They don't call the Australians Diggers for nothing... F-111 Disposal
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
I do like these comments on the ADF Serials board
"The US government has already allocated F-111s to community museums in the United States."
"Work that needs to be done to demilitarise the aircraft is defined in a “U.S. Government Demilitarisation Manual” which is freely available online. Currently the Defence Materiel Organisation is actively discouraging potential tenderers from referring to this manual because “reference to the Demilitarisation Manual on its own can be confusing and misleading.” The only thing confusing about the Demilitarisation Manual is that its requirements are significantly less stringent than those imposed by the Australian government!"
"This deterrent factor is now working against the aircraft in that it is deemed to be an ongoing threat. The well-equipped RAAF stopped using the F-111 because the aeroplane was proving difficult to keep in the air. How could a non-nuclear configured, demilitarised airframe, out of the maintenance schedule, and minus engines, pose the slightest threat to anyone, particularly when no other nation on earth operates F-111s?"
Sounds to me like the Aust Gov't just didn't want to go through the hassle.
"The US government has already allocated F-111s to community museums in the United States."
"Work that needs to be done to demilitarise the aircraft is defined in a “U.S. Government Demilitarisation Manual” which is freely available online. Currently the Defence Materiel Organisation is actively discouraging potential tenderers from referring to this manual because “reference to the Demilitarisation Manual on its own can be confusing and misleading.” The only thing confusing about the Demilitarisation Manual is that its requirements are significantly less stringent than those imposed by the Australian government!"
"This deterrent factor is now working against the aircraft in that it is deemed to be an ongoing threat. The well-equipped RAAF stopped using the F-111 because the aeroplane was proving difficult to keep in the air. How could a non-nuclear configured, demilitarised airframe, out of the maintenance schedule, and minus engines, pose the slightest threat to anyone, particularly when no other nation on earth operates F-111s?"
Sounds to me like the Aust Gov't just didn't want to go through the hassle.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the late 1930's, there was no room for design stuff ups
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The F111 was acknowledged (if with GREAT reluctance) as having inadequate performance when compared with contemporary Soviet aircraft of the day. This was rammed down the very unwilling throats of the Pentagon heirarchy by USAF Colonel John Boyd (See:
and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Boyd_(military_strategist).)
However, despite its enormous cost and the long delay in its entry into RAAF service, I think you will find, onetrack, that from a military, but far more importantly, political point of view, it would be considered a great success in RAAF service, for it gave Australia a very credible long range (and most importantly, unsupported) strike capability far, far superior to what the RAAF currently has with its replacement.
Whereas it definitely had inferior performance to first ranking Soviet aircraft as far back as the 1970s, in the environment it would have operated if put into active service with the RAAF, it presented a very real threat to nations best left unnamed here and one that, in more than one moment of very serious political crisis - crises that the vast majority of Australians know nothing about - it gave the Australian government options that although (thankfully) never needed to be implemented, the potential ‘other side’ were very aware of.
I also think most who had anything to do with the aircraft would take you task over your hyperBOWLic (sorry, couldn't resist that
) comment "the seemingly regular losses of F-111's, in non-combat flight". I think most disinterested observers would attest that the loss rate was low by any standard.
In closing - and getting back to the thread title - I agree with 500N. Those airframes could quite easily have been made available to museums rather than dumped the way they were. There seems to me to be far too many in Canberra who are far too willing to destroy or at least minimise any semblance of military tradition in this country.
However, despite its enormous cost and the long delay in its entry into RAAF service, I think you will find, onetrack, that from a military, but far more importantly, political point of view, it would be considered a great success in RAAF service, for it gave Australia a very credible long range (and most importantly, unsupported) strike capability far, far superior to what the RAAF currently has with its replacement.
Whereas it definitely had inferior performance to first ranking Soviet aircraft as far back as the 1970s, in the environment it would have operated if put into active service with the RAAF, it presented a very real threat to nations best left unnamed here and one that, in more than one moment of very serious political crisis - crises that the vast majority of Australians know nothing about - it gave the Australian government options that although (thankfully) never needed to be implemented, the potential ‘other side’ were very aware of.
