Navy's frigates break down at sea.

[terbang]

Fisheries protection.
The P-3's play the same game, just that the fisho's monitor the P-3 frequencies and know when they are taking off...



Ship info.
http://www.navy.mil.nz/visit-the-fle...ha/default.htm

When I was flying patrols for the Aussies we did a job for the Kiwi customs and fisheries. We arrived in direct from Canberra, high leveling it over NZ dropping down out to sea for low level work off Tauranga, then up towards the Kermadecs. We had no kiwi naval support as they were also broken at that time though we had some Kiwi 'fisho's' on board. Our unannounced arrival caught a lot of foriegn and 'Indigenous' vessels, that were illegally fishing, off guard. It was carnage and the Kiwi Fisho's were shocked and tearing their hair out because there was SFA they could do apart from just wave and take images of them. The P3, though primarily a submarine hunter, is also useful at surface detection for fisheries though the problem here is our own security. You fire a P3 up at Whenuapai and the whole world knows about it (including the bad guys). And when they find them there is no surface vessel available (broken down) to make the arrest.

[dman]

On the bright side SARGE - picking up on a comment earlier... the video games on board would keep the crew happy and we'd WASTE anyone at World of Warcraft (or whatever the fuck) if it came to that.

Nope, Korea would severely humiliate us at StarCraft. Even before StarCraft has finished loading up on our own crap computers...

[Ixion]

I think you're missing the true value of an offensive air capability in terms of homeland defence.

However, the success or failure of any seaborne invasion hinges on air supremacy.

The Battle of Britain was fought as a prelude to Operation Sea Lion (Hitler's plan for seaborne invasion of the south coast of England). ,,,
The ability to control the airspace around and beyond our shores and to strike offensively at blue-water targets from the air is a pre-requisite to any real defence against invasion from the sea. In this 21st century, any Navy that cannot operate under an airpower umbrella is doomed.

Viewed in that light, our Navy really is more of a Coast Guard. Our lack of airpower gives us very limited capability to respond to offensive actions by other nation-states.

Sort of true. Consensus of agreement is that even if Engand had "lost" the Battle of Britain, SeaLion would still have failed. Though the Royal Navy would have been completely destroyed in the process.

But, naval air control doesn't have to be, and should not be, land based. That was the mistake Mussolini made ("Italy, the unsinkable aircraft carrier") . And with modern missile systems, I'm not convinced that it needs fixed wing aircraft (though I'll defer to any experts here on that)

[NighthawkNZ:Me]

Sort of true. Consensus of agreement is that even if Engand had "lost" the Battle of Britain, SeaLion would still have failed. Though the Royal Navy would have been completely destroyed in the process.

But, naval air control doesn't have to be, and should not be, land based. That was the mistake Mussolini made ("Italy, the unsinkable aircraft carrier") . And with modern missile systems, I'm not convinced that it needs fixed wing aircraft (though I'll defer to any experts here on that)

Too make any offence and or defence work you need all three working as one

[loftyk3]

Ignorance is bliss

[jrandom]

Sort of true. Consensus of agreement is that even if Engand had "lost" the Battle of Britain, SeaLion would still have failed. Though the Royal Navy would have been completely destroyed in the process.

Indeed. I wasn't arguing that Sea Lion would have been a cakewalk even with Luftwaffe supremacy over the Channel. Winning the air battle was still a matter of life and death for Britain, though.

But, naval air control doesn't have to be, and should not be, land based.

NZ will never afford an aircraft carrier and its support flotilla. An air umbrella over our littoral zones will either be land based or nonexistent.

That was the mistake Mussolini made ("Italy, the unsinkable aircraft carrier")...

[giggle] No, I think the mistake Mussolini made was using Italians to fly the aeroplanes...

And with modern missile systems, I'm not convinced that it needs fixed wing aircraft (though I'll defer to any experts here on that)

Perhaps a network of coastal batteries would suffice, but I'm unable to comment with any authority.

[Ixion]

Perhaps a network of coastal batteries would suffice, but I'm unable to comment with any authority.

Nor am I, nor , I suspect, is anyone, really. But the operative phrase in my post was "fixed wing".

