MILAVIA Forum
Military Aviation => Military Aircraft => Topic started by: Gripen on February 26, 2007, 07:58:16 AM
-
Hmm, i love this plane.. Would love to seen some pictures and stuff on it..
its being retired from service in the RAAF from what i think is the end of next year (2008).
but i love this
so... pictures would help pretty please ;D
-
(http://C:\Documents and Settings\user\My Documents\My Pictures\F111.jpg)
-
Ok. Another lot. Missed out the first time. I didn't sketch that.
-
Look familiar, Grip? Like maybe from the RAAF?
-
Heres a couple of mine
-
You put that somewhere else already.. Was it the "show me your AFB" one?
-
Here's a bit more.
-
I love the first pic :) that looks soo cool
-
The one right at the top? I think it's cool too. Hey, i made 500 post befor you! YEEEEE HA! Just for you, Grip.
-
Does anyone know the Australian F-111 song? There's a question that will have a few of the younger jet enthusiasts busy for a while!
Oh, and by the way, I'm back! 8)
-
YAY finally another Aussie.. and Raptor, get a life..
-
Aussie Aussie Aussie! ;D
-
OI OI OI!!
LOL
-
Hey Reccejet, glad your here because Gripen is making your country look bad ;D
USA USA USA! ;D
-
WTF how am i making my country look bad?
atleast my head isnt so far up my a** to make a statement along the lines off 'why do u care? your pople arnt dying' and then try and say 'i forgot you live in Australia' >:(
-
Hey Reccejet, glad your here because Gripen is making your country look bad ;D
USA USA USA! ;D
Could you point out how you think this is the case? I'm all for people having their own opinion. This is a bloody big country and I hardly think one person could make it look bad, even if they tried!
No takers on the F111 song? Has anyone tried?
-
i didnt even know there was an F-111 song :|
-
YAY finally another Aussie.. and Raptor, get a life..
Too late...I'm already one of the undead... What's the song?
-
http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=66160 (http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=66160)
Now, Robert Menzies was walking down the street,
And thinking of our airforce which was mostly obsolete;
"Our Canberra bombers are getting old as hell,
I'd better call up Uncle Sam and see what he can sell."
Chorus:
Oh, the F-one-double one it is a lovely plane,
It flies at twice the speed of sound and scatters bombs like rain,
It's wings go back and forward, it's the latest thing around,
It's a pity that it isn't safe to take it off the ground.
He said to Uncle Sammy, "We want to buy a plane
To save our lovely country from going down the drain;
We want to scare some Asians, so see what you can do."
The answer was, "Bob, buddy, we've got just the thing for you."
Bob said, "We'll take two dozen." The plane they had to make,
And soon they had one ready, its first flight for to take,
It whistled down the runway with a dreadful roaring sound,
And then broke up in little bits and fell back on the ground.
They sent six off to Vietnam, the country to defend,
To wipe out all the Viet Cong and cause the war to end,
But Ho Chi Min said, "Comrades, don't waste our precious shells,
These brand-new planes the Yankees have all fall down by themselves."
Now years have come and years have gone, and we all still depend
On our nice old Canberra bombers our country to defend;
The plane's prices double every time one takes a spill,
And if Sir Robert was still here, we'd make him pay the bill.
And when they are all ready, and we have paid the fee,
Our Generous Uncle Sammy will make delivery,
But I doubt if it will be much good to him or you or I,
At the present rate of accidents we've got a week's supply.
-
That's a laugh, all right.
-
that got to hurt man
-
σмg тнαтѕ ƒυηηу!
-
Also read the Q&A afterwards...
http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/NelsonMintpl.cfm?CurrentId=6437 (http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/NelsonMintpl.cfm?CurrentId=6437)Australia is assured of maintaining its air combat capability edge with the Government’s decision to acquire 24 F/A-18F Block II Super Hornet multi role aircraft. At a cost of approximately $6 billion over 10 years, the acquisition of the Super Hornet will ensure the transition to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter over the next decade.
The acquisition will include 24 aircraft, initial support and upfront training for aircrew and maintenance personnel.
The Howard Government has delivered solid economic management and Budget surpluses over a decade. We are now in a position to deliver this for Australia. The acquisition of the Super Hornets will be fully supplemented as part of the 2007/08 Budget process.
The JSF is the most suitable aircraft for Australia’s future combat and strike needs. Australia remains fully committed to the JSF. But the Government is not prepared to accept any risk to air combat and strike capability during the transition to the JSF.
