|
|
Post by beagle on Sept 10, 2009 21:32:57 GMT 12
good stuff in here guys I see there is quite a wide spectrum of opinions! who said tornado's? I think you might be onto something there, aren't the Brits replacing them with eurofighters? however I suppose they will be very well 'used' and probably just as bad as battered ex aus f18's? ! I have read, I'm sure, that the Tornado was built for a 10,000 hour life-span, and all of them have exceeded that! We would have to be barking mad to buy, or accept as a gift, anything from the UK. All of this is purely academic anyway, because it will never happen. The strike force is gone, and it ain't coming back! ya just spoiled our party |
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Sept 10, 2009 21:35:53 GMT 12
I have read, I'm sure, that the Tornado was built for a 10,000 hour life-span, and all of them have exceeded that! We would have to be barking mad to buy, or accept as a gift, anything from the UK.
didn't Steve Moore do a Test Pilot course and part of it was a project on the tornado, it was more or less brand new, and found something like 300 faults with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by yak2 on Sept 10, 2009 21:40:21 GMT 12
Maybe NZ should think outside the square. We are told that the days of manned strike aircraft are coming to an end. Why not be the first to develop a pure UAV force for that application? Involve local industry, some IT whiz kids and radio control hobbyists, some airframes/engines from the boneyard, and the possibilities are endless. For cruise missiles use the Skyhawks. Just rip the cockpit out, fit a R/C system and load it with HE. We might even donate a few F111's to convert as well. For defence all you need is a bunch of SAM's. The Russkies built good ones.........check on ebay. Now that I have solved that little problem. Yer rugby team......  |
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Sept 10, 2009 21:43:11 GMT 12
Otago to lift the shield this weekend
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Sept 10, 2009 22:10:10 GMT 12
Now this thread is really getting into the realms of fantasy Beagle.
|
|
|
|
Post by corokid66 on Sept 11, 2009 0:15:24 GMT 12
The proposed attack version of the KAI T-50 the F/A-50 would be able to do the business as it is set up for the same roles our A-4's did. They have been designed to be operationally complementary to the Korean F-16’s and are able to work within the strike matrix of allied - western alligned defence forces as a second tier capability. No different to what the A-4 (or cancelled F-16-A’s) were. It is estimated that this aircraft will be supplied to foreign air forces at around US$20-25 million depending on avionic suites, which is substantially less than new build F-16's and the modern Euro strike aircraft. The other point is that NZ wishes a FTA with South Korea - something like 14-18 F/A50's would go a long way to seal a deal. As for a future jet powered UCAV the Global Atomic Predator C 'Avenger' recently had its first test flight. A sort of a cross between the Global Hawk and the Reaper set up for CAS, COIN, Interdiction and possible maritime strike roles. Said to be worrying the JSF people as it is likely to cost substantially less.
|
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Sept 11, 2009 0:31:45 GMT 12
I have read, I'm sure, that the Tornado was built for a 10,000 hour life-span, and all of them have exceeded that! We would have to be barking mad to buy, or accept as a gift, anything from the UK. All of this is purely academic anyway, because it will never happen. The strike force is gone, and it ain't coming back! ya just spoiled our party Just think on....the last fully British designed military aircraft was....wait for it......The Hawk: Forty years ago! |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Sept 11, 2009 6:48:36 GMT 12
Umm.. no it wasn't, that was the Sea Harrier FA2.
The FA2 was an evolution of the British FRS1, and not of the BAe/MDD GR5/AV8B collaboration.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Sept 11, 2009 8:46:40 GMT 12
Just out of interest, who was the designer of the Hawk?
|
|
|
|
Post by oldnavy on Sept 11, 2009 9:21:41 GMT 12
Not sure the Hawk design was attributed to one person, but I am sure it's an excellent jet. This British design was even picked up by the mighty USN, and derivatives are still coming off the production line with many internal and external improvements. A country in desparate need could do a lot worse than having Hawk as a front line aircraft.
|
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Sept 11, 2009 10:00:17 GMT 12
Just out of interest, who was the designer of the Hawk? A team from Hawker Siddeley! First flown 1974, entered RAF servioce 1976. |
|
|
|
Post by flycookie on Sept 11, 2009 10:56:29 GMT 12
I find some of the critical comments in this thread about the age of aircraft designs to be outright bizarre.
The B747 must be close to (if not actually ?) 40, and Boeing are still pumping out latest and greatest variants thereof.
Ditto the even older C-130, which inherited some of its baseline data and internal structural design concepts from the Spruce Goose.
The mighty CT-4 isn't exactly a puppy, either, yet a fine basic trainer in 2009.