The capabilities of modern missiles are such that all that is required, I think, is to get them launched early enough that interception takes place before the attacking aircraft's own missiles are in range. That doesn't need dedicated fixed wing fighters.

[sAsLEX]

Equipment and training could and should be better

I am training at the moment, and its world class, what Navy you looking at?

Certainly Indonesia or someone could send some planes to shoot stuff up (though I dunno if Indonesia has anything with the capability to get hear and back without refuelling), and kill a few people.

Why do they need to return....Kamakazeeeeeee

NZ Marines ???...


boarding party more likely


http://www.navy.mil.nz/join-us/sits-...ations/scs.htm


again ... a role that the NZ Coast Guard should be doing .. more wasted resources

The group have some nice boats, maybe we should have them embarked for doing the down and dirty?

And when they find them there is no surface vessel available (broken down) to make the arrest.

The only time a skyhawk fired in anger was against? where?

The capabilities of modern missiles are such that all that is required, I think, is to get them launched early enough that interception takes place before the attacking aircraft's own missiles are in range. That doesn't need dedicated fixed wing fighters.

Prompt Global Strike

The ability to strike anywhere, and I mean anywhere in the world inside an hour from go to blow!

It aint science fiction, and the more advanced plans have the ability to put a UCAV anywhere in the world in the same timeframe so it can loiter and do damage as it finds things to damage.

[terbang]

The only time a skyhawk fired in anger was against? where?

We don't have skyhawks anymore and we don't do that anymore either. We find them with an aeroplane, gather the appropriate intel to make it stick in court, then we catch them with a boat and yes it has been known for them to fire a warning shot or two.

Does anyone really think that we had or will ever be likely to stave off anything greater than an attack from the kingdom of Tonga..! You gotta be joking. Our defence force is better off assisting those that could in the future help us (like our SAS) and our own border (economic) protection. Australia, though in close liason with the military, now uses a law enforcement agency (customs) for economic border protection, above a military one. They have their own boats and planes.

[sAsLEX]

We don't have skyhawks anymore and we don't do that anymore either. We find them with an aeroplane, gather the appropriate intel to make it stick in court, then we catch them with a boat and yes it has been known for them to fire a warning shot or two.

Does anyone really think that we had or will ever be likely to stave off anything greater than an attack from the kingdom of Tonga..! You gotta be joking. Our defence force is better off assisting those that could in the future help us (like our SAS) and our own border (economic) protection. Australia, though in close liason with the military, now uses a law enforcement agency (customs) for economic border protection, above a military one. They have their own boats and planes.

Was in fisheries protection off the coast of New Plymouth.

[Edbear]

All these opinions are fine and dandy, but I opine that it's all a bit academic. NZ isn't really needed by anyone else -strategically or otherwise, with perhaps the exception of the Japanese who want to buy it and turn it into a golf course...

We have nothing of value apart from nice scenery and some fresh water, still, that anyone might want. The risk of invasion diminished post WW2 with the advancement in delivery and monitoring systems. The modern submarines of the major players can launch ICBM's against anywhere with no warning, planes are unneccesary, but fun for the pilots.

Wars are begun by superpowers who have no fear of reprisal - against defenceless nations - in their own interests and for specific reasons, ie: Iraq, and highly unlikely in our neck of the woods.

Countries with real military power, and Japan is one now as it has been rebuilding its military quietly, are conscious of the potential and risks in warfare and are more interested in seeing how the world powers can cooperate to avoid military conflict against each other. Note the efforts that went into resolving the North Korea issue peacefully. Note that the China/Taiwan issue is very quiet lately.

A lot goes on behind closed doors. NZ is small potatoes. Could be a good refuelling point for fishing patrols on the Southern Ocean, though...

[Swoop]

But, naval air control doesn't have to be, and should not be, land based. That was the mistake Mussolini made ("Italy, the unsinkable aircraft carrier")

Almost the mistake the Brit's made in the late '70's. Do away with aircraft carriers "because the Air Force says it can defend the fleet at sea from any piece of land".
To prove it, they drew up a map of the world with the ranges of the RAF aircraft overlayed over the top. It was fine except for the fact that there was a dirty big hole in the middle of the Indian Ocean. SOLUTION: They simply moved the Australian sub-continent 800 nautical miles to the left.