I also think most who had anything to do with the aircraft would take you task over your hyperBOWLic (sorry, couldn't resist that
) comment "the seemingly regular losses of F-111's, in non-combat flight". I think most disinterested observers would attest that the loss rate was low by any standard.In closing - and getting back to the thread title - I agree with 500N. Those airframes could quite easily have been made available to museums rather than dumped the way they were. There seems to me to be far too many in Canberra who are far too willing to destroy or at least minimise any semblance of military tradition in this country.
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
Wiley
At least one has been named continuously, Indonesia and that wouldn't be giving away anything.
Re "There seems to me to be far too many in Canberra who are far too willing to destroy or at least minimise any semblance of military tradition in this country."
The Gov't - and military - are so tied up with the "UN, anti war, anti gun, anti firearms" they just don't want any type of history along these lines to survive. They seemed destined to want to fight everything in the future with one arm tied up.
Re the F111's, I am sure it would only have taken a couple of people to say so and all the cockpits, canapoy's and even some skeleton of frames could have been saved and displayed. What harm would a cockpit and canopy on display at Oakey do ? Or even the whole crew escape capsule since it can't be too hard to take out considering it is designed like that. It would look great.
At least one has been named continuously, Indonesia and that wouldn't be giving away anything.
Re "There seems to me to be far too many in Canberra who are far too willing to destroy or at least minimise any semblance of military tradition in this country."
The Gov't - and military - are so tied up with the "UN, anti war, anti gun, anti firearms" they just don't want any type of history along these lines to survive. They seemed destined to want to fight everything in the future with one arm tied up.
Re the F111's, I am sure it would only have taken a couple of people to say so and all the cockpits, canapoy's and even some skeleton of frames could have been saved and displayed. What harm would a cockpit and canopy on display at Oakey do ? Or even the whole crew escape capsule since it can't be too hard to take out considering it is designed like that. It would look great.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
If, as Green Knight says, 13 of the original 45 purchased have been saved, what's the issue here? With 6 already on display in appropriate venues, and another 7 earmarked, that seems a very worthy tribute to me.
I wonder if they'll pickle Bbadanov and mount him somewhere
I wonder if they'll pickle Bbadanov and mount him somewhere
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wingham NSW Australia
Age: 83
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TSR2 v F-111
The F111 inferior to the TSR2. Hardly a comment which has any validity. The TSR2 was "still-born", the RAAF F111's gave almost 40 years of service, albiet costly. As for the "seemingly regular losses of F111 aircraft in non-combat situations", I would suggest that the F111 had a good safety record compared to many other types.
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
jindabyne
"If, as Green Knight says, 13 of the original 45 purchased have been saved, what's the issue here? With 6 already on display in appropriate venues, and another 7 earmarked, that seems a very worthy tribute to me."
Have you read the link here ?
ADF Serials Message Board -> F-111 Retirement
See the post Latest from the QAM website
At present, depending on where the rest end up, only one aircraft can be viewed by the public, the one at Point Cook. Anything on a Military base will be off limits to the public.
And the cost of over a million $ is beyond most places.
.
"If, as Green Knight says, 13 of the original 45 purchased have been saved, what's the issue here? With 6 already on display in appropriate venues, and another 7 earmarked, that seems a very worthy tribute to me."
Have you read the link here ?
ADF Serials Message Board -> F-111 Retirement
See the post Latest from the QAM website
At present, depending on where the rest end up, only one aircraft can be viewed by the public, the one at Point Cook. Anything on a Military base will be off limits to the public.
And the cost of over a million $ is beyond most places.
.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,077
Received 2,942 Likes
on
1,253 Posts
The reason their Government are keen to see them buried...
