Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

SMH article re RAAF buying c-17s

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

SMH article re RAAF buying c-17s

Old 24th Feb 2006, 21:27
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,842
Taildregger67,

38 SQN doesnt need to be re-formed... it already exists.

Caribou, based in Amberley with a detachment in Townsville.

Aussie
Aussie is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2006, 23:40
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 329
PAF,

Ahh yes, good old Kwaj.

Karaoke and line dancing at the Yuk-yuk club with that never-ending popcorn machine; beers at the Caribou Lounge with all those ex-CIA types. The fun never ends. I remember them closing tower services exactly on the hour once, the fact that we were on 3 mile finals didn't seem to matter! At least the P-3 could get there from EDN, that new-fangled J model had to go through TVL when we deployed to Fincastle '02.

ruprecht.

Last edited by ruprecht; 24th Feb 2006 at 23:53.
ruprecht is offline  
Old 25th Feb 2006, 00:41
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Victoria
Age: 58
Posts: 984
Would also love to see the F111 continue to live on forever. Fact is is just won't happen unfortunately
The F111 already takes a sizeable portion of the defence budget just to keep it running.
Captain Sand Dune is offline  
Old 25th Feb 2006, 01:24
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Eden Valley
Posts: 1,732
Originally Posted by Point0Five
An individual's opinion on the generic structure of Qantas, is these days, almost a political view. So it's not a matter of qualification of comment, but whether you believe, in this case, that pilot remuneration is an imperative component of Qantas's makeup, or just an expeditionary platform to reinforce self-serving operations from a long gone reality.

Touche!

But.........

Frozo's virginity with the civilian world needs constant guidance. His cop out rebuttle, where he questions the ethics of industrial strikes, was neither accurate ( as no one suggested this option ) and naively ignorant.

Qantas pilots are a carefully, choreographed, chosen few. Psychometric & personality testing ( which most people fail as evidenced by bitterness on these pages ) lean toward an odd character; where despite passionate loyalty never being reciprocated, their almost "deontological" morality has a strike option erased from the industrial quiver.



Frozo

How does a deontologist ( ? ) march to war on a Bush bandwagon?
Gnadenburg is offline  
Old 25th Feb 2006, 01:27
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Eden Valley
Posts: 1,732
Originally Posted by Captain Sand Dune
Would also love to see the F111 continue to live on forever. Fact is is just won't happen unfortunately
The F111 already takes a sizeable portion of the defence budget just to keep it running.
Wonder if Boeing would do a deal on a small F15/C17 purchase?
Gnadenburg is offline  
Old 25th Feb 2006, 04:33
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,217
Snoop

I'm trying ignore your misguided comments Gnad to prevent thread hijacking. Start a new thread and I'll explain all. By the way Gnad, I have worked in the civilian world (and no, before you make another assumption, not McDonalds during high school) - A lot of people on this site have made a lot of inaccurate assumptions about me simply because they don't like my opinion. You know everyone in the military didn't walk out of school straight into the recruiting office.

Strike out of the question?? I guess that would explain the flood of people posting "No, don't do it" on the townsville pilot industrial action thread??

A deontologist goes to war because he thinks it is the right thing to do. I thought the definition of the word would explain that.

Finacastle 02. That was Scotland?? I did the redeploy

As for air to air refuelling, The J model has all the plumbing etc for air to air refueling. They just didn't get the probe. Don't know why. I guess since they haven't even got externals on the beasts, I'm dreaming about them installing the probe.
Pass-A-Frozo is offline  
Old 26th Feb 2006, 21:04
  #67 (permalink)  
Music Quizmeister
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Can'tberra, ACT Australia
Age: 62
Posts: 230
Taildragger - if your read one of my earlier posts - I answered that question about the RAF.

They started with 4 leased, and are now buying them outright, plus two more (I understand it's been reported open-source).

And Yes, a Chinook will fit. You have to remove the forward and aft rotors, hubs, gearboxes and any pylons, and store the blades and fwd pylon/gearbox inside the helo. Also still have room for a Landrover 110, the 15T crane to re-assemble the Helo, and 43 personnel.

I have a copy of the Boeing booklets on US Military Loads and Pacific Nations Military Loads Cargo Compartment Versatility books if anyone wants to have a look..........
scran is offline  
Old 26th Feb 2006, 23:22
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever I can log on.
Posts: 1,692
Gnads

A well placed source told me two years ago that Boeing had put an offer to the Oz Gov't for leased F15E's to be operated as an interim measure until the JSF enters operational service. I believe that the offer was rejected as it is cheaper to fit the F-18s and AP3C's with standoff weapons to supposedly do the required missions in the interim.
Going Boeing is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2006, 04:59
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Eden Valley
Posts: 1,732
Originally Posted by Going Boeing
Gnads
A well placed source told me two years ago that Boeing had put an offer to the Oz Gov't for leased F15E's to be operated as an interim measure until the JSF enters operational service. I believe that the offer was rejected as it is cheaper to fit the F-18s and AP3C's with standoff weapons to supposedly do the required missions in the interim.

Would be interested in the relative costing of a Boeing commercially guaranteed, leased flightline of F15E's versus operationally capable F111's.

If our 500 million a year F111 budget, only delivers under a dozen war capable aircraft and reducing, a small number of F15's could affordably replace that capability and reduce expectations of the F18 fleet.

Would the structure of a RAAF equipped with F15/F18's be the lowest risk option until a replacement available?
Gnadenburg is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2006, 08:15
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 75
1 & 6 SQN will become F18 squadrons when the F111 is retired, until the JSF arrives. 1 SQN will be at Williamtown and 6SQN will be at Tindal.

We are getting 4x C17s and they will be going to Amberley (via Richmond for a few years).
bob55 is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2006, 08:19
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,217
You know if they plan on keeping any H's at this stage? Will they keep all H's at 36 and form a new SQN for the 17's?
Pass-A-Frozo is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2006, 08:21
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 75
C-17s are not replacing C130 capability - they are replacing contracted aircraft capability (like the Air Luxor A330).

If anything the C130H will be replaced by the C130J. But there's no hurry. I believe they are upgrading the C130H with new avionics.
bob55 is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2006, 08:24
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,217
I thought they finished that a little while ago. More J's would be good though. A shame they let the option for 24? more expire.
Pass-A-Frozo is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2006, 08:31
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 75
Originally Posted by Pass-A-Frozo
I thought they finished that a little while ago. More J's would be good though. A shame they let the option for 24? more expire.
Yeah actually they have. Considering all the money they are spending on new aircraft (JSF, Wedgetail, A330 and now C17) I guess they have to draw the line somewhere.
bob55 is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2006, 13:26
  #75 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,637
Aussie,

Thanks - I stand corrected ("No, you were wrong!"). Did I mean 35? I've been out of the country for a while but I seem to recall there was a rejig in ALG a few years back and I thought one of the sqns - 35 or 38 - got folded.

Anyway Scran, thanks - sorry I missed that in your post. I knew the RAF had converted to purchase but wasn't aware of the extra two they'd gone for. I also checked the Boeing website and agree that a C17 could swallow a Chook. Surprising; they just don't look that big in photos but they're bigger than a Starlifter.

Good luck Bs & Gs - with all those new types coming in, looks like you've got lots of new toys to play with!! The Pt Cook museum had better start making some room for new exhibits...
Taildragger67 is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2006, 03:12
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Eden Valley
Posts: 1,732
Originally Posted by bob55
1 & 6 SQN will become F18 squadrons when the F111 is retired, until the JSF arrives. 1 SQN will be at Williamtown and 6SQN will be at Tindal.

We are getting 4x C17s and they will be going to Amberley (via Richmond for a few years).

So the RAAF will have 5 fighter squadrons with around 40 operational Hornets after F111 retires? Is that a lot of unneccessary bureaucracy or just keeping an unrealistic structure in place for 100 JSF's?

Anyone know why the government abandoned cruise missiles for the Orions yesterday? Political, technical or naval rivalry? On paper, seemed a great capability to have in terms of the aircraft's range and in context of a war on terror.
Gnadenburg is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2006, 12:33
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 75
Originally Posted by Gnadenburg
So the RAAF will have 5 fighter squadrons with around 40 operational Hornets after F111 retires? Is that a lot of unneccessary bureaucracy or just keeping an unrealistic structure in place for 100 JSF's?

Anyone know why the government abandoned cruise missiles for the Orions yesterday? Political, technical or naval rivalry? On paper, seemed a great capability to have in terms of the aircraft's range and in context of a war on terror.
Who says we will only have 40 operational units? F18s are about as common as 737s these days, we can easily 'borrow' a few to tie us over.

You might find they will disband 77 squadron.

And no, they are keeping 1 and 6 SQN operational to maintain a capability. We will have the A330s by then, so the F18 will be able to perform the same role. They could keep the squadrons for a few years without aircraft if they wanted to.
bob55 is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2006, 18:48
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: iNZid
Posts: 200
Pigs

1 Sqn is the oldest RAAF unit and can't be disbanded for traditions sake, hence the reason it turns into a Hornet unit. Just before I left the talk was of 1 and 6 merging when the G model retires, thus pooling all the maint effort into keeping the C's flying...therefore I don't think 6 Sqn will exist as a seperate entitiy until the JSF arrives.

Bad time to be a Nav...you want fries with that?
kmagyoyo is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2006, 19:03
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 213
Who says we will only have 40 operational units? F18s are about as common as 737s these days, we can easily 'borrow' a few to tie us over.
That's right, and all F/A-18s around the world share the same configuration and capabilities regardless of upgrades and model
Point0Five is offline  
Old 1st Mar 2006, 19:05
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 213
1 Sqn is the oldest RAAF unit and can't be disbanded for traditions sake
Worked for Point Cook.......
Point0Five is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.