Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Gixer on February 23, 2008, 01:35:27 PM
-
C'mon guys let us have em... :D
Ironic, all that ore we are selling to the Chinese means we have cash to spare for new weapons.. :lol
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/national/australia-launches-bid-for-f22-fighter/2008/02/23/1203467451381.html
Fixed... ;)
...-Gixer
-
Need to fix your link. :)
-
what does Australia need F22's for? You gona go to war with NZ?
-
Originally posted by john9001
what does Australia need F22's for? You gona go to war with NZ?
What about the giant monster to the NW known as China?
-
I don't have a problem selling F22's to Australia or Japan, who may want them too.
It would lower our per unit cost.
-
Originally posted by AquaShrimp
What about the giant monster to the NW known as China?
why would china attack ozzy land, china already has enough desert.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
I don't have a problem selling F22's to Australia or Japan, who may want them too.
It would lower our per unit cost.
Yes it would, by distributing the R/D costs' out over a larger run of planes. Japan, however, might wanna just build them under license, like they do alot of other planes.
And don't forget, Hillary will let them sell the tooling to China when she gets' elected! :aok :rofl
-
I thought the ozzies were going to purchase the jsf. wonder what changed their mind.
-
Originally posted by john9001
what does Australia need F22's for? You gona go to war with NZ?
We keep beating them at rugby, so probably yes.
-
Originally posted by john9001
what does Australia need F22's for? You gona go to war with NZ?
Can you say Indonesia?
-
Originally posted by john9001
why would china attack ozzy land, china already has enough desert.
When they both are squabbling over resources in neutral territory, Australia will need some of our fine post-Cold War technology.
-
Wouldnt an ICBM do the job cheaper?
:)
-
With the kind of conflicts Australia typically involves herself in the F-22 aint going to win them any wars, but when you are upgrading your air force why not buy the best?
-
they should buy some from the Russians without breaking the bank;)
-
Originally posted by SD67
Can you say Indonesia?
I agree that having 200+ millions orthodox Muslims that near is not quite comfortable, but I thought Indonesia isn't a threat to anyone since mid-60s when USSR stopped building their navy. Do you guys think they'll build rafts and invade?
What I can't understand at all is why the hell ANZAC were involved in Vietnam war. I realized that only when I talked to a police officer (he showed me a place where I can smoke) in Beenleigh, he had a medal... hmmm how to say it... sign, a "medal band", and he said he was in Vietnam. What for? What did you guys forget there?
-
Well once they (the Indonesians) run out of room they are going to have to start looking elsewhere and the wide open spaces afforded by Australia are viewed with some envy by these rapidly overcrowding countries. For as long as I can remember we have been turning away boatloads of them trying to sneak in to the county. They already have somewhat of a bad opinion of us due to our forces aiding the East Timorese in their battle for independence.
Our involvement in Vietnam began with the reign of King Bob the 1st through the short reign of King Harry (who did the Harold Holt on us), King Johnny the 2nd and King Billly the 2nd winding up with the short reign of King Gough shortly before the Guv stabbed him in the back. You can view a more comprehensive timeline here: http://www.vvaa.org.au/calendar.htm
-
Australia is actually situated in an area of the world that is already a hotly contested resource zone. First there is Australia herself. She is chockful of strategic minerals such as iron ore, nickel, bauxite/aluminium, copper, gold, silver, uranium, diamond, opal, zinc, coal, oil shale, petroleum, and natural gas.
In her region Lie some of the most hotly contested sight of offshore oil, most of all the Spratly Island area.
Also the waters around her play host to the largest commercial transport and fishing fleets in the world. They are hotspots for pirates and drug dealers. And geographically Australia has been cursed with a huge and wild border area. Add to all this they have a history of conflict with the regions Totalitarian states.
Why else would they build the most remarkable system of radar , JORN, the world has ever seen?
So theres no question Australia needs a strong defense. And theres no question America needs her to. The question is do we go past the JSF and sell them the F-22? I myself say no.
The thing is the F-22 will "win wars". Thats why we built it and thats why so many want it. It is the most vital war winning system we have right now. It is that undefeatable. With the F-22 we are guaranteed to achieve air dominance and you saw what that did to the Iraqis in the Gulf Wars.
-
They're making a push for Rabaul. 65 years late. :)
-
Tough question. The U.S. has always sold first line military equipment to its strongest allies, although sometimes the very latest updates or gizmos are not included.
Like the F-18 instead of the F-15, the F-35 sounds like a better fit for Australia than the F-22, at least initially, although the Aussies have preferred twin engines for a little more safety margin.
As world population growth continues, particularly in Asia, Australia and New Zealand need all they help they can get to maintain their sovereignty.
-
I can understand why the aussies wants the F22 over the JSF.
Everything speaks for it when you see that some of the neighbours are buying top russian stuff. The JSF was never intended for, nor will it be a great air-superiority fighter. I really hope we also skip that plane and go for one of the competitors or beg for the F22.
-
Originally posted by john9001
what does Australia need F22's for? You gona go to war with NZ?
Lol I had always thought that if we hadn't sold the F16 to so many folks, we would never have needed to BUILD the F22, (Does ANYTHING own the F16?)
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Lol I had always thought that if we hadn't sold the F16 to so many folks, we would never have needed to BUILD the F22, (Does ANYTHING own the F16?)
