|
|
Post by Calum on Oct 1, 2006 15:14:03 GMT 12
I like to do 2 models at the same time so I don't get borded with just one. As I just finshed the Buffalo I've been struggling to decide on my next project, to run alongside the RAN seahawk. ( Quite frankly the Seahawk is becoming a chore  ) I've flirted with the Tempest..(couldn't decide so it's on the back burner) Cobber Kain Hurricane (still waiting for the kit) RAF Desert Strom Jaguar (still waiting for the resin) RAF Desert Storm Tornado (still wating for the resin) Thankfully the postie solved the problem. A Hasegawa F-16B turned up in the mail It's going to be a "what could have been" 2 Sqn F-16. So help me decide the colour scheme. Also does anyone know what tail no (eg NZ65? ) were going tp be assigned to them? |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Oct 1, 2006 16:35:40 GMT 12
They were going to be grey, something to do with the techie composites was going to make it too hard to repaint green.
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Oct 1, 2006 23:24:36 GMT 12
gee no votes for the scheme what I want to paint it.
C'mon people... this democracy thing only goes so far :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Oct 2, 2006 8:40:20 GMT 12
So if you want to pint it like the P3 or Herc, which one? they are not the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by smithy on Oct 2, 2006 15:22:52 GMT 12
Green or Euro I, make a difference from all the grey F-16s you see.
There was a Eurofighter on Hyperscale last year in what if RNZAF markings and Euro I, looked damn mean.
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Oct 2, 2006 18:09:54 GMT 12
Despite the votes I have always had the Euro 1 scheme in mind
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Oct 2, 2006 20:50:07 GMT 12
What about Iraqi (or Afgan) Desert pink? after all it is hypothetical....
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Oct 3, 2006 8:42:49 GMT 12
They wouldn't have been used in low level, so no need to repaint for that. They would have operated medium level, with lgb and jdam, to avoid the SAM and AAA threat. You will note that even the RAF harriers haven't been repainted and they are probably the lowes, slowest aircraft operating.
The days of pink aircraft flying low level went out with the first gulf war after the RAF lost too many tornados.
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Oct 3, 2006 11:59:00 GMT 12
I just evened things up a bit in the poll... although I agree that they would have probably been delivered in the standard USAF grey scheme. But I'm sure over time we would have given them a darker scheme to fit in with the environment we mostly operated in. I think the serial numbers were going to be NZ65XX.
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Oct 6, 2006 23:13:13 GMT 12
They wouldn't have been used in low level, so no need to repaint for that. They would have operated medium level, with lgb and jdam, to avoid the SAM and AAA threat. You will note that even the RAF harriers haven't been repainted and they are probably the lowes, slowest aircraft operating. The days of pink aircraft flying low level went out with the first gulf war after the RAF lost too many tornados. To a degree this is true Phil. But this assumes that you have sufficient SEAD and EW assets to either overwhelm or destroy the enemies IADS. Granted this is the situation twe currently find ourselves in. In Desert Storm the coalition had this, mainly because the entire IADS was located in several main centres within a small (compared to Europe). Plus when the opposing airforce doesn't come up to play it makes life significantly easier. If WW3 had broken out, In Western Europe NATO (including the US) would not have had the ability to target and destroy the Warsaw pact IADS to the extent required that would allow safe (ish) operations at medium altitude. they would also have had many many Red fighters to deal with. Hence the reason the US maintained nearly their entire F-111 fleet in the UK or had them allocated to Europe. Low level also has a role in the maritime environment, Considering the Radar horizon is effectively line of sight. For example, a Radar at 20 metres has a will detect a aircraft flying at 100 ft at about 41 km. At 30 ft the aircraft will get undetectable until it is at 31km... Close enough to fire a Harpoon and get out. An aircraft at 10000 ft is (theoretically) detectable at about 430km.. Plenty of time for the ship to get ready fro the engagement. |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Oct 7, 2006 9:17:21 GMT 12
They wouldn't have been used in low level, so no need to repaint for that. They would have operated medium level, with lgb and jdam, to avoid the SAM and AAA threat. You will note that even the RAF harriers haven't been repainted and they are probably the lowes, slowest aircraft operating. The days of pink aircraft flying low level went out with the first gulf war after the RAF lost too many tornados. To a degree this is true Phil. But this assumes that you have sufficient SEAD and EW assets to either overwhelm or destroy the enemies IADS. Granted this is the situation twe currently find ourselves in. In Desert Storm the coalition had this, mainly because the entire IADS was located in several main centres within a small (compared to Europe). Plus when the opposing airforce doesn't come up to play it makes life significantly easier. If WW3 had broken out, In Western Europe NATO (including the US) would not have had the ability to target and destroy the Warsaw pact IADS to the extent required that would allow safe (ish) operations at medium altitude. they would also have had many many Red fighters to deal with. Hence the