Talk:Douglas A-4 Skyhawk/Archive 2

Question about comparable aircraft
Why is a Chinese built aircraft, based off a high performance Russian fighter aircraft that flies at twice the speed of the A-4 listed as a comparable aircraft? The aircraft look vaguely similar but it doesn't make much sense that they're considered comparable aircraft if they're not in the same performance envelope. --122.107.198.87 (talk) 10:10, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I came here for the same reasons, how is a Harrier, a VTOL aircraft designed much later comparable? I know they fought against each other in the Falklands but that doesn't make them comparable.(Morcus (talk) 04:22, 21 December 2010 (UTC))


 * Because the AV-8A Harrier and A-4M Skyhawk II were both used by the USMC in the 1970s in light attack roles from forward operating bases, and both were replaced by the AV-8B Harrier II. - BilCat (talk) 05:03, 21 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Also, the US first ordered the AV-8A Harrier I in the 1970s instead of A-4s. They have similar attack capability.  By the way for this template in See also section, comparable means similar role, era, and capability.  -fnlayson (talk) 13:11, 21 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The USMC bought the Harrier to replace the A-4 Skyhawk and the Bell HU-1A in the Ground Attack/Close Support role. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.115.91 (talk) 12:14, 20 August 2016 (UTC)


 * The HU-1A?? Gotta cite for that? To my knowledge, the USMC never used that model of Huey. In addition, they've always replaced their Hueys with newer model Hueys and/or Cobras. - BilCat (talk) 12:28, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The UH-1C had increased power to carry weapons. I've only read of Army troops arming their Hueys, but Marines could have too. -Fnlayson (talk) 15:05, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The Marines often arm their N-Model Hueys with an M240 and M134 minigun on the doors.Jak474 (talk) 14:51, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Top Gun stand-in use (MiG-17 vs MiG-21)
From the article, bolding added.:


 * With renewed emphasis on Air Combat Maneuvering (ACM) training brought on with the establishment of the Navy Fighter Weapons School (TOPGUN) in 1969, the availability of A-4 Skyhawks in both the Instrument RAGs and Composite Squadrons at the master jet bases presented a ready resource of the nimble Skyhawks that had become the TOPGUN preferred surrogate for the MiG-17.

I think that the Skyhawk was a stand-in for the MIG-21, with which it shares a general layout in planform - delta wing plus tailplane. An expert on the subject is needed, however.

Leonard G. (talk) 23:00, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The A-4 was one of the closest aircraft the US had to the fighters the North Vietnamese were flying (MiG-17s and -21s). Size and flying characteristics were/are more important than similar configuration. -Fnlayson (talk) 23:21, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


 * So perhaps the edit "...surrogate for the MiG-17 [and MiG-21]." would be appropriate. - I leave it to your choice. - Leonard G. (talk) 00:47, 16 January 2013 (UTC)


 * IIRC, the F-5 was closer in performance to the MiG-21. The A-4 was not supersonic. - BilCat (talk) 02:24, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * However, for its use in the TOPGUN program, selected A-4s were equipped with an uprated engine. Jak474 (talk) 14:53, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Single seat / versus Trainer
Except for trainer versions, this aircraft was a single seater, and the article is primarily about its role as a warplane.

I've added this explicitly to the lede. But I'm not entirely happy with the result. The information really belongs in the infobox, but I can't see anywhere in Template:Infobox aircraft type to put it... have I missed it somewhere?

The other thing I wrangled with is whether to say (except for trainer versions). That seemed too wordy for the lede, and would be true of all single-seaters that had trainer versions. Does it need saying?

Anyway, I had to dig for the information, and think it should be more prominently displayed than it was. And it now is.

