F-15E for RAAF?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F-15E for RAAF?
Can someone tell me with escalating cost of JSF why F-15E is not a serious contender for F/A-18 F-111 replacement.
It can perform both roles, better than our current platforms.
Range/Payload
Interoperability
Combat proven
Still in production - ie South Korea and Singapore recent purchase
Great CAS platform (probably the role most likely to find our selves in)
I know out F/A-18 guys were salivating over the beagle in the gulf in 2003, with the amount of ordnance and loiter time it had.
I am just not convinced that JSF is what we need.
Why do we keep persisting with A model kit???
Do we really need stealth???
Why cant we just buy something that just friggin works for a change???
I am entirely open to suggestion here
It can perform both roles, better than our current platforms.
Range/Payload
Interoperability
Combat proven
Still in production - ie South Korea and Singapore recent purchase
Great CAS platform (probably the role most likely to find our selves in)
I know out F/A-18 guys were salivating over the beagle in the gulf in 2003, with the amount of ordnance and loiter time it had.
I am just not convinced that JSF is what we need.
Why do we keep persisting with A model kit???
Do we really need stealth???
Why cant we just buy something that just friggin works for a change???
I am entirely open to suggestion here
I'd like to see some Russian equipment in Oz colours, myself! 
Nunc est bibendum
F15 is same generation technology as the Hornet- albeit with bigger payload and fuel tanks.
JSF and F22 provide a quantum leap in capability- in all of the above plus with a bit of a better stealth. Plus, have a look around at those with whom we could end up in some sort of conflict. Some of them are flying aircraft that are equally as capable as the F15 and in some cases, are modernising to aircraft that out performs.
Then again, what do I know. I just read books. I'd be interested to read the opinions of those who do this sort of stuff for a living- no, I don't mean you Dr Kopp!
Perhaps Pass-A-Frozo could get some of his knuck bretheren to look in and comment. 
JSF and F22 provide a quantum leap in capability- in all of the above plus with a bit of a better stealth. Plus, have a look around at those with whom we could end up in some sort of conflict. Some of them are flying aircraft that are equally as capable as the F15 and in some cases, are modernising to aircraft that out performs.
Then again, what do I know. I just read books. I'd be interested to read the opinions of those who do this sort of stuff for a living- no, I don't mean you Dr Kopp!
Perhaps Pass-A-Frozo could get some of his knuck bretheren to look in and comment.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
please lets stop wasting money on old US equipment, keep a few pigs and hornets for flypasts cause that is all they are good for.
We need more battle field mobility (ie transports be it fixed or rotary) and a few medium pace (for want of a better description) attack aircraft to chuck bombs. As far as I can gather high flying US Mach 2 p.o.s' have a checkered history of 'blue on blue' f@#$ ups or collateral civillian deaths in US service and wasting my tax dollars in Australian service. I am sure we could have had a few CN295's or C27's for the $150million plus we have wasted so far on the JSF rather than risking the lives of young soldiers and airmen (and airwomen or is it airpersons?) in antiquated UH1's, UH60's and DHC-4's.
We need more battle field mobility (ie transports be it fixed or rotary) and a few medium pace (for want of a better description) attack aircraft to chuck bombs. As far as I can gather high flying US Mach 2 p.o.s' have a checkered history of 'blue on blue' f@#$ ups or collateral civillian deaths in US service and wasting my tax dollars in Australian service. I am sure we could have had a few CN295's or C27's for the $150million plus we have wasted so far on the JSF rather than risking the lives of young soldiers and airmen (and airwomen or is it airpersons?) in antiquated UH1's, UH60's and DHC-4's.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: S 40°12'07" E 175°22'52"
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funk,
Before you can throw transports and attack aircraft in the mix, you need to control the battlespace they are going into. That means fighters that can control the sky.
Keg is bang on with his observations. There are already 4th generation aircraft in the region, and the ADF needs to take a leap beyond this if they want to show some dominance in the sky. Now is the time to do it, so they might as well take the time to invest in the technology and get a good product at the end of it. The F-15E may do as an interim measure, but come the not-too-distant future, if I was going into a fight I'd want either the JSF or a F-22 strapped to my back, and also on the backs of my wingmen.
Before you can throw transports and attack aircraft in the mix, you need to control the battlespace they are going into. That means fighters that can control the sky.
Keg is bang on with his observations. There are already 4th generation aircraft in the region, and the ADF needs to take a leap beyond this if they want to show some dominance in the sky. Now is the time to do it, so they might as well take the time to invest in the technology and get a good product at the end of it. The F-15E may do as an interim measure, but come the not-too-distant future, if I was going into a fight I'd want either the JSF or a F-22 strapped to my back, and also on the backs of my wingmen.
