Australian Fighter options
 

This seems to end several Australian defence analysists crusades to have the F-22 in Australian service (you know who you are!), the interim is to purchase F18E/F's as a stop gap measure.

This IMHO side steps a flyoff and real evaluation process for suitable aircraft that a purcase of this magnitude requires.:ugh:

it all seems very odd to me.

Cheers

I don't know why this is so surprising, it's unlikely that the Raptor will ever be released for export by the US government

Its not the f-22 export restriction thats funny , it the decision to go with the Super Hornet without any kind of competition or tender process.

As a hi/lo mix the Super Hornet and JSF do not seem to be a good choice, if you were going to have two aircraft types, why would you choose these two and not for example a Typhoon/JSF mix, these are at least complimentary!, and a couple of airforces will operate that mix, with tactics and training thats suitable for Australian exchange pilots etc.




Cheers

JWC,

its pure and simple - time; or lack thereof.

The proposed timeframe does not support a flyoff, and cost does not support a totally unique type (not just airframe, but infrastructure associated with the 'parent' operator also affects cost - i.e supporting a USN type and a separate RAF / USAF type). This proposal basically requires max bang for buck to get off the ground.

It will (would) be an F18A / F18F mix for at least 6 years or so; possibly longer, at the same time as introduction of AEWC, A330 tankers, network-centric C&C, UAV's etc etc. Big Picture = Manpower / Management / Risk

Hi/lo mix doesn't come into it, the RAAF isn't big enough; its a matter of getting what can be afforded.

But some people are considering the F22?

Oh mercy.:rolleyes:

It smacks of incompetence, fancy letting the it go this far without alternatives such as the Typhoon, Rafale etc, Australia could have 20 odd Typhoons by 2010, France would jump at the chance of an export!!!

So lack of time is a very poor excuse, it is like pleading incompetence.
It seem ludicrous that a government would paint itself into a corner and put itself it a terrible bargaining position with just a single supplier, if they have run out of time they should have listened to those who said don't buy a paper plane off the drawing board. the JSF will suffer delays like any other program only the terminally stupid would think otherwise.

And whats all this about commonality I thought the F18E/F was a completely different to the C/D, what are the common items?:confused:
IMHO Only the F18 quadron badges are the same! ;-).

Prepare yourselves for another round of keep the F111 and buy F-22 (when and If etc..) from the usual suspects. :yuk:

whatever you say

The Americans wont like us anymore of we don't buy their things.........

I suppose the K/E/F/A-18F would be a Force Multiplier. You can read the headlines - "Australia to get new fighters, bombers & tankers - all in one Airframe!"

If I remember both the Typhoon and Rafale were regarded as too 'short on legs' for the RAAF requirement, and the F-18f is an in-service airframe. More importantly, youcan sell it to the polititians as 'not a new aircraft, but an improved version of what we have'

Ftrplt...
Time? When do you think that you will get F-35 IOC? And at what cost, since anything before 2015 delivery is LRIP and costs over $100m a pop, and the 2015 price won't be fixed until 2013?
Legs?
Might have been the case once but no longer - there is now relatively little difference between the F-35 and Typhoon or Rafale, just that the F-35 carries all fuel internally.

You might find that the US are unwilling to sell F-22 because it it that airframe that will take on the Iranian and Nth Korean IADS at once (seem to remember their 2 war simultaneous theory). Before anyone jumps up and down, I really mean that it will be used on day 2 after all the CALCMs, TLAMs, Black UCAVs etc have done the dirty work, and the planned 'swift' clean up commences. The US may want to do this sweep on its own, as it would be difficult to sell such a war to the UN et al, given the attempts to gain international support to clean out Iraq during the spring offensive of '03. Therefore, why should it sell its nice new toys, only to have some of them denied the use that they were intended.

Isn't the F-35 significantly stealthier than the Typhoon or Rafale?

Ofb Slf
.
.
.
.
.

Yes
.
.
.
.
.
.

OFBLSF - just to make myself clear, I was talking about range difference between the JSF and others.

I think the evaluation process in Australia that was curtailed suddenly in 2002 put some manufacturers noses out of joint, You have to wonder if some bridges were not burnt then??.

As for range both the Rafale and Typhoon have conformal tanks planned, and all alternatives have similar range.

Oz Conformal tanks

Information I have (from a few weeks ago) is that the Australian government have not even sought quotes or delivery schedules for alternatives!!...

How do they know this is the 'best deal' as Angus Houston put it - if they have not asked the price of the alternatives??... This is what I find unusual.:confused:

Oh and The F-22/F-111 brigade entrenched in Oz have fire up again, theres now several reports/opinion pieces flying about mainly about begging for the F-22, and questioning the knee jerk purchase of SH..Danger from China

Just a quick addition, Boeing is refusing to give india the source code for the radar in their fighter competition, does Australia get operational soverignty, another good reason not to rush into things!!

