Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates
Yep
RAAF member badly burnt in portaloo blast - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Smoking kills. Seriously, seems unbelievable. I hate people who smoke in the toilet, don't know if he deserved an exploding shitter.
RAAF member badly burnt in portaloo blast - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Smoking kills. Seriously, seems unbelievable. I hate people who smoke in the toilet, don't know if he deserved an exploding shitter.
Thanks for that guy's, just thought it was a bit funny becuase I received the email but could not find the media release ? Why would you want to have a smoke on the bog ?
especially a chemical bog
We are still getting F-35's just perhaps not the 100 (or 120) that were talk about before.
Worse case, we keep our SH and buy 50-75 F-35's. I don't think it will come to that. Also we may be in a situation where we can sell our early spots to other nations (if the agreement allows it I would imagine Japan, Israel and Korea would be keen). So we keep the SH for longer and have bigger later orders. If we are stuck with the SH, they aren't a bad bomb truck, could be useful as Growlers more so than a F-35 as a fighter.
I don't think we will need to buy an interim or alternative. We were the only nation ordering more F-35's than we had F-18 (or F-18 + avalible and useful F-111).
100 F-35's puts us into a very elite club. Uk was going to cut numbers down from 130. Italy was getting 130 (but may drop the F-35B entirely). Dutch were geting 85. Canada was only getting 65.
So Australia getting 75-100 still places us in an extremely capable position. 75 F-35A's + 24 SH = Huge capability boost. Not to mention F-35 cheaper to run, more avalible etc. The idea of 100 was that we would get out of a small RAAF pickle where it would like to have more squads avalible so having more airframes of the same type would be benifical.
More of an issue if we a dropping to 50 F-35's or going to 75 F-35's and ditching the SH. That would be a significant cut. I don't think its that bad. Worst case we keep the SH, USN just add 24 more on its last build.
The SH basically solved most of our problems with waiting and cost increases. It allows us to delay (for a long time) what we want with the money we got. Add to the fact it actually adds complimentary features and its not all bad.
Worse case, we keep our SH and buy 50-75 F-35's. I don't think it will come to that. Also we may be in a situation where we can sell our early spots to other nations (if the agreement allows it I would imagine Japan, Israel and Korea would be keen). So we keep the SH for longer and have bigger later orders. If we are stuck with the SH, they aren't a bad bomb truck, could be useful as Growlers more so than a F-35 as a fighter.
I don't think we will need to buy an interim or alternative. We were the only nation ordering more F-35's than we had F-18 (or F-18 + avalible and useful F-111).
100 F-35's puts us into a very elite club. Uk was going to cut numbers down from 130. Italy was getting 130 (but may drop the F-35B entirely). Dutch were geting 85. Canada was only getting 65.
So Australia getting 75-100 still places us in an extremely capable position. 75 F-35A's + 24 SH = Huge capability boost. Not to mention F-35 cheaper to run, more avalible etc. The idea of 100 was that we would get out of a small RAAF pickle where it would like to have more squads avalible so having more airframes of the same type would be benifical.
More of an issue if we a dropping to 50 F-35's or going to 75 F-35's and ditching the SH. That would be a significant cut. I don't think its that bad. Worst case we keep the SH, USN just add 24 more on its last build.
The SH basically solved most of our problems with waiting and cost increases. It allows us to delay (for a long time) what we want with the money we got. Add to the fact it actually adds complimentary features and its not all bad.
24 extra Growlers is better than 24 extra Shornets
So on that note, just curious, why have we done this ? As I understand it the Growler is a USN Specific aircraft designed for aircraft carrier use, does the capability/capacity of the Growler justify the expense for us ?
And if so, what would be our primary use for them ? How would we employ them and how do they fit into plans/direction already in place
its the capability of the asset rather than its initial primary role which is the plus
what a growler can bring to the fight at a common operating picture and picture contribution level is significant
worth the expense and brings more capability to bear in the purple air space than any other manned winged asset in the region outside of the wedgetails, AP3-C's and E2D's
unfort its popular to focus on weapons and speed and not on the ISR/I3/C4 benefits.
:kar everything is about guns and weapons.
Although going back to topic, with ongoing delays, cost overruns etc... What could/should Australia do if the F-35s weren't ready till say 2025-2030? (those numbers are worst case scenario)
Plan B or C. I would suggest Shornets & some Growlers but keep an eye on what USN do because that seems to be what RAAF are doing with the F18 buys and Shornets until F35s come online. If all else fails panic.
Worst case, F-35 is cancelled or delayed by that much. Another batch of leased superhornets if the USN lets us push in again with the same deal. (it might if it included growler upgrades).
We only have 12 of our SH wired to accept Growler upgrades.