What concerns me, is we risk going into the next decade, with a dwindling force of 30 upgraded F18's and a hundred stand off missiles. And the great white hope being 'A' model JSF's.
We aren't gambling with JSF, we are by circumstance and lack of alternatives, totally committed!
An interim, long range fighter bomber still makes sense to me.
We aren't gambling with JSF, we are by circumstance and lack of alternatives, totally committed!
An interim, long range fighter bomber still makes sense to me.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahh, a little Catch 22. Despite military pleadings, politicians kept deferring decisions on upgrades. So now we are in a position where we have to replace aircraft or else. RAAFies have fingers crossed that the F111 fleet will still number more than a couple of operational aircraft by the time replacements come through.
Decision:
Purchase a 30 yo design now (F-15), albeit with some upgrades with modded electronics and unable to accept much in the way of further upgrades as electronics and weapons technology advances and have to consider an additional replacement immediately, or
Bank on the very latest technology available in a few years; hope the current fleet is serviceable enough to meet the nation's security needs until then; trust the pollies to keep foreign diplomatic relations calm; get an aircraft that will be serviceable and competitive for another 30 years; and put off having to front up to the pollies cap-in-hand for additional acquisitions for as long as possible.
You make a similar decision when you purchase a computer. Do you get the top of the range model due out in a couple of months for $6K, the 2nd generation model available now at $3K, or the el cheapo model that's been on the market for a few years at $1K? I guess it depends on the state of your current computer and what you want to achieve with the next one.
I'd hate to make that RAAF decision. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Decision:
Purchase a 30 yo design now (F-15), albeit with some upgrades with modded electronics and unable to accept much in the way of further upgrades as electronics and weapons technology advances and have to consider an additional replacement immediately, or
Bank on the very latest technology available in a few years; hope the current fleet is serviceable enough to meet the nation's security needs until then; trust the pollies to keep foreign diplomatic relations calm; get an aircraft that will be serviceable and competitive for another 30 years; and put off having to front up to the pollies cap-in-hand for additional acquisitions for as long as possible.
You make a similar decision when you purchase a computer. Do you get the top of the range model due out in a couple of months for $6K, the 2nd generation model available now at $3K, or the el cheapo model that's been on the market for a few years at $1K? I guess it depends on the state of your current computer and what you want to achieve with the next one.
I'd hate to make that RAAF decision. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Victoria
Age: 62
Posts: 984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAAF aircraft aquisition 101.
1. Sit around with a few of your mates and some beers. Decide what aircraft we really want.
2. Spend months (if not years) coming up with a proposal whose specifications are written to almost exactly match the aircraft we really want all along. Include a few other contenders to make it look kosher.
3. Spend sh!t loads of $'s trotting around the world looking at said aircraft. Oh and while we're in (insert applicable country here) we'll have to have a few days off to (insert applicable activity here).
4. Come back to Oz, and allow liver and credit card time to recover by spending a few months writing a report on said "fact finding" tour.
5. Select aircraft as discussed at point 1.
Then comes the "introduction" phase!!
Cynical?? moi??
1. Sit around with a few of your mates and some beers. Decide what aircraft we really want.
2. Spend months (if not years) coming up with a proposal whose specifications are written to almost exactly match the aircraft we really want all along. Include a few other contenders to make it look kosher.
3. Spend sh!t loads of $'s trotting around the world looking at said aircraft. Oh and while we're in (insert applicable country here) we'll have to have a few days off to (insert applicable activity here).
4. Come back to Oz, and allow liver and credit card time to recover by spending a few months writing a report on said "fact finding" tour.
5. Select aircraft as discussed at point 1.
Then comes the "introduction" phase!!
Cynical?? moi??
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given the nature of the regional affairs our unappreciated uniformed people are being committed to might not an old A1 (on a boat of course) provide what might be needed. (tongue not necessarily in cheek)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fragnasty
Funk,
Before you can throw transports and attack aircraft in the mix, you need to control the battlespace they are going into. That means fighters that can control the sky.
Keg is bang on with his observations. There are already 4th generation aircraft in the region, and the ADF needs to take a leap beyond this if they want to show some dominance in the sky. Now is the time to do it, so they might as well take the time to invest in the technology and get a good product at the end of it. The F-15E may do as an interim measure, but come the not-too-distant future, if I was going into a fight I'd want either the JSF or a F-22 strapped to my back, and also on the backs of my wingmen.
Before you can throw transports and attack aircraft in the mix, you need to control the battlespace they are going into. That means fighters that can control the sky.
