RAAF Orders 24 Super Hornets?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be interesting to see who the new "insider" is. Wonder if he has more credibility than Roberton who has actually flown the aircraft.
I just hope people in the RAAF involved in the decision are allowed to bite back (no, not you CAF), instead of being told to bend over and take it up the ar$e by the Minister's office as usual.
Should be a good laugh anyway!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A bit better...
DEFENCE RESPONSE TO FOUR CORNERS
Defence rejects claims to be aired tonight by the Four Corners program that suggest Australia is conceding its crucial air superiority in the region by purchasing the F-18F Super Hornet.
Defence Spokesman Brigadier Andrew Nikolic said: “Defence rejects any assertion that our air superiority would be compromised. The Super Hornet is a true multi-role aircraft that spans the air combat spectrum, including maritime strike that is so vital for Australia.
“The acquisition of 24 Super Hornets will ensure Australia’s air combat superiority well into the future and will enable us to maintain our edge in all aspects of air combat as the Air Force goes through the transition from the F-111 and Hornet to JSF.”
Group Captain Steve Roberton, Head of the Defence Air Combat Transition Office, reinforced the capability edge offered by the Super Hornet.
As one of Australia's most experienced fighter pilots, he said: “If a Super Hornet was to meet a Su-30 in the next 5-8 years and I had to bet my life on the outcome, I'll sit in the Super Hornet F-18F cockpit every time. Any pilot who has flown the new Block II F-18F with AESA radar would do the same.
“The Super Hornet will test any modern air defence system. The airframe is designed for signature reduction and the aircraft is built around the most advanced radar in any non-fifth generation aircraft in the world.
“Its advanced radar, weapons and electronic warfare suite make it a superb dogfighting system and it can defeat an enemy’s ability to shoot before the Super Hornet,” Group Captain Robertson said.
Brigadier Nikolic reinforced the importance of a complete capability package to support any advanced fighter aircraft. He said: “Reliable, sustainable logistics support, the best training and a full air combat system of command and control is required to defeat modern threats. No other aircraft can meet this requirement and complement Australia’s existing air combat system better than the F-18F Super Hornet.”
Defence rejects claims to be aired tonight by the Four Corners program that suggest Australia is conceding its crucial air superiority in the region by purchasing the F-18F Super Hornet.
Defence Spokesman Brigadier Andrew Nikolic said: “Defence rejects any assertion that our air superiority would be compromised. The Super Hornet is a true multi-role aircraft that spans the air combat spectrum, including maritime strike that is so vital for Australia.
“The acquisition of 24 Super Hornets will ensure Australia’s air combat superiority well into the future and will enable us to maintain our edge in all aspects of air combat as the Air Force goes through the transition from the F-111 and Hornet to JSF.”
Group Captain Steve Roberton, Head of the Defence Air Combat Transition Office, reinforced the capability edge offered by the Super Hornet.
As one of Australia's most experienced fighter pilots, he said: “If a Super Hornet was to meet a Su-30 in the next 5-8 years and I had to bet my life on the outcome, I'll sit in the Super Hornet F-18F cockpit every time. Any pilot who has flown the new Block II F-18F with AESA radar would do the same.
“The Super Hornet will test any modern air defence system. The airframe is designed for signature reduction and the aircraft is built around the most advanced radar in any non-fifth generation aircraft in the world.
“Its advanced radar, weapons and electronic warfare suite make it a superb dogfighting system and it can defeat an enemy’s ability to shoot before the Super Hornet,” Group Captain Robertson said.
Brigadier Nikolic reinforced the importance of a complete capability package to support any advanced fighter aircraft. He said: “Reliable, sustainable logistics support, the best training and a full air combat system of command and control is required to defeat modern threats. No other aircraft can meet this requirement and complement Australia’s existing air combat system better than the F-18F Super Hornet.”
I wonder if Cut...ummm, I mean, 4 Corners interviewed him to balance out Kopp and co?!?!?
ABC.net website:
Australia 'will lose air superiority' with new jet fighter
The Federal Government has been accused of putting Australia's defence at risk with the $7 billion purchase of the Super Hornet jet fighter to replace the ageing F111 aircraft.
Cabinet decided to buy 24 Super Hornets as a stopgap measure until the new Joint Strike Fighter is delivered in 2014.
Tonight's ABC Four Corners program has revealed that the decision to buy the Hornets was based on a critical mistake made during wing-tests on an F111 aircraft, that suggested they were unsafe.
