Hi guys! First up post so bear with me...
Having read most of what has already been discussed here, I can only say that from an Australian point of view, the F/A-22 is an aircraft we need. However, it cannot be our only aircraft. We are trying to replace two types with one, which I think was a pie-in-the-sky proposal at best. The only way that little dream could be fulfilled would be with the Su-27/37/34 or the F/A-22/ F/B-22. Since the F/B-22 looks like a dead duck at the moment, that is unlikely to happen at all. The Sukhoi proposal (they did actually bid) would have been unacceptable for two reasons. The Sukhoi could never have been integrated into the ADF for compatibility reasons and secondly, the US government would never allow us to put Western avoinics into a Sukhoi.
That leaves the JSF. IMHO, the JSF would be a good back-up to the F/A-22, enabling the RAAF to fly the missions it is required to, particularly anti-shipping. However, its reduced stealth capability and marginal performance renders it unsuitable for interception/air superiority missions if we are to maintain a capability edge. Add to that the fact that the JSF will be sold to us as an "export" version with downgraded stealth, RAM and a non-stealthy engine nozzle. In reality, it is only stealthy in the forward hemisphere. The F/A-22 would not allow us any special privileges either but at the very least we would be getting a more capable aircraft, especially in the field of range. If we are going to defend a country the size of the continental United States, we need a very significant range capability. The F/A-22 is the only aircraft which can do it.
A force mix of 48/48 would give us a very credible long-term capability and would even allow a greater level of mission flexibility than what we currently have. In my mind, the acquisition of a fleet comprised solely of JSF's is a significant backwards step and that's before we even get talking about power projection. It offers us few advantages over the Superhornet...and it's a single.
Australia needs the F/A-22 and should buy it if it becomes available. The cost will become much more reasonable should the US decide to sell it to bolster their fleet numbers and justify the enormous development costs to an increasingly hostile Congress. The obsession with increasing the F/A-22's capabilities is further pricing it out of the market and having the added effect of reducing its numbers. The Australian Labor Party has proposed buying it on the basis that it is more cost-competitive than the Government would have us believe. The Federal Government is also trying to sell the JSF as a "mini Raptor" which it clearly is not. My view is that since the Government went into overdrive following Howard's rather precipitous decision to override the selection process and buy the JSF because they knew it would come up short. Look at the way they went about it. They sold it only on the basis that it would be good for Australian business. The problem is that the general public understand nothing but the bottom line. The original budget for this was AU $16b but this now appears to have been reduced to AU $12b. The public likes the idea of the JSF because they know nothing about it. I don't really see this as a policy battle the Labor Party could ever hope to win on that basis rather I see it as a Beazley influence. The stupid part about it is that it has only been discussed in terms of costs and no debate has been entered into on capability.
Cost is only one consideration in the defence equation but when the defence of such a vast and relatively unpopulated country is the question there are some things which should not and cannot be compromised. At that level, the JSF, as a sole type, is a very, very bad buy for us. The argument the the US will never sell the F/A-22 has become more speculative than anything else now because Lockheed applied for - and got - a licence to export the aircraft. See here:
http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,Defensewatch_062204_Raptor,00.html
In the end, the US needs to sell the Raptor just to make up for the horrendeous amount of money which has been poured into its development. We need it because it is the only aircraft which can do what we need it to do.
"ACQUISIONS 1:
HOW TO PICK 'EM
The best acquisitions will look overpriced and you'll be tempted to veto them on that score. Don't - not if everything else looks right.
A bag of snakes will come disguised as an ever-loving blue eyed bargain."
Robert Townsend: "Further Up the Organisation"
Having read most of what has already been discussed here, I can only say that from an Australian point of view, the F/A-22 is an aircraft we need. However, it cannot be our only aircraft. We are trying to replace two types with one, which I think was a pie-in-the-sky proposal at best. The only way that little dream could be fulfilled would be with the Su-27/37/34 or the F/A-22/ F/B-22. Since the F/B-22 looks like a dead duck at the moment, that is unlikely to happen at all. The Sukhoi proposal (they did actually bid) would have been unacceptable for two reasons. The Sukhoi could never have been integrated into the ADF for compatibility reasons and secondly, the US government would never allow us to put Western avoinics into a Sukhoi.
That leaves the JSF. IMHO, the JSF would be a good back-up to the F/A-22, enabling the RAAF to fly the missions it is required to, particularly anti-shipping. However, its reduced stealth capability and marginal performance renders it unsuitable for interception/air superiority missions if we are to maintain a capability edge. Add to that the fact that the JSF will be sold to us as an "export" version with downgraded stealth, RAM and a non-stealthy engine nozzle. In reality, it is only stealthy in the forward hemisphere. The F/A-22 would not allow us any special privileges either but at the very least we would be getting a more capable aircraft, especially in the field of range. If we are going to defend a country the size of the continental United States, we need a very significant range capability. The F/A-22 is the only aircraft which can do it.
A force mix of 48/48 would give us a very credible long-term capability and would even allow a greater level of mission flexibility than what we currently have. In my mind, the acquisition of a fleet comprised solely of JSF's is a significant backwards step and that's before we even get talking about power projection. It offers us few advantages over the Superhornet...and it's a single.
Australia needs the F/A-22 and should buy it if it becomes available. The cost will become much more reasonable should the US decide to sell it to bolster their fleet numbers and justify the enormous development costs to an increasingly hostile Congress. The obsession with increasing the F/A-22's capabilities is further pricing it out of the market and having the added effect of reducing its numbers. The Australian Labor Party has proposed buying it on the basis that it is more cost-competitive than the Government would have us believe. The Federal Government is also trying to sell the JSF as a "mini Raptor" which it clearly is not. My view is that since the Government went into overdrive following Howard's rather precipitous decision to override the selection process and buy the JSF because they knew it would come up short. Look at the way they went about it. They sold it only on the basis that it would be good for Australian business. The problem is that the general public understand nothing but the bottom line. The original budget for this was AU $16b but this now appears to have been reduced to AU $12b. The public likes the idea of the JSF because they know nothing about it. I don't really see this as a policy battle the Labor Party could ever hope to win on that basis rather I see it as a Beazley influence. The stupid part about it is that it has only been discussed in terms of costs and no debate has been entered into on capability.
Cost is only one consideration in the defence equation but when the defence of such a vast and relatively unpopulated country is the question there are some things which should not and cannot be compromised. At that level, the JSF, as a sole type, is a very, very bad buy for us. The argument the the US will never sell the F/A-22 has become more speculative than anything else now because Lockheed applied for - and got - a licence to export the aircraft. See here:
http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,Defensewatch_062204_Raptor,00.html
In the end, the US needs to sell the Raptor just to make up for the horrendeous amount of money which has been poured into its development. We need it because it is the only aircraft which can do what we need it to do.
"ACQUISIONS 1:
HOW TO PICK 'EM
The best acquisitions will look overpriced and you'll be tempted to veto them on that score. Don't - not if everything else looks right.
A bag of snakes will come disguised as an ever-loving blue eyed bargain."
Robert Townsend: "Further Up the Organisation"
