For the Aviation enthusiasts...

**Fryin Finn** · 22nd June 2006, 07:42

Originally Posted by gareth_d

lies... Australia never had F-14's. May have been an F-111 if it was swing wing, with twin after burner. My guess is he went to wellington for a pie before heading back to NZOH, dont think you could match Mach 2 no matter how pimped your prelude was.

Yeah well I didn't slow down for the "SLOW DOWN DANGER AREA SIGNS" north of Hunterville. And didn't have to stop for train crossings at Mangaweka and Ohingaiti.
The F jet didn't have it's after burners on so I guess he was only cruising - maybe didn't realise it was a race

**marty** · 22nd June 2006, 08:19

F/A-18 maybe. they come over here more than the F1-11.

**sAsLEX** · 22nd June 2006, 09:22

Originally Posted by gareth_d

One thing that does scare me is the nuclear warhead capacity of the B2, not sure if it was 16 or 32, but either is a scary number, especially when multiplied by the number of B2's the USAF has at its disposal. Mutually assured distruction? I think so...

A tomahawk cruise missile can carry quite a few Nuke warheads in the one delivery device, I would fathom an educated guess that if they wanted to a B2 to could more than 32! And a B52......well instant winter anyone?

**Mental Trousers** · 22nd June 2006, 16:24

The joys of being on ACC for a wee while - you get to search for unimportant facts and take an hour to format them

B2 Weapon Loads - Maximums

NUCLEAR	CONVENTIONAL	PRECISION
16 B61	80 MK82	8 GBU 27
16 B83	16 MK84	12 JDAM
16 AGM-129 ACM	36 CBU87	8 AGM-154 JSOW
16 AGM-131 SRAM 2	36 CBU89	8 AGM-137 TSSAM
	36 CBU97

BGM 109 Tomahawk
Conventional: 1,000 pounds Bullpup, or
Conventional submunitions dispenser with combined effect bomblets, or
WDU-36 warhead w/ PBXN-107 explosive & FMU-148 fuze, or
200 kt. W-80 nuclear device

Only multiple munition the Tomahawk can carry is the submunitions dispenser with combined effect bomblets. Multiple nukes can only be carried ICBM's and SLBM's

**sAsLEX** · 22nd June 2006, 17:44

Originally Posted by Mental-Trousers

fas is great

ok, still right about the b52 holding a few more warm rounds though

**gunnyrob** · 22nd June 2006, 19:54

So much for this being a motorcycling site!

As an Airforce armourer, I'm bitterly disappointed we don't have F-16's, thanks to the lady in charge. (We nearly had them!!!)

The photo's in the first bit are: Alpha Jets, Italian updates of the Huey, Blue Angel F18's, An F16(Aaaaaah), and sporty Aerobatic thingies.

To check out most modern USAF Stuff see www.globalsecurity.org . which has taken over from fas (federation of american scientists.) The yanks are working hard on the small smart bomb, which is only 250lbs, but smacks in no more than 1.5m off target on average from about 30km. As it's so accurate, a B-2 can service over 200 targets at once. (Pack 'em in, big boy!)

For the target that needs real attention, why not choose the Massive Ordnance Penetator that can whack it's way through 60m of reinforced concrete? 30,000 lbs of one on one councelling for someone who just has to be shut up!

**Swoop** · 23rd June 2006, 09:02

Originally Posted by gunnyrob

I'm bitterly disappointed we don't have F-16's, thanks to the lady in charge. (We nearly had them!!!)

NZ does not need F-16's.
We only have Whenuapai, Mangere, Ohakea, wellington? (Too short?), and Chch to base them. Nice simple targeting solution for an invading force...
NZ would require combat jets that can be based anywhere and take the fight to an enemy from concealed locations, so the ideal candidate would be the Harrier.

**terbang** · 23rd June 2006, 09:52

Someone (fairly well in the know) once told me that, in the event of an ernest takeover attack of NZ, the previous NZ strike wing (A4's) would have given us less than 30 mins before the inevitable happened.
What we need is a more capable and secure Maritime patrol force to look after our fisheries ETC. Here is a good reason why..
In 2000 I was flying for aussie Customs on Electronic Maritime patrol aircraft based out of Darwin. Being a Kiwi (I was also the fleet manager) I scored the job to fly to NZ and demo the capability of the aircraft to the Kiwi Fisheries and Customs. We left from canberra picked up the kiwi Fishos and customs people in Auckland and headed out into the yoggin to see what was around. The fishos had assured us that it was a quiet area as they had had a P3 through there a couple of days previous with little found. On dropping down to low level about 100 miles off Tauranga we encountered all sorts of dodgey stuff happening. Asian and local boats blatantly fishing ilegally right inside NZ's economic zone. We had obviously caught them off guard and there was some hurredly reeled in lines and flags ETC. The Kiwi Fishos were going nuts and couldn't believe thier eyes and even our own Aussie crew were a little dismayed at the, relatively unchecked, economic raping that was happening just over NZ's horison.
This is part of NZ's economy we are talking about here and yet we have a very innefective and insecure Airforce and Navy. Where did the strike wing money go to when we did disband our strike force.?
I suspect the difference between us (the aussie customs aircraft) and the RNZAF P3 was more of a security issue rather than aircraft capabilty.

**Mental Trousers** · 23rd June 2006, 11:07

F16's??!! Saab Gripens are a far better match for our needs than F16's!!!

(We need a 'pouring petrol on a fire' icon dammit)

**Swoop** · 23rd June 2006, 11:10

An excellent post Terbang! The approach to border protection and resource protection is abysmal in NZ. The fisho's know that there are only five P-3's of which maybe 2 would be servicable at any time.
Orions have to be launched under complete EMCON to be effective, since their frequencies are monitored by the people they are trying to catch.

Instead of having frigates, the navy should have many more of a smaller, fast patrol boat like the Aussies use. They would pay for themselves quickly with the vessels caught!

**sAsLEX** · 23rd June 2006, 13:18

Originally Posted by Swoop

An excellent post Terbang! The approach to border protection and resource protection is abysmal in NZ. The fisho's know that there are only five P-3's of which maybe 2 would be servicable at any time.
Orions have to be launched under complete EMCON to be effective, since their frequencies are monitored by the people they are trying to catch.

Instead of having frigates, the navy should have many more of a smaller, fast patrol boat like the Aussies use. They would pay for themselves quickly with the vessels caught!

We are getting 4 new Inshore Patrol Craft

and Two new Offshore Patrol Vessels

in the next two years which have a strong fisheries and customs aspect with officers from both those parties embarked on the vessels, top speed around 20 knots I think.

Currently have 5 or 4 cant remeber IPC's that do fisheries at present, along with the frigates(2) when they are about .

The new ships are designed to spen the vast majority of their time at sea catching bad guys, and the good news is the little ones are being built in whangarai