapt tactics to plug the holes left because of poor equipment. The kiwi A4 punched well above its weight at the hands off flexible, adaptable young drivers.
The Douglas was fine aircraft to which many have emotional attachments but it was the aircrew that made it 'potent'.
Im sure the kiwi ingenuity (deveolped over several rum-bos) would have turned the F16 into a fine anti shipping weapon too....and as a bonus you get an NVG compatible multi role aircraft. (What night tactical capability did the A4 have? [not even sure it had a weekend capability?
]) The wicked witch at the helm axed the AAF as a role, the concept of self defence and ultimately self determination...not the A4. In so doing she has deprived the NZDF of some of its most capable lateral thinkers, deft hands and made NZ, in several respects, the 'dole-bludger' of the Sth Pacific and beyond.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Hot and Dry
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blue wolf: When was this exercise that saw A4's take out eight aussie Hornets without loss?
I have the greatest respect for the RNZAF A4 Drivers who are/were complete professionals and extracted every ounce of potential capability out of their A4's. However the A4 is not a modern air to air fighter, with no BVR air to air weapons and subsonic performance only. To say that it comprehensively defeated a force of hornets in an exercise is laughable.
I have the greatest respect for the RNZAF A4 Drivers who are/were complete professionals and extracted every ounce of potential capability out of their A4's. However the A4 is not a modern air to air fighter, with no BVR air to air weapons and subsonic performance only. To say that it comprehensively defeated a force of hornets in an exercise is laughable.
Lupus Domesticus
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NZ
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10and6
It was the swansong performance for 75 Sqn RNZAF, against traditional grudge match foes 75 Sqn RAAF, at RAAF Base Tindall, NT, September 2001. The A4s also took out the Base.
Laughable maybe, but it happened. Sorry.
Jungly
Apologies for the misunderstanding; agree entirely with all that.
It was the swansong performance for 75 Sqn RNZAF, against traditional grudge match foes 75 Sqn RAAF, at RAAF Base Tindall, NT, September 2001. The A4s also took out the Base.
Laughable maybe, but it happened. Sorry.
Jungly
Apologies for the misunderstanding; agree entirely with all that.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahem... It was 2x 5 v 4 flows with a level Mk-82 attack against the 75 Sqn ops building in the middle. The Hornets were on a BARCAP limited to 0/2/2+. We initially pushed in the charlies (to get some initial hits), then ramped down to the weeds where we were able to run in at low low level to be able to pitch up in their shorts from underneath. It was certainly a valid tactic for us to flow in at extremely low level to make the most of radar shielding and our small size. A quick "polish hand grenade" thrown in at the right time, and we'd try to make the most of the short period of confusion. This involved a lot of throwing the chicken bones by us and a fair amount of luck, as our RWR and radar performance was "average"!!
We certainly weren't running at them in a wall of death in the deltas, facing AMRAAM shooters! In this case it would've been 10 - nil against us.
We then flew back down to Tindal that arvo for just a few quiet ales. I seem to remember through the ensuing haze that we were thrashed at crud!
We certainly weren't running at them in a wall of death in the deltas, facing AMRAAM shooters! In this case it would've been 10 - nil against us.
We then flew back down to Tindal that arvo for just a few quiet ales. I seem to remember through the ensuing haze that we were thrashed at crud!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Usually Somewhere Else
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't really think reinstating a strike force is a particularly likely option unfortunately. While we can buy new jets overnight, getting the personnel back is the big problem. I think it was said when the dis-bandment began, it would take 5-10 years to regain the capability, due to loss of personnel of all trades.
How gutting to sit over here and watch NZ go down the tubes due to a hairy armpitted hippy with no idea!
How gutting to sit over here and watch NZ go down the tubes due to a hairy armpitted hippy with no idea!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: A Barren Featureless Wasteland
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flyboy,
If I ever got a sniff that NZ was thinking about re-booting its fighter force, then I (plus I dare say a gazillion others) would be fighting for a place in the line to help make it happen. I think NZ is just about the nicest place on Earth (ignoring the current govt and the lack of FF).
You never know..............
MT
If I ever got a sniff that NZ was thinking about re-booting its fighter force, then I (plus I dare say a gazillion others) would be fighting for a place in the line to help make it happen. I think NZ is just about the nicest place on Earth (ignoring the current govt and the lack of FF).
You never know..............
MT
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: South of the border
Age: 53
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately our man in Wellington Simon Power has got foot-in-mouth disease. There are some encouraging aspects to his speech (text below) but an obsequious kow-tow to the Yanks isn't going to win him any votes, even in the pro-defence faction.
Still, for all you chaps overseas: come home! Vote National!
Nats will send army wherever US goes
08 May 2004
By HANK SCHOUTEN
New Zealand's armed forces would be sent wherever Australia, the United States or Britain wanted them, under a new policy announced by National.
