Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates

[Depot Dog]

I apologise I didn't mean disrespect. I was just using the Australian vanacular. If it was too strong I'll pull it back.

I do stand by my point that there is a defence sub culture out there fixed on nuclear subs. It just not here but everywhere. Read any defence article with readers comments. Out of the woodwork usually someone says get rid of the Attack Subs and go nuclear or something to that effect. Now it is B21's. The good people of this forum educating the masses (including me) on why it isn't feasible to aquire these at the moment. Please accept this and move on.

Sometimes in life the language has to be plain, simple and direct. My language was no different to what was used in the military in the 80's. Being a defence forum I thought it was okay. My language was not directed to any individual just the sub culture mentioned above. As I said above I genually apologies if I have offended anyone.

Then I brought in actual goverment statements detailing where the government was heading in the near future. I feel that Government policy is one of the best indicators to the public of where we are actually heading.I was trying to bring in reality. All I'm saying is stay in the possible and it okay to aspire and dream. But if your dreams cant happen for reasons outside your control move on. That is all I'm saying to people who think we should have nuclear subs, B21 etc.

Now to rest with a BEX and a hot cup of tea.

Regards
DD

 

[Depot Dog]

I slept on this and now I have to expand my point.

I am a member of Defence Talk Forum because I want to have rational debate about defence topics. I find this forum refreshing as you can debate a variety subjects and someone smarter than I usually gives an informative answer. I appreciate the level of tolerance to questions that are asked.

The debates I find tiredsome is "Dude we should scrap Attacks and get nukes" "Dude we cannot for these good reasons" "Dude I want one!!!!!!" That is how a three year old argues for a treat.

I am just getting tired of this endless cycle. So I was blunt in my message. As I said this a defence forum, I thought it was acceptable to use language that I would of used in the 80's airforce. I don't know the demographics but I thought we were from similiar culture. If I'm wrong I'll go woke

Now this cycle I feel is going to B21. I'm sorry but I can't do this again. I appeal to the moderators can't we do something for this mob. Give them a special forum topic, counsel them in red and green, give them vouchers for armoma theraphy. Just please seperate these people from the others who want rational debate.

enough is enough
DD

 

[spoz]

While I might not have used the same language as DD, I entirely agree with his sentiments. A lot of highly experienced people have put a lot of thinking and effort, armed with information which is not in the public arena, to develop the strategic update and the investment program. Examining that is of course legitimate debate; pushing agendas which ignore the directions being set and proposing outlandish acquisitions unrelated to the current Australian reality because the proposer happens to have read a glowing review of the item in Soldier of Fortune, or even more respectable publications such as ADM or APDR, is not.

I do speak with some authority on this - although I now have absolutely no involvement or connection and am way out of date, nearly 30 years ago I was one of the people doing that thinking and putting in that effort. Of course we didn’t get everything right; but we, and not bystanders whether interested or not, had the best chance of doing so.

 

[ngatimozart]

The B-21 isn't going to fly in an Australian context (pun intended) in the foreseeable future. It has been explained why more than a few times by DEFPROs, senior members, and Moderators. We understand that others elsewhere, especially some who should know better because of their profession and position, are pushing this idea without assessing the full situation. That is both lazy and in some cases unprofessional.

We have repeatedly stated that we do not tolerate fantasy fleets and such posts are against our rules. If you want to post such material, there are plenty of other forums on the interweb which thrive on such material. We don't because we are a professionally run defence forum that deals in facts not fantasy, and that is how the owner wants it. If you cannot follow our simple relatively easy rules, then maybe you should reevaluate your reasons for being here.

We are serious about what we do on here and many of us are here because we want to learn proper stuff and not rubbish; we want to be able to discuss defence seriously with some knowledge that is correct: and because we are open to learning something new each day that is valid, reliable knowledge from reliable, verifiable, reputable, sources.

 

[Volkodav]

I slept on this and now I have to expand my point.

I am a member of Defence Talk Forum because I want to have rational debate about defence topics. I find this forum refreshing as you can debate a variety subjects and someone smarter than I usually gives an informative answer. I appreciate the level of tolerance to questions that are asked.

The debates I find tiredsome is "Dude we should scrap Attacks and get nukes" "Dude we cannot for these good reasons" "Dude I want one!!!!!!" That is how a three year old argues for a treat.

