F-111buff26when did i say that? I believe that nation Vs nation warfare is likely for australia- and should be prepared for accordingly. my point is expeditionary warfare should take a backseat to conventional defence of the country!
F-111buff26I think Australia should make sure it dominates the regions airpower, and worries about expeditionary warfare later. at the moment, expeditionary warfare does not require a stealth aircraft. what radar network doesthe Taliban own that we need to avoid?;) an F-111 would bring more to the party:D
I was also meaning that instead of just F/A-18F’s, australia should only acquire E/A-18G’s. we lose the wingtip rails, but i believe the other capabilities off set the loss of the wingtip rails. and after F-35 is in service the aircraft will have a much more important role!
F-111buff26considering pakistans history of updating aircraft like Mirage & F-7, would a tornado buy be in order? from RAF, GAF or RSAF stocks? ADV variants modified for Ground attack?
F-111buff26No at all, the phrase ‘chinaman’ is a racist slur no matter what circles you move in and through its usage gate has proven himself to be a racist.
you accuse people of racism, but every discussion i see you involved with about russia, you come across racist.your opinion is just that- YOUR OPINION- the fact that most people disagree with you is just a sign that you are wrong, or the way you go about things isw wrong. take a good hard look at yourself and the way you go about things. you have made good contributions in the past, but recently have decended into flaming.
F-111buff26As every australian with an bit of defence understanding knows, F-35 is wrong for us. we could easily have got the F-22A- threaten to withdrw from the ‘ghan, if we don’t get it, or deploy an extra battalion to the ghan if we did. everyone knows one aussie battalion is worth 2 others, and america would have gladly gave us F-22A. and instead of rebarrelling legacy hornets, take the 50 best F-111’s from AMARC (and some EF-111’s) and rebarrel them. who cares about lack of stealth, speed and air cleared by F-22A would make that up, and we’d have two types of aircraft, both twin engined, with similar range, that would beat anything it came up against. the time could then be taken to develop the F-22C ground attack systems. legacy hornets could be formed into Air national guard type flights around Australia, and the rest committed to the ghan for “expenditure”, and great CAS mission experience.
i think even you cant find much fault with that scoot, but i know what you know- we are stuck with F-35, and we should just deal. but what type is best for Australia? the A, B, C? i think it should either be the B or C. B because of our purchase of the Canberra class carriers? or the C, because the extra ruggedness of the C is suited to FOB operations a bit more? could our F/A-18F be all converted to E/A-18G’s, apart fromt the loss of the wingtip rails, is their much combat ability lost or would the electronic attack capabilities negate that loss?
F-111buff26it can if plans to remain any sort of power are what they want. nuclear deterent means nothing.and any sort of conflict requiring the SSBN’s to fire would be done by america quicker and better. a change to a range of tactical nuclear weapons would make sense, and the money saved from scrapping the SSBN’s would make up the defence short fall. and without JSF, what replaces Typhoon?.
F-111buff26If you mean that they should aim to do this around the time of JSF or its replacement it would make sense, but at the moment the money invested in other systems to keep them operational would probably mean it would not make monetary sense, unless you phased out tornado, got the rest of the typhoons as 2 seaters and hand the GR.9s to the FAA and upgrade them to have asraam.and rotate 1 squadron to afghanistan, 1 squadron deployed on carrier and two at home base training and maintenance.
F-111buff26Britain will get JSF because thats what being an american ally is going to come down to. and a big part of the CVF project is british jobs, so how would that be served by buying from france an inferior system like rafale? would britain give up the JSF work share it has for itself? JSF+CVF is the future. buying systems that when introduced in 2015 will be outdated would more likely to kill the program than save it.
F-111buff26but I am talkin about the cost of doing this to 2-4 hulls(only considering the thought if the UK had done it as well) and you must take into account the 400 from the OHP’s- because if you examine the numbers after the melbourne left, they were 1300 down on the numbers before it was retired- alot of people left due to air wing being disbanded, assests moved to air force, lose of prestige from no flagship, specialist jobs no longer needed etc etc. melbornes replacement would have been a massive outlay- only if a CTOL carrier was bought could anything be salvaged from the Melbourne- the A-4G becoming dedicated attack aircraft and a possible refurbishment of the S-2G’s. please dont mistake my logic as thinking this enterprise being carried out by australia alone.
F-111buff26The Rock: General Hummel(Ed Harris)- ‘the tree of liberty is refreshed with the blood of patriots- Thomas jefferson’
John Mason in reply(sean connery) ‘ patriotism is the virtue of the viscous, according to oscar wilde’
and alsoStan goodspeed- ‘we got of on the wrong foot-stan goodspeed FBI. lets talk music-do you like the Elton John song rocket man?
Mercenary-“Idon’t like soft a** s***.
Stan goodspeed-“too bad cause its you-your the rocket man”(fires SSM into the mercenary!)
and from Navy seals- Intel guy-‘upon entering the room, did you fire your weapon?’
SEALs response-‘Fu**in A!’
F-111buff26The Rock: General Hummel(Ed Harris)- ‘the tree of liberty is refreshed with the blood of patriots- Thomas jefferson’
John Mason in reply(sean connery) ‘ patriotism is the virtue of the viscous, according to oscar wilde’
and alsoStan goodspeed- ‘we got of on the wrong foot-stan goodspeed FBI. lets talk music-do you like the Elton John song rocket man?
Mercenary-“Idon’t like soft a** s***.
Stan goodspeed-“too bad cause its you-your the rocket man”(fires SSM into the mercenary!)
and from Navy seals- Intel guy-‘upon entering the room, did you fire your weapon?’
SEALs response-‘Fu**in A!’
F-111buff26again you only pay attention to things said that can be used for your benefit. I said that if you take into condieration that if you take into the account the cost that was allocated to melbournes replacement, and the cost of two OHP’s, vs capability, makes it a possibility? who say that the ship would have kept her old boilers? if you add 1400 (melbornes crew) and the OHPs 400,
you have a respectable number. and our airwings were always modest.
F-111buff26cost was no issue for the liberal government that instigated the MELBOURNE’s replacement program. in the election it promised by both parties to replace Melbourne despite cost, but this was reneged on when labour came into power. any Australian essex would have included higher amounts of automation, a smaller air wing than american versions, and less sailing time.it would also have ment that we would not have had to purchase 2 of the OHP class frigates(which were added to replace the firepower of the Melbourne, so I have reason to believe it would have only cost a bit more in manpower and money compared to the payoffs provided
F-111buff26It could have been……..If the UK had had any foreign policy and thus doctrinal interest in maintaining a carrier fleet of limited availability and progressively degrading material state, which of course it did not. And how would Australia have magically been able to man and fund an Essex class if the British accepted one?
If the British had wanted to keep carriers in the 60s they had plenty of their own that had already hat their huge and costly reconstructions to make them jet age viable. Procuring an Essex in the late 1970s would have just been illogical. By that time the Phantom was aging, the RN was in the grip of a manpower crisis and the much more suitable Invincibles were being planned.
Gee, i guess that with the impening retirement of the MELBOURNE planned for the early 80’s that Australia would have been easy to take the crew and air wing from MELBOURNE and transferred it to another aircraft carrier? remember where INVINCIBLE was heading before the Falklands? The RAN’s manpower problems came with the loss of pride associated with losing the flagship
F-111buff26Well, I am not ranting away, just giving my point of view. As you are presenting yours. The politics was the cause of what happened there and then – not ethnic cleansing, not humanitarian disaster or something else (as there have been never found factual proofs for either of these).
I don’t like urban myths nor I need to read Venik’s page (as I haven’t for a long time). That (number of destroyed MiGs) is something what I noted back then in 1999. I was following the CNN and listening what Jamie Shea was saying. Now if you wanna say that I am lying ask the CNN for the tapes when they were covering the war and please prove me wrong. Maybe you’ve got your sources after the war when everything was fixed and corrected. Similar things were happening with numbers of destroyed tanks and APC’s. Those numbers presented by NATO officials were ridiculously high and when the KFOR has entered Kosovo all they found was that only 13 tanks and APC’s were destroyed during the time of entire war.
The NATO spent 78 days in playing the cat and mouse game. The political ghostwriters needed some aircraft and tank kills in order to justify all that tax payers money. It wasn’t nice for them to say everyday: “Today we have hit the hospital”, “Now we have hit the market”, “Yesterday we have hit the national TV headquarters”, “Tomorrow we are gonna hit that factory and then destroy that bridge”… Doesn’t sound nice, does it. And this is what they’ve been doing very successfully. And for those reasons they had to put some numbers of MiG’s destroyed or APC’s hit..Thank you for the explanation how the AGM-130 works when fired by an F-15E. Anyway, in whatever mode the AGM-130 was launched the WSO has the ability to follow its final path trough his/her screen in the cockpit. AFAIK, the AGM-130 has the retargeting ability so the impact on the bridge could have been avoided (or retargeting works only in the manual mode:confused:).
The bridge was a legitimate target by whom? The NATO? According to the UN it wasn’t as the UN have never approved the action.
Of course that they will say it was proportionate. That tribunal was formed to convict and not to judge (but I don’t want to speak about that here and know as you will accuse me for political ranting again).
Anyway TJ, we could carry on this conversation somewhere else as this is not the right place.
Best regards
I remember watching the footage of CNN at the time, no need for the tapes. Every few hours they would do a ‘recap’ of the events so far, and would replay jamie shea talking earlier. not exaggerating claims, just replays of him talking earlier. Bu to have the nerve to claim there was no ethnic cleansing going on rates with me as sick and disgusting as denying the holocaust. If you were the victim not the agressor the facts would be more clear to you.
Sign In
