A-4 today

[David E. Powell]

I was wondeirng, given the NZ government having problems with
Skyhawks, what made them so put off about them? I know they are older,
but the Israelis really modified theirs and they seemed OK with
precision weapons.

Can the A-4 Skyhawk mount Harpoon missiles? If not I would guess that
Penguin or something like that would be doable. With a good mix of
fuel tanks and underwing missiles I could see the A-4 giving the New
Zealanders a good quick-reaction capability over a very good range.

Are the Kiwis planning to replace the A-4 with a new attack jet type
due to expense and maintenance or are they just making the decision
they don't need that type of craft for their defensive needs?

At any rate A-4s being used as aggressors for training today is still
pretty cool after about 50 or so years of Skyhawk service.

David

[Andrew Chaplin[_2_]]

On Sep 10, 3:28*pm, "David E. Powell" >
wrote:
> I was wondeirng, given the NZ government having problems with
> Skyhawks, what made them so put off about them? I know they are older,
> but the Israelis really modified theirs and they seemed OK with
> precision weapons.
>
> Can the A-4 Skyhawk mount Harpoon missiles? If not I would guess that
> Penguin or something like that would be doable. With a good mix of
> fuel tanks and underwing missiles I could see the A-4 giving the New
> Zealanders a good quick-reaction capability over a very good range.
>
> Are the Kiwis planning to replace the A-4 with a new attack jet type
> due to expense and maintenance or are they just making the decision
> they don't need that type of craft for their defensive needs?
>
> At any rate A-4s being used as aggressors for training today is still
> pretty cool after about 50 or so years of Skyhawk service.

With the disposal of the A-4s and the Aermacchis, the RNZAF would
appear to have gone from an air force to an air service. However,
their Orions and Sea Sprites remain combat-capable. In 2007, I saw
RNZAF personnel working in the Persian Gulf supporting coalition
maritime patrol ops.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO

[[email protected]]

On Sep 10, 12:28*pm, "David E. Powell" >
wrote:
> I was wondeirng, given the NZ government having problems with
> Skyhawks, what made them so put off about them? I know they are older,
> but the Israelis really modified theirs and they seemed OK with
> precision weapons.
>
> Can the A-4 Skyhawk mount Harpoon missiles? If not I would guess that
> Penguin or something like that would be doable. With a good mix of
> fuel tanks and underwing missiles I could see the A-4 giving the New
> Zealanders a good quick-reaction capability over a very good range.
>

"Israeli Phantoms and Skyhawks were armed with the
Gabriel Mk 3, an active radar-seeking variant of the
Israeli developed anti-ship missile. "

Source:

http://www.global-defence.com/2003/anti_ship.htm



> David

[Andrew Venor]

David E. Powell wrote:
> I was wondeirng, given the NZ government having problems with
> Skyhawks, what made them so put off about them? I know they are older,
> but the Israelis really modified theirs and they seemed OK with
> precision weapons.
>
> Can the A-4 Skyhawk mount Harpoon missiles? If not I would guess that
> Penguin or something like that would be doable. With a good mix of
> fuel tanks and underwing missiles I could see the A-4 giving the New
> Zealanders a good quick-reaction capability over a very good range.
>
> Are the Kiwis planning to replace the A-4 with a new attack jet type
> due to expense and maintenance or are they just making the decision
> they don't need that type of craft for their defensive needs?
>
> At any rate A-4s being used as aggressors for training today is still
> pretty cool after about 50 or so years of Skyhawk service.
>
> David

New Zealand's Labour government has retired both the A-4's and their
Aermacchi MB-339's as well as canceled an order for F-16's because they
decided to retire all of their combat jets in favor of transport
aircraft. So the country has converted the RNZAF from an air force into
an air freight service.

ALV

[David E. Powell]

On Sep 10, 5:24*pm, wrote:
> On Sep 10, 12:28*pm, "David E. Powell" >
> wrote:
>
> > I was wondeirng, given the NZ government having problems with
> > Skyhawks, what made them so put off about them? I know they are older,
> > but the Israelis really modified theirs and they seemed OK with
> > precision weapons.
>
> > Can the A-4 Skyhawk mount Harpoon missiles? If not I would guess that
> > Penguin or something like that would be doable. With a good mix of
> > fuel tanks and underwing missiles I could see the A-4 giving the New
> > Zealanders a good quick-reaction capability over a very good range.
>
> "Israeli Phantoms and Skyhawks were armed with the
> Gabriel Mk 3, an active radar-seeking variant of the
> Israeli developed anti-ship missile. "
>
> Source:
>
> http://www.global-defence.com/2003/anti_ship.htm

OK. That'll make a dent.....

> > David-

[David E. Powell]

On Sep 10, 3:39*pm, Andrew Chaplin > wrote:
> On Sep 10, 3:28*pm, "David E. Powell" >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > I was wondeirng, given the NZ government having problems with
> > Skyhawks, what made them so put off about them? I know they are older,
> > but the Israelis really modified theirs and they seemed OK with
> > precision weapons.
>
> > Can the A-4 Skyhawk mount Harpoon missiles? If not I would guess that
> > Penguin or something like that would be doable. With a good mix of
> > fuel tanks and underwing missiles I could see the A-4 giving the New
> > Zealanders a good quick-reaction capability over a very good range.
>
> > Are the Kiwis planning to replace the A-4 with a new attack jet type
> > due to expense and maintenance or are they just making the decision
> > they don't need that type of craft for their defensive needs?
>
> > At any rate A-4s being used as aggressors for training today is still
> > pretty cool after about 50 or so years of Skyhawk service.
>
> With the disposal of the A-4s and the Aermacchis, the RNZAF would
> appear to have gone from an air force to an air service. However,
> their Orions and Sea Sprites remain combat-capable. In 2007, I saw
> RNZAF personnel working in the Persian Gulf supporting coalition
> maritime patrol ops.

The patrol stuff allows crossover to search and rescue as well, and if
they aren't worried about fighters or other modern threats, the
helicopters and Orions can carry missiles and antisub stuff.

I agree it is kind of sad they are phasing out all the fast stuff.
Didn't they have some mutual force plan with Australia a few years
back for their air forces?

> --
> Andrew Chaplin
> SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO

[Tiger]

David E. Powell wrote:
> On Sep 10, 3:39 pm, Andrew Chaplin > wrote:
>
> I agree it is kind of sad they are phasing out all the fast stuff.
> Didn't they have some mutual force plan with Australia a few years
> back for their air forces?
>
>
>>--
>>Andrew Chaplin
>>SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTIN
>
> O


While I share your thoughts, NEw Zealand is kinda of in a nice
neighborhood to be in. No natural enemies. Not much worth invading for
(mostly sheep in NZ). Friends with folks with big guns ( US, UK, Aussies).

[tankfixer]

In article <fdcc7be5-a86d-485f-b675-
>,
says...
> I was wondeirng, given the NZ government having problems with
> Skyhawks, what made them so put off about them? I know they are older,
> but the Israelis really modified theirs and they seemed OK with
> precision weapons.
>
> Can the A-4 Skyhawk mount Harpoon missiles? If not I would guess that
> Penguin or something like that would be doable. With a good mix of
> fuel tanks and underwing missiles I could see the A-4 giving the New
> Zealanders a good quick-reaction capability over a very good range.
>
> Are the Kiwis planning to replace the A-4 with a new attack jet type
> due to expense and maintenance or are they just making the decision
> they don't need that type of craft for their defensive needs?
>
> At any rate A-4s being used as aggressors for training today is still
> pretty cool after about 50 or so years of Skyhawk service.


NZ got rid of them because they are evil war making machines and a kind
genteel government just can't own that kind of thing now can they ?


--
Meddle ye not in the Affairs of Dragons, for Thou art Crunchy and taste
Goode with Ketchup.

[ErrolC]

On Sep 11, 7:28*am, "David E. Powell" >
wrote:
> I was wondeirng, given the NZ government having problems with
> Skyhawks, what made them so put off about them? I know they are older,
> but the Israelis really modified theirs and they seemed OK with
> precision weapons.
>
> Can the A-4 Skyhawk mount Harpoon missiles? If not I would guess that
> Penguin or something like that would be doable.

They had been upgraded to use IR Mavericks in the anti-shipping role.
History in RNZAF service
http://www.kiwiaircraftimages.com/skyhawk.html
"The updated installation provides HOTAS and a 'glass' cockpit (2
large CRT screens), new HUD, APG-66 radar aquisition and tracking (as
per the F16), and a ring laser gyro inertial navigation system, as
well as upgraded VOR/ILS equipment and the provision of chaff/flare
dispensers. Parts of the wings were reskinned and some structural
elements rebuilt, and the aircraft wiring replaced. The weapons
capability now includes AIM-9G/L and AGM-65B."

<snip>


Errol Cavit | Tomb of the Unknown Warrior, NZ
The great pain we feel / Is for you who were our future
Comeback return home, / We have waited for you
Through the long years / You were away
Sorrow / Aches within me