Australian lawmakers confident in F-35's future

[cosmicdwarf]

People have this weird obsession where the only way to defend your country is with a pure air to air fighter. This ignores the past 30 years though.

[hornetfinn]

People have this weird obsession where the only way to defend your country is with a pure air to air fighter. This ignores the past 30 years though.

I'd say it pretty much ignores the whole history of aerial warfare. I don't think many wars have been won with doing only air-to-air combat. Vietnam war is probably the closest large one from North Vietnamese point of view and even they did some very limited air-to-ground work. More importantly they had massive amount of AD systems and almost unlimited missile inventory from USSR protecting quite small piece of land. Good luck trying to do the same in Australia...

[popcorn]

"Fighter pilots make movies, bomber pilots make history..."

[gideonic]

Didn't see this posted:
http://www.sldinfo.com/shaping-the-airp ... roup-raaf/

[cosmicdwarf]

People have this weird obsession where the only way to defend your country is with a pure air to air fighter. This ignores the past 30 years though.

I'd say it pretty much ignores the whole history of aerial warfare. I don't think many wars have been won with doing only air-to-air combat. Vietnam war is probably the closest large one from North Vietnamese point of view and even they did some very limited air-to-ground work. More importantly they had massive amount of AD systems and almost unlimited missile inventory from USSR protecting quite small piece of land. Good luck trying to do the same in Australia...

I was more thinking that multirole aircraft have taken over as the main fighter in many air forces, but this is a valid point as well.

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

"Fighter pilots make movies, bomber pilots make history..."

Love that movie.

[nathan77]

Apologies if this has already been posted. I did do a search, and didn't see it:

Australian Pilot insists fighter jets aren't lemons
https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/312 ... nt-lemons/

Squadron Leader Andrew Jackson has no intention of sugar-coating the feedback he gives his superiors about the plane that will be Australia's next-generation jet fighter.

"It's my pink body on the line at the end of the day," he said of the F-35 Lightning Joint Strike Fighter he's been test-flying in the US.

Australia plans to spend $17 billion purchasing 72 of the fighters, expected to be fully operational by 2023.

They'll replace the RAAF's ageing fleet of Hornets and Super Hornets.

Sqn Ldr Jackson is one of three RAAF fighter pilots, based at the Luke Air Force Base in Arizona, who have clocked up 230 flying hours on the JSF.

Its production has been plagued by delays, budget blowouts and technical problems as well as criticism of its stated capability.

But Sqn Ldr Jackson is confident Australia has chosen the right aircraft to achieve regional superiority.

The feedback he and his colleagues are providing to Defence is objective and, when necessary, blunt.

"There's no advantage for me in being posted to a dog," he told reporters at a briefing in Canberra on Wednesday.

Sqn Ldr Jackson hasn't seen any aircraft come into service without critics.

"I don't have any concerns that the aircraft is going to be a lemon or dog (meat), I think it's going to be a very good aeroplane."

He acknowledged the planes had their "warts" but the technical challenges were being worked through.

"I think a lot has been made of the plane's inability to fight in (dogfight) arenas, I don't share that view point."

Asked how the planes compared to the Hornets - now running airstrikes against Islamic State targets in Iraq and Syria - Squadron Leader Jackson said the JSF could broadly do the same job.

However the JSF was designed for a contested environment.

There wasn't much difference between a fourth generation and fifth generation aircraft's ability to work with command to drop weapons on targets.

"If you start to add a contested element then it's a very different kettle of fish."

In coming weeks Sqn Ldr Jackson will be involved in testing out the plane's weapons drop capability.

[spazsinbad]

US Navy plans to bring USS Tripoli to patrol Australia after completion in 2018
29 Mar 2016 BEN SMEE

"THE US Navy plans to use its next big warship – the $3.4 billion USS Tripoli – to patrol Australia and support marines based in Darwin. The Tripoli, an amphibious assault ship specifically *designed to support Joint Strike Fighter aircraft, which will fly from Tindal and Darwin, is under construction and due to be completed in 2018.

Speaking to Military.com, commanding general of US Marine Corps combat development Robert Walsh said there was a lack of suitable ships to transport Marines *stationed in Darwin and *elsewhere. Lt Gen Walsh said the long-term plan was to task the Tripoli to lead an “amphibious group” that would support two 90-day patrols around Australia per rotation.

“So it’s trying to get (Marines) off Australia to be able to train in other areas because it’s tied a lot to that wet season that they have out there,” he said.

“You put a (Marine air-ground task force) ashore, and ... Marines need to be on ships. We go ashore when we need to be ashore, but we shouldn’t ­design ourselves to be ashore.”