Yes. It gets more problematic when you add the awesome Yank support mechanism/systems behind it. But yes others build airplanes that would out fly and outfight the F-16. At the top of my head the French and the Russians have. And the Chinese have rolled out their shiney new F-16 clone. The world is quickly becoming populated with air forces that could bloody a F-16/15 equipped air force.
Which is why we dont want anyone rolling out an F-22 clone.
But nowadays the better flying aircraft doesnt necessarily win. The aircraft with the most LOS/stealth, better radars, better weapons, will most likely win. The stealth/radar/weapon/speed package behind the F-22 makes it the most dominant air defense fighter to ever take to the skies.
It IS a War Winner. Just a dozen or two stationed off the south Islands of Japan changes the balance of power in the region tremendously.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Australia is actually situated in an area of the world that is already a hotly contested resource zone. First there is Australia herself. She is chockful of strategic minerals such as iron ore, nickel, bauxite/aluminium, copper, gold, silver, uranium, diamond, opal, zinc, coal, oil shale, petroleum, and natural gas.
In her region Lie some of the most hotly contested sight of offshore oil, most of all the Spratly Island area.
Also the waters around her play host to the largest commercial transport and fishing fleets in the world. They are hotspots for pirates and drug dealers. And geographically Australia has been cursed with a huge and wild border area. Add to all this they have a history of conflict with the regions Totalitarian states.
Why else would they build the most remarkable system of radar , JORN, the world has ever seen?
So theres no question Australia needs a strong defense. And theres no question America needs her to. The question is do we go past the JSF and sell them the F-22? I myself say no.
The thing is the F-22 will "win wars". Thats why we built it and thats why so many want it. It is the most vital war winning system we have right now. It is that undefeatable. With the F-22 we are guaranteed to achieve air dominance and you saw what that did to the Iraqis in the Gulf Wars.
Seriously, no one should be this sold on the F-22 yet. I guess you forgot that the Swedish Gripen recently waxed the F-22 21-0 in dogfights over Alaska. The Gripen didn't lose a single aircraft, in combat or in operational readiness. You'll say it's just practice...but you practice how you play, when it comes to playing war.
I'm not sold on the F-22 being so rock solid. A generation 4.5 aircraft beat out the generation 5 F-22. So, it's either the aircraft or the training...which do you want to fix it on?
-
Originally posted by MORAY37
Seriously, no one should be this sold on the F-22 yet. I guess you forgot that the Swedish Gripen recently waxed the F-22 21-0 in dogfights over Alaska. The Gripen didn't lose a single aircraft, in combat or in operational readiness. You'll say it's just practice...but you practice how you play, when it comes to playing war.
I'm not sold on the F-22 being so rock solid. A generation 4.5 aircraft beat out the generation 5 F-22. So, it's either the aircraft or the training...which do you want to fix it on?
In actual combat the Gripen will never even see the F-22, or even know its there, before its destroyed.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
I can understand why the aussies wants the F22 over the JSF.
Everything speaks for it when you see that some of the neighbours are buying top russian stuff. The JSF was never intended for, nor will it be a great air-superiority fighter. I really hope we also skip that plane and go for one of the competitors or beg for the F22.
Agreed, but honestly, i say we send them everything we can.
18's 15's 22's JFS's the works.
maby some bombs and missiles to go with them.
Nothin's to good or bad for our aussie friends.
-
Originally posted by MORAY37
Seriously, no one should be this sold on the F-22 yet. I guess you forgot that the Swedish Gripen recently waxed the F-22 21-0 in dogfights over Alaska. The Gripen didn't lose a single aircraft, in combat or in operational readiness. You'll say it's just practice...but you practice how you play, when it comes to playing war.
I'm not sold on the F-22 being so rock solid. A generation 4.5 aircraft beat out the generation 5 F-22. So, it's either the aircraft or the training...which do you want to fix it on?
I'd like to see a link to that.
-
Originally posted by MORAY37
Seriously, no one should be this sold on the F-22 yet. I guess you forgot that the Swedish Gripen recently waxed the F-22 21-0 in dogfights over Alaska. The Gripen didn't lose a single aircraft, in combat or in operational readiness. You'll say it's just practice...but you practice how you play, when it comes to playing war.
I'm not sold on the F-22 being so rock solid. A generation 4.5 aircraft beat out the generation 5 F-22. So, it's either the aircraft or the training...which do you want to fix it on?
Even if the Gripen is on our shortlist for the upcomming fighter investment i seriously doubt that. I think you may have gotten those numbers reversed so unless you can find some hard facts to back up that 21-0 in the Gripens favor i would say that you are mistaken.
Off topic... I read somewere (janes?) that the actual cost of the F22 will be very similar to, or even slightly cheaper than the F35 due to many factors even if it is more advanced. Maybe its due to a less problematic development process and the fact that they didnt have to develop 3 versions. I am pretty sure tho that the F35 is further behind schedule than the F22 was and that always adds to the cost of the end product. As far as i know the development cost of the F22 has already been payed for by the first batch of ordered planes and if further are made they will be "cheaper"
If i sat on the bag of money for the USAF i would sertainly make sure that the F22 kept rolling off the line at the expence of the F35
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
I'd like to see a link to that.
I know in mock fights F22's regularly eat several F15's for lunch simultaneously
-
Originally posted by MORAY37
Seriously, no one should be this sold on the F-22 yet. I guess you forgot that the Swedish Gripen recently waxed the F-22 21-0 in dogfights over Alaska. The Gripen didn't lose a single aircraft, in combat or in operational readiness. You'll say it's just practice...but you practice how you play, when it comes to playing war.
I'm not sold on the F-22 being so rock solid. A generation 4.5 aircraft beat out the generation 5 F-22. So, it's either the aircraft or the training...which do you want to fix it on?
Seriously, I think that has been debunked here before. You have the numbers backwards.
Sure, the Gripen is a sweet fighter and so is the Eurofighter Typhoon and the French Rafael. We also can't forget the Russian Su-34, that one is darn good as well. And all of these are much sexier looking than the F-22. :)
Nice video of a Gripen demo flight. Title says its a dogfight demo, but it just looks like a normal demo flight to me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErbKrV19Dd0
-
Originally posted by bj229r
I know in mock fights F22's regularly eat several F15's for lunch simultaneously
I've heard of as many as 5 or 6 F-15's vs one F-22 and the F-15's lose.
-
Originally posted by SD67
Can you say Indonesia?
Indeed.
We've been America's lap-dog for long enough, I think we qualify for a little preferential treatement.
Our airforce needs all the help we can get. We still have F-111s FFS :rofl
If it comes to a confrontation with Indonesia their army has the strength on us. We need overwhelming strength of technology to make up for that.
-
Originally posted by Xasthur
Indeed.
We've been America's lap-dog for long enough, I think we qualify for a little preferential treatement.
Our airforce needs all the help we can get. We still have F-111s FFS :rofl
If it comes to a confrontation with Indonesia their army has the strength on us. We need overwhelming strength of technology to make up for that.
are brown people @ north really flooding in to your country?
-
Aussies should get the f22. im sure well be getting some as well.
-
Originally posted by mg1942
are brown people @ north really flooding in to your country?
No but that's not for lack of trying. Think of Indonesia as our Mexico, we've just had a little more of a geographic advantage over the USA in that regard but we still have a hell of a lot of illegal Indonesian immigrants in this country.
China would absolutely love to see Australia as an Indonesian annexe, then they'll be free to rape our resources to their hearts' content.
-
Originally posted by MORAY37
Seriously, no one should be this sold on the F-22 yet. I guess you forgot that the Swedish Gripen recently waxed the F-22 21-0 in dogfights over Alaska. The Gripen didn't lose a single aircraft, in combat or in operational readiness. You'll say it's just practice...but you practice how you play, when it comes to playing war.
I'm not sold on the F-22 being so rock solid. A generation 4.5 aircraft beat out the generation 5 F-22. So, it's either the aircraft or the training...which do you want to fix it on?
Utterly untrue.
-
Originally posted by SD67
No but that's not for lack of trying. Think of Indonesia as our Mexico, we've just had a little more of a geographic advantage over the USA in that regard but we still have a hell of a lot of illegal Indonesian immigrants in this country.
China would absolutely love to see Australia as an Indonesian annexe, then they'll be free to rape our resources to their hearts' content.
More reasons to get off this rock.
-
Originally posted by SD67
No but that's not for lack of trying. Think of Indonesia as our Mexico, we've just had a little more of a geographic advantage over the USA in that regard but we still have a hell of a lot of illegal Indonesian immigrants in this country.
China would absolutely love to see Australia as an Indonesian annexe, then they'll be free to rape our resources to their hearts' content.
Not to disparage the quest for the F22, but in fighting off an indonesian / muslim attack force, I don't think that stealth or lack of stealth technology is going to make or break it.
-
The post you're quoting is actually in response to the question about the number of illegal Indonesian immigrants. I do however see your point. If an invasion was to occur it would most likely start as low level incursions. By the time it escalated from low level operations into a shooting war things will be different. The F22 could most certainly play a decisive role in maintaining air superiority over the Indonesian air force once the shooting starts. By then we will likely also have an invasion force infiltrated in our top end.
We do have an advantage in this department since the inhospitality of the terrain is one of our best defences.
-
Originally posted by Xasthur
Indeed.
We've been America's lap-dog for long enough, I think we qualify for a little preferential treatement.
Our airforce needs all the help we can get. We still have F-111s FFS :rofl
If it comes to a confrontation with Indonesia their army has the strength on us. We need overwhelming strength of technology to make up for that.
Oh here we go. The "Waaafest". This is why I avoid this topic in my defense forums because I cant stand hearing our friends down under describe themselves as our lapdogs in a pityparty.
Truth is there is a huge list of systems we never sold to anybody. Australia already buys some of our most sensitive systems, including the JSSM cruise missile and they are slated for more F-18s and the JSF with advanced radars.
The F-111 has had a very successful service life down under. Between them and your Collins class boats you have controlled the sea lanes around your mainland quite nicely.
-
I think you missed the sarcasm there, mate.
It was a snide comment toward our government and its policy to simply ask "how high?" when America asks us to 'jump'.
What is there to fear from us having your technology?