The F/A-18F Super Hornet is a highly capable, battle proven, multi role aircraft that is currently in service with the US Navy through to 2030. The next generation Block II Super Hornets will provide a more flexible operational capability than currently exists with the F-111.
Only last week Aviation Week reported
“Supporters of the design say it will give the Block II Boeing built Navy aircraft a fifth-generation capability similar to that of the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The Hornet’s electronic attack capabilities could become even more sophisticated with additional modifications.” – Aviation Week 26 February, 2007
It is anticipated that Australian personnel will begin Super Hornet training in the United States in 2009.
The selection of the Super Hornet builds on the Royal Australian Air Force’s deep understanding of the current F/A-18 fleet. The Block II Super Hornet will provide Air Force with the flexibility to assign all air combat crew and technical personnel across a relatively common fleet during the transition to the JSF.
The Super Hornet will be based at RAAF Base Amberley. Negotiations for commercial support arrangements will commence immediately. Defence is already engaged with Boeing and the United States Navy to ensure that the maximum potential of Australian Industry Involvement is achieved. Local Industry participation will be a key factor in developing the through life support concepts for the Super Hornets.
The Australian Super Hornet program plans to contain local contractor owned and operated intermediate maintenance and training for aircrew and support personnel. Additionally, the supply chain infrastructure, warehousing and operation will be manned locally in support of both Australian and US Navy Super Hornets in the region.
The selection of a next generation fighter allows for upskilling of the workforce. The Super Hornet brings a significant growth of capability within the support and supply chain, low observable materials (stealth), advanced sensors and IT. This will ensure that Australian industry is trained, qualified and has access to both USN and then JSF markets as they share common technologies.
This in no way diminishes our commitment to the JSF Program subject to final Government approval in 2008. Current planning is for Australia to acquire its first JSF in 2013.
There is no gap in Australia’s air combat capability and the Government is taking all necessary steps to ensure a gap does not emerge.
Air combat capability is vital to defend the approaches to Australia and enables us to operate air power on deployment overseas. Our air combat forces are a key part of enhancing our land and maritime forces. This was most ably displayed by the combat performance of our F/A-18 squadron in Iraq in 2003.
The Australian Government is committed to retaining the leading edge in air combat and the Block II Super Hornet will enable this through the next decade.
The F-111 has been a stalwart aircraft at the centre of Australia's strike capability for over three decades. The Chief of Air Force, Air Marshal Geoff Shepherd, a pilot with around 2500 hours flying F-111’s, said it is important for Australia to retire the F-111 at a time of our choosing. This ensures that the men and women who operate them are not endangered through the risks of an aging platform.
The withdrawal of the F-111 is expected in 2010 with the F/A-18F Super Hornets to be operational that same year.
Many generations of Air Force personnel and Defence civilians will be sad to see the F-111 withdrawn from service in 2010. The Government acknowledges the tireless efforts and professionalism of personnel at Amberley who have maintained this vital element of Australia's Defence. The immense experience base from decades of F-111 service will boost the new air combat capability in the coming decade.
Our nation is grateful to those who gave Australia this magnificent aircraft, those who have flown and maintained it and who will do so for a further three years.
With the C-17 and KC-30B tanker refuelling aircraft also to be based out of Amberley, as well as the Wedgetail AEW&C support centre, the region is well placed to capitalise on these significant aerospace industry involvement opportunities.
The Super Hornet provides Australia with the greatest capability enhancement and least risk option to ensure Australia’s capability edge.
-
um.. isnt the hornet like old?
-
Huh? have you ever heard of F-18E and F-18F Super Hornets?
-
Yea, but the Hornet design is old. you cant just stick some new bits into an old plane and say its brand new
-
Put the two airframes alongside each other and you will see that in size alone there is a big difference. The Super Hornet isn't simply a modified Hornet with altered intakes and a convex Leading Edge Extension.
Personally I'd rather see the Pigs replaced with Raptors instead of having a couple of dozen Super Bugs fill a gap as an interim measure. Why not retain a capability on a more permanent basis and go one step further by acquiring the Raptor? By the time the F/A-18F comes into service I think it's possible neighbouring Sukhois will be able to give the Super Bugs a run for their money.
-
One word to solve all problems:
GRIPEN :)
(the plane..not my name)
-
The F-18 E/F Super Hornet is roughly 1/3 larger than the C/D models. The only thing I can't stand about any of the Hornet models is the so-so thrust of the engines. What the Super Hornet needs engines just like the Tomcat's General Electric F110 engines that produce 27,000 lbs of thrust each. That's a total of 10,000 lbs of thrust MORE than the Super Bug's F414 engines. That would put the Super Bug past the Mach 2 Class Category, not to mention give the Bug a significant boost in a dogfight.
