furkensturker

Way back in the 60s, Australia bought 24 F111's, that's right a whole 24, in the last ten years, we bought some more(not sure on numbers) 2nd hand from the US. Now, in all their wisdom, they have decided to scrap the F111's for the new F22 raptor, that doesn't become available for a number of years.

So as a stop gap, we have bought a number of Super Hornets.

I heard on the radio today, some ****in saying that the Super Hornet was the wrong plane to buy because; they were not real fast, not stealthy and no match for the new Mig that has been bought by Indonesia.

Canberra will never admit that Indonesia is a threat to Australia, but the deciding factor for buying the F111's was they were the only bomber with enough fuel to fly from Darwin to Jakarta and return. Most of our sharp end army and airforce are also at Darwin.

With Indonesia being the largest Muslim country on earth, and their unwillingness to do much about fundamentalist terrorism, we have a right to be worried. Indonesia is an Archipelago of 1800 islands with hundreds of million population standing shoulder to shoulder making it almost impossible to patrol as far as customs are concerned.

So, my question is, Is the Super Hornet a good bit of gear, or is it a dud? We already have the FA/18 hornet.

We have no navy air arm any more, that went with the HMAS Melbourne back in the eighties, with the Skyhawkes. There was talk of the Navy buying HMS Invincible and getting a handful of Harriers, but that never happened.

So, come on, Pro's and Con's please

Freddie

__________________
I'm the Happiness Fairy. I've sprinkled happy dust on you.
So Smile dammit. This sh1t's expensive.
Bulla Fiax concouria quantium vis

VarSity

WHOW THERE CHICKEN EYES!

Thats this about the F22? Has the US changed its mind on letting other nations buy them?

I think Auss was going to buy the HMS Invincible around the time of the Falklands. I doubt that would be a plan now, she is rather old after all.

glyn

__________________
Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.

furkensturker

Defense analyst: Australia's purchase of the Super Hornet is a big mistake
Flying into trouble

Quote:
Australia is risking its credibility in the region if it pursues its plan to buy 24 Super Hornet aircraft, writes Carlo Kopp.

LAST week's disclosure of negotiations to procure 24 Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornets as interim replacements for Australia's existing F-111 fleet is the latest instalment in the sorry saga of the RAAF's decline as a credible regional air force.

Until last week, senior Defence figures repeatedly denied that Super Hornets were being sought as gap fillers to overcome continuing difficulties with the long running F/A-18A Hornet Upgrade Program, increasing delays with the Joint Strike Fighter, and Defence's campaign for premature retirement of the F-111 fleet.

The Super Hornet is the US Navy's follow-on fighter to the "Classic Hornet", currently flown by four RAAF squadrons. While slightly larger than Australia's Hornets, the Super Hornet's agility, supersonic speed and acceleration performance, critical in air combat, are no better than the earlier model, due to a Congressional mandate during development. With unique engines, radar, airframe and electronic warfare systems, the Super Hornet shares little real commonality with its predecessor, driving up support costs. All it offers is a better radar, improved avionics and 36 per cent more internal fuel, at a price tag estimated at $2.5 billion.

The bad news is that the Super Hornet is not competitive against the latest Russian Sukhoi Su-30MK fighters, operated or being acquired by China, India, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia, and it is also not competitive against the Boeing F-15 models being acquired by Singapore, South Korea, and flown by Japan.

The larger Sukhois are faster, much more agile, and have greater range and firepower than the Super Hornet. The Russians are now testing an advanced supersonic cruise engine in the Sukhoi fighter, which will effectively double the combat speed of the Russian fighters, putting them well out of reach of the lacklustre Super Hornet.

The Super Hornet is not a credible air combat fighter in this region, and no upgrade can ever make it so.

The stated intention to use the Super Hornet as an interim replacement for Australia's F-111s is no less incredible.

Capable of carrying about half the F-111's payload of smart bombs to about two-thirds the distance achievable by the F-111, in raw firepower terms the Super Hornet delivers around one-third the punch of the F-111.

To match the range and persistence of the F-111, the Super Hornet must be supported by aerial refuelling tanker aircraft in numbers that Defence has no intention of ever acquiring. In real terms, replacing F-111s with Super Hornets reduces strike capability three-fold.

Claims by Defence that the F-111s will become dangerous to fly after 2010 are absurd, given the advanced testing used to verify structural integrity of the fleet. Defence has repeatedly inflated the cost of operating and upgrading the F-111 in evidence to Parliament, and made factually incorrect claims on a wide range of technical issues, while publicly admitting "we don't know what we don't know". In short, the Defence leadership has no credibility whatsoever in justifying the early retirement of the F-111s. Even a fraction of the budget required to buy the Super Hornet would equip the F-111s with new engines, new wings and new avionics, allowing them to remain in use decades longer.

Compared to the mediocre Joint Strike Fighter that Defence intends as the ultimate replacement for both the F/A-18A and F-111 fleets, the Super Hornet has inferior stealth and avionics. Neither of these aircraft were designed to be credible in air combat against the latest Russian Sukhois.

Nor were they designed to defeat the advanced Russian S-300 and S-400 surface-to-air missile systems, largely superior to the US Patriot, and now appearing in this region.

In strategic terms, Defence is re-equipping the RAAF with a fleet of aircraft that will be little more than a bad joke in the region — and doing so despite better alternatives, such as the superlative F-22A, and despite repeated advice to the contrary.

Defence runs a real risk that as further difficulties emerge with the Joint Strike Fighter, and its cost continues to creep up, a future government will bale out, and with Super Hornets already in service, opt to buy more to replace the legacy Hornets. This further reduces capability against the non-credible Joint Strike Fighter plan. A far better strategy for the future of the RAAF is to scrap current planning, and start again.

The F-22A Raptor suffers none of the limitations of either the Joint Strike Fighter or Super Hornet, and is in production and operational in the US.

If Australia is to have any strategic credibility in the region, it cannot pursue the path sought by the Defence leadership.

Dr Carlo Kopp is a defence analyst and research fellow in regional military strategy at the Monash Asia Institute. He has flown the Super Hornet.

Stan

yep, your not going to get the raptor no matter how much you want it.

VarSity

Think there is some confusion between the Raptor (F22) and the JSF (F35).

highsea

^^^ Apparently also between Flankers and Fulcrums....

__________________
My baby called me up. She said- Why don't you ever take me out? Pick me up in your brand new car....You shake the short change from the old fruit jar...

Versus

And who is going to attack Australia with Sukhoi's and MiG's?

__________________
Let's go swimming...

furkensturker

Correction,
Yes, even the RAAF is saying that we wont be getting the F22, we will be getting the JSF instead.

HistoricalDavid

Versus, Indonesia and Malaysia, apparently.

F-22s farmed out to the world's good guys would be nice but even with an amenable US Congress, it's not going to happen.

__________________
HD Ready?

furkensturker

Indonesia have or are buying the new MIGS.

Gun Grape

Well theres your problem. I've heard Kopp called the Mike Sparks of Australia

Feanor

No. Flankers and Super Flankers only iirc.

Adux

Its Carl Kopp

wabpilot

Carlo Kopp is not a naval or military aviator. He is not a civilian test pilot. In fact he holds a civilian commercial pilot certificate and nothing more. He has logged exactly zero hours in any F-18. He may be a defense analyst, but he knows nothing of aviation. And he is apparently proud enough of his ignorance to put it on paper for all to see. He's actually rather humerous. But, a good chuckle is really all he's worth.