Do you consider Australia a threat to America? Not bloody likely, mate. We have always been right behind any action America has taken. As far as countries go, we're as close to being your brother as you can get.
The Collins submarines have been the subject of much controvesy down here too, mate.
The F-111 has indeed been fantastic but you cannot say that it has not passed its 'use by' date? We're in need of an upgrade and I would think that our record of support and loyalty should count for something in the consideration of our request.
Don't get too worked up about it, mate. We're on your side and we always have been.
-
King's English, Xasthur. It'd do you Aussies good.
-
I'd give the aussies ANYTHING they wanted.
great allies........great country.........great people.
-
(quote) I'd give the aussies ANYTHING they wanted.
great allies........great country.........great people. (unquote)
Yep, that about sums it up.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
I think you may have gotten those numbers reversed
He tends to do that.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/07/airforce_raptor_070730/
-
Originally posted by Xasthur
I think you missed the sarcasm there, mate.
It was a snide comment toward our government and its policy to simply ask "how high?" when America asks us to 'jump'.
What is there to fear from us having your technology?
Do you consider Australia a threat to America? Not bloody likely, mate. We have always been right behind any action America has taken. As far as countries go, we're as close to being your brother as you can get.
The Collins submarines have been the subject of much controvesy down here too, mate.
The F-111 has indeed been fantastic but you cannot say that it has not passed its 'use by' date? We're in need of an upgrade and I would think that our record of support and loyalty should count for something in the consideration of our request.
Don't get too worked up about it, mate. We're on your side and we always have been.
What makes' me wonder, is why you guys' don't buy from the Brits?
-
The Chinese are likely to start operational trials on their new stealth fighter this year or the next. The F-22 may be what the doctor ordered for the Aussies.
(http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/2590/19bh1.jpg)
-
That jet looks like the one Clint Eastwood snatched from the russia's in 'Firefox' ...
:)
-
And everyone has seen our railguns.
And everyone has seen our missiles that can go mach 5-6+ and hit anything they want PINPOINT.
You chinese can take your *stealth* and sit on it.
Same reason we let the russians TAKE the german's jet engines "woo we got mig jets in 2 years - russia 1947"
"woooo, we got sparrows and sidewinder's to whop your monkey arse's for the next 45+ years. - America."
Chinese better work on vis, because if it can be seen, it can be hit, instantly.
(china) we dunno, we just lost a formation of *stealth* jets over hawaii.
Stupid stupid dumb dumb.
:Edit: oh yeah, just a FYI it doesnt matter if the cross section is the size of a bee, if radar indecate's a bee flying at mach 2.3 your going to be shot at.
Sleep tight you commie sob's
-
oh my
-
I sense a nervous breakdown in your future. ;)
-
i think he might be having one now
-
aaaaaaaaaggghhh
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a107/BaDkaRmA158Th/shocked.gif)
-
(http://brian.shaler.name/images/blog/matrix-red-blue-pills.png)
-
Originally posted by BaDkaRmA158Th
And everyone has seen our railguns.
And everyone has seen our missiles that can go mach 5-6+ and hit anything they want PINPOINT.
You chinese can take your *stealth* and sit on it.
Same reason we let the russians TAKE the german's jet engines "woo we got mig jets in 2 years - russia 1947"
"woooo, we got sparrows and sidewinder's to whop your monkey arse's for the next 45+ years. - America."
Chinese better work on vis, because if it can be seen, it can be hit, instantly.
(china) we dunno, we just lost a formation of *stealth* jets over hawaii.
Stupid stupid dumb dumb.
:Edit: oh yeah, just a FYI it doesnt matter if the cross section is the size of a bee, if radar indecate's a bee flying at mach 2.3 your going to be shot at.
Sleep tight you commie sob's
Just a bunch of pajama wearing locals with some old guns - Famous last words just before the Vietnam war - America.
Never EVER underestimate your enemy....EVER!
-
Originally posted by AKIron
He tends to do that.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/07/airforce_raptor_070730/
That doesn't reference the exercise in Alaska vs the Swedish Gripen. I tried to find infos on it and failed miserably. heh
-
Generation 5.5 N.O.E.
(http://deanmassey.net/images/jet_train.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Lumpy
The Chinese are likely to start operational trials on their new stealth fighter this year or the next. The F-22 may be what the doctor ordered for the Aussies.
(http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/2590/19bh1.jpg)
Why does this plane kinda look like the YF-23????
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2b/Northrop_YF-23_DFRC.jpg)
-
They all sorta has to have similarities when the object is to be stealthy and perform the same functions. That beeing said i see just as many differences as similarities between the yf23 and the chinese version.
-
Originally posted by VooWho
Why does this plane kinda look like the YF-23????
The tail does... kinda... but the whole rest of the aircraft is extremely different. Its actually pretty sexy IMO. (unlike the F22/23/35 which are very ugly honestly).
-
Originally posted by Xasthur
I think you missed the sarcasm there, mate.
It was a snide comment toward our government and its policy to simply ask "how high?" when America asks us to 'jump'.
What is there to fear from us having your technology?
Do you consider Australia a threat to America? Not bloody likely, mate. We have always been right behind any action America has taken. As far as countries go, we're as close to being your brother as you can get.
The Collins submarines have been the subject of much controversy down here too, mate.
