Aussie MRH-90
Trojan - the answer as to who, what, when and where the RAAF gets deployed does not lie with the RAAF.
If the pollies wanted Fast Jets in theatre, they would be there. They don't so they aren't.
If the pollies wanted Fast Jets in theatre, they would be there. They don't so they aren't.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'500n wrote'--
kb
I don't doubt what you say re the US.
But I would much rather be in bed with the US than the Cluster eff of the EU
and having to deal with decisions by committee / vagaries of European Governements. "Oh no, sorry, you can't overfly our country on the way to bomb Liby
kb
I don't doubt what you say re the US.
But I would much rather be in bed with the US than the Cluster eff of the EU
and having to deal with decisions by committee / vagaries of European Governements. "Oh no, sorry, you can't overfly our country on the way to bomb Liby
Sure some European countries (not the least France) have a very dubious history when it comes to loyalty and putting their own interest above the others, Taiwan comes to mind.
The US is indeed a fairly trustworthy allie, a good friend to have and they deserve the benefit of the doubt.
If the general feeling about the European countries in Australia is really that unfavorable , even today, then sure, don't buy any weapons from us, that's your perogative and I respect that.
I hope the future will proove you wrong about us but I'm not certain it will on all accounts, systemic pacifism and misplaced feelings of righteous indignation still remain strong among some people over here, sorry to say.
Thread Starter
Two reasons the Oz pollies don't want our fast jets, more helos, tanks, our artillery etc in theatre are 1. cost and 2. potential for collateral damage and "bad" publicity.
Trojan
Not trying to pick a fight but you are wrong re the F18s in the MEAO.
I'm not sure the C130 and P3 crews who have been deployed and constantly fly into the 'hot' area for 9 years with some guys over 4 deployments would think its all that low intensity.
It may not be WWII but even being shot at once is probably real enough.
I do agree the army is doing the main lifting however and deserve the best airlift/support that we can give them.As already mentionrd its not up to the RAAF when and what it goes to war with.
Not trying to pick a fight but you are wrong re the F18s in the MEAO.
I'm not sure the C130 and P3 crews who have been deployed and constantly fly into the 'hot' area for 9 years with some guys over 4 deployments would think its all that low intensity.
It may not be WWII but even being shot at once is probably real enough.
I do agree the army is doing the main lifting however and deserve the best airlift/support that we can give them.As already mentionrd its not up to the RAAF when and what it goes to war with.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kbrockman
"If the general feeling about the European countries in Australia is really that unfavorable , even today, then sure, don't buy any weapons from us, that's your perogative and I respect that."
I doubt what I wrote is the "general feeling", we do have a huge e European population here. It is from the perspective of a white, anglo saxon who heard about the embargo from Vietnam vets and since then my own reading and of course the military procurement stuff ups since I became interested in it - late 1980's onwards and especially those recent and very public fiascos.
As has been posted
"Building here a European boat with an American system and we can't even get the 'blocks' right, hold on tight for that mess."
If we are so small, why do we need to re invent the wheel as above.
Are we facing any threat that is so vastly different from anyone else,
especially the US who deploys the world over, that we THINK we need to design our own ship ?
"If the general feeling about the European countries in Australia is really that unfavorable , even today, then sure, don't buy any weapons from us, that's your perogative and I respect that."
I doubt what I wrote is the "general feeling", we do have a huge e European population here. It is from the perspective of a white, anglo saxon who heard about the embargo from Vietnam vets and since then my own reading and of course the military procurement stuff ups since I became interested in it - late 1980's onwards and especially those recent and very public fiascos.
As has been posted
"Building here a European boat with an American system and we can't even get the 'blocks' right, hold on tight for that mess."
If we are so small, why do we need to re invent the wheel as above.
Are we facing any threat that is so vastly different from anyone else,
especially the US who deploys the world over, that we THINK we need to design our own ship ?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Green
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kindda makes me laugh to read about "countries being loyal" and so on when history teaches that NO one country will be loyal to NO ONE if it does not serve its own interrests...And our american friends are exactly the same, except they've only had some 200 years to exert put into practice their "loyalty" (Suez for example...)
Self interest, self interest, self interest...and if you don't trust the europeans, as someone said, don't buy... There is another thread dealing with issues about putting all your eggs in one basket...
BTW, I seem to recall that Seasprite was a all-round success for the RAN...
