F-111 Retirement

[likes2fly]

G'day all,

With the Pig winding down at the end of this week just wondering what you guys up brisbane way have seen of it, a few final jollies over the city? Are they letting their hair down yet?

I read they are doing the final flight this afternoon for the invitation only crowd, but those around amberley might get a look.

Would like to hear some reports or see some pics of the final ceremonies today if anyone gets a chance to post. I'm interstate otherwise i'd be there myself.

Long live the pig

[F111]

Final flights are tomorrow, with at least 4 aircraft departing around 11, they will split into 2 formations with 1 going north and the other 1 heading south. The formations will fly around Brisbane, the Gold Coast and Sunshine coast before returning to Amberley just after 1 pm for a mock attack on the base and a dump and burn.

Today is the last look an touch for those who have worked at the base.

[Jabawocky]

Today is the last look an touch for those who have worked at the base. All details are at pigtails.

Yes..... Only if you are an invited guest, which is a very select few. :{

So where is the best place to be to watch it and what time?

[Ascend Charlie]

The sad part is that the Gummint is gonna chop them into little bits for scrap metal, instead of donating them to museums or putting them on sticks outside the base.:sad::{

[F111]

Along the back fence (Ipswich side of the base) seems to be a popular spot. They have removed the escape capsules from a lot of the parked aircraft so perhaps they will be offered for sale. At this stage 4 F111C have been allocated to bases.

[hei yu]

From Triple M BNE website

"Brisbane will get one last chance to farewell the F-111 aircraft as it makes a final fly past on Friday December 3.

Their final journey will take them over Ipswich, Brisbane CBDs, South East Queensland and Northern New South Wales.

F-111 Final Route and Approximate Timings:

* Takeoff: Amberley 11:30, Laidley 11:43, Rosweood 11:44, Amberley 11:45, Ipswich 11:46, Brisbane 11:50

* Northern Route: Sandgate 11:55, Redcliffe 11:55, Bribie Island 11:57, Caloundra 12:00, Maroochydore 12:02, Noosa 12:05

* Southern Route: Gold Coast 12:00, Coolangatta 12:05, Byron Bay 13:07, Ballina 13:10, Evans Head 13:15 (all times local)

* Best Vantage Points For Brisbane: Mt Cootha, Red Hill Church, Victora park, Toowong Reach, Southbank, Story Bridge, Kangaroo Point Cliffs, Mt Gravatt"

Brisbane Gets Final F-111 Fly Over | The Cage | Triple M Brisbane (http://www.triplem.com.au/brisbane/shows/thecage/blog/brisbane-gets-final-f111-fly-over/20101123-aoq6.html)

[Jabawocky]

And what is the ETA back at YAMB after the run?

[VH-XXX]

There seem to have been so many "final flights" of the F1-11's lately. Anyone would think that John Farnam's manager was involved.

[F111]

Due back between 1245 and 1345, depending on what site you read.

[Captain Sand Dune]

Should make the professional noise complaint brigade happy - until 1 & 6SQNs come up to strength with Super Hornet:E

[Taildragger67]

Should make the professional noise complaint brigade happy

Hope the lads rattled a few windows today!

Long live the Pig!

[Fly_by_wire]

http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/132b9267cf.jpg
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/7419459087.jpg
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/02a324f945.jpg

[Mick.B]

Some shots from yesterday.

http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr164/mickbawden72/DSC_0026.jpg

http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr164/mickbawden72/DSC_0040.jpg

http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr164/mickbawden72/DSC_0041.jpg

http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr164/mickbawden72/DSC_0047.jpg

http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr164/mickbawden72/DSC_0054.jpg

http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr164/mickbawden72/DSC_0057.jpg

http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr164/mickbawden72/DSC_0067.jpg

http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr164/mickbawden72/DSC_0075.jpg

http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr164/mickbawden72/DSC_0083.jpg

http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr164/mickbawden72/DSC_0082.jpg

http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr164/mickbawden72/DSC_0097.jpg

[Worrals in the wilds]

Ascend Charlie,
The Courier Mail reported yesterday that one was going to a museum down south and one was going on a stick outside Amberley... had you heard differently?
Awesome photos, btw, thanks chaps!