The F-111 has indeed been fantastic but you cannot say that it has not passed its 'use by' date? We're in need of an upgrade and I would think that our record of support and loyalty should count for something in the consideration of our request.
Don't get too worked up about it, mate. We're on your side and we always have been.
I aint worked up mate and nobody values our friendship with Australia more then I. It may surprise you guys but we Yanks love the bloody Aussies. Come to this country and you'll never have to buy a beer nor be without female company.
But every time this F-22 thing comes up we get a big Waa-fest from down under and it makes me bloody sad to hear an Aussie describe their proud and accomplished country as a US lickspittle. Especially since your own bloody people have said the 22 isn't the right airplane for you.
Because the fact is Australia has a networked defense mechanism that is second to none, most of all in your region, and most of all the RAN and RAAF. The Collins boats, weapons, and crews are so good that they could basically shut off the maritime approaches to Australia, by a potential enemy, on their own. And they are getting even better with systems like the new LHDs, JSF, and cruise missiles coming on line.
Dont make one of histories great alliances sound like a trip to a local potatohouse. Our alliance has been beneficial to both of us and thats why it continues.
The F-111 does "need and update" but why would you update a maritime strike fighter bomber with an air dominance fighter like a Raptor? It just doesnt make sense, not when the dual role JSF will fit both roles nicely. And best of all you'll get 3 for the price of one Raptor.
We dont want to sell the Raptor to other countries because we dont want to increase the chances of technology theft. The theft of the software code alone would be a huge setback for us, as would theft of the radar. While we may not worry about the Aussies once we sell the thing to one country then every customer we have would be whining for it. And within a few years the Chinese would be rolling out their shiny new J-22 stealth fighter.
I dont know whats going to happen. It might very well end up we do sell the Raptor to you. But do get your ducks in a row before you say this stuff. The Raptor is not a viable replacement for the F-111.
-
VooWho: Why does this plane kinda look like the YF-23????
Perhaps the Chinese have better taste than the USAF? ;)
-
The f-22 has always been butt ugly, even back in 96' the prototype model was just yuck (sadly it looked the same nothing changed)
I remember being young, and being sickend by the sight of it.
Then again, it was made by people who consider A-10's to be "ugly".
But like i said before, dont worry about the f-22 or the Jsf's
Push comes to shove and watermelon hits the fan, the americans will drop all the planes/types/models you can get your pilots hands on.
Just make sure you have alot of pilots in reserve ( and no aces high pilots dont count, unless..maby its a ground controled UAV fighter.)
*Sighs* course, it would be nice to have a joint venture into making a totaly new fighter strikly for aussies.
-
While the '35 is a nice plane and all it's still go the same thing that made us chose the 18 over the 16... ONE engine. Our pilots like the redundancy of a second engine particularly with the distances one may be expected to "glide" once the fan shuts down. It may appear to be a flat sandy plain out there but it's anything but and it's not a nice place to wait for help even under the best of circumstances.
I'm aware that the '22 is not going to be up to the task that the Aardvarks do but then again the reason we've kept them around for so long is that really there are very few aircraft than have the came capability as the venerable F111.With any luck we'll be getting something like the Super Hornet to pick it up when they finally get retired.
-
China people need to stop breeding so much.
They are taking all my gas.
-
mmmmm..super hornet. :aok
-
Originally posted by BaDkaRmA158Th
:Edit: oh yeah, just a FYI it doesnt matter if the cross section is the size of a bee, if radar indecate's a bee flying at mach 2.3 your going to be shot at.
Sleep tight you commie sob's
Thats funny as ****.:rofl
-
Rich46yo is quite right - currently the F-22 is not a viable replacement for the F-111.
The problem is that the past liberal govt. couldn't wait to retire the F-111, even though realistically its still has a number of years left in thier airframes/wings, and we still have stacks of spares, but for the first time ever the Liberal govt jumped at the F-18 E/F Super Hornet without even offering a tender to other manufacters! Its a joke to think we're replacing a still viable combat asset for something that trucks half the bomb load, half the distance, at half the speed!!
Our A330 MRTT's are a number of years away yet, and the Boeing delays with the Wedgetail AEW 737's are a problem, but so is the decision to bridge the JSF gap with F-18 E/F's, as is the decision to chase F-22's.
There isn't anything available like the precision bomb truck that the F-111 offers, but why decide to get not even the best 4th gen aircraft without tenders???
It smacks of political expedience, but not even smart political expedience...our immediate neighbours are buying truckloads of Su-30MK's with Indian radars and chinese technology which are the equal to our HUG F-18s and right now a Chinese Backfire could strike Australian shores without being refuelled - so we should be thinking not only long term - but our immediate to medium futures while hoping the chinese don't get a hold of the plenty of Russian Tu-22M's sitting around. The indonesians are painful - but they could hardly invade Australia...lucky for us the only people who could - are currently our best friends - but the Indo's Sukois could become a menace over the timor/indian oceans
The Koreans and Isreali's aren't idiots...we should be looking at the latest versions of F-15K, or Eurofighter - chucking away the JSF and wait to see what happens with the capability of the F-22 - not wasting all our future A330 air refuelling capacity with short legged F-18's
Tronsky
-
You aussies are actually facing many of the same problems as us it seems. Articles today here sais that the JSF is almost guaranteed to win the bid now but its one of the most useless planes for our real needs. It sais it all when the russians have actually said that they want us to choose the JSF over the EF or Gripen :rolleyes:
-
Tronski the F-111 is really a high speed bomber, it has no air to air capability to speak of. I have no idea why they put an F designation on it. It also has something most combat aircraft don't have, terrain following radar which makes it perfect for hugging the deck at high speeds.