Self interest, self interest, self interest...and if you don't trust the europeans, as someone said, don't buy... There is another thread dealing with issues about putting all your eggs in one basket...
BTW, I seem to recall that Seasprite was a all-round success for the RAN...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"BTW, I seem to recall that Seasprite was a all-round success for the RAN..."
Are you saying that because the Seasprite was US equipment ?
I would call it another case of our DoD deciding that they know better
and can turn a sow's ear into a silk purse - in this particular case, a 1960's
decaying helicopter that the US couldn't give away into a state of the art,
current platform.
I think the above is one of the best examples of where by trying to
do things on the cheap by reinventing the wheel, we screwed up big time
- $1 billion on this alone. How many new, off the shelf helos, spares, training and flying time could have been purchased with that $1 billion ?
Are you saying that because the Seasprite was US equipment ?
I would call it another case of our DoD deciding that they know better
and can turn a sow's ear into a silk purse - in this particular case, a 1960's
decaying helicopter that the US couldn't give away into a state of the art,
current platform.
I think the above is one of the best examples of where by trying to
do things on the cheap by reinventing the wheel, we screwed up big time
- $1 billion on this alone. How many new, off the shelf helos, spares, training and flying time could have been purchased with that $1 billion ?
Thread Starter
Interesting that Seasprites flown by our Kiwi cousins, Poland, Egypt seem to work fine. It was not the airframe but rather Navy/DMO trying to build an experimental model in the avionics area...the cop out was old airframes. The airframe bit including engines etc etc worked real fine...
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you check the history books I think you will find that Britain and Russia were co- chairman of the peace agreement after the French/ Indo China war under the auspices of the UN so neither of them could really offer assistance to either side except surreptitiously.
TBM Legend is right about the Kiwi Seasprites -v- the Australian ones. The Kiwi models worked and continue to work because they simply refurbished the existing airframes, where the Australians tried to turn an old Apple Mac into an iPod.
As to the RAAF not "really" being involved in the 'Stan... I think there's be a few P3 crews who'd be quite willing to take you to task over that. (But to some, I appreciate, it doesn't really count unless you land your aircraft right on the FEBA every night, break out a MRE and then dig a shellscrape under the wing.)
Meanwhile... back to the title of this thread. The best option would be to hand the MHR-90s to civil contractors (for police, SES work etc?) so they can be what they're designed to be - civil helicopters (not that anyone could afford to operate them) and then buy some real military helicopters.
As the Swedes have done.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trojan
I beg to differ mate. Whilst we brought a few back because our pods were crap and ROEs were tight, we did drop ordnance on numerous occasions in Iraq.
And while the HVA escort missions were tedious and uneventful, I submit to you that we freed up other coalition assets to join the fight.
...but suffice to say they deployed, but did not actually see any real combat.
And while the HVA escort missions were tedious and uneventful, I submit to you that we freed up other coalition assets to join the fight.
Trojan
Not trying to pick a fight but you are wrong re the F18s in the MEAO.
I'm not sure the C130 and P3 crews who have been deployed and constantly fly into the 'hot' area for 9 years with some guys over 4 deployments would think its all that low intensity.
It may not be WWII but even being shot at once is probably real enough.
I do agree the army is doing the main lifting however and deserve the best airlift/support that we can give them.As already mentionrd its not up to the RAAF when and what it goes to war with.
Not trying to pick a fight but you are wrong re the F18s in the MEAO.
I'm not sure the C130 and P3 crews who have been deployed and constantly fly into the 'hot' area for 9 years with some guys over 4 deployments would think its all that low intensity.
It may not be WWII but even being shot at once is probably real enough.
I do agree the army is doing the main lifting however and deserve the best airlift/support that we can give them.As already mentionrd its not up to the RAAF when and what it goes to war with.
The P-3 and C-130 guys are doing a great job in their respective roles. Their deployments are relatively short, but the job they perform is essential. I dont know any P-3 guys personally but I have spoken to them and I know they are constantly over the AO; hats off to them. Unfortunately, due to lack of equipment and training, the RAAF hasn't been in a position to provide tac airdrop for a long time, so most of the ALG sorties are intra-theatre admin transport. The only guys who are actually mixing it with the enemy on a daily basis are the Army CH-47 crews.
