F-16.net

The Australian Minister of Defence has announced the the RAAF will be getting F-35's to replace the F/A-18 Hornets and the F-111's. Personally I don't think that the RAAF should get the new F-35's but rather spend the money on upgrading the original hornets on buying more hornets to replace the F-111's. this is a really big issue and they won't even tell us why they want the F-35's or why we need them. I think we are doing just fine with the Hornets.

F-16.net Sponsor

Elite 1K Joined: Aug 01, 2006 Posts: 1003 Status: Offline

Parkeran wrote:

The Australian Minister of Defence has announced the the RAAF will be getting F-35's to replace the F/A-18 Hornets and the F-111's. Personally I don't think that the RAAF should get the new F-35's but rather spend the money on upgrading the original hornets on buying more hornets to replace the F-111's. this is a really big issue and they won't even tell us why they want the F-35's or why we need them. I think we are doing just fine with the Hornets.

The reason is that the F-35 is a much more effective platform for A2A and A2G missions that any evolved F-18 or the F-111. In fact, it'll be a platform which is second to none and will totally dominate ANY enemy fighter or integrated air defense, whereas the f-111 and F-18 is either dead meat or with great upgrade efforts at best in parity,

F-16.net Editor Joined: Sep 23, 2003 Posts: 2862

Ask someone what the future threat is and you get at least 3 different answers. Laughing

Parkeran wrote:

The Australian Minister of Defence has announced the the RAAF will be getting F-35's to replace the F/A-18 Hornets and the F-111's. Personally I don't think that the RAAF should get the new F-35's but rather spend the money on upgrading the original hornets on buying more hornets to replace the F-111's. this is a really big issue and they won't even tell us why they want the F-35's or why we need them. I think we are doing just fine with the Hornets.

Buying more hornets wouldnt do anything helpfull for the RAAF. Even less for replacing the F-111.

F-35's or Typhoons were the only realistic options Australia had.

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 1035 Status: Offline

I'll be brief since this topic has been previously discussed before...Short of asking for the F-22, I think they should buy a mixed fleet of Superhornets and F-35's. Geographic location dictates that they will want an aircraft capable of carrying Harpoon or something like it. Most countries looking at Typhoon see it for what it really is (at least right now)...a not so capable F-16. Since thats the case, you'd do better to buy the latest gen F-16's right now, than wait for Typhoon to become capable. I would suggest you also revisit this discussion which has happened previously on this site.

F-16.net Editor Joined: Sep 23, 2003 Posts: 2862

Harpoon isn't cleared yet for Super Hornet. A technicality I am sure ( the usual flying of the weapon to make sure it is safe when hung under different flying conditions, and all the other things some other people on this forum that have been there done that on weapons qualifications know all about. ) it is possible and will happen soon. Just hasn't been done yet. I am sure that Navy funding for the war has made things they didn't need right away a big part of that. Just like USAF is short of cash, Navy is too. Be nice if there was an actual public consuption web page of weaps that are currently authorized to be hung from the aircraft. It is made to hang a vary diverse menu of weapons like the classic Hornet, just that they haven't gotten around to all of them yet. And you can forget the weapons graphic on the Navy Super Hornet fact page as being correct. It ain't. Laughing

Wouldn't be a bad idea to have Australia do some of the remaining clean up on weapons certifications if Navy hasn't completed them in the coming years. Everything that is allowed to hang off of the Super Hornet now is certainly more than good enough to do the job the Navy needs. HARM, JSOW, JDAM, Paveway, Maverick. There were some early OEF photos showing some dumb iron but I don't think you are going to see much of that with GBU-38 and GBU-12 being the majority of stuff you see hang from the aircraft. Super Hornet loadouts are consistantly showing single GBU-38 or GBU-12 on all three of the left wing hardpoints, then of course ATFLIR in it's place, a centerline tank, on the right wing...a wing tank and another GBU-12 or GBU-38 on the middle hardpoint and nothing on the outer hardpoint. I am sure they have their reasons, but don't know if that is a load out the glue sniffers would pick for their model display. Laughing

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 1035 Status: Offline

I'm not really hung up on Harpoon Elp, just pointing out that they would probably want some anti-ship capability. Harpoon has already gone through sep testing on the Superbug, so what they're waiting for is anyone's guess. I would think that it would be only something an export customer would really be interested in.