F-111 Deseal/reseal drama: Workers' Stories
F-111 Deseal/reseal drama: Workers' Stories
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Malkin Tower
Posts: 847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committe...0al%202004.pdf
"The Royal Australian Air Force has reported that personnel involved in F-111 fuel tank maintenance were concerned that exposure to a range of chemicals during the period 1977–mid-1990s was the cause of health problems. Particular concern was directed at a desealant chemical mixture known as SR-51®. The current study, using in vitro submitochondrial assays, was designed to investigate the relative toxicities of the four components of SR-51® (Aromatic 150 solvent (Aro150), dimethylacetamide (DMA), thiophenol (TP) and triethylphosphate (TEP)). Based on the EC50 values, TP and Aro150 were the most toxic components and were markedly more toxic than TEP and DMA."
Thiophenol is bad news. Toxic. Prolonged exposure would be a serious issue
Toxicological Data on Ingredients: Thiophenol: ORAL (LD50): Acute: 46.2 mg/kg [Rat]. 267 mg/kg [Mouse]. DERMAL
(LD50): Acute: 134 mg/kg [Rabbit]. VAPOR (LC50): Acute: 33 ppm 4 hours [Rat]. 28 ppm 4 hours [Mouse].
CDC - NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards - Benzenethiol
http://www.ee.iitb.ac.in/~nanoe/msds/msds%20triophenol.pdf
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committe...0al%202004.pdf
"The Royal Australian Air Force has reported that personnel involved in F-111 fuel tank maintenance were concerned that exposure to a range of chemicals during the period 1977–mid-1990s was the cause of health problems. Particular concern was directed at a desealant chemical mixture known as SR-51®. The current study, using in vitro submitochondrial assays, was designed to investigate the relative toxicities of the four components of SR-51® (Aromatic 150 solvent (Aro150), dimethylacetamide (DMA), thiophenol (TP) and triethylphosphate (TEP)). Based on the EC50 values, TP and Aro150 were the most toxic components and were markedly more toxic than TEP and DMA."
Thiophenol is bad news. Toxic. Prolonged exposure would be a serious issue
Toxicological Data on Ingredients: Thiophenol: ORAL (LD50): Acute: 46.2 mg/kg [Rat]. 267 mg/kg [Mouse]. DERMAL
(LD50): Acute: 134 mg/kg [Rabbit]. VAPOR (LC50): Acute: 33 ppm 4 hours [Rat]. 28 ppm 4 hours [Mouse].
CDC - NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards - Benzenethiol
http://www.ee.iitb.ac.in/~nanoe/msds/msds%20triophenol.pdf
Last edited by jamesdevice; 1st Dec 2011 at 23:01.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Malkin Tower
Posts: 847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
more chemicals used the the Oz F-111
Volume 2 Part 1 Chapter 7 Annex b - Chemical Data
the Alodine 1200S also looks bad -
"chromium trioxide 54%; potassium fluoborate 20%; potassium ferricyanide (III) 10-60%; sodium flouride < 10%; potassium fluozirconate < 10%"
Looks like this was applied with an abrasive pad to bare aluminium panels. You really don't want to play around with chromium salts...
Volume 2 Part 1 Chapter 7 Annex b - Chemical Data
the Alodine 1200S also looks bad -
"chromium trioxide 54%; potassium fluoborate 20%; potassium ferricyanide (III) 10-60%; sodium flouride < 10%; potassium fluozirconate < 10%"
Looks like this was applied with an abrasive pad to bare aluminium panels. You really don't want to play around with chromium salts...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,077
Received 2,942 Likes
on
1,253 Posts
I use Alodine, it is common in the aviation industry for corrosion protection, gives the ally a golden brown colouration.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Malkin Tower
Posts: 847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bad news
I wouldn't want to touch it except in a controlled atmosphere with heavy duty protective clothes
Chromium salts can ruin your life. Very toxic, very carcinogenic
You can absorb it through skin or lungs as dust
http://www.sciencelab.com/msds.php?msdsId=9923475
edit
just found an old copy of Henkel's MSDS for the Alodine 1200S
I'd say it rather understates the risk
http://www.hillbrothers.com/msds/pdf...dine-1200s.pdf
I wouldn't want to touch it except in a controlled atmosphere with heavy duty protective clothes
Chromium salts can ruin your life. Very toxic, very carcinogenic
You can absorb it through skin or lungs as dust
http://www.sciencelab.com/msds.php?msdsId=9923475
edit
just found an old copy of Henkel's MSDS for the Alodine 1200S
I'd say it rather understates the risk
http://www.hillbrothers.com/msds/pdf...dine-1200s.pdf
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cloud9
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
James D
When I look back to the RAF of some 40yrs ago, we aircraft engineers were splashing a lethal cocktail of chemicals around on an almost daily basis:
Trichloroethane/ethylyne
Metheylethylketone (MEK)
Toluene
PRC Sealing compounds
And lots of other nasty things
ElfnSafety had not been invented yet; protective clothing was minimal & education on such products non-existant.