Afghanistan has been ongoing for eleven years and the RAAF are yet to drop a single bomb or fly a single FJ sortie over that country, why? Cost? Not good enough when they can afford to send them to the US! The same applies to the Army's Blackhawks, which have deployed to far more AOs than the Hornets, but still not to where they are most needed. And the Tiger... eleven years and still not operational. I have made the point elsewhere and Ill make it again; air assets (in particular our fighter force) are the single most expensive capability in the ADF. Why are they not earning their keep? If you believe a war is worth fighting you can't have some commit all and others commit none.
OZbiggles, I don't want to pick a fight either, but I have seen friends deploy on repeated, long deployments. I have seen some die and others come back and ruin their lives. There needs to be some accountability WRT properly supporting our soldiers with sound and deployable kit.
I agree with 500Ns remarks regarding OTS gear. In some ways (Bushmaster) we have been world leaders. In others, such as battlefield helicopters, we should follow those who do more combat flying than anyone else and buy OTS.
Trojan, you are absolutely correct that our soldiers deserve the assets that the ADF has and they need eg: Tigers, more CH 47 and some fast air in Afghanistan.
On the Tiger front, you are incorrect. They are operational and have no operational restrictions. The fighting unit is operational by night with all weapons systems, the question should be why are they not in Afghanistan? The French have been there with theirs since 2009!
On the MRH, Tiger front, maybe those projects are too big for such a small army to handle? I think the benefits of putting MRH, CH47 & Blackhawk in ALG in the RAAF & Tiger in ACG RAAF, should be given serious consideration &'would be worthy of debate. They are expensive and capable assets that deserve the appropriate level of management however, I reckon the Australian Army Air Corps head honchoes would resist that heavily for fear of losing their
empire? Surely an organization like the RAAF would be able to support it better and I doubt the operators/tradesmen would mind changing uniforms?
On the Tiger front, you are incorrect. They are operational and have no operational restrictions. The fighting unit is operational by night with all weapons systems, the question should be why are they not in Afghanistan? The French have been there with theirs since 2009!
On the MRH, Tiger front, maybe those projects are too big for such a small army to handle? I think the benefits of putting MRH, CH47 & Blackhawk in ALG in the RAAF & Tiger in ACG RAAF, should be given serious consideration &'would be worthy of debate. They are expensive and capable assets that deserve the appropriate level of management however, I reckon the Australian Army Air Corps head honchoes would resist that heavily for fear of losing their
empire? Surely an organization like the RAAF would be able to support it better and I doubt the operators/tradesmen would mind changing uniforms?
G'day Trojan
I completely agree with you regarding giving our troops what they need to do the job, I think we all do. I also agree the army is and has been doing the majority of the heavy lifting. And probably like you too I get wet eyes every time I see the families of fallen soldiers dealing with the loss of a loved one and fear for what repeated deployments does to ones life.
But I firmly believe all elements of the ADF do what is required of them by their political masters. I'm not a knuck but I know what the fighter boys have done and what they are capable of if required. The cost of sending an Australian fighter Sqn to the MEAO now vs the amount of work they would do is probably a main reason for there being no deployment. I remember the bidding war an American Sqn had to be involved in a big operation in Iraq post 'mission accomplished' simply because they had been doing months of nothing but CAP. In addition I think we are dealing with the issue of how long we are going to have to keep the classic F18 going before the F35 arrives.
In regards to the MRH 90 I think if it had delivered what it promised we would all be happy now. I think the logic however of buying off the shelf American would have made far more sense, particularly as they are the ones we are going to play with and the support in country that would provide.
As for airdrop, your after my heart there!!!!
I completely agree with you regarding giving our troops what they need to do the job, I think we all do. I also agree the army is and has been doing the majority of the heavy lifting. And probably like you too I get wet eyes every time I see the families of fallen soldiers dealing with the loss of a loved one and fear for what repeated deployments does to ones life.
But I firmly believe all elements of the ADF do what is required of them by their political masters. I'm not a knuck but I know what the fighter boys have done and what they are capable of if required. The cost of sending an Australian fighter Sqn to the MEAO now vs the amount of work they would do is probably a main reason for there being no deployment. I remember the bidding war an American Sqn had to be involved in a big operation in Iraq post 'mission accomplished' simply because they had been doing months of nothing but CAP. In addition I think we are dealing with the issue of how long we are going to have to keep the classic F18 going before the F35 arrives.