RAAFs First Super Hornet | Australian Defence News & Articles | Asia Pacific Defence Reporter
I would imagine an another batch would be in much the same ratio. 24 Growlers and 24 SH. Our legacy hornets can't fly forever. We are getting 14 F-35, I would imagine pretty soon, as soon as we get those those hornets will start retiring or SH might get a conversion. Once the SH aren't tasked with all the stuff the legacy hornets are doing, then converting 12 to growler makes sense (im not sure the RAAF would want it until then). The conversion cost isn't cheap, but is not outragous either, operation costs are the same something that should be able to tuck into a budget.
However, the SH is the wild card. We can keep them, keep half as Growlers, get rid of all of them to get more F-35 (but the SH is a safe option to continue with atleast until we have all our F-35 and they are all atleast IOC). I wouldn't be suprised if we did upgrade 12 to growlers, held onto those.. If the F-35 numbers are cut, the SH is already here. Even if its cut to 75, with 24 SH thats still 99 aircraft of top notch capability.
We only have 12 of our SH wired to accept Growler upgrades.
RAAFs First Super Hornet | Australian Defence News & Articles | Asia Pacific Defence Reporter
I would imagine an another batch would be in much the same ratio. 24 Growlers and 24 SH. Our legacy hornets can't fly forever. We are getting 14 F-35, I would imagine pretty soon, as soon as we get those those hornets will start retiring or SH might get a conversion. Once the SH aren't tasked with all the stuff the legacy hornets are doing, then converting 12 to growler makes sense (im not sure the RAAF would want it until then). The conversion cost isn't cheap, but is not outragous either, operation costs are the same something that should be able to tuck into a budget.
However, the SH is the wild card. We can keep them, keep half as Growlers, get rid of all of them to get more F-35 (but the SH is a safe option to continue with atleast until we have all our F-35 and they are all atleast IOC). I wouldn't be suprised if we did upgrade 12 to growlers, held onto those.. If the F-35 numbers are cut, the SH is already here. Even if its cut to 75, with 24 SH thats still 99 aircraft of top notch capability.
If the SH aren't that old and used when they start being replaced maybe some of the best could come across the Tasman if our poli's grew some gonads and stumped up with some cold hard cash. I know dreams are free.
As nice as it would be to see NZ get some aircraft, I don't see it happening. And I don't see them basing them in NZ.
If it was concidering aircraft, then Superhornets or F-35A would be fantastic choices. I think the F-35 would be perfered because of its lower operating costs.
But frankly Australia's aircraft plans are not dependant on NZ pitching in. IMHO NZ is better off spending money on the navy and army.
If it was concidering aircraft, then Superhornets or F-35A would be fantastic choices. I think the F-35 would be perfered because of its lower operating costs.
But frankly Australia's aircraft plans are not dependant on NZ pitching in. IMHO NZ is better off spending money on the navy and army.
Guys, the future is not all dim. Messrs Smith et al haven't just been sitting on their keesters eating meals at our expense, they have come up with an interim solution to the interim capability that are the 24 SHornets that have nearly all been delivered.
"AIR 6007/a/minor revision" is a new sub project in case there is either insufficient cash in the treasury to purchase the F-35's (after all we have to buy all our pensioners set top boxes, then set up enquiries as to why 80% of all pensioners houses burned down when untrained monekeys instaled them, them spend twice the original budgeted amount fixing the mess). Or, the other scenario that it covers is the gap that may result if that the testing of the highly advanced integrated and digitised CRAP (Cup Retaining And Positioning system) - or F-35's cupholder to you an I, takes another 30 or so years to reach IOC.
The capability is highly cost efficient and will provide additional front line airframes. APA have also been cross promoting the aforesaid system, so you know this has been a throughly researched and tested proposed solution.
Now that the L1A1 SLR has been superceded, there are bound to be scads of them sitting in grease somewhere. All ronnie RAAF needs to do is buy a couple of pallets of 100MPH tape and another roll of hutchie cord and we can gaffer tape a bunch of these surplus weapons to the wings of the hawks and PC-9's. Tie hutchie cord to the triggers, drill a hole (or hey just shoot - you've got rifles after all!) in the cockpit near the throttle and tie the other end around the throttle lever (just because you've gone cheap on weaponry, there is no need to distrupt the ergonomics of the HOTAS system). Voila - instant front line Sukhoi killer/coin aircraft/trainer in one. The more advanced pilots (or ex grunts) may like to use a match stick to conver the SLR to full auto for that truly professional touch.
All it will cost the Australian taxpayer is the $40 Million consultation fee per airframe for APA - bargain!
So never fear fellow aussie forumers, we will be well protected into the future.
