RAAF to get the F-22 and/or F-18E/F?
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Croppyking
I'd be interested to see the realities of the combat ranges you have quoted with similiarly configured aircraft (does this include loading stores on the outboard supers pylon?)
Originally Posted by Croppyking
My understanding of the super vs classic for front seaters is that they are almost identical aircraft to fly - ie one or two mission checkouts is all that is required on the super.....?
Magoo
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Footlights College, Oxbridge
Age: 47
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Buster Hyman
Wow! Some serious wing upgrades have gone on there! Don't think I like the red tail though...
Evertonian
I think pink would be fine....on the condition that the gorgeous little red Kangaroo is returned...I can't abide that hideous grey one!
Originally Posted by Magoodotcom
Let's order 48 Super Hornets now for 1, 6 and 77 SQNs............Then get 48 F-35s in about 2017
Labor/Beazley wants the F22 aswell. 24 F22's then your number of F35's. What balance! What structure! And we have the people resources to fix & fly those numbers.
And a missile on the Orion. To put all the villages of Asia within RAAF range.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.defence.gov.au/news/raafn...es/story01.htm
Will Nelsons call for options produce anything of substance? Or are we too far down the JSF path?
Will Nelsons call for options produce anything of substance? Or are we too far down the JSF path?
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dragon79
Will Nelsons call for options produce anything of substance? Or are we too far down the JSF path?
Cheers
CB
Originally Posted by Pass-A-Frozo
No.. Labor want to be different. Nothing strategic in their thinking.
All this with context to an agressive foreign policy and over commitment of defence resources abroad. A deterent force makes as much sense now, as it did in the 70's & 80's.
But you were just taking a political swipe anyway!
Last edited by Gnadenburg; 14th Aug 2006 at 12:59.
I read the article too. Quite a concern if a directive from the Brass. A pretty clear JSF agenda.
I would have liked them to address serious alternatives too: a hi-hi mixed fleet of 5th generation aircraft. F22's to replace F111 in a strategic deterrent role, Hornets soldier on in reduced numbers until F35 replaces them.
Also, how can the RAAF maintain and crew a 100 aircraft fleet of 5th generation fighters? We will need more pilots than we have now.
Will having such a large fleet of fighters, without an adequete number of tankers, create an 'airborne Maginot Line'?
If the RAAF deems it neccessary to have a 100 fleet of JSF's in a decade to meet emerging threats, how will a fleet of under 40 Hornets be satisfactory for the next ten years?
20 F22's now. 50 F35's when the aircraft ready. No lapse in capability, deterrence from conventional threats for the forseable future, solid alliance committment and capability, and in numbers the RAAF can crew
I would have liked them to address serious alternatives too: a hi-hi mixed fleet of 5th generation aircraft. F22's to replace F111 in a strategic deterrent role, Hornets soldier on in reduced numbers until F35 replaces them.
Also, how can the RAAF maintain and crew a 100 aircraft fleet of 5th generation fighters? We will need more pilots than we have now.
Will having such a large fleet of fighters, without an adequete number of tankers, create an 'airborne Maginot Line'?
If the RAAF deems it neccessary to have a 100 fleet of JSF's in a decade to meet emerging threats, how will a fleet of under 40 Hornets be satisfactory for the next ten years?
20 F22's now. 50 F35's when the aircraft ready. No lapse in capability, deterrence from conventional threats for the forseable future, solid alliance committment and capability, and in numbers the RAAF can crew
JSF delay may weaken defences
Cameron Stewart
August 25, 2006
THE nation's largest defence project, the $16 billion purchase of Joint Strike Fighters, could be delayed by a year at the request of the US Navy.
The move, if approved by the US Office of the Secretary of Defence, would add millions of dollars to the cost of the new planes for Australia, which plans to purchase up to 100 of them.
A year-long delay in the arrival of the JSF to Australia would also complicate plans to retire the ageing F-111 bombers from 2010.
The US Navy and Marine Corps have this month requested a 14-month delay in their initial purchases of the yet-to-fly JSF, preferring instead to spend the money on other naval priorities.