I recall a guy at Lyneham(?) being found unconscious over a solvent bath for a protracted period - severe brain damage (IIRC, he was cleaning some motorcycle parts at lunchtime?). We just did not realise the risks in those days at all.
I have instructed my family that on no account am I to be cremated upon my demise; I fear that the ensuing conflagration would take several days & the ministrations of the Fire Brigades of two counties to extinguish, due to the amount of such substances I have absorbed.
However, I am still here, age 56yrs & fit as a butcher's dog. I still have to fight the popsies off with a stick, and have cultivated a theory that draught Guinness clearly neutralises the threat posed by such toxins in the human body.
HB
Trichloroethane/ethylyne
Metheylethylketone (MEK)
Toluene
PRC Sealing compounds
And lots of other nasty things
ElfnSafety had not been invented yet; protective clothing was minimal & education on such products non-existant.
I recall a guy at Lyneham(?) being found unconscious over a solvent bath for a protracted period - severe brain damage (IIRC, he was cleaning some motorcycle parts at lunchtime?). We just did not realise the risks in those days at all.
I have instructed my family that on no account am I to be cremated upon my demise; I fear that the ensuing conflagration would take several days & the ministrations of the Fire Brigades of two counties to extinguish, due to the amount of such substances I have absorbed.
However, I am still here, age 56yrs & fit as a butcher's dog. I still have to fight the popsies off with a stick, and have cultivated a theory that draught Guinness clearly neutralises the threat posed by such toxins in the human body.
HB
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,077
Received 2,942 Likes
on
1,253 Posts
yup, when the hangar floors at Odius used to "sweat" a couple of 45 gallon drums of Trichloroethane were opened, tipped over to flood one end of the shed then a row of bods would use sweep the lot down the hangar with squeegees out the other end door and down the drain.... extra drums were added as needed.
The lad at Lynham was doing his bike wheels if memory serves me correctly, he survived in a comatose state for several months before sadly dying from his injuries, a shock wave went round the RAF and a lot of bad practices ceased..... Poor Guy.
HB
I still use
Trichloroethane/ethylyne
Metheylethylketone (MEK)
Toluene
PRC Sealing compounds
And lots of other nasty things
and add to that zinc chromate aerosol primer........
The lad at Lynham was doing his bike wheels if memory serves me correctly, he survived in a comatose state for several months before sadly dying from his injuries, a shock wave went round the RAF and a lot of bad practices ceased..... Poor Guy.
HB
I still use
Trichloroethane/ethylyne
Metheylethylketone (MEK)
Toluene
PRC Sealing compounds
And lots of other nasty things
and add to that zinc chromate aerosol primer........
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Malkin Tower
Posts: 847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you're confusing different types of toxicity here
Yes, those solvents are unpleasant, but providing you use them with plenty of ventilation and keep skin exposure to a minimum then they won't cause a lot of long term damage. The problems come if you use them continuously, or in a closed / unventilated room, as I imagine the poor chap who was found did.
The chromium in the Alodine is of a totally different nature. Seriously toxic, and causes cancer. Not "may" cause. DOES cause it. You really don't want to touch that stuff. Since my initial reading last night I've found that the Alodine is also sold as a premixed solution for pickling. That would be a lot easier / safer to handle as liquids can be poured. But the suggestion on the Oz chemical guide that you polish the metal with the powder and a scrubber is totally insane.