No fighter aircraft is going to replace the capability that the F-111 brings to the table.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
You aussies are actually facing many of the same problems as us it seems. Articles today here sais that the JSF is almost guaranteed to win the bid now but its one of the most useless planes for our real needs. It sais it all when the russians have actually said that they want us to choose the JSF over the EF or Gripen :rolleyes:
At least hopefully you'll offer the EuroFighter, F-15, Rafale, or Gripen a chance to even compete, unlike our idiot ex-govt!
Originally posted by Elfie
Tronski the F-111 is really a high speed bomber, it has no air to air capability to speak of. I have no idea why they put an F designation on it. It also has something most combat aircraft don't have, terrain following radar which makes it perfect for hugging the deck at high speeds.
No fighter aircraft is going to replace the capability that the F-111 brings to the table.
Completely agree, our F-111's a still a good asset - we were too hasty in finding its retirement date, especially if we think somehow the F-18 E/F or JSF will be an adequate replacements for our current F-18 HUG's and F-111's
Tronsky
-
The Super Hornet isn't going to be as good as the F111 at doing the things it does and as I've said before, there really isn't anything out there that is. The JSF isn't even going to come close. Unfortunately the F111 fleet is aging and is becoming increasingly costly to maintain and for this reason the RAAF needs to begin considering replacements now so they have the data they need to find a suitable one when the time comes.
I think the JSF is so far from being an ideal replacement for anything in our current arsenal I don't even know why we are even entertaining the idea of using it. While the F15 is a capable airframe, I'd still prefer the F22 over it as a replacement for our F/A18's. Seriously this purchase is not ging to be happening anytime soon (inside the next 5 years) so there is plenty of time for the RAAF to sit back and gather data so they can make (hopefully) the best choice for the country and not the best one for political expediency.
-
Thats actually a bit of a fallacy when it comes to the cost and age of our F-111's, right now we have the spares - and critically the wing life till 2018...
The problem is capability - we can get the same fleet of F-15K's with all the bells and whistles that South Korea paid for almost the same amount as we will pay for the Super Hornets...Our own F-18's AND Super Hornets are completely reliant on tankers/AEW to be able to force project successfully as well as the F-111 does. Well flown Sukois could eat our strike packages for breakfast over Jakarta if we still persist with the F-18 options post 2010
The potential cost of the JSF makes the F-22 more and more attractive, but that just might not be something we can buy - the yanks don't want to sell it to the Isrealis or Japanese - our chances are pretty slim, and as for the JSF...well I'd rather be defending our shores, or supporting our diggers in Timor with large numbers of excellent F-15K's than a few costly overpriced/under armed JSF
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by -tronski-
At least hopefully you'll offer the EuroFighter, F-15, Rafale, or Gripen a chance to even compete, unlike our idiot ex-govt!
Tronsky
What plane we choose is going to be decided in 2008. The Eurofighter left the competition just before xmas because they felt that JSF was getting unfair advantages (and they are) but the gripen is still in the competition in theory. The problem is that the airforce community is too scared to lose the training that the US is and has offered since we started buying american aircraft and the US ambassador has also made direct threats to our country if we dont choose their aircraft. Sounds strange that a so old ally would do that but thats the Bush government for you.
The funny thing is that the F16s we have will actually outperform the JSF so if (when) we choose them the russians will fly in circles around our JSFs. No wonder the russians wants us to choose the JSF :lol
-
That's the bit right there.
and critically the wing life till 2018
That's only 10 short years away. We need to be in the market looking for replacements now so we have them in time for the retirement of the F111.
It's been a faithful platform for us for about 40 years now and it's going to be damn hard to replace. I wonder if we could get a coupe of surplus B-ones?
-
i maybe wrong here, but i thought the "f" designation originated because the f-111 was originally designed to be a fighter for both the u.s navy and air force but it became to big and heavy during development to fill that role. changing the designation from f to b maybe would have been too much of an admission of failure?
as for raaf f-111's, the first time i ever saw one was back in the 70's. it was making a low level pass in formation with two rnzaf a-4's over south auckland.. a very impressive sight, and it's still an impressive and formable looking bird 30 odd years later.
the a-4s are collecting dust but it's good to know that there's still plenty of life left in the raaf f-111's yet, and that there are realists on the other side of the ditch when it comes to a government's obligations and duty as regards defence and commitment with it’s allies and friend’s.. which is in stark contrast to the blinkered socialists who have reduced the rnzaf's combat capability to helos, and throwing sheep out of the back of a c-130
-
Japan began its own stealth fighter program (ATD-X) several years ago after the US refusal to sell F-22 technology. The goal is to make it all indigenous, including airframe, engines, software and advanced phased-array radar. Likely be well made and with excellent mileage. ;)
Here (http://www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.173/pub_detail.asp) is a link for more info, plus a look into other future plans.
-
Originally posted by SD67
That's the bit right there.