[rlandmann]

According to 'batman' on the adf-serials messageboard:

"One F-111G has gone to RAAFM at PCK. I believe the other 13 are being shredded into razor blades.

There will be several F-111Cs retained for preservation:
A8-125 to RAAFM
A8-126 RAAF Heritage Centre at Amberley
A8-132 to ARDU gate guard at Edinburgh
A8-138 RAAF Amberley gate guard
A8-109 or A8-113 were being negotiated I believe with the USAF"

[uncopilot]

Excellent photo's of the F111. Thanks for posting.:ok:

[L J R]

A8-109 or A8-113 were being negotiated I believe with the USAF"

-113 was a modified F-111A, and as an 'A' Model was the Last F-111 to fly in Vietnam. It returned with some battle damage (that has since been repaired)

[Jabawocky]

I believe a few USAF guys came out for the event....and one operational unit was spare.....the old folk were wondering if they could find the keys :E.

So if one went to the USAF.... that would be to preserve flying history.....why the F:mad:K are we not doing the same. F86 at YTEM for example. what is wrong with these folk. FFS we wasted more on dodgy roof insulation :ugh:

[SgtBundy]

Why would the USAF take one of the RAAF units? Pretty sure they have a desert full of airframes somewhere just baking away in the sun.

[FoxtrotAlpha18]

109 and 113 are ex-USAF F-111As, 67-?109 & 67-?113. They were two of four ex-USAF jets bought as attrition replacements c.1982, (with 112 & 114).

113 reportedly dropped the final bomb by the USAF in Vietnam in 1973, hence the USAF interest in it, but NOT as a flying museum piece. It'll probably go on a pole at Nellis or in the museum at Wright Pat

Awesome that 132 is going back to Edinburgh where it spent so much time in the 80s and 90s. :ok:

[Jabawocky]

One of the USAF guys that flew it in Vietnam was there for the show, pity they did not get him a ride. Amazing to hear some folk had around 4000 hours on the F111 and the guy I met at YCAB on Saturday had 3400 I think.

Quite a lot for military hours.

[GAFA]

Update on the F111C disposal from the latest Airforce News

MANY people will be pleased to learn that not all the F-111Cs will go into storage sheds and scrap yards after their retirement. Four of the aircraft are destined to become permanent displays at locations around Australia. One aircraft will be placed on display at RAAF Base Edinburgh, two at RAAF Base Amberley and one at the RAAF Museum at RAAF Base Point Cook. The ADF is planning to have the four aircraft on display during 2011.

Of the remainder of the fleet, another three will be retained within Defence to
preserve military heritage, in particular for Air Force units that have flown or supported the F-111C.

Another four will be disposed through destruction as investigations have determined that they are unsuitable for demilitarisation or for display purposes.

The remaining aircraft are then to be offered for general sale by tender for other groups or organisations to use as static displays. Any such group will be required to agree to pay the costs to make the aircraft inoperable (estimated to be in excess of $1 million) so as to meet US Government approvals to transfer them from Defence, as well as the costs to remove asbestos from the aircraft and to restore them to displayable condition (estimated at up to $1.5 million) before approval is given.

All G models will be destroyed.

Anyone want to chip in and buy one?

[Worrals in the wilds]

Probably a very civilian question, but why are all the G models to be destroyed when so many C models are being kept and even offered for private sale?

[Tiger35]

I think the G's are part of the SALT agreements - ie they used to be able to carry nukes.

Lucky they never went across the pond to NZ then hey. :)

[Worrals in the wilds]

Fair enough, you probably wouldn't want to see them on ebay then :}.
Thanks very much.

[GAFA]

No mention yet of the escape modules that were used at airshows or the sim. Anyone know if they could remove the escape modules from the 'Gs' and sell them. I'm sure if the museums and collectors can't get a complete aircraft the modules would be a great second prize.

[Teal]

There seem to have been so many "final flights" of the F1-11's lately


They were going through their "final paces" back in early August....

YouTube - Royal Australian Air Force F-111s - phased out (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VczLsQLBE-U)

YouTube - F-111s fly for the last time (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWrdjTeNUns&NR=1)

Glad to read that one will make it to Point Cook - birthplace of the RAAF.