That chromium, plus the toxic thiophenol from the tanks are guaranteed to give chronic medical problems
PS - one risk that may not have occurred to you
If you smoked while sploshing those chlorinated solvents around, you would have generated phosgene as the solvent passed through the flame. Did they taste any different? Phosgene is a funny thing - it smells different to different people. Or so say those who've smelt it and survived. The one time I got a whiff it smelt like burnt sugar
Yes, those solvents are unpleasant, but providing you use them with plenty of ventilation and keep skin exposure to a minimum then they won't cause a lot of long term damage. The problems come if you use them continuously, or in a closed / unventilated room, as I imagine the poor chap who was found did.
The chromium in the Alodine is of a totally different nature. Seriously toxic, and causes cancer. Not "may" cause. DOES cause it. You really don't want to touch that stuff. Since my initial reading last night I've found that the Alodine is also sold as a premixed solution for pickling. That would be a lot easier / safer to handle as liquids can be poured. But the suggestion on the Oz chemical guide that you polish the metal with the powder and a scrubber is totally insane.
That chromium, plus the toxic thiophenol from the tanks are guaranteed to give chronic medical problems
PS - one risk that may not have occurred to you
If you smoked while sploshing those chlorinated solvents around, you would have generated phosgene as the solvent passed through the flame. Did they taste any different? Phosgene is a funny thing - it smells different to different people. Or so say those who've smelt it and survived. The one time I got a whiff it smelt like burnt sugar
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
Jindabyne
No problems.
I have been to / on a fair few of these bases and live close to Point Cook - which is the one that the public will be able to see.
They have tightened up security no end and you can't even get onto Point Cook unless the Museum is open and that is just a cadet training with the museum and a runway. Imagine trying to get onto a fully operational base.
I might pop down to Point Cook and see if the F111 is on show yet.
No problems.
I have been to / on a fair few of these bases and live close to Point Cook - which is the one that the public will be able to see.
They have tightened up security no end and you can't even get onto Point Cook unless the Museum is open and that is just a cadet training with the museum and a runway. Imagine trying to get onto a fully operational base.
I might pop down to Point Cook and see if the F111 is on show yet.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,077
Received 2,942 Likes
on
1,253 Posts
The young lad involved was overcome by the fumes and collapsed fwd into the tank during his lunch break, I believe his legs were seen but he was hanging over into the tank, he remained sadly in a vegative state until his demise. He would have at the very least have been breathing more or less pure trich vapour.
Sad Sad Sad.....
Sad Sad Sad.....
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
Have you read the link here ?
ADF Serials Message Board -> F-111 Retirement
See the post Latest from the QAM website
At present, depending on where the rest end up, only one aircraft can be viewed by the public, the one at Point Cook. Anything on a Military base will be off limits to the public.
ADF Serials Message Board -> F-111 Retirement
See the post Latest from the QAM website
At present, depending on where the rest end up, only one aircraft can be viewed by the public, the one at Point Cook. Anything on a Military base will be off limits to the public.
Originally Posted by jindabyne
Thanks for that 500N. Not brilliant if that's so. but it differs to GK's view.
ADF Serials Message Board -> F-111 Retirement
near the bottom of the page:
Originally Posted by Mick Raftery Sep 30 2011 06:49 PM
This afternoon's press release.
Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced that up to seven retired F-111 fighter jets will be made available to Australian aircraft museums and other historical organisations.
The iconic F-111s were the front line of the Australian Defence Force for almost four decades.
Following their retirement in December last year, aircraft museums and historical organisations around the country expressed strong interest in displaying the F-111.
“I’ve met with museum operators around the country and I understand how important it is that as many Australians as possible have access to this piece of Australia’s aviation history,” Mr Clare said.
“I have therefore decided that up to seven F-111s will be made available to Australian aircraft museums and other historical organisations.”
The aircraft will be loaned to museums so that Defence can continue to manage the risk of hazardous material in the aircraft like asbestos and will be subject to a number of conditions to ensure the safe preservation of the aircraft.
