I have been reading everywhere on the internet that we need to just buy more... and to an extent in some area's, I would agree, and yet in other area's why do we need to.

So what am I talking about? Our defence budget needs to be increased. Yes, I agree with that. We need our fighter air wing back. Yes, I would agree with that as well. We need to go back to a four frigate navy with a patrol squadron and have the new sealift capabilities. Yes I agree. Do we need more than the 4 P-8A Posiden's to replace the 6 P-3K2's? Yes. What about more NH-90's? Yes. What about more C-130's, well I say a maybe. What about more than the 8 SeaSprites (and or future replacements) especially with current fleet and the future fleet, yes but not as many as you would be thinking.

I want ot see our defence budget increased but we can just go round spending willy nilly on equipment does really increase any capability or have a real need for... I have to spend it wisely.

Apparently we need 3 so we can have one in dry dock undergoing maintenance, one in port training the crew for deployment, and one doing diving support, hydrographic surveying, and deep-sea salvage. Going by this notion we should have 3 Tankers like HMNZS Aotearoa & 3 ships like HMNZS Canterbury. 

I expect once throughout her career HMNZS Manawanui will do a deep maintenance period, and have many much lighter maintenance periods where she can still deploy at short notice if needed. The OPV's can do many of the jobs the DHV can do for the divers during the maintenance periods. Though yes many of the specialised equipment won't be there. The OPV's can also be deployed for hydrographic surveying as well and so can the IPV's.

This argument is okay for the four frigate navy, one in deep maintenance, one on stand-by, one on patrol and one on oversea's deployment. Or any mix of thereof, but for a DHV it is unneeded and what would this achieve or accomplish? How often is the DHV be needed for deployment, that the one vessel can't handle already or that one of the OPV can't handle? How often will she actually do any actual deepsea salvage, considering HMNZS Manawanui II only did a couple of salvage operations during her 30 year RNZN career.

HMNZS Manawanui A09 during live fire exercise at RIMPAC 2020

Again hydrographic surveying can be done by any vessel if needed, like the OPV's, and the diving support again the OPV could do this. But admittedly that some of the specialised equipment wouldn't be there. But would be possible to set up a mobile compression chamber on the quarter-deck, maybe using the crane and the with a wet diving bell. It would be useable but obviously not to the same extent as the DHV, but still usable to meet range of deployments.

What about the IPV's they are now down to only 2 from having 4? Well, the thing here is even back in the day with the older IPC's they only ever wanted a couple to complement the frigates on patrols. 

The thing with just saying we need more of... [Insert equipment here] ... there is more to it than just buying more, not just the extra money. In the above example, I would also answer with more questions, where is the extra manpower coming from to man these extra vessels. Most new vessels are replacements of older vessels and manpower does not become an issue old crew are transferred to the new vessel. Considering the future fleet a new SOPV and the new Enhanced Sealift Vessel and I suspect the Enhanced Sealift Vessel will be much larger than HMNZS Canterbury, so Considering this we have to think about docking facilities at Davenport Naval Base. More expenses to build more wharf space to accommodate the extra vessels.  Now we have 3 vessels instead of the planned 1 vessel to man, maintain and run with no actual real gain in capability which all costs money on a limited budget.

• Options for the NZDF and RNZN 2nd enhanced Sealift vessel
• Why do I think the Endurance 170 LHD is a good choice for the RNZN.
• New Zealand Army to Replace Its Armoured Pinzgauer Fleet
• Capable for what? New Zealand’s 2019 defence capability plan

Ok but you say we should get more P-8A's, what is the difference. The first there here is we already operate 6 P-3K2's so while the P-8 is better tech we are still downgrading the numbers. With aircraft, it also becomes a numbers game and having too few airframes it can become a problem as the aircraft get older, look at the C-130H with five airframes. There have been times the RNZAF has had none available due to maintenance. ie; 1 maybe 2 in deep maintenance, 1 or 2 in light maintenance and the 1 on standby has a breakdown. The Boeing 757's is a classic example of this with only 2 airframes. Aircraft require more and regular maintenance periods than ocean-going vessels.

The 4 P-8A's will be fine during their younger years, however as the maintenance periods start to ramp up 4 may not be enough to always have one available for tasking and I would say have 2 available tasking at any one time, one patrolling our EEZ and a 2nd on stand by for search and rescue operations or any other emergency that could happen at any time. So yes at least 2 more P-8A's would be advisable. The same for the NH-90's a few more would be advisable as they start to get older and even possibly for C-130j-30's having that extra one airframe.

What about more NZLAV's or armoured bushmasters? Here I would say maybe with the armoured bushmasters. As they are replacing 64 armoured Pinguzer with 43 bushmasters. However with the NZLAV's, no, the army didn't want 105 and only requested around 75-80. So why did they get the 105? Well, I know the answer and that is a topic for another day and another article.  However, I would say that instead of the extra 25 NZLAV's have 25 MBT or Main Battle Tanks instead. This line up would give the NZ Army a full range of capabilities for a variety of operations they can operate in and giving the ground troops extra and mobile cover and firepower.

So it is not as simple as saying "just buy more of", somethings yes sure you can do this, 9500 MARS-L Rifles... maybe they should have got 12000, considering the future armed forces will be growing slightly, with the Army to 6000 personal and the extra naval vessels etc. Other things like having 3 DHV's no. Maybe 2 extra OPV's? but again it brings up the same manning, berthing spots, extra running costs etc.