"AIR 6007/a/minor revision" is a new sub project in case there is either insufficient cash in the treasury to purchase the F-35's (after all we have to buy all our pensioners set top boxes, then set up enquiries as to why 80% of all pensioners houses burned down when untrained monekeys instaled them, them spend twice the original budgeted amount fixing the mess). Or, the other scenario that it covers is the gap that may result if that the testing of the highly advanced integrated and digitised CRAP (Cup Retaining And Positioning system) - or F-35's cupholder to you an I, takes another 30 or so years to reach IOC.
The capability is highly cost efficient and will provide additional front line airframes. APA have also been cross promoting the aforesaid system, so you know this has been a throughly researched and tested proposed solution.
Now that the L1A1 SLR has been superceded, there are bound to be scads of them sitting in grease somewhere. All ronnie RAAF needs to do is buy a couple of pallets of 100MPH tape and another roll of hutchie cord and we can gaffer tape a bunch of these surplus weapons to the wings of the hawks and PC-9's. Tie hutchie cord to the triggers, drill a hole (or hey just shoot - you've got rifles after all!) in the cockpit near the throttle and tie the other end around the throttle lever (just because you've gone cheap on weaponry, there is no need to distrupt the ergonomics of the HOTAS system). Voila - instant front line Sukhoi killer/coin aircraft/trainer in one. The more advanced pilots (or ex grunts) may like to use a match stick to conver the SLR to full auto for that truly professional touch.
All it will cost the Australian taxpayer is the $40 Million consultation fee per airframe for APA - bargain!
So never fear fellow aussie forumers, we will be well protected into the future.
I'm looking for the 'Like' button.....
Today's SMH has an article intimating that the AUD could get to USD1.50.
But that could well mean that the US economy is in deep doo doo.
I'm curious as to how this would affect Oz defence spending. F-18F(G), MH-60R, CH-47F, (CH-53K!!) all look more affordable.
More dollar dazzle to come | Michael West
cheers
rb
Today's SMH has an article intimating that the AUD could get to USD1.50.
But that could well mean that the US economy is in deep doo doo.
I'm curious as to how this would affect Oz defence spending. F-18F(G), MH-60R, CH-47F, (CH-53K!!) all look more affordable.
More dollar dazzle to come | Michael West
cheers
rb
While they may be more affordable a higher dollar will mean less money in the treasury.
Brilliant!! Maybe I could sub contract the SLR conversion, I have the kits (waterproof matches are made of supirior wood) but if the budget dosnt allow, I can source used red heads. Labour could form a commitee to decide who gets the tender, and then in a decade or 2 we may get the nod!Guys, the future is not all dim. Messrs Smith et al haven't just been sitting on their keesters eating meals at our expense, they have come up with an interim solution to the interim capability that are the 24 SHornets that have nearly all been delivered.
"AIR 6007/a/minor revision" is a new sub project in case there is either insufficient cash in the treasury to purchase the F-35's (after all we have to buy all our pensioners set top boxes, then set up enquiries as to why 80% of all pensioners houses burned down when untrained monekeys instaled them, them spend twice the original budgeted amount fixing the mess). Or, the other scenario that it covers is the gap that may result if that the testing of the highly advanced integrated and digitised CRAP (Cup Retaining And Positioning system) - or F-35's cupholder to you an I, takes another 30 or so years to reach IOC.
The capability is highly cost efficient and will provide additional front line airframes. APA have also been cross promoting the aforesaid system, so you know this has been a throughly researched and tested proposed solution.
Now that the L1A1 SLR has been superceded, there are bound to be scads of them sitting in grease somewhere. All ronnie RAAF needs to do is buy a couple of pallets of 100MPH tape and another roll of hutchie cord and we can gaffer tape a bunch of these surplus weapons to the wings of the hawks and PC-9's. Tie hutchie cord to the triggers, drill a hole (or hey just shoot - you've got rifles after all!) in the cockpit near the throttle and tie the other end around the throttle lever (just because you've gone cheap on weaponry, there is no need to distrupt the ergonomics of the HOTAS system). Voila - instant front line Sukhoi killer/coin aircraft/trainer in one. The more advanced pilots (or ex grunts) may like to use a match stick to conver the SLR to full auto for that truly professional touch.
All it will cost the Australian taxpayer is the $40 Million consultation fee per airframe for APA - bargain!
So never fear fellow aussie forumers, we will be well protected into the future.
Personally I used to prefer switching safeties and Mags with an AR, was only ever able to do that when playing enemy party.
The trouble with Canberra is far too many pollies (apart from the uni politics tragics) seem to be lawyers, teachers and failed small business owners, not many competent technical types, let alone project managers to be seen.