[HappyBandit]

Is this like the Johnny Farnham "Last Tour"!!!??? :)

[Stationair8]

Going to miss seeing the F-111 down low and going like a cat cut!

[frigatebird]

Had a mob of cattle mustered up, and driving them to the yards on our leased Forestry block west of the Mary River, back in about '74/'75 or so, (not long after we finally got ours, and the guys were training hard down low in case they had to drop a bomb in anger). Anyway, we were under one of the Low Jet Routes, (probably the one from Kilkivan to about Childers before they did the 'abrupt vertical manoeuvring' - as it was described on the Notams). When the first one came over at what felt like tree-top height, the cattle spooked and scattered - of course, - so we had to spend a few more hours gathering them out of hiding again. Had a few choice words at the time, - but forgave them, of course.. fascinated.

[SgtBundy]

I was in the AIRTC at Lismore back around 95-96, and we used to get the odd invite by the local RAAF guys out to the Evans Head bombing range to watch the F-111s or SAF Skyhawks do their thing.

One particular time we we watching the F-111s and we were told to climb up on a demountable block, and one cadet was given a large orange triangle to hold above their head. We watched the F-111 appear out from the ocean down south of Yamba and come screaming in directly at us, wings fully swept back and he shot over us at what seemed about 200 feet (probably higher). Never forget the absolute kick to the chest as the sound hit and almost being knocked off the building because of it. Awesome experience. :ok:

Also used to watch them do circuits over town when they did touch and goes at YBNA instead of paying attention in class.

My kids first experience of them was one doing a dump and burn at the Richmond air show a few years ago. Unfortunately it was their first introduction to aircraft that close and I am pretty sure it scarred them... :ouch: At least that time I had a decent camera.

http://i1013.photobucket.com/albums/af260/sgtbundy/P1040082.jpg

[QSK?]

From the Australian Government tender website:The Commonwealth of Australia requires physical destruction and disposal of F-111 aircraft, TF-30 engines and associated components and equipment currently located at RAAF Base Amberley, Queensland. Proper management of environment, health and safety hazards will be a key requirement of the contract.

[Fris B. Fairing]

QSK?

Certainly it is true in the case of the F-111Gs but the position regarding the F-111Cs is less clear. What is clear is that the government is likely to be spending taxpayers' money to destroy taxpayers' property. This is deplorable when there are established aviation museums that would be willing to preserve an F-111. This is the view of one such museum (quoted from the website of the Queensland Air Museum):

The Hon Stephen Smith MP
Minister for Defence
PO Box 6022
House of Representatives
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600

Dear Minister

I refer to my letter of 21 September regarding the disposal of F-111 aircraft. As we have not yet received a response from your office, I would appreciate your urgent advice on this matter.

In the absence of any official advice from your office, we have to accept the following report from Air Force News to be the official policy:

The remaining aircraft are then to be offered for general sale by tender for other groups or organisations to use as static displays. Any such group will be required to agree to pay the costs to make the aircraft inoperable (estimated to be in excess of $1 million) so as to meet US Government approvals to transfer them from Defence, as well as the costs to remove asbestos from the aircraft and to restore them to displayable condition (estimated at up to $1.5 million) before approval is given.

Presumably this offer to make aircraft available to "other groups or organisations" is intended to satisfy the Government's sole commitment to QAM that our request will be considered along with other interested parties. So once again we find ourselves at the mercy of the tender system which has consistently failed to provide for community groups like QAM. Not only do we have to come up with a competitive tender, but now we have to contend with an additional "flagfall" impost estimated to be in excess of $2.5M. I would put it to you Minister that there is no community group in the nation that could afford that amount. In QAM's case, that is more than we have ever spent on capital works in our thirty-five year history and more than we dare aspire to in the foreseeable future.

While we accept that an aircraft must be made safe for display, the quoted cost would appear to be nothing more than a contrived deterrent to prevent non-Government museums from displaying an F-111. The clear implication of this policy is that community group museums are not good enough to display an F-111 despite the fact that these groups are comprised of tax-paying volunteers who effectively paid for these aeroplanes in the first place. It is all very well to claim that the Government is fulfilling its heritage obligations by displaying F-111s at military establishments but are these aeroplanes accessible to the public? Clearly military establishments are obliged to have a high level of security and the level of that security is only going to increase in coming years.