Keg is bang on with his observations. There are already 4th generation aircraft in the region, and the ADF needs to take a leap beyond this if they want to show some dominance in the sky. Now is the time to do it, so they might as well take the time to invest in the technology and get a good product at the end of it. The F-15E may do as an interim measure, but come the not-too-distant future, if I was going into a fight I'd want either the JSF or a F-22 strapped to my back, and also on the backs of my wingmen.
The F22 is a nice peice of kit granted, but that kind of money is beyond our budget and lets leave it to the Yanks to iron out the bugs for a few years yet. The knuckle heads can bide there time on Hawks till we really need to spend the cash on something that works.
Funk
So do you like walking around in public with you pants down around your ankles exposing all your vulnerabilities and insecurities to the world? If you don’t why do you think Australia should for that is what you are asking it to do?
So do you like walking around in public with you pants down around your ankles exposing all your vulnerabilities and insecurities to the world? If you don’t why do you think Australia should for that is what you are asking it to do?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 404 Titan
Funk
So do you like walking around in public with you pants down around your ankles exposing all your vulnerabilities and insecurities to the world? If you don’t why do you think Australia should for that is what you are asking it to do?
So do you like walking around in public with you pants down around your ankles exposing all your vulnerabilities and insecurities to the world? If you don’t why do you think Australia should for that is what you are asking it to do?
we could all go on about our theories on air asset expenditures...so I will subject you to mine
... my concerns are that the current administration in Canberra and Defence Departartment are slavenly following the concept that everybody must have Mach2 semi stealth air superiority fighters (that can throw bombs as well). These aren't our current needs, we need proper transport mobility and close support for our soldeirs and sailors staitoned in Iraq, Afghanistan, East Timor and to a lesser extent the Solomon Islands. These types of missions have been the mainstay of the Australian Armed Forces since the Korean War and for the medium term future will continue to be our type of mission.
So I ask why do we committ so much angst & money pursuing airframes that don't support this type of mission. I hazard to speculate that the most sort after air support in Afghanistan is provided by A10's, RAF & Marine Corp Harriers, C17's, Hercs and CH-47's. On the other hand I don't subscribe to the NZ notion of no air combat capability what so ever. We can easily maintain a cadre of fast jet pilots and instructors through continued service of the Hawks and some of the Hornets (up until the point that the Hornet costs are prohibitive like we currently have with the F111!).
Back to the thread....
....The F15E is an out of date airframe for a mission we dont have and the JSF is just another Collins Class Sub/Seasprite/C130J/F111(circa 1964 delivered 1973)/Manoora & Kinimbla in the making. Australia doesn't have to continue to play sucker to US defence manufactures.
BTW saw the Red Arrows yesterday now that is what a fast(ish) jet should really be used for, PC9's just don't cut it Roulettes
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 404 Titan
Funk
So do you like walking around in public with you pants down around your ankles exposing all your vulnerabilities and insecurities to the world? If you don’t why do you think Australia should for that is what you are asking it to do?
So do you like walking around in public with you pants down around your ankles exposing all your vulnerabilities and insecurities to the world? If you don’t why do you think Australia should for that is what you are asking it to do?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funk
I completely agree about the Roulette thing
The PC9 just doesnt cut it, but its cheap, and the RAAF loves cheap.
Our airforce is all about tangible costs and benifits.
The intangible benifits of having a jet display team, ie recruiting!, would be massive. The public just wants to see something make a s%^t tin of noise and go real fast. One jet on its own is a whole lot more impressive than several turboprops. I daresay the macchis would have been awesome for the roulettes in their day.
It is easy to put a dollar cost next to maintaining a Hawk Jet display team, but not so easy to put a dollar figure next to the benifits in terms of recruiting and the public image of the RAAF.
The other organisational barrier to doing this is that roulettes are training wings turf. Not ACGs. And ACG owns the hawk 127.
Hawks are obviously used for fast jet training for junior aircrew, are there hours left over to be used for a display team, deployed away from williamtown constantly? Probably not.
Would the current contract with BAE allow such an endevour?? Probably not.
I would love to see it happen, but alas I dont think it will.
I completely agree about the Roulette thing
The PC9 just doesnt cut it, but its cheap, and the RAAF loves cheap.
Our airforce is all about tangible costs and benifits.
The intangible benifits of having a jet display team, ie recruiting!, would be massive. The public just wants to see something make a s%^t tin of noise and go real fast. One jet on its own is a whole lot more impressive than several turboprops. I daresay the macchis would have been awesome for the roulettes in their day.
It is easy to put a dollar cost next to maintaining a Hawk Jet display team, but not so easy to put a dollar figure next to the benifits in terms of recruiting and the public image of the RAAF.
The other organisational barrier to doing this is that roulettes are training wings turf. Not ACGs. And ACG owns the hawk 127.
