PDA

View Full Version : Kiwis Can Fly!



Sayeret
01-10-2005, 07:43 PM
http://images.military.com/Shock/0,,SA_050106_Skyhawk,00.html

budgie
01-10-2005, 09:11 PM
Correction: Kiwis COULD fly. The RNZAF fighter wing has been scrapped :(

Anyone know of concrete plans to replace the Skyhawks?

Ngati Tumatauenga
01-10-2005, 10:16 PM
Correction: Kiwis COULD fly. The RNZAF fighter wing has been scrapped :(

Anyone know of concrete plans to replace the Skyhawks?

None whatsoever. :(

Sloppy Joe2
01-10-2005, 10:19 PM
short but cool :)

DarkCypher
01-10-2005, 10:29 PM
LMAO I bet those guys shat themselves.

Does anyone know if the Skyhawks were ever used in combat??

Flagg
01-10-2005, 11:22 PM
LMAO I bet those guys shat themselves.

Does anyone know if the Skyhawks were ever used in combat??

Ummmmm yes.......a Skyhawk once strafed across the bow of a foreign fishing boat poaching in our EEZ.

Mailman
01-11-2005, 04:54 AM
Getting rid of the skyhawks was the sensible thing to do. The strike wing hadnt seen combat since Korea and was eating up a disproportionate amount of a rather small defence budget as it was.

Yes Im an aviation buff and a pilot but Im also a realist.

[flame suite on]

Mailman

anv2
01-11-2005, 06:39 AM
So I take it that NZ puts its money into the royal navy then? Kind of odd that an island country doesn't have any combat aircraft.

How big is the military budget anyway? I found the 2004 budget for the whole country, which is appr. €22 billion.

Mailman
01-11-2005, 09:10 AM
I guess the money (what was left after government pilfering) was reinvested in the Navy (new frigate), Army (new APC's - PAV's) and Airforce (C130 upgrades, Orion upgrades, new engine rubberbands for choppers).

I think its worth bearing in mind that NZ will never deploy overseas operationally by itself. We will always be part of a greater UN deployment. As such its better we concentrate on those things we can do well (soldiering for example).

Regards

Mailman

DarkCypher
01-11-2005, 01:33 PM
I guess the money (what was left after government pilfering) was reinvested in the Navy (new frigate), Army (new APC's - PAV's) and Airforce (C130 upgrades, Orion upgrades, new engine rubberbands for choppers).

C130 upgrades?? Are you sure?? How many C130s just recently broke down in Indonesia?? It was two...

New Zealand’s defense is a bloody joke. How the hell are we suppose to take part in helping humanitarianly when stuff like that happens.

GG Helen Clark you ignorant b****

anv2
01-11-2005, 03:27 PM
I think its worth bearing in mind that NZ will never deploy overseas operationally by itself. We will always be part of a greater UN deployment. As such its better we concentrate on those things we can do well (soldiering for example).


You're probably right. Does NZ take part in a lot of overseas operations or is defending the country from evil australians considered more important?

Zorro C9
01-11-2005, 05:06 PM
Getting rid of the skyhawks was the sensible thing to do. The strike wing hadnt seen combat since Korea and was eating up a disproportionate amount of a rather small defence budget as it was.

Yes Im an aviation buff and a pilot but Im also a realist.

[flame suite on]

Mailman

IIRC, the Infantry hadn't seen combat from Vietnam until East Timor, but we're not going to scrap them are we?

The A4's were worth it just for the training factor alone.

You know I'll debate this until the cows come home, Scott :D

squeak
01-11-2005, 06:00 PM
After Vietnam the NZ defence force became more directed to UN type Humanitarian missions. The current structure is not designed for full combat.

Ngati Tumatauenga
01-11-2005, 09:57 PM
Topic hijacking..... in your own time, go on.

Wheke C9 wrote,

IIRC, the Infantry hadn't seen combat from Vietnam until East Timor, but we're not going to scrap them are we?

*cough Somalia, Bosnia cough*

squeak quote,

After Vietnam the NZ defence force became more directed to UN type Humanitarian missions. The current structure is not designed for full combat.

Er....no. The only equipment the army lacks to perform combined arms manoeuvre warfare today is MBTs. Conventional warfare is still taught and exercised at all levels. It's a common misconception that humanitarian missions don't consist of 'full combat'. There are plenty of historical examples to dispel that myth. When 1 RNZIR battle group deployed to ET in '99 the only combat power that wasn't taken into theatre were the 105mm light guns. Mortars filled the gap.

anv2 wrote,

Does NZ take part in a lot of overseas operations or is defending the country from evil australians considered more important?

:roll:

Zorro C9
01-11-2005, 10:21 PM
Seems I didn't recall correctly, then LOL.

digrar
01-12-2005, 04:19 AM
You're probably right. Does NZ take part in a lot of overseas operations or is defending the country from evil australians considered more important?

We're just waiting until they all immigrate to Bondi, then we will deport all our undesirables to the newly named North East Australia and South East Australia. The previously mentioned undesirables will probably be all Kiwi's so it might be a self defeating exercise :P .

Zorro C9
01-12-2005, 04:49 AM
I've watched Red Dawn, I know how to deal with you lot 0_o