PDA

View Full Version : Will New Zealand get new Jet Fighters ?



jango
09-08-2010, 09:10 AM
About 12 years ago New Zealand retired its skyhawks and has since not replaced them. They looked at purchasing a number of F16's off the US but cancelled due to the cost.

But is it now time for the New Zealand goverment to readdress the issue of it's lack of air defence in this area. And with the Superhornet Eurofighter and Joint Strike fighters now coming into service should they be looking at wheather they could purchase or lease a number of fighter to protect NZ airspace. Or does the RAAF currently protect NZ airspace in some way now ?

Alfacentori
09-08-2010, 09:13 AM
Never happen, no money, no motivation, and many would argue no need

Alfa

DivingEngineer
09-08-2010, 09:36 AM
Never happen, no money, no motivation, and many would argue no need

Alfa

Nothing worth invading New Zealand for- unless you need ****loads of scaffolding or concreteing done
[/tongue in cheek]

budgie
09-08-2010, 09:44 AM
If NZ were to fork out for fighters - that's a big if - it wouldn't be new shyt like the Super Hornet or Lightning. They could maybe spring for 12-24 Gripens or F-16s. Not likely even that.

marktigger
09-08-2010, 09:47 AM
or Typhoons if enough come up cheap enough if Germany & UK scale orders back

kalboy
09-08-2010, 10:11 AM
Not in our lifetime i dont think.
Maybe when NZ becomes a the South Islands of Australia LOL

futurepilot2004
09-08-2010, 10:21 AM
Is there any need for jet fighters? (not a flame btw, honest question).

Have been looking at NZ military recently(thread on another forum), its similar in size, role, budget etc to Ireland which also no longer operates fighters due to costs.IMHO future investment in the RNZAF should be transport or maritime patrol aircraft which are getting on in years.

Alfacentori
09-08-2010, 10:30 AM
If NZ was ever really interesting in keeping its fingers in the fighter pie it would be better if it joined the RAAF in the JSF program, pay a small percentage of the costs for the new aircraft, base say 6-10 of the RAAF's JSF's in NZ with NZ pilots and ground crews etc, and integrate them as part of the RAAF.

Alfa

TheKiwi
09-08-2010, 03:44 PM
No

10 characters

Arnie100
09-08-2010, 03:47 PM
Does New Zealand have the money to even acquire any new fighters?

Dankster
09-08-2010, 06:37 PM
The same New Zealand that things having 105 NZLAVs is "too much"? I don't think so.

Elbs
09-08-2010, 06:40 PM
It's a shame the Kiwi Aermacchis were retired. They were neat machines and good for at least keeping a light attack/advanced training capability. I doubt NZ will go for fighters... maybe something like a Hawk 200 would be better suited for their needs. Small, capable and affordable.

Dankster
09-08-2010, 06:45 PM
The NZ government quickly shot down (no pun intended) rumors that some trainers may be taken back into service a few years ago...maybe I'm being ignorant but the New Zealand gov. doesn't seem to care too much about the state of the NZDF.

Ordie
09-08-2010, 06:51 PM
Perhaps a program similar to the RNZN's Project Protector can be applied to the air force.

That is to take a comprehensive look at the air fleet and match it with potential challeneges.

Looking at the air fleet, the highest priority should be the P-3 Orion replacement. Perhaps a combination of P-8 and CN-235MP.

2/1kiwi
09-08-2010, 06:55 PM
the skyhawks are still sitting in woodburn covered in plastic

2495
09-08-2010, 07:08 PM
NZ needs ultra long range maritime airframes - P8 as noted above with a stand off weapons capability. The only reason why a fleet would attack en mass is if the Chinese wanted holiday homes.

Thats not going to happen unless Oz falls first and the US don't send help.

Flagg
09-08-2010, 08:26 PM
NZ needs ultra long range maritime airframes - P8 as noted above with a stand off weapons capability. The only reason why a fleet would attack en mass is if the Chinese wanted holiday homes.

Thats not going to happen unless Oz falls first and the US don't send help.

The current threat picture doesn't require NZ to have an Air Defense Fighter capability.

I'd agree that Maritime Patrol.......with the longest duration/persistance possible to cover the NZ EEZ(and then some) will ALWAYS be a need for NZ and the NZDF.

