RAAF fighter buy stuns US
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAAF fighter buy stuns US
Sat "The Weekend Australian"
RAAF fighter buy stuns US
By Cameron Stewart
October 26, 2002
UNITED States defence giant Lockheed Martin has admitted to being "absolutely flabbergasted" when Australia said it wanted to buy its Joint Strike Fighter.
Lockheed executives in Texas told The Weekend Australian Magazine they had not expected Australia to make a decision for many years on a replacement for the RAAF's F-111 and F/A-18s.
"That was just amazing, it stopped everything in the room at the time," Lockheed's international programs director for the JSF, Mike Cosentino, said about Australia's surprise announcement in June. "This was our first international customer so it was a memorable day."
Lockheed's vice-president for business development, Mac Stevenson, said he was delighted but "absolutely flabbergasted" that Australia had chosen the JSF so quickly.
Defence Minister Robert Hill yesterday flew to Washington where he will sign a $300 million deal for Australia to join the design phase of the JSF, also known as the F-35.
Although the deal does not commit Australia to purchase the F-35, the Government says it intends to buy the yet-to-be-built plane which would enter service for the RAAF from 2012.
Worth more than $12 billion, the F-35 purchase will be the country's biggest ever arms deal.
The Weekend Australian Magazine has today retraced the inside story of how the deal came together.
It shows how the Australian Government aborted its own selection process and fell for the F-35 years ahead of time.
The Government was not due to choose a replacement aircraft for the F-111s and F/A-18s until 2005.
But the RAAF was seduced by the F-35 in only six months, telling Senator Hill in early June that it could not imagine a situation where it was not patrolling Australian skies.
Senator Hill agreed and suddenly closed down the competition for the country's most lucrative defence contract, leaving some of the world's largest arms-makers speechless and angry.
"It was a modern-day case of all the way with LBJ," said Mark Proctor, from the Swedish group SAAB which tried to sell its Gripen fighter to Australia. "I think they went further than they needed to for the sake of the strategic relationship with America."
Now rival arms-makers are asking whether either the US Government or Lockheed cut a special deal to convince Australia to choose its F-35.
The Government denies it was pressured to buy the F-35, saying the plane best suits Australia's needs and offers the best value for money.
But Lockheed's rivals are asking what happened when the Prime Minister visited President George W. Bush in Washington only two weeks before the surprise F-35 announcement,
During that visit, John Howard was given a private briefing in his hotel by executives from Lockheed.
RAAF fighter buy stuns US
By Cameron Stewart
October 26, 2002
UNITED States defence giant Lockheed Martin has admitted to being "absolutely flabbergasted" when Australia said it wanted to buy its Joint Strike Fighter.
Lockheed executives in Texas told The Weekend Australian Magazine they had not expected Australia to make a decision for many years on a replacement for the RAAF's F-111 and F/A-18s.
"That was just amazing, it stopped everything in the room at the time," Lockheed's international programs director for the JSF, Mike Cosentino, said about Australia's surprise announcement in June. "This was our first international customer so it was a memorable day."
Lockheed's vice-president for business development, Mac Stevenson, said he was delighted but "absolutely flabbergasted" that Australia had chosen the JSF so quickly.
Defence Minister Robert Hill yesterday flew to Washington where he will sign a $300 million deal for Australia to join the design phase of the JSF, also known as the F-35.
Although the deal does not commit Australia to purchase the F-35, the Government says it intends to buy the yet-to-be-built plane which would enter service for the RAAF from 2012.
Worth more than $12 billion, the F-35 purchase will be the country's biggest ever arms deal.
The Weekend Australian Magazine has today retraced the inside story of how the deal came together.
It shows how the Australian Government aborted its own selection process and fell for the F-35 years ahead of time.
The Government was not due to choose a replacement aircraft for the F-111s and F/A-18s until 2005.
But the RAAF was seduced by the F-35 in only six months, telling Senator Hill in early June that it could not imagine a situation where it was not patrolling Australian skies.
Senator Hill agreed and suddenly closed down the competition for the country's most lucrative defence contract, leaving some of the world's largest arms-makers speechless and angry.
"It was a modern-day case of all the way with LBJ," said Mark Proctor, from the Swedish group SAAB which tried to sell its Gripen fighter to Australia. "I think they went further than they needed to for the sake of the strategic relationship with America."
Now rival arms-makers are asking whether either the US Government or Lockheed cut a special deal to convince Australia to choose its F-35.
