Defence plan to scrap F-111s

[Wirraway]

Tues "The Australian"

Defence plan to scrap F-111s
By Patrick Walters, National security editor
August 05, 2003

THE RAAF's 35 F-111 warplanes – Australia's front-line strategic strike force – could be retired from service from 2006, a decade earlier than originally planned, if the Government accepts a controversial option put forward by the Defence Department.

A key issue is whether early retirement for the long-range F-111s could leave a gaping hole in Australia's front-line defences early next decade.

The Government has accepted strategic advice that Australia faces no conventional military threat for the next 15 years and has placed greater emphasis on the defence force working in coalition operations further from Australia's shores.

The problem for defence planners is that the RAAF's 71 F/A-18 strike fighters are also rapidly ageing and due to be phased out from 2012 as the air force bets on the timely arrival of the state-of-the-art US-designed Joint Strike Fighter.

A growing lobby in defence circles argues that the RAAF will have to consider an interim fighter solution to replace the F/A-18s if the Joint Strike Fighter fails to arrive by 2012 as planned.

Critics of the F-111 argue that the aircraft is now too expensive to maintain and, lacking stealth technology, is highly vulnerable to modern air defence systems.

Air Force chief Angus Houston said recently the bomber fleet could be kept in service at least until 2010. "The reality is that if we are going to take this through to 2020, as indicated in the white paper, it will be very expensive," he told a Senate estimates committee hearing.

"The F-111 was an extremely serviceable aircraft when it was young. The older it gets, the more maintenance we will have to put into it to maintain the capability."

A cost blowout in defence is driving the politically contentious plan to retire the F-111s early. At current estimates, Defence does not have the money to fund the 10-year, $50 billion defence capability plan.

The Defence Capability Review now being considered by the Government argues the case for retiring the 30-year-old F-111 fleet from 2006, compared with the phase-out schedule of 2015-2020 envisaged by the 2000 Defence White Paper.

The option to bring forward the retirement of the F-111s has already sparked sharp debate in defence circles, given that more than $1.2 billion has been spent upgrading the planes and their weaponry over the past 10 years to extend their in-service life.

The Defence White Paper, arguing for the long-term retention of the F-111, said it was unlikely any comparable strike aircraft suited to Australia's needs would be available about 2015.

Defence planners say that by then, other alternative long-range strike platforms could be available, including unmanned aerial vehicles.

The Joint Strike Fighter, still in the development phase, will not have the range and payload of the F-111.

With this in mind, the Government approved further massive expenditures, including upgrades of the F-111's stand-off weapons. Further electronic warfare upgrades were approved for 2004-2008.

The F-111 bomber fleet costs about $500 million annually to keep in service. Maintenance costs have soared in recent years as structural problems with wings and fuel tank seals have emerged.

==========================================

[SeldomFixit]

Or a cynic might say that the Yanks have promised to RUSH to our aide, should it be requested IF.............full and unfettered access to all and any Australian domestic trade markets whilst our exorts are exised out of the ballpark on their domestic field. Our politicians are just about dumb enough to fall for that one. God save us because the yanks won't.

[Buster Hyman]

The Government has accepted strategic advice that Australia faces no conventional military threat for the next 15 years

Peace in our time....:rolleyes:

Time to order those F15E's I think!

[Desert Digger]

Methinks we have not native born, Asian/ME radicals giving the Government advice on Australia's (non) defence needs.
In less than fifty years from now, Australia will have changed from that freedom loving culture we developed and enjoyed from 26th January 1788, to an unrecognisable South Pacific appendage of whichever power holds sway north of 0 degrees latitude.
I fear for my grandchildren.

[Captain Sand Dune]

The F-111 was, and in many ways still is a great aircraft. The unfortunate and inescapable fact is that we simply cannot afford to keep it flying.
The alternative is to sacrifice other roles or procurement programs to keep the F-111 flying.
I believe that Australia does not face a “conventional” threat - ie the landing of a large enemy expeditionary force on our shores – but that the threat has changed to that of small scale guerrilla/special forces/terrorist operations. The ADF with its oh so finite resources must be capable of changing with the times.
The F-111 was primarily designed to counter a “Cold War” threat, which really does not exist today. Nevertheless an aircraft capable of flying a significant bomb load at high speed and low level is still a good “big stick” to have J.I.C.
I believe the Strike Eagle and Super Hornet are being examined as replacements (anyone out there with more accurate intel?), and IMHO this should be done ASAP before the F-111 becomes a millstone around the neck of Defence (that's not meant as an insult to the Pig world).

[ZK-NSJ]

yanks are retireing some b-1b lancers arnt they, they would do the trick

[Buster Hyman]

True, they'd have the range to strike anywhere in New Zealand!;) :p

[Soulman]

Hmmm... Could pose a few headaches for the men with the money in Canberra. :p
There's a big shopping list out their, with the Super Hornet (IMHO) at the top, The F-15E (or D for that matter) and there is even the possibility for such craft as the F-16, Tornado, Mirage, Tomcat...

Super Hornet - the obvious choice in my opinion.
• Two seat F variants to employ the excess navigators from the retired Pigs.
• Easy conversion for existing Hornet pilots.
• Amazing aircraft with the most advanced technology to date.
• Large payload (11 weapon stations - 8,000 kg) & excellent range in excess of 800 nautical miles un-refueled. (40% greater than current RAAF Hornets)
• Multi-Role Capability.

F-15E - Probably second choice, again, in my opinion.
• Two seats to employ the excess navigators from the retired Pigs.
• World superior Air-to-Air fighter capable of in excess of Mach 2 and 50,000ft.
• Air-to-ground capable, as proved in recent conflicts.
• Big payload and large range.
• Multi-Role capability.

Looking back, the one key difference between the two aircraft is the familiarisation factor of the Super Hornet. Obviously, ex-Pig drivers would have to complete the conversion course (6-12 months), but with their fast-jet knowledge of the F-111, this would make the conversion somewhat easier.

The majority of differences between the current RAAF Hornets and the Super Hornet lie in the larger physical structure and exterior of the craft - the cockpit is almost identical (except for the colour GPS I think).

Obviously they will need to define the length of time that the aircraft will be required. Is it an interim proposal, or a more permanent fixture? Again, an interim proposal would call for a 'cheap fix', where as a more permanent fixture will probably mean a huge spend-up by the DoD.

Whatever the outcome, it will be sad to see the Pig go - still the only aircraft in the western world capable of legally emitting a 60 foot Roman Candle (http://www.airliners.net/open.file/148825/M/) from its rear to please a crowd!
The F-111 was the premier theatre strike aircraft of the Cold War era. With 2.5 times or better the payload radius of typical multirole tactial fighters, the F-111 remains today in a class of its own. With Mach 2.6 class high altitude supersonic dash performance, and Mach 1.2 dash capability at low level, the F-111 is arguably the fastest combat aircraft remaining in operation in any Western air force.

On the topic of displays - what will supply the best Airshow display? The Eagle at Avalon was awesome, as was the F-16, but could you possibly 'out-display' a Super Hornet with Ricardo Traven (Canadian Air Force & Boeing Test Pilot) at the controls? :p

Check out the latest edition of 'Defence Today' or F-111.net (http://www.f-111.net/) for an insight into the history of the F-111 with the RAAF.

Think its time those Defence 'experts' put their heads together! Should be an interesting outcome, whatever the final choice is. ;)

Cheers,

Souls.

[pigprodder]

I'm with you soulman. It'll be a sad day, particularly for the airshow organisers, when the pig is laid to rest. Still, you can't say an earlier than planned retirement isn't exactly surprising.

.......sniff..........

[P.O.M]

Or more of a question to those more qualified :)

As we would only be looking at an interim solution would there be any reason we wouldn't look at the option of F-15E as the mud mover (arguably the best replacement for the PIG), with the F-15C as air-air role?

I don't think the C model is still on the assy line but would there be any excess late mod 15C's in the states?

Both proven aircraft.

I am thinking the benefits being parts commonality to some degree along with training for pilots?

Just a thought.....would be interested in hearing comments from those with better knowledge in this area.

P.O.M:ok:

[Captain Custard]

Soulman,

Pig drivers would have to complete the conversion course (6-12 months), but with their fast-jet knowledge of the F-111, this would make the conversion somewhat easier.

Excuse me while I puke! The average pig driver wouldn't know how to look past his 10/2, let alone over his shoulder! Perhaps they know how to go fast, in a straight line, but that's all. They do no air-to-air at all (yeh, oorright, they've got a couple of 'winders!!!), drop a few big bombs, and then come home with their fingers in their ears hoping nobody can run them down. The standard hornet driver would %iss all over them in a conversion to Strike Eagles!

[ftrplt]

P.O.M,

the F15E is better than the F15C in the A/A role.

It was politically restrained in the A/A role in the US to avoid it taking away some of the momentum for the F22.

The F15E and C were never available at the same time, the E replaced the C on the production line.

[P.O.M]

Thanks ftrplt.......

Makes things even easier then....stop ******ing around and bring on the Stike Eagle:ok:

Cheers
P.O.M :ok:

[ozbiggles]

Captain C, let me guess you are a junior dude with f all hours on type, just the type that is oh so easy to bait in the mess. One team, one fight young man. Banter is one thing, the over-exuberance of youth another. I'm not a pig driver, but respect the jet, and most of the guys who fly them :o).

[kmagyoyo]

Captain C,

Where did you gain your vast insight into the respective merits of either operator??

Pull your head in...oh and bye the way, in which planet does it take one year to convert onto a new type????

[Love Monkey]

How much of a gap will retirement of the F111 fleet really leave in our defences? I think the deterrent card is overplayed in this case. It's not the 70's or 80's anymore. A couple of dozen F111's, whilst being amazingly capable strike platforms, are smaller players these days in the Su27/33 equipped Asian environment. Long term servicability in any operation, as well as prolonged ordnance supply would be a significant achilles heel. I agree with soulman. 15's or 18E/F. Hard to look past a phased array equipped 15 thogh.:ok:

[Buster Hyman]

Why not get a few squadrons of Flankers, rip the avionics & engines out & upgrade them? Alternatively, we could get all the remaining Nomads and............:rolleyes:

[GLOC]

There is some more constructive comments there....

:hmm:

[Captain Custard]

kmagyoyo,

I normally convert to a new type on a planet, not in one. But then you seem to know more about this than I do...

Biggles,

I do respect pig drivers (anybody who sits calmly, at night, watching the flash of the anti-col beacon reflecting off the trees deserves respect). My point was that they would have a big shock to convert to a real fighter. The pig is a dinosaur bomber, and that's all. Great at what it does, but that's all. It's not an A to A machine's backside.

And if you two turkeys would care to meet me on the 090 at 50 at any height you like, I'm more than willing to oblige! Sounds like I'll be drinking free for a long time!

[sancho]

Captian Custard you sir r a w^nker!

I could wax your tail in a bloody Seneca anytime,.... that is a pig of an aeroplane for sure.....

Have some respect for the boys who defend our country regardless which type they fly. We are lucky to have them considering the pittance spent on defence here.

May I suggest you hang up your anorak and go sail a boat?

:mad: :mad: :yuk:

[ozbiggles]

Custard, No I don't care to meet you, I don't rate PONTIs.. You might be drinking for free, but it will be by yourself.
The F111 was, is and will be our 'Big stick' for years to come. This dinosaur as you call it has modern avionics, modern weaponry (for us) and better pilots then you can ever hope to be based on your level of SA from your comments. A level of SA akin to that of The IRAQI IADS.
Sancho, I think, summed it up perfectly.

[Captain Custard]

Hey Sancho,

What's a Seneca?

[Swingwing]

All the banter about replacements is interesting, but misses the point. The reason that early retirement is being considered is to cover a large cost shortfall in the DCP (Defence Capability Plan), ie Defence wants X dollars, the government has Y dollars to spend. Y minus X = a huge negative number. Therefore, a couple of options present themselves. The two most obvious are a) increase funding above 1.9% of GDP - sounds nice, but doesn't do much for schools and hospitals; or b)Cut costs in a variety of ways, one of which is to remove large and expensive items from the balance sheet.
Therefore, please understand that if the F-111 goes, THERE WILL BE NO REPLACEMENT! Talk about leases of F-15's and Super Hornets is so much pie in the sky, and this in any event would end up quite a bit more expensive than just maintaining the current F-111 squadrons until 2012 or so. There is simply no money for anything new. The argument for retirement is being held on cost, not capability grounds.
No, if the Pig goes, there will be nothing in it's stead. We'll have to bank on the Hornet making it until JSF IOC sometime after 2015. That debate is still to be finalised, and is an entirely separate can of worms.
Now I love the Pig - don't get me wrong. However, in the cold hard light of financial reality, we have to make a case for it's retention that relies on something other than the old rhetoric about the threat to continental Australia from our Northern neighbours. Arguments based around the F-111's unrivalled range / payload / loiter capability, and it's ability to deliver precision weapons over long distances in a benign air environment might carry more weight. After all, Mr Custard, whoever he is, correctly identifies that the pig is seriously deficient in the A/A role. However, it was, is and will remain a far superior strike platform to the F/A 18, on any criteria you care to name. The Hornet did a good job in Iraq, but the Pig would have done just as well, albeit without the flexibility in the DCA and escort roles!


The argument needs to be had, but lets understand the issues we're talking about. If you want to get rid of the pig, fine, but you need to be clear that this will mean that the F-18 is the only air strike asset Australia will have for more than the next decade, up until whenever JSF is ready. Don't argue for the F-111's retirement based on some pipe dream that it might result in the sudden appearance of Strike Eagles at Amberley!

cheers,

SW

[Ruffus]

Swingwing, point taken and maybe quite close to the target which would be a crying shame :{

But if the Pigs were to be withdrawn, would we not be able to 'trade-in' the Bugs for a lease on Super-Bugs? if we are going to be left with only the hornet surely it would make sense to have a more capable version?

Would the def dept not have any sway over the way this choice would be made??:confused:

I guess the poli's always know best about these things...:hmm:

[Snowballs]

I guess it is easy to mock the poli's or any non airforce type but when the airforce albeit ADFA employ a person like Take…y R.y, who was supposedly dismissed from AN for th..t, give a dog a bone. Get your own house in order before making political dispersions.

Regardless the Pig is a great airplane and while it is economically operational, lets hope it keeps flying for a few years yet.

As to an interim type, perhaps the RAAF could consider the F15 on lease for a few years to tide us over. I guess “George” owes us a few brownie points. I think we did the same with the Phantom some years ago.
:8

[Gnadenburg]

F111 versus Royal Australian Navy?

If the long range strike capability of the F111 is irrelevant because of the perceived change in the strategic threat ie: terrorism; why does the Navy/Howard Government have Anti-Air Warfare Frigates on the shopping list? Surely the talk of ex USN Aegis class warships the classic Admiral's Barge syndrome!

If we need sophisticated Aegis warships to fight off hoardes of enemy aircraft , then a long range counter-air/maritime strike platform coupled with the new tankers neccessary too. ie: F111.

There must still be some crippling inter-service politics at play. Or will Aegis provide a capability and political tie up with the Bush Administration's ballistic misslile defence?


F111 Replacement?

Agree with swingwing. We will be short changed. And Strike Eagles we can't afford. How many would the Yanks make available for lease when their own resources stretched anyway? They have the same life of type/JSF introduction problems with their fighters as we do ours.

The F111 can not be replaced with one platform so a combination would be neccessary.

1.New Fighter bombers and tankers. Government is committed to this.

2. P3s with a land attack missile capability. Thought this would be glowingly obvious in the war on terror. This aircraft, from forward bases such as Xmas Island, has a range that stretches to all possible regional terrorist threats. The capability has been used in Kosovo, Afganistan and Iraq. Not glamorous but a dgree of effectiveness commensurate with the financial investment in the capability.

3 Long range capability of delivering special forces for recon/targeting and other stuff they seem to do so well.

4 A politically limited land attack capability for the Navy subs/frigates ie: not cruise missiles.

The above four should cover the loss of capability F111/tankers provided in the long term.

In the short term the government will probably opt for the cheaper loss of capability.

The RAAF should lobby while the iron is hot. For the first time since the 60s and the Indon threat, the taxpaying hoardes will justify the expenditure on long rang weapons due the insecurity of terrorism.

Keeping the above in the context of the best way to kill a muslim terrorist is with another muslim. Diplomacy, arm twisting, intelligence etc.

[Chocks Away]

...interesting show that was on Compass, ABC @ 8pm (11/8/03) about a couple of their crashes and lack of RAAF investigation.

I'm not in there but I hope you all caught it... something to chew on.

:ok:

[FADM]

Re "Therefore, a couple of options present themselves. The two most obvious are a) increase funding above 1.9% of GDP - sounds nice, but doesn't do much for schools and hospitals"

What is wrong with that - Schools and Hospitals are the responsibility of the State Government so isn't it about time they pay for it.

Everyone who nows anything about planes nows that the F/A-18 hornets are pretty crappy so wouldn't it be easy to scrap 30 Hornets and keep the Pigs flying.

And anyone who reckons that the Super Hornet (the Bug is Back) or the Eagle (plug and play jet) can replace the F-111 as an interim fighter needs there head examined.

Pigs forever!

[Captain Custard]

FADM,

Your lack of knowledge of the capabilities of the aircraft mentioned in your post is concerning to the point that your credibility must be questioned! We all (well, those in the know) agree that the pig is a great aeroplane for it's job, but that job is very much a "single issue" task. Go fast, in the dark (preferably #issing down with rain), 1000nm, drop yer bombs and get out. All on your own. But that's's all it can do. A straight-line bomber. It ain't an air to air fighter's @sshole, and any of the hornet, shornet or eagle could despatch a pig while flying backwards! A big part of the task for the RAAF is air defence of ADF assets either here or abroad, and the pig just doesn't cut it.

IF the pigs are very expensive to operate, then the only option is to rent a fleet of Strike Eagles. They'll do a damn good job over almost the same distance as a pig, and also do the job of the hornets (when they konk out) until the mighty F35 arrives (god's gift to mil aviation??!!; I've got my doubts).

[pigprodder]

Chocks Away,

Unfortunately I missed the Compass show the other night (damnit) and I'm curious to hear what the show had to say about the F111 crashes and the lack of investigation. Care to expand a little?

Anyone know if the ABC repeats the show on another day of the week?

Cheers

PP

[Booger]

I believe the show you're referring to is "Australian Story" shown on Monday night. This show is normally re-screened on Saturday (around midday? - refer to your local TV guide).

The episode you're referring to dealt with the F111 crash & loss of the crew near Guyra in 1993.

A terrible tragedy, but personally I felt the show was a very one sided "Frontline-esque" affair which gave no right of reply to the RAAF.

[Swingwing]

I've been waiting for you to join the debate, Booger ! Let's hear your thoughts on the subject of the thread, not just the Oz Story article (which I agree was pretty predictable).

SW

[Sheep Guts]

"History never repeats" that good old Split Enz song mmm

Well Im afraid it aint true. Look at this analogy of past and future.

Didnt we extend the life of the Canberra Bomber ( F-111 NOW), to the Mid sixties( 2006 now), then tried to wait for the new Technology F-111( JSF now), but the order got canned effectively by US Congress(?), so an interim replacement was ordered F-4E( could be F-15C or F-18E now).Why do we do this? We need to be up to date with our machines. Surely when the yanks retired their Pigs we should have gotten the idea. And the Fact that all the US FA-18as are parked in the Mojave, surely we should be parking ours.

Why do we do this? Or are we waitin for Musharif to buy our Hornets and Pigs this time again.

:rolleyes: :uhoh: :\ :{

Regards
Sheep

[FADM]

Captain Custard appears to have little knowledge about aircraft and their intended otherwise he would quite clear understand the importance of keeping the F-111s in service.

Firstly a mixture of Fighter/Strike aircraft is extremely important for the RAAF. While Captain Custard appears to understand the concept of Air Defence as performed by the Hornets (Bug) he clearly doesn't understand the concept of DETERANCE which is performed by the F-111.

While the F-111 may not be a "true bomber" it is the most capable "strike aircraft" still avaliable in the world today. It carries about 1/2 the payload of a B-1B and its range is astounding.

The Hornets in the RAAF are useless when it comes strike. If we launched them from RAAFB Williamtown/Tindal they would hardly get anywhere near another country without refuelling. The amount of ordances it can carry is laughable/:mad: .

The RAAF don't even have enough pilots to fly all the Hornets. There is almost 2 planes for each Hornet pilot!!

Therefore scrap some Hornets and keep the pig flying.

If Captain Custard had any understanding of aviation in the least he would understand the importance of keeping this Fighter/Strike mix and not making it a Fighter/Fighter mix.

From your message I gather you are either a Knuckle (Hornet Pilot), an Engineer or a Burecrat - the three people who don't know what a real plane is.

[wessex19]

Captain Custard.
You are an idiot!!!!!! If you are in the service, I really think the recruiters need a big shake up. Most the guys who I went through flight training with were brought quickly back to earth with a thump if their egos got out of control. My gut feeling tells me the closest you have been to flying a fast jet is with the X-BOX mummy brought you for chrissy. because santa thinks you are a F**kwit and bypassed your house!!!

On another note, while we are on the topic of AEGIS, I was having a drink at HMAS Watson late last year with a few old mates, one who is now a CO of what we would call a major warship, I raised with this former PWO, do you think we should of picked up the 4 Kidd class DDG's to replace ours that were paid off. He thought it would of been good bang for your bucks however the navy was burnt badly by picking up the rust buckets HMAS Manoora and Kanimbla and we just wouldn't have the manpower to support 3 or 4 Kidds. However, it would of greatly improved our air defence capabilities and given us instant tomohawk!!! Food for thought!!

[Booger]

SW, you goaded me into it...!

I have been watching the 2 threads (this & the one in MIL forum) unfold for the last few days, but until now have managed to keep my mouth shut - for a change. :eek:

Regrettably, I see now that you speak the truth re: any "interim replacement" being a pipe dream. It's apparent that the financial position faced by the government is not one of saving money so much as not going further into the red. (Of course, it doesn't stop me propogating the rumour of F15Es for all!!):D

The Canberra to Pig analogy previously given is also very fitting. I cannot believe that the Australian Defence acquisition MO has so consistently been to buy the "A-model" of everything. Time & time again we have seen (and are seeing) extensive delays and cost overruns due unproven types. Why can't we be happy with tried & tested? Why must we bastardise (often for dubious benefit) every type we procure? I wish the TAB offered odds on the JSF incept date sliding because I would bet everything on it. Our track record of capital acquisitions is a fairly sad state of affairs. Of course, the F111 was the most criticised and delayed of all acquisitions but also arguably one of our best buys... perhaps JSF will turn out the same way???:ugh:

On that note, I have mixed emotions on the JSF itself. In theory, I agree with the Defence doctrine it represents: that of USAF "little brother". What bothers me is the loss of an autonomous strategic asset that the F111 represented. You cannot put a price on the foreign perception of force projection the F111 offered. We like to say the ADF has the "big 3" strategic deterrents: SAS, Subs & F111s. I'm sure most would agree the Collins' Class are experiencing some "A-model" teething problems at the moment, leaving us with the overworked & underpaid SAS after the demise of the Pig.

As a jet, the F35 doesn't really do it for me - a stealthy, single engine Hornet albeit with "sensor fusion" (obligatory fighter catch-cry of the new millenia). Although a great technological leap forward, I lament the return to Hornet sized payloads and combat radii. (GWII anecdotes are rife with stories of limited tanker assets constraining strike ops due to the large numbers of lawn darts & bumblebees requiring multiple pre/post strike refuels).

Of greater concern to me in this whole caper is the aggressive antipathy shown towards the F111 by the likes of (purportedly) smart members of the RAAF. Although it's easy to dismiss the D-cat drivel of the likes of Captain Custard, it's far more disappointing to read the anti-Pigmatism of more experienced operators who should know better. Their demand for a "final solution" is so vitriolic it's as if the source of all fighter problems could be directly attributed to the Pig: "Dam their expensive hides, if it wasn't for the F111 we'd have goggles, (decent) jammers, AESA radar and ALR2000 !??!" ;)

Banter is all good fun in the bar after a good stoush, but when so-called "comrades-in-arms" embark upon ill-informed rants it's just plain bad-form.

At the end of the day we're all on the same team, so get on board motherfcukers and support the mighty Pig!!!! (til 2009 at least!!) :ok:

[FADM]

Yeah Booger I am with you - the show was fully one sided.

While I do feel sorry for the families that lost their loved ones, the ABC just turned the whole show into a bit of "Socialist/Lefty" propoganda.

:mad:

:{ = Peter von Gimpenstein

[ftrplt]

Sheepguts,

RAAF F18's are F18A airframes with F18C systems and software. The reason USN F18A's are parked is because they flog them to death in a 1/4 of the years we do. The fatigue life of our F18's is managed to the n'th degree, something US forces dont do (because they know their replacements will come).


FADM,

fighter manning is the best it has been for years, the SQNs if not now, will soon be fully manned; childish argument based on numbers. P.S: Why would you launch a strike from Williamtown?? (No 's' in Williamtown by the way)

RAAF F111's can carry no more sophisticated weaponary than an F18. (cant wait for AGM-142 to come into service!!)

An F15E would 'outstrike' an F111 any day, the F111 is NOT THE MOST CAPABLE STRIKE ACFT AVAILABLE. It will also outfight an F18 in a combat scenario and give the F15C a run for its money in A/A (the F15E is a better platform, the F15C guys more experienced in A/A, so I would give it to the C's. If the RAAF flew 15E's we would scare the pants of USAF 15C's)






Booger, just how many F111's are fully combat capable these days?? (I dont mind if you dont answer!) ;)

As we have said, should have blown off the F18 upgrade, and ordered 15E's 10 years ago to repace both.

[FADM]

ftrplt,

Quote: "An F15E would 'outstrike' an F111 any day, the F111 is NOT THE MOST CAPABLE STRIKE ACFT AVAILABLE."

The F-15E would outstrike an F-111. :rolleyes: yeah?

Interesting how that wasn't the case in the 1991 Gulf War.

However,
Quote: "It will also outfight an F18 in a combat scenario " I agree with this because Hornets are crap.

I also do accept you argument about the Armanent - I don't dispute that the Hornet can carry just as modern armaments - just it can't carry as many. And Re: the selection of the Popeye - two words "Burecrats" and "Engineers"

It all comes down to PAYLOAD and RANGE!

Also ftrplt if you really are a Fighter Pilot then you would understand the importance of having the Fighter/Strike mix of the Hornet/F-111. If you don't and you are really a fighter pilot you must be from the RNZAF and fly the almight P-3 fighter turboprop


Edit:
Okay before Ftrplt has a cry about the fact that I didn't mention that the F-15E was not yet fully combat ready for the Gulf War, I acknowledge that here - but it did still fly in the conflict!

The F-15E wasn't fully combat ready because there was some integration problems with the LANTIRN (turning night into day...).

[Fox3snapshot]

In Flight International 5-11 August 2003 :

BAE Systems Australia is to equip RAAF GD F111's with night vision capable cockpit and external lighting.

Am confused as to why contracts are still being issued if they will be withdrwn from service well ahead of the planned retirement date.

:ooh:

[ftrplt]

F3S,

the NVG contract would have been started quite a while ago.

Its only a Defence proposal to early retire the F111, Government hasnt made it policy yet.

[Gnadenburg]

wessex

Tomahawk raises the argument regarding cruise misslies and our defence policy. Aswell as the partial replacement of the F111 capability.

I understand that the reason we don't have long range missiles is a fear of their proliferation in the region. Presently, the conventional threat is relatively limited fighter-bombers.

Cruise missiles amongst enemies raise new problems. The advantage of distance we have now in our defence, turns right back around into a nightmare disadvantage. Cruise missile platforms can launch from any point of the compass and at distances which make point defence of a few strategic targets the only defensive option.

If the RAAF loses the F111 capability it would be difficult to justify frigates, AEGIS and submarines. A patrol boat style navy with more concentration in the area of army support would make more sense to those who see no role in long range weapons systems.

A tough world now and hope they get the strucure right.

[Sheep Guts]

Gnadenburg brings up a good point and that is LONG RANGE weapon systems. The closest foreign land mas to Australia outside New Guienea is Timor which is a around 350nm -385nm from Darwin. . But the rest of the Land masses and possible fows are much further than this. I think the " White Paper" has still credible points, but really we need to think Globally and not remain content in our Remote Continent.

If the F-111 is out dated lets get something to replace it "PRONTO" not wait forsome Machine that hasnt been proven. We allways go for the non proven Aircraft. Sometimes I admit this comes off like the C-130 but sometimes it bounces us like the inital phase of the F-111 aquisition.

ftrplt: Fair enough but let me tell you that Airframe hours versus Calender year age. Has allways been a questionable one. With an Airframe that gets the starins of a fighter we need to "er" more on the side of replacement. Thats another reason why the US gets rid of theres.

Lets get F-18 Es and F15ES what the heck! Lets spend some of my taxes Mr Howard and I want a free ticket to the Amberely Air Show

Regards
Sheep

[The_Cutest_of_Borg]

Your Taxes SG?? I thought you were working in the Caribbean... probably for the express purpose of avoiding paying them...;)

[Fox3snapshot]

Yes, it is certainly a down under issue, but a lot of people avoid this section of the forums because of the narky and whinging comments that typically follow.

Why not move ths post and similar to the military forums area where it is far more appropriate and is exposed to a more realistic audience.

There have certainly been some constructive posts on the issue but there are some in the fraternity who have some very credible input (globally) that will not venture into this section of the forum, so effectively we are not seeing the best of the responses.

Just a suggestion of course..........

:)

[ftrplt]

Tomahawks have their place but are far from the be all and end all. Very reliant on real time intelligence, not something we will always be able to get from the US, and something we will never have ourselves to the required fidelity.

Many heads scratched and hairs pulled due to Tomahawk issues in GWII.

[Captain Custard]

Wessex,

Thanks for the compliments. When you get to Mach 2, describe it to me and I'll decide whether you're telling the truth. Until then, go back/stick to driving boats.

FADM,

I maintain the F15E IS a strike machine. It just also happens to be a bloody good A to A jet as well. My whole point is "affordable defence"; being able to hit Jakarta with refuelled F15Es being run much more cheaply than a fleet of pigs makes sense to me. And the pig IS a "real bomber". That's all it is. Nothing more. And further, we're talking about aeroplanes, laddy. "Planes" shave wood.

[Sheep Guts]

Talk about ego central.......

Why is it? Pilots these days act like Anal Retentative Chuck Yeager wannabees.....:p :E

Come on Guys act your age

Sheepster
:E

[Gnadenburg]

Captain Custard

So tell us about yourself and tell us about Mach 2 in a Hornet!

Truscott, Caldwell and the like would be rolling in their graves seeing how a Hollywood movie and a banana up the bum has pervaded your fighter culture.

Your an advocate of strategic bombing reference Jakarta? Tell us more.

[Soulman]

Mach 2 in a Hornet? It's only capable of Mach 1.7!!! :p

But then again, maybe nose down from 55,000ft, full afterburner - who knows?

I sure as hell would like to give it a try! ;)

As I said earlier in the thread, I still think F-15E's or Super Hornets are the way to go.

Whilst on the topic...

What are all these ideas on striking Indonesian targets? Don't you think you're jumping the gun, even just a little bit? :confused:

I mean sure, they may be the only targets that we perceive as capable of posing a threat, but I bet the Americans didn't think the Taliban from Afghanistan were capable of hi-jacking four airliners and destorying the WTC, Pentagon and countless lives.

A little bit premature don't you think? :hmm:

Cheers,

Souls.

[Captain Custard]

Sheepgizzards,
I was merely defending myself against what I considered unnecessary vitriole from wessex, if that's OK.

Gnadenberg,
You're so gullible.

Soulman,
Given the opinions on this thread about the overwhelming need to keep these fling wings, is it not unreasonable to raise the issue of what the hell you're gunna do with them?? Sorry if I was actually giving them a task. Are they going to be tasked to fly, all on their lonesome, over hundreds of miles of enemy territory, with no support, to drop a few bombs or missiles to act as a deterrent or to destroy Osama in a cave? In today's climate, would they be used this way? Sure, in the 60s and 70s, when they were conceived, they had no threat in the near north and were the perfect device to get bombs a long way (with no tankers, and no other fighter-type jets that would go the distance) to keep the communist Indons at bay. But now, things are different.

The Iraq war proved that: I reckon we would probably be drawn into a regional conflict or assault on terrorists where a Close Air Support type mission (not with Ginweels and smoke!!!) would be the go. A manoeuvrable, dual-role jet would be much more beneficial. And as I said in my previous post, it's all about cost. For the money needed to run a few pigs, we may be able to have a couple of squadrons of F15Es, supported by F18s with overall much more strike power and much greater serviceability.

And if it's ships you want to hit, then let them come to within a couple of hundred miles of the coast, then let them have it with bucketloads of fighters with 'poons. You don't have to bomb them as the sailors are waving farewell to their families at the dock. Besides, today's politics would kill that idea dead quick smart. You start being too aggressive these days, and you run the risk of a small nuke coming our way. Defend the farm, by all means, but watch who you're hitting with your big (F111) stick.

Time for the pigs to join the Concrode at the bar!

And Ronnie, please keep one going for airshows, like you should have done with the Mirage (come to think of it, it was a pig pilot that wouldn't keep any pointies, was it not?).

[Gnadenburg]

Gullible?

I was probing in a desperate hope you were not the product of my tax!

"Horrido" with whoever you meet on the 090 at 50 in PC Land.