I'd be happy with simply enough reliable, durable airframes carrying modern sensor suites...and a stand off weapons capability as mentioned by 2495.

It would also be nice if it were possible to have plug and play capability to include future systems like long-range maritime strike UCAVs networked into existing and upgraded manned platforms....if the future threat picture dictates a need for it.

The ability to find,fix,finish anything on(or under) the water that represents a military, economic, or political threat to NZ be it invasion(extremely unlikely), poaching, illegal immigration, blockade, organized crime, etc is a good thing.

It's a big patch of water to surveil and if necessary, defend.

Insane Tadpole
09-08-2010, 08:47 PM
Good video for your question.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PM8bOKkAJMA&feature=related

bikewrench
09-09-2010, 04:54 AM
Good replies guys.
I do think that a few more fixed wing assets would be good, but everyone knows that they're just too expensive for a small country.
We've got some new helos on the way at least.;-)

As an aside how are my fellow Mainlanders? I'm pretty over aftershocks myself.

BLUE THOR
09-09-2010, 05:10 AM
uNZud doesnt need an airforce, we are their buffer zone from everyone but Korean fishermen...

2/1kiwi
09-09-2010, 05:26 AM
just got back into NZ late last night, slept thru the 2 last night and only felt 1 today of the three today lol

Ballistic
09-09-2010, 05:35 AM
No point. They are better off spending cash on better equipment for the Army and Navy, like more army aviation assets and patrol ships that work.

Some good long range naval surveillance platforms and transport aircraft are always a good thing to have, but fighter aircraft for NZ are a thing of the past.

sauerstoff
09-09-2010, 02:16 PM
NZ must buy some Super Tucanos. Embraer needs money.

just kidding.

Ngati Tumatauenga
09-10-2010, 05:41 AM
maybe I'm being ignorant but the New Zealand gov. doesn't seem to care too much about the state of the NZDF.

No maybe's about it, you are ignorant.

As is the OP who has an ongoing ****** with NZ Airpower. Too bad he can never articulate why NZ should invest billions in the capability other than "just because".

budgie
09-10-2010, 02:18 PM
Is there any need for jet fighters? (not a flame btw, honest question).

Have been looking at NZ military recently(thread on another forum), its similar in size, role, budget etc to Ireland which also no longer operates fighters due to costs.IMHO future investment in the RNZAF should be transport or maritime patrol aircraft which are getting on in years.

And that's where it probably will be, yeah.

bababooey
09-10-2010, 06:37 PM
Question. I recall a controversy with NZ buying LAV's. If someone could tell me, was there a guy from NZ who wanted to sell unused wheeled APC's from Hungary at a must lower per unit cost?

jango
09-10-2010, 07:23 PM
Could the RNZAF get some pilotless drone airgraft that they could put a weapon system on so that they could carry out the job of fighter intercepter and ground attack. They could also fulfill the role of coastal patrol duties. That way the kiwi's get the best of both in one aircraft. Can you get drone's with jet engines for the use of high speed air duties and other roles now ?

I can't think of a name
09-10-2010, 08:00 PM
Nevermind.....

Ngati Tumatauenga
09-10-2010, 08:35 PM
Could the RNZAF get some pilotless drone airgraft that they could put a weapon system on so that they could carry out the job of fighter intercepter and ground attack. They could also fulfill the role of coastal patrol duties. That way the kiwi's get the best of both in one aircraft. Can you get drone's with jet engines for the use of high speed air duties and other roles now ?

It really does crack me how much time you spend obsessing over something that you are completely impotent to effect.

Just wait till the DVD of 'Tommorrow: When the war began' is released then you can strop off to your fantasy full time.

goat89
09-10-2010, 08:37 PM
It really does crack me how much time you spend obsessing over something that you are completely impotent to effect.

Just wait till the DVD of 'Tommorrow: When the war began' is released then you can strop off to your fantasy full time.
Hey, an Aussie version of Red Dawn! ;3

2/1kiwi
09-10-2010, 08:45 PM
Question. I recall a controversy with NZ buying LAV's. If someone could tell me, was there a guy from NZ who wanted to sell unused wheeled APC's from Hungary at a must lower per unit cost?

yea it was the BTR 80

Ngati Tumatauenga
09-10-2010, 08:50 PM
PANDUR and Patria XA.

