RAAF Orders 24 Super Hornets?
Its about craters in the ground not Air to Air.
and...
It's hard to make craters in the ground if you can't reliably fight your way through the enemy's ADIZ into air-surface weapon range.... And what of close air support? Do the pig-lovers really think an F-111 can do it better than an F-model?
Tell 'im 'e's dreamin'!
Tell 'im 'e's dreamin'!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVdvTof186w
Whats the missile this super hornet is carrying on its centre pylon, starboard wing???
Whats the missile this super hornet is carrying on its centre pylon, starboard wing???
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: All over the place
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming for a minute that the fundamental deterrent factor of the Strike group is dropping a GBU into the living room of the president of Kamaria and maybe one onto the cabinet building.
What is the payload difference between the Super Hornet and the Pig? I understand the pig is around 50,000lb(yes/no?) and the F18F was only around 18,000lb (yes/no?).
Is this true? Isn't a 64% decrease in crater creators a problem?
If so, you now need 3 F18Fs to carry the payload of 1 F111
The ferry range of an F111 is just under twice that of an F18F.
So now you need 3 Fs for 1 Pig and twice the JetA1. Onya Mr Nelson
What is the payload difference between the Super Hornet and the Pig? I understand the pig is around 50,000lb(yes/no?) and the F18F was only around 18,000lb (yes/no?).
Is this true? Isn't a 64% decrease in crater creators a problem?
If so, you now need 3 F18Fs to carry the payload of 1 F111
The ferry range of an F111 is just under twice that of an F18F.
So now you need 3 Fs for 1 Pig and twice the JetA1. Onya Mr Nelson
Last edited by Track Coastal; 14th Dec 2007 at 01:23.
TC, I think you are using WWII Bomber command thinking there.
1 smart bomb is all you need per target...and exactly where are you getting your 8 F111s from to match 24 super hornets?
And your refuellers to provide their escort?
1 smart bomb is all you need per target...and exactly where are you getting your 8 F111s from to match 24 super hornets?
And your refuellers to provide their escort?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: All over the place
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
where are you getting your 8 F111s from to match 24 super hornets?
From the data 3 F models carries the same payload as 1 F111, and only half the distance.
I got the data from some books on my shelf (hence the question mark regarding veracity and the "is this true?").
1 smart bomb is all you need per target
Assuming for a minute that the fundamental deterrent factor of the Strike group is dropping a GBU into the living room of the president of Kamaria and maybe one onto the cabinet building.
Squandering tax payers money on sh!t, is a defence artform (even for the 2 decades I was in uniform and the taxes from a Def payslip), why should anything change now?
No craters in the ground without air superiority dude!
Last edited by Track Coastal; 14th Dec 2007 at 15:34.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: ...
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Buster's got nothing, VD, he's mouthing rot. The yanks aren't gonna drop everything and fight any old war on our behalf. Did they step in during the Falklands?
If it doesn't affect their oil supply they'll just sit back, send us some ordnance and watch what happens.
Which two? GWII and...?
They may (or may not) have a technology edge but anyone who's worked with them can tell you they lack another important element of a successful combat force:
Put them onto any sort of difficult task and they run out of HEART at a moment's notice.
If it doesn't affect their oil supply they'll just sit back, send us some ordnance and watch what happens.
Originally Posted by Flex
The F-18s (sic) have been used in two Gulf Wars
Singapore ..........as a result of not piss-farting around ....now have the capability edge in the region
Put them onto any sort of difficult task and they run out of HEART at a moment's notice.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: ...
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PS:
Now I'm no knuck but I thought the latest fashion is to drop TWO LGBs onto a HAS... one for the roof and one for the pink mist inside.
1 smart bomb is all you need per target
Thread Starter
No craters in the ground without air superiority dude!
And after all the money spent on the tactical fighter force over the years. The access to yank technology and training. The expensive force multipliers.
And some are fretting over export rated Flankers?
Maybe our guys really do need the F22.
Scotty, if you only knew what the US did behind the scenes during the Falklands conflict. Your posts only expose your lack of knowledge of the matters discussed on this thread.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is the payload difference between the Super Hornet and the Pig? I understand the pig is around 50,000lb(yes/no?)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sydney
Age: 55
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My interest was aroused by some of the points made in the discussion over the last 3 pages. Not being of fighter/strike background, my recollection of the original decision to retire the F111 was that the planned withdrawal date (PWD) of 2012 was prior to the arrival of JSF in 2013, to release personnel numbers for training prior to arrival of the new platform.
