RAAF Orders 24 Super Hornets?
Thread Starter
I might have missed something here, but the last time I looked, the Singaporeans were on our side!
Proceed to F111 retirement and they have evolved toward the most capable air force in the region. They have had early warning and tanking decades before the RAAF. Area SAM's. Numerically their F16's are at parity with our F18's- however they gave their A models to the Thai's. Their current F16's are a fusion of top line American and Israeli munitions and electronic equipment. Their pilots are very well trained now; American & Israeli trained and influenced. With close training ties evolving with the Indians.
JSF is an option if proven. But they have the F15E in good numbers as their insurance policy.
How much have the politically and business astute Singaporians paid for all this ? I don't reckon the Aussie taxpayers would want to compare- " Buy proven, buy American and buy a bargain- and the Jews will sell you what the Yanks don't".
Last edited by Gnadenburg; 17th Dec 2007 at 14:38.
Thanks Gnads, the carrier was sitting off Ascention Is for the duration ready for a RN crew if Hermes or Invincible were sunk. Re-taskinking of satellites (very expensive) can be added to your list. As Scotty said "shedloads of 'L' model snakes to the RAF" resulted in even the Nimrods sprouting an air to air capability as well as Harpoon anti surface missiles and probe & drogue refuelling. Phalanx CIWS were supplied in large numbers for RN ships (Sea Wolf was barely operational and was only fitted to two vessels).
The Yanks may be reluctant to get directly involved but they have a history of looking after their friends.
The Yanks may be reluctant to get directly involved but they have a history of looking after their friends.
Yesss..... so it would seem!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: perth
Age: 74
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this background support the yanks gave the poms in the falklands is interesting stuff, especially as the Argentines still managed to inflict serious damage on the RN. So what went wrong? and can we learn anything from it? I have nothing to contribute personally, as I am not current or ex-military, but I have followed this thread with interest.
Last edited by TCFOR; 19th Dec 2007 at 04:35.
Thread Starter
I said no googling, go-gnads!
Worked with a few Falklands vet's. Interesting yarns and plenty of unofficial American help. One bloke telling the story of a rush flight to pick up Stingers. Another delivering the precious cargo of heatseeker missiles from NATO stocks at an F15 base in Germany to the Ascension Islands- halfway through the flight the female loadmaster comes to the flight deck, proud of herself, with dozens of "remove before flight" pins taken off the missle cargo. A good yarn anyway!
Back on thread, did anyone come up with a viable solution or alternative to the Super Hornet?
Thread Starter
No I didn't see that .
I thought Buster was referring to the deterrent value of having a couple of USAF squadrons based at Tindal or a Marine base in Darwin.
There is an obvious deterrence to our near neighbours.
The cost, to me, was social and demographic. As well as some foreign policy implications in Asia. And on the lessor side, perhaps, more a home grown terrorist risk with US forces so visible on our soil.
Anyway. Viable alternatives to the Super Hornet??????
A super dooper F111? Or a hotted up, westernised Sukhoi?
I thought Buster was referring to the deterrent value of having a couple of USAF squadrons based at Tindal or a Marine base in Darwin.
There is an obvious deterrence to our near neighbours.
The cost, to me, was social and demographic. As well as some foreign policy implications in Asia. And on the lessor side, perhaps, more a home grown terrorist risk with US forces so visible on our soil.
Anyway. Viable alternatives to the Super Hornet??????
A super dooper F111? Or a hotted up, westernised Sukhoi?
Evertonian
Well, at least someone got it!
(The wink smiley was for the fact that it wont happen & was a little tongue in cheek...some people don't seem to understand the subtleties of smileys)
(The wink smiley was for the fact that it wont happen & was a little tongue in cheek...some people don't seem to understand the subtleties of smileys)
First Short Takeoff/Vertical Landing Stealth Fighter Unveiled at LM
(Fort Worth, Texas, December 18, 2007) -- The Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] F-35B Lightning II, the first fighter to combine stealth with short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) capability and supersonic speed, made its debut today amid customers from the United States Marine Corps, the United Kingdom's Royal Navy and Royal Air Force, and the Italian Air Force and Navy.
Attendees at the rollout ceremony in Lockheed Martin's Fort Worth assembly plant included Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway. "The flexibility that the STOVL variant of the F-35 will add to the contemporary Marine Air Ground Task Force is amazing," Conway said. "This generational leap in technology will enable us to operate a fleet of fighter/attack aircraft from the decks of ships, existing runways or from unimproved surfaces at austere bases. We find that capability extremely valuable."
The F-35B, designed to replace Marine Corps AV-8Bs and F/A-18s, is one of three variants of the Lightning II. Its first flight is planned for mid-2008, following a series of extensive ground tests. The F-35A conventional takeoff and landing version began its flight test program in December of 2006. The F-35C, designed for catapult launches and arrested recoveries aboard large U.S. Navy carriers, will make its inaugural flight in 2009.
"Think F/A-18 speed and maneuverability, AV-8B forward deployment, F-22 stealth, and astonishing avionics," said Dan Crowley, Lockheed Martin executive vice president and F-35 program general manager. "It's a combination of technologies that may seem like science fiction, but our abundantly-talented international team has made it science fact."
The heart of the F-35B is a STOVL propulsion system comprising the most powerful engine ever flown in a jet fighter, a shaft-driven counter-rotating lift fan situated behind the cockpit, a roll duct under each wing for lateral stability, and a rear 3-bearing swivel nozzle that vectors engine exhaust in the desired direction.
During vertical or short takeoffs, or vertical landings, doors above and below the lift fan open, and a clutch connecting the lift fan to the engine drive shaft engages. A dorsal auxiliary engine inlet opens to increase airflow to the engine. At the same time, doors beneath the 3-bearing swivel nozzle open and the rear nozzle pivots downward, deflecting engine thrust toward the ground. Roll ducts under each wing also are engaged, keeping the aircraft laterally stable. In this configuration, the F-35B can hover, land vertically, take off in a few hundred feet fully loaded, or take off vertically with a light load. When the aircraft transitions from jet-borne to conventional wing-borne flight, the doors close and the pilot can then accelerate to supersonic speeds. The system is completely automatic.
The Lockheed Martin X-35B successfully demonstrated the shaft-driven lift fan propulsion system in 2001, becoming the only aircraft in history to execute a short takeoff, level supersonic dash and vertical landing in a single flight.
The Pratt & Whitney F135 engine will power the first series of F-35Bs. The F136, an interchangeable engine under development by the GE Rolls-Royce Fighter Engine Team, will make its first F-35 flight in 2010. Rolls-Royce produces the shaft-driven lift fan, 3-bearing swivel nozzle and roll duct systems.
Source : Lockheed Martin
Attendees at the rollout ceremony in Lockheed Martin's Fort Worth assembly plant included Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway. "The flexibility that the STOVL variant of the F-35 will add to the contemporary Marine Air Ground Task Force is amazing," Conway said. "This generational leap in technology will enable us to operate a fleet of fighter/attack aircraft from the decks of ships, existing runways or from unimproved surfaces at austere bases. We find that capability extremely valuable."
The F-35B, designed to replace Marine Corps AV-8Bs and F/A-18s, is one of three variants of the Lightning II. Its first flight is planned for mid-2008, following a series of extensive ground tests. The F-35A conventional takeoff and landing version began its flight test program in December of 2006. The F-35C, designed for catapult launches and arrested recoveries aboard large U.S. Navy carriers, will make its inaugural flight in 2009.
"Think F/A-18 speed and maneuverability, AV-8B forward deployment, F-22 stealth, and astonishing avionics," said Dan Crowley, Lockheed Martin executive vice president and F-35 program general manager. "It's a combination of technologies that may seem like science fiction, but our abundantly-talented international team has made it science fact."