But is there a better way? Andrewa (talk) 19:37, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Just for noting, the OA-4M was a two-seater, though not a trainer but a warplane. Regards, DPdH (talk) 13:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Reading both the article and this talk page - I would suggest a separate page for the Training versions, and the Adversary roles usage. - Article make no reference that at peak of A4 Skyhawk usage during the Vietnam War 39 squadron of USN used the A-4 as a attack craft. US Navy had NO attack squadron using A4 as of 1976. At peak in the late 1980s to 1990s, TA-4 were used by 7 training aircraft for the US Navy. There is a Page for List of operators that lists squadrons. FOR US Navy - I count 19 Squadrons operating A4 when dis-established, and that occurred before 1975. There are 10 squadrons that are former primary user or A-4 still in existence, now using F/A-18 (and interim usage of A-7 in the 1970s to 1980s. 5 squadrons transitioned to A-7 before dis-established- from 1976 to 1980, another 5 squadrons transitioned to A-7 before dis-established in the 1980s. IN 1992; 3 Training Squadrons with TA-4 dis-establised, 4 other transitioned to newer (T-45 GosHawk) and stillin existance. Also in 1992 3 VC - Composite Squadrons disestablished.    Wfoj3 (talk) 14:04, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Blue Angels
"The A-4's nimble performance also made it suitable to replace the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II when the Navy downsized its aircraft for the Blue Angels demonstration team, until McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornets were available in the 1980s. The last U.S. Navy Skyhawks, TA-4J models belonging to the composite squadron VC-8, remained in military use for target towing, and as adversary aircraft, for combat training at Naval Station Roosevelt Roads. These aircraft were officially retired on 3 May 2003."    My recollection is the transition of the Blue Angels may have been made for economic reasons - the cost of Fuel - they changed in 1974- the Oil Crisis. The F4 was 2 engines, the A4 a single engine, and NOT afterburning. Needs a citation before added to article. Wfoj3 (talk) 13:53, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Civil users
Civil users - e.g (at least Top Aces (or whatever they are called now) Draken and others really need proper third part references. None of the ones used at the moment for Top Aces (and none of the ones supplied for Draken) really pass muster - surely, as private companies flying high performance jet fighters, someone must be writing about them?Nigel Ish (talk) 20:52, 11 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Agreed, 3rd party sources are needed. -Fnlayson (talk) 21:16, 11 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Text trimmed more and tagged as needing 3rd party refs. -Fnlayson (talk) 14:37, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * This article in Aviation Week talks about Discovery (which I think is now called Top Aces) operating A-4s in Germany - and also mentions that in the past, target duties in Germany were carried out by Tracor Flight Systems.,  and  from Flight International refer to Draken International operating A-4s (apparently ex-New Zealand A-4Ks) as targets.Nigel Ish (talk) 16:41, 15 March 2019 (UTC)


 * BAe System Flight Systems (which if I remmber were Flight Systems International earlier) were a big user https://www.airliners.net/photo/BAE-Systems-Flight-Systems/McDonnell-Douglas-A-4N-Skyhawk-II/2001196 (Yes I know the image is not a reliable source) MilborneOne (talk) 17:55, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I think that BAe Flight Systems was previously Tracor (see above), which may have been previously called Flight Systems International or Flight International, and were the organisation that operated A-4s and F-100s as target tugs for Germany.Nigel Ish (talk) 18:32, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

A spotters resource and the FAA register has the current commercial operators as: Just some clues to find references MilborneOne (talk) 18:24, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Top Aces
 * Discovery Air Defense Services Inc (Canada)
 * Draken International (US)
 * Discovery were renamed Top Aces, although it is possible that the old name may still be used as well.Nigel Ish (talk) 18:32, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Attribution
Text and references copied from Douglas A-4 Skyhawk to Attack on HMS Invincible, See former article's history for a list of contributors. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 20:22, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

RAN
An episode of the Australian tv show 'Patrol Boat' (1979-1983) very clearly shows A4's with Aussie roundels being flown from HMAS Melbourne. Toyokuni3 (talk) 04:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Do you have a point? BilCat (talk) 04:20, 13 March 2023 (UTC)