BTR-80 was never seriously considered....

Breerman
09-10-2010, 09:45 PM
If NZ were to fork out for fighters - that's a big if - it wouldn't be new shyt like the Super Hornet or Lightning. They could maybe spring for 12-24 Gripens or F-16s. Not likely even that.
It's Friday so you might very well be drinking... F/A-18 bug/superbug and F-16 belongs to an older generation than Gripen.

jango
09-11-2010, 12:59 AM
It really does crack me how much time you spend obsessing over something that you are completely impotent to effect.

Just wait till the DVD of 'Tommorrow: When the war began' is released then you can strop off to your fantasy full time.

well that is the way that air defence is going in the future so what is wrong with the comment. I can assure you that there are a few dead taliban today becouse of these drones. So it is just a question of when it is going to happen and not fantasy. Beside that is what a forum is for to pose question's and idea's . And are you less impotent to effect on any of your comments . Smoke your gear and chill out !!!!

Ought Six
09-11-2010, 01:01 AM
If NZ is attacked, it will deploy its hobbit special operations folk, with a wizard. Problem solved.

Ngati Tumatauenga
09-11-2010, 01:23 AM
well that is the way that air defence is going in the future so what is wrong with the comment. I can assure you that there are a few dead taliban today becouse of these drones.

Really? I had no idea, thanks for the heads up, sport...


So it is just a question of when it is going to happen and not fantasy.

Australia being invaded and occupied for a Asian coalition?

OK......


Beside that is what a forum is for to pose question's and idea's .

Not when it's the same tread topic again and again.


And are you less impotent to effect on any of your comments .

Far, far less...


Smoke your gear and chill out !!!!

Only one smoking here is you, sport.

Engine Mech
09-11-2010, 01:57 AM
Fighter aircraft for NZ is not going to happen. The Skyhawks are going to museums and the Macchi's are a liability. The Govt does not have the will or the money to buy expensive toys. Besides the infrastructure to support hi tec aircraft is gone. Helicopters are the best that the Air Force can do these days.

Ordie
09-11-2010, 02:04 AM
http://www.airliners.net/photo/New-Zealand--/Boeing-757-2K2/1777548/L/

RNZAF way of projecting its power around the globe.
http://www.airliners.net/photo/New-Zealand--/Boeing-757-2K2/1777548/L/

Alfacentori
09-11-2010, 02:28 AM
On a more serious note, anyone think NZ would ever consider purchasing attack helo's to give its ground forces more fire support on missions, i.e. peacekeeping etc?

Especially considering they are much more flexible (as they can operate from ships as well) and more likely to be deployed than fast movers ever would be

Alfa

Ought Six
09-11-2010, 04:01 AM
Ac:
"On a more serious note, anyone think NZ would ever consider purchasing attack helo's to give its ground forces more fire support on missions, i.e. peacekeeping etc? Especially considering they are much more flexible (as they can operate from ships as well) and likely to be deployed than fast movers ever would be."An excellent point, and good unconventional thinking.

Here is more.... They could also order some Su-25KMs from TAM in Georgia. This is the 'westernized' version of the Su-25 attack aircraft, with a glass cockpit, LASER designator, HUD, inertial/GPS nav, all by Elbit, the Israeli avionics company. The aircraft is fully capable of using NATO weapons, and has a MIL-STD-1553 buss. Since the standard Su-25TM can carry four Kh-31s or Kh-35s, it is reasonable to assume that the Su-25KM could carry four Harpoon or similar anti-ship cruise missiles. With a 400 mile combat radius and twin engines, it would be an excellent aircraft for maritime patrol and attack duties for an island nation like NZ. It would also be a fraction of the price of your average fighter. And its utility in overseas peacekeeping missions in supporting ground troops is obvious. Dedicated ground support aircraft working in concert with attack helos offer a much better capability than either platform working alone. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts. So attack helos and Su-25KMs would make a really nice combination.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?45675-Su-25-Scorpion-made-in-Georgia

bababooey
09-11-2010, 06:40 AM
Has NZ thought to produce their own light aircraft so as to keep its aerospace industry going? I am thinking of a Reims F404 maritime patrol aircraft, perhaps under license. Would such a plane be appropriate for NZ?