Such a move, if accepted by the US Defence Secretary, would have a ripple-like effect on the entire JSF production schedule, which aims to build more than 2000 of the planes for the US Navy and US Air Force and for nine other countries including Australia.
The RAAF hopes to receive its first JSF in 2013, but this now looks highly unlikely.
The US Navy's proposal, if approved, would be the second serious schedule change for the JSF in the past two years. In 2004, the program was delayed when designers of the yet-to-be-built plane struggled to reduce its weight.
The delays and production problems have so far pushed the expected fly-away cost of the plane for Australia from about $45 million to more than $60million.
Defence Minister Brendan Nelson has remained a staunch supporter of the JSF, but concedes that it will be the most challenging defence project in Australia's history.
Australia has paid $155 million to jointhe design of the JSF but it does nothave to commit to buying the plane until 2008.
In addition to its weight problems, which have since been solved, the JSF has been beset by serious software problems, which have prevented its hi-tech warfare systems from being properly integrated.
Defence experts in Canberra say these technical issues, production delays and cost overruns are inevitable in such a massive and ambitious project.
They cite the teething problems experienced by the F-111 strike bomber, pointing out that it became an excellent aircraft for the RAAF.
But critics say Australia should choose a tried and tested aircraft such as a version of the F-16 fighter jet or the potent but expensive F-22 Raptor.
The timing of the JSF's arrival in Australia is politically sensitive because it will almost certainly not arrive until after the F-111 strike bombers have been withdrawn from service.
Critics say this leaves Australia without a frontline strike bomber between the retirement of the F-111 from 2010 and the arrival of the JSF some time from 2013.
To partially offset this, the RAAF has ordered long-range cruise missiles - the first of their kind in Southeast Asia - to attach to its ageing F/A-18 fighters in an attempt to increase their potency.
Dr Nelson says the biggest threat to the JSF is the US political system, with Congress consistently threatening to cut the budget of the JSF program.
If this occurred, the price of the plane would skyrocket, forcing Canberra to consider alternative aircraft.
The first test flight of the JSF is scheduled to take place in Texas this spring.
Cameron Stewart
August 25, 2006
THE nation's largest defence project, the $16 billion purchase of Joint Strike Fighters, could be delayed by a year at the request of the US Navy.
The move, if approved by the US Office of the Secretary of Defence, would add millions of dollars to the cost of the new planes for Australia, which plans to purchase up to 100 of them.
A year-long delay in the arrival of the JSF to Australia would also complicate plans to retire the ageing F-111 bombers from 2010.
The US Navy and Marine Corps have this month requested a 14-month delay in their initial purchases of the yet-to-fly JSF, preferring instead to spend the money on other naval priorities.
Such a move, if accepted by the US Defence Secretary, would have a ripple-like effect on the entire JSF production schedule, which aims to build more than 2000 of the planes for the US Navy and US Air Force and for nine other countries including Australia.
The RAAF hopes to receive its first JSF in 2013, but this now looks highly unlikely.
The US Navy's proposal, if approved, would be the second serious schedule change for the JSF in the past two years. In 2004, the program was delayed when designers of the yet-to-be-built plane struggled to reduce its weight.
The delays and production problems have so far pushed the expected fly-away cost of the plane for Australia from about $45 million to more than $60million.
Defence Minister Brendan Nelson has remained a staunch supporter of the JSF, but concedes that it will be the most challenging defence project in Australia's history.
Australia has paid $155 million to jointhe design of the JSF but it does nothave to commit to buying the plane until 2008.
In addition to its weight problems, which have since been solved, the JSF has been beset by serious software problems, which have prevented its hi-tech warfare systems from being properly integrated.
Defence experts in Canberra say these technical issues, production delays and cost overruns are inevitable in such a massive and ambitious project.
They cite the teething problems experienced by the F-111 strike bomber, pointing out that it became an excellent aircraft for the RAAF.
But critics say Australia should choose a tried and tested aircraft such as a version of the F-16 fighter jet or the potent but expensive F-22 Raptor.
