The Hawk 200 isn't a like for like replacement for the Skyhawk, the Hawk 200 is a 2nd rate ground attack aircraft. The Skyhawk was a 1st rate combat aircraft when it was purchased in 1970 and again when it was upgraded in the 80s and by the late 90s had run out of life.
The important thing to keep in mind with NZ is that it's a first tier military or its nothing, no point having the fighter force as the only 2nd tier capability.
How far is an F-16 really going to go if it is supersonic?
And even then it Probably wouldn’t be quick enough to get shoot down an airliner highjacked in NZ airspace.
The A4 may have been a first class aircraft in 1970 (though that's at best debatable the RN rejected it as obsolete in the late 50's) but by the late 90's it was very much a second or even third rate aircraft.The Hawk 200 isn't a like for like replacement for the Skyhawk, the Hawk 200 is a 2nd rate ground attack aircraft. The Skyhawk was a 1st rate combat aircraft when it was purchased in 1970 and again when it was upgraded in the 80s and by the late 90s had run out of life.
The important thing to keep in mind with NZ is that it's a first tier military or its nothing, no point having the fighter force as the only 2nd tier capability.
I must say I was impressed by the descriptions of the final upgrades of the New Zealand A4's. Adding a modern radar seemed like a nice upgrade.The A4 may have been a first class aircraft in 1970 (though that's at best debatable the RN rejected it as obsolete in the late 50's) but by the late 90's it was very much a second or even third rate aircraft.
I must say I was impressed by the descriptions of the final upgrades of the New Zealand A4's. Adding a modern radar seemed like a nice upgrade.
I suppose domestic air defence / air soverginity could have been a conceviable mission for a small fleet of F16's or similar air craft had New Zealand acquired them.
The A4 may have been a first class aircraft in 1970 (though that's at best debatable the RN rejected it as obsolete in the late 50's) but by the late 90's it was very much a second or even third rate aircraft.
It was. The Kiwi A-4s were very capable A-4s, perhaps the most up to date ones in the world, just like the RNZN Leander-class frigates were the most up-to-date Leanders in the world. It was still a bit like having the most up-to-date Morris Minor in the world, unfortunately.
They looked at them as replacements for the Sea Hawks on the Centaurs.The RN rejected it as obsolete in the 50s? I've not heard that story.
The RN rejected it as obsolete in the 50s? I've not heard that story.
The morris minor is a good analogy, it is a small, economical 4 seater with some luggage space. However just because it is old after 20+ years of service doesn't mean it gets replaced by a motorbike with a sidecar.
For perspective the USMC replaced their A4s with AV8Bs, the Israelis, SIngaporese, Malaysians with F16s and the Argentine Navy with Super Etendards, taking the next capability step rather than accepting the 50s performance parameters which is all the Hawk 200 delivers.
My understanding is the F16's in question had only been flown a few hours each. I take your point about the mid life upgrade. In any event a newly elected government cancelled the project so perhaps another approach that could have been spun as a sustainment of an existing capability might not have been cancelled.They weren't new F-16s, they were stored old models (embargoed from being delivered to Pakistan) that needed mid-life upgrades to be be vaguely relevant. Which was still a better option than trying to tart up A-4s again.
My understanding is the F16's in question had only been flown a few hours each. I take your point about the mid life upgrade. In any event a newly elected government cancelled the project so perhaps another approach that could have been spun as a sustainment of an existing capability might not have been cancelled.
Maybe new old stock that was never deliveredSo to use an automotive term, not used by certified pre-owned.![]()
Maybe new old stock that was never delivered![]()
As far as I know the air craft in question were never loaned to any other air forceLike one that was used as a loaner car.
As far as I know the air craft in question were never loaned to any other air force![]()
Interesting... I have run across demo or loaner cars being sold over the years, but I don't recall them being sold as "new."True but I learned this little tidbit last weekend while shopping for a new car. I did not understand how a dealership could sell a car with over 4000 miles on it as a new car and not a used (or pre-owned) car. It's because it was a dealership loaner car, it had never been sold and it was a 2019 so it still counted as a new car (we didn't buy it).
True but I learned this little tidbit last weekend while shopping for a new car. I did not understand how a dealership could sell a car with over 4000 miles on it as a new car and not a used (or pre-owned) car. It's because it was a dealership loaner car, it had never been sold and it was a 2019 so it still counted as a new car (we didn't buy it).
The morris minor is a good analogy, it is a small, economical 4 seater with some luggage space. However just because it is old after 20+ years of service doesn't mean it gets replaced by a motorbike with a sidecar.
For perspective the USMC replaced their A4s with AV8Bs, the Israelis, SIngaporese, Malaysians with F16s and the Argentine Navy with Super Etendards, taking the next capability step rather than accepting the 50s performance parameters which is all the Hawk 200 delivers.
Perhaps the post Falklands war Argentine acquisition of refurbished and upgraded A4s from the US might have been a better approach for the RNZAF to have followed?