marage1does anyone know why the USAF or any other operator haven’t used the outer under wing hard points for maybe the harms
marage1that would have bought into the one fighter type in the mid 90’s instead of after 2020.
marage1replacing it with super hornets was the right thing to do . i just like the idea of a super f111. wonder what would have happen had we bought F15’s instead of the classic hornets back in the early eighties
marage1it was cost and getting parts for them that our pigs were retired and the fact that we are going for one type if fighter (F-35).the super hornets are a stop gap and will make it easier to transition to the F-35 when they arrive. though with the money spent on 14 F-35 i’d like to see what could have been done to f111’s. maybe F119 engines, new intake design Aesa radar, glass cockpit,replace pavetack with one like on the F-35,6 swivel hard points instead of 4 outer s to carry harms/aim9x, plus the bay carrying weapons again.
marage1I’d prefer to see Australian cancel JSF and opt for more Super Hornets, taking advantage of the roadmap. The threat environment through 2025 is benign enough that SHornets will suffice till then, and post-2030 who wants to be relying on F-35s anyway? I’ll take NGAD thanks.
no the Sh will do until then but we need to replace our classic hornets by 2020.which is why we need the F35.why would you rely on on SH’s when china has been developingthe J-10 to J-20.
Super Hornet has not been much more successful than Rafale when we talk about exports.. If it wasn’t for Aussies who needed an interim gap filler between F-111 and F-35, then the export record of the Super Bug would still have been zero.
if you aretalking about brazils order for rafales then why are there suggestions the navy wanted SH but had to settle for rafales for pollitical reasons maybe?. and our aussie order for them is still an order no matter how you look at it.:)
i like to see 3 SQN’s of F-35A’s about 80 aircraft 1 SQN of F-35B’s for opperating off the LHD’s,NO1sqn keep SH’s for secondry air defence,cas,inflight refuelling to supplement the 5 KC30’s, no6SQN upgraded to Growler. would have liked to have seen the F111’s fly till 2020 they could still cause trouble even for newer fighters.
goverment’s today only look to the next election not to the future. good example is Afghanistan where they seem to think this is how the next war will be fought or before were they thought of only full frontal assualts like WW2,didn’t see terrorist flying airliners into buildings when the evidence was there for them to see
marage1Bring in the OV-10X
I agree but will have 5 bladed props.
Looks good, but let’s be realistic: it doesn’t exist, whereas the Super Tucano – which can do pretty much everything the proposed
the OV-10x no but OV-10 has operated in combat from ships from the 60’s till the mid 90’s by the US and is still operated by some asian country’s.
I cant see the super tucano doing have the stuff the OV-10 could.
marage1our fa-18’s were deployed on bombing missions in the gulf, or have you forgotten
No i didn’t forget
RAAF still has access to refuelling for the Hornets, by using this company Omega Aerial Refuelling Services
Yes they do only the company was being used by the USAF at the time the RAAF wanted to send F-18’s so the F111’s were sent instead
S-70B Blackhawks can fly to Timor unrefuelled as well. It’s not all that far…
Yes true but they didn’t fly back in the same flight
marage1we 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
marage1my vote the F111c/RF111c, C130, UH-1 CH-47
Some of them were probably tasked with Recon, I know that some of the F-111’s were set up as RF-111C’s
4 RF111c infact, these were used to fly recon over east timor when it was made independent of Indonesia. these flight had no Aerial Refueling.
Aerial Refueling capacity and smart bombs make the range and payload of the F-111 less of an advantage. Remember that our B707 tankers could not refuel the F-111’s in flight.
it would have improved it. allowing it to stay over operational areas longer (like the B-1 B-52 are doing over Afghanistan and during the first gulf war where they{f-111f’s} formed wagon wheels to destroy enemy tanks dug into revetments).
With the retirement of the B-707 tankers the the A/B hornets are proving very short legged. (ie:-we sent the F-111 to red flag as it was the only aircraft able to fly there with no tanking making fewer stops along the way)
As for the F/A-18A/B’s they to were a true leap forward in technology and capability (as a kid in the 1980’s – ‘I for what it mattered’ endorsed the F/A-18 Hornet purchase, predominantly due to its two-engine ‘over-water’ reliability and its ‘medium-range’ AA engagement capability with its Sparrow MRAAM’s.