With deployments set to ­increase to 2500 in the near ­future, capacity onshore is already a potential problem.

The recent Australian defence white paper outlined $20 billion to be spent on infrastructure in the NT over the next two decades. But the NT News understands the US and Australia have still not reached an agreement over who should pay for the permanent facilities needed to support the Marine rotations.

Using the USS Tripoli could mean Marines spend chunks of their deployment offshore, rather than stationed at Robertson Barracks, and could potentially extend their rotation to other parts of the Pacific during the Top End’s Wet.

It is unlikely the Tripoli will be sent this way until 2020, by which time the Marine build-up should have increased to rotations of 2500 troops...."

Source: http://www.ntnews.com.au/news/northern- ... 67a584516f

[spazsinbad]

Oh bad luck - the Federal Election 02 Jul 2016 intervened - too bad - boo hoo & everything.... double dissolution indeed.

"Inquiry Status - Inquiry lapsed" http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Bus ... ubmissions

[Dragon029]

Would that be a temporary lapse, or permanent? I could see it being the latter with the double dissolution, but you'd think there'd be some process for continuing inquiries with new governments.

[spazsinbad]

Permanent - no one really cares [except a few independents who needed to be mollified at the time for political advantage for them and the Labor Party connivance for their gain - they may not be in the new parliament].

[spazsinbad]

Note how this snippet is here and not on the LHD thread because I'm sick of the B/S about it - so here goes. PDF attached.

'I hate the word game changer, but it just is' page three
19 May 2016 Leigh Watson RAAF News

"...So we'll have Australians flying F-35Bs with the USMC in the near term"...." LTGEN Jon Davis USMC

Source: http://www.airforce.gov.au/News/Air-Force-Newspaper

[spazsinbad]

Not so 'permanent' lapse after all - maybe. Will depend on the political make up of the next Parliament - twas thus ever.

"At the dissolution of the Senate and the House of Representatives on 9 May 2016 for a general election on 2 July 2016, the parliamentary committees of the 44th Parliament ceased to exist. Therefore inquiries that were not completed have lapsed and submissions cannot be received. However, information about the inquiries is still available on this website. Information on this committee in the 45th Parliament will be presented here as soon as it is available." http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Bus ... nt_fighter

The Labor main opposition party (formerly in power some four or so years ago) wanted some advantage gained from the GREENS and Independents to support this Inquiry (what that is I do not know - see earlier posts about Labor 'fully supporting the purchase of the F-35' even as the Inquiry was supported by them - wot?). Anyway one can see the GREENS do not like the F-35 or even the Australia - US alliance from this little dummy spit from the GREENS leader today [offensive GREEN remarks not excerpted below - go read this short precis at the URL]:

"...Opposition Leader Bill Shorten reiterated Labor's support for the American alliance...." http://www.skynews.com.au/news/politics ... iance.html

[zerion]

Australia's third F-35A pilot takes to the skies
May 24, 2016

A third RAAF pilot is now qualified on the F-35A after Flight Lieutenant Edwin Borrman recently completed his qualifying flight at Luke Air Force Base in Arizona.
Defence said on Tuesday FLTLT Borrman was now qualified to instruct other pilots in flying the aircraft, joining SQNLDRs Andrew Jackson and David Bell as Australia’s first qualified F-35 pilots.

“The last jet I flew in Australia was the Hawk 127 as an instructor and I must say it feels good to be back at the front edge of aircraft performance,” Borrman said in a statement.

“A little more power and capability definitely puts a grin on my face.”

“The training went surprisingly quickly, although I did rely upon my previous experience in the F/A-18A and instructional experience in the Hawk 127 to help me through.

“Tactically the jet is amazing, there is so much situational awareness on display. The hardest part is determining what my priority is at any given time and where do I look to get that information.

“This course has given me great insight as to how our future F-35 pilots will transition directly from the Hawk to the F-35A

http://australianaviation.com.au/2016/0 ... the-skies/

[spazsinbad]

On Track [2 page PDF of article attached]
June 2016 Nigel Pittaway, AIR International

"Nigel Pittaway reports on the current status of the Australian F-35 programme...

...The Final Word
To conclude the briefing, Lt General Bogdan took some time to address what he called the misconceptions and inaccuracies regarding the F-35’s performance.

He said: “The critics of the programme and those who propose to do other things besides what we’re doing right now have no data to base their opinions on. I have the data; I have the pilots flying the airplane and you can go and ask them. Here’s what I will tell you: there is not an airplane in the world today – anywhere – that, if put up against an F-35 in an air-to-air environment, we would not see them first, shoot them first and kill them first. Period. Dot.”
Source: AIR International Magazine June 2016