|
Post by bell407 on Mar 26, 2012 14:37:42 GMT 12
I think they are called Harvard 2's in the UK
|
|
|
Post by tfly on Mar 26, 2012 16:02:18 GMT 12
Not bothered what we call them just would like the RNZAF to BUY some, especially if they were to be the slightly more aggressive AT6 variant? Add a nice set of 'teeth' on the nose, hang some ordinance off the hard points and at least we have something that our crews can train on (and more importantly something our army can train with)? Then who know's what the future might be when the Aussies decide to 'move on' from the Super Hornet?
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Mar 26, 2012 16:07:44 GMT 12
Ya mean something like this
|
|
|
Post by tfly on Mar 26, 2012 16:15:39 GMT 12
On the button Beagle exactly what I mean! Let's put the 'force' back into Air Force!
|
|
|
Post by tfly on Mar 26, 2012 16:16:31 GMT 12
Oh and don't forget the nose art!
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Mar 26, 2012 16:20:06 GMT 12
needs a pod with a 30mm rotary cannon like the A10
|
|
|
Post by tfly on Mar 26, 2012 16:26:27 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2012 16:26:40 GMT 12
If you want a Trainer and light attack platform, then the super tucano would be better surely?
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Mar 26, 2012 16:36:27 GMT 12
reasons ?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2012 17:21:30 GMT 12
From what I have heard it seems more capable.
|
|
|
Post by tfly on Mar 26, 2012 20:00:59 GMT 12
Currently we have no capability, the AT-6 would give us some capability do we really need more capability?
|
|
|
Post by meo4 on Mar 26, 2012 21:05:09 GMT 12
Interesting configuration in the FAC role doubt the Air Force would spend bit extra on avonics probably stick to just basic trainer . With Civilization NZDF has civi bean counters sitting next to the uniformed chiefs trying to justify not to spend any extra than is required for certain role. Would have to rewrite defence white paper or another major conflict to change minds. Otherwise say maybe 10 years ago with different government it would have been definitely feasible using skyhawk stocks of GBU-16 , AGM65G etc.
|
|
|
Post by shamus on Mar 31, 2012 9:25:25 GMT 12
A report in the latest AvWebb Flash says that rumours persist that Hawker-Beechcraft will file for bankcruptcy protection soon. I wonder if this will influence prospective purchasers of the AT-6.
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Mar 31, 2012 13:01:47 GMT 12
A report in the latest AvWebb Flash says that rumours persist that Hawker-Beechcraft will file for bankcruptcy protection soon. I wonder if this will influence prospective purchasers of the AT-6. Another company crippled by greedy private equity firms?
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 31, 2012 20:04:21 GMT 12
I never had much interest in this discussion but seeing the Texan II today was amazingly impressive. It is so damned quick, I was amazed. If NZ bought some and armed them we won't need jets.
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Mar 31, 2012 20:15:00 GMT 12
QUICK Dave, you must have had too many coffee's. Based on a PC9 which I have been in, but almost 3 times as heavier.
|
|
|
Post by skywarrior on Apr 1, 2012 19:34:51 GMT 12
I thought the texan II display was shit
|
|
|
Post by saratoga on Apr 1, 2012 20:46:15 GMT 12
I thought the texan II display was shit Agree, it just went up and down the crowd line. Though there was a nice looking model of it in RNZAF markings in the 'corporate' tent .
|
|
|
Post by skywarrior on Apr 1, 2012 21:32:43 GMT 12
and the commentary was just ammusing
|
|
|
Post by yogi on Apr 4, 2012 19:00:20 GMT 12
needs a pod with a 30mm rotary cannon like the A10 ;D pretty sure that pod would be larger than the actual aircraft
|
|