Thanks for the BTR answer.

Bro Jangles
09-11-2010, 06:52 AM
Cant NZ just borrow Australias air force? trade them some sheep?

budgie
09-12-2010, 11:03 AM
If NZ is attacked, it will deploy its hobbit special operations folk, with a wizard. Problem solved.

Ssshh dude! Opsec...

SilentType
09-12-2010, 12:13 PM
Simple Solution

New Zealand wait for one of the JSF partners to purchase their F-35 JSFs. At that point one of those nations should have older aircraft they're looking at cutting lose. So you buy some F-16s or whatever and then get a deal with Lockheed for replacement parts.

Lockheed makes money off the deal, because allowing the other aircraft to be sold second hand makes it easier for the JSF partner to purchase F-35s and then they get money in a contract for spare parts and support for the older F-16s. NZ gets the fighters they need and everyone wins.

bababooey
09-12-2010, 09:00 PM
the skyhawks are still sitting in woodburn covered in plastic

Has Argentina, who has Skyhawks, considered buy those aircraft?

Elbs
09-12-2010, 09:01 PM
Has Argentina, who has Skyhawks, considered buy those aircraft?

Argentina has trouble with getting enough funds to keep its own fleet of Fightinghawks operational to even think about buying more planes.

Ought Six
09-12-2010, 09:42 PM
Another possibility is the South Korean T-50 Golden Eagle. It has good range, speed and avionics. Since NZ is unlikely to be attacked by a swarm of sophisticated enemy fighters or bombers anytime soon, the fact that it cannot carry a bunch of AAMRAMs is not a huge problem. It would be fine in the anti-ship and maritime patrol role, and still has the ability to carry AIM-9X to deal with shipborne helos. It is also apparently a good light ground attack aircraft. And again, the price is a hell of a lot lower than your average fighter. Since the world economy sucks right now, this would be a good stopgap measure to keep their pilots experienced in supersonic fighter operations until an improving economy might allow the purchase of something like F-35s down the road. And even then, the T-50 will remain valuable as a supersonic trainer and light attack fighter.

gafkiwi
09-12-2010, 10:26 PM
Even if we were to ever look at bringing an air combat capability back online, The costs would be astronomically more than the aircraft alone, There is no real infrastructure and manning to support it. The ability to stand up the required support for a Combat Air wing is something we no longer have the capability to do. The only way this would happen would be a massive change in whats happening in the Pasific and for some larger nations to be very generous

Ought Six
09-12-2010, 11:03 PM
That is another good reason to start with an inexpensive supersonic trainer/light attack aircraft like the T-50.

Ordie
09-12-2010, 11:21 PM
Has Argentina, who has Skyhawks, considered buy those aircraft?

Any buyer must get US Approval.

I assume they'll end up in the hands of warbirds collectors, historical flights, and museums.

Ordie
09-12-2010, 11:24 PM
One idea is to consolidate Australia, New Zealand, and Singapore's lead in fighter training in New Zealand with BAe Hawks or MB-339.

This way NZ will have an air combat asset with subsidized maintenance and operations by the other partners.

Ought Six
09-12-2010, 11:25 PM
The cooperative pooling of resources by smaller nations in the region could be an excellent solution.

Zarak
09-12-2010, 11:28 PM
I assume they'll end up in the hands of warbirds collectors, historical flights, and museums.

I hope so. :( A-4s are pretty iconic.

Sandgroper
09-12-2010, 11:53 PM
Has NZ thought to produce their own light aircraft so as to keep its aerospace industry going? I am thinking of a Reims F404 maritime patrol aircraft, perhaps under license. Would such a plane be appropriate for NZ?

Thanks for the BTR answer.