Enthusiast Joined: Jul 06, 2007 Posts: 24 Status: Offline

Parkeran wrote:

The Australian Minister of Defence has announced the the RAAF will be getting F-35's to replace the F/A-18 Hornets and the F-111's. Personally I don't think that the RAAF should get the new F-35's but rather spend the money on upgrading the original hornets on buying more hornets to replace the F-111's. this is a really big issue and they won't even tell us why they want the F-35's or why we need them. I think we are doing just fine with the Hornets.

Because the F-35, despite what some may say, will guarantee the RAAF the same aerial superiority we have enjoyed in South East Asia since WWII (apart from Indonesia's brief flirtation with Communism under Sukarno which saw their Air Force equip with TU-16s, IL-28s, MiG-17 and -21s) for the foreseeable future.

I just wonder what markings the Aussie Rhino & F-35 will have! Cool

<<<Certified "Glue Sniffer"! Wink

L/M is collaborating with the maker of the AGM-119 Penguin to fit a new stealth naval strike missile in the bays of the F-35. See http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-8703.html for more about the missile

F-16.net Editor Joined: Sep 23, 2003 Posts: 2862

Lodni_Kranazon wrote:

I just wonder what markings the Aussie Rhino & F-35 will have! Cool

<<<Certified "Glue Sniffer"! Wink

You can see some of the RAAF squadron markings on their websites to get an idea. Maybe one jet will be painted all pretty for airshows. The shape of the F does look good.

Looks like Dr. Neslon got a Super ride (his second) out to the Kittyhawk for a trap and to see things (Recent exercise off of Australia). Don't know if he got a cat shot and left the same way he arrived.

======

Photo caption-
070704-N-7883G-127 TASMAN SEA (July 4, 2007) - Australian Defense Minister Dr. Brendan Nelson is flown past USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63) in an F/A-18F Super Hornet assigned to Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 102. Nelson toured the ship with nearly 40 other Australian guests. Kitty Hawk recently completed exercise Talisman Saber with Australian and other U.S. Navy and Marine Corps forces in the Coral Sea. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Kyle D. Gahlau (RELEASED)

Enthusiast Joined: Jan 05, 2007 Posts: 41 Status: Offline

Quote:

Because the F-35, despite what some may say, will guarantee the RAAF the same aerial superiority we have enjoyed in South East Asia since WWII (apart from Indonesia's brief flirtation with Communism under Sukarno which saw their Air Force equip with TU-16s, IL-28s, MiG-17 and -21s) for the foreseeable future

Sorry,but the F35 will not offer Australia "the same aerial superiority we have enjoyed in S.E.A since WW2"....The F35 does not have the range or persistence as the F111,which means plenty of air to air refueling,and moving our HVTs closer to any conflict zone.
Our export version will be a watered down model [if planned USAF F35s will be LO then what will the export model offer?? VO {very observable}]

Now if we had 40 to 50 F22s,80 or so F35a and 20 or so F35 STOVLs then we would be doing well,but because of the unique capability of the F111 will be lost with no replacement,it is very hard to see us regaining air superiority in SE Asia.

Active Member Joined: Nov 22, 2004 Posts: 134

beepa wrote:

Sorry,but the F35 will not offer Australia "the same aerial superiority we have enjoyed in S.E.A since WW2"....The F35 does not have the range or persistence as the F111,which means plenty of air to air refueling,and moving our HVTs closer to any conflict zone.

That's true, but there's nothing better available either now or on the horizon in this regard. Well, there's the upcoming strategic bomber project, but no one knows how long it will be until it really gets going or if it ever will. The only alternative for the RAAF would be to keep flying the F-111, acquiring more of them from the USAF's Boneyard as needed, but this can't go on forever. If the F-35's range and payload are good enough, then you'd have to consider everything else that it brings to the fight.

beepa wrote:

Our export version will be a watered down model [if planned USAF F35s will be LO then what will the export model offer?? VO {very observable}]

I don't have any details, but I think it's pretty safe to assume, if only for the sake of argument here, that the export model will still be significantly more capable than any other fighter available. If it turns out to be compromised a bit too much, then the RAAF could push for some F-22s to go along with the deal.

beepa wrote:

Now if we had 40 to 50 F22s,80 or so F35a and 20 or so F35 STOVLs then we would be doing well,

This would make for a formidable air force, no doubt--not huge, but the kind of attrition it could inflict on other air forces in the region would be devastating.

beepa wrote:

but because of the unique capability of the F111 will be lost with no replacement,it is very hard to see us regaining air superiority in SE Asia.