Ex-Air Commander Peter Criss says the Super Hornets are no match for the new Russian Sukhoi fighters that the Indonesians and Chinese are buying.
"Contrary to the claims it's not a fifth generation fighter. It's not stealthy," he said.
"You can't have a stealthy aircraft when every bit of ordnance you have has to be carried externally.
"It's not fast. It can't carry a lot of weapons. It can't run. It's just vulnerable from the word go."
There are also claims that the temporary replacements to the F111s are substandard and will see Australia lose its air of superiority to the Indonesians, Malaysians and Chinese.
Defence Minister Brendan Nelson and Defence chief Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston both declined to record interviews for the Four Corners program.
But Group Captain Steve Roberton says the Super Hornet is better than some of its detractors make out.
"Very few aircraft are going to be able to get into a turning fight with this aircraft, they're not going to be able to get into that dog-fight zone," he said.
"But if they do, the ability of this aircraft to turn rapidly and use the world's most advanced multi-role radar and helmets to cue the latest US weapons, is going to give them a very rude shock."
The big question is why was the competitive acquisition process bypassed?
Defence did not ask for the F18F!!
Was it just that Brenden saw the powerpoint show and thought it was a good idea to blow $7 Bil before the budget surplus was sucked away by election promises at the end of the year?
Australia 'will lose air superiority' with new jet fighter
The Federal Government has been accused of putting Australia's defence at risk with the $7 billion purchase of the Super Hornet jet fighter to replace the ageing F111 aircraft.
Cabinet decided to buy 24 Super Hornets as a stopgap measure until the new Joint Strike Fighter is delivered in 2014.
Tonight's ABC Four Corners program has revealed that the decision to buy the Hornets was based on a critical mistake made during wing-tests on an F111 aircraft, that suggested they were unsafe.
Ex-Air Commander Peter Criss says the Super Hornets are no match for the new Russian Sukhoi fighters that the Indonesians and Chinese are buying.
"Contrary to the claims it's not a fifth generation fighter. It's not stealthy," he said.
"You can't have a stealthy aircraft when every bit of ordnance you have has to be carried externally.
"It's not fast. It can't carry a lot of weapons. It can't run. It's just vulnerable from the word go."
There are also claims that the temporary replacements to the F111s are substandard and will see Australia lose its air of superiority to the Indonesians, Malaysians and Chinese.
Defence Minister Brendan Nelson and Defence chief Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston both declined to record interviews for the Four Corners program.
But Group Captain Steve Roberton says the Super Hornet is better than some of its detractors make out.
"Very few aircraft are going to be able to get into a turning fight with this aircraft, they're not going to be able to get into that dog-fight zone," he said.
"But if they do, the ability of this aircraft to turn rapidly and use the world's most advanced multi-role radar and helmets to cue the latest US weapons, is going to give them a very rude shock."
The big question is why was the competitive acquisition process bypassed?
Defence did not ask for the F18F!!
Was it just that Brenden saw the powerpoint show and thought it was a good idea to blow $7 Bil before the budget surplus was sucked away by election promises at the end of the year?
Last edited by Roller Merlin; 29th Oct 2007 at 10:47.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Standing at P37
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Very few aircraft are going to be able to get into a turning fight with this aircraft, they're not going to be able to get into that dog-fight zone," he said.
Even if the F18 jocks wanted to ignore this sage advice, they'll never get the chance to do so if the other side is equipped with a superior fighter with a long range missile.
At least they are more or less buying off the shelf this time, unlike some of the other disasters lately that are still sitting on the ground pulled apart in pieces well after some of the first airframes were accepted..
There are a lot of ex F111 drivers that get quite emotional over that aircraft, you can hear it at RAAF formal dining in nights, I wonder if that has anything to do with this story?
But to me, the real issue is "Operational Sovereignty", as I think the British termed it.
What will Indonesia's aircraft be armed with, and will they actually work as advertised if Mr. Putin (or one of his successors) decides they shouldn't?
Same with ourselves and the JSF, will its weapons systems work if, at some time in the future, the US Government decides they shouldn't?
I seem to recall being told that an Iranian fighter pilot flying a Tomcat got a rather nasty surprise some months after the Shah was deposed.
But to me, the real issue is "Operational Sovereignty", as I think the British termed it.
What will Indonesia's aircraft be armed with, and will they actually work as advertised if Mr. Putin (or one of his successors) decides they shouldn't?
Same with ourselves and the JSF, will its weapons systems work if, at some time in the future, the US Government decides they shouldn't?
