RAAF Stopgap air plan is 'dumb'

[Occum]

The F-111 could in theory carry four SDBs internally ........
Anecdotal evidence from the tests suggested the F-111/SDB combination would be quite effective.
Magoo

Hi Magoo,

In terms of updating your knowledge base.
In reality, I suggest you will find the aircraft can carry eight SDBs or eight GBU-39s using two Smart Munition Dispenser Racks. No structural mods were required and bay does not need aeroacoustics to achieve satisfactory releases from all stations on the racks. The trials of which you speak were in 2001 and 2004.

Your anecdotal assumption is supported by hard data and fact.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Where are your 'devil's advocate' comments on post #378? I am looking forward to your insight into the costings? By the way, apart from the F-22 UPC, these figures are all traceable back to Defence and RAAF financials and statements.

Through your reluctance to comment, are you suggesting that $6bn to $10bn are worth ignoring? Or is it that numbers and hard data just aren't your forte?

WHAT THE FERK IS WITH YOUR ATTITUDE SPORT?

Whenever we seem to travel down a path of open discussion, as soon as people don't dance around the F-22 maypole you turn into a confrontational and ignorant prat.

If you don't agree with any of my comments - then so be it. I'm not the one you need to convince - and to be blunt - whoever is feeding McLellan and Bomber has made a fist of it to date. They're the ones you need to get antsy with. The Govt once put me through a Media Liaison course with the Collins fracas, maybe you could suggest to the F-22 advocates that they invest in one themselves. If you're failing "Communication 101" with me - then you sure as heck won't get past the barriers in Russell

Getting precious with people who aren't falling over the wisdom of your logic doesn't seem a terribly smart and productive way to engage in this debate. If you're seeking to create some kind of support base - then you're sure as heck not doing it properly.

To be blunt - get over it. Try and sort out the clowns who can't get the message across properly to DefMin rather than that congenital idiot in the position of Shad-DefMin. (Hint, don't try the popular press - and get someone to sit down with McLelland and draw pictures.) I always found that PowerPoint and less than 2 pages of text did the trick.

Wandering around in here becoming periodically belligerent just because some haven't genuflected in front of your efforts to convert the naysayers seems to be an utter waste of time.

I've already given my opinion. If your opinion and logic was so spectacularly concrete, then its the bosses people you need to convince. Not me.

 

[Occum]

Australia's Requirements

Dear Occum,
You see this goes right to the heart of it....I (like you) do want the best for our troops. However unlike you I do not agree that the aircraft in question (the Raptor) is far more capable (based on Australia's requirements), more cost effective or even less risky.

What are Australia's requirements?

Why will the Raptor not be more capable (than the JSF)?

Why will the Raptor not be more cost effective?

Why will the Raptor not be less risky?

I have seen a lot of opinion, rumour, perception and innuendo cited in this thread but not a lot of hard data on what is right (as opposed to who). That is why the above questions have been framed this way.

Looking forward to seeing the 'why, what and how' of the arguments rather than the 'who'.

 

[Sea Toby]

It appears to me that if the Hornets can be life extended, it would be best to do so and wait for the F-35A price to fall in the later half of the next decade. From what I have read here the F-22A is at least a $100 million aircraft in American dollars, and while the F-35A may approach $100 million in the earlier part of the decade, the price is due to drop when more are ordered during the later part of the decade, possibly down to around $50 million in Amerian dollars.

Since the difference can be as much as $50 million each, if I were an Australian I would expect my government to wait for the fire sale. Surely life extending the Hornets and/or the F-111s ain't gonna run as much as $50 million each, but ordering Super Hornets as a filler will.

THERE IS NO REASON TO RUSH INTO A JOINT STIKE FIGHTER BUY!

If for some reason the price doesn't drop for the F-35As, there is always the option for the Rafael or the Eurofighter. Both aircraft should still be in production in the later half of the next decade.

 

[Occum]

WHAT THE FERK IS WITH YOUR ATTITUDE SPORT?

Exactly the type of response expected based upon your previously demonstrated behaviours - classic avoidance and deception theory 101. Thank you for being so obliging. This will be most useful.

And all that was sought was your considered comments. Tsk, tsk!

By the way, I am not trying to convince you or win you over to any opinion or position. Clearly, unlike yours, mine is a quite different agenda which goes to the useful purpose of such Newsgroups like this, that being the sharing of knowledge through critical debate.

You might also want to read your own words about posting etiquette, though 'do as I say not as I do' is a common trait of those who practice avoidance and deception behaviour.

Once again, thanks for the case study material. Its classic.

nfloorl:

Oh, would still be interested in your considered comments on the numbers. How about a rebuttal with some supporting data?

 

[Magoo]

Round and round we go...

405 posts and counting on this thread, and yet nothing has been decided, and nobody has been swayed to cross the floor!!!
:finger :nutkick 4

If it's like this on the street (metaphorically speaking), imagine what it's like on the Hill or at Puzzle Palace!!!:eek2
As the song goes, 'Why can't we all get along?':cheers

Magoo :coffee

 

[alexsa]

What are Australia's requirements?

Why will the Raptor not be more capable (than the JSF)?

Why will the Raptor not be more cost effective?

Why will the Raptor not be less risky?

I have seen a lot of opinion, rumour, perception and innuendo cited in this thread but not a lot of hard data on what is right (as opposed to who). That is why the above questions have been framed this way.

Looking forward to seeing the 'why, what and how' of the arguments rather than the 'who'.

And another....

Why isn't Israel buying it?

It would appear that with development (and cost) the F-22 (or F-22C) may pick ISR roles but from what I have read it does not have the yet while the JSF is purpose built for it. So in that sense it is developmental (I don't argue that is the predominatnt A2A aircraft) and as such there is risk and cost (and time) associated with taking this option.

What happens if we buy the F-22 and the exclusion of all others (including other service budgets) and it is not developed beyond the current capability (lets be honest there are those in the US advocating this so it is a real risk). Then we only get about 30 to (maybe) 40 aircraft with fantastic A2A capability but limited ISR. I don't see that as best for our troops.

And finally is this aircraft going to be sold outside the US? Not so far. On this basis what other aircraft should we be looking at at this point in time? (and don't say evolved pigs).

 

[alexsa]

405 posts and counting on this thread, and yet nothing has been decided, and nobody has been swayed to cross the floor!!!
:finger :nutkick 4

If it's like this on the street (metaphorically speaking), imagine what it's like on the Hill or at Puzzle Palace!!!:eek2
As the song goes, 'Why can't we all get along?':cheers

Magoo :coffee

Sorry, should have read your post before I posted mine. Good point, nobody is answering my question any way. Time for a beer instead.

Cheers
Alex

 

[gf0012-aust]

Exactly the type of response expected based upon your previously demonstrated behaviours - classic avoidance and deception theory 101. Thank you for being so obliging. This will be most useful.

What planet are you on? What have I been avoiding? What did I say that contradicted your view on the numbers? More to the point - what is it that compels you to somehow want and get a supportive response from me as an individual - is it that important to the "cause"?

Do you disagree with the issues I raised about the Israelis and the F-22? - or do we as a combat airforce - who's last shot at an enemy fighter in anger was in 1953-54, know more than a country thats fought real air wars and combat 5-6 times in the last 58 years? Or is it remiss to draw real life parallels with real life air forces who do actually fight for a living and thus might have a clue about whats suitable?

And all that was sought was your considered comments. Tsk, tsk!

You've had considered comments - the problem is that they're not to your liking. Thats an issue for you to deal with - not me. I'm not sure how much simpler I can spell out my comments and concerns.

Clearly, unlike yours, mine is a quite different agenda which goes to the useful purpose of such Newsgroups like this, that being the sharing of knowledge through critical debate.

please tell me what my agenda is? actually, it seems that you're more interested in ramming down your own opinion and are less than charitable towards anyone who doesn't jump on the hay cart with you. thats not sharing knowledge at all - its a hyde park approach thats pretty transparent.

This forum is a vehicle for anyone to promote their own opinion - it's not exactly a vehicle of opportunity to ram same said opinion down anyones throat to gather disciples. The people you need to influence haven't been converted - gird your loins and thus spend it trying to convince them instead.

You might also want to read your own words about posting etiquette, though 'do as I say not as I do' is a common trait of those who practice avoidance and deception behaviour.

gee sport - I've been more than patient with you. The fact that you revert to pomposity to support all of your arguments and virtually drip sarcasm as a form of response hardly merits a civil response at times. My patience ran out a few minutes ago - so shoot me for not having the compassionate perseverence of mother theresa.

Once again, thanks for the case study material. Its classic.

case study material? what in? a failure of a moderator to extend their patience towards someone whos obsessed with their pet beliefs? Give me a break - Again, spend your valuable time trying to convince the cohort of F-22's advocates to lift their game in getting their message across to the people that count. If the benefits are so cut and dried, then they sure as heck are employing amateurs to date.

Oh, would still be interested in your considered comments on the numbers.

why? the numbers look fine to me - do you want the gettysburg address as an answer? where did I express disagreement with the numbers?

How about a rebuttal with some supporting data?

what have I got to rebut? you're confusing my indifference over your style of engagement on this issue with an expression of disagreement.

I've stated long and far my attitude to ADF procurement processes - to the JSF and F-22. You apparently only seem to want to focus on my complete indifference to patting you on the head in public about what you want for the RAAF. Thats what some of the more enthusiastic 16 y.o.'s get up to in here - personally I'm not up to that kind of engagement.

as for "deception theory 101" - for gawds sake - grow up. Those kinds of comments make you sound borderline delusional - I also don't have time for it or pandering to your ego. This is not "The Final Phase" site - please don't continue to confuse DT with it.

If the above isn't to your liking - then tough. Its a private forum - and thus the egalitarianism extends only so far.