For once, Gripen and I agree on something - Australia could use the Gripen.
-
The F-18 E/F Super Hornet is roughly 1/3 larger than the C/D models. The only thing I can't stand about any of the Hornet models is the so-so thrust of the engines. What the Super Hornet needs engines just like the Tomcat's General Electric F110 engines that produce 27,000 lbs of thrust each. That's a total of 10,000 lbs of thrust MORE than the Super Bug's F414 engines. That would put the Super Bug past the Mach 2 Class Category, not to mention give the Bug a significant boost in a dogfight.
For once, Gripen and I agree on something - Australia could use the Gripen.
I agree there are airframes other than the F/A-18F that are better for Australia. It is unfortunate that politics has such a strong influence on defence procurements.
I'd be curious to see what the Australia could do with a few Su-35s if they had the funding fit them out with avionics and weapon systems used by the RAAF. If they can keep the Pigs up even this far into their lifespan, how much more could they do with a more modern airframe. I think a Flanker would be an aesthetically pleasing replacement for the Pig, with a nice range and speed too.
-
I may have to agree w/you on that one. I'm an American and I don't even like the Hornet for the reason I gave. I would like to see what the Australian Air Force could do w/Flankers. It would be nice if the U.S. had allies flying them; it would also give us the opportunity to see what they're really capable of.
Remember when the Soviet pilot defected w/his Mig-25 to Japan? The Foxbat was a highly feared flying interceptor, But after careful inspection, it wasn't what the West thought it was.
The Flankers are nice, but like the Eagle, the airframe is getting there in age. The Gripen would be a much better alternative, I feel. Heck, I would buy them for the USAF!!!
-
Yes but isnt in the US constitution or something that the weapons used in the US military must be American made?
-
Yes but isnt in the US constitution or something that the weapons used in the US military must be American made?
No idea if its in the constitution or not but there are plenty of examples of foreign weapons in American service. For instance: BAe T-45 Goshawk, BAe AV-8A Harrier and the Kongsberg AGM-119 Penguin. It might have something to do with the actual production of the weapon. Often the licence is acquired by an American company and the production is done in the States.
-
Yes but isnt in the US constitution or something that the weapons used in the US military must be American made?
C-27 Spartan - European origin
http://www.theaviationzone.com/factsheets/c27.asp (http://www.theaviationzone.com/factsheets/c27.asp)
AGM-142 Have Nap - Israeli origin
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/agm-142.htm (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/agm-142.htm)
Just to name a couple
-
YTes, but the BAE harrier is different to the one that the USMC uses
Isralie ORIGIN
The Spartan is modified from the G222 airframe
see? you change it all so its differnet
-
YTes, but the BAE harrier is different to the one that the USMC uses
The first American Harrier (the AV-8A) was an exact copy!
-
no, the american had radar, the british ones didnt. its in my red book!
-
Oh, yes. The little Magic Red Book.
I think i go with Joopey here...
-
Design origins are from outside the USA though, I don't think it matters too much, as long as the bulk of the production is done in the US and some percentage of offset is achieved.
Some more recent examples:
US101 "Marine One" (US version of the Merlin EH101 for the president)
Eurocopter UH-145
Airbus KC-330 (well maybe)
And an old example:
B-57 Canberra
Then there are the Mi-17 and C-212 of the CIA, hehe, but I guess the law wouldn't apply to those anyway.
-
Airbus KC-330
You're referring to the Multi-Role Tanker Transport (MRTT)? That's the KC-30B (A330 airframe)
-
Yep, hehe, KC-330 is easier to remember :P, just like KC-767. I'll call it KC-30B when it is in USAF service.
-
Marine one? i thought that was based on a blackhawk or super stallion?
-
no, the american had radar, the british ones didnt. its in my red book!
You're confusing it with the AV-8B, which initialy carried a laserdesignator in its nose and a radar in later versions (the AV-8B Harrier II Plus with an APG-65). Sorry buddy!
-
The Us should have kept the F-111 Electronic Fox for anti-radar duties. They need one that can travel fast and carry a sufficient load for this kind of assignment. But once again, politics just kills everything of value.
-
The Us should have kept the F-111 Electronic Fox for anti-radar duties. They need one that can travel fast and carry a sufficient load for this kind of assignment. But once again, politics just kills everything of value.