"Without reservation we will support our close allies, Australia, the United States and Britain when and wheresoever our commitment is called upon," party defence spokesman Simon Power said. "New Zealand has been an ally of these nations throughout the 20th century. We recommit to doing so in the 21st," he said in a speech to National's central regional conference.
In the past 20 years, New Zealand had allowed its defence relationship with its traditional allies to slide "because we have not been prepared to match our allies' expectations. We must show we can be relied upon". He said: "Post-September 11, Australia stepped up to the plate . . . Australia unhesitatingly joined her allies the UK and the US in the fight. It was a principled policy decision.
"New Zealand must be seen as a credible combat-ready nation. Ready to defend our country in a physical attack, ready to defend our freedom from dangerous regimes, ready, willing and able to cooperate with allies who share our values."
Australia spent more than $20 billion, or 2 per cent of gross domestic product, on defence while New Zealand spent less than $2 billion, or 0.8 per cent of gdp. National would be looking for at least 1 per cent, he said.
He suggested a third frigate could be a priority for the navy, and New Zealand could work with Australia to develop an air strike capability.
He criticised Government plans to spend $500 million on a multi-role ship and patrol craft which would do work for customs, conservation, fisheries, maritime safety, police and other agencies. "The first priority for a naval force is defence."
The air force had been "reduced to a maritime search and rescue, civil defence and Helen's personal transport".
Still, for all you chaps overseas: come home! Vote National!
Nats will send army wherever US goes
08 May 2004
By HANK SCHOUTEN
New Zealand's armed forces would be sent wherever Australia, the United States or Britain wanted them, under a new policy announced by National.
"Without reservation we will support our close allies, Australia, the United States and Britain when and wheresoever our commitment is called upon," party defence spokesman Simon Power said. "New Zealand has been an ally of these nations throughout the 20th century. We recommit to doing so in the 21st," he said in a speech to National's central regional conference.
In the past 20 years, New Zealand had allowed its defence relationship with its traditional allies to slide "because we have not been prepared to match our allies' expectations. We must show we can be relied upon". He said: "Post-September 11, Australia stepped up to the plate . . . Australia unhesitatingly joined her allies the UK and the US in the fight. It was a principled policy decision.
"New Zealand must be seen as a credible combat-ready nation. Ready to defend our country in a physical attack, ready to defend our freedom from dangerous regimes, ready, willing and able to cooperate with allies who share our values."
Australia spent more than $20 billion, or 2 per cent of gross domestic product, on defence while New Zealand spent less than $2 billion, or 0.8 per cent of gdp. National would be looking for at least 1 per cent, he said.
He suggested a third frigate could be a priority for the navy, and New Zealand could work with Australia to develop an air strike capability.
He criticised Government plans to spend $500 million on a multi-role ship and patrol craft which would do work for customs, conservation, fisheries, maritime safety, police and other agencies. "The first priority for a naval force is defence."
The air force had been "reduced to a maritime search and rescue, civil defence and Helen's personal transport".
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, superb. I don't see how you can say "Vote national" while in the same breath quoting their policies vis a vis supporting the yanks. Saying New Zealand's record is second to Australia's because of a refusal to backup America and the govt here in England is absurd, and will be viewed as such, the world over.
I for one think its a fair call that Helen made the decision to abandon Ohakea and our strike capability. Nothing against the abilities of our A4 crews and the aircraft themselves, but with limited defense budgets far better to focus attention on improving Hercs, P3's and Iroquois; whose records have undeniably served more use to the country. If any squadron was going to go, surely this is the one that had to be chopped? The question is, should one have gone in the first place...that is moot.
Sure we can play on about future threats etc etc, but the best place for NZ to play its role in the worlds military allegiences is either with logistical support and specialist foot soldier support in the form of the "squadron", OR, peacekeeping roles. Other than that, offensive air weapons have been too rarely used and in all likelyhood still will be too rarely used, to justify their existence.
It's a tough decision, but one that needs to be taken. Seen it made with the Comanche, perhaps should have been made with the F22 and Typhoon. We all like our planes, especially new shiny ones, but white elephants have to be seen and prevented. Expensive, redundant squadrons are the same. They can perform their role admirably, but one also has to step back and consider their relevence.
Someone earlier brought up 9/11 as a motivation for keeping an attack squadron. I think Afghanistan and Iraq are prime examples that offensive, devistating military operations AREN'T of use to NZ. Seems they wouldn't have been invited to play with the yanks anyway, until they are needed to clean up the mess. I challenge anyone to tell me that having A4's deliving 500 pounders onto the Middle-eastern soil will make NZ safer.
I fear from some of the above threads theres still far too much of a "reds under the beds" attitude prevalent in NZ. Sure, if your ex-75 SQN its understandably regardless of perceived threat: its your job and you have every right to want to maintain it. Outside of that circle I think New Zealand needs to be a little more objective.