The Government denies it was pressured to buy the F-35, saying the plane best suits Australia's needs and offers the best value for money.
But Lockheed's rivals are asking what happened when the Prime Minister visited President George W. Bush in Washington only two weeks before the surprise F-35 announcement,
During that visit, John Howard was given a private briefing in his hotel by executives from Lockheed.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Perth....ish
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talk About Premature........
I agree Buster, both with your comment and the AA article.
Why have we suddenly decided that a single engine a/c is ok now after years of saying we need 2 engines for this countries airforce.
The F35 may suite the yanks, but they will have it working alongside the F22, i think together these two aircraft would probably make a formidable team.
Having the F35 as a stand alone aircraft wouldn't work IMHO, its already been stated that its more of a mud mover rather than a fighter.
I would have thought that the F15E/K type varient to replace the F111 and the F18E to replace its earlier A model currently in service makes more sense.
I have to wonder which bright spark suddeny decided that we should drop all other offers for the F35.
And who in the Airforce has been consulted?
Would the airforce really have gone for the F35 with the other options available?
I still can't get over going to a single engine, the pilots going to want to hope he doesn't receive any battle damage to it and has to bail when he could otherwise have made it back to base on the other engine had he had it.
Cheers
P.O.M
Why have we suddenly decided that a single engine a/c is ok now after years of saying we need 2 engines for this countries airforce.
The F35 may suite the yanks, but they will have it working alongside the F22, i think together these two aircraft would probably make a formidable team.
Having the F35 as a stand alone aircraft wouldn't work IMHO, its already been stated that its more of a mud mover rather than a fighter.
I would have thought that the F15E/K type varient to replace the F111 and the F18E to replace its earlier A model currently in service makes more sense.
I have to wonder which bright spark suddeny decided that we should drop all other offers for the F35.
And who in the Airforce has been consulted?
Would the airforce really have gone for the F35 with the other options available?
I still can't get over going to a single engine, the pilots going to want to hope he doesn't receive any battle damage to it and has to bail when he could otherwise have made it back to base on the other engine had he had it.
Cheers
P.O.M
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: australia
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When was the last time a Western fighter aircraft locked horns with a terrorist flying a jet fighter ?
Airforces, armies & navies became redundant post Soviet collapse & Sept 11 & we could beat the Indonesians with the war bird collections lying around the country !
So why does the taxpayer have to fund this mega purchase & wouldn't the money be better spent trying to eliminate immediate threats ? Bin Laden & Al Queda are still lurking & all of a sudden it's "get Hussein" ?!!
Just how do you eliminate a terrorist with a Raptor ?
Airforces, armies & navies became redundant post Soviet collapse & Sept 11 & we could beat the Indonesians with the war bird collections lying around the country !
So why does the taxpayer have to fund this mega purchase & wouldn't the money be better spent trying to eliminate immediate threats ? Bin Laden & Al Queda are still lurking & all of a sudden it's "get Hussein" ?!!
Just how do you eliminate a terrorist with a Raptor ?
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: OZ
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this is for mmmbop
In regard to the collins class submarine. Firstly I am not in the defense force, so I have no facts to backup, but wasn't the collins sub made from blue prints, by an inexperienced Australian ship building company, based on a design by the germans, who don't have a huge defense industry. Also, the fluid dynamics test were only tested on scale models.
Hasen't Lockheed martin been making military equipment since ww2.
???? ?? ?? ?
U2
Hasen't Lockheed martin been making military equipment since ww2.
???? ?? ?? ?
U2
ftr pilot
If QF has a zero hour multi-engine acceptence I still reckon it will be slim pickings for our JSF pilot with about 1500 single hours at the end of his RAAF career.
Even if our JSF pilot buys himself a 737 endorsement, he doesn`t have the 500 multi-engine requirement for Virgin Blue.
Emirates-no. Dragon-no. Singapore-no and on and on.
Maybe Cathay? A bit of a military pilot's bastion. And hopefully the ban will be over by the time JSF pilot's return of service complete. Do they have a zero multi-engine experience too?
At the moment RAAF fast jet pilots are well groomed for airline selection at completion of return of service. Both our combat types multi-engine.
In the past some Mirage pilots fell by the airline wayside, some had multi-engine time in FACs and Phantoms to meet requirements and, you mention, Qantas the saving grace for some.
Slim pickings for JSF pilot when time to send the kids to private schools. Due an outdated requirement.