I agree politics do kill a lot of good projects and ideas. The F-111 is one of my favorite aircraft overall and it's shame the right upgrades didn't happen to keep this useful aircraft flying. I think part of what did it in is the overall maintenance and maybe the sweep wing too. I always wished they made a new design off of the F-111, kind of like a large F-15E with modern engines and no sweep wings but still keep the payload and range. I always felt the air force needed an aircraft larger then a F-15E but smaller then a full size bomber.
-
I found a pic of a F-111. Looks intimidating, hen?
-
It looks like a duck with an over-sized bill...
-
Looks can be deceptive
"call me a duck and i blow you up"
-
Yeah, its like a jellyfish...aww its pink and squishy how dangerous can it be? but its sting can kill you ;)
-
Finding Nemo? Sheesh.
And really, i never had much appreciation for the triple-one.
Oh, yes. Like an AIM-9. Oh, it looks so nice and cylindrical. "CAN I FLY IT? PLEASE???"
-
They will still be the most capable strike aircraft in the region until they are withdrawn. Only then will the regional Flankers be at the top of the list.
-
Hm. Flankers. You guys should get some new aircraft.
From France. Just Kidding
-
France? Rafale? Hmmm.. possibly
but no.. Stupid F-35
*growls*
-
I'd take the F-35 over almost anything else available today to meet advanced strike capabilities. The only other option I would personally consider is a later variant of the Flanker family.
The F-35 is receiving a substantial amount of negative reporting, but so do most expensive procurements when they are in the development stage. When it is finally operational I think it could well become the most capable strike fighter in the region for Australia and Singapore. It won't enjoy the range and speed of the Flanker, nor would it have the payload, but it would beat the Flanker in any other aspect.
Weapons are getting longer ranges these days and a lot of things can be done remotely. By the time the F-35 comes out, the technology it operates could make the Flanker close to obselete.
...but that's moving away from the F-111 topic. ;D
-
Why cant we just re-modernize the F-111?
-
I think you could, but the F-111 is a rather old airframe. It would take considerable work.
-
Would it be cheaper then buying the F-35's?
-
Considerably, but i don't think it would be wise to use an airframe that can be outmatched by many other new airframes from russia, ja?
-
And Russia is attacking us why?
Who would wanna attack Australia.. theres nothing here.. other then politicians and desert
-
Russia is not the problem, some people are concerned about China, Indonesia, India, Vietnam, etc. So they want to keep the F-111 for long-range interdiction, because the Hornets and F-35 lack the range. There's an entire website dedicated to this argument: http://www.ausairpower.net/
I think Australia made a good decision though, investing on Hornet upgrade, stand-off cruise missiles, tankers, AEW, and lease Super Hornet to fill the gap until F-35 enters service. Okay, so maybe they are Super Bugs, but for Australia it is the best option availabe to fill the gap, and I am glad they did recognize and fill the gap!
Of course the F-22 would be ideal, but it's not really an option for Australia (yet...), neither is buying Flankers (Su-34 would make a good replacement though, too bad it isn't made in the US of A).
The F-111s are old, dated, expensive to maintain and operate. It's time to move on and get over it.
-
The Super Hornets are a very modern aircraft overall and maybe the United States second most advance operational fighter currently flying. I can't remember if there buying Block-II or not but either way there good aircraft which can use buddy tanks to further extend there range. It gives a slightly better fighter then the early models and a good mid size striker that carries almost every weapons the US makes. People knock the Hornet because of it's range, I know overall top speed, and payload, comparing it to a F-14. It was never a fair the mighty F-14 is huge! only a Flanker is larger as far as fighters go. Never mind comparing to the range and payload of basically a light bomber in the F-111. Like the webmaster mentioned it's old and needly in maintenance department which translates into high cost. Another way of looking at is the length of time the E/F Hornet will be flying it's future. The US Navy is buying hundreds of them and plans on flying them for years. Weapons, spare parts, and upgrades will be around for a while making it a better long term investment until the F-35 is produced in numbers.
-
Yep, 24x F/A-18F Block 2s with APG-79 AESA and ATFLIR.
So they'll have a excellent FAC(A) platform as well, so you can use the old Hornets merely as bomb trucks :)
-
The Super Hornets are a very modern aircraft overall and maybe the United States second most advance operational fighter currently flying.
Not just the second most advanced operational fighter, but because the F-22 Raptor is almost solely an air superiority fighter, the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet is currently the most advanced fighter/attack(/strike) aircraft.
