Bloody huge aren't they? I've seen them a few times now at Avalon and Amberley. Astonishing aircraft...
Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates
I've stepped inside a few, its like walking into the tardus.
Only saw it from the road, towering over the buildings at the edge of the hardstand. Took the kids into the Aviation Heritage Museum for a look too, the B-52 is another very impressive aircraft.
Yep me too. It still amazes me the things can fly, though my sense of wonder has a low bar.
Ooh look a butterfly, oh look a train...
Best thing about the C-17s is the room and comfort. Compared to flying on a Herc or, god forbid, a Caribou, a C-17 is like a commercial jet. Being 6'5", leg room is important to me, and the worst seat on a C-17 is better than the best seat on a Herc. They still need to work on the in flight entertainment though. The drinks service is still rubbish.Yep me too. It still amazes me the things can fly, though my sense of wonder has a low bar.
Ooh look a butterfly, oh look a train...
It all started to go down hill when they stopped us smoking on the hercs. It was a real inconvienience not being able to have durrie a few minutes before the jump, couldnt work out what the problem was with it, just because 64 of us were wearing 2 parachutes each, live ammo, and pyro,s etc....
No cans of beer on the flight home as the British still do? (RAF - 216 Squadron "Beer for the Boys" programme).
At 6'5" I guess you're also the unlucky bar steward who ends up carting the heavy gear...
No, no beer on the flight home. Mind you, I'd take that if they just got us a plane that worked. The A340 they've contracted to do the milk runs is the crappiest, most broken, most unreliable aircraft I've ever flown on (and that's saying something!) Who knew contracting a Portuguese company would be a bad decision? I miss Strategic Air, who used to have the contract, they were gold.
Carry things? What do you think I am, a peasant? I was smart enough to pick a corps where my weapon carries me, and not the other way around. Mind you, in the bad old days when I did have to carry things around, I did always seem to be the gunner.
I've seen C-5's taking off and it amazes me they can even move.Yep me too. It still amazes me the things can fly, though my sense of wonder has a low bar.
Ooh look a butterfly, oh look a train...
I felt the same way when I flew on my first jet as a child, a Boeing 707. It looked far too heavy to fly. But then I read up on the Wright Brothers and aeronautical engineering, and learned its all about thrust and lift. I understood it better when I stretched my hands out the window of a car tilting my hands just a bit made a big difference whether my hands went up or down. I also noticed when the car was stopped there was a difference with no thrust.
I remember a vulcan flying overhead when I was a kid. It was this huge bat like object and I was convinced that the noise would blow the house down... It still sticks in my head, this huge black triangle....
I must have been 4-5 at the time
Er, I think most of us understand the basic principles of flight...
There is a significant difference however between understanding those basic principles and standing in the cargo bay of a C-17 and seeing first hand just how massive those things really are.
An educated sense of wonder if you like...
Australia chose the F/A-18A/B in the early 1980's after a direct competition against other types including F-15, F-16 and Mirage 2000 (thanks Magoo!).
It had the capabilities we were looking for at the time and has served us very well since.
We chose the Super Hornet has a bridging or temporary strike capability to replace our rather old and tired F-111's until the F-35 Lightning II - Joint Strike Fighter is available to fulfill our tactical fighter needs. The Super Hornet is expected to serve from 13-15 years in RAAF service, with no decision yet taken (publicly known) on what will happen to them in the 2023-2025 timeframe.
The Hornet and Super Hornet are carrier capable aircraft. That doesn't mean they can't fly from land bases as well.
Canada, Spain, Finland, Switzerland, Kuwait and Malaysia also use the F/A-18A/B/C/D in a land based role and chose it for reasons other than it's ability to take off and land on aircraft carriers.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #2,916
Further addition, the F/A-18F Super Hornets were selected as the bridging aircraft due to an urgent need to retire the F-111's from service. IIRC the F-111's were originally expected to be kept in service until ~2020, but due to some issues with the airframes (wheel up landing IIRC) as well as the exploding cost to maintain an orphan legacy aircraft and the increasing irrelevance of the capability in the face of modern air defence threats... The decision was made to retire the F-111 in 2010.
Once it was realised when the F-111 would be out of service, it was know that the F-35 would not be ready for service by then, so the RAAF would have a gap in terms of strike capability. The only aircraft the RAAF could get and actually reach IOC with to cover part of that gap, was the F/A-18 Super Hornet.
The RAAF could have placed an order for some other fighter, like the Rafale, F-15 or F-16, but by the time the first aircraft was delivered, it would likely be about the same time the RAAF would start taking deliveries of non-LRIP F-35's.
There were several reasons why the RAAF could get an order for F/A-18 SHornets into service sooner than other fighters. Amongst them was that the USN already had a contract for SHornets which Boeing has been producing, and the USN was willing to allow the RAAF order to 'jump' USN production slots. This means that aircraft which are being built at a steady rate (4 per month?) would be ready for delivery sooner than if production needed to be re-started or ramped up. By comparison, the Rafale is being produced by Dassault for the French Air Force and Navy, but Dassault is AFAIK only producing ~11 Rafales per year. In the case of any order for the F-15 or F-16, it would have required the RAAF to wait until deliveries were met for existing orders, unless the nations/services awaiting such orders could be induced to delay receiving their aircraft to allow the RAAF order to 'jump ahead' in the production queue. Then there would also be the need to setup the various support functions which are required for the RAAF to operate new aircraft types.
Also, while the F/A-18F looks very similar to the 'Classic' Hornets in RAAF service, they are entirely new fighters. Having said that, the two aircraft are very similar, so pilots of the Hornets can be quickly transitioned to Super Hornets in a matter of hours. This means that while the SHornets are a new type for the RAAF, including this fighter into the mix of aircraft has been easier than if the design was not already so much like the older Hornets.
-Cheers
New security requirements as well. On domestic bases, whilst overseas and so on. Operating low observable or even semi-low observable aircraft comes with penalties not appreciated by most.
Puts the capability they offer into further perspective when the cost and difficulties inherent in operating them are considered...