NZ doesn't need to licence build F404s to 'keep its aerospace industry going', they have a thriving aerospace industry and already produce a number of light aircraft like the (extremely ugly p-)) PAC 750XL.

jango
09-21-2010, 09:21 AM
Could NZ airspace be brought into the air defence of Australia. And would the Australian goverment along side the kiwi goverment consider basing a number of RAAF fighter in NZ to do this ?

kalboy
09-21-2010, 09:33 AM
The Australian State of Tasmania is to far South to base our fighters so i dont think we will see any RAAF bases in NZ somehow.
New Zealand fighters based in Aust. would be a more realistic arguement though.

TheKiwi
09-23-2010, 05:21 AM
Right, well the US State Department deadline for sale of the Skyhawks has passed with no-one purchasing them, so they're almost certainly going to become museum pieces. There is talk of one going to Australia for the RAN.

ggk
09-23-2010, 05:32 AM
If NZ buy 2 batteries of S-400 (or equivalent) ... can it cover the whole island?

TheKiwi
09-23-2010, 05:37 AM
I don't know, what is the effective radius of the S-400?

Insane Tadpole
09-23-2010, 05:41 AM
Wiki says 400kms. So no.

ayanami_tard
09-23-2010, 05:43 AM
even if they do not need a fighter aircraft they should at least have some training aircraftit would be costly to retrain pilots(or worse,the whole branch) if the capability is being let to rot

gafkiwi
09-23-2010, 05:52 AM
Not costly, They either retrained as Multi engined pilots C-130, 757's etc (less cost to training new pilot) or got out.

Ambassador
09-23-2010, 06:12 AM
Another possibility is the South Korean T-50 Golden Eagle. It has good range, speed and avionics. Since NZ is unlikely to be attacked by a swarm of sophisticated enemy fighters or bombers anytime soon, the fact that it cannot carry a bunch of AAMRAMs is not a huge problem. It would be fine in the anti-ship and maritime patrol role, and still has the ability to carry AIM-9X to deal with shipborne helos. It is also apparently a good light ground attack aircraft. And again, the price is a hell of a lot lower than your average fighter. Since the world economy sucks right now, this would be a good stopgap measure to keep their pilots experienced in supersonic fighter operations until an improving economy might allow the purchase of something like F-35s down the road. And even then, the T-50 will remain valuable as a supersonic trainer and light attack fighter.

There is FA-50 too. It can use the same weapon as F-16. But it's already going to be your average fighter so the price advantage might not be too ****ounced. However, cost of Korean labor and manufacturing is lower than Sweden's, so KAI is hoping it could sell for the same capability as Gripen, another fighter alternative, while being more affordable.

Sandgroper
09-23-2010, 07:19 AM
Right, well the US State Department deadline for sale of the Skyhawks has passed with no-one purchasing them, so they're almost certainly going to become museum pieces. There is talk of one going to Australia for the RAN.

Yay, I'll hazard a guess and say it will be one of the aircraft the RNZAF got from the RAN in the 1980s.

TheKiwi
09-24-2010, 02:46 AM
Almost certainly. However, the US State Dept has granted an extension now until the end of the year. So much like Min, the Skyhawks will remain wrapped in Latex for a while longer.

Ngati Tumatauenga
09-24-2010, 02:52 AM
Facinating how there is such a drive from some people to sink billions into a capability and yet no one has articulated a reason other than 'just because'...

Anyone???

shuredgefan
09-24-2010, 03:14 AM
NZ has made a conscious decision (defense = 1% GDP) that it doesn't need a war-fighting capability. Either there will be no threat or someone (Aus or US) will ultimately rescue them.

They're probably right.:roll:

Ambassador
09-24-2010, 03:18 AM
What if Aus or US attack them?

Ngati Tumatauenga
09-24-2010, 03:28 AM
NZ has a war fighting capability.

Anything that threatens NZ will be threatening Aus/US well before it ever reaches NZ...

Sandgroper
09-24-2010, 03:34 AM
Facinating how there is such a drive from some people to sink billions into a capability and yet no one has articulated a reason other than 'just because'...

Anyone???

Airshows. p-)


What if Aus or US attack them?

The hundreds of thousands of Kiwis in Australia wage guerrilla warfare. Bondi becomes a war zone.

Ngati Tumatauenga
09-24-2010, 03:38 AM
What if Aus or US attack them?

Maybe NZ should call in it's outstanding debts from countries were it's citizens have sacrificed themselves for that countries defence.

