it was on tv, but I’ll look after it on youtube, maybe get something

You the man!!!

Not as uncommon as some of the forum members have stated!
The earliest design of aircraft that I know that did this was the massive Convair B-36 Peacemaker bomber
It could (and did) carry two spare radial engines and maintenance gear in two large pods, when deploying to overseas bases!

Pic from National Air and Space Museum Archival

Regards
Pioneer

we may have replaced the F.111’s when the us retired there’s.if we had the F15 in service now instead of F18’s.we might have F15E.s now flying in gulf

Good point!!
And point taken!!!!!

Although it would have to have been a F-15C and F-15E mix – as I would have to imagine how many Eagles we would have ended up with if they all had been the more expensive F-15 E Strike Eagles! (from memory I read somewhere that if we purchased the F-15, we could only have afforded the likes of forty airframes tops!)
I for one would have loved to have seen the F-15 purchased over that of the F/A-18A/B’s – but I am a firm belive in the historical proven fact that in the end numbers can and more often than not count in the end – especially war!!

Hey lets not forget that the Saab Viggen was looked at as part of the Mirage IIIEO replacement RFP’s
Now this truly rugged and workman like fighter (in a multi-role fighter bomber variant!!), with it STOL, rough field performance, all-weather capability and Sparrow AAM’s would have been great.
I could see it operating from RAAF Tindal taxiways, after its main runway had been knocked out by a small Marzorian SF’s team ‘from our Northern’, in a couple of civilian acquisitioned Land Cruiser 4×4’s from the local pub, after landing on some remote airfield in a common civilian aircraft (due to our long-term neglect of a AWACS / AEW platform!)

Regards
Pioneer

I have a hard time believing that new build F-18’s are much cheaper than new build F-15’s when it comes to operational costs. Any time you reach the maximum range of the F-18 but stay inside the range of the F-15 you incur a huge financial penalty (aerial refuelling) to cover that gap. Especially when you figure in the much higher all around flexibility the F-15 gives a country with such broad borders, like Australia. F-35’s will help alleviate the problem, considering the F-35 is every bit as big and powerful as the F-15 – if not more all around flexible – when it gets down to the nitty gritty details.

Sorry MadRat

I was meaning the F/A-18A/B Hornet and F-15A/C Eagle in the 1980’s time period when the RAAF was looking for a replacement for its Mirage IIIO’s

Not the F/A-18E/F’s that I think you are thinking!!!
Even though I would opt for the latest variant of the F-15SG/K’s over that of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet!!

Regards
Pioneer

I would put it towards a much needed and productive ‘Indigenous Defence Industry’
With the ADF’s Army, Air Force and Navy having to get together working out a 10-15-years combines force (hence the term Australian Defence ‘Force’) and determine a list of priority of what it would ‘need’ (not like’!!) designed and built in Australia for the ADF’s needs and service!
So the likes of Metal Storm may have stayed in Australia,
Basic training aircraft, a much improved and coherent ship-building industry, and indigenous assault rifle, mine warfare……………………………………………………..
Then we would only need Federal Legislation relaxed – so as to allow the sales of Australian weapons & equipment to be sold on an even playing field – so as to allow this ‘Indigenous industry’ to meet other armed forces needs!!!
The existing DTO & DSTO is to political and bureaucratically controlled for my liking!!

Regards
Pioneer

Full stealth fighter won’t work, ever

Full passive tactics is something that sounds cool, but won’t work…..ever

The “you emit, you die” is a cool catchphrase…but only that.

The F-22’s radar is no way a LPI radar, it power output is higher than previous radars, it emits more energy…

Reduced RCS is ok, it helps…but a full stealthy aircraft only works on romantic movie scenes…but not in the real live..

Manned aircrafts will stay at least for the next 50 years, or even more, the tale tha UAVs will achieve 20-30-50 gs , is just that, another cool tale, the g-limit is a structural limit, not an human limit yet, the problem is that for high performance aircraft you need a machine with some size, the fuel, big engines, etc, all them need a decent room, it makes the plane big and heavy, more big and more heavy makes the structure more susceptible to loads……no matter what, a Typhoon with a pilot replaced by a robot won’t save a lot of weight, and the structural g limit will be the same..

Radar is still the best sensor, even against stealth aircraft

The lack of AB does not decrease the IR signature, that’s another tale, is a reactor, meaning that you need to jettison gas at certain temperature to achieve some speed, no matter if it has or not an AB, you still need the same quantity of energy, same temperature, same exhaust velocity….

Regarding IR “stealth” the best way is to make a plane more aerodynamic…no matter what Janes has told you

OverG
I like the way you think!!
I also think that to cut costs, it may often not pay to be as over ambitious in your design.
I have been a big fan of the ‘Fighter Mafia’s principles – which lead to the likes of the ‘Once’ big and stupidly heavy ‘Fighter Experimental’ (FX / F-15) program being reviewed and revised by members of the so-called Fighter Mafia, which made the final ‘FX / F-15’ Eagle design what it has been for the past 30-years – which was against what many in the USAF wanted or would tolerate!
Them there was the Light Weight Fighter (LWF) program, which was pushed by the ‘Fighter Mafia which everyone criticized, and the USAF tried to kill at every opportunity in the beginning because they sore it as a threat to the FX / F-15 program.
Who out there class the F-16 as a dud?
The biggest things I liked about the LWF program was –
Its principles were designed around factual information, history of air-to-air combat, and combat fighter pilots input of both the past and (then) present!

It incorporated many advanced (yet simple) techniques and ideas to achieve the likes of excellent agility, AOA, cost effectiveness in a package that allowed substantial numbers to be purchased – whilst setting standards and capability’s which all else would be judged by! (its only when the USAF began tampering with the ‘basic F-16A lightweight day fighter’ design – wanting greater air-to-ground capability, larger radar, more range, LR AA capability, did the basic principle LWF suffer some from its intended design of want! (as to did the original Northrop YF-17 to F/A-18 metamorphous!)

So what I am getting at is that there is nothing wrong with incorporating the likes of stealth into your design – after all everyone know knows the basics and importance of minimizing RCS. Use state of the art off-the-shelf avionics, which have upgrade capability and life cycle in them – as opposed to starting from scratch – of brand new aircraft and brand new engine and brand new avionics, radar and weapon systems in one package – This is called the F-22, and look how long it has taken to develop, cost, enter service and at what cost?

Maybe we need to return to a 10-15-year life cycle of fighter designs – not being as ambitious, with the ability to field far more of them at a much better cost regime?
But that will just get me accused of being a supporter of the ‘Fighter Mafia!!

Regards
Pioneer

the F15 would have been a better choice only the RAAF thought it’s production run would be short and that it’s ground attack had not been developed enough. Mirage1

Yep no argument here.
F-15’s (with latter ‘FAST’ packs) would have been an excellent system for the ADF as a whole!
But I was always under the impression that although the RAAF would have wet their pants for the F-15 Eagle, they also were very aware of its high purchase price and operational costs (the F-14 Tomcat being the most expensive of aircraft to be looked at!)

Regards
Pioneer

Something else to think about…..Did the RAAF ever consider buying Tornados to augment/replace the F-111C?
I know they bought USAF spares (FB-111A-F-111G’s), but I wonder how long would the Tornados last if the were purchased.

Tornado – not as a F-111 augment/replacement, but it was looked at early in the Mirage III replacement comp!
But due to the fact that the Tornado could not be a true multi-role platform (without having to purchase IDS or F.2 variant or both!!)

I have a write up about the Mirage Replacement Program in a mag somewhere, the contenders and why they were dropped!
I will endeavour to find it on the weekend!!

Regards
Pioneer