Jump to content

RAAF may halve F-35 purchase


Recommended Posts

Now this is very disturbing. Due to projected budget funding downsizing by the US governement, the cost of an F-35 may well increase which meas the RAAF with halve it's projected purchase to 50. The RAAF to have only 50 combat A/C?

Bloody hell, this is going to be a real issue for Australia! Note that the delivery date has gone from 2012 to 2014.

My opinion? Cut the losses and dump the project now. There are a number of alternatives available to the ADF including (gasp) the Su-30/35.

The whole sorry story

:)

MikeJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes indeed. I remember bits of all that well.

No matter how capable the F-35 is vaunted to be, time to drop the coat tails and purchase the correct numbers of a fighter(s) that is not going to cost the bloody earth.

F-18E and F-15E combo would be a good start for investigation.

:)

MikeJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

:) can't agree with you more Mike. Time to can this whole nonsense, cut our bloody losses and move on to something that can and will do the job. We've already wasted between $M150-$M450 depending on which newspaper you read but even the lower figure is waaaaaaay too much for stuff all your honour. For that amount we could have had at least 3 Sukhois, like now, not in 8 - 19 years time maybe. This is not only beginning to look like the F111 saga all over again but even worse. More like the old army saying when on excercise. One sheet of toilet paper per man per day per haps. My opinion? Flush the whole darned program down the loo now with that one sheet of toilet paper.

To Johnny Howard, Robert Hill, and their Airships, do you read ARC? Perhaps you should to find out what your employers are saying about this whole debacle.

Cheers,

Ross.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya

From the beginning I too have thought the JSF to be a massive nightmare for the RAAF and totaly unsuited to their needs and requirments

while Id love to see aussie su-30s :wave: .... a f-15 + 18e Mix makes perfect sence.

woudl have been nice to have seen the cannarded F-15 research continue. in my totall armchair oppinion: a redesigned "4++" F-15 woudl have been alot better (kinda liek what a su-35 was to a su-27 sorta thing) new engines modified structure cannards etc.... woudl probaby work out a damsight cheaper and be better suited! :lol:

ohwell, i just hope the RAAF cuts its losses eitherway and pulls out. since our AF is down the cr@pper u aussies are our last hope! :) buy Rafales! :)

regards

Raymond

Edited by Raymond
Link to post
Share on other sites

:) Whoa,

That was a quick reply Raymond. Probably the only politically acceptable choice would be F-18E and/or modernised NEW F15s. But at what cost? If we have to also protect our cousins across the tasman we need as many fighters as we can afford as quickly as possible. That's why I think the Government here should approach the Sukhoi organization and Russian Government to see if it would be possible to get something that will meet our requirements in the very near future.

Cheers,

Ross.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ohwell, i just hope the RAAF cuts its losses eitherway and pulls out. since our AF is down the cr@pper u aussies are our last hope! :) buy Rafales! :lol:

regards

Raymond

The F/A-20 Magpie?

I'd say replace the Hornets with Super Hornets and F-111Cs with something like the Korean Strike Eagles if we can't get F/A-22s (And not very likely on that point). The Rhinos might well do something to alleviate out tanker shortage as well... :wave:

Edited by Ken Middleton
Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the JSF is that although most are buying similar aircraft they all have different requirements. The RAAF needs a good strike fighter that has long legs to patrol its vast expanses, whilst countries like the UK also need a good strike fighter but the need for long legs is not there.

In simple terms the JSF is like the Euro (currency that is) as in both are middle of the road for everyone but not a perfect match with all involved having to make compromises.

I'm most likely staeing the obvious here, but i find it had to believe governments don't see it this way.

Edited by Bullet101
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am surprised the Australian gov'ment is willing to purchase a single engine aircraft considering the ranges involved and the fact that most of the stuff is water down there!

If more people (read Countries) were willing to think outside the box (read USA) and discuss matters with other manufacturers of advanced fighters/tranports (read MIG, Sukhoi, EFA agency and Dassault) and shift the volume of purchases, the US Industrial Lobby would either sharply refine their costs down or even the US Government would cut their purchases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:explode: Amen Brothers Raymond and Bullet 101 Amen,

What many of our readers don't realize is that we have a Norht and South coast as well as an east and West coast to patrol, so our total coastline is a lot longer than theirs, giving us a requirement for an aircraft with very long legs. One that doesn't need refueling every couple of hours. I remeber many debacles with the Mirage's short legs when winds stronger than predicted on long tanscontinental westward flights caused quite a few "outlandings" at out of the way places.

