Air Force flies on borrowed time

One Air Force Skyhawk pilot killed and two near-misses in five weeks. Are the ageing jets at fault? SCOTT MACLEOD investigates.

The easy answer when a Skyhawk crashes, and the first that springs to mind, is that the geriatric attack planes are simply too old and too dangerous to be flown.

But although the Royal New Zealand Air Force is often the butt of bar-room jokes, Skyhawks are well-liked by pilots and have a reputation matched by few other warplanes.

Another possible cause is human error. But two of the pilots involved in the three incidents this year were highly experienced and the third finished top of his training course.

What is a Skyhawk?


The McDonnell Douglas A4 Skyhawk is often wrongly called a fighter. But the "A" stands for "attack," meaning the jet is built to hit ground targets.

The United States-made plane first flew in 1954, and the next year set a world speed record of 695 mph (1118 km/h).

It saw much action in Vietnam, often flying from American aircraft carriers to hit heavily defended ground targets. Most of the US Navy pilots killed in Vietnam died in Skyhawks.

In later wars, the aircraft flew combat missions for the Israeli, Kuwaiti and Argentinian air forces. Skyhawks sank several British ships during the Falklands War.

Production stopped in 1979, after 2960 had been built in an unrivalled run of 25 years.

The US Navy and Marines see the jet as one of the best they have used, and still fly a small number. The Argentinian, Brazilian and Israeli air forces also still use Skyhawks.

The surviving Skyhawks are relatively slow compared with F-16s and other modern jets, but have a good power-to-weight ratio and can roll quickly to either side.

US Top Gun dogfight instructors flying Skyhawks have beaten many rookie pilots in their new Tomcats, Phantoms, Crusaders and Hornets.

Are they unsafe?


Not yet, says the RNZAF - but they are probably getting close.

Our oldest Skyhawks flew Vietnam War missions in 1967, and mechanics are having trouble keeping them airworthy.

Squadron Leader Ric Cullinane says the airframes are obviously old, but are still in good condition. The main problem is that parts are getting hard to find.

For example, the Escapac* ejector seats, made by Douglas, have gone out of production and are becoming tricky to service.

The Air Force is also running out of simple parts such as seat harnesses, which must be replaced after a set time.

Skyhawks are losing their combat ability because their airframes are too small to cram in new computer gear and weapons. But that problem has little effect on safety.

"They're still a capable aircraft, just getting old and difficult to support," says Squadron Leader Cullinane. "They're no dog or anything - we're not looking at a Lada."

The Air Force has crashed seven Skyhawks in 31 years - in 1974, 1981, 1989, 1992, 1996 and two this year - leaving 17 in service. Three pilots died in the crashes.

But the Air Force has also crashed more modern jets. One of its near-new Aermacchi trainers slammed into mangroves in October 1993 when its Rolls-Royce engine failed. The pilot ejected just 100m from the ground.

What happened in the three latest incidents?


The first incident this year was also the most serious. On February 16, Squadron Leader Murray Neilson was performing a barrel roll while linked to another Skyhawk by a refuelling pipe. His jet dropped into bush near his base south of Sydney and exploded.

Squadron Leader Neilson was highly experienced and led No 2 Squadron.

The second incident was on Monday, when an Ohakea-based Skyhawk clipped a power line near Murchison, in the South Island.

The Air Force will not name the pilot, but says he is experienced and has flown jets for years.

The latest incident was on Tuesday, when Flight Lieutenant Phillip Barnes ejected from his Skyhawk 1700m over the Indian Ocean during an exercise.

The Air Force says the jet seemed to go out of control at 3000m while manoeuvring to defend Australian ships from two "attacking" Skyhawks.

Flight Lieutenant Barnes was top of his flying class in 1996.

What went wrong?


Defence chiefs are likely to take months to work out what caused the one near-miss and two crashes, but enough is known to draw tentative conclusions.

The main one is that in all three incidents the pilots and jets were operating at the limit of their ability, or close to it. Only a small aircraft fault or pilot error would be needed to spark disaster.

The Air Force said after the death of Squadron Leader Neilson that there was no suggestion of mechanical problems, and at least one former Skyhawk pilot believes nothing went wrong with the jet.

But it seems possible that engine failure caused the crash. At least two of the other six RNZAF Skyhawks that have crashed did so after losing power.

The near-disaster with the power line cannot be blamed on the Skyhawk. The aircraft was flying 85m above the ground with another jet when it hit the line, which the Air Force says was marked on its maps.

As for Tuesday's crash, several theories were doing the rounds yesterday.

One, from an unnamed former pilot, was that the Skyhawk was doing a high-speed turn to chase one of the "attacking" aircraft when it turned too far, so that too little air was going over its wings.

The jet would then have stalled and struggled to suck enough air into its engine ducts, causing power to drop. It could then have gone into an inverted or upright spin, which often forces a pilot to eject.

Another Air Force spokesman, Air Commodore John Hamilton, says such accidents "happen from time to time with high-performance aircraft when they're operated at the top corners of the flight envelope. People will exceed the envelope and the aircraft can stall."

But Squadron Leader Cullinane says the theory is pure speculation. There are "a zillion" possible causes, such as pieces falling off the engine.

Air Force investigators are likely to look at tape-recordings of the electronic Head Up Display units in the Skyhawks. This will give a "virtual image" of the incidents, as seen by the pilots of the accompanying Skyhawk.

How good are our pilots?


They are certainly good enough for the Australian Air Force and many commercial airlines. These snap up our pilots whenever possible, and boost their salaries up to 200 per cent.

This year alone, six of the Air Force's most experienced pilots have resigned.

Just three pilots are left to fly our six Orion ship-spotting planes.

But it remains to be seen whether the actions of Skyhawk pilots played a role in the three incidents.

Will things improve?


If pilot error is playing a role in crashes, then Skyhawks and other Air Force planes are likely to drop from the skies more often.

The reason is not that the planes are old, but that money woes have forced the Air Force to cut the amount spent on training pilots.

The chief of the Defence Force, Air Marshal Carey Adamson, said three weeks ago that the Skyhawks were being forced to operate at a "basic" level - one step short of taking them out of service.

The $233 million allocated to Skyhawks would last 4425 flight hours.

Skyhawk maintenance was trimmed back when a deal to buy 28 F-16s looked poised to go ahead, and has not been restored.

National's defence spokesman, Max Bradford, claims the Government is starving the force into the ground.

Prime Minister Helen Clark says the problems are caused by rocketing fuel prices and the low New Zealand dollar.

But there are also rumblings of discontent from deep within the Air Force as the Government shows signs of scrapping the Skyhawk fleet. Pilots have feared for their futures since the F-16 deal was dropped, and morale is getting worse.

The growing list of resignations means the amount of experience in the Air Force is dropping.

But Helen Clark says morale had nothing to do with Tuesday's crash - it was "a matter of technique."

Whether the crashes were caused by technique, low morale, engine failure or some other factor remains to be seen.

But one thing does seem certain - times are only going to get tougher for the Air Force.

* This is an amended version of this story. In the original version, we stated incorrectly that Skyhawks were fitted with Martin Baker ejector seats.