BF2S Forums RAAF FA-18's waste of money?

whats an ICBM

sounds like fun

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

Nappy wrote:

sounds like fun

Oh yer kilotonnes of fun... unless your on the receiving end of one.

Fixed

FEOS wrote:

2. The SH's will be replacing the F-111s that the Aussies are struggling to keep in the air. The US retired those things more than a decade ago.

I would hardly say that our Air Force is struggling to keep the F111's in the air. I havent heard of too many probs with them. US retired them because they dont suit their needs any more, and they have found more suitable replacements ( which is fair enough). However they suit Aus because they have a massive range which suits the size of our country. Carry a massive payload, and have a high ceiling. They were made in the cold war for flying long distances to drop nukes on Russia, thankfully that is no longer needed. Lucky for us they are still very useful in Australia.

I live about an hour away from where they are stationed, they really look impressive when they do a fly past. Especially with their Afterburners on.

Four Corners doumentary wrote:

For more than 30 years the F-111 has ensured Australia’s air superiority in the region. In aviation circles, F-111 is considered a freak - affectionately nicknamed the pig by its pilots, there are only one or two planes in the world even today that can fly as far, as fast, and deliver as massive a bomb load as the F-111.

In 1999, 25 years after the F-111 entered service, Australia started the preliminary groundwork looking for a replacement for its fighter bombers. There was no hurry, the F-111s were in tip top shape and weren’t due to retire until 2020, two decades away.

Whatever was to replace the F-111 would have to be an extraordinary aircraft.

Burwhale the Avenger wrote:

FEOS wrote:

2. The SH's will be replacing the F-111s that the Aussies are struggling to keep in the air. The US retired those things more than a decade ago.

I would hardly say that our Air Force is struggling to keep the F111's in the air. I havent heard of too many probs with them. US retired them because they dont suit their needs any more, and they have found more suitable replacements ( which is fair enough). However they suit Aus because they have a massive range which suits the size of our country. Carry a massive payload, and have a high ceiling. They were made in the cold war for flying long distances to drop nukes on Russia, thankfully that is no longer needed. Lucky for us they are still very useful in Australia.

I live about an hour away from where they are stationed, they really look impressive when they do a fly past. Especially with their Afterburners on.

It wasn't a knock on your AF or on the jet itself...it's a matter of how old the aircraft is. As they get older, the maintenance time, resources, and cost get exponentially greater. Many times that is masked by the fine troops busting their asses on the flight line and in depot keeping the birds airworthy.

I suppose it helps that you guys have a massive pile of spare parts for your F-111s sitting in the Arizona desert.

F-111s are amazing aircraft, but they don't compete in today's air-to-air battlefield (at least not when your neighbors have SU-30MKIIs).  As a strike aircraft, they are superb.

Frankly, it doesn't sound like the F/A-18E/F really has the air-to-air capabilities the SU-30 has.  Unfortunately for Australia, the US isn't keen on selling F-22s...so basically, you're screwed against well trained Sukhoi pilots...sorry.

VspyVspy wrote:

The "Supers" are a great aircraft that will be needed to fill a capability gap left behind by our aging F111's.  The F111's (Pigs) are a fantastic aircraft that has no current day comparison in capability but they are getting too old and have issues with the fuselage cracking, which makes them unsafe to fly.  The F35 will undoubtedly be delivered late (we are supposed to get ours in 2020) so we need something to fill the gap when the F111's go. 



P.S.  I know this because our company has just been awarded the data link support contract with Boeing!! 

http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/news/b … 87106.html

F111's dont need to retire until 2020... we could have spent a few million on replacement parts from the US instead of 6.6 billion on 24 Superhornets which against any new generation enemy fighter... would be shot down

nukchebi0 wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

VspyVspy wrote:

The "Supers" are a great aircraft that will be needed to fill a capability gap left behind by our aging F111's.  The F111's (Pigs) are a fantastic aircraft that has no current day comparison in capability but they are getting too old and have issues with the fuselage cracking, which makes them unsafe to fly.  The F35 will undoubtedly be delivered late (we are supposed to get ours in 2020) so we need something to fill the gap when the F111's go. 



P.S.  I know this because our company has just been awarded the data link support contract with Boeing!! 

http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/news/b … 87106.html

F111's dont need to retire until 2020... we could have spent a few million on replacement parts from the US instead of 6.6 billion on 24 Superhornets which against any new generation enemy fighter... would be shot down

I think that is mere speculation, especially considering the relative RCS's of a Su-30 and the F-18E/F.

True... in a documentary i watched (the one posted earlier) it seemed pretty clear on the fact that the superhornet was an unnessesary buy and also does not compete with the top end new planes....

I just think its an unnessesary purchase... and that they shouldnt have rushed into such a big decision.

oh well thats my view

sgtdude1987 wrote:

Please buy Eurofighters? We have been working on them for soooo long now it would be great to sell them to anybody other than the Mid East!

Hmm yer it was one of the options pushed aside by Brendon Nelson without being examined... also a proposal by Dassault and their Rafale.

decision was rushed into...

To be honest, 24 isn't really that many, and even if the plane is slightly less maneuverable than Chinese fighters, it is better stealthed and has better weaponry.

nukchebi0 wrote:

To be honest, 24 isn't really that many, and even if the plane is slightly less maneuverable than Chinese fighters, it is better stealthed and has better weaponry.

Its stealth capabilities are very limited... really it just looks good on paper to say its stealthy...

FEOS wrote:

F-15Es are probably a much better choice to replace the F-111, given the mission of the F-111. You get increased strike capability with an actual air-to-air capability only matched by the F-15C and F-22.

As for the Su-30 argument, it is a peer with the F-15, aerodynamically. The difference lies with the avionics and pilot skill level. The SH can handle itself in a dogfight with any frontline fighter. In fact, there is that video running around the internet (and posted here a while back) of a SH with a Raptor in its gun sight.

Of course alot depends on the pilot... i think the SH's dont suit our purpose... we already have quite a few F/A-18's... i think another plane is needed for diversity... but i dont think we even need one right now...

FEOS wrote:

Keep in mind that, essentially, all the SH really has in common with the A-D models is the name.

that is true... but there are plenty of better alternatives... the US navy didnt even want to use to Super hornet until their alternative (forget name) fail miserably... we are the only country apart from america to buy super hornets.