The Hawk? Greatest fast jet trainer in history, with nothing even on the horizon to dent its order book.
On the surreal comments apropos the FRS1 and FA2 Sea Harrier as a maintenance hogging, crap fighter, I'll just repeat the word 'surreal' and leave it at that. Other words come to mind, but this is a family-friendly forum, so quiet stays the FlyCookie.
And none of this has any bearing on the excellent raison d'etre for this thread, I might add.
You know, fast and nasty Kiwi roundels over the Pacific........
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Sept 11, 2009 11:20:32 GMT 12
I agree with you Ian, the age of the design matters not if it's a good design, it's the age of the airframe that matters somewhat. Our Hercules are all getting up towards 45 years old and are a 60 year old design, but we're upgrading them to stay on for another 20+ years.
The F-16 is as old as the Hawk, surely. And even the new fangled Eurofighter is about 15 years old at least as a design.
I'm also unsure why I got the "rolled eyes" for asking who designed the Hawk. As a Hawker Siddley product I was wondering if Sir Sydney Camm was involved but could not find any attributed designer on the web. So I guess it was designed by a committee then? Sounds about right for 1970's British industry I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by flyinkiwi on Sept 11, 2009 11:39:29 GMT 12
Will any of the RAAF F/G Hornets be manufactured in Australia like the A/B's were? NZ could tack some extra's to the order or even inherit the Aussie ones after the F-35 comes online (we might be waiting a while though :  I think the Gripen is a great aircraft but politically the cost is too high for the NZ government to risk alienating the US. A Hornet purchase might be the leverage we need to get that free trade deal we are so close to getting. |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Sept 11, 2009 11:55:01 GMT 12
No one said either the FRS1 or FA2 was a crap fighter.
They were both extremely capable fighters, especially the FA2 with it's look down shoot down Blue Vixen radar and BVR AMRAAMs.
Comments were made by someone about it's poor payload when taking off vertically, and you can't argue the toss on that point.
|
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Sept 11, 2009 13:37:54 GMT 12
Will any of the RAAF F/G Hornets be manufactured in Australia like the A/B's were? NZ could tack some extra's to the order or even inherit the Aussie ones after the F-35 comes online (we might be waiting a while though : I think the Gripen is a great aircraft but politically the cost is too high for the NZ government to risk alienating the US. A Hornet purchase might be the leverage we need to get that free trade deal we are so close to getting. When did NZ ever worry about alienating the Americans? I also wouldn't be too concerned about getting a free trade agreement with the US. It, the US, doesn't enter into ANY deal that isn't to its benefit above all else. It hasn't benefited Australia that I'm aware of! |
|
|
|
Post by yogi on Sept 11, 2009 17:52:12 GMT 12
I would doubt buying gripens would worry the americans anymore than our anti nuclear policy currently does haha, they know clark put down the f-16 deal and for sure they know we have a new government with a new direction. What they might do if made aware we were interested in getting gripens is offer us another super good deal on f-16s but hey.... i'm getting wayyyy ahead of myself....
dam this thread is going great! keep the opinions coming peeps
I also have a question regarding the f16 vs the Gripen, specifically maneuverability, range, and survivability
if anyone is interested enough to find out or knows (for sure not just wikipedia haha!) I would be keen to find out thanks ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Sept 11, 2009 17:52:31 GMT 12
Will any of the RAAF F/G Hornets be manufactured in Australia like the A/B's were? NZ could tack some extra's to the order or even inherit the Aussie ones after the F-35 comes online (we might be waiting a while though : I think the Gripen is a great aircraft but politically the cost is too high for the NZ government to risk alienating the US. A Hornet purchase might be the leverage we need to get that free trade deal we are so close to getting. all RAAF F-18F and maybe G super Hornets will be manufactured in the US of A. I would say that if, if they get the 100 F-35's they want, they will also be made in the USA. They need the jobs to keep the USA going. |
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Sept 11, 2009 18:56:59 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by yak2 on Sept 11, 2009 19:55:47 GMT 12
all RAAF F-18F and maybe G super Hornets will be manufactured in the US of A. I would say that if, if they get the 100 F-35's they want, they will also be made in the USA. They need the jobs to keep the USA going. This is the era of offsets and manufacturing of components/sub assemblies rather than complete aircraft. Think Boeing is still manufacturing F18 bits in Australia, as well as other components (rudders, winglets etc.) for various Boeing and Airbus aircraft. They have at least 2 autoclaves in Australia, with the largest at Fishermans Bend, producing Dreamliner bits. I would expect any F35 order would also involve a substantial offsets program for Australian industry. It is not only about local jobs but also technology transfer. |
|
