Rip RAAF F111's

Wasn’t it Barnes Wallis that was responsible for the invention and development of the variable geometry wing ?

Enjoy!

Would that be Operation Eldorado Canyon ? 🙂

As well as being used in Iraq.

Didn’t the F-111, in fact, drop bombs in anger? Not Australian ones, granted, but wasn’t the Libyan attack by F-111s many years ago?

My understanding is F-111 has some pretty nasty stuff in the fuel tanks that is carcinogenic. Probably easier to bury them today and make it someone else’s problem in 50 years. :rolleyes:

That’s too common these days. Bury it, forget it, SEP in the future. It could be said the fact they never dropped a bomb in anger is testament to their deterrent value.

Had this one sent to me today![ATTACH=CONFIG]223268[/ATTACH]

Burial

Burying the darned things doesn’t seem reasonable in these so-called environmentally conscious times.

It may be practical, yes, but whatever problem there is with them will endure and require dealing with one day.

It reminds me of the pictures from the Gulf War when they buried tons of captured ammunition in the deserts. What was the point of that? It’s just a hazard waiting for another day. Why not deal with it i.e. blow it up or scrap it?

It probably just comes down to cost at the end of the day.

Anon.

Burial

Burying the darned things doesn’t seem reasonable in these so-called environmentally conscious times.

It may be practical, yes, but whatever problem there is with them will endure and require dealing with one day.

It reminds me of the pictures from the Gulf War when they buried tons of captured ammunition in the deserts. What was the point of that? It’s just a hazard waiting for another day. Why not deal with it i.e. blow it up or scrap it?

It probably just comes down to cost at the end of the day.

Anon.

As part of the purchase contract (for the above 19 ) we had to dispose / destroy the aircraft to US standards.

All very good, and an interesting piece, except that burying aircraft isn’t the US standard way of disposing of airframes.
I still think dr Strangeloves’ theory on this is the nearest to the truth!:D

As part of the purchase contract (for the above 19 ) we had to dispose / destroy the aircraft to US standards.

All very good, and an interesting piece, except that burying aircraft isn’t the US standard way of disposing of airframes.
I still think dr Strangeloves’ theory on this is the nearest to the truth!:D

This in from the Spitfire Association in Australia this morning may add to our knowledge.

Mark

Hello all

We sent this video out this morning and one of our clever Associate members has just let us know why the F111’s are being buried……

Big Steve Cormio said, “….. You will find that the frames in the video are :-

. F 111 A’s (4) we purchased in 1979-80 and converted to our F 111 C standard and

· F111 G’s (15) we purchased from the US in the early ‘90’s to cover attrition of the original F 111 C’s

As part of the purchase contract (for the above 19 ) we had to dispose / destroy the aircraft to US standards.

The surviving original Australian F111 C’s are not covered by the later contract so can be ‘lent’ to museums and community organisations for display.

Another interesting fact is that in the original agreement of the mid ’60’s if Australia waited to purchase further F 111’s it could and the US had to make the planes available at the original PRICE!!!

Hence the reason we keep coming back and did the Oliver ‘Can we please have more? ’

Over and Out.

Regards

The Spitfire Association

Steve McGregor

This in from the Spitfire Association in Australia this morning may add to our knowledge.

Mark

Hello all

We sent this video out this morning and one of our clever Associate members has just let us know why the F111’s are being buried……

Big Steve Cormio said, “….. You will find that the frames in the video are :-

. F 111 A’s (4) we purchased in 1979-80 and converted to our F 111 C standard and

· F111 G’s (15) we purchased from the US in the early ‘90’s to cover attrition of the original F 111 C’s

As part of the purchase contract (for the above 19 ) we had to dispose / destroy the aircraft to US standards.

The surviving original Australian F111 C’s are not covered by the later contract so can be ‘lent’ to museums and community organisations for display.

Another interesting fact is that in the original agreement of the mid ’60’s if Australia waited to purchase further F 111’s it could and the US had to make the planes available at the original PRICE!!!

Hence the reason we keep coming back and did the Oliver ‘Can we please have more? ’

Over and Out.

Regards

The Spitfire Association

Steve McGregor

Interesting video. The Theiss guy showboats the disposal as cutting-edge technology, but really it’s nothing any dog won’t do with a bone – dig a big hole, and bury it!

See

http://www.adf-messageboard.com.au/invboard/index.php?showtopic=1560&st=50

Airframes on offer:
a. F-111C aircraft A8-109;
b. F-111C aircraft A8-113;
c. F-111C aircraft A8-129;
d. F-111C aircraft A8-130;
e. F-111C aircraft A8-134;
f. F-111C aircraft A8-147;
g. F-111C aircraft A8-148;
h. F-111C crew module from A8-131;
i. F-111C crew module from A8-135;
j. F-111C crew module from A8-140; and
k. F-111C crew module from A8-141.

It will be interesting to see who gets the “up to seven” Pigs for museum purposes. My guess is that Temora and HARS may have a bid for them? Possibly Williamtown and Darwin may throw their name in, however they could have trouble finding undercover space.

Temora has been quite clear they only want active aircraft, and recently moved on the static Canberra there. And no, they won’t be flying an F-111.

If there’s any justice, The Queensland Air Museum should be top of that list of seven, given that it was mainly their lobbying that has made the change of policy. Not that the Minister would acknowledge that.

Certainly the F-111A with the bang-seat rather than capsule setup was a candidate for preservation – but for a US collection, having little relevance here. Evidently there wasn’t a US collection prepared to lobby hard enough to get it, which is a pity, but not a surprise, given the financial and paperwork demands that would’ve come with it.

I’m surprised, frankly, that a (presumably) hazardous material landfill dump was an ‘acceptable’ solution. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s some fallout of the political kind over this, maybe sooner than the decades the dumpers of the problem are hoping for…

Regards,

Yep… that was the one delivered for ground training.

The real tradgedy im told though is that the third prototype ejection seat equipped YF-111A was among those buried 🙁

It will be interesting to see who gets the “up to seven” Pigs for museum purposes. My guess is that Temora and HARS may have a bid for them? Possibly Williamtown and Darwin may throw their name in, however they could have trouble finding undercover space.

Hi Macca,beat me to posting that one hahaha … that news footage show the c models being buried too 😡