Cheers

With Typhoon, Rafale, F-15E(customized for your country), and F/A-18E/F all having been the subject of several competitions recently, I would think that all of the cost (both purchase & long-term), performance, offset, etc. info that anyone needs to compare them is already available from governments friendly to Australia... therefore there is no need to do it all over again just to get the same data.

The pro-F-22 mob (including Carlo Kopp) are already countering with claims that the US Deputy Defence Secretary: A) does not know what he is talking about; B) does not have the authority to make that decision; C) never sent that letter at all... it is a lie by Defence Minister Brendan Nelson to cover his arse.

This of course ignores the following: A) England is in a post where he would be part of the process of making such a decision; B) would not be making that decision, but would surely know if the President, etc had made that decision; C) would not make any such claim unless his bosses would back it up, due to the political ramifications of saying it if it weren't true; D) Nelson would be exposing himself dreadfully if he were to make up something like this... it would be easy for the Opposition to verify or disprove, just by talking with the Democrats in the US... now that they control Congress, they have to be fully informed of all such things, and have no reason to protect any deception by a representative of the Bush Administration... therefore it is extremely unlikely he would say such a thing if it were not true.

I do think its necessary to run a competition to see whats on offer, Norway is reaping the benefits of a competition by getting workshare from all competitors and the US has offered much more just because of the competition re JSF/Typhoon/Gripen.

Now whether Eurofighter would bother with Australia now is another matter!.:)

Offsets are yet another matter, Eurofighter offered a large offset to Australia, Boeing is offering zero, Eurofighter offered all source code to enable operation sovereignty, has Boeing, because its been denied to India??.

Now the whole deal with the US company starts to look less attractive the more you look into it.

Potentially billions missed in workshare, millions missed in competitive tenders, and operational sovereignty handed to a foreign power!!!..

I doubt an incompetent fool could have negotiated any more away :rolleyes:
Hmm just reread this and it does sound a bit harsh, but thoroughly deserved.

Please tell me I'm wrong I'd hate to think Oz is that bad!:sad:

A fair appraisal of the situation by Andrew Davies here

Carlo Kopp, Peter Goon etc are quite famous in Oz for championing F111 and F-22's despite reality trying to tell them otherwise,

Cheers

OK, so you are comparing a no-offset Boeing 24-aircraft "something to fly until the Lockheed-Martin F-35 gets here" deal with the only possible Typhoon deal... a 75-90 aircraft mega-offset "permanent fighter choice instead of the F-35" deal? :rolleyes:


And you want to spend the time and money to run a "next-fighter competition just for the sake of being able to say "we are having a competition"... when all of the same info the competition would give you is already available right now?

Or are you really just looking for all of the bribes... er... "incentives"... that holding a competition would bring to everyone who could possibly influence the final decision (BAE-Saudi, etc)?

Superbug advantages for Oz
 

By buying SuperHornet, the RAAF will be getting a combat-proven, capable multi-role aircraft already fully cleared for just about every A2A and AtG weapon in the RAAF inventory, with a state of the art AESA well ahead of anything in Typhoon or Rafale. Furthermore, they'll save a great deal on training costs due to the similarity with the current F18 fleet and the aircraft are available near term. So in fact, buying SuperBug makes eminent sense for RAAF. Especially as they're unlikely to want to fund conformal tanks/AESA for Typhoon/Rafale on their own.

GK121
No I'm still comparing apples with apples, the offsets (or Bribes :rolleyes:) were offered to Austria for 24 airframes (later reduced to 18),l I don't see why a similar sort of deal could not be done for Oz!, it runs into billions!!!, I'm sure the french would bend overbackwards to sell the Rafale.

The capability gap is mainly in the fighter area, something the Typhoon is designed for, and would compliment the JSF far better than the SH, both the UK and Italy will use the Typhoon/JSF.

I was just suggesting that Typhoon or Rafales might fit that gap better and at a similar price (possibly better with offsets\bribes), BUT you won't know till someone asks!!.

The time and money running a comp seems to be worth it, virtually every other buyer do not rely on other countries evaluations to make decisions.. What makes Oz different???, if you really want to rely on other countries evaluations then who the hell has ordered super hornets?:confused:

If the RAAF get a better aircraft that will remain current longer and have more allied flying it, then I'm all for the 'incentives' being offered by all sides in a fair competition, just shocked nobodys been asked!!!

Lazerhound
Where has the SH Block 2 been used in combat, I didn't think it had?.

Hmmm... is this the same radar in the Block 2 thats got the 'nagging software problems' that Janes reported or is it another model?, and does it come with operational sovereignty to fix any such problems in Oz, or do we have to purchase upgraded software?.

I was under the impression the SH Block 2 was a different beast to the Oz hornets Ie if its a very high % commonality why are we buying a old design, if its virtually all new design wheres the commonality?, what is it?.

BTW Conformal Tank work is already done in Oz for the Typhoons, see link earlier, no payment required thanks.

To sum up why hasn't anyone asked for prices or requests for information from manufacturers?, things sure have change since 2002 when the last real evaluation was cut short!.

Cheers