F111 in trouble
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: USA
Age: 67
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Taildragger67
a) boys in the sim figuring out what to do;
b) less nasty liquid to fall onto Moreton Bay and get the locals riled.
b) less nasty liquid to fall onto Moreton Bay and get the locals riled.
They could have just done the worlds longest dump and burn
The F111 has been a very effective aircraft for Australia. Those doubting the eventual cost effectiveness of the aircraft, should consider what the proposed alternative was in the early seventies. If F111 failed to make operational status in the RAAF.
Government & the RAAF came up with an alternatively structured, all fighter force. It involved disbanding a Mirage squadron, obtaining another 24 F4's on top of the 24 already leased and a direct purchase of 9 to 12 KC135 tankers.
Twenty four, initially very expensive F111 aircraft, eventually provided cost effective and unequalled regional capability!
Is there another aircraft, that in such small numbers ( 24 ), could provide a modern day deterent to regional ambitions? The F22 is the only aircraft that could 'disturb the Asian psyche' in the way the F111 is purported to have done in the 80's & 90's.
Will the Yanks sell it to us? Beazley no. It would be humiliation for Labor to go down the F22 path because they wouldn't get it without a pro-US foreign policy and troop committment. But John Howard would be able to secure the aircraft for the RAAF.
Perhaps the real fear of the F22 for the Liberal Party, is political. How would Asian nations look at countering an Australian F22 capability? Rhetoric and asymmetric warfare? For example: anti-Australian regional sentiments and building up non-conventional forces or support of ( similar to what the Iranians & Syrians have done to counter Israeli military superiority in Lebanon ). Too hot for Howard?
But the F22 would provide true 80's F111 deterent capability in the region. The aircraft revolutionises all aspects of the counter-air mission- whether it be shooting down the opposition's air forces or launching cruise missiles undetected at fixed strategic targets such as airfields.
Twenty four F22's and a smaller thirty odd F35 or F15E purchase? The RAAF will be lucky to have 60 fighters- but I think their current procrastinations will see them with those numbers anyways!
F22 is a somewhat unbalanced capability- but so was the tankerless RAAF F111 force. Proven technology could eventually bring RAAF structure into balance.
Government & the RAAF came up with an alternatively structured, all fighter force. It involved disbanding a Mirage squadron, obtaining another 24 F4's on top of the 24 already leased and a direct purchase of 9 to 12 KC135 tankers.
Twenty four, initially very expensive F111 aircraft, eventually provided cost effective and unequalled regional capability!
Is there another aircraft, that in such small numbers ( 24 ), could provide a modern day deterent to regional ambitions? The F22 is the only aircraft that could 'disturb the Asian psyche' in the way the F111 is purported to have done in the 80's & 90's.
Will the Yanks sell it to us? Beazley no. It would be humiliation for Labor to go down the F22 path because they wouldn't get it without a pro-US foreign policy and troop committment. But John Howard would be able to secure the aircraft for the RAAF.
Perhaps the real fear of the F22 for the Liberal Party, is political. How would Asian nations look at countering an Australian F22 capability? Rhetoric and asymmetric warfare? For example: anti-Australian regional sentiments and building up non-conventional forces or support of ( similar to what the Iranians & Syrians have done to counter Israeli military superiority in Lebanon ). Too hot for Howard?
But the F22 would provide true 80's F111 deterent capability in the region. The aircraft revolutionises all aspects of the counter-air mission- whether it be shooting down the opposition's air forces or launching cruise missiles undetected at fixed strategic targets such as airfields.
Twenty four F22's and a smaller thirty odd F35 or F15E purchase? The RAAF will be lucky to have 60 fighters- but I think their current procrastinations will see them with those numbers anyways!
F22 is a somewhat unbalanced capability- but so was the tankerless RAAF F111 force. Proven technology could eventually bring RAAF structure into balance.
Last edited by Gnadenburg; 23rd Jul 2006 at 12:18.
Evertonian
Seeing that we've had years of "industry participation", we must surely be in a position to buy the Licence for new build F111's. We can get the software chaps from the Collins Subs to put modern avionics in it (perhaps the Seasprite chaps if they're too busy), maybe we can squeeze the F101 engines into the airframe?
By jingo, I think I've got it!
By jingo, I think I've got it!
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Buster
I hear you brother.
I dont care what modern military strategists and the USAF think. Lower and Faster is the way ahead.
It was in favour during the cold war and the principle still holds true today, it is hard to hit an aircraft that is capable of doing 800kts at low level. I have it on good authority that this is the reason why the pig doesnt need a MAWS, because no manpad in existence is capable of chasing it down.
Gnandenburg: I dont understand why we could possibly want the F-22 when we already have a superior platform!! No one can really convince me that with a bit of money and effort by our friends at DSTO, we cant modify the pig to have superior low-observable and radar cross sectional characteristics to the F-22.
I hear you brother.
I dont care what modern military strategists and the USAF think. Lower and Faster is the way ahead.
It was in favour during the cold war and the principle still holds true today, it is hard to hit an aircraft that is capable of doing 800kts at low level. I have it on good authority that this is the reason why the pig doesnt need a MAWS, because no manpad in existence is capable of chasing it down.
Gnandenburg: I dont understand why we could possibly want the F-22 when we already have a superior platform!! No one can really convince me that with a bit of money and effort by our friends at DSTO, we cant modify the pig to have superior low-observable and radar cross sectional characteristics to the F-22.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that 25% of the total air force budget goes into keeping the F-111 flying.
Whilst I love the aeroplane, surely we could get better value for money from a newer platform.
Whilst I love the aeroplane, surely we could get better value for money from a newer platform.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's not forget the mighty C-130H. It's the real hero of all recent operations and has served the ADF exceptionally well over the years; certainly far better than the crazy, new fangled technology of the J. No idea why they persist with it.
I think that it's clear the ADF needs, no must, continue to invest in upgrading existing systems. The F-111 is our "big stick", and is essential to our continued regional superioritiy. I dunno about this JSF thing, but it's clearly less capable than an F-16; you can tell just by looking at it and its single engine.
P05 BE(hons), MSc, PhD, MIEEE, MAIAA, PEng
I think that it's clear the ADF needs, no must, continue to invest in upgrading existing systems. The F-111 is our "big stick", and is essential to our continued regional superioritiy. I dunno about this JSF thing, but it's clearly less capable than an F-16; you can tell just by looking at it and its single engine.
P05 BE(hons), MSc, PhD, MIEEE, MAIAA, PEng
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middle East
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Point0Five
I dunno about this JSF thing, but it's clearly less capable than an F-16; you can tell just by looking at it and its single engine.
P05 BE(hons), MSc, PhD, MIEEE, MAIAA, PEng
P05 BE(hons), MSc, PhD, MIEEE, MAIAA, PEng
??.....Penguin?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just get sick of all these operational types thinking they know whats best for the RAAF, they have had their heads buried in the operational world too long and cant see the big picture.
By contrast Dr Kopp is arguably better informed and in the best position to have an unbiased point of view. After all he has logged several hours in the F-111 simulator and spoke very favourably about its handling characteristics.
Whilst on the topic of post nominals, Dr Kopp has a large list of them.
By contrast Dr Kopp is arguably better informed and in the best position to have an unbiased point of view. After all he has logged several hours in the F-111 simulator and spoke very favourably about its handling characteristics.
Whilst on the topic of post nominals, Dr Kopp has a large list of them.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Footlights College, Oxbridge
Age: 47
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by oldm8
modify the pig to have superior low-observable and radar cross sectional characteristics to the F-22.
I like it! I think I could get pissed with you. but especially:
Originally Posted by oldm8
No idea
Originally Posted by pass-a-frozo
25% of the total air force budget goes into keeping the F-111 flying.
And there must be an taxpayer-funded I*****c school we could close down? Or a hospital, maybe... all those sick and infirm people holding us back
Or an orphanage... you get the idea.
Speaking of huge budgets, apparently the US congress is set to approve the F-22 for export so all the tossers who have been salivating over it for years and repeatedly suggesting the RAFF acquire some, might now be in with a chance to beat the meat with a sense of reality.
Moderator
Buster,
PEng .. Professional Engineer .. not generally in Oz practice .. common in US. Local Oz accreditation via Engineers Australia is CPEng ..Chartered Professional Engineer .. England CEng .... indicates registration standing within the engineering fraternity.
.. and, from the folks who brought you Penguin .. try Ing in the European arena ...
PEng .. Professional Engineer .. not generally in Oz practice .. common in US. Local Oz accreditation via Engineers Australia is CPEng ..Chartered Professional Engineer .. England CEng .... indicates registration standing within the engineering fraternity.
.. and, from the folks who brought you Penguin .. try Ing in the European arena ...
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by john_tullamarine
Buster,
PEng .. Professional Engineer .. not generally in Oz practice .. common in US. Local Oz accreditation via Engineers Australia is CPEng ..Chartered Professional Engineer .. England CEng .... indicates registration standing within the engineering fraternity.
.. and, from the folks who brought you Penguin .. try Ing in the European arena ...
PEng .. Professional Engineer .. not generally in Oz practice .. common in US. Local Oz accreditation via Engineers Australia is CPEng ..Chartered Professional Engineer .. England CEng .... indicates registration standing within the engineering fraternity.
.. and, from the folks who brought you Penguin .. try Ing in the European arena ...
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by tlf
They could have just done the worlds longest dump and burn
Would've been fun to see though. But would've cut down the thinking time for the guys in the sim...
Moderator
..Weasil .. two kinds of engineer, as it turns out ... PE, CPEng, etc .. relate to the slide rule type with uni degrees who design things with bits of tin (like planes), dirt and stuff (like runways) and wires (like FMSs) ...
Mind you, having worked with the other sort at oh-dark-thirty on dirty approaches with lightning and hills and stuff all around .. the real flight eng with an off the shop floor background is worth his weight in gold at times ... and saved our sorry tails on more than one occasion ..
Mind you, having worked with the other sort at oh-dark-thirty on dirty approaches with lightning and hills and stuff all around .. the real flight eng with an off the shop floor background is worth his weight in gold at times ... and saved our sorry tails on more than one occasion ..
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here goes nothing
First time poster long time listener...
This discussion finally made me sign-up and contribute. Hoping I am qualified enough, as I once had a ride in a Sea Hawk.
The F111 debate is one, which I don't believe has thoroughly been examined in the public domain. As one not in the know, and probably don't need to, (apart from the fact that each day I work) the only debate that I have seen is one which resulted in JSF being given the tick and F18 and F111 being waved good buy. No real reason, no real debate.
I think there are a number of other options out there that could provide a better option for replacement.
What about 30 F22 and 65 F18E/F and 12 F18G, and the possibility of a new floating air base for the navy to operate. This is probably in the realms of fantasy, don't worry I am sure the RAN would let the RAAF pilots fly them off and on.
Or 30 F22 and 60 F15X.
Or similarly is it worth looking at taking over 30 F117 from the USAF, I have read that they are looking at retiring this capability, why not acquire these and reserve 6 places for US Pilots, keep them happy, then if they really need them they could re-acquire say 12 after 30 days and the remaining after 60 days notice?
As I have said I have no real operational experience, but I do pay my taxes(most of the time).
Dragon79
This discussion finally made me sign-up and contribute. Hoping I am qualified enough, as I once had a ride in a Sea Hawk.
The F111 debate is one, which I don't believe has thoroughly been examined in the public domain. As one not in the know, and probably don't need to, (apart from the fact that each day I work) the only debate that I have seen is one which resulted in JSF being given the tick and F18 and F111 being waved good buy. No real reason, no real debate.
I think there are a number of other options out there that could provide a better option for replacement.
What about 30 F22 and 65 F18E/F and 12 F18G, and the possibility of a new floating air base for the navy to operate. This is probably in the realms of fantasy, don't worry I am sure the RAN would let the RAAF pilots fly them off and on.
Or 30 F22 and 60 F15X.
Or similarly is it worth looking at taking over 30 F117 from the USAF, I have read that they are looking at retiring this capability, why not acquire these and reserve 6 places for US Pilots, keep them happy, then if they really need them they could re-acquire say 12 after 30 days and the remaining after 60 days notice?
As I have said I have no real operational experience, but I do pay my taxes(most of the time).
Dragon79