It would be interesting (to me anyways) to understand what it would have cost to build out and maintain a basic early warning and GCI capability to provide at least some coverage over a few vital areas within New Zealand.
AHC: Have the RNZAF acquire a light attack capability
- Thread starter La Rouge Beret
- Start date
Indeed, as I've said creating such a basic system was on the "wishlist" of the last Irish WP on defence but I doubt as things stand it will be done.
The UAE bought 2 SAAB 340 AEW for around 1.2 billion US. I assume this includes ground support & training, since an E-2D Hawkeye cost a little over 100 million, but the USN allready has the rest. If you want AEW but don't want a full-sized 767-based model, then use these to start checking costs...
I was thinking more along the lines of ground based microwave 3D radars along with crews to operate them on a 7x24 basis to provide an early warning and GCI capability. There might also be some cross over with civilian ATC requirements. If a small isolated nation doesn't have suitable hills or mountains on I would be inclined to look at balloon / aerostat platforms (at least for 2D warning radars) as an alternative to AEW aircraft.
Last edited:
Ground-based will have the problem of line of sight/range. I guess in NZ this can be improved by placing them on their plentifull supply of high mountains (not available in Ireland...), but this would also cause many blind spots (because of said mountains); and you'd have the added costs of building the road infrasture and support for this isolated sites. Civilian airlines tend to follow set flightpaths, with makes ATC a lot easier, but if you want proper EW and GCI, you need a radar way up, to improve LOS and eliminate ground blind spots (hills, mountains, canyons, etc.
True but the Irish WP was for Ground based system of some sort as well, but given how low the bar is anything would be an improvement.
Ok. But unless a nation can afford to fly AEW aircraft on a 7x24 forever basis I suspect they are also going to need a basic ground based radar system as well as AEW aircraft if they want a 7x24 forever air defence / air surveillance capability.
I would be curious to know if NATO was able to keep AEW aircraft on station on a 7x24 forever basis during the Cold War with their fleet of E3's ?
I can't imagine any nation other than perhaps a super power even considering to operate a fleet of AEW aircraft to keep one or more on station on a 7x24 forever basis in lieu of ground based radars.
Last edited:
No one has just AEW. See for example the UK or France. AEW is used to extend radar coverage and range, as well as eliminate blind spots; it does not replace ground radars.
That makes sense.. So in my view nations that don`t really have any form of organized air defense systems probably need to start by building ground based systems before investing in AEW air craft.
Definetly. Ireland has the double advantage of being in NATO and "behind" the UK. This means that it has 2 layers of AEW that can relay data to a ground network, as well was GCI. NZ... is stuck way out in the ocean, so it's all on it's own.
I`m thinking that having any form of 7x24 forever air defense (or at least air surveillance system) will make the job of any one who who wants to violate a nations air space much more difficult. Even if a major power for example could likely manage to get low level strike air craft over likely targets in an actual shooting war, I would still see value in a small nation having a system that can deal with wayward airliners, probing flights by higher altitude air craft etc. Simply denying the attackers a `free ride` is in my view a major role of an air defense system.
Is being outside the range of 99% of combat aircraft really a problem? (Especially if you ignore threats from Australia or USN its more like 99.9%)
Ah, we're not in NATO (though in the PfP) so we don't however yeah we're "behind" the UK so currently they handle any Bears tooling around off the West Coast and have an "agreement" with Dublin, though the AC wasn't involved in it.Definetly. Ireland has the double advantage of being in NATO and "behind" the UK. This means that it has 2 layers of AEW that can relay data to a ground network, as well was GCI. NZ... is stuck way out in the ocean, so it's all on it's own.
Agreed, but try selling that to voters (particularly Irish voters), everything is basically "why bother".
Based on my limited travels over the years to Ireland I am a bit surprised that the bulk of Irish voters are ok with having the RAF fly air defence missions for Ireland (as an alternative to Ireland having its own ability to do this.)
Anyway I respect their choices.
Last edited:
Don't ask, it's an "interesting" mindset. A good chunk will rail against the UK yet have no support of spending on the DF.