The heart of the F-35B is a STOVL propulsion system comprising the most powerful engine ever flown in a jet fighter, a shaft-driven counter-rotating lift fan situated behind the cockpit, a roll duct under each wing for lateral stability, and a rear 3-bearing swivel nozzle that vectors engine exhaust in the desired direction.
During vertical or short takeoffs, or vertical landings, doors above and below the lift fan open, and a clutch connecting the lift fan to the engine drive shaft engages. A dorsal auxiliary engine inlet opens to increase airflow to the engine. At the same time, doors beneath the 3-bearing swivel nozzle open and the rear nozzle pivots downward, deflecting engine thrust toward the ground. Roll ducts under each wing also are engaged, keeping the aircraft laterally stable. In this configuration, the F-35B can hover, land vertically, take off in a few hundred feet fully loaded, or take off vertically with a light load. When the aircraft transitions from jet-borne to conventional wing-borne flight, the doors close and the pilot can then accelerate to supersonic speeds. The system is completely automatic.
The Lockheed Martin X-35B successfully demonstrated the shaft-driven lift fan propulsion system in 2001, becoming the only aircraft in history to execute a short takeoff, level supersonic dash and vertical landing in a single flight.
The Pratt & Whitney F135 engine will power the first series of F-35Bs. The F136, an interchangeable engine under development by the GE Rolls-Royce Fighter Engine Team, will make its first F-35 flight in 2010. Rolls-Royce produces the shaft-driven lift fan, 3-bearing swivel nozzle and roll duct systems.
Source : Lockheed Martin
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like Labor may knock the Super-Hornets on the head. From the SMH... THE $6.6 billion purchase of 24 Super Hornets as a stop-gap fighter jet could be jettisoned by the Federal Government as it reviews all aspects of the program to give Australia a critical edge in regional air combat capability. The Herald understands that Department of Defence planners have been asked to present an analysis on all the fighter jet options to the Federal Government and how they stack up against likely adversaries, the first time such a study has been done for at least five years. All projects in the $30 billion program will be scrutinised "with fresh eyes". That includes what aircraft are to be bought, how many, when and at what price. "Absolutely everything is on the table," a Government source said. Even if contracts have been signed, as is the case with the Super Hornets, the Government is prepared to break them if the case is compelling. This is a shift from previous Labor thinking. The air combat program is supposed to deliver air superiority in the region, long-regarded as fundamental to Australia's strategic doctrine given its large land mass and isolation. The coming year is looming as a critical one. A final decision must be made on the centrepiece of the air-combat project - a $15 billion outlay on up to 100 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, a high-stealth aircraft yet to be developed, has been troubled by delays and is at risk of big cost blow-outs. The prevailing view in the Government is that it makes sense for the entire air combat force structure to be re-examined at the same time. The Defence White Paper - outlining the nation's long-term strategic priorities and being developed next year - is also likely to guide the review. Writing in his local newspaper last week, the Minister for Defence, Joel Fitzgibbon, made clear his concerns with the Super Hornets, a purchase pushed through with great haste by his predecessor, Brendan Nelson, who is now the Opposition Leader. "Few decisions of the Howard government were more controversial than its commitment to spend more than $6 billion on 24 Super Hornets without proper due process or capability justification," he wrote in The Newcastle Herald. Dr Nelson sold the Super Hornet option to cabinet's National Security Committee this year without the co-operation of defence chiefs or undertaking the long due diligence and comparative analysis that usually precedes acquisitions of such scale and expense. Before his pitch, RAAF planners had said an interim jet was not required. Defence analysts say it is the wrong aircraft anyway, lacking stealth and power. The Herald understands that the Super Hornet contract - like those for all foreign military sales - can be abandoned, at a cost of about $300 million. If it is not dumped the Government may seek to renegotiate its terms, or buy fewer aircraft. Back to you, Brendan.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
From a different thread.