I for one think its a fair call that Helen made the decision to abandon Ohakea and our strike capability. Nothing against the abilities of our A4 crews and the aircraft themselves, but with limited defense budgets far better to focus attention on improving Hercs, P3's and Iroquois; whose records have undeniably served more use to the country. If any squadron was going to go, surely this is the one that had to be chopped? The question is, should one have gone in the first place...that is moot.
Sure we can play on about future threats etc etc, but the best place for NZ to play its role in the worlds military allegiences is either with logistical support and specialist foot soldier support in the form of the "squadron", OR, peacekeeping roles. Other than that, offensive air weapons have been too rarely used and in all likelyhood still will be too rarely used, to justify their existence.
It's a tough decision, but one that needs to be taken. Seen it made with the Comanche, perhaps should have been made with the F22 and Typhoon. We all like our planes, especially new shiny ones, but white elephants have to be seen and prevented. Expensive, redundant squadrons are the same. They can perform their role admirably, but one also has to step back and consider their relevence.
Someone earlier brought up 9/11 as a motivation for keeping an attack squadron. I think Afghanistan and Iraq are prime examples that offensive, devistating military operations AREN'T of use to NZ. Seems they wouldn't have been invited to play with the yanks anyway, until they are needed to clean up the mess. I challenge anyone to tell me that having A4's deliving 500 pounders onto the Middle-eastern soil will make NZ safer.
I fear from some of the above threads theres still far too much of a "reds under the beds" attitude prevalent in NZ. Sure, if your ex-75 SQN its understandably regardless of perceived threat: its your job and you have every right to want to maintain it. Outside of that circle I think New Zealand needs to be a little more objective.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well dave, how bout you tell us about the upgrades that the hercs, p3's, and hueys have had. finding it hard to think of anything?
i dont think that the issue most rnzaf people had with the retirement of the strike force was that they were losing a nice shiny toy that was fun to fly. i think the dissappointment was in the fact that the nzdf was losing a capability and that through this the nz govt was effectively wimping out of their international responsibility. previous posts have referred to the environment in which nz resides and the requirement to play some part in the defence of the region.
the govt promised that the money that would be saved from the retirement of the strike force would be put back into the rest of the nzdf. this hasnt happened, and is i believe the greatest issue. if the labour govt had done as promised then the nzdf would have p3's with a fully updated back end. the hercs would have been replaced or at least sent for a major upgrade to replace many components that need to be brought up to modern standards. the navy would have another frigate. if these and all the other promises had been delivered on then i think that there would be much less criticism of nz as they would still be upholding their committment to the region. but they haven't. nz now stands as the dole bludger of the region, looking to others to provide the security that is sorely needed in an unstable part of the world.
i dont think that the issue most rnzaf people had with the retirement of the strike force was that they were losing a nice shiny toy that was fun to fly. i think the dissappointment was in the fact that the nzdf was losing a capability and that through this the nz govt was effectively wimping out of their international responsibility. previous posts have referred to the environment in which nz resides and the requirement to play some part in the defence of the region.
the govt promised that the money that would be saved from the retirement of the strike force would be put back into the rest of the nzdf. this hasnt happened, and is i believe the greatest issue. if the labour govt had done as promised then the nzdf would have p3's with a fully updated back end. the hercs would have been replaced or at least sent for a major upgrade to replace many components that need to be brought up to modern standards. the navy would have another frigate. if these and all the other promises had been delivered on then i think that there would be much less criticism of nz as they would still be upholding their committment to the region. but they haven't. nz now stands as the dole bludger of the region, looking to others to provide the security that is sorely needed in an unstable part of the world.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree whole-heartedly that the cash should have gone to the rest of the NZDF and that this is the core issue, if not in whole, then at least in part.
But I do believe though, that NZ is better placed and can contribute more by focussing on our other assets. Losing the strike capability per-se is no reason to get hot under the collar at the government.
I am somewhat circumspect about investment in another Navy frigate however. There is some interesting academic discussion in the UK about the continued effectiveness of such classes of vessel.
I would like to say that NZ will still see an increased investment in the defense forces as a whole. From personal experience, they could start by improving basic soldiers kit - purchasing our own webbing, humping Ellis packs and still getting by with an AN/PRC-77 set was pretty sad.
But I do believe though, that NZ is better placed and can contribute more by focussing on our other assets. Losing the strike capability per-se is no reason to get hot under the collar at the government.
I am somewhat circumspect about investment in another Navy frigate however. There is some interesting academic discussion in the UK about the continued effectiveness of such classes of vessel.
I would like to say that NZ will still see an increased investment in the defense forces as a whole. From personal experience, they could start by improving basic soldiers kit - purchasing our own webbing, humping Ellis packs and still getting by with an AN/PRC-77 set was pretty sad.