Your reach would be more limited, but your air force would also be more survivable. The F-35 will have excellent range for a modern strike fighter--possibly enough that you won't miss out on anything practical.

Elite 1K Joined: Aug 01, 2006 Posts: 1003 Status: Offline

RobertCook wrote:

beepa wrote:

Sorry,but the F35 will not offer Australia "the same aerial superiority we have enjoyed in S.E.A since WW2"....The F35 does not have the range or persistence as the F111,which means plenty of air to air refueling,and moving our HVTs closer to any conflict zone.

I believe that the F-35A's range will be similar to that of the F-111. Why? Because the F-111's fuel fraction with maximum internal fuel is about 42%. whereas the F-35's fuel fraction is about 40%. There is also no question that the F135 engine will be notably more efficient than the TF30 in the F-111.

Here's an indication of how far the F-35 will go. During test flight #9 it expended 56% of its maximum fuel load. For this amount of fuel, it flew 1.5 hours including a full afterburner take off and extremely steep climb out (50~60 degrees). The aircraft spent most of its time doing maneuver testing at 20,000 feet and power approaches. Let's just say that all of that stuff do not exactly add up to most economical flight profile. Even then, it flew for 1.5 hours on the said amount of fuel. At an average of 950km/h, you can cover 1425km in 1.5 hours. I think that it is safe to say that the range of the F-35 on internal fuel should be in excess of 3000km with fuel conscious flying. With no combat and dash allowances, that's a maximum radius in excess of 1500km or 810nm.

That is full stealth with no external tankage. This I believe is as good or better than the F-111 on internal fuel only. The F-35 can increase its fuel load by a further ~50% with external tankage. Because of parasitic drag from the tanks, this will not translate to 50% more range, but it should permit an operational radius somewhat similar to the F-111's maximum combat radius of ~1100nm.

The problem with the F-111 is that it is not a survivable platform whether the enemy is fielding good fighters, double digit SAMs or a combination of both. This means that it will need jammer support, escort fighters or both. The range of these platforms will effectively limit the range of the F-111. Even then, the F-111 and its support aircrafts probably has to simply out attrit the enemy. The F-35A on the other hand gives you the ability to strike far, strike undetected and move around with near impunity. That plus its unequalled sensor, avionics, targeting, interface and other systems makes it the ultimate tactical strike aircraft currently known to exist. Nothing comes close.

Enthusiast Joined: Jul 06, 2007 Posts: 24 Status: Offline

beepa wrote:

Quote:

Because the F-35, despite what some may say, will guarantee the RAAF the same aerial superiority we have enjoyed in South East Asia since WWII (apart from Indonesia's brief flirtation with Communism under Sukarno which saw their Air Force equip with TU-16s, IL-28s, MiG-17 and -21s) for the foreseeable future

Sorry,but the F35 will not offer Australia "the same aerial superiority we have enjoyed in S.E.A since WW2"....The F35 does not have the range or persistence as the F111,which means plenty of air to air refueling,and moving our HVTs closer to any conflict zone.
Our export version will be a watered down model [if planned USAF F35s will be LO then what will the export model offer?? VO {very observable}]

Now if we had 40 to 50 F22s,80 or so F35a and 20 or so F35 STOVLs then we would be doing well,but because of the unique capability of the F111 will be lost with no replacement,it is very hard to see us regaining air superiority in SE Asia.

Umm, sorry, but it will. Despite people like Carlo Kopp claiming that it was only designed for Battlefield Interdiction missions, the F-35's combination of stealth and sensors, not to mention being powered by the most powerful fighter engine in production bar the F-119, will make it a highly capable air-air and strike platform.
As much as I love the Pig it is simply not survivable in today's air defence environment in SEA; flying low and fast no longer guarantees survival.
As for moving our tankers closer to the conflict zone, they will be protected by F-35s just as they are protected now by F/A-18s, not to mention that any strike package is also likely to include Wedgetails.

F-16.net

Forum: F-35 Lightning II

F-35's for the RAAF?