My concern is that the F-53 JSF will pretty much have the same role as the F/A-18E/F, being a fighter/attack airframe with limited strike capability. This is a great replacement for the RAAF's current inventory of F/A-18C Hornets, but it still doesn't fully fill the gap of the F-111's capability. Seeing as there is no real modern equivalent of the F-111 in terms of range and payload, the RAAF should consider mixing the future airframe capabilities in a different way.
Instead of F/A-18s as fighter/attack aircraft and F-111s as strike aircraft, bring in the F/A-18F Super Hornets as the interim measure for the F-111, but work towards redefining the RAAF capability and deterence through a combination of F-35 fighter/attack/strike aircraft with a couple of squadrons of F-22 fighters. The roles will change from long-range strike capability in the region (with the F-111) to negating the capability and threat of the regional Flankers through the use of the F-22. That way the JSF will simply become the advanced replacement for the Hornet and the loss of a dedicated strike platform is mitigated.
-
well, there is an equivalent of the F-111.... and it is callled Tornado ::)
-
well, there is an equivalent of the F-111.... and it is callled Tornado ::)
The Panavia Tornado is a good strike aircraft, but it doesn't have the range of the F-111. It is an equivalent in terms of strike capability, but it is not a modern equivalent. What I stated above was in the context of something in the generation range of the Super Hornet and the JSF. The Tornado made its maiden flight only 10 years after the F-111 did. That's not really recent anymore.
-
Ok, understood now. Yes, it happens to have been designed in Europe, where distances are not so bog as in your or my countries :-\
And how is the Australian aviation industry? Would it be possible for them to design something regarding your needs?
-
Australia AA is ok at the moment. The budget people have gone wacko (YAY) and decided on buying new gear like the F-35, Eurocopter Tiger, Wedgetail, C141 (? so the rumour is ?) and we're meant to be getting like 12 A-380's. These all new people to look after it and they are pretty advance aircraft which means more specialised people are needed. As far as i know, there is a good portion of our planes that are built in Australia.. so yeah we're all right. The shipbuilding on the other hand is even better, but that wasnt the question...
-
And how is the Australian aviation industry? Would it be possible for them to design something regarding your needs?
Design something? I think the last time Australia designed an aircraft it was during WW2 and the result was the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation (CAC) Boomerang. Not exactly the most competitive of fighters, but a good interim measure until the Kittyhawks and Spitfires were available.
Australia is manufacturing the Tiger armed reconnaisance helicopters, though the first two were delivered from France.
I doubt Australia has the technology, skills, funding or infrastructure to effectively design and produce an indigenous solution. That's why the Australian government jumped onto the JSF bandwagon. That will at least provide skills to the Australian aviation industry and hopefully create jobs if Australia succesfully becomes a regional maintenance hub for the JSF. Australia won't be designing any airframes, but DSTO, the defence's R&D organisation, will definitely value-add to new aircraft like they did with the F/A-18 and other aircraft.
I don't think we're going for C-141s either... but Boeing seems optomistic that the RAAF will want a 5th C-17 Globemaster III.
-
The only thing with more range than a SH/JSF considered "good enough" for Australia is the F-22. Maybe Australia should start investing on UCAV for the interdiction/strike requirements, join in with the UK and US on this.
C-141? As in Starlifter? Must be a joke. Unless they got an order to cut them into pieces? You can add MRH90 and the Super Hornet to the industry project list.
Some years ago I read a joke, I think April's fools day, that the RAAF would get second-hand B-1B bombers. If budget was unlimited, I think that would be the best option for F-111 replacement, until something like a FB-22 is available. But under the circumstances, I think they made the right decisions... although I am still not convinced about the F-35 itself.
About the Tornado, it has been extensively updated and it is currently more capable in terms of strike than the RAAF F-111s, apart from the range. 10 years in 1960-1970 era, is huge. But it is a limited platform at the end of its life. I think however that a modern new-built F-15E version, could also have filled in the gap instead of the Super Hornet. But taking in mind the existing fleet, costs, and tanker ability, the Super Bug wins.
The only other thing that comes to mind, are extended range Typhoon Tranche 3 and Rafale B, fitted with stand-off missiles and conformal fuel tanks. But Australia opted for the JSF, which makes these buys now near impossible, and created this gap in the first place. :P
-
UCAV? Whats the range on one of them?
-
UCAV? Whats the range on one of them?
How long is a piece of string? It all depends on what UCAV you're talking about, but I would guess that would be close to the endurance of a UAV. UCAVs would burn more fuel depending on what kind of profile they fly, whereas UAVs fly at a high altitude and generally cruise at a relatively fuel efficient level.
I guess the Australian UAV procurement will pave the way for a future UCAV trial for the RAAF.