RAAF F111 Replacement

[Cessnadude]

I have been reading with interest the two part analysis of the Joint Strike Fighter in Australian Aviation by Doctor Carlo Kopp. He makes excellent sense and in light of recent defence acquisition bungling maybe it is time for the Australian Governement to listen to experts like this. The way ahead seems simple, F111's till 2020 and beyond:D

[Buster Hyman]

Okay, I may be VERY naive in saying this (note; I haven't read the article in AA) but if there's nothing out there that can replace the performance & range/payload of the F111, why don't we build more under licence? Yes, very simplistic, but in light of the JSF costs & possible problems, would it cost much more?

Okay, bring it on...:confused:

[Sheep Guts]

Buster there are still quite a few airframes in the Mojave Desert, that may be used, or not. We have to keep it. Why? Because we are miles away from anyone and if we need to bomb those mobs we need range. KEEP THE PIG KEEP THE PIG!.

Sheep

[kmagyoyo]

Your all on drugs...

[Cessnadude]

Kmagyoyo, are you saying that the author of the story in AA is on drugs? He seems like a pretty smart guy. It seems like the yanks are building another F111 type (FB-22), why don't we just upgrade ours, may not be as good but surely it would save us all some big bucks, while still maintaining an awesome capability.

Maybe we can get some of those F111 airframes out of the mojave desert, upgrade them as well to replace the Hornet when it retires?:ok:

[Buster Hyman]

I suppose the ones in the desert would be okay, but they'll need serious work as well. Add to that the lifetime left in them and that's why I thought of my initial post.

Look, I know it won't happen, but it'd be nice to think that there might be a glimmer of lateral thinking going on somewhere in CBR....Okay, I see the error in my ways.:(

[Seamore Butts]

YES!!! Carlo Kopp is smoking this finest of weed.

His unrelenting obsession with the F-111 is truely remarkable. Unfortunately, his ability to enter into complete denial of reality makes his statements somewhat comical.

I have to wonder what capability we might have now if Carlo and some of his close followers in CB were put out to pasture when mentioning flying the aircraft out to 2020, or in Carlo's case 2050!!! This was complete craziness. Yes, do-able on paper, but so is almost anything if you don't take all the facts into account. I fear we missed a great opportunity about 10years ago when the decision was made to do the AUP to the pig. If we had retired them then, and grabbed a couple of squadrons of F-15E's, we may not now have to drag out the F-18's the way we are to get them to last until the JSF. And standby for major dramas when the JSF gets delayed... and delayed... and delayed.

The notion of pulling jets out of the desert, or building them ourselves, simply put, cannot work. The engineering nightmare would be enormous, for a capability that is fast becoming obsolete with the advent of UAV's etc.

The F-111 is a fine aircraft, but so was the spitfire, mustang and sabre. There comes a time when you need to stop pouring good money after bad. The F-111 should have been retired when the USAF retire their fleet. The amount of $$$ required to keep them flying as a sole operator is horrendous. Not to mention the problems faced with keeping a 30 year old aircraft flying day to day.

Carlo Kopp has a lot to answer for. His opinions are listened to and accepted as achievable by some people in high places.


Seamore. That (what I deleted) was very naughty. Good post - then you break the rules.

This site is rated "G". First and last warning! :*

Woomera

[Milt]

Seamore Butts

Great pity you don't know what you are talking about.

You obviously have not understood any of the very logical articles by Carlo Kopp.

He makes very good sense with the tankers and the Wedgtails also.

Would like to see him as Chief Defence Scientist

[Feather #3]

Milt,

While I enjoy Dr. Kopp's articles, the nature of defence argument and any reaction by serving members is highly restricted. Therefore, we are highly unlikely to see any rebuttal of his arguments and ergo the debate becomes unbalanced.

I recently had very cogent and sensible rebuttal of the F-111 extension put to me by a recently retired ADF member which made a great deal of sense. There ARE two sides to every argument. I rather suspect Mr. Butts may be able to put the same ones?

G'day ;)

[Specnut727]

I agree with you on this Milt !

How many Tankers will we need to give the new aircraft the same payload/ range as the F-111 ???


Dr.Carlo has said it all. Let's hope somebody listens !

[ftrplt]

Carlo Kopp is to Defence Acquisitions, as Dick Smith is to Airspace Reform

[Seamore Butts]

ftrplt - shack!!!

Specnut & Milt - I am more than aware that Carlo's articles are "logical" when written from an airconditioned office in Melbourne (or where ever he lives). My point is they do not take into account the realities of maintaining a 30 year old jet.

My last comments stand.
Milt, judging by your Canberra address, I would suggest you are one of the people I was refering to in my previous post. An inflammatory comment, perhaps, but it is these types of comments and opinions from people that have hurt the airforce in the past.

Seamore

P.S. Milt, I can't help but think you may be pulling my leg, if so I retract the previous statement. If not, feel free to re-read it, just to make sure you don't misunderstand.

[Tankengine]

Would everyone please remember that Mr Kopp is a JOURNALIST!! , not an "expert"
For the numerous errors in AA's airline "news" [which I have a little inside Knowledge of] and bias I have not renewed my subscription.:cool:

[kmagyoyo]

Where can I get what you guys are on??? Seriously, its amazing stuff!!

What else can screw with you head so much that it makes a 30+ year old platform with massive (and I mean massive) reliability issues look like the most capable attack aircraft ever built- so good in fact we should build them from scratch, or at the very least keep them going till they're 50 years old.

I am sick to fricking death of hearing how capable this aircraft is from a group of 'experts' who's total experience on the jet is watching a dump and burn on the Telly!

One final point; I for one will wave a BS flag on Milt's profile. Hope thats not a CLM
:O

[Lodown]

This thread is interesting. I should mention that I haven't read the article by Mr Kopp and am unlikely to do so.

A couple of questions to the proponents for the F111:

The F111 is not a commercial aircraft. It's a military weapon with a military purpose. Range and payload have been mentioned, but what is the expected future mission and how will it be accomplished? Range and payload don't mean squat if the aircraft can't do its mission. Everything revolves around its mission. If the aircraft can't get in, drop its bombs, and get out again, then it is useless. The aircraft is about as stealthy as a day-glo elephant blowing a trumpet from the top of Parliament House. In low level ops, the terrain following radar lights up every detector for thousands of miles. At high level (if it can even get there) it has the radar cross section of an aircraft carrier, the thermal trail of a small sun and all the nimbleness of a tortoise on a cold day.

How does it fit in with modern and future weapons and delivery systems? How does it integrate with the weapons/communications/capabilities of our allies? How vulnerable is it? Additionally, it ties up a crew of two, when a crew of one in an F-18 has an arguably better chance of mission success.

It might put on a nice airshow display at night, but realistically, I think its time as an effective weapon are well gone. It will be a nice (albeit expensive) decoy to facilitate an attack by other aircraft, but that's about it.

Specnut727, I would imagine in most scenarios, one tanker supporting F-18s will be much more flexible, more reliable, more precise, more surgical and have a far better chance of accomplishing the mission than a squadron of F111s.

[ftrplt]

Nicely said Lodown!

Notice how there have been no questions asked as to why F18's went to the Gulf and F111's didnt, it could have been a very lo threat environment for it and it still didnt go.

[Cessnadude]

All of those arguments seem valid, but why not strap an AESA radar in the nose, load it with a bunch of AMRAAMs/ASRAAMs, and make it stealthy and you've got a poor mans FB-22????

Age should not be a factor - look at the B52!

[Lodown]

Cessnadude, you make it appear so easy. Now you're attempting to make an outdated bomber into a modern fighter! The only reason it was ever classified a fighter in the first place was in order to receive US congressional funding.

First, forget about the fact that the enemy has probably got your F111 identified and targetted well in advance of you detecting and identifying the enemy. As soon as you flick your radar on, every anti-radiation missile in the area will be locking on and every enemy aircraft will know exactly where you are. Usually, (and the figures aren't even close) the first pilot to detect and identify the enemy wins the ensueing battle. Fighter aircraft technologies are favouring passive systems - hence the Wedgetail operating the transmitter from a safe zone and coordinating fighters with only receivers active, etc.

Now you have to assume there is room to install an AESA in the nose, that there is space and capacity for additional wiring, cooling, power supply and mounts, and capacity for the appropriate instrumentation and fire control within the cockpit. What current equipment should be scrapped to make room?

Second, what additional equipment would you like to install that enables the crew to positively identify the enemy aircraft prior to tossing a missile in that direction? You'll need something because you can't have the crew shooting down an airliner or a friendly by mistake and unless the enemy aircraft is in the twelve o'clock at the same level, the cockpit visibility from an F111, combined with poor maneuverability limits the capacity for visual ID and target acquisition. And forget about dogfighting. The F111 might have a chance in a tussle with a B52, but a Citation with a gun strapped to the nose could outduel an F111 in a dogfight...and the passengers wouldn't even spill their drinks. What I'm trying to say here is that by the time you ID the enemy, the enemy has put a missile up your tailpipe. There is no element of surprise with an F111. Despite the equipment, the F111 will be no match.

Stealth is designed into an aircraft. While it was discussed earlier, stealth only really came into existence with the number crunching power of supercomputers. It's in the angles of the intersecting surfaces and the arrangement of the external panels to disperse and scatter radar waves away from the radar receiver. Engine intakes and compressor fans are a big source of radar returns. A special absorbant coating and electronics assist an already stealthy design by further reducing the strength of the few radar returns to the receiver. You can't just paint something like an F111 and expect it to be invisible to radar. The F111 cannot be made stealthy.

Despite your best wishes, age is a factor and you can't avoid it. The B-52 is still around because it retains some advantages and is still good at its mission. - dropping an enormous load of ordinance accurately on any target in the world. There is nothing else in the arsenal that can do the same job so effectively. When there is, then the B52 will be retired. Unfortunately, that is not so for the F111. Military evolution has relegated the F111 and its mission to dodo status. The F111 has been totally outclassed by other aircraft and technologies and no longer has a viable advantage on the battlefield. Its unreliability is just another aspect of its poor performance in modern times. Other less vulnerable aircraft can do a far better job. The F111 is not competitive in the fighting role, is too obvious and vulnerable in the bombing role and its photo-recon role has been replaced by satellites and realtime technologies in UAVs.

A poor man's FB-22? We've already got something in that order and it's called an F-18!

[Soulman]

In response to your post ftrplt regarding the government and the DoD's decision to send a squadron of F/A-18's and not F-111's, you must take into account the mission which the RAAF was designated to perform.

The majority of the flying done by the Hornets was on things like CAP (Combat Air Patrol) and SEAD (Supression of Enemy Air Defences). Our main objective was not a 'shock and awe' campaign like G Dubya's - more of a Sorbent job - cleaning up the tail...

We've had this discussion before and with all the new technology coming about it does beg the question.

In my opinion, we should have grabbed some Strike Eagles (F-15E's) when we had the chance and not waste our time (and ultimately money) continually upgrading our deprived Hornets - simply get Super Hornets.

Sure - you might say what about the cost? But it's going to have to happen sooner or later.

For me - the sooner the better.

Soulman.

[ftrplt]

Soulman,

therein lies the question - what came first; the mission or the choice of acft

(I know the answers by the way, agreed on F15E)

[Macchi]

Unable to resist posting any longer.... Must hassle Carloss.... :}

Two things:

1. Just because Mr. Kopp is a "glass is 1/2 full" kind of guy doesn't warrant the sort of tirades he's getting here (ftrplt - that was a v. harsh call!). Many Engineers would do well to take a leaf out of Carlo the Magnificent's "can-do" attitude: The man could make 100 airworthy airframes from the Boneyard using nothing but dried seaweed and snot (and the obligatory "minor wiring and sheet-metal changes". :E )

2. Yes the Hornet went to the gulf and KICASsed (bad pun intended) whilst the Pigs didn't, but let's face it, someone had to stay in Australia and give the wives/girlfriends something to hang their towels on!!!:ok: (copyright Lord Flashart).

On a serious note, some mention has been made of which came first: mission or platform request? Here's another angle on the issue: What platform did the Air Component Commander want in theatre?