The decision to bring F111 PWD forward to 2010 was dependent on a number of factors:
- existing F18s upgraded with Link 16, 'full weapons suite' including stand off weapons and satellite guided munitions
- Wedgetail, and
- AAR (dependent now on KC-30B arrival with imminent B707T retirement)
Then-CAF AM Houston stated that 'if any of the F18 enhancements do not arrive by 2010, we will extend F111 to 2012'. He subsequently also stated that 'if JSF is late we will keep the Hornet'.
The then-Minister for Defence Nelson's rationale for the Super Hornet purchase was due to possible delays in JSF arrival ... but given that JSF was bought to replace both F111 and F18 it didn't really specify whether Super Hornet was meant for the air-to-air or air-to-ground role (or indeed both!). The inference from the earlier extension to current F18 capability would be that it was the air-to-air role (in which case patching up F111s would be irrelevant, except from a pure numbers perspective). However, interestingly, the Minister's website cites rejection of the F15 due to 'lack of maritime strike capability', and its 2-seat configuration obviously puts a lot of people in the mindset that it's air-to-mud. Confusing?
So, my take on the situation is that ... the decision to purchase Super Hornet was simply a non-rational (not irrational, just politically motivated) one, and Air Force will just get on and make the best of it (a la F111G). Remember, flexibility is the key to airpower! I have to believe that the Super Hornet is a better capability than both F111 and current F18, so that any discussion in which Super Hornet is getting thumped would equally apply to the existing aircraft.
Track Coastal's discussion regarding payload, while true in terms of pure payload (weight) and range, is irrelevant in the face of the Air Force view that PGMs from stand off range is the way to go. That is, neither F111 nor Super Hornet will be used as a 'bomb truck' to go downtown badlands; in which case the number of hardpoints for PGMs is the limiting factor. The most telling factor is likely to be one of range, in which case AAR is a vital component to extend combat radius.
It will be interesting to see what the political/RAAF response is if either or both of Wedgetail and KC-30B start looking shaky for an initial operating capability of 2010 ...
The decision to bring F111 PWD forward to 2010 was dependent on a number of factors:
- existing F18s upgraded with Link 16, 'full weapons suite' including stand off weapons and satellite guided munitions
- Wedgetail, and
- AAR (dependent now on KC-30B arrival with imminent B707T retirement)
Then-CAF AM Houston stated that 'if any of the F18 enhancements do not arrive by 2010, we will extend F111 to 2012'. He subsequently also stated that 'if JSF is late we will keep the Hornet'.
The then-Minister for Defence Nelson's rationale for the Super Hornet purchase was due to possible delays in JSF arrival ... but given that JSF was bought to replace both F111 and F18 it didn't really specify whether Super Hornet was meant for the air-to-air or air-to-ground role (or indeed both!). The inference from the earlier extension to current F18 capability would be that it was the air-to-air role (in which case patching up F111s would be irrelevant, except from a pure numbers perspective). However, interestingly, the Minister's website cites rejection of the F15 due to 'lack of maritime strike capability', and its 2-seat configuration obviously puts a lot of people in the mindset that it's air-to-mud. Confusing?
So, my take on the situation is that ... the decision to purchase Super Hornet was simply a non-rational (not irrational, just politically motivated) one, and Air Force will just get on and make the best of it (a la F111G). Remember, flexibility is the key to airpower! I have to believe that the Super Hornet is a better capability than both F111 and current F18, so that any discussion in which Super Hornet is getting thumped would equally apply to the existing aircraft.
Track Coastal's discussion regarding payload, while true in terms of pure payload (weight) and range, is irrelevant in the face of the Air Force view that PGMs from stand off range is the way to go. That is, neither F111 nor Super Hornet will be used as a 'bomb truck' to go downtown badlands; in which case the number of hardpoints for PGMs is the limiting factor. The most telling factor is likely to be one of range, in which case AAR is a vital component to extend combat radius.
It will be interesting to see what the political/RAAF response is if either or both of Wedgetail and KC-30B start looking shaky for an initial operating capability of 2010 ...
Thread Starter
Exercised with their Vipers lately?
This puts a strong case for the F22.
Of course. That said. Some RAAF Brass & Defence Bureaucrats should be shot at dawn. HTF have the Singaporians so efficiently and quickly snatched air capability dominace in the region?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: ...
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if you only knew what the US did behind the scenes during the Falklands conflict.
As you said - behind the scenes. That's a far cry from stepping in for us in some regional spat with any of the noodles to the north.
Last edited by ScottyDoo; 17th Dec 2007 at 13:59.
Thread Starter
Stingers for the SAS, Com upgrades, the promise of a Tarawarra class carrier if the Invincible or Hermes sunk, NATO munitions stocks, arm twisting of the Chileans to ensure co-operation of clandestine activities from their soil, satellite intelligence, something to do with Shrike missiles and TPS-145 ( bar talk ) etc etc........