Last flight of thr Skyhawks

last SG · 2005-04-01T23:06:47+00:00

how bout the remaining base in France? still use as AJT?

CenturionMBT SG

thunderbirds two in the making?

epImetheus SG

then use F-5s loh

SBS3624G SG

Thanks for pointing this out. But the F-5 was not designed for air-superiority. Rather it was a economical intercepter, with short range only. The A-4 is quite long-range, and is designed for fairly heavy loads too. Hence, we cannot really compare them, like wat I said.

sbst275 SG

F-5 is a light fighter

SBS3624G SG

The F-5 was also an aggressor platform stimulating MIG-21 attacks.

dettol SG

Yup. It can carry external stores that are more thans its own weight. Shocked
A really wonderful aircraft.

ChineseJunk SG

Off topic.....

The combat performance of A-4s is something I've been following closely, both from the armchair ploughing through books and walking the flightline at various place and talking to people.

The Argentine air force and navy Skyhawks were operating almost at the limit of their combat radius.

It would have been a different story if:
1) They recognised their fuzing problems early. Many bombs were dropped too low. Several bombs that hit their targets were not armed and failed to explode on impact, example the one that hit the Type 21 frigate HMS Antelope. The UXB exploded when it was being disarmed. Those that exploded did so with devastating effect, example: the sinking of Type 42 destroyer HMS Coventry.

2) The A-4s carried more bombs per sortie. Because of the extreme range, many A-4s flew with only one 1,000Ib bomb on the centreline pylon.

3) On a related point, if the A-4s had enough fuel to make more than one pass in San Carlos water, i.e. bomb alley, for strafing runs.

4) The A-4s had better close range AAMs for self defence. It's no contest between early model AIM-Bs versus all-aspect AIM-9Ls on the "black death" Sea Harriers.

5) There was more better coordination between Argentina's air and naval forces.

6) A-4s worked with Airborne Early Warning support.

Again off topic, I'm not sure the F-16 can best replace the Scooter in the CAS role... but that is my personal opinion.

Apaches are optimised as tank-busters when operating in concert with A-10s. That should be the ideal mud mover mix, and this again is my personal 2 cents opinion.

sbst275 SG

We had the most powerful A-4 in the world

SBS3624G SG

I am always amazed how the team at Douglas managed to roll out sth half the govt requirement for weight, carry more than required, and still have more range than expected! Really, the skyhawk is a neat aircraft.

spencer99 SG

Tribute must go to the Argentine pilots who were very determined and attacked at very low level to drop "iron" bombs at very close range. Which is why many of the fuzes was not armed.

But we must also realized that if the ships have more simple close-in AAs like optical aimed 20mm cannons or 12.7 HMG, the Skyhawks will have a harder time.

If i am not wrong the Coventry was sailing with a Type 22 class frigate and in a way depending on the Type 22's Sea wolf SAM for protection, but the sea wolf's FCS hung confused and went to a reset which is why the 2-3 skyhawks can swopped in and bomb the Coventry.

CenturionMBT SG

2 more factors
the british had the lack of AA guns or ciws

and from what i have learnt recently, the brtish ships used then were constructed mainly of a light aluminium alloy. Hence just a blast and the ship goes down.

CenturionMBT SG

anyway, welcome back. how's the new MN these days?

tvdog SG

The US Navy flew the A6 Intruder for 34 years. The Intruder was finally retired in 1997 but they continue to fly a ECM version called the A6 Prowler.

The A10 Warthog is another long-serving aircraft.

I guess some things are hard to replace.

SBS3624G SG

Woohoo, the EA-6A/B Prowlers!

zoik SG

This in fact only affected the Type 21 frigates [Antelope and Ardent] that were lost, as these had aluminium used in their superstructures - this class was originally a private sector venture, and the aluminium useage was shown as an example of weight-saving on an 'economy' hull design.
The Type 21's were then commisioned for the Royal Navy as a stop-gap measure while the Type 42 and Type 22's were beng developed and the Leanders [Type 12] and Type 82's replaced and cancelled respectively.

The rough seas of the South Atlantic had initially caused enough damage to the structural integrity of the ships, and cracks were observed on the hull, and although alot was made of the aluminium content of these ships at the time, not one subsequent report pointed to this as a major contributing factor to the ships losses.
Aluminium useage in the construction of any RN ships was ceased post-war anyway, with only the Type 21's ever having significant amounts of aluminium used in them.

solaris SG

The A4 did operate with AEW. The Argentines did have a P-2 Neptune and a converted B707 operating in the vicinity of the task force. It was the P-2 that provided the initial targeting data for the Super Etendards during the Sheffield strike. The crucial weakness of aluminium alloy was more that just its weak tensile strength but rather its combustibility. It just burns too easily.....the same tragedy was to befall USS Belknap during an accident which caused the USN to rethink its usage in ship construction.

seancannot SG

Just saw on the magazine , Israel has upgraded your sky hawk and they will serve until 2015 to 2020!!! Isnt it a waste our skyhawk are so powerful beleive they have strengthened the airframe it still has a few years to go.

suntze SG

Solaris,

You are right about the aluminium deckhouse on USS Belknap.

However, HMS Sheffield had steel superstructures. Apparently, she was sunk after extensive fire and damage following a hit by an exocet missile.

There was no AEW covering the fleet and no CIWS to protect the Sheffield, contributing factors leading to the sinking.

Cheers and rgds,

zoik SG

Sheffield was the forward Radar Picket on that operation, and so was particularly vulnerable, especially when it is alleged that they had to temporarily turn off her main radar as it interfered with her communications with her escort, a Type 22 frigate.
There was also some other issue apparently of Sheffield crossing the field of the sensors that were tracking the missiles and so broke contact twice, unable to fire to target and fire the Sea Darts in time.
The previous day she had downed too Argentine aircraft with this system.

Her escort suffered a direct bomb hit, but because it was released too low, it crashed through the ship, bounced beneath the flight deck, wrecked the tail of the Lynx ASW and bounced out to sea.

there are more accurate accounts of this but I cba to type them up atm.

« Previous Page