I am just getting tired of this endless cycle. So I was blunt in my message. As I said this a defence forum, I thought it was acceptable to use language that I would of used in the 80's airforce. I don't know the demographics but I thought we were from similiar culture. If I'm wrong I'll go woke

Now this cycle I feel is going to B21. I'm sorry but I can't do this again. I appeal to the moderators can't we do something for this mob. Give them a special forum topic, counsel them in red and green, give them vouchers for armoma theraphy. Just please seperate these people from the others who want rational debate.

enough is enough
DD

Just wait until F-35B on the LHDs raises its head again, and personally I am surprised the keeping the tigers along side the Apache didn't result in more carry on.

Defence discussions can get very emotive and many have their own favourite "what if" to push. For every decision made there are unsuccessful options that were not selected for a variety of reasons. All worthy of discussion.

Some thing's though are seriously left field and not worth discussing unless there is a major change in funding or policy direction. German coastal subs and B-21s definately fall in that category.

 

[ngatimozart]

Just wait until F-35B on the LHDs raises its head again, and personally I am surprised the keeping the tigers along side the Apache didn't result in more carry on.

Defence discussions can get very emotive and many have their own favourite "what if" to push. For every decision made there are unsuccessful options that were not selected for a variety of reasons. All worthy of discussion.

Some thing's though are seriously left field and not worth discussing unless there is a major change in funding or policy direction. German coastal subs and B-21s definately fall in that category.

Totally agree Volk and I have my own pet projects that rarely see the light of day here. I posted an image a few years back of an X-wing in RNZAF markings. It was the Mk-69 powered by the flux capacitor.

 

[Volkodav]

Totally agree Volk and I have my own pet projects that rarely see the light of day here. I posted an image a few years back of an X-wing in RNZAF markings. It was the Mk-69 powered by the flux capacitor.

I'd steer clear of anything with a flux capacitor, there are known safety issues.

Boston25 reporter says a plane crashed due to a defective flux capacitator

Boston25 reporter says a plane crashed due to a \"defective flux capacitator\"

www.bing.com

 

[ngatimozart]

I'd steer clear of anything with a flux capacitor, there are known safety issues.

Boston25 reporter says a plane crashed due to a defective flux capacitator

Boston25 reporter says a plane crashed due to a \"defective flux capacitator\"

www.bing.com

Yep well they most likely used the wrong fuel. We did extensive research and followed the research of the great Tasmanian scientist who first split the beer atom and fuel it using Australian beer.

 

[John Newman]

Video of Exercise Arnhem Thunder:

Enjoy!

 

[cdxbow]

Video of Exercise Arnhem Thunder:

Enjoy!

Nice vid, very 'artistic'

In the first 30 seconds you see an F18 and an F35 taxi and take off. The F18 produces a big bright plume as it takes off, the F35 seemingly nothing.
Is this part of signature management of the F35 or some side effect of the video? The difference is quite pronounced. In an earlier post V. mentioned about the deeper F35 sound being hard to localise. Is this also part of signature management?

 

[FormerDirtDart]

Nice vid, very 'artistic'

In the first 30 seconds you see an F18 and an F35 taxi and take off. The F18 produces a big bright plume as it takes off, the F35 seemingly nothing.
Is this part of signature management of the F35 or some side effect of the video? The difference is quite pronounced. In an earlier post V. mentioned about the deeper F35 sound being hard to localise. Is this also part of signature management?

It just appears that the F-18 is using it's afterburners during takeoff, and the F-35 is not.

 

[John Newman]

Nice vid, very 'artistic'

In the first 30 seconds you see an F18 and an F35 taxi and take off. The F18 produces a big bright plume as it takes off, the F35 seemingly nothing.
Is this part of signature management of the F35 or some side effect of the video? The difference is quite pronounced. In an earlier post V. mentioned about the deeper F35 sound being hard to localise. Is this also part of signature management?

I noticed that too, had thought the same thing at first, but I don’t believe the F-35 was full burner, see below:

Cheers,

 

[aviation_enthus]

In the first 30 seconds you see an F18 and an F35 taxi and take off. The F18 produces a big bright plume as it takes off, the F35 seemingly nothing.

The F-35 uses no afterburner purely to reduce noise on takeoff. This is why the runway at RAAF Williamtown was extend recently, to allow no afterburner takeoffs.

