optimist wrote:A lesser man, would be medicated with those delusions

AS you would know, Andrew McLaughlin is a well known aussie jurno. To nitpick the article, the F-35 isn't to replace the F-111. I don't recall the FA-18f on a 10 year fill in. Early on it was decided to review in 2025 keeping the FA-18f. with retiring them in 2025-2030. Other than that it was good. I recall the RAAF didn't want them and were happy to just have the hornets. They also didn't want the growlers counted as fast air. They are financed under another item. It is possible we keep the FA-18f/G as a marine gap filler with the subs. Currently the FA-18f retire 2030 and the growler 2035.
Yeah nitpicking can go on and on however he seems to have this idea fixed: "...The Super Hornet was initially acquired as a Bridging Air Combat Capability (BACC) through Project AIR 5439 after concerns the RAAF’s F-111C strike fleet was becoming increasingly costly to operate and was experiencing some fatigue issues. At the same time, the replacement F-35 JSF program was experiencing developmental and programmatic delays, and the RAAF determined that the F-111 couldn’t be extended beyond 2010....
A Super Decade March 26, 2020 Andrew McLaughlin
https://adbr.com.au/a-super-decade/ [still there - probably all these quotes are referenced already in this thread at the time]
“...When we have an effective maritime strike weapon onboard the F-35, we will look to retire our Super Hornets, with the exception of the Growler. Flying the Super Hornet has prepared us for F-35 in some key ways, notably in terms of the security requirements necessary to manage data generated by the aircraft.”... & ...“You fly a legacy asset you cannot drive the kind of change the ADF needs in the near to mid-term..."
Crafting a Fifth Generation Combat Force: The Perspective of Air Marshal (Retired) Geoff Brown 24 Nov 2018 Robbin Laird
https://sldinfo.com/2018/11/crafting-a- ... off-brown/"...One factor must be the RAAF’s argument that EA-18Gs are
support , not combat, aircraft. "While they do
attack [electronically], that is a fraction of their role and they cannot do all of the roles of a strike fighter,” says the senior officer. The Growlers will spend much of their time collecting electronic intelligence, not attacking, the officer says. Using them for conventional attacks would be beyond the training of their crews, specialists in the techniques of electronic warfare.
If Growlers are not combat aircraft, then the air force can argue that, despite their induction, it still needs 100 fighters—a mix of Super Hornets and Lightnings, at least at first. The government has made no comment on that possibility, and it
is struggling to get its budget back into surplus....-
RAAF Classifies Growlers As Support Aircraft 18 March 2013 By Bradley Perrett - Aviation Week & Space Technology
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article/Pri ... tView=true
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos