super hornets to be axed!!!!

[wessex19]

"Sydney morning herald"

THE $6.6 billion purchase of 24 Super Hornets as a stop-gap fighter jet could be jettisoned by the Federal Government as it reviews all aspects of the program to give Australia a critical edge in regional air combat capability.

The Herald understands that Department of Defence planners have been asked to present an analysis on all the fighter jet options to the Federal Government and how they stack up against likely adversaries, the first time such a study has been done for at least five years.

All projects in the $30 billion program will be scrutinised "with fresh eyes". That includes what aircraft are to be bought, how many, when and at what price. "Absolutely everything is on the table," a Government source said.

Even if contracts have been signed, as is the case with the Super Hornets, the Government is prepared to break them if the case is compelling. This is a shift from previous Labor thinking.

The air combat program is supposed to deliver air superiority in the region, long-regarded as fundamental to Australia's strategic doctrine given its large land mass and isolation.

The coming year is looming as a critical one. A final decision must be made on the centrepiece of the air-combat project - a $15 billion outlay on up to 100 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, a high-stealth aircraft yet to be developed, has been troubled by delays and is at risk of big cost blow-outs.

The prevailing view in the Government is that it makes sense for the entire air combat force structure to be re-examined at the same time. The Defence White Paper - outlining the nation's long-term strategic priorities and being developed next year - is also likely to guide the review.

Writing in his local newspaper last week, the Minister for Defence, Joel Fitzgibbon, made clear his concerns with the Super Hornets, a purchase pushed through with great haste by his predecessor, Brendan Nelson, who is now the Opposition Leader.

"Few decisions of the Howard government were more controversial than its commitment to spend more than $6 billion on 24 Super Hornets without proper due process or capability justification," he wrote in The Newcastle Herald.

Dr Nelson sold the Super Hornet option to cabinet's National Security Committee this year without the co-operation of defence chiefs or undertaking the long due diligence and comparative analysis that usually precedes acquisitions of such scale and expense.

Before his pitch, RAAF planners had said an interim jet was not required. Defence analysts say it is the wrong aircraft anyway, lacking stealth and power.

The Herald understands that the Super Hornet contract - like those for all foreign military sales - can be abandoned, at a cost of about $300 million. If it is not dumped the Government may seek to renegotiate its terms, or buy fewer aircraft.

[mattyj]

Gosh doesnt that sound familiar!! When us lucky Kiwis got the current Labour Govt. back 9 years ago, New Zealand had signed contracts for 20 odd F16s at absolute bargain prices and Helen who protested against the old Skyhawks when they arrived in the 70s, cancelled the contract under the guise of saving money, and then cancelled the strike wing altogether saying (and get this) that they were outdated and ineffective (a problem the F16s wouldve sorted no worries)
So point being?
Beware, if the Labour Govt you have inflicted yourselves with, is anything like what we have over here, it will be pathologically against providing an effective defence, and will begin to let the defence forces gradually self destruct, then claim it is ineffective at its job and close squadrons/units down.
Also, watch out for corrupt practices like stealing public funds for elections then retrospectively passing laws to make it legal, covering up for illegal activity that goes right to the top, lying and misinformation campaigns and desperately trying to hang on to power at all costs and anti-democratic laws being passed. In fact, this post would probably be illegal after midnight tonight as we have a new Labour law here that makes it illegal to publish political statements unless you register with the govt as a political organisation!!
You have been warned!
Oh and happy new year:}:}

[Launch_code_Harry]

Gosh doesnt that sound familiar!! When us lucky Kiwis got the current Labour Govt. back 9 years ago, New Zealand had signed contracts for 20 odd F16s at absolute bargain prices and Helen who protested against the old Skyhawks when they arrived in the 70s, cancelled the contract under the guise of saving money, and then cancelled the strike wing altogether saying (and get this) that they were outdated and ineffective (a problem the F16s wouldve sorted no worries)
So point being?
Beware, if the Labour Govt you have inflicted yourselves with, is anything like what we have over here, it will be pathologically against providing an effective defense, and will begin to let the defense forces gradually self destruct, then claim it is ineffective at its job and close squadrons/units down.mattyi, I suggest that you view the ABC Four Corners (http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2007/20071029_hornets/interviews.htm) episode that dealt with this issue. If you can't download the program, there is always the transcript (http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2007/s2073943.htm).
I wonder if after doing your research you come the same conclusions as you state above.

[c100driver]

Absolute crap Mattyj.

The new legislation whilst not the best legislation will allow anyone to SPEND up $12K on saying and doing what they want in an election year. If you want to spend more than 12K you need to register with the election commission and you can then spend up to $100K.

All parties had to return money to the comission due to over spending except the Maori Party. Labour was by far the largest amount but the others also broke the law and over spent.

[CaptCloudbuster]

Thanks for the "warning" mattyj:rolleyes:
"Also, watch out for corrupt practices like stealing public funds for elections"
The unprecedented spending by little Johnny (for misinformation) on everything from work (no) choices to the perils of union officials taking high office have set the new gold standard here in Aus.:ooh:
"covering up for illegal activity that goes right to the top"
AWB springs to mind:ouch:
"lying and misinformation campaigns and desperately trying to hang on to power at all costs"
Tampa, children overboard, Iraq war - they never did find any WMD's:=
"and anti-democratic laws being passed."
Just ask The Chaser team what happens under a Liberal Govt's laws when they highlighted the absurdity of security overkill at APEC:oh:

[Mr. Hat]

Super Hornet
Shock and awe
Working Australians have never been better off

All have one thing in common

[Like This - Do That]

Folks can we get back on topic please?

This is potentially very serious. The damage done to the Army in decades past as a result of the 'acceptable' doctrine of the era is still being repaired. If this review results in a new 'acceptable' doctrine (remember: "Everything is on the table") there could be fundamental changes to the way the RAAF does things.

In the RAAF's favour is the built-in bias in Labor thought towards DOA ... Sea-Air Gap etc. Hopefully this will prevent a mixture of ideology from the left and austerity from the right slashing the $ available.

[Going Boeing]

They better have a very good reason to cancel the order and throw away $300 million for nothing. If they do cancel then they will have to pay for strengthening the inner pylons on existing F/A18A's and certifying them for release of long range stand-off missiles as well as other expensive short term changes.

The alternatives are not cheap so there has to be a very good reason for cancelling the order.

[Point0Five]

mattyi, I suggest that you view the ABC Four Corners episode that dealt with this issue.

Actually I suggest that you don't, unless you're after a superficial analysis by people with an axe to grind. :hmm:

At any rate, they won't cancel the order. This is just a beat up to create the impression that something is being done... and ensuring that the annual "Operation: Deny Christmas" is alive and well in Canberra. :)

[nomorecatering]

keep the Super Hornets as a stop gap measure.
What we really need is;

40 x F15E for Long range Strike

60 x F22 for air superiority

20 x B1B for ultra long range strike.(now make it the new B-1R as proposed by Boeing. mach 2.2 perfrmance and 25,000 Kg bomb load out to 3,000 nm radius.

Thats enough of a big stick to stop anyone in our region getting smart.

[RedTBar]

What we really need is;
40 x F15E for Long range Strike
60 x F22 for air superiority
20 x B1B for ultra long range strike.(now make it the new B-1R as proposed by Boeing. mach 2.2 perfrmance and 25,000 Kg bomb load out to 3,000 nm radius.
Whats it like living in wonderland there Alice?
Do you expect the govt to increase GST to 20% to pay for that little shopping list or do you think we should have another lottery and call it the defence fantasy lottery so we can fund it.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Beware, the Ghost of Whitlam Past!:}

[Whizzwheel]

:ugh::DHmmm...pretty glad I'm not working in that project right now...here comes three months of wasted, pointless work so that the new Minister can change nothing...that's three months that should be spent keeping the project running on time...and three months that all of the usual suspects will bleat about when the project is delayed by...you guessed it...3 months.

[Whizzwheel]

No more catering,

What about a few Missleers?! Who needs B-1Rs when you could spend the entire defence budget on re-engining 6 F111s and calling it the F-111CK.:ok:

[FoxtrotAlpha18]

What about a few Missleers?! Who needs B-1Rs when you could spend the entire defence budget on re-engining 6 F111s and calling it the F-111CK.:ok:

Then Carlo's Chinese hoards can collectively scream "Faaarrk, here come the F-111CKs!" :hmm:.... Carlo--->:8

Anyway, if the Supers are cancelled, what are they going to get in their place??? F-35 won't be here anytime soon, and the F-15 would be a huge mistake!

[ZK-NSJ]

i know where theres a dozen a-4's , carefully wrapped, one lady (we think) owner

[unscathed]

Nothing like a bit of aeros and form, couple of jollies, a few sim rides and a bunch of 'boys own' articles to underpin becoming a 'prominent defence analyst' - Wikipedia says so so it must be true. What, no extensive professional experience or background? The credibility given by the media without much apparent question has to be a worry. Does squeaky wheel mean anything?

http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~carlo/ckprof.html

Anyway, draw your own conclusions.:confused:

[virgindriver]

I think what we really need is a US Navy and Air Force base somewhere between Darwin and Port Headland.

They can base as many B1B's, F22's and ships there as they want- and pay us for the privilege!!

Perhaps we could then channel some of the $billions saved into maybe Education and Health...


Any better ideas?

[tio540]

What a great idea.

Then paint a target around the bases to make it easier to hit.

We could rename Darwin - Pearl Harbour.

Where is my bourbon!

[virgindriver]

Then paint a target around the bases to make it easier to hit.
Easier to hit by who?

[Mr. Hat]

We need nuclear weapons so we can.. you guessed it ...shock and awe.


We should adopt the american health care system to... shock and awe.

We should invade New Zealand because they have WMD.

[Spaz Modic]

:uhoh: Well, I got a better idea.
Why don't we just GIVE IN.
They're coming anyway, so we might as well keep the money, spend up big on the looney left programs about to filter in with the NY.
I'm still waiting on the Rolls Hawke promised.:O

[Angle of Attack]

Well I would'nt say they are being axed as the title said, there is just a thorough review of the available choices. Nothing wrong with that, if something is deemed better its all good. The previous government put $hitloads of legislation and decisions through with very little thought and consideration, there will need to be a lot of reviews like this to fix the mess that it created. History will view the previous Liberal government as an unmitigated disaster. Either way the title of this thread is sort of incorrect maybe it should be Super Hornets MAY be axed?!

[flying-spike]

That would be a wooly mating device would it not?:confused:

[Mr. Hat]

just invade anywhere that isn't america.

they need to know who's boss.

[Agony]

While we have the axe in hand Mr Rudd.....Can we give it a mighty swing in the direction of the Seasprite.:ok:

[Going Boeing]

virgindriver, your name isn't Chamberlain, is it?

[Captain Sand Dune]

The SMH article in post #1 is nothing more than wishful thinking by the usual left wing loony journos who are frothing at the mouth now that their Labour mates have got into government. Of course the Super Hornets could be axed! Indeed anything could happen!

Somewhat similar to the drivel by Tim Costello in last Friday's Australian. In his considered and well researched opinion the aquisition of the F-16 :hmm: Super Hornet should be cancelled, and the money spent on finding a way of somehow extending the life of the F-111's. :eek: The scary thing is a lot of people believe this garbage. And don't start me on that fool K.C!:mad:

Given the experience of previous Labour governemnts, I am wary of what the future holds for Defence. However having said that the Rudd government appears to be the most conservative Labour government that I can remember. I get the feeling that Defence will not get screwed in the same manner that it was by the Whitlam/Hawke/Keating governments. Here's hoping!

[ZK-NSJ]

given australias lapdog support for the yanks, isnt it about time they handed over the keys to a few f-22's, 70 or 80 of those would ensure australia is miles ahead for the forseable future

[MrApproach]

What really needs reviewing is the cosy deal that got Australia lumbered with the F35. As far as I can see it is a replacement for a heap of single engined fighters such as the Harrier and F16. Didn't we get past single engines when the F18 was purchased? We are not the Connecticut Air National Guard (with apologies to that no doubt very competent air force) neither are we the US Marine Corps...we have a continent to defend, so we need continental defence airplanes in the class of the F15 or F22.

The Super Hornet and F111CK are a side show, how is a single engined F35 going to stand up against the Russian heavy metal if the going ever gets tough?

[Spaghetti Monster]

Somewhat similar to the drivel by Tim Costello in last Friday's Australian. In his considered and well researched opinion the aquisition of the F-16 :hmm: Super Hornet should be cancelled

Terrible when people can't even get the basic facts right when spouting their opinions, isn't it? I'm sure Tim Costello :hmm:, the Baptist minister, would agree with you, as would Michael Costello :hmm:, the columnist. (And presumably by 'that fool K.C.' you mean 'that fool C.K.' :hmm:)

Spot-on otherwise.:ok:

[Captain Sand Dune]

Ummmm........yes.......well......very good! Well spotted!:O:O
Tim, Michael, C.K., K.C.....c'mon - what's the difference?!

[Gnadenburg]

It's just politics!

Super Hornet was Nelson's baby. He didn't trust the RAAF view on an interim requirement for tactical fighters that gambled on JSF.

So Labor is going to sling mud on the deal and consequently the Opposition Leader.

Alternatives?

1) F15E Strike Eagle- Labor should have bought this long ago- but didn't! Now it's just a bit too late and unsuitable as an interim capability ( availability and introduction )

2) JSF- Pushed in too early is risky and expensive.

3) F111 Upgrade- Wasn't sent to two Gulf Wars. Why? Great for bombing coconut countries. But fast approaching obsolescence.

4) Long Range Missiles- P3 was dumped and how's the Hornet coming along?

Super Hornet seems to be a comon sense purchase as an interim capability.

[gaunty]

So tell me again why the Minister/Government preempted the defence departments final decision, maybe they got wind it wasn't Goeing Boeing.

And in any event defence track record in these things isn't exactly peerless. Or should we go back to the Sea Sprite fiasco, how many billion for a turkey.

Same scenario, paying a bazzillion dollars for warmed over technology that could have been bought for only a gazzilion by warming over the F111 for the meantime and then some F35s when they have a reasonably mature airframe. Besides whats wrong with the Rafaele and the Sukhoi apart from them not being Umurrican.

[ozbiggles]

Gaunty, do you think the Russians would back us in any scenario we might see us in?
I'd back the US over Russia keeping a supply line of aircraft parts (AND WEAPONS) available in the remote case we ever need them. Might be the same the way the EU operates as well.
And I can't remeber the last time a Mig got a US aircraft, due in no small part to the fact that the US aircraft is networked into AEW&C, refuellers, satellites etc etc.
There is no warming over the F111...not unless we want to relive the wirraway vs zero fights of a samll war a few years back....that was never going to involve us.