Luckily the Invincible carriers ("through deck cruisers") arrived in the nick of time for a little dustup in the South Atlantic...

The RAF contribution to that war? One single bomb dropped successfully on Port Stanley runway. All the rest missed. One whole Vulcan bombload failed to detonate... because some dick forgot to arm them (not that it really mattered since they all missed the target anyway).

[Ixion]

True, in the case of Britain which still has far flung Imperial obligations. But we were talking about NZ (and, tacitly, assuming that the Cook Islands can be sacrificed). In that same little dust up, the Fleet suffered by no means trivial casualties, all inflicted by land based aircraft. The Argentinian aircraft carriers played no part at all.

If you wish to take the battle to a distant opponent, then carriers are needed. But if your concern is to defend the bit of dirt you are sitting on, then that is a different matter. And I did specify "fixed wing" for a reason.

Not to mention that a "Guided Missile Cruiser" can , in reality, be little more than a cheap box with a bunch of missile batteries and some clever electronics. A clever country could make them from old freighters and some #8 wire and corrogated iron.

[terbang]

All these opinions are fine and dandy, but I opine that it's all a bit academic. NZ isn't really needed by anyone else -strategically or otherwise, with perhaps the exception of the Japanese who want to buy it and turn it into a golf course...
.

Thats the reason or military is what it is now. I had mate who flew A4's and whilst he had a cool job, he admitted that they could only slow an earnest attack by about 10 mins and that was it.
Someone mentioned Indonesia? From what I could see they have a huge and modern military. I was based in Halim Perdanakasuma which is a joint civil/military airfield and saw some fairly modern type stuff (F16) in large numbers operating there. I often chuckled at comments made by some aussies in the wake of the Bali bombing that their airforce should be bombing Jakarta in retaliation. Naïve to the sheer volime of people in Indonesia, they missed the fact that if every citizen in Indonesia armed themselves with a shot gun or even a pitch fork and swam across the arafura sea, then walked across the desert with a 50% loss to the elements, they would still be outnumber the aussies by nearly 10 to one.
And reality is that the Indons have a little more than pitchforks and shotguns and also don't really have any interest in Australia...!
So back to us Kiwi's, can we hold off Indonesia (if they bothered) on our own? I think not but we could wisely spend our defence budget in support of those that can and also look after our commercial interests. The latter requires a border surveillance and enforcement capability that our current military is not well delivering over our 200 mile economic zone.

[SARGE]

A
Wars are begun by superpowers who have no fear of reprisal - against defenceless nations - in their own interests and for specific reasons, ie: Iraq, and highly unlikely in our neck of the woods.

Iraq??.. Defenseless??... i doubt it .. Iraq had the 4th largest military in the world prior to Desert Storm and they gave Iran a good run in their little 'misunderstanding'

also not afraid of gassing dissidents in their own country ( by dissidents.. i mean women and children)

dont think NZ is safe..the Japanese were keen to get a foothold here in WW2 and if it wasn't for US Admiral Nimitz im pretty sure the map would look a bit different today.. NZ IS being invaded .. not through military means .. through immigration .. Mt. Roskill has a HUGE Arab community.. you cant tell me for a blue second that NONE of the Islamic immigrants has connections or at least loyalty to the extremists ..lets not forget about Asian gangs ..(which the NZ police are ill-equipped to deal with)

i arrived here Sept 20 2001 .. on that day ( look it up) there was a boat full of Afghan Refuges arrived..apparently they had been on the water for a few months at that time ..for some reason , they HAD to get out of Afghanistan right away .. think maybe they knew something was coming .. how could they have known??.. i doubt the Taliban took out a full page advert in the Afghan Daily news to say " we are attacking the US , prepare to leave.."

NZ is a target BECAUSE it is so far out off the beaten path .. The conflict in the Middle East has Coalition Troops everywhere..communications are monitored and its hard to pull anything together without being busted ..

example: the cops are all over SH16.. lets look at a map .. whats another ' out of the way' road with nice twisties and low plod numbers ...???


never underestimate your strategic value on the world stage my friend ..