For all its yet to be proven merits I don't believe the JSF is the right aircraft for Australia. Letting us out of this whole sorry mess now would pay the bill I believe.

Cheers,

Ross.

Edited by Ken Middleton
Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember the RAAF's preference for twin engined birds.

That will factor heavily, which is why I am dead keen on the Mudhen/Super Hornet combo as both fighters are twin engined.

:explode:

MikeJ

Link to post
Share on other sites
seriously... it was a good idea on paper, but let's get back to the drawing board and maybe develop an aircraft worth buying?

Oh really..... how long will that take to get a new fresh sheet design into service? How long did it take to get to point that the Eurofighter is at? The Rafale? The F-22? The Su-34? Guess you don't want anything for a few decades do you.

You can debate all you want whether the F-35 is right for country X, but if you start from scratch you had better be prepared for a long wait and while you are at it, who is going to fund this very expense new project?

Now for the guy who are all for going Su-XX, fine, ever talk to the pilots or maintenance guys who have to keep them operational? Not talking about some PR guy, or what is written by some journalist who got a ride in one or has an agenda to push, but the people who have to go out and get the job done, well I have and the story goes like this time after time, "Yeah, they are great when they work, they just don't work all that often†and "you want to talk about spares, man we are always scrounging for parts, they are never there when we need them." And this is in "peace time" try this when you really need it to go fight a war. It's a lot like the F-111, in its day, when everything worked, it was awesome, just trying to get it all to work was the problem. The Su-27 series is also a really fine set of aircraft when everything works, but like one Indian pilot said. "I get tired of being scheduled to fly and can't because the aircraft is broke, or I do get off and then have to abort, I want to be able to fly, I want an aircraft that works.†Or like one very high ranking Indian General said, "I am tired of Russian equipment; it's crap (That's the PC term) and doesn’t work." The Su-27 series really look neat, have some great camo schemes, the Russian sell them for really cheap prices (Wonder why?), I have several models of them, but I would not want to be at war and have to depend on them or plan my countries defense strategy around them being available when I really need them.

Any way, some things to think about.

Regards

Jim Barr

Link to post
Share on other sites

F-18 E, F and G. They may not be the absolute best, but they come at a reasonable price, have a pretty good reliability and MMO to flt hour ratio and will get the job done. :) :explode:

Darwin

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh really..... how long will that take to get a new fresh sheet design into service? How long did it take to get to point that the Eurofighter is at? The Rafale? The F-22? The Su-34? Guess you don't want anything for a few decades do you.

I won't get into specifics regarding certain types of aircraft (a few in both branches of service), but the aircraft types all had the life left within them to weather out the extension (and do a damn fine job of it no less). I can't speak for other countries, and if any of them put all of their eggs in one basket, well.. that's their problem.

It's not as if Lockheed-Martin was the only game in town and you'd be crazy to think that the other companies out there might not have projects waiting in the wings

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Ray,

What kind of beer would you like to drink with your guacamole?

Cheers,

Ross.

...pissst!.....u diddn thear this, but....im quite keen on the old Victoria Bitter!!! ;) :cheers:

MY 2c: Its not the development time specifically but the massive costs accrued by the JSF project for a an airfraft that is goign to take sometime to see service, further the lack of tech transfers and other issues surrounding the program. Penultimatly that this aircraft that cannot replace the capability of its predasessor combining f-18 and F-111 and the cost of the JSF vs its capabilities issnt favourible. as a F-16 successor its neato, and for european countries its fine and dandy, but as others have mentioned Australia is verry different. It jsut goes to show: nothing can screw defence forces over like political dealings! :lol:

f15smtd01.jpg

this woudl be verry nice in RAAF markings! :D

Regards

Raymond

Edited by Raymond
Link to post
Share on other sites

:cheers: Hi Jim,

Well if we want to get into spares and maintenance, (being from the ground side of military aviation) do you think that in Australia we didn't/don't have to scrounge for parts and cannibilze other aircraft to keep some others flying? Mate, all I can say is you have no idea about what goes on here. And I'm not just talking Mirages here either. I had many experiances working on C130's where I could not get the spares I and my troops needed and so we'd have to cannibilize far more often than we wanted to. When the serviceing of the cannibilized aircraft was almost finished and all the paperwork being finalized they would find a cannibilization report, have a look and the aircraft was incomplete. I my time there were some items the aircraft could fly without and we just carried forward the unserviceablity in the maintenance form until we had what we needed. Now, however with everything being computer controlled the computer won't release an incomplete aircraft for flight.