It is also clearly understood that the Government has a need to prevent operational military equipment falling into the wrong hands and yet the Government has demonstrated on many occasions that where there is a will to do so, these problems can be overcome. I refer specifically to the recent gifting of Leopard tanks to various RSL Clubs around the country. While we applaud the Government's action in this case, we have great difficulty reconciling the Government's policy with the disposal of tanks with its policy on the disposal of F-111s. It is our understanding that not only have the Leopard tanks been gifted but they have also been demilitarised and delivered at Government expense. What is so different about QAM and the F-111 given that many of our volunteers are RSL members?

Another example of the prevailing double standard concerns the gifting of former RAN vessels as dive wrecks. Is it not true that these dive wrecks are gifted, demilitarised and delivered at Government expense? Surely the cost of demilitarising a guided missile destroyer would be significantly more expensive than the cost of demilitarising an aeroplane?

In the event that no appropriately constituted organisations are able to tender for an F-111, would it be a reasonable assumption that the aircraft set aside for public tender will be scrapped? If they are to be scrapped, will the successful tenderer be required to pay the estimated $1M cost of decommissioning each aircraft? We estimate that there may be as many as eight aircraft available for public tender. If these aircraft are unsold and have to be scrapped, does that mean that the successful tenderer will be required to pay $8M in "flagfall" just to destroy the airframes? Obviously, this amount exceeds the scrap value of the airframes by a huge margin so clearly scrapping the aircraft cannot be a commercial proposition unless the Government is absorbing the demilitarising cost. If the Government can absorb the cost of destroying taxpayers' property, why can it not absorb the cost of placing the aircraft on display to the people who paid for them?

As alluded to in my previous unanswered letter, there is more to this than the gifting of a single aeroplane to a museum. It's all about recognition. Does the Government accept that QAM's volunteers have provided a useful service to the community during the past 35 years or is it the Government view that we should give up what we are trying to do and leave it all to the Government owned museums? Clearly, if the policy pertaining to the F-111s is projected into the future, QAM can forget about acquiring any ex ADF aircraft forever.

Please do not underestimate the extent of feeling within this organisation and within our wider community regarding the Government's dismissive attitude to a group of citizens who are dedicated to nothing more than trying to put something back into their community.

We would greatly appreciate your urgent assurances that QAM is performing a valuable service to the community and that you will review your attitude to our request for an F-111 to be displayed on the Sunshine Coast. Please be advised that this matter is being followed with great interest by the local media and there is much public interest in taking up a petition.

[F111]

Any news on the Minister's reply?

[Fris B. Fairing]

From the latest QAM newsletter:

We can report limited progress if acknowledgement of our latest letter can be regarded as progress. We have been advised to expect a response in the new year. From the tone of the advice it would appear that they are now aware that we will not be fobbed off by the usual weasel words and platitudes. Quite likely they are stalling for time while they think up new weasel words and platitudes!

[F111]

You would think they would at least offer the escape modules/cockpits to museum's. I'm sure there would be collectors out there who would also be happy to purchase them. Easy to put on a trailer and would be great for display at airshows.

[Fris B. Fairing]

The latest development is that the original tender for the destruction of the 13 remaining F-111Gs has been expanded in its scope. The 13 G models are now identified as the "Core Scope". To this has been added an "Optional Scope" which provides for the destruction of 1 F-111A and up to 14 F-111Cs. What this means is that if the so-called "Optional Scope" is fully invoked, all remaining F-111s can be destroyed without further refernce or tenders being called. The only F-111s left will be the 5 already announced for display at ADF establishments plus another 2 which are rumoured to be going to the USAF Museum.

Given previous advice that any organisation wishing to display an F-111 would be required to pay $1M to have the aircraft demilitarised, one has to wonder who will be paying to demil the aircraft that are to be destroyed? If the scrap merchant has to pay the demil cost then obviously the scrap value of the aircraft would be negated, even if the demil costs were substantially discounted. More likely, we the taxpayers will be required to absorb the demil costs so that someone can profit from the destruction of taxpayers' property.

If the taxpayer has to foot the bill for the demil costs, wouldn't it make more sense to gift the aircraft to established museums which have indicated interest in displaying an F-111? At least then the taxpayer would have something to show for the huge investment that has gone into these aeroplanes. If the destroy/display option were presented to the people who have maintained these aeroplanes with pride for 37 years, I doubt if any would prefer to see them destroyed.

If you agree that this is a scandal, please say so to your local Federal member.

Rgds

[Jabawocky]

Would it be cheaper to fly them back to the USA boneyard....reunite them with their brothers and sisters?

[Baritji]

So while the USAF quite happily donated a B52G to a third class Aviation Museum in Darwin, our own government will not donate an Australian aircraft to QAM?

Pathetic.

[Fris B. Fairing]

Baritji

While I agree with your other sentiments, it's hardly fair to call the Darwin museum third class.

Rgds

[Baritji]

Fris B.

My apologies, I meant no offence mate, just my opinion. The museum wouldn't exist without the B52.

I will refrain from slandering them any further. However, I do have reasons for my opinion. :)

[Fris B. Fairing]

The latest press release from the Queensland Air Museum on the unfolding scandal that is the F-111 Destruction Project:

In December last year, the Royal Australian Air Force finally retired its F-111 strike aircraft after 37 years service to the nation. The event was surrounded by a blaze of publicity and rightly so. The select group of aircrew who flew the F-111 were fiercely proud of their aircraft right to the end. Similarly, specialists from many disciplines who had kept the aeroplane in service for all of these 37 years with many challenges along the way maintained their pride in the aircraft right to the end. It wasn’t just the RAAF that had a genuine affection for the F-111. The aeroplane was well known to the average citizen who otherwise had no interest in aviation. This was largely due to a quirk of the F-111's design. When it was discovered that dumping fuel while using afterburner produced a spectacular torching effect, a star was born in the eyes of the public. It was because of this “dump and burn” capability that the Australian public took the F-111 to their hearts as it became a showpiece at many public ceremonies and sporting events. An aeroplane which was designed as a killing machine and which was born amidst political controversy was now the darling of the people. The F-111 was recognised and adored by everyone. Probably no military aircraft in history has attracted such affection while it was still in service. Most aeroplanes had to wait for years after their retirement for such adoration, if it came at all. By the time the adoration finally came it was usually too late as most of them had gone. But this time it’s going to be different isn’t it? We have 35 surviving F-111s and a public ready and willing to provide them with an honourable retirement.

Australia has a number of museums which might be expected to be obvious homes for an F-111. Foremost is the RAAF Museum at the historic Point Cook RAAF Base in Melbourne. There is also the famous Australian War Memorial in Canberra. In addition to these government owned museums, there are also a number of not-for-profit aviation museums run by community groups.

The Queensland Air Museum (QAM) at Caloundra on Queensland’s Sunshine Coast is one such group. QAM was inaugurated in 1974 with the unveiling of a Canberra bomber (predecessor of the F-111) which it had purchased from the Australian government with funds donated by its members. QAM’s second aeroplane was a Meteor jet fighter which arrived the following year as an outright gift from the British government. Nearly 40 years later, QAM is still waiting to receive an aeroplane from its own government!

As early as 2005, QAM began planning for the retirement of the F-111 by approaching the Australian government with a request that an F-111 be gifted to the museum, not only as a means of preserving an F-111 but also as a means of recognising QAM’s thirty-five years service to the educational needs of the community. During the ensuing years, three different Ministers for Defence assured QAM that it’s interests would be taken into account at the appropriate time.

As the F-111’s December 2010 retirement approached, it was announced that four F-111Cs would be preserved on RAAF Bases at Point Cook, Amberley (2 aircraft) and Edinburgh (SA). Earlier it had been announced that one of the remaining F-111G models would be preserved at the RAAF Museum at Point Cook. However, the rest of the G models would be scrapped in accordance with international treaties as they were technically deemed nuclear capable. Although preservationists generally don’t like to see aeroplanes scrapped, this was accepted as inevitable, despite the apparent anomaly of allowing one F-111G to escape destruction.

Subsequently it was announced that three F-111Cs would be retained for “RAAF Heritage use” but four aircraft would be scrapped as they were determined to be unsuitable for display. The clear implication of this is that the estimated eleven remaining F-111Cs are suitable for display. Indeed it was announced in Air Force News that:

The remaining aircraft are then to be offered for general sale by tender for other groups or organisations to use as static displays. Any such group will be required to agree to pay the costs to make the aircraft inoperable (estimated to be in excess of $1 million) so as to meet US Government approvals to transfer them from Defence, as well as the costs to remove asbestos from the aircraft and to restore them to displayable condition (estimated at up to $1.5 million) before approval is given.

What this means is that any group wishing to display an F-111 would be required to find an estimated $2.5M just to buy the right to submit a tender! The only way a museum such as QAM could find such a fortune would be to approach a sponsor and what sponsor in his right mind is going to hand over $2.5M knowing that it will go to the government for nothing in return? Indeed, no museum would insult a potential sponsor with such a request. When QAM advised the Minister that no community group in Australia could afford that sort of money it was probably seen as confirmation that the government’s inflated estimates had served their intended purpose.

The latest development is that the original tender for the destruction of the 13 remaining F-111Gs has been expanded in its scope. The 13 G models are now identified as the "Core Scope". To this has been added an "Optional Scope" which provides for the destruction of up to another 15 F-111s. What this means is that if the so-called "Optional Scope" is fully invoked, all remaining F-111s can be summarily destroyed without further reference or tenders being called. It would appear that this “Optional Scope” may include aircraft previously set aside for RAAF heritage purposes.

As previously announced, any organisation wishing to display an F-111 would be required to pay $1M to have the aircraft demilitarised. Apart from confirming that the aircraft can be demilitarised to the satisfaction of the U.S. government to permit transfer to a non-government recipient, one has to wonder who will be paying to demilitarise the aircraft that are to be destroyed? If the scrap merchant has to pay the demilitarisation cost then obviously the scrap value of the aircraft would be negated, so it is no surprise that Request For Tender documents make no provision for these costs to be passed on to the successful tenderer. What this means is that the taxpayer will have to absorb the cost of preparing the aircraft for destruction while a private individual or company will make a significant profit from destroying taxpayers’ property! Clearly it would make more sense to gift the aircraft to established museums which have indicated interest in displaying an F-111. At least then the taxpayer would have something to show for the huge investment that has gone into acquiring and maintaining these aeroplanes to say nothing of the potentially huge cost of destroying them. The people who have flown and maintained these aeroplanes with pride for 37 years should be appalled that their years of effort are held in such low esteem by their own government.

Work that needs to be done to demilitarise the aircraft is defined in a “U.S. Government Demilitarisation Manual” which is freely available online. Currently the Defence Materiel Organisation is actively discouraging potential tenderers from referring to this manual because “reference to the Demilitarisation Manual on its own can be confusing and misleading.” The only thing confusing about the Demilitarisation Manual is that its requirements are significantly less stringent than those imposed by the Australian government!

Because of the deterrent factor of the F-111, it was never used in anger by the RAAF. This deterrent factor is now working against the aircraft in that it is deemed to be an ongoing threat. The well-equipped RAAF stopped using the F-111 because the aeroplane was proving difficult to keep in the air. How could a non-nuclear configured, demilitarised airframe, out of the maintenance schedule, and minus engines, pose the slightest threat to anyone, particularly when no other nation on earth operates F-111s?

The US government has already allocated F-111s to community museums in the United States. How would Australian museums differ? Perhaps the Australian government could show some initiative in preservation by working with the US government to identify equally acceptable organisations in Australia that would meet the standards of the National Museum of the United States Air Force (NMUSAF) for the placement of such equipment?

The project to destroy the remaining F-111s would appear to be moving with indecent haste. Why this is so is difficult to understand when even the U.S. government itself provides for the demilitarisation of defence assets to facilitate their placement in museums. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that the Australian government believes that only their own museums are worthy enough to receive F-111s and that community group museums should remain unrecognised as they have been for decades.

In allocating four aircraft to RAAF Bases, the government doubtless feels that they have fulfilled their heritage obligations and that four is enough. Of these four aircraft, only one (Point Cook) will be accessible to the public in a currently operational aviation museum. The other three will be subject to the stringent security restrictions which are now unavoidable at military establishments. Indeed there have been recorded instances where people attempting to photograph aircraft on display at the front gates of an RAAF Base have been unceremoniously chased away by security staff on the premise that any photos taken will show defence establishments in the background. Only in Melbourne will Australian families be able to turn up unannounced with their cameras to view an F-111 (which they effectively paid for). An F-111 positioned at the front gate of a military establishment is not publicly accessible and does not meet the heritage expectations of the community. They want to see an F-111 displayed as part of a collection of aircraft and above all they want to be able to touch it. No, four aeroplanes is nowhere near enough.

To be using taxpayers’ money to destroy taxpayers’ property is a scandal.

[PyroTek]

What if QAM approaches the US Govt and asks for their opinion of this issue?:sad:
Might turn out good, nothing to lose either.

[Pera]

If it costs $1 less to destroy them than preserve them, then you need to have a good argument in this current climate.

I would suggest that you will only need to pay the 2.5M if you win the contract. I don't think the QAM is doing itself any favours by not doing a gross error check on their PR.

[ozbiggles]

You have to remember too you are dealing with a government that had to be publicly humiliated into giving funding to the Australian War Museum. The only reason they succumbed to that was the hypocrisy that they knew the PM was going to announce a spend over 3 million to build some type of memorial in the US and knowing this mobs record that much would probably buy a couple of red roses, and by the time they got them there they would be the wrong type of flower and dead. ( A brilliant tactical move by a member of the AWM to I might say to squeeze the money from this governement).

[Fris B. Fairing]

Pera

I would suggest that you will only need to pay the 2.5M if you win the contract.

The $2.5M was per aeroplane when there was a suggestion that non-government museums might get a look in. The scrappies won't be paying any of that.

I don't think the QAM is doing itself any favours by not doing a gross error check on their PR.

Care to explain?

Rgds

[GAFA]

Hasn’t the precedent been set with Private Museums in Australia such as Fighter world and Darwin having Mirages? I know they got those 20 years ago, but when they went to museums smaller countries were still using them as front line fighters, so wasn’t putting them in museums back then a greater risk then allowing the F111 to be given to museums now?

They would have to been demilitarised before going to these museums so what was the cost for them and what had to be done? Did they have asbestos in theml? And what about the asbestos in the Bou, how was that handled? Seems to be no problems from both of these aircraft so why is the government making it so hard for the F111 to go to private museums?

Why can private museums in the USA display fighters and bombers from the same era without any problems?

[Fris B. Fairing]

GAFA

Don't get me started on the Mirages!

Defence are citing three reasons why civilian museums can't have an F-111.

1. Asbestos
2. Demil costs
3. US Govt end user restrictions.

All of these can be overcome where there is a will to do so. It seems that these reasons are just a smokescreen to hide the objections of a small minority within the RAAF who think that only their museums are good enough to have F-111s (and I'm not referring to the RAAF's museums themselves).

Rgds

[GAFA]

QAM has a Caribou,it has/had Asbestos and you delt with it. That box should be ticked for the F111 then.

Demil costs, how much does really cost to remove the pave-tack and other weapons systems. Give me a pair of pliers a screwdriver (and a hamer just in case). Open up a few panels and I will cut a few wires and the bloody thing will be demiled. If they want, I will remove some controls in the cockpit all for free! One hit with a hamer to the sensor on the pave-tack pod and it's demiled.

US Govt end user restrictions. Yet the US Govt gave the Darwin museum a B52 while the USAF still operate them, how does that work.

The US Govt trust the Intrepid Museum to not only having aircraft such as the Blackbird, A6, A4 etc, the museum is on a former aircarft carrier. And the Museum of flight at BFI also has a blackbird, B52, A4, A6, F14, AV8C, F4 and a YF5A. They are American museums, but they are civilian and the US GOV is happy for them to have military aircraft so why can't a civilian museum in Australia have a similar aircraft ie the F111?

Keep it in the news, most Aussies don't want to see the F111C's destroyed.

[bankrunner]

The problem is Defence culture.

It's not good enough adopt proven standards set by other countries for the same kit, they NEED to change things/be arbitrarily more stringent/etc to justify their own existence.

They needlessly fiddle with **** just for the sake of it all the time, this ranges from software to (in this case) demil standards for aircraft.

[CHAIRMAN]

I have staff 'needlessly fiddling with ****' all the time.:ugh:
But they don't make the decisions.:D