In regards to the MRH 90 I think if it had delivered what it promised we would all be happy now. I think the logic however of buying off the shelf American would have made far more sense, particularly as they are the ones we are going to play with and the support in country that would provide.
As for airdrop, your after my heart there!!!!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question for those in the know.
Can the RAAF still do para load follows of Boats / soldiers
like the Zodiacs. I would assume yes but since we are talking
dropping supplies, thought I would ask.
Can the RAAF still do para load follows of Boats / soldiers
like the Zodiacs. I would assume yes but since we are talking
dropping supplies, thought I would ask.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 500N
As has been posted
"Building here a European boat with an American system and we can't even get the 'blocks' right, hold on tight for that mess."
If we are so small, why do we need to re invent the wheel as above.
Are we facing any threat that is so vastly different from anyone else,
especially the US who deploys the world over, that we THINK we need to design our own ship ?
"Building here a European boat with an American system and we can't even get the 'blocks' right, hold on tight for that mess."
If we are so small, why do we need to re invent the wheel as above.
Are we facing any threat that is so vastly different from anyone else,
especially the US who deploys the world over, that we THINK we need to design our own ship ?
The AWD is the Spanish F100 design... Spanish-designed hull & basic systems, with the US SPY-1D AEGIS system.
Spain has built 4 successfully, and a 5th is nearing completion.
All the RAN has done is to swap out some radios, etc for RAN-specific units, and ask for a couple-three other really minor changes.
The problems came in when the shipyards stuffed up some basic math, and failed to be able to translate Spanish to Oz-English.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
500N - yes, this capability is maintained in the C-130H.
GK - I think you'd be surprised how different internally the Hobarts are to the Spanish F104 upon which they are based.
Plus, the AWD hull block issues have been misreported, and are more related to workmanship (or lack thereof) by a particular Australian company than misreading blueprints.
The classic Hornets will make it to planned F-35 IOC and then a little bit more...no more Rhinos please.
GK - I think you'd be surprised how different internally the Hobarts are to the Spanish F104 upon which they are based.
Plus, the AWD hull block issues have been misreported, and are more related to workmanship (or lack thereof) by a particular Australian company than misreading blueprints.
The classic Hornets will make it to planned F-35 IOC and then a little bit more...no more Rhinos please.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re the AWD: what about the enlisted crew accommodation? I've heard reports that the Spanish 'fit' is a total ballsup. Bunks four high and only 1.8m long - limited to that length by structural bulkheads. Might do for the 95 percentile Spanish conscript sailor who might get to spend the occasional one night out of harbour. For the 95 percentile Australian volunteer sailor with our coastline and area of operational responsibility? And bunks four high for three month deployments? Don't think so. Next they'll be putting them in hammocks.
I've heard reports, unconfirmed, that they're moving bulkheads to make the bunks longer.
$$$$$$$$$$!
DMO strikes again.
I've heard reports, unconfirmed, that they're moving bulkheads to make the bunks longer.
$$$$$$$$$$!
DMO strikes again.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GK
My bad, I meant design or should i say put together a ship
based on bits from here, there and everywhere.
Why can't we just buy the US Ship, lock, stock and barrel ?
We are using the Aegis system, probably more than a few
US Missiles, why try to fit this into a different hull when
the US has already worked most things out already.
If they are good enough for the US Navy, why not our Navy ?
Are our roles and tasks that different ? We seem to be patrolling
the same waters in the Gulf and doing the same job.
I'm being a bit of a devil's advocate here, nothing more.
My bad, I meant design or should i say put together a ship
based on bits from here, there and everywhere.
Why can't we just buy the US Ship, lock, stock and barrel ?
We are using the Aegis system, probably more than a few
US Missiles, why try to fit this into a different hull when
the US has already worked most things out already.
If they are good enough for the US Navy, why not our Navy ?
Are our roles and tasks that different ? We seem to be patrolling
the same waters in the Gulf and doing the same job.
I'm being a bit of a devil's advocate here, nothing more.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just as a point of reference,
how are the New Zealand military doing with their NH90's or is it still to early to tell ?
Do they also have the same problems the Australians seem to have ?
how are the New Zealand military doing with their NH90's or is it still to early to tell ?
Do they also have the same problems the Australians seem to have ?