Hardly surprising after 10 years and given that all the Skyhawk spares were taken out of the Ohakea and Woodbourne stores and put in warehouses in Palmerston North and Blenheim! I bet a fair bit of it has "walked" since then.
Last Edit: Jul 16, 2012 14:33:58 GMT 12 by skyhawkdon
The NZ Government bean counters should have created their own contract CAS company utilising the Skyhawks and Aeromacchis. The would have kept all the jobs in NZ and generated more overseas income. Just dreaming
The NZ Government bean counters should have created their own contract CAS company utilising the Skyhawks and Aeromacchis. The would have kept all the jobs in NZ and generated more overseas income. Just dreaming
Here's an application of CAS testing the RNZNs phalanx block 1B ciws . Good clip of skyhawk IR signature.
Guess the goverment will have to invest in RNZAF AA ASuW capability at some stage be it Drone or P8 type aircraft .
Post by ngatimozart on Jul 18, 2012 18:45:31 GMT 12
Actually at another place where I lurk it has been suggested that the P8 may not be the best buy and that the "SeaHerc" would be better because it keeps the advantages of the P3 low and slow with a long loiter time. Whereas the P8 cannot do that. Lockheed have unveiled an MPA/ASW C130, the SC 130J at Farnbourgh, aimed at the UK's MPA requirements. Maybe an option for NZ.
Please no... As great is the Herc is at carting stuff around the world, I would be very doubtful it'd make a good MPA. The P-8 may not be perfect, but I reckon has a lot more potential than a modified Herc...
I know the US Coast Guard use them, but that is for only a fraction of the capability of what a 'military' MPA can do.
All depends on the baseline requirement for a future MPA if the Herc can meet that requirement cant see why not. Can't just build requirements to suit around P8. There's also a P8 lite version Boeing investigating for P3 replacement market.
Post by ngatimozart on Jul 19, 2012 11:01:29 GMT 12
I have it from elsewhere that the P8 is Tier 1 capability far more than just ASW & ASuW, with the ISR capability having something to do with people who work behind a veil and is multi-agency It is something that would set NZDF & NZG up for many years in the future. It also appears the the NZG is "locked into this" because the capability and benefits on offer far outweigh the costs. Unfortunately for us the fitout and capability is classified and on a NTK basis.
I have it from elsewhere that the P8 is Tier 1 capability far more than just ASW & ASuW, with the ISR capability having something to do with people who work behind a veil and is multi-agency It is something that would set NZDF & NZG up for many years in the future. It also appears the the NZG is "locked into this" because the capability and benefits on offer far outweigh the costs. Unfortunately for us the fitout and capability is classified and on a NTK basis.
This makes sense to me, but what would we then use for SAR? While I can appreciate the massive increase in surveillance capability which is welcome considering the large area of ocean NZ claims as its own, its not like we can drop a liferaft to a yacht crew in distress from FL330 in a P8.
Sorry about the thread drift Dave.
"The thing about quotes from the internet is that it's very hard to verify their authenticity." - Winston Churchill
I remember trying to get Skyhawk and Macchi stuff from the (mythical) off Base storage 10 or so years ago. It just didn't happen.
How do we accommodate thread drift?
Re the Maritime Herc. I recall standing in a hangar parade at Woodbourne cira 1963 when Mr Morrison (then CAF) told us we were getting three C-130's and possibly a few more with a maritime role fit. Lockheed talked us out of that by extolling the airframe difficulties inherent in using the Herc that way. Naturally they would, as they were selling the P-3 (not P3) at the same time. Now that the P-3 is off the market the Maritime Herc has reappeared. Lockheed could have done it earlier, after all the P-3 is just an adapted L-188.
There is no such thing as a stupid question - It is stupid answers that cause all the worlds problems.
I have it from elsewhere that the P8 is Tier 1 capability far more than just ASW & ASuW, with the ISR capability having something to do with people who work behind a veil and is multi-agency It is something that would set NZDF & NZG up for many years in the future. It also appears the the NZG is "locked into this" because the capability and benefits on offer far outweigh the costs. Unfortunately for us the fitout and capability is classified and on a NTK basis.
This makes sense to me, but what would we then use for SAR? While I can appreciate the massive increase in surveillance capability which is welcome considering the large area of ocean NZ claims as its own, its not like we can drop a liferaft to a yacht crew in distress from FL330 in a P8.
Sorry about the thread drift Dave.
Since when is SAR a core military capabilty? (or should be in expensive of ASuW/ASW/ISR)
And who says you can't drop down in Altitude to drop a liferaft, or that they aren't developing this capabilty like they are for the torpedos
Likewise sorry aboutt he drift. Perhaps a Mod could move these posts to a new thread.
Meanwhile, in further developing back on track news......after so many stops and starts, the day I see one of the ex-RNZAF/RAN Skyhawks taxi out and takeoff from Draken's base in Florida, is the day when I finally believe this deal has sucessfully gone through and the Skyhawks were flyable again.
I'm with you Craig. While Draken may have the financial resources to make it happen, they don't yet have US State Dept. approval for the Skyhawks and their Kahu avionics. Plus going from running 5 L-39s at airshows, to 50 odd mixed Russian, US and Italian jets will be an "interesting" learning curve for their maintenance and logistic guys, to say the least. They must be planning on expanding from their current 5 maintenance guys to over 100 to maintain a mixed fleet of that size! Jeez just one RNZAF Squadron for 12 jets had over 100 guys on it and Draken are going to have over 50 aircraft...
Getting some Macchis flying will be a relatively straight forward exercise, but the Skyhawks is a different matter. They need a lot of work and I'll put money on it that you won't see any of them flying by the end of the year!
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 20, 2012 8:21:17 GMT 12
Don, on top of the squadron personnel there were probably up to another 100 people in the base maintenance wing who also kept those aircraft flying. Think how many S&S workers were involved in doing the liferafts, parachutes, drag chutes, repaints, life preservers, etc, alone and nobne of them were on the squadron, only a couple who did daily inspections and despatch of equipment. Then there are the avionics guys, armourers, machinists, admin, accounts, soppliers and all the others that contributed to keeping the 12 aircraft aloft. They too were all part of it, not just those "on squadron" who got all the overseas trips and other jollies.
