It amazes me the extent to which bureaucratic bungling and internal politics plays a part in Defense procurement decisions made in Australia. It almost seems like the RAAF want to deliberately turn themselves into the laughing stock of the Asia Pacific region. I simply cant see how you can justify a decision to purchase an aircraft like the Rhino that despite a whiz bang AESA radar is hopelessly too short ranged for Australia’s needs. The RAAF does not, and will not have the tanker assets to enable the Rhino to take the place of the F-111.

Ultimately any decision made in Washington could, and likely would be overturned if it was deemed in the best interests of the United States. Given that the F-35 will be freely available to America’s allies a ban on foreign sales of the F-22 doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. If the USAF was genuinely concerned about its technology falling into the wrong hands then the F-35 wouldn’t be available given that the same level of technology is being invested in this aircraft (albeit in a diluted form) as already exists in the F-22.

I’ll concede that certain countries probably wouldn’t pass muster, namely Israel, given their propensity for adapting/improving technology and then selling it on to a third party. Australia however would be a different matter, as Australia is often seen half-jokingly as the fifty-first state of the Union then the prospect of the RAAF operating the F-22A in some form or another should be of no concern to US senators. On the contrary it may well be something of a blessing in disguise. The Asia-Pacific region is fast becoming strategically the most important region in the world. With that in mind the more commonality between the USAF and the RAAF the better for both countries.

Leasing the F-22A (with an option to buy) would initially be the safest option. The main reason behind the proposed purchase of a squadron of F-18F’s is that in order to extend the life of Australia’s current F-18’s through to approx 2015 it has been discovered that a large portion of the fleet require centre barrel replacements (ouch my hip pocket!). With all the constant fuss over the the F-111 it escaped most peoples attention that it was in fact the F-18’s that were burning out their airframes. The F-111 is not the real concern its our Hornets that need replacing long before the venerable old Pig. It could prove to be a very wise investment (long term that is) to start pushing for the Raptor to replace the F-18.

Clearly, the RAAF needs both the F-22 and F-35!:diablo: Now we need just to find a way to pay for them……………….:eek:

Well now you’ve gone and opened a can of worms. 😉

Dare I say it, perhaps Australia should be making serious advances towards the United States to allow the export of the Raptor – cue disturbing mental image of John Howard puring in Dubya’s ear. All jokes aside considering Australia’s size and geopraphical location the F-22A is a better single platform solution than the proposed F-35. Granted this is just pipe dreaming as the Raptor is politically off limits and still horribly expensive, but then so was the F-15 when it was first built.

Short of buying a specialised bomber … or duct taping the F-111s together and hoping for the best … all the RAAF can do at the moment is purchase fighter aircraft, equip them with standoff weapons and rely on tanker support.

So then why not get the duct tape out and keep the Pigs operational until the F-35 is delivered. Now before everyone rolls their eyes and tut tuts, why not weigh up the options.

Up until just recently it was always envisaged that the RAAF would continue to operate the F-111 until the F-35 was delivered. Then they suddenly decided that they would retire the F-111 by 2010 and the F-18 equipped with AGM-158 JASSM’s would take on the long range strike role. Now Brendan Nelson has stated that he is considering earmarking 3.5 billion dollars to purchase a squadron of Super bugs as a stopgap, despite repeated assertions in the past that the government and the RAAF were not going to even entertain any thought of a stopgap aircraft. So just what is going on in Canberra and do we even need a stopgap aircraft?

Contrary to popular belief the F-111’s are despite their age, structurally in very good shape, a point conceded by the RAAF when questioned by the media as to why they intended to bring forward the aircraft’s retirement to 2010. In fact the best the RAAF could come up with was that the aircraft should be retired on the grounds that an unforeseeable structural failure could occur. A risk of an unforeseen structural failure is a fact of life in all flying be it a Tigermoth or a Raptor. To pass that of as the reason for the Pigs demise is frankly an insult to most peoples intelligence.

The other popular reason often bandied about in the media for canning the F-111 is that being an old aircraft it is no longer survivable and cannot be integrated into a combined strike package. Well that’s a load of ******** which has been repeatedly blown out of the water during recent Red Flag deployments where the performance of the F-111 has left more than a few keen observers slack-jawed in amazement. The F-111’s ability as a bomb truck has never been in question so it makes no sense whatsoever to replace it with an aircraft that simply isn’t designed for hauling heavy loads over a long distance.

So what needs doing to keep the F-111’s as a viable option through to 2015 given that that is the time frame for the delivery of the F-35? Well not as much as many people might think. Considering that the most difficult phase, that is the transition to a digital avionics suite was completed in the 1990’s with a path for further incremental upgrades already in place the next logical step on the “Pig wish list” would be new engines. The USAF had already conducted a successful feasibility study to retrofit its fleet of F-111F’s with the F110 engine. If the performance gains seen with the F-14 when it traded up to the F110 from the TF30 are anything to go by then the F-111 would benefit from just such un upgrade. At a unit price of $US4-5 million each the the engine upgrade is not only a fairly simple upgrade that would deliver substantial performance gains as well as lowering maintenance costs and down time it is a financial bargain. When you consider that the government is apparantly willing to part with up to 3.5 billion dollars merely on a stopgap aircraft then upgrading the F-111 starts to make a whole lot of sense. With that sort of money you could probably start entertaining thoughts of an AESA radar upgrade as well.

Just a thought, ever wondered just how effective a squadron of upgraded F-111’s (F110 engines, new radar, glass cockpit) each carrying four AGM-158 JASSM’s would be?

The F-111 won’t be an easy aircraft to replace but the thing is that Australia doesn’t need a bomb truck anymore … the F-18F has adequate range and performance to do the job.

Considering that the RAAF is only planning on having four new tankers by about 2010 I’d have thought the combat radius of the Rhino would be of considerable concern. Furthermore it strikes me as being rather cavalier to suggest that the RAAF doesn’t need a long range strike asset like the Pig. If Afghanistan taught us one thing it was that you can never have too many long range bombers. While where on the subject of combat radius I thought this article on the Super Hornet was interesting if a little worrying as well.

Battle Of The Superfighters