These include:
Housing the aircraft in a completely enclosed facility;
Ensuring members of the public are prevented from climbing into engine intakes and exhaust ducts;
Limiting, controlling and supervising public access to the cockpit;
Preventing the public from opening aircraft panels;
Supervising public access to the wheel well and weapons bays;
Completing specified preservation maintenance; and
Meeting Commonwealth auditing and reporting requirements.
As the aircraft were produced in the United States, organisations selected to display the aircraft will be subject to the approval of the US Government under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations.
Interested organisations will be asked to respond to a Request for Offer which will be released by Defence later this year.
F-111 aircraft will also be preserved at the following RAAF Bases across Australia:
RAAF Base Amberley, QLD (two aircraft);
RAAF Museum at Point Cook, VIC (two aircraft);
RAAF Base Edinburgh, SA (one aircraft); and
RAAF Base Wagga, NSW (one aircraft).
“The F-111s were affectionately known as ‘Pigs’ because of their ability to hunt at night and fly low in the weeds thanks to their terrain-following radar,” Mr Clare said.
Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced that up to seven retired F-111 fighter jets will be made available to Australian aircraft museums and other historical organisations.
The iconic F-111s were the front line of the Australian Defence Force for almost four decades.
Following their retirement in December last year, aircraft museums and historical organisations around the country expressed strong interest in displaying the F-111.
“I’ve met with museum operators around the country and I understand how important it is that as many Australians as possible have access to this piece of Australia’s aviation history,” Mr Clare said.
“I have therefore decided that up to seven F-111s will be made available to Australian aircraft museums and other historical organisations.”
The aircraft will be loaned to museums so that Defence can continue to manage the risk of hazardous material in the aircraft like asbestos and will be subject to a number of conditions to ensure the safe preservation of the aircraft.
These include:
Housing the aircraft in a completely enclosed facility;
Ensuring members of the public are prevented from climbing into engine intakes and exhaust ducts;
Limiting, controlling and supervising public access to the cockpit;
Preventing the public from opening aircraft panels;
Supervising public access to the wheel well and weapons bays;
Completing specified preservation maintenance; and
Meeting Commonwealth auditing and reporting requirements.
As the aircraft were produced in the United States, organisations selected to display the aircraft will be subject to the approval of the US Government under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations.
Interested organisations will be asked to respond to a Request for Offer which will be released by Defence later this year.
F-111 aircraft will also be preserved at the following RAAF Bases across Australia:
RAAF Base Amberley, QLD (two aircraft);
RAAF Museum at Point Cook, VIC (two aircraft);
RAAF Base Edinburgh, SA (one aircraft); and
RAAF Base Wagga, NSW (one aircraft).
“The F-111s were affectionately known as ‘Pigs’ because of their ability to hunt at night and fly low in the weeds thanks to their terrain-following radar,” Mr Clare said.
The key is the word ALSO... indicating that the 6 at RAAF bases are IN ADDITION TO the 7 for "other museums and historical organizations"!
This is repeated again in the 23 November 2011 press released quoted in this post in that same thread 500N linked:
ADF Serials Message Board -> F-111 Retirement
about 1/3 of the way down:
Originally Posted by MaYHeM Nov 23 2011, 02:00 PM
Minister for Defence Materiel – Iconic F-111 fighter jets seek new homes
23 November 2011
Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today released the Request for Offer (RFO) for up to seven retired F-111 fighter jets that will be made available on loan to Australian aircraft museums and other historical organisations.
Mr Clare announced in September that up to seven F-111s will be made available on loan to Australian aircraft museums and other historical organisations.
The release of the Request for Offer is the next step in that process.
23 November 2011
Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today released the Request for Offer (RFO) for up to seven retired F-111 fighter jets that will be made available on loan to Australian aircraft museums and other historical organisations.
Mr Clare announced in September that up to seven F-111s will be made available on loan to Australian aircraft museums and other historical organisations.
The release of the Request for Offer is the next step in that process.