Oh the joys of the pi$$ing contest - how I long for the day when we're all operating the one type (JSF in 2027?) and there's no more bickering... sigh:(

And just for the record, I too reckon that time should be now and that the type should be another McDonnell Douglas twin-tailed jet, albeit made with a lot less tupperware.

[ftrplt]

What platform did the Air Component Commander want in theatre?

god love him!!

[itchybum]

As soon as you flick your radar on, every anti-radiation missile in the area will be locking on Don't know of any anti-radiation Surface to Air (SAM) or Air to Air (AIM) missiles in use... can you name one?

As far as I know anti-radiation (HARM) missiles are Air to Ground.

[Sheep Guts]

Lodown,

The F111 might have a chance in a tussle with a B52, but a Citation with a gun strapped to the nose could outduel an F111 in a dogfight...and the passengers wouldn't even spill their drinks.

Yeah :rolleyes: if a Citation could keep up. A citation is barely a jet as it is infact most of its speeds are comparable with Turbo Props, maybe you should have chosen a Lear :hmm:

When selecting a Fighter Bomber or keeping one. One should look at their posssible advisaries Equipment first. And really with what the arsenals are like in South East Asia, the PIG still has some stick in comparison. Most of the more modern exquipemnt recently sold to Singapore, Malaysia and alike may sound good on paper, but infact without the full avionics systems package ie. the Third WOrld budget package, our superiority with F-111 and F/A-18 A is still, and will be overwhelming in the Future.

But that doesnt say we shoulnd be looking for a replacement. We should have and we should be chosing proven technology. Australia has allways been in a rush to aquire new equipment in the past and have stumbled in the process. The F-111 aquisition was a classic example of this. We allways jump in and buy the newest and the first off the production line. Why not wait and asses a proven platform. F23 an F22s great machines but are they being used yet in Combat? When I heard the we were one of the first to order, I squeemed and thought not again.:rolleyes: :(

Lets research and buy proven TECHNOLOGY, not Stuff still on the drawing table.



Sheep

P.S. in the mean time keep the PIG

[Buster Hyman]

I guess it's not really relevant, but they cancelled the Commanche program after billions of investment when they realised that these state of the art machines, like Blackhawks, could be shot down by an inexpensive RPG! (Amongst other things...)

[Cessnadude]

A lot of good points and interesting discussion have come on this subject, but of those so far Sheepguts seems to be on the money. Recently I was at Singapore Airshow, there was nothing I saw that an F-111 could not handle, remember training is also an important part of the problem. A SU-30, F-16 Block 50+ or Rafale can not go in low and fast on TFRS, or swing their wings in a dogfight like the F-14 Tomcat for extra turn performance. Combine this with a Helmet Sight and Aim-9X and now your the guy driving this fight!:cool:

[ftrplt]

Cessnadude,

Im very embarrased for you, because you obviously have no clue that you should be embarassed by your last post.

Didnt your mummy tell you not to annoy the grownups when they are talking

[Lodown]

Thanks itchybum. My mistake and I missed it in my edits.

[Cougar]

Those of you who wish to believe all the crap that CK writes in AA (oh and yes, of COURSE its right because its in a published magazine...) may wish to do a google search on said parasite and look at his qualifications. Go on, i dare you.

[Love Monkey]

Here here. I hope all participants in this drivvel are aware of the mentality of its originator.

Cessnadude, better not to confuse reality with the latest PS2 shootemup.

:p

[Captain Sand Dune]

For all Mr Copps' impressive qualifications it appears he has exactly 0 (zero, ringbone, f#ck-all) actual military experience.
Puts him in the same category as all the other wanna be's that think they know what's best for the ADF.:rolleyes:

[Cessnadude]

It's one thing to call yourself a 'fighter pilot' - ftrplt (yes I do know the encryption!), however I am skeptical that you are anything but some type of wannabe. I have held an avid interest in all things related to military aviation (including 7 years in the air cadets!) and I base my comments on this solid background as well as first hand experience gained at the Singapore Airshow.

