RNZAF
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I missing something cribble?
I suspect there'd be the odd Kiwi A4 driver out there who might have a quibble with you on that point.
Unless, of course, you're an old fashioned purist who doesn't rate the Skyhawk as a 'pure' fighter.
The only jet fighters we have had were Vampires and Venoms
Unless, of course, you're an old fashioned purist who doesn't rate the Skyhawk as a 'pure' fighter.
Join Date: Jun 1997
Location: auckland, new zealand
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wiley
The meaning of technical terms doesn't change much: granted "...the term "fighter" is also sometimes used colloquially for dedicated ground-attack aircraft".... (can't be arsed finding the AP - or its modern equivalent-definition so have gone to Wikipedia).
With around 1500 hours on the jet over three tours, I don't say lightly that I don't see the A4 as a fighter (except when poking piss at trash-haulers).
For the last 20 -plus years a if jet can't reach out and touch someone BVR and turn 6G+ sustained, then it can't claim to be a fighter IMHO. It may be a great interceptor or a tough mud-mover, but fighter? Not in my book, except in the bar.
The meaning of technical terms doesn't change much: granted "...the term "fighter" is also sometimes used colloquially for dedicated ground-attack aircraft".... (can't be arsed finding the AP - or its modern equivalent-definition so have gone to Wikipedia).
With around 1500 hours on the jet over three tours, I don't say lightly that I don't see the A4 as a fighter (except when poking piss at trash-haulers).
For the last 20 -plus years a if jet can't reach out and touch someone BVR and turn 6G+ sustained, then it can't claim to be a fighter IMHO. It may be a great interceptor or a tough mud-mover, but fighter? Not in my book, except in the bar.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The 'Bat Cave' @ HLP in the Big Durian Indo
Age: 61
Posts: 781
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well all is not lost , you Kiwis have a stack of privately owned warbirds that you can use at a pinch.
With a long weekend and Kiwi ingenuity fueled by some tinnies who knows what's possible.
Kiwi A-10s ? ... I wouldn't want to be a Deer on a lonely hill somewhere.
With a long weekend and Kiwi ingenuity fueled by some tinnies who knows what's possible.
Kiwi A-10s ? ... I wouldn't want to be a Deer on a lonely hill somewhere.
Evertonian
New Zealand needs about the same air power as Ireland. Still a bit over manned, I think.
However, they are signatories to certain defence pacts & with that comes a responsibility. I'm not sure ANZUS is still active anymore, but there was some tension recently, however I can't recall if that was over capability or methodology.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lost, but often Indonesia
Posts: 653
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tension
Buster, the "tension" you are refering to would be when NZ in 1986 I think it was told the Yanks that nuclear powered/ armed machines (ships, aircraft etc) are not welcome in the land of the long white cloud....
The Yanks got a bit shirty about the whole business, you know, pissy tin pot country telling them what they could do and not do....
The Yanks got a bit shirty about the whole business, you know, pissy tin pot country telling them what they could do and not do....
Evertonian
That's probably it. For me, the jury's still out on that. They have every right to make that choice, but every choice has a consequence.
Piss off your biggest & strongest ally, then reduce your capability...you don't need a slide rule to figure that one out!
Piss off your biggest & strongest ally, then reduce your capability...you don't need a slide rule to figure that one out!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ilchester
Age: 51
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let’s face it, all the best will in the world, NZ are never getting a combat force back. My humble opinion is the NZ Govt should invest (and a modest one too at approx $10m USD a copy) in a small fleet of reapers. They can provide persistent surveillance over our larger expanse of water. They also can enforce this with their weapons capability. Also they will provide overland surveillance, if required, over our major cities. Hell I'm sure they would be able to strap an asraam on it as well.
Opening the floor......
Opening the floor......
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 45
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New Zealand will call on big brother just across the ditch to intervene if they get into trouble. Although a few hornets on a CAP over Bondi would protect a fair chunk of the New Zealand population....
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Olney, Bucks
Age: 82
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure about you not having Air Defence/GCI. When I was an Aircraft Apprentice at RAF No 1 Radio School (87th Entry 1957-60), there was a contingent of RNZAF lads doing the same courses with a few in each entry. I'm sure I remember some of them doing the Ground Radar C&R soeciality (Radar Type 80/FPS6/Fixed Coil) and if you had that kit you had Air Defence.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
By the time the war ended, the strength of the RAF was 963000 personnel. When the war-time forces were demobilized in 1945, however, the total strength of ...
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...oyal-Air-Force -
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...oyal-Air-Force -
During the Second World War the RAF reached a total strength of 1208843 men and women. Of these, 185595, were aircrew. The RAF also had the services of ...