If QF has a zero hour multi-engine acceptence I still reckon it will be slim pickings for our JSF pilot with about 1500 single hours at the end of his RAAF career.
Even if our JSF pilot buys himself a 737 endorsement, he doesn`t have the 500 multi-engine requirement for Virgin Blue.
Emirates-no. Dragon-no. Singapore-no and on and on.
Maybe Cathay? A bit of a military pilot's bastion. And hopefully the ban will be over by the time JSF pilot's return of service complete. Do they have a zero multi-engine experience too?
At the moment RAAF fast jet pilots are well groomed for airline selection at completion of return of service. Both our combat types multi-engine.
In the past some Mirage pilots fell by the airline wayside, some had multi-engine time in FACs and Phantoms to meet requirements and, you mention, Qantas the saving grace for some.
Slim pickings for JSF pilot when time to send the kids to private schools. Due an outdated requirement.
U2
No. The Collins class is a Swedish design, that was slightly modified for Australian requirements.
The tender came down to two contracts - one from the Germans and the other from the Swedes. Go figure, the Germans are probably the most famous (and best) makers of diesel electric submarines and yet they choose a design never proven. Oh hang on, I think it had something to do with the Minister of Defence at the time, who happens to be the Ex leader of the Opposition, doing 'WOndErFUL deals'.
Aside from that, my point is this - why is it that Australia buys into a design that is yet to be proven and is (based on the experience of every bit of newly introduced military kit) going to take years (read $$$$$$$$$$) to iron out 'blue print' faults. Australia doesn't need the 'latest and greatest', a purchase of F-15s would be a far better use of tax-payers money, allowing the surplus cash to be spent where it is really needed - ie surveillance, intelligence and protection of our shores. Remember, the F-18,- what a great purchase that was, NOT - can't even provide 20mins of CAP protection to our Navy's fleet when outside 100 miles of Australia's coastline.
Regards
Mmmbop
No. The Collins class is a Swedish design, that was slightly modified for Australian requirements.
The tender came down to two contracts - one from the Germans and the other from the Swedes. Go figure, the Germans are probably the most famous (and best) makers of diesel electric submarines and yet they choose a design never proven. Oh hang on, I think it had something to do with the Minister of Defence at the time, who happens to be the Ex leader of the Opposition, doing 'WOndErFUL deals'.
Aside from that, my point is this - why is it that Australia buys into a design that is yet to be proven and is (based on the experience of every bit of newly introduced military kit) going to take years (read $$$$$$$$$$) to iron out 'blue print' faults. Australia doesn't need the 'latest and greatest', a purchase of F-15s would be a far better use of tax-payers money, allowing the surplus cash to be spent where it is really needed - ie surveillance, intelligence and protection of our shores. Remember, the F-18,- what a great purchase that was, NOT - can't even provide 20mins of CAP protection to our Navy's fleet when outside 100 miles of Australia's coastline.
Regards
Mmmbop
Evertonian
Shhhh mmmbop! Don't tell everyone what our CAP is...
Well, at least the Eurocopter is a proven...hang on....how about the new Hercs, they're...oh wait....Steyr rifles....nah...Well, thank Christ we've got the best troops in the field & in the skies & on the water, otherwise we'd be in some serious $hit!!!!
One-nut! Thanks for that. I guess we can always rely on you to keep us on the straight & narrow!
Well, at least the Eurocopter is a proven...hang on....how about the new Hercs, they're...oh wait....Steyr rifles....nah...Well, thank Christ we've got the best troops in the field & in the skies & on the water, otherwise we'd be in some serious $hit!!!!
One-nut! Thanks for that. I guess we can always rely on you to keep us on the straight & narrow!
Buy American I say.
Stay away from Euro-garbage.
And don't let the bureaucracy try and Australianise it.
Our service people will make it work in our environment more cost-effectively.
How do I know this?
1942 and the P40 Kittyhawk.
We could have had hundreds of these by the time the Japs entered the war. The bureaucracy said buy British! So at wars start we had no fighters in Australia-Churchill wouldn't release any aircraft.
Australia finally got it's hands on P40s. RAAF personnel made them work in our environment , developed tactics to counter more agile aggressors and used them as a ground attack platform to stop the Japanese advance cold in its tracks.
F35 Kittyhawk has a ring to it. Could paint sharks teeth on it too!
One Ball - Rally a bit of civilian support. Don't want to end up like NZ with no shiny toys.
Stay away from Euro-garbage.
And don't let the bureaucracy try and Australianise it.