That's only 10 short years away. We need to be in the market looking for replacements now so we have them in time for the retirement of the F111.
It's been a faithful platform for us for about 40 years now and it's going to be damn hard to replace. I wonder if we could get a coupe of surplus B-ones?
Well the F-111's are destined to be retired in 2010, a mere 2 years away...
Originally posted by Excel1
i maybe wrong here, but i thought the "f" designation originated because the f-111 was originally designed to be a fighter for both the u.s navy and air force but it became to big and heavy during development to fill that role. changing the designation from f to b maybe would have been too much of an admission of failure?
as for raaf f-111's, the first time i ever saw one was back in the 70's. it was making a low level pass in formation with two rnzaf a-4's over south auckland.. a very impressive sight, and it's still an impressive and formable looking bird 30 odd years later.
the a-4s are collecting dust but it's good to know that there's still plenty of life left in the raaf f-111's yet, and that there are realists on the other side of the ditch when it comes to a government's obligations and duty as regards defence and commitment with it’s allies and friend’s.. which is in stark contrast to the blinkered socialists who have reduced the rnzaf's combat capability to helos, and throwing sheep out of the back of a c-130
Lovely little areoplanes those A-4K's, and when they were upgraded to Kahu's they were quite handy...I saw a few fly out of Dubbo to go bother the RAN when 2 sqn RNZAF was based there....shame helen didn't take up the F-16's - the RNZAF fighter pilots were some of the best in the world....lucky we got a lot of them for us!
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by -tronski-
Well the F-111's are destined to be retired in 2010, a mere 2 years away...
Lovely little areoplanes those A-4K's, and when they were upgraded to Kahu's they were quite handy...I saw a few fly out of Dubbo to go bother the RAN when 2 sqn RNZAF was based there....shame helen didn't take up the F-16's - the RNZAF fighter pilots were some of the best in the world....lucky we got a lot of them for us!
it’s history now but it wasn’t appreciated by a lot of new zealanders just how good the pilots and ground crews of the combat wing were, and how capable the a-4’s were after the upgrade. using ideological driven bogus reasoning helen clark and the other ex- anti vietnam war protesting socialist cronies in her government ripped the guts out of an air force that despite being small and operating on a shoe string budget by international standards is highly professional and gave the country a credible level of security, as well as contributing to regional security; and we were going to get the f-16s cheap. incidentally the national opposition party did raise the idea of reforming the combat wing when they get in to power by tacking an order for the jsf on to australia’s order for the jsf, but they quickly back tracked on that idea when they claimed the cost of the aircraft plus the cost of reforming the combat wing from scratch after so long would be too much.
Looks like I was wrong abut the f-111’s having a lot life left in them if they are going to be retired in two years. I’ll look forward to seeing their f-22 replacements when they visit this side of the ditch :)
-
It's been a faithful platform for us for about 40 years now and it's going to be damn hard to replace.
Impossible probably. There just isn't anything comparable out there. The F-111 was designed during the cold war to make low level, deep penetration strikes using it's speed as it's primary defense.
-
Originally posted by FrodeMk3
What makes' me wonder, is why you guys' don't buy from the Brits?
I'm no military purchases expert, but I would say it is mostly a matter of logistics. Of actually being able to get the equipment, parts, ammo etc down here in wartime.
Too much hostile, or potentially hostile space between here and England no matter which route you take.
Only thing between here and the West coast of the USA is the Pacific Ocean........it contains not a lot besides water, the RAN, USN, Guam, Wake, Midway, Hawaii, things like that.
Indonesia, China, Pakistan, Russia, the Middle East etc make the other choice a bit more impractical in hostile times.
There's no doubt a lot more to it than that, but there is one reason for you.
As an afterthought, the fall of Singapore and the Battle of the Coral Sea probably have as much to do with it as anything .
Those two events showed Australians which side their bread is buttered on in the military sense.
-
The F-111 was rubbish compared to the TSR-2. Blame Wilson for that!:D
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
What plane we choose is going to be decided in 2008. The Eurofighter left the competition just before xmas because they felt that JSF was getting unfair advantages (and they are) but the gripen is still in the competition in theory. The problem is that the airforce community is too scared to lose the training that the US is and has offered since we started buying american aircraft and the US ambassador has also made direct threats to our country if we dont choose their aircraft. Sounds strange that a so old ally would do that but thats the Bush government for you.
The funny thing is that the F16s we have will actually outperform the JSF so if (when) we choose them the russians will fly in circles around our JSFs. No wonder the russians wants us to choose the JSF :lol
Direct threats? So what were going to bomb you if you dont buy Yank?
Please post your links to the "F-16 is better" statement you made. Boy thats a new one. You dont know the first thing about modern military aircraft do you?
US training? What? If you buy the Eurofighter you expect us to train you in the US how to fly it? Boy...this was just a remarkable post.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Direct threats? So what were going to bomb you if you dont buy Yank?
Please post your links to the "F-16 is better" statement you made. Boy thats a new one. You dont know the first thing about modern military aircraft do you?
US training? What? If you buy the Eurofighter you expect us to train you in the US how to fly it? Boy...this was just a remarkable post.
Yes the Ambassador said that if we chose not to buy their JSF it would have serious and damaging consequences for the relationship between norway and the us.