In the four years up to 2000, the Australian DoD was provided with almost 100% of Typhoon's classified specification and the potential upgrades which would follow, including all those enhancements which are now starting to emerge. Yes there was much glossy-brochure stuff, but behind the scenes there was serious business. The Government (and the Opposition) was also offered some attractive and highly innovative purchase options, which would have made a 100-plus buy very affordable, at today's prices. At the time, there were more than a few senior players throughout the RAAF and DoD who were convinced that Typhoon might well have offered them a very viable multi-role solution, and in the right timescale. There was also a highly vocal element (mainly the US-centric and Pig fraternity - and how wrong the latter have been proved) that stuck their heads in the sand, and in some notable cases simply refused to listen. This latter group has done the ADF no favours, and I trust their like will be muted in the upcoming review process.
From an RAAF fan.
In the four years up to 2000, the Australian DoD was provided with almost 100% of Typhoon's classified specification and the potential upgrades which would follow, including all those enhancements which are now starting to emerge. Yes there was much glossy-brochure stuff, but behind the scenes there was serious business. The Government (and the Opposition) was also offered some attractive and highly innovative purchase options, which would have made a 100-plus buy very affordable, at today's prices. At the time, there were more than a few senior players throughout the RAAF and DoD who were convinced that Typhoon might well have offered them a very viable multi-role solution, and in the right timescale. There was also a highly vocal element (mainly the US-centric and Pig fraternity - and how wrong the latter have been proved) that stuck their heads in the sand, and in some notable cases simply refused to listen. This latter group has done the ADF no favours, and I trust their like will be muted in the upcoming review process.
From an RAAF fan.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Off the self' Super Hornets
I must point out that buying 'off the self' Super Hornets will be one of the best things Australia has ever done in the ADF.
C-17? A proven platform. A no fuss purchase in quick time with no 'red-tape'
The same applies to the Super Hornet. YES, the government made a quick decision - GOOD. About time they took responsibilty and did what we elect them to do - GOVERN and make HARD decisions.
We can argue about F111 and Hornets all day, but the F111 will not last forever and needs to be brideged.
The Typhoon - brilliant aerodynamically, but has useless ergonoics and avionics.
Anything French - I'd rather eat and drink French goods than strap my body to one!
Boeing is the correct decision - wait and see. Labour can 'sing and dance' all they want, but I bet they stick with the decision after making some inquiries of their own.
C-17? A proven platform. A no fuss purchase in quick time with no 'red-tape'
The same applies to the Super Hornet. YES, the government made a quick decision - GOOD. About time they took responsibilty and did what we elect them to do - GOVERN and make HARD decisions.
We can argue about F111 and Hornets all day, but the F111 will not last forever and needs to be brideged.
The Typhoon - brilliant aerodynamically, but has useless ergonoics and avionics.
Anything French - I'd rather eat and drink French goods than strap my body to one!
Boeing is the correct decision - wait and see. Labour can 'sing and dance' all they want, but I bet they stick with the decision after making some inquiries of their own.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: F22. Mentioned to me some time ago that one of the first episodes involving an F22 - it 'shot' down several F16s before the F16 group realized that something was nearby. Yanks still working out tactics and probably will be for some time. Concept of hooking up aircraft fault sensors with stores, spares, hangar is wonderful for serviceability and operational readiness. And no doubt the F-35 will be similar. Current calls in the USA to retire the F-15 fleet due to fatigue, age, serviceability and loss of superiority issues. Do we want to purchase a fighter that is also past its prime? Typhoon? Nice aircraft, works well in Europe, but if there was any spat, what would the Europeans be like in keeping up with the supply of spares? And is it just one step above an F111 when a leap is more desirable? Same concern applies with any of the Russian aircraft. One hiccup with Russian relations and we'd have museum pieces. The F111 was developed on the basis of a supersonic aircraft to deliver a nuke. RAAF has done a great job with it, but it's way, way out of its league now. Super Hornet is the way to go for the interim.