The timing of the JSF's arrival in Australia is politically sensitive because it will almost certainly not arrive until after the F-111 strike bombers have been withdrawn from service.
Critics say this leaves Australia without a frontline strike bomber between the retirement of the F-111 from 2010 and the arrival of the JSF some time from 2013.
To partially offset this, the RAAF has ordered long-range cruise missiles - the first of their kind in Southeast Asia - to attach to its ageing F/A-18 fighters in an attempt to increase their potency.
Dr Nelson says the biggest threat to the JSF is the US political system, with Congress consistently threatening to cut the budget of the JSF program.
If this occurred, the price of the plane would skyrocket, forcing Canberra to consider alternative aircraft.
The first test flight of the JSF is scheduled to take place in Texas this spring.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Concur with the mixed fleet, 22/35, 22/18E/F/G, 22/111, 22/15 or the 35/???.
Lets have a look at the last time we signed up to a next generation unproven air frame with our American Friends, the 111 required the F4 in the interim, ended up great, but the process took a lot longer then we expected.
Then have a look at our recent procurement experiences, Wedge tail delayed, sea sprite, well you all know the story, tiger, getting there but slowly.
Theres a song about this kind of thing, 'history repeats' would be a good fit I think.
The longer we keep our head in the sand, the bigger an issue it will become later.
Lets have a look at the last time we signed up to a next generation unproven air frame with our American Friends, the 111 required the F4 in the interim, ended up great, but the process took a lot longer then we expected.
Then have a look at our recent procurement experiences, Wedge tail delayed, sea sprite, well you all know the story, tiger, getting there but slowly.
Theres a song about this kind of thing, 'history repeats' would be a good fit I think.
The longer we keep our head in the sand, the bigger an issue it will become later.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a great article:
Didn't we consider buying the F-16, oh I don't know, 25 years ago?
"The first test flight of the JSF is scheduled to take place in Texas this spring", which is quite an achievement for a "yet-to-be-built plane".
I also like the obvious bias towards the "potent but expensive F-22 Raptor" as opposed to the purchase of cruise missiles merely being an attempt to increase the potenecy of the ageing F/A-18... clearly we should be buying a version of the F-16 instead.
But critics say Australia should choose a tried and tested aircraft such as a version of the F-16 fighter jet or the potent but expensive F-22 Raptor.
"The first test flight of the JSF is scheduled to take place in Texas this spring", which is quite an achievement for a "yet-to-be-built plane".
I also like the obvious bias towards the "potent but expensive F-22 Raptor" as opposed to the purchase of cruise missiles merely being an attempt to increase the potenecy of the ageing F/A-18... clearly we should be buying a version of the F-16 instead.
The cost of any RAAF F22 project would include additional costs of US 1 billion plus; to tweak the technology down a few levels to make the aircraft 'exportable'. 
Noted from a recent AW&ST article.
Noted from a recent AW&ST article.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any truth in the rumor (from the Australian) that the wedgetail is delayed even further and won't be delivered until August 08?
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...-31477,00.html
Don't know why anyone would think that the 16 would be a viable option, even as an interim replacement.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...-31477,00.html
Don't know why anyone would think that the 16 would be a viable option, even as an interim replacement.
Music Quizmeister
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Can'tberra, ACT Australia
Age: 67
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dragon 79:
Don't worry about any late delivery of Wedgetail - it's not a capability gap......
Because we have never had that capabilty......
I still remember sitting through a brief by Grumman (it was then from memory) explaining the capability of the E2 at Williamtown in 1976 or 77!!!!
They had a trailer parked on the base with a radar head (SSR only IIRC) on top and E2 displays inside the trailer, and we were watching traffic into and out of Sydney.
Don't worry about any late delivery of Wedgetail - it's not a capability gap......
Because we have never had that capabilty......
I still remember sitting through a brief by Grumman (it was then from memory) explaining the capability of the E2 at Williamtown in 1976 or 77!!!!
They had a trailer parked on the base with a radar head (SSR only IIRC) on top and E2 displays inside the trailer, and we were watching traffic into and out of Sydney.