reason the US maintained nearly their entire F-111 fleet in the UK or had them allocated to Europe. Low level also has a role in the maritime environment, Considering the Radar horizon is effectively line of sight. For example, a Radar at 20 metres has a will detect a aircraft flying at 100 ft at about 41 km. At 30 ft the aircraft will get undetectable until it is at 31km... Close enough to fire a Harpoon and get out. An aircraft at 10000 ft is (theoretically) detectable at about 430km.. Plenty of time for the ship to get ready fro the engagement. I'm not actually assuming anything, other than we are operating F16s... My comment was directly related to operating 'our' F16s in the current conflict in Afghanistan, where medium level with JDAMS seems to be the order of the day. Since this is the only conflict we would likely to be operating our a/c in. Clearly the RAF did not have sufficient SEAD capability during ODS, since they lost a number of Tornados doing low level attacks against airfields. Hence after ODS they rethought their approach. Pink aircraft would look mighty silly against the sea. |
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Oct 7, 2006 16:20:18 GMT 12
I'm not actually assuming anything, other than we are operating F16s... My comment was directly related to operating 'our' F16s in the current conflict in Afghanistan, where medium level with JDAMS seems to be the order of the day. Since this is the only conflict we would likely to be operating our a/c in. Fair enough, although I'd doubt we'd send combat aircraft there Clearly the RAF did not have sufficient SEAD capability during ODS, since they lost a number of Tornados doing low level attacks against airfields. Hence after ODS they rethought their approach. The RAF (as part of the coalition) did have enough SEAD assets. However they were limited to using the tactics they had been trained to use (primarily for WW3 conflict in western Europe) and the weapons (JP223/Dumb Bombs) they had. The only way to deliver these accurately was from low Altitude. Most of the losses were sustained attacking the most heavily defended targets (IE Airfields) and the majority were from AAA. AAA being the main threat when operating at Low Altitude. When they switched to medium altitude attacks originally they were limited to dropping Dumb bombs which proved far from successful. Hence TILAD was rushed into service (TILAD was currently undergoing qualification and wasn't really cleared for use when ODS kicked off) Also this is why the Buccaneer was rushed to the theatre so they could lase for the Tornados. In the conflicts we're seeing today, I agree they best place to be is medium altitude dropping GPS or LGB's. IF you look at the loadouts the USN use over Iraq, they are generally 1 JDAM, I LGB. LGB's being the preferred option as they are more accurate than the JDAM. The JDAM is used when the target is obscured. But if it ever came to a shooting war with a country with a significant naval force then Low Level approaches would still be a valid tactic IMHO. Pink aircraft would look mighty silly against the sea. indeed they would |
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Oct 7, 2006 16:31:41 GMT 12
Hmmm, maybe I shouldnt have suggested Pink F16s! how much difference does camouflage make to operations in the modern world? In most circumstances Radar would pick the jets up before visual range, and once in visual range, I would say camo wouldnt make a lot of difference (so long as the aircraft werent bright orange)- what do the ex RNZAF guys reckon? |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Oct 7, 2006 17:35:04 GMT 12
Fair enough, although I'd doubt we'd send combat aircraft there If we had a govt that let us keep our F16s, I'd like to think that same govt would be prepared to send them to Afghanistan to support the SAS. Even the govt we do have sent the P3 to the gulf. |
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Oct 7, 2006 20:00:38 GMT 12
fair point Phil
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Feb 7, 2007 22:14:02 GMT 12
Obviously I ignored the poll result ;D   |
|
|
|
Post by kiwichappers on Feb 7, 2007 23:34:25 GMT 12
One mans views for what its worth
I built one some years ago for NZ SIG display at the IPMS UK nationals when there was a 'definite' prospect of these aircraft becoming part of the RNZAF. As for finishes I and used the Euro 1 scheme, because it looked rather good on the F-16 and serialed it NZ 6512 accepting the logic set out on the ADF-Serials web site, i.e 6 for strike aircraft, 5 next digit [Skyhawks 2, Stirkemasters 3, and Macchis 4], then any number up to the total of type in service.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Feb 8, 2007 9:15:53 GMT 12
The reason I used NZ6554 is because it's a T bird, For Example the TA-4's were NZ625x.
From memory the original F-16 deal was for 12 A,s and 18 B's. So I'd expect the RNZAF would have continued the idea of starting the T birds at 6551.
Got any pictures of your f-16?
For some reason I always had a soft spot for TA-4 NZ6254, so I chose 54 for the F-16.
|
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Feb 8, 2007 9:32:36 GMT 12
Looking good!
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Feb 8, 2007 14:22:10 GMT 12
Awesome Calum. Today is the first time I've seen this thread. It's a good one. It almost makes you weep, doesn't it? What could have been. I think you should send the photos to the email on this page for comment... www.primeminister.govt.nz/frame-contacts.htmlIs that masking tape on the canopy? Or did you envisage heavy tinting? How about for the next one, a gold F-16B in markings celebrating the upcoming RNZAF 70th Anniversary? That'd be cool. |
|
)