I seem to recall being told that an Iranian fighter pilot flying a Tomcat got a rather nasty surprise some months after the Shah was deposed.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: ...
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you can hear it at RAAF formal dining in nights
Ex-Air Commander Peter Criss says the Super Hornets are no match for the new Russian Sukhoi fighters that the Indonesians and Chinese are buying.
"....It's not stealthy," he said.
"....It's not stealthy," he said.
the ...replacements to the F111s are substandard and will see Australia lose its air of superiority to the Indonesians, Malaysians and Chinese.
And rightly so...
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Australia
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About the only person's cred which has been savaged here ozbiggles is your own, and by your own hand with an entirely unsubstantiated acccusational and ad hominem post.
Let's run through a few things you said shall we?
Well, given the immediate repercussion such a stand invites, (eg: Mills on this issue; Wilkie, former government intelligence analyst on the Iraq pretext and subsequent mess) or potential for career free fall to anyone speaking out from within, that's entirely understandable.
Discredit the credibility of the opposing view with ad hominem attack. Of course, without any specific allegation or even base substantiation for your accusations denying opportunity of rebuttal.
As for cred. Hmmmm...Let me see now. A former Air Commander Australia with the balls to risk reputation and 'club membership' by appearing publically on a program like 4 Corners, ....or the anonymous unfounded rhetoric of ozbiggles? ....
Says pretty much a lot about your perspective? Would you call the current ACA an "OF" too?
And you're first hand familiar with the Su's avionics, weps, handling and specific force doctrine of real and potential operators with the Su27 -> 30 through 37 family and sub-variants et al are you? ...other than, like most of us, what you might have "have read in a book".
Since you make the degoragtory accusation, you might spell out the specifics you believe it to be for us lesser mortals to understand. The only "agenda" I see is that the truth of the matter regarding the Super Hornet acquisition be revealed so our pilots lives aren't encumbered with a sheep dressed up in wolf's clothing.
The abundantly obvious was confirmed by the process not only not going to tender, but the representatives of contenting competitors not even being 'received at court'. Smacks of, our (then) next boat, "Collins class" type political considerations over-riding sound decision making.
Let's run through a few things you said shall we?
The usual brigade (and note there only a couple)
of people who will appear on this show have about as much cred as former Prime ministers (and there is nothing sadder) coming out and saying what they would do now, when they did nothing of the sort when they were running the place.
As for cred. Hmmmm...Let me see now. A former Air Commander Australia with the balls to risk reputation and 'club membership' by appearing publically on a program like 4 Corners, ....or the anonymous unfounded rhetoric of ozbiggles? ....
None of theses OFs
And you're first hand familiar with the Su's avionics, weps, handling and specific force doctrine of real and potential operators with the Su27 -> 30 through 37 family and sub-variants et al are you? ...other than, like most of us, what you might have "have read in a book".
They have another agenda.
The abundantly obvious was confirmed by the process not only not going to tender, but the representatives of contenting competitors not even being 'received at court'. Smacks of, our (then) next boat, "Collins class" type political considerations over-riding sound decision making.
F-35 Progress
NGC Achieves Two Major F-35 Production Milestones, Continues Record of On-Time, On Cost Performance
(Palmdale, Calif., October 26, 2007) -- Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE:NOC) today completed the center fuselage for the first weight-optimized Air Force F-35 Lightning II aircraft -- a conventional take-off and landing (CTOL) variant designated AF-1.
The milestone comes just 24 hours after the company officially began the first phase of F-35 low rate initial production by starting the fabrication of a single-piece, all-composite inlet duct for the Air Force's first production F-35. That duct is being produced at Northrop Grumman's composites manufacturing center in El Segundo, Calif.
The company celebrated the AF-1 production milestone with a ceremony at its F-35 assembly facility in Palmdale, Calif. The ceremony, which coincided with today's sixth anniversary of the awarding of the original F-35 system development and demonstration prime contract, was attended by Northrop Grumman employees and executives from Lockheed Martin and the U.S. Department of Defense's F-35 Lightning II Program Office.
"The completion of the AF-1 center fuselage on schedule and on cost reinforces Northrop Grumman's commitment to help our customers field the most reliable, versatile and affordable 5th generation fighter," said Janis Pamiljans, F-35 program manager for Northrop Grumman's Integrated Systems sector. "Our disciplined production and assembly processes help ensure the quality and reliability of this multi-role aircraft for U.S. warfighters and our international F-35 partners."
The AF-1 center fuselage is one of 19 center fuselages Northrop Grumman is producing for the current system development and demonstration (SDD) phase of the F-35 Lightning II program. To date, the company has delivered center fuselages for six F-35 aircraft, including AA-1, the first F-35 aircraft to fly; and BF-1, the first F-35 short take-off/vertical landing (STOVL) variant. BF-1 will be the first F-35 to be delivered to the U.S. Marine Corps.
"Meeting these key program production commitments on time helps ensure that the F-35 Lightning II will enter the U.S. Air Force inventory as scheduled in 2013," said Major General Charles R. Davis, the Defense Department's F-35 Program Executive Officer. "The F-35 will provide the service with a powerful, multi-role fighter that will dovetail seamlessly with the versatile F-22, allowing the Air Force to continue operating effectively and decisively in high threat environments against increasingly sophisticated enemies."
Source : Northrop Grumman Corporation
LM F-35 Program Achieves Critical Milestone - STOVL Variant Completes Successful "Power On"
(Fort Worth, Texas, October 26, 2007) -- Electrical power was applied to the Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] F-35B Lightning II for the first time Thursday night, initiating a series of ground tests that will lead to the inaugural flight of the short-takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) stealth fighter next spring.
"The successful 'power-on' demonstrates that the integration of this unique aircraft is progressing to plan. It signals that production of our first F-35B Lightning II is on track for first flight next year, a key step toward realizing the aviation future of the U.S. Marines, the Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy," said Dan Crowley, Lockheed Martin executive vice president and F-35 program general manager. The aircraft is scheduled to roll out of the factory in December.
The F-35 will be the most electronically advanced aircraft ever built, with capabilities unavailable in current multi-role fighters. The F-35B's power-on is an incremental process of testing the aircraft's circuits, electronic components and wiring.
"This event is one of the major milestones in the life of the STOVL aircraft and we have eagerly anticipated it for some time," said Maj. Gen. C.R. Davis, F-35 program executive officer. "The F-35 has the most complex electrical system of any fighter to date. We had great success with the first jet we flew, but that jet taught us some very important lessons about its electrical system and those lessons have been incorporated into the jet we powered up today. So congrats to the team and on to first flight."
Source : Lockheed Martin
(Palmdale, Calif., October 26, 2007) -- Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE:NOC) today completed the center fuselage for the first weight-optimized Air Force F-35 Lightning II aircraft -- a conventional take-off and landing (CTOL) variant designated AF-1.
The milestone comes just 24 hours after the company officially began the first phase of F-35 low rate initial production by starting the fabrication of a single-piece, all-composite inlet duct for the Air Force's first production F-35. That duct is being produced at Northrop Grumman's composites manufacturing center in El Segundo, Calif.
The company celebrated the AF-1 production milestone with a ceremony at its F-35 assembly facility in Palmdale, Calif. The ceremony, which coincided with today's sixth anniversary of the awarding of the original F-35 system development and demonstration prime contract, was attended by Northrop Grumman employees and executives from Lockheed Martin and the U.S. Department of Defense's F-35 Lightning II Program Office.
"The completion of the AF-1 center fuselage on schedule and on cost reinforces Northrop Grumman's commitment to help our customers field the most reliable, versatile and affordable 5th generation fighter," said Janis Pamiljans, F-35 program manager for Northrop Grumman's Integrated Systems sector. "Our disciplined production and assembly processes help ensure the quality and reliability of this multi-role aircraft for U.S. warfighters and our international F-35 partners."
The AF-1 center fuselage is one of 19 center fuselages Northrop Grumman is producing for the current system development and demonstration (SDD) phase of the F-35 Lightning II program. To date, the company has delivered center fuselages for six F-35 aircraft, including AA-1, the first F-35 aircraft to fly; and BF-1, the first F-35 short take-off/vertical landing (STOVL) variant. BF-1 will be the first F-35 to be delivered to the U.S. Marine Corps.
"Meeting these key program production commitments on time helps ensure that the F-35 Lightning II will enter the U.S. Air Force inventory as scheduled in 2013," said Major General Charles R. Davis, the Defense Department's F-35 Program Executive Officer. "The F-35 will provide the service with a powerful, multi-role fighter that will dovetail seamlessly with the versatile F-22, allowing the Air Force to continue operating effectively and decisively in high threat environments against increasingly sophisticated enemies."
Source : Northrop Grumman Corporation
LM F-35 Program Achieves Critical Milestone - STOVL Variant Completes Successful "Power On"
(Fort Worth, Texas, October 26, 2007) -- Electrical power was applied to the Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] F-35B Lightning II for the first time Thursday night, initiating a series of ground tests that will lead to the inaugural flight of the short-takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) stealth fighter next spring.
"The successful 'power-on' demonstrates that the integration of this unique aircraft is progressing to plan. It signals that production of our first F-35B Lightning II is on track for first flight next year, a key step toward realizing the aviation future of the U.S. Marines, the Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy," said Dan Crowley, Lockheed Martin executive vice president and F-35 program general manager. The aircraft is scheduled to roll out of the factory in December.
The F-35 will be the most electronically advanced aircraft ever built, with capabilities unavailable in current multi-role fighters. The F-35B's power-on is an incremental process of testing the aircraft's circuits, electronic components and wiring.
"This event is one of the major milestones in the life of the STOVL aircraft and we have eagerly anticipated it for some time," said Maj. Gen. C.R. Davis, F-35 program executive officer. "The F-35 has the most complex electrical system of any fighter to date. We had great success with the first jet we flew, but that jet taught us some very important lessons about its electrical system and those lessons have been incorporated into the jet we powered up today. So congrats to the team and on to first flight."
Source : Lockheed Martin
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i guess we will have to wait and see, when in a few years the RAAF's FA18F's take on the RMAF's SUK's when both aircraft are operational in exercisers -if the rumoured results of when the IAF suks took on the USAF latest F15's is anything to go with,i guess will find if the FA18F is all that its cracked up to be. according to 4corners it will be a slaughter.
good luck boys
good luck boys
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking at that US navy pic above by "Spanner Turner" I think the winner is Air Marshal Geoffrey Shepherd, he got to do something no RAN pilot can ever do these days, the CAT launch and TRAP.
Here's a couple more of him on the roof of USS Kitty Hawk
http://www.navy.mil/management/photo...-8591H-059.jpg
http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=48333
Here's a couple more of him on the roof of USS Kitty Hawk
http://www.navy.mil/management/photo...-8591H-059.jpg
http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=48333
Last edited by wessex19; 30th Oct 2007 at 00:16.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: God's Country
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What the?
Now I really don't have a dog in this fight one way or another , but I watched this program lat night and came away with the feeling that it was just a big beat up on Boeing and they struggled to make a coherent point on the other stuff.
Yes Boeing tried to sell Oz new airplanes, that is what they do. However, they also have the contract to maintain the F-111s.
What other point were they trying to make, that the F-111 is better to plug the gap for the next ten years while we wait for a new aircraft that may never arrive?
And the F-111s are?????? I know which plane I would rather go against a Su in, one with an Air-to-Air radar and a BVR weapon.
No it is not, neither is an F-111, that is why we are buying JSF. What the?
Substandard as compared to what???
Plus, in their first hypothetical they had F-111's going downtown to Jakarta in response to militias attacking troops in East Timor. Hardly a likely response, taking out radars and comm facilities in Jakarta is hardly going to have a big impact on militia troops in East Timor, I would think Close Air Support would be a more likely response.
Then in the second hypothetical they had 16 Super Hornets going against a wall of Su-30s. Well how do you think 6 or so serviceable F-111s are going to go against a wall of Su-30s. Again I think I would rather have the Air-to-Air radar, and BVR stand-off weapon.
Yes Boeing tried to sell Oz new airplanes, that is what they do. However, they also have the contract to maintain the F-111s.
What other point were they trying to make, that the F-111 is better to plug the gap for the next ten years while we wait for a new aircraft that may never arrive?
Cabinet decided to buy 24 Super Hornets as a stopgap measure until the new Joint Strike Fighter is delivered in 2014.
...
Ex-Air Commander Peter Criss says the Super Hornets are no match for the new Russian Sukhoi fighters that the Indonesians and Chinese are buying.
...
Ex-Air Commander Peter Criss says the Super Hornets are no match for the new Russian Sukhoi fighters that the Indonesians and Chinese are buying.
"Contrary to the claims it's not a fifth generation fighter. It's not stealthy," he said.
There are also claims that the temporary replacements to the F111s are substandard
Plus, in their first hypothetical they had F-111's going downtown to Jakarta in response to militias attacking troops in East Timor. Hardly a likely response, taking out radars and comm facilities in Jakarta is hardly going to have a big impact on militia troops in East Timor, I would think Close Air Support would be a more likely response.
Then in the second hypothetical they had 16 Super Hornets going against a wall of Su-30s. Well how do you think 6 or so serviceable F-111s are going to go against a wall of Su-30s. Again I think I would rather have the Air-to-Air radar, and BVR stand-off weapon.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets face it. The Hornet is a small aircraft with limted capability. Same goes for the newer models. Australia has been flying them for ages now, they have only ever gone overseas in anger once and all that really involved was menial flying about in circles miles from any real threats or hostile forces. The Americans allowed them to drop a few bombs on sand dunes to make them feel like they were involved in the campaign, the hornets returned, the pilots got a different coloured flying suit smothered with ridiculous macho "Operation Tactical Desert Eagle Sabre Deny Intercept" badges to remind them of their stint in the sandpit and the hornets purpose in life now is to fly around the occasional airshow or car race as a PR exercise.
If Australia was involved in a hostile campaign to hold the best display at a car race then our hornet pilots would be streaks head!
If Australia was involved in a hostile campaign to hold the best display at a car race then our hornet pilots would be streaks head!
Quote:
"Very few aircraft are going to be able to get into a turning fight with this aircraft, they're not going to be able to get into that dog-fight zone," he said.
What's the one common thread that links every high scoring fighter ace since WW1? The dictum "Never, never, never get yourself involved in a turning dogfight."
Even if the F18 jocks wanted to ignore this sage advice, they'll never get the chance to do so if the other side is equipped with a superior fighter with a long range missile.
"Very few aircraft are going to be able to get into a turning fight with this aircraft, they're not going to be able to get into that dog-fight zone," he said.
What's the one common thread that links every high scoring fighter ace since WW1? The dictum "Never, never, never get yourself involved in a turning dogfight."
Even if the F18 jocks wanted to ignore this sage advice, they'll never get the chance to do so if the other side is equipped with a superior fighter with a long range missile.
Interesting how they didn't show anything from him that attempted to explain the leap in capability driven by the new weapon system (primarily derived from AESA)
-if the rumoured results of when the IAF suks took on the USAF latest F15's is anything to go with,i guess will find if the FA18F is all that its cracked up to be. according to 4corners it will be a slaughter.
As for cred. Hmmmm...Let me see now. A former Air Commander Australia with the balls to risk reputation and 'club membership' by appearing publically on a program like 4 Corners, ....or the anonymous unfounded rhetoric of ozbiggles? ....
And you're first hand familiar with the Su's avionics, weps, handling and specific force doctrine of real and potential operators with the Su27 -> 30 through 37 family and sub-variants et al are you? ...other than, like most of us, what you might have "have read in a book".
The abundantly obvious was confirmed by the process not only not going to tender, but the representatives of contenting competitors not even being 'received at court'. Smacks of, our (then) next boat, "Collins class" type political considerations over-riding sound decision making.
Oh by the way, the Collins is now the best non nuclear sub in the world at the moment
Victor 2; don't be a complete idiot
Chris Mills - never heard of him in my 15 years in the fighter world
Kopp and Goon show - most people when they get ignored for years tend to fade away; points for persistence for these two.
What 4 Corners did not show was Roberton explaining the difference between FA18E/F (original version) and the FA18E/F Block II.
The Block II is only now in production, so to compare it to the Hornet of the 90's is irrelavent. The AESA radar is the difference here, when combined with data links, jammers, HMS and a revised cockpit set-up make then two versions uncomparable. Throw in AEW&C and AAR then our northern neighbours are no-where near us.
Soviet aircraft in service with our northern neighbours have a history of major serviceability issues.
We are talking 1990 Commodore compared to 2007 Commodore, effectively same in name only.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: All over the place
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
all that really involved was menial flying about in circles miles from any real threats or hostile forces. The Americans allowed them to drop a few bombs on sand dunes to make them feel like they were involved in the campaign, the hornets returned,the pilots got a different coloured flying suit smothered with ridiculous macho "Operation Tactical Desert Eagle Sabre Deny Intercept" badges to remind them of their stint in the sandpit and the hornets purpose in life now is to fly around the occasional airshow or car race as a PR exercise.
If Australia was involved in a hostile campaign to hold the best display at a car race then our hornet pilots would be streaks head!
If Australia was involved in a hostile campaign to hold the best display at a car race then our hornet pilots would be streaks head!
PS I think you've already got one. Is there a bag limit? Catch and release?
Last edited by Track Coastal; 30th Oct 2007 at 03:54.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: AUS
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Radical thought
Watching that Su-30 manoeuvring was impressive. Considering most of our Asian neighbours have these, I can't help but think you could do a lot worse and purchase these for the RAAF!