100% ad-free
Vegetableman wrote:QUOTE (Vegetableman @ Jan 3 2009, 08:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I do however feel that the standard of reporting for the herald is terrible.
Yeah I'd say I always love it how the news papers seem to know everything about anything.Aliens stole my brain and drank my liquor
Yak52aholic wrote:QUOTE (Yak52aholic @ Jan 8 2009, 07:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Yea, the spelling is horrible, I would prefer it if there was a V in Yakolev and maybe a few hyphens wouldn't hurt.
Not that any of those planes' guns work anyway...........
Yakovlev has got to be the most commonly mis-spelled name in aviation, even in quite a few otherwise accurate publications. Another common one seems to be "Tupelov".
ZK-MAT wrote:QUOTE (ZK-MAT @ Jan 4 2009, 11:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Surely you lot aren't reading this more than it a tongue in cheek pisstake?
I think Tom's the only one who read anything more than that into it, everyone else is too busy getting angers about the bad spelling and quality of reporting these days.
Personally I think the standard of journalism has actually improved - 6 months ago that would probably have appeared with a file picture of a Qantas Airbus because it was about aeroplanes and they had that picture of an aeroplane handy ...![]()
![]()
![]()
Cheers
GaryThe above post is in the public domain and is guaranteed by the manufacturer to contain no references to anything illegal or discussion of piracy, although this signature may contain traces of nuts.
greaneyr wrote:QUOTE (greaneyr @ Jan 4 2009, 11:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Tongue in cheek or whatever, I get really angry when I read stuff like this. I'm SO tired of RNZAF-bashing. It was old about 6 years ago. Now, it's just sad.
Why can't we just cope with the change and move on? I think we've had long enough! I've not seen any other single issue in my lifetime cause more people to wheel themselves out of the woodwork and voice their opinion against it as Labour's disbandement of the air combat wing in 2001.
I agree. Our Air force isn't all bad, look to the future, brand new NH 90's and A-109's. I spoke to an man at Wigram open day, after I said I'd join the RAAF he asked, "Why?" I said, "We don't have fighter aircraft, and I want to be a fighter pilot. " He understood my point, but told me that an Air force doesn't need fighter aircraft when a country is in the middle of the Pacific Ocean (NZ). A fighter aircraft needs to take off, linger, attack, and come back. The only place it can do this is New Zealand, and the only time I've seen this happen was in Sleeping DogsHowever, a P-3K can take off and fly to Fiji for example, linger, attack( P-3's can be equipped withe AGM-65's and AiM-9's [correct me if I'm wrong]) , and come back on a single load of fuel. Well that's what he told me anyway.
Dan
Chairman wrote:QUOTE (Chairman @ Jan 6 2009, 02:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Well, here is a question which I'm genuinely curious about. Even a dumbass like me can think of two possible answers so if you can't come up with anything better than "nothing" don't bother answering.
Given a situation of a Piper Cherokee buzzing around Auckland City threatening to smack into the sky tower, what could the RNZAF as it stands at the moment actually do about it ?
Cheers
Gary
Both the Seaprite and the Iroquois have side gun capability? They could try gun it down...or they could have an aerial police chase with the new 'Police' Cessna
Return to New Zealand Aviation
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests