Defence plan to scrap F-111s
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.
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.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark side of the moon
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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??
I guess the poli's always know best about these things...
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??
I guess the poli's always know best about these things...
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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.
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.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: ...second left, past the lights.
Posts: 1,101
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
...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.
I'm not in there but I hope you all caught it... something to chew on.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Melbourne, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pigs
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!
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!
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere on earth
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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).
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).
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
"Australian Story"
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.
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.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
SW
Props are for boats!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: An Asian Hub
Age: 56
Posts: 994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"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.
Regards
Sheep
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.
Regards
Sheep
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Melbourne, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Get you facts right Captain Custard you gimp
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/
.
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.
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/
. 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.
Last edited by FADM; 15th Aug 2003 at 15:25.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!!
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!!
Alright... I'll bite!!!
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.
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!!)
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???
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!!)
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.
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!!)
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???
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!!)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Melbourne, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australian Story
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.
= Peter von Gimpenstein
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.
= Peter von Gimpenstein
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.
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.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Melbourne, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another Gimp with no idea
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. 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...).
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.
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...).
Last edited by FADM; 15th Aug 2003 at 16:18.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middle East
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also Posted in Military Forums
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.
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.