Darwin already had a long runway, so I’m sure there’s no performance issues out of there. Maybe ex Tindal you might see afterburner usage (it’s only 2700m long).

“The extension of the runway allows the F-35A aircraft to take-off without the use of afterburner, which will reduce noise impacts to the Base and surrounds,” Williamtown Senior Australian Defence Force Officer, Air Commodore Craig Heap said

RAAF Base Williamtown runway extension opens

A MAJOR milestone in the anticipated arrival of the F-35A Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter aircraft took place at RAAF Base Williamtown last week, with the opening of the first runway extension designed specifically for

www.newsofthearea.com.au

 

[John Newman]

On the subject of RAAF F-35A, I was just having a look at ADF Serials (the F-35A page was recently updated on 10 June).

It now appears that 40 aircraft for the RAAF have rolled off the LM production line (doesn’t necessarily mean they’ve all been delivered here to Willy Town as yet).

Welcome to ADF Serials

Another eight are due for completion by years end to bring the fleet total to 48.

Not long now before the last Squadron of Classic Hornets are retired, only about six months to go.

Cheers,

 

[hauritz]

I believe that the first F-35 with tail number 29 has been assigned to No. 75 Squadron, so yes, the classic hornets will probably shipped off to greener pastures, or to be more precise the frozen expanses of Canada, sooner rather than later.

The next question is when will they replace the supers. I must admit I am in two minds about this. They still have a lot of airframe life left in them.

 

[John Newman]

I believe that the first F-35 with tail number 29 has been assigned to No. 75 Squadron, so yes, the classic hornets will probably shipped off to greener pastures, or to be more precise the frozen expanses of Canada, sooner rather than later.

The next question is when will they replace the supers. I must admit I am in two minds about this. They still have a lot of airframe life left in them.

Canada has already received the 18 ex RAAF Classic Hornets, the last two were transported back in late April:

Canada receives final ex-RAAF F/A-18A/B Hornets | ADBR

Canada has taken delivery of the 18th and final former-Royal Australian Air Force McDonnell Douglas F/A-18A/B Hornet. The milestone was achieved with the delivery to Mirabel in Ontario of two…

adbr.com.au

There are still the ‘up to seven’ additional airframes for spares to go at some stage too.

As for replacing the Super Hornets or not, ask yourself a question, if you had to go into a highly contested environment what would you want to strapped into, F/A-18F or F-35A?

I know which one I’d want to be in.

Cheers,

 

[oldsig127]

The next question is when will they replace the supers. I must admit I am in two minds about this. They still have a lot of airframe life left in them.

F-35 is replacing the legacy hornets. The Supers replaced the F-111

The (maybe) extra 28 F-35 or some still to be determined aircraft will replace the Supers. They're going to be around alongside the F-35 long after the 72 ordered to date have been delivered

oldsig

 

[Boagrius]

As for replacing the Super Hornets or not, ask yourself a question, if you had to go into a highly contested environment what would you want to strapped into, F/A-18F or F-35A?

I know which one I’d want to be in.

Cheers,

I suspect the question on a lot of people's minds is whether to go for another tranche of F35A or to wait and see what NGAD produces. If the US can deliver on its aspirations it could be a compelling jet, but still some water to pass under the bridge before that decision gets made.

 

[Redlands18]

F-35 is replacing the legacy hornets. The Supers replaced the F-111

The (maybe) extra 28 F-35 or some still to be determined aircraft will replace the Supers. They're going to be around alongside the F-35 long after the 72 ordered to date have been delivered

oldsig

I think the RAAF would like to get the 3 F-35 Sqns + the OCU to FOC before getting to carried away with replacing the SHornets and they still have a lot of life left in them. Lets not forget the SHornets are getting LRASMs with a 370k range so can release weapons from well outside a hotly contested Environment

 

[John Fedup]

I suspect the question on a lot of people's minds is whether to go for another tranche of F35A or to wait and see what NGAD produces. If the US can deliver on its aspirations it could be a compelling jet, but still some water to pass under the bridge before that decision gets made.

OT
If NGAD proves to be a significant advance then waiting might be an option. In Canada’s case I just hope junior doesn’t use this as an excuse to derail our fighter replacement. With an election looming possibly this fall I can’t see a fighter selection now that would become a hot-bottom issue. Afterwards, who knows.