Scrounging for spares is a way of life here as well, no matter what aircaraft it is. I guess it has something to do with us being a tiny air force and not really mattering that much in the big picture of things as far as nations like the US are cocnerned. If you don't believe me just ask motty. He's also been there and done that, (and still is) but now as a civilian worker. Western aerospace companies are quite willing to make us great promises and take hugely inflated sums of money from us for their products but when it comes to putting THEIR money where THEIR mouths are it is a totally different story. And don't try to tell me it isn't. We would occasionally have aircraft company reps come to us to "see how we can help you guys with any problems you might have in the future." To hear it from their side they were going to do wonders and eat cucumbers for us, and they might as well have for all the real good they ever did us. And all this WAS during peacetime.

We haven't forgotten the problems we had getting spares form you guys sixty years ago, and the British as well. "What? Give you licences to produce P&W R2800 engines and GE turbos so you can build your own figthers? We'd prefer you buy our products, that way we can continue to sell you spares at whatever price we feel like. Yes, the CA-15 wes originally designed to have a turboed R2800. So even though there were no shortages of what we wanted they and we already had a licence to build the R1340 here we were denied what we wanted. WE even had trouble getting the Griffon engine that eventually powered the single CA15 prototype.

So there is more to this argument than just the reputation of Russian equipment. Oh, BTW, if you were talking to "a very senior Indian general", he must have been an army officer. You see the Indian Air Force uses the British rank system, so he would been an Air Commodore or above, probably above because an Air Commodore is equal to a Brigadeer General in your air force.

Cheers,

Ross.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hiya

well the Indians cant be too unhappy with their russian aircraft: there getting 29Ks for the the gorskov and are workign with russia on a 5th gen AC, not to mention signing the transport aircraft deal, the brahmos missile deal, the AL-55I jet trainer engine deal etc...

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is sorta sad what is happening to JSF. I see it steadily sinking in a nightmare. Costs are shooting up and the quality of the plane will likely be lacking. Canada is a bit player in the future of JSF. I am worried that this may be a blunder for us like it looks for Australia. I would be perfectly happy with Canada investing in the newest gen. F-18 E/F models to begin coming online in the last years of our MLU CF-18s. This means we would have to sign a contract by about 2012 with deliveries beginning 2013 though 2016. Then as the modernized CF-18s are withdrawn from service the more capable new CF-18E, CF-18F come into full sqd. service.

An alternative for us would be looking at the Eurofighter Typhoon. This is obviously a step above the F-18 E/F in total performance and probably will cost more but may last longer.

Anyways I was in its early days a big supporter of JSF, today I see it as a big black hole never making any service happy.

Edited by Les / Creative Edge Photo
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like to get into arguments because I deal with far worse situations in my job on a day to day basis. When I do see one on ARC, I usually stay away and either be amused at what's being written or just shake my head and shape my opinion(s) on the participants. Here though, I'll post a comment.

I'm with Jim here. The F-35 is being built because "legacy" aircraft such as the F-16, F-18Cs, and AV-8 Harriers are all old. Potential modern aerial adversaries and more importantly, advancements in IADS are the reasons why the JSF exists. Upgraded F-15s and F-16s would be a short term solution. IMO, the F-35 has a lot to offer and is a better solution than upgrading older platforms. As I mentioned before in an earlier topic here, it is easy to criticize and yell "cancel" to something that hasn't even proven itself yet, but it will starting late summer.

The Aussies, though, definately know their own situation far better than anyone else. If they feel that purchasing upgraded F-15Es or Super Hornets fit their requirements better, so be it and I say "go for it". I recommend getting out of the JSF program ASAP. But that is the decision of officials at the Australian Gov't Dept. Of Defense, their Parliament, and maybe their Prime Minister.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...