Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
I'm just a tad worried about the range/payload comparison with the JSF. I have a feeling this airframe will not be remembered as one of the greats - it's not optimised for any particular task. Part stealthy, not much range (though better than an FA18) and too much of a compromise design (the basic structure has to be designed to handle CTOL carrier landings - adds weight and reduces payload.).
There was a proposal put forward to re-engine the F111 - toss out the TF33's (50/60's technology) and whack in a pair of F110's - bang up to date. More thrust, more reliability, (maybe even the ability to supercruise?), lower fuel burn so more range or payload. The avionics have been progressively updated to an 80/90's level, why not the powerplants? I believe there were enough airframes at the Arizona Boneyard a few years back to ensure the pick of low fatigue airframe components... Oh well too late now
We could then have chosen a smaller number of F22's (yes I know the septic's haven't released them for overseas sales yet - they would have with the right persuasion) and had a proper air superiority fighter to defend the pigs. If the close support/interdiction role was needed then a squadron purchase of FA 18F's (as is already coming) or more Hawks (maybe 200's) could have filled the role.
Force could have looked like this 12 - 18 F111 'upgrades', 30 odd F22's, 24 or so fA18F's/Hawk 200's.
Instead we'll have all the eggs in the JSF basket. Hope it works...
Aaah Boarder Man did you hit a hot spot with that post!!! You got a reaction from a few people here because the RAAF's platform choices have been brought up a few times before, and did we have some BATTLES over it! Whewie!!! It got so hot you could see steam coming of the screen!!! have a look:
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4973
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5982
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6190
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5920
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6089
The F111 is an awesome platform, its just beutifull. But the fact is thats its a 1970's platform that is just not surivable in the curent threat environment. We didnt send it to GW1 or 2, even with with all the support of the USAF due to this fact. As it stands now the F111 is totally relyant on fighter assets in any scenario's that include enemy fighters or a decent IADS, which is alot of scenario's. Its primary function, long range deep strike, is constrained by the range restrictions of escorting assets, hence the need to "self escort".
In order for it to be combat viable into the next decade or 2 the pig doesent need to just be up engined, what it would need is an overhal of the likes of that outlined by the infamous Dr Carlo Kopp and his F111S concept, because anything less would be useless given threat capabilities. Lets have a look at the F111S idea. Assuming the US allowed export for all the following technologies, it required:
- Up engining with F119
- Replacing the radar with the APG 79
- life extention prosesses for the airframe
- F35 RAM used for a new skin to lower the platforms huge RCS
- the engine nosells from the F35 to reduce IR signature
- A whole new avionics package, lifted from the F18E/F
- Software to goven the whole platform
This would require the whole airframe to be striped to the bone, a new pair of engines that would be a different size and shape to be installed. The whole skin of the aircraft to be replaced with composits used on the F35. The whole avionics pacage would need to be replaced from the radar to the operating system to the flight instrements. This hurculean task would in reality envolve manufacturing a new aircraft in the same shape of as the F111, and was "claimed" to cost less than $4bn...
nfloorl: The australian taxpayer would have to shoulder the truely massive risk of a project of this scale and complexity that would be bound to have massive set backs and budget blowouts (especially with a budget that optomistic). If you look at the Super Seaspite project, that only envolved new a new, unique avionics package being installed, a much simpler task than the F111S idea and its running years and years behind. What would the RAAF do while the pigs were being upgraded for 10 years??? Anyways if somehow this ridiculously complex project was completed this century what would the commonwealth have for its blood, sweat, tears, money, reduced combat capability during upgrade time and decade of time passed??? A mongerell of a platform that was part F35, part F18F, part F22 and part F111, but enjoyed the benifits on none of them. It would be faster with the F119's installed and it may even supercruse, but its fast now and that doesent really change the game that much. It would have a lower RCS due to the F35's RAM but its total RCS would still be huge given the shape of the platform, especially the engine placement and inlets. I would guess it would be much larger than an F35, in the ballpark of a clean F18F, hardly spectacular. Its IR supression would be better than it is now, especially due to the fact it wouldn't need to use the burners but that is less important because its RCS would still be large enough to be detected at very long range. in an air superiority role it would be AMRAAM capable, but it isnt a platform i would take into battle against any sort of air threat. imagine the thing trying to maneuver???? like a pig i suspect. pluss we would have a totally unique platform with alll the costs of maintinance, upgrades and systemic or individual problems being sholdered by the Commonwealth.
Basically we would be in the same boat we're in right now. The platform would not be survivable without fighter escort so its range would be irrelevent. As an air superiority platform it is a joke, as an ISR platform it would be simlar to an F18F at twice the price, as a CAS platform it would not be as capable as the F35, and in the deep strike role (the pigs fortey) it would be less capable than an JASSM equiped F35/F18F. The high speed low altiude ingress is now outdated and irrelevent. Much better results can be achieved by LO platforms in high altitude profiles, equiped with stadoff weapons and good electronic warfare capability, all with mich less risk. The ONLY thing it would do any better than the current options (not mentioning the F22) would be as a high speed interceptor, but thats it.
In conclusion its a stupid idea. The whole concept of the F111 is outdated, and the masssive cost and risk of heavily upgradeing the platform would be rewarded with what??? A fast lemon thats what. A strike platform that is outclassed by the F35, an ISR platform that would be outclassed by the F35, an air superiority platform that would be outclassed by (you guessed it) an F35 and an F18F. All for huge risk and huge cost. Instrad we get 4 squadrons of 5th generation multi role platforms that will be better strike adn better airsuperiority platforms than our F111S with a mounten of risk removed. I dont understand Carlo's thinking on that one, if the F22 was for sale why not just buy an extra squadron instead of bothering with the F111, its a far better deep strike platform and interceptor???
As far as the F35, the combination of LO, networking, AIM120D/ASRAAM, and EW will make any 5th generation platform far superior to any legacy platform in battle. that combination ensures information dominance and the ability to detect, engage and kill without counter detection. The F35 is definatly the best choice as the basis of the future RAAF orbat, but a sqadron of F22's would be beyond perfect, giving us a hi/lo mix on par with the USAF. Alas the export ban is unliekely to be lifted and in that case 4 squadrons of F35's, will be more than enough to handle most situations, the only problem thay will haveis with the cruise missile threat, as the F35 will be a poor interceptor.
And just 1 question, why on earth would the RAAF want hawk 200's exept as a lead in fighter when they can afford super bugs, eagles or even better lighnings??????
