PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - RAAF CAF slams 'his' Air Force!
View Single Post
Old 9th Jun 2014, 04:41
  #43 (permalink)  
SpazSinbad
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,583
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes on 45 Posts
Bomber pilots OR Fighter Pilots? Reports suggest some pilots in the recent past have been on prescribed amphetamines (and have made mistakes due to the effects of these drugs perhaps). But anyway here goes an oldie but a goldie for the RAAF Crab on LHD thingo.

A SELF RELIANT DEFENCE FORCE Submitted to the [Australian] Defence [Force] White Paper Team
28 July 2008 John Bird
"Paul Dibb (The Dibb Report June 1986) emphasised that as far as is possible, we should ensure that Australia's equipment purchases are 'Force Multipliers' by which he meant that as far as possible, defence equipment should serve, in addition to its primary purpose, to support other areas of defence and so maximise its utility. We are presently on the brink of acquiring a number of equipment items that could form the basis of the best 'force multiplier' that the ADF has ever possessed, but sadly it would appear that government is unlikely to see the need to properly equip two of the platforms presently in the pipeline....

...Objections have been raised in various quarters to the proposal to acquire a fixed wing integral air capability and it would be worthwhile identifying some of these and challenging them.

*Navy will be fully committed in handling all the equipment currently owned and in the pipeline, given the constraints of personnel available.
The proposal does not consider an increase in equipment for Navy. Air Force would bring its aircraft, spares, maintenance equipment and personnel aboard Navy platforms and if one has to consider detail, Air Force could contribute to victualling and any other incidental costs for which it would be responsible should the aircraft be in service elsewhere....

...*RAAF opposition has long been a barrier to the acquisition of a shipborne (integral) air capability. Having long ago lost its control of rotary wing flying, it wishes to retain control of fixed wing aircraft, no matter where they are operated.

This proposal supports that aim and supports the one service control of the F35 and all its support facilities. It requires only that the aircraft is made available to the navy when required, to provide the support with which the air force has long been tasked. The essential difference this time is that would be a credible, an achievable support.

There is still an urgent need to develop a defence force that is, to the extent that is economically feasible, self reliant, and a fleet without integral fixed wing air support cannot, in this day and age be considered to be self reliant. The force requires to be able to respond to situations which may develop in and around our island home and in our neighbourhood, embracing at least New Zealand and our island dependencies. We must also be able to a reasonable extent, to protect our sea lines of communication, the loss of which would deny the nation the ability to resist an aggressor for more than a very limited period of time, given the crippling effects on our economy that would be suffered. Our 'Neighbourhood' should additionally encompass Papua New Guinea and our neighbour allies in the island chains to our north and in near Southeast Asia. A self reliant fleet is an essential element of any force charged with these tasks...."
http://www.defence.gov.au/Whitepaper.../Bird_John.pdf (0.27Mb)
SpazSinbad is offline