Our service people will make it work in our environment more cost-effectively.
How do I know this?
1942 and the P40 Kittyhawk.
We could have had hundreds of these by the time the Japs entered the war. The bureaucracy said buy British! So at wars start we had no fighters in Australia-Churchill wouldn't release any aircraft.
Australia finally got it's hands on P40s. RAAF personnel made them work in our environment , developed tactics to counter more agile aggressors and used them as a ground attack platform to stop the Japanese advance cold in its tracks.
F35 Kittyhawk has a ring to it. Could paint sharks teeth on it too!
One Ball - Rally a bit of civilian support. Don't want to end up like NZ with no shiny toys.
Last edited by Gnadenburg; 31st Oct 2002 at 03:37.
Props are for boats!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: An Asian Hub
Age: 56
Posts: 994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A well maybe they wont lose so many to Cathay from 2012 on eh! Just jokes guys. But I can remember only about 20 years ago it was a choice between the F/A-18 AND the F-16. The Hornet ended winning by the narrowest of margins. We were replacing the Single Engine Mirage and the twin one.
What are the statistics on single engine returns on multi engine fighters, I would say generally 90-95% of the time the Pilot exits the Aircraft if hes lucky.
I was a tech aTindal when a USMC Hornet returned for landing on a double engine fire in 1993 and the airpalne was returned to the States in burnt bits. The Aircraft was totally gutted, he probabaly should have punched out, but elected to return.
What are the statistics on single engine returns on multi engine fighters, I would say generally 90-95% of the time the Pilot exits the Aircraft if hes lucky.
I was a tech aTindal when a USMC Hornet returned for landing on a double engine fire in 1993 and the airpalne was returned to the States in burnt bits. The Aircraft was totally gutted, he probabaly should have punched out, but elected to return.
Evertonian
PAF...no need to show us your little "angry" face there!
My point is that I have the utmost faith in the men & women of the ADF, regardless of the equipment that is chosen for them by people that will probably never use it in anger.
With regard to the Hercules, I have the utmost respect for it's ability & the history it has had in RAAF service. It's just that it's another defence purchase that was probably made, about 2 years too soon. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there were software problems & the aircraft (C130J) was delayed into service with the RAAF.
As someone else's signature says, "Never buy the A model of anything!"
My point is that I have the utmost faith in the men & women of the ADF, regardless of the equipment that is chosen for them by people that will probably never use it in anger.
With regard to the Hercules, I have the utmost respect for it's ability & the history it has had in RAAF service. It's just that it's another defence purchase that was probably made, about 2 years too soon. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there were software problems & the aircraft (C130J) was delayed into service with the RAAF.
As someone else's signature says, "Never buy the A model of anything!"
I'll believe we've bought the F35 when - and only when - I see them operating from Tindal and other bases with their RAAF roundels painted on 'em and Aussie pilots flying 'em.
The F/A-18E seems a more likely contender, once the true price of the F35s becomes known. Makes more sense to update to a product-improved derivative of a proved type. I'll bet the price of the F35 quadruples in the next five years. The F/A-18E will likewise increase but it will most likely be far more afffordable, allowing the savings to be put towards avionics/weapons and guidance systems upgrades and a decent inventory of spares.
As for buying "off the plan" as it were, well, I'm old enough to remember the debacle of the F-111. We bought that off the plan too and fatigue-testing problems with the wing spar pivot box caused a decade delay in the delivery date. The happy result was our RAAF types got to experience the Phabulous Phantom, albeit on a temporary basis.
It is one thing for the government of the day to say "this is what we are going to buy" but quite another to actually see the hardware on the ramp.
Believe it only when you actually see it.
The F/A-18E seems a more likely contender, once the true price of the F35s becomes known. Makes more sense to update to a product-improved derivative of a proved type. I'll bet the price of the F35 quadruples in the next five years. The F/A-18E will likewise increase but it will most likely be far more afffordable, allowing the savings to be put towards avionics/weapons and guidance systems upgrades and a decent inventory of spares.
As for buying "off the plan" as it were, well, I'm old enough to remember the debacle of the F-111. We bought that off the plan too and fatigue-testing problems with the wing spar pivot box caused a decade delay in the delivery date. The happy result was our RAAF types got to experience the Phabulous Phantom, albeit on a temporary basis.
It is one thing for the government of the day to say "this is what we are going to buy" but quite another to actually see the hardware on the ramp.
Believe it only when you actually see it.