Royal Air Force - Cached - Similar
Royal Air Force - Cached - Similar
Royal Air Force
Trained 8,450 (officers) 30,620 (men)
Untrained 1,270 2,960
Defence Personnel Totals - Strength of UK Regular Forces - Deployment in Budgetary Area - Overseas Deployment - Recruitment of UK Regular Forces - Outflow of UK Regular Forces - Reserve Forces - Cadet Forces - m13 -Armed Forces
Trained 8,450 (officers) 30,620 (men)
Untrained 1,270 2,960
Defence Personnel Totals - Strength of UK Regular Forces - Deployment in Budgetary Area - Overseas Deployment - Recruitment of UK Regular Forces - Outflow of UK Regular Forces - Reserve Forces - Cadet Forces - m13 -Armed Forces
As at 1 November 2007, the nominal strength of the RNZAF stood at 2,866, and the DSI target is to grow to 2,996 by the end of the 07/08 financial year. This remains an ambitious target necessitating the recruitment of some 420 personnel this financial year (about 160 more than the number recruited last financial year).
Last edited by Pontius Navigator; 9th Aug 2009 at 17:36.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: See that little island just above France? Yeah, there...
Age: 37
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well with a defense Budget of $1.1bn (2008) that wouldn't even get you 1xT45...
However, as an island nation... maybe just keep the Navy? Get say 4x decent air defense destroyers, stick one over Wellington and bobs your uncle...
Some Reapers and helo's manned by Naval Aviation bods - reckon Reaper could fit Sea Skua or Penguin?
Looking at the NZ Army they have nothing that couldn't be taken and inserted within a Marine Force structure...
Suggest put 'tongue in cheek' detectors on gentlemen
However, as an island nation... maybe just keep the Navy? Get say 4x decent air defense destroyers, stick one over Wellington and bobs your uncle...
Some Reapers and helo's manned by Naval Aviation bods - reckon Reaper could fit Sea Skua or Penguin?
Looking at the NZ Army they have nothing that couldn't be taken and inserted within a Marine Force structure...
Suggest put 'tongue in cheek' detectors on gentlemen
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: due south
Posts: 1,332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pontius Navigator: I did Google and came up with similar numbers to you.
RAF May 1st 1945 total strength 1,079,835; and 9,200 aircraft.
1st April 2009 total strength 39,600.
What I could not find out was the total number of aircraft as at 1st April 2009, and I suppose if I were to ask for it here someone will shout Beadwindow.
Using my numbers the RAF now has only about 3.7% of the 1945 strength, whereas the RNZAF has about 4.5%.
RAF May 1st 1945 total strength 1,079,835; and 9,200 aircraft.
1st April 2009 total strength 39,600.
What I could not find out was the total number of aircraft as at 1st April 2009, and I suppose if I were to ask for it here someone will shout Beadwindow.
Using my numbers the RAF now has only about 3.7% of the 1945 strength, whereas the RNZAF has about 4.5%.
New Zealand will call on big brother just across the ditch to intervene if they get into trouble. Although a few hornets on a CAP over Bondi would protect a fair chunk of the New Zealand population....
Unless, of course, you're an old fashioned purist who doesn't rate the Skyhawk as a 'pure' fighter.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Henry, ah, I obviously missed the inference.
As for numbers of RAF aircraft, there are public figures and of course there will be different numbers.
In 1945 civil aviation was very much a minority and the bulk of passenger aircraft available were State aircraft such as the Dakota and the Lancastrian. Then it was likely that the bulk of the aircraft were combat aircraft with relatively few trainers although many obsolete types, such as the Wellington, were to remain as trainers until the 50s.
By 2009 the State could call on its flag carrier and does charter others to instantly bulk up its airlift capacity. The numbers of training aircraft from the primary trainers (with civil registration), through other non-combat types such as the Dominie, Tucano, Hawk and sundry training helicopters would be a far higher proportion of the total today.
For real teeth you only have to look at Tornado GR4, F3 is going soon, GR7/9 and the Typhoon. These numbers are not classified at all.
As for numbers of RAF aircraft, there are public figures and of course there will be different numbers.
In 1945 civil aviation was very much a minority and the bulk of passenger aircraft available were State aircraft such as the Dakota and the Lancastrian. Then it was likely that the bulk of the aircraft were combat aircraft with relatively few trainers although many obsolete types, such as the Wellington, were to remain as trainers until the 50s.
By 2009 the State could call on its flag carrier and does charter others to instantly bulk up its airlift capacity. The numbers of training aircraft from the primary trainers (with civil registration), through other non-combat types such as the Dominie, Tucano, Hawk and sundry training helicopters would be a far higher proportion of the total today.
For real teeth you only have to look at Tornado GR4, F3 is going soon, GR7/9 and the Typhoon. These numbers are not classified at all.