|
Post by 30sqnatc on Jan 4, 2009 21:16:15 GMT 12
[/quote] If he did, then he didn't bother giving me the credit for writing the original two articles. Brett. [/quote] You know the story never reveal your sources Paul
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Jan 5, 2009 7:58:44 GMT 12
Perhaps you need to read this tounge in cheek? I doubt he was serious about Spitfires and Mustangs shooting up the RNZAF. But hey we haven't got a combat wing and I for one would like to have one! And at the very least its got us talking about it. Of course it's tongue -in-cheek; so he'll get a laugh at the replies won't he!
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Jan 5, 2009 9:21:35 GMT 12
Thinking back to the 70's when I heard this (correctly or incorrectly?), didn't at least one A-4 be kept on 24 hour standby? If so, was it fully armed (20mm canon & sidewinders?) and ready to "scramble"? And when did this practice end, perhaps after the ANZUS breakdown or after the Cold War ended? (Or up to the disbandment)? We never had any Skyhawks on QRA, armed or otherwise, except for the odd exercise. Remember the Skyhawk was not designed as a fighter/intercepter and there was no credible airborne threat to NZ. While Kahu gave the A-4 a useful self defence capability they were never bought for the true "fighter" role. 75 Sqn always maintained a duty crew over the holiday periods who could be called back to work if needed but like others have suggested, getting weapons prep'ed and loaded wouldn't have happened quickly, especially since most of them weren't even kept at Ohakea due to OSH rules
|
|
|
Post by baz62 on Jan 5, 2009 15:06:39 GMT 12
Perhaps you need to read this tounge in cheek? I doubt he was serious about Spitfires and Mustangs shooting up the RNZAF. But hey we haven't got a combat wing and I for one would like to have one! And at the very least its got us talking about it. Of course it's tongue -in-cheek; so he'll get a laugh at the replies won't he! Good one phil82 I thought I wouldn't be alone in this ;D
|
|
|
Post by nige on Jan 5, 2009 23:44:42 GMT 12
Thinking back to the 70's when I heard this (correctly or incorrectly?), didn't at least one A-4 be kept on 24 hour standby? If so, was it fully armed (20mm canon & sidewinders?) and ready to "scramble"? And when did this practice end, perhaps after the ANZUS breakdown or after the Cold War ended? (Or up to the disbandment)? We never had any Skyhawks on QRA, armed or otherwise, except for the odd exercise. Remember the Skyhawk was not designed as a fighter/intercepter and there was no credible airborne threat to NZ. While Kahu gave the A-4 a useful self defence capability they were never bought for the true "fighter" role. 75 Sqn always maintained a duty crew over the holiday periods who could be called back to work if needed but like others have suggested, getting weapons prep'ed and loaded wouldn't have happened quickly, especially since most of them weren't even kept at Ohakea due to OSH rules Thanks for the replies Don, Paddy and Phil etc. Obviously you guys were there and know the facts etc! Anyway, I can't recall now how/why "I thought" that one Skyhawk was on 24 hour standby many years ago. Maybe I thought I had read that in the newspapers, or NZ Wings or Flight International magazine back in the late 70's early 80's when my interest in aviation took off so to speak (the only good thing about going to Evans Bay Intermediate at the time was gazing out the second story classroom windows and watching aircraft land and take off from Wellington airport - saw every RNZAF aircraft at the time except the helicopters, and saw heaps of RAAF Mirages and F111's & other foreign C130's - the RNZAF/RAAF jets loved to touch and go there a lot for some reason)! Anyway I digress, obviously the Skyhawks wouldn't have been armed with anything as there was no threats/incursions by Russian Bears etc. And even if the Skyhawks "were" on some sort of standby but unarmed, as Paddy says as there weren't any A4 Duty crews, so therefore this cannot have been the case and I am truely mistaken - sorry for wasting people's time but at least it has helped clear this up!
|
|
|
Post by mcmaster on Jan 7, 2009 23:35:00 GMT 12
I read the article and I think the guy is actually on "your" side i.e. it does the job (though imperfectly) to remind the NZ public about the loss of the jet combat wing. Sure 24/7 QRA is not realistic but here in Aust we have had F18's on QRA for major events eg Commonwealth games, and at the APEC meeting had armed hornets on CAP over sydney for a day or so. Then again NZ is not missing out on much with these APEC like events (if they are foregone without fighters) as they are a pain in the ar*@ for the citizens.
|
|
|
Post by phil on Jan 8, 2009 6:52:04 GMT 12
We held APEC here in '99.
|
|
|
Post by Kenny on Jan 8, 2009 9:55:40 GMT 12
Hah. Where my brother sat around in DPMs all day doing nothing
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 8, 2009 12:35:49 GMT 12
I read the article and I think the guy is actually on "your" side i.e. it does the job (though imperfectly) to remind the NZ public about the loss of the jet combat wing. If that is the intent, it could be written in a much better way, without innuendoes and with a few researched facts, to make a better article. I don't find it useful at all.
|
|
|
Post by flyinkiwi on Jan 22, 2009 10:44:33 GMT 12
I read the article and I think the guy is actually on "your" side i.e. it does the job (though imperfectly) to remind the NZ public about the loss of the jet combat wing. If that is the intent, it could be written in a much better way, without innuendoes and with a few researched facts, to make a better article. I don't find it useful at all. I couldn't agree more Dave. I think its sad that the topic of defense in NZ is seen as a matter to be made fun of by our media. Imagine if we wrote something about our health or education systems in that light.
|
|