Korea would be a good start.

DaveDash
09-24-2010, 03:39 AM
If we are even in the geopolitical situation where AUS or even the US is threatening us with attack, something has seriously gone wrong.

Ambassador
09-24-2010, 03:43 AM
Maybe NZ should call in it's outstanding debts from countries were it's citizens have sacrificed themselves for that countries defence.

Korea would be a good start.

No can do. US would ask us to fight for them first. :-(

LoboCanada
09-24-2010, 04:08 AM
To save you skin if your northerly neighbor wanted to visit.^

Why would NZ want fighters? Give them up to buy more 12 years later?

Ngati Tumatauenga
09-24-2010, 04:17 AM
No can do. US would ask us to fight for them first. :-(

Gee, that's too bad.

I wonder who Korea will come crying to (other than the US, etc) next time the North looks South...

Ambassador
09-24-2010, 05:47 AM
Maybe we should ask Russia to nuke them for us. We have thousands of Russian chicks conveniently taken hostage in cities nearest the North, so if they don't want to see them Putinas and Medvedevas ransacked and violated... ;-)

Captain Thundebolt
06-11-2012, 04:35 AM
Facinating how there is such a drive from some people to sink billions into a capability and yet no one has articulated a reason other than 'just because'...

Anyone???


I would love to see fast jets in Kiwi colours again. Super Hornet would be logical solution plug and play with the RAAF.Australia will soon have to bite the bullet in regards to LIF aircraft (Hawk 127)for F35A depending on the out come NZ could in theory take on the end a different version one which can combine LIF and limited multi role fast jet capability (Hawk 200?).I believe you could reconstitute it an ACW with the FA-50 with 24 flyaway aircraft 750 million USD, but it is the support package that will cost that again to set up from scratch.

Some of the roles a NZ ACW could do,

Air Interdiction,
Maritime strike,
Close Air Support,
Training support for JTAC course (not need for RAAF assets)
High value escort aircraft (Wegdetail, MRTT, B757)
Common EO package with current aircraft in NZ service.

But all the wishful thinking in the world will not bring back an ACW, Aunty Helen has seen to that it would take 10 plus years to generate that capability again. But the idea of a gunship or in OZ terminology Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter as part of the new NZ joint amphibious task group has a lot of merit.

It is a pity under the circumstance that NZ did not go the Blackhawk route with the number of airframes NZ will eventually acquire their was an avenue to consolidate their aircraft type with MH-60S Knighthawk in the utility role, MH-60R Romeo ASW role and MH-60L DAP in reconnaissance/CAS role. You could have gotten the first 2 type in service quicker than the support both New Zealand and Australia had with Eurocopter which has left a sour taste in most people’s mouths.

ggk
06-11-2012, 06:00 AM
2010 thread...


btw i propose combination of K-300P Bastion-P and RBS 23 BAMSE

Zorro C9
06-11-2012, 08:54 PM
I've got thoughts on the matter that I'll post if I can get a guarantee the thread won't be locked because of resurection.

TheKiwi
06-11-2012, 09:14 PM
Why bother. Retarded question from a retarded poster who has long since been hit with the ban hammer.

Zorro C9
06-11-2012, 11:49 PM
For the discussion, man, for the discussion.


Bloody IT people...

/Zorro wanders off on horseback.

TheKiwi
06-12-2012, 12:11 AM
What does it prove when you debate with an idiot?

That you're smarter than an idiot? That you take their opinions seriously? That you can descend to the same level as them? Worse, that you can be out debated by them?

Better to leave things as it is...

Zorro C9
06-12-2012, 12:25 AM
I was talking about some of the other posters in here. It's pretty clear a banned person can't reply.

TheKiwi
06-12-2012, 12:35 AM
Lecturing people on why they were wrong two years ago....

Not my problem, but I'd either start a new thread or find something else they've done/said recently to rub in the faces...

Zorro C9
06-12-2012, 12:40 AM
Thanks Uncle Kiwi.

TheKiwi
06-12-2012, 12:54 AM
That's the spirit. Go find and Indian and tell them how they're all wrong about India... :-)

Zorro C9
06-12-2012, 12:56 AM
Ahhh you know me too well!