The F16 is faster than the JSF bomber and the russian jets we have on our doorstep will fly circles around the JSF bomber. Let me know what you know about modern jets. thx
Yes it is a remarkable post but can you debunk ANY of it?
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Yes the Ambassador said that if we chose not to buy their JSF it would have serious and damaging consequences for the relationship between norway and the us.
The F16 is faster than the JSF bomber and the russian jets we have on our doorstep will fly circles around the JSF bomber. Let me know what you know about modern jets. thx
Yes it is a remarkable post but can you debunk ANY of it?
The ambassador says it would cause, "serious and damaging consequences"? How does that translate into "direct threats"? Norway is the one who agreed to fund the program at its inception, volunteered in fact, and agreed to buy the thing when it was finished. Your Government isn't beefing about the jet. Its beefing about the amount of jobs being created in Norway during the JSF contruction phase. Direct threats?:lol
In order for NATO to be able to function the NATO members have to operate the same types of weaponry.
I know this much about modern jet fighters. That air show dog and pony shows are virtually meaningless in the modern threat environment because the airplanes that electronically "see's" the other, without itself being seen, is going to have the advantage. The JSF is not just a stealth aircraft. Its a fusion of technologies that is going to enable it to win in the future threat environment. Thats radar, stealth, weapons, in a dual role package that's going to come in far cheaper then the EF.
Stealth platforms are inherently unstable because the importance is on making them as invisible as possible. Thats where they get their edge, not in flying air show loops. That we are making an airplane like the JSF, which is going to be slightly more manueverable then the modern F-16, with its far reduced radar cross section, and for the price? Its remarkable. Its not designed to fly circles around anything. It is designed to approach its target unseen, kill it, and come home.
Boy a lot of good Saddams "fast" Russian fighter jets did for him. What good are "fast jets" when nearly invisible fighter bombers are reducing your air defense network to junk? Or killing your pilots before they even know the enemy is there?
The JSF fighter program, especially for its lofty goals, has been a remarkably trouble free program. Unfortunately its also become the LA-7 of modern Internet forums when it comes to finding a subject to whine about the Americans over. And/or George Bush.
We couldnt care less what airplane you fly. Unfortunatly these Internet rumors fly at the speed of light and people actually believe them.
-
No.. threats as in threatening the relationship and alliance between our countries. I doubt this has made headline news in the US so i dont blame you for not knowing.
Your reference to equal weaponry within NATO is not correct either.
The only advantage that the JSF has is stealth (if you carry weapons and fuel inside only) and more users than the gripen plus the pilot training in the US. The stealth is useless unless we want to go bomb some foreign country or we end up in an all out war with russia and then stealth will be the least of our problems lol.
Sensor fusion as you say will be included in the Gripen and in the typhoon if they reenter the competition.
The JSF is not an interceptor and was never intended to be one.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
No.. threats as in threatening the relationship and alliance between our countries. I doubt this has made headline news in the US so i dont blame you for not knowing.
Your reference to equal weaponry within NATO is not correct either.
The only advantage that the JSF has is stealth (if you carry weapons and fuel inside only) and more users than the gripen plus the pilot training in the US. The stealth is useless unless we want to go bomb some foreign country or we end up in an all out war with russia and then stealth will be the least of our problems lol.
Sensor fusion as you say will be included in the Gripen and in the typhoon if they reenter the competition.
The JSF is not an interceptor and was never intended to be one.
So your saying that stealth is useless in the air to air role?
The JSF is a multi-role aircraft. As is the F-16. You found a way to live with the F-16 in the ATA role so what would be different with a stealth one that actually flys better? With better radar? And better range? A far better all around sensor suite?
By your definition the JSF would only be useful if you want to "bomb someone" or you, "go to war with Russia". So what pray tell are we leaving out?
The Gripen is a fine 4'th gen aircraft and other then the fact nobody really wants to buy it the Swedes are quite happy with it. It does however have rather poor range and limited capability with external ords.
Sensor fusion may be included in the Gripen, indeed the Swedes were one of the pioneers in data links but no manufacturing Base eon earth can match Americas expertise with AESA radars, data-links, AWACSs, EW systems, C4ISR capability, and CPU processing capability. The JSF is going to have 1/1,000'th the radar cross signature of an F-16. You dont think thats important in the ATA role?
Oh, and the JSF is cheaper then the EF. But thats probably because of its "useless stealth". Which reminds me how a few dozen of our crummy first gen stealth strike aircraft brought the Iraqi air force to its knees.
-
The Gripen we are offered is not the one in production today. It will have far better range than the current one, AESA radar, data-links, EW systems, C4ISR capability, and CPU processing capability just like the JSF and its faster. Its fully NATO compatible. It also costs less, requires less maintnance per flying hour and uses shorter runways.... even roads if they have to.
We need a fighter that has the speed to intercept russian backfires, bears and their fighter jets. Beeing a stealthy plane that is too slow to "meet and greet" the russians are worth very little in peace time and in times of tention. In an all out war with russia they will all get shot down anyway and stealth will not help much.
The JSF is ideal for many, but not for our use.
The F16 is faster than the JSF and with the latest upgrades it would be plenty enough for our needs for a long time if it was not for the fact that the airframes gets old.