A-4C/A-4E/A-4EM/A-4H /A-4M/A-4N /A-4PTM/A-4SU/A-4AR
-
Since the two PMCs (Discovery Air and Draken International) are the main operator of this fleet currently, I think it could worth to have it in standard KTO.
However, these companies are operating different variant, A-4N and A-4K.
I don’t know much about Skyhawk, so have no idea how much different externally and internally between each model.They use them as Aggressors right ?
-
They use them as Aggressors right ?
AFAIK, yes.
They provide it as part of Red Air in various military exercises, and also play a role of coalition aircraft for JTAC training. -
Updates!
Cheers,
Radium
-
Hello,
As Malaysian A-4L are close from Singapore A-4SU, I made some tests to check if I can go from one version to the other one easily…
I may include A-4 PTM which is very close from A-4L in the final package.
I continue to enhance the model and fix normals issues.
Cheers,
Radium
-
A-4K was a major upgrade…
-
A-4K was a major upgrade…
Yes, this was a very nice variant! Many aspects were close to A-4SU.
-
For those who requested and are interested, you can see that landing trim works well!
regards,
Radium
-
Hello,
tonight, I made, unwrapped and backed A-4 pilot. I assume, it will be used for most A-4 variants, even this one was especially made for A-4SU.
Regards,
Radium
-
Hello,
Pilot is done!
I go to sleep!
Regards,
Radium
-
Nice work, well done!
Nikos. -
+1.
And, Radium, if for any reason in need, I would volunteer for testing.
With best compliments and regards,
-
Hello,
Some news there, I am working on a muti-version system for A-4…
Not that easy, as there is a lot of differences between them…
Then, I will be able to integrate more variants…
Regards,
Radium
-
Amazing work on the A-4.
-
Hello,
Thank you Stratos!
I am finishing the last details before unwrapping.
I might offer to some of you a beta test copy… Just thinking of it. Do not send any PM, it’s far too early.
Regards,
Radium
-
Multi-version. can you add the A4-AR version?
-
Totally AWESOME!!!
It would be extremely cool if we can have the RNZAF A-4K “Kahu” upgraded Skyhawk in a future BMS release.
Why? Because the RNZAF pretty much stuffed the internals of the F-16A into their A-4K Skyhawks during the 1980s, complete with AN/APG-66, two MFD screens, a wide-angle HUD, full HOTAS controls, giving these super Skyhawks the ability to carry AGM-65s and even GBU-16s.
-
Like the AR version.
-
Like the AR version.
Makes me wonder why the FAA didn’t purchase the RNZAF A-4Ks? They’ve been in storage for years before they were sold at bargain price to Draken International in the USA.
-
Makes me wonder why the FAA didn’t purchase the RNZAF A-4Ks? They’ve been in storage for years before they were sold at bargain price to Draken International in the USA.
Matter of governments. I would not know what to answer
-
Hello,
I am happy to see reactions on my A-4 topic, thank you for your interest in that project.
To tell you the truth, I had been thinking to make a cockpit for this A-4. But, it is an issue when thinking about which variant to represent. Anyway, for now, nothing was decided, including if I will make a cockpit of not.
What is sure is that I started this project with A-4SU. Why A-4SU? Because Republic of Singapore is in Asia, because I have deepest sympathy for this country, and, because I often saw A-4SU and TA-4SU at the place I used to live when I was a child.
A-4SU cockpit is interesting, as it incorporates some new features like HUD, MFD, without losing legacy A-4 look. I would say that A-4K re-used many solutions developped for A-4SU.
A-4K is also interesting. But, it is not in Asia, and very very far from KTO.
Just as a reminder, if I take Fukuoka as the South limit of KTO, and my reference point for measurements :
Fukuoka → Pyongyang : 400 nm
Fukuoka → Singapore : 2,400 nm
Fukuoka → Kuala Lumpur : 2,400 nm
Fukuoka → Jakarta : 2,700 nm
Fukuoka → Wellington : 5,100 nm
Fukuoka → Paris : 5,100 nmWhy did I mentionned this? Because I think it’s interesting to remind that while Singapore is already far from Japan (and KTO), New-Zealand is much further. Also, While Japan is a frontier between Asia and Oceania, New-Zealand is indeed far Oceania. Also, as a conclusion, I may be wrong but I don’t think New-Zealand could be implied in an Asian conflict. Singapore, Malaysia are much more likely to get. So, even A-4K is very attractive, to me, it’s too national to have a real relavance in KTO.
It’s the same with A-4AR. While I don’t like the cockpit, as I feel it’s a forceps inserted F-16 avionics suite into an A-4, there is no theater for now ready to welcome her. So, I am not willing for this reason to take time to make her.
But you can rightly ask me why did I make A-4N of Israel and Aggressor A-4E? I would simply reply that A-4N could be used for the excellent ITO theater, while Aggressor A-4E is a nice asset for everyone who wish to use it for realistic training prupose, like what existed at NAS Miramar or NAS Oceana.
Thank you for commenting this topic,
Kindly yours,
Radium