And for information, PS2 is widely regarded in the real 'fighter pilot' world as a very valid tool to increase your SU (situational understanding).

As for the google search on Carlo Kopp, thanks I greatly enjoyed it. And for the non believers, here is a quote from the first link:

"Carlo has flown the F/A-18F Super Hornet, the PC-9/A (Aussie JPATS), the F-111C simulator on three occasions, as well as the A320 simulator " - no military experience hey??????

[Lodown]

Cockpit conversation from F111:

Nav: 'Enemy aircraft at 2 o'clock, 16 miles, same altitude and closing. He's trying to come round on our tail.'
Pilot: 'Got him. I'll tickle off an Aim-9X when he gets a little closer.'

Pilot: 'Ah, Nav, would you kindly sit forward a little so I can keep the aircraft in my new, u-beaut, whizz-bang helmet sight. No, no, that won't work. Sit back. You're still in the way. Take your belts off. NO! SIT FORWARD! Oh what the heck! Missile fired.'

Pilot: 'Damn, I just shot my Nav. Well, at least I can see a little better now. Now, I'll bring my wings forward and utilise my aircraft's superior handling skills to slow down and if that bad guy can be a good chap and just speed up a little and come back around in front of me, I'll be able to get a better shot off at him. I wonder if I can sight in the mirror?...hmmm. I know! I'll pull up into a 6G climb and my wings will take him out when they fall off. Or perhaps if I do a few bunts, some extraneous parts like the AESA will fall off and be ingested in his intakes. Stupid piece of equipment only gets in the way of the TFRS anyway.'



I don't have military experience and it shows, but Cessnadude, I wouldn't be boasting about your 'solid background' while being critical of others' on here.

[ftrplt]

Cessnadude - nice windup attempt.

Yawn

[Di_Vosh]

Solid background of 7 years in the air cadets? Plus being at the Singapore airshow??? ROFLMAO!

Cessnadude, you're a crack up! :p

(bugger, ftrplt beat me to it)

[Captain Sand Dune]

Carlo has flown the F/A-18F Super Hornet, the PC-9/A (Aussie JPATS), the F-111C simulator on three occasions, as well as the A320 simulator " - no military experience hey??????

So has Mr Kopp has completed an operational conversion and a tour on any of the above aircraft? Ummmm..........no. So his experience consists of a joyflight.
What I said mate - NO MILITARY EXPERIENCE!

[DoctorProctor]

Cessnadude - Booger - is that you???
This is one of the better windups I've seen. When I started reading your first post, I really thought you were just another misguided trainspotter. It wasn't 'till the last couple of posts that I realised you must be fj qualified - surely no-one in GA is actually as misguided as you pretend. Good job. If it is you Booger, send me an e-mail on DRN.

[Cessnadude]

Obviously I am operating at a level above the par on this topic, seem to be coping a little flack from recent posts. Thats OK, enjoyed the reading and I am looking forward to providing input to the next post of a military nature....:cool:

[itchybum]

Cessna dude and 7 years in the hitler youth... HAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!! :ok:

Oh.. hang on, I was in the cadets too. :ooh:

Anyway, Cessna dude, whose military A320 sim did this guy "fly"? I might apply for a warry job so I can get paid big bucks AND have hot/cold running hostitutes/air stupids/whatever plus plenty of gongs and a warm bed. Beats sleeping on the ground in the 'J'.

I noticed the B737 (AWACS ???) version equipped with Harpoons. Now THAT sounds cool... :cool:

PS I don't know why I'm bothering to add this but Cessnadude, the strike version of Rafale does come with TFR.

[Lodown]

Must...resist...must...resist...oh buggar!

Cessnadude, what course are you playing? Above par? Is there a putt putt course in aviation?

[Cougar]

i liked cessnadudes attempt at humour: SU instead of SA (thats right mate, its referred to as situational awareness, not situational understanding). But i figured you knew that as you have such high mil quals (7 years in Cadets - is this guy from Syria??)

I also spose the Singas Airshow puts you in the bracket of anyone who has ever attended Avalon - gee there must be 50,000 mil experts born a year then in Oz. LOL, you gave me a good laugh though.