Yeah, that would be kinda cool, though rarely used.
That might be the single most scary thing I have ever seen
1 Like
I would love to see the engineers face when they were told of this idea
The sheer amount of drag those things would make would rip the aircraft apart
Not to mention the water getting thrown up into the intakes
I’ve seen that image a few times but what in the world was the guy who made this thinking?
It’s like the late Cold War casemate. Chimera.
Clearly it can drop the floats and become a weird x wing
1 Like
Aircraft rank VI ~ rank X from 6 countries (British, Australian, Canadian, New Zealand, Oman & South African) ?
Singapore also, basically just Britain + western Commonwealth aircraft
Anyone know why the UK hasn’t backcharged Germany for blocking the EF sales to Saudi and Turkey. IIRC in the original contract if any partner blocked a foreign sale they had to pay compensation and with 40 typhoons due to go out of service, across both sales you could replace them 1-1 with the new T4’s?
A pre-KAHU A-4K would have to end up at 8.3 or something, at least with how the BRs currently are.
Sure, it’s an A-4F airframe with the J52-P-8A. But one that doesn’t have a radar warning system or a countermeasure dispensing system (both were only added with KAHU).
It also wouldn’t have any guided weaponry outside of a pair of AIM-9Gs - again, that capability was only added as part of KAHU - leaving you with a selection of unguided rockets (Mighty Mouse, Zuni, CRV7) and dumb bombs (Mk 81, 82, 83 only). And you wouldn’t even have CCRP to help with those, as the avionics needed for that weren’t fitted (and - to sound like a broken record - were only added with KAHU).
1 Like
no clue politics
1 Like
Incidentally, the A-4K - both before and after KAHU - isn’t a naval aircraft. It physically doesn’t have the equipment needed to launch from carriers.
Do you have a source for that, from what I can tell the A-4Ks gear remained unchanged from standard A-4s and they retained the arrestor hook that was graded for carrier operations.
Not to mention the fact that every major source I see does not list them as lacking carrier provisions, which is something I feel would be quite a major modification
It’s about more than just the tailhook. After all, the F-15 has one, but it isn’t a naval aircraft.
Carrier-capable A-4s have bridle hooks inside the main gear wells, as seen on this A-4M:
Compare that with the main gear well of Skyhawk NZ6205, one of the original A-4K aircraft that was later upgraded under KAHU. Note the lack of a bridle hook, thus meaning the aircraft can’t launch from a carrier:
Also note the painted-over indexer lights in the leading edge ahead of the gear well (no need for them, as not flying from carriers).
Here’s the same aircraft in 1973. Make note of the lack of bridle hooks in the gear wells.
Also, here’s one of my sources, pictured next to a Skyhawk stick from my personal collection (manufactured for the RNZAF alongside Project KAHU)
So yeah. No bridle hooks means no catapult capability, which means no carrier capability.
2 Likes
Ok, fair enough, although i cant really see the A-4K fitting into the tree any other way so it may just have to stay where it is
Fair enough. We already have the Harriers for naval strike aircraft.
We had done it to continue the bomber line at higher tiers, although the T.3 and FGR.4 are basically identical in terms of weapons loadout. Basically intended to put something at that rank.
I suppose we could get one in the naval line between the SHAR FA.2 and the F-35B, simply because the GR.9 with Brimstones is going to be absolutely cracked.
1 Like
This makes very little sense and I don’t even know where to begin…
It’s a valiant attempt but it doesn’t make much sense.
1 Like
Possibly, really does depend on what it gets instead. If its literally a Gr7 with the slightly better engine (and even then I think that is the Gr9A and not the Gr9) then what else is left? Sniper pod and thats about it?
I think I can see the Gr9 being a premium and the Gr9A being the crakced TT one with Brimstones at a notably high BR along with Sniper Pod.
Welp as I found out the Gr.7 could use sniper. The upgraded engine was on the A sub variants. TL;DR the Gr.9 upgrade was general maintenance mostly but the main difference would be the addition of HMD, the change of the rear from composite materials to metal, and probably some other additions and changes. In other news the Gr.9 was tested with Brimstone.