Hawks are obviously used for fast jet training for junior aircrew, are there hours left over to be used for a display team, deployed away from williamtown constantly? Probably not.
Would the current contract with BAE allow such an endevour?? Probably not.
I would love to see it happen, but alas I dont think it will.
Funk
The ADF has no funds for specialist close air support aircraft or helicopters. The best chance it had recently, was an Army equiped with Apaches. But the bueracrats wanted a ' scout ' helicopter primarily; with a fire support backup role. So we ended up with the unproven European Tiger. The vulnerability of helicopter platforms in the close support role probably warrants seperate debate- the ambush of 82nd Airborne Apaches in the last Gulf War tif case in point.
In saying that, the RAAF has through it's flexibility, delivered very good army support with non-specialised aircraft over the years- WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq. It seems to have always been up there with advancing technologies in the army support eg: very early introduction of laser guided weapons on aircraft such as the Mirage & F111.
By your own admission, close support is an important role for the ADF. How do they deliver it without specialist platforms? Through the flexibility of fighter bombers and RAAF crews.
Our geography and lack of tankers dictates you need a long range fighter bomber too. F15E seems the logical choice as an 'interim' capability, to maintain the RAAF beyond a handful of Hornets next decade and taking the pressure of being forced into accepting early production run JSF's.
I don't think the F15E is obsolete. Ppruners here have flown it and guys I work with have stated it was the most flexible asset they put together in NATO air packages- in one yarn on a big package mission, the AWACS went U/S and the F15E's were able to provide a mini replacement capability quickly- very good radar and very good range.
So, lease a squadron of F15E's, push the F18's out a bit further by means of a smaller operational fleet, put a missile on the Orions and buy later model JSF's.
How can you pay for it? Drop the ridiculous concept of Air Warfare destroyers for the navy.
The ADF has no funds for specialist close air support aircraft or helicopters. The best chance it had recently, was an Army equiped with Apaches. But the bueracrats wanted a ' scout ' helicopter primarily; with a fire support backup role. So we ended up with the unproven European Tiger. The vulnerability of helicopter platforms in the close support role probably warrants seperate debate- the ambush of 82nd Airborne Apaches in the last Gulf War tif case in point.
In saying that, the RAAF has through it's flexibility, delivered very good army support with non-specialised aircraft over the years- WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq. It seems to have always been up there with advancing technologies in the army support eg: very early introduction of laser guided weapons on aircraft such as the Mirage & F111.
By your own admission, close support is an important role for the ADF. How do they deliver it without specialist platforms? Through the flexibility of fighter bombers and RAAF crews.
Our geography and lack of tankers dictates you need a long range fighter bomber too. F15E seems the logical choice as an 'interim' capability, to maintain the RAAF beyond a handful of Hornets next decade and taking the pressure of being forced into accepting early production run JSF's.
I don't think the F15E is obsolete. Ppruners here have flown it and guys I work with have stated it was the most flexible asset they put together in NATO air packages- in one yarn on a big package mission, the AWACS went U/S and the F15E's were able to provide a mini replacement capability quickly- very good radar and very good range.
So, lease a squadron of F15E's, push the F18's out a bit further by means of a smaller operational fleet, put a missile on the Orions and buy later model JSF's.
How can you pay for it? Drop the ridiculous concept of Air Warfare destroyers for the navy.
Originally Posted by Led Zep
I'd like to see some Russian equipment in Oz colours, myself!
Yep.
Go for the Su-37 Super Flanker. A metric ar*eload better than the F-15 and pretty much every other US fighter. Just get the Israeli's to retrofit US avionics so it's all compatible with the rest of our gear.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Victoria
Age: 62
Posts: 984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and the RAAF loves cheap
The RAAF - indeed the ADF - is given "cheap" by our lords and masters.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 18-Wheeler
Yep.
Go for the Su-37 Super Flanker. A metric ar*eload better than the F-15 and pretty much every other US fighter. Just get the Israeli's to retrofit US avionics so it's all compatible with the rest of our gear.
Go for the Su-37 Super Flanker. A metric ar*eload better than the F-15 and pretty much every other US fighter. Just get the Israeli's to retrofit US avionics so it's all compatible with the rest of our gear.
It all sounds so simple doesnt it!
The Su looks much better than anything else in Carlo's bar graphs in Aussie Av, why wouldnt we get it???
While we're at it we should fit an AESA and AMRAAM to the pig!
Originally Posted by 18-Wheeler
Just get the Israeli's to retrofit US avionics so it's all compatible with the rest of our gear.
Defence should become more corporate like. So here's one, in business, beware of a Jew bearing gifts. Didn't we have a shed full of incompatible Israeli missiles until recently?