But I can not but help think(with hindsight!!) that if we had waited that little bit longer, the GD F-16 may have been the better choice – with its improved F100-engine reliability, better agility, and latter ability to use Sparrow AAM’s and later Aim-120 AMRAAM, also the fact that we could have purchased more F-16’s for the price of the F/A-18’s!!!)
Add to the fact that (and its just me!!) that we could have done without the added weight and complication of the carrier-compatibility built into the Hornet (if anything – I always thought the F-18L was a missed opportunity, which the RAAF should have pushed for with Northrop!!!!!)
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.
marage1Well, I’ve read Australia is looking to reengine its f-111’s with f-119’s for supercruise? Maybe then it can cruise at supersonic for long distances.
the f 119’s have a bigger diameter then that of the f-111’s.
The f-111 was the first aircraft to supercruise( though in clean Configuration). don’t forget the f-111 has a internal weapons bay able to carry two 2000lb bombs.
The F-111 got pretty high bypass turbofans and therefore suffered in afterburner. Add to that the high static margin and the less than perfect aft-body design, and you’ll get an aircraft that doesn’t feel home in supersonic.
you forget that supercruising is without afterburning. the f22 will burn lots off fuel too with afterburning.
having talked to pilots fly F-111c’s out of amberley say she has no problems flying at supersonic speeds, only limited by the sonic boom near populations
marage1I remember seeing something in the initial stories about the RAAF superbug deal that it WAS a stopgap measure and they would likely be bought back by the USN once the F-35 was operational. The theory being the USN would be happy to get relatively low hour, few arrested landing block 20 superbugs at about the time the first USN airframes were wearing out. Remember, the RAAF F-35 wasn’t meant to replace the legacy F-18 like the USN plans… it was to replace the F-111 while the legacy hornets were rebuilt and re-used.
The SH is only a stop cap for the pig, which will be retired in 2010( a sad day that will be):(. the hornets upgrade is almost complete. though only 3 are now having center barrels replaced.
keeping the SH will add other options too. like buddy refuelling where you wouldn’t sent a KC-30B. Our F-111,s do alot of maritime duties too, so the SH will easily fill this cap as the F-35’s won’t have anti ship missile like harpoon.
marage1the C-5 can only use main airports/ fully prepared airstrips. the C-17 was designed to land at the same locations that the C-130 can land at.
the CH47s rear rotor mounting from fuselage to rotor head can be removed as one piece in i think it was one hour(trying to find Article).
EAGL may be built like the 787 using one piece moulding of the fuselage.
marage1Never going to happen, we are not the US.
no we aren’t the US. don’t want to be, as we already have a coast guard it,s just voluntary. the US isn,t the only other country to have a coast guard.
it may encouage people to enlist in the coast guard but don’t want to join the navy.
marage1Wonder if it would be worth it for the RAN to pass the Armidales to Customs and replace them 1 for 1 with a class of 1,500-2,000t helicopter capable “sloops”.
pass the Anzac’s as well. replace these with AWD’s. Replace Armidales with LCS-2’s.
I’d like to an aussie coast guard to take over from customs and navy in patrolling our waters, freeing up these services to do their other jobs.
marage1The F-35 is two times louder as a F-15.
I had think that a stealth plane should quieter as legacy fighter.
what’s the point of steath if it can be tracked by sound( subs track other subs that way.) Tu-95’s were tracked by underwater SOSUS.
I was at the Amberley airshow last month. most poeple thought the F111 doing dump and burn was lound until the hawks and hornets took off.
on the other end of the scale was the quite Meteor,Canberra,Vampire.
how loud is the F-22 at take off won’t matter when super cruising.
How many complain about aircraft noise then go to airport to go on holiday’s?
How prime minister Kevin Rudd who over the years before he became PM
was always complaining about aircraft noise. there’s a rumour that a duff person making daily complaints to airport authorities.
Sign In
