@nikhilbw The problem with that is they are f series not fa that means they arent strike fighters just fighters so your an idiot the navy uses strike fighters and the airforce has the plain fighters i know because im in the navy and work on fa18 a+s
@nikhilbw No, F-16's were always out of the question. Before we got the original F/A-18A's we considered the F-16, and it was decided that they're too large for a single engine aircraft. We didn't get the F-15 as they're more of a air-air combat system, so the F/A-18 was really the best option at the time, good all-rounder aircraft, and the F/A-18F is a nice upgrade, to keep us moving forward till we get the F-35.
@nikhilbw I don't think the F-35 is what it is purported to be. China and Russia have stolen the stealth coding on it. It can't carry that much payload and countries would be much better mainting a fleet of F-22s, F-15s, A-10s and F-16s (supplemented by heavy bombers.) We don't need stealth for airstrikes against terrorists. The only time they would be needed is against a country like Iran (although that didn't really work out with that drone.)
F18 super hornet on top of the rest? Just lost the US$11 billion tender in India for 126 fighters to EF Typhoon n Dassault Rafale.
Was it USA foreign policy of supplying F16s' for free to ungrateful terrorist loving, Osama hosting pakistan that caused the USA to lose this tender n all those jobs at Boeing?
F-16's and 15's would be a nice addition to the RAAF fleet, but we don't really need them. At the momment, we have the standard F-18 Hornets and the F-18 Super Hornets, and we are getting our F-35's soon. Our government was holding talks to try and pursuade the US to sell some F-22's to us, but they declined.
@IIproductionsII tbh F-35 is overhyped and shit. Such a waste of money by our government. And why the heck do we need F-35 against Fiji and Indonesia. LOL. overkill
The United States has tremendous military power. But this power has been compromised in recent years. In 1985, under President Reagan, the United States Army had 27 divisions. Today, we have 10 divisions. In 1985, we had 37 Air Force wings. Today, we are down to 13 wings. In 1985, we had 546 ships in the United States Navy. Today, we have 339.
How does America's current strength match up with Russia's?
America's military superiority ought to be questioned
The one would be to overestimate our strength, and thus neglect crucially important actions in the period just ahead. The other would be to underestimate our strength. Thereby we might dishearten our friends, and to lose our national poise and perspective in approaching the complex problems ahead. Any orderly balance-sheet of military strength must be in two parts. The first is the position as of today. The second is the position in the period ahead.Eisenhower-State of the Union-1958
@JacobTaborOz Yes, I agree with you, the F111 is a piece of crap. It won't even stand a chance at all against the ancient Mig-17, air-to-air, except to run away at supersonic speed at low level. Its "F" designator should be replaced by a "P" for a piece of crap. The guy who led the Fighter Mafia & the Father of F-16, Col John Boyd, tried his best to kill it, but somehow, it survived. I can't believe RAAF waste huge sum of money on it.
Your responses shows you have no knowledge as to the role the F-111 plays within the Australian Defence Force. They are not used for air-to-air engagements, they are used as a medium-range bomber and for strike missions. In that role they serve the ADF's needs and there is no western aircraft available that meets all the mission requirements that the F-111 does. I.E. Range/Speed/Payload. Everything else falls short of those three requirements.
@RasterGraph If F-111s are so good as bombers, why do you think the USAF can't wait to scrap them & replace them with F-15E? Aussie AF scrapped them too, right?
Congress even tried to operate it from aircraft carrier as fleet defense fighter, when F-14 Tomcat was born.
To answer your first question quite simply, the US Military Budget is $687,105,000,000 and the Australian Military Budget is $19,799,000,000. If we had the US Budget we would not need the F-111.
The second part of your response is not really a question, however let me say that Australia has not the luxury off spending huge sums of money on military resources/equipment/research. We have a military strategy that calls for the capabilities the F-111 offers.
@RasterGraph May I ask you a question? When the F-111s were in the service with RAAF, what were RAAF air-defense fighters? F-111s were offensive platforms designed to fly low & fast to strike targets deep within hostile territory, presumeably, in Indonesia.
The US crapped its F-111 to save money too as F-15E can do the bombing job nearly as well & can fight its way out too, if needed, a true multi-role aircraft.
We use the F/A-18a/b/e/f Hornet as our Air-Defence/Superiorty/Strike Fighter.
I would agree the F-15E is almost as good in the role the F-111 plays, however the F-15E combat radius is less than that of the F-111 as well as the maximum weapons carrying capacity and the maximum tafe-off weight. All of this means that the F-15E cannot strike as far or as hard as the F-111. The other point is we don't have the F-15E and do have the aforementioned limited budget.
If that's the case, why RAAF decided to abandon its deep strike capability or whether such threat never existed in the first place?
Also, why RAAF decided to buy carrier-based fighter like F/A-18 CD & EF? Naval jets are designed to be operated from aircraft carrier, penalized by weight penalty of beefed up airframe/landing gear/tail hook & other constrains of dimentional limitation imposed by carrier operation? Will RAAF be better off with land-base counter parts free of those constrains.
I believe that the reason for the F/A-18 was that to start with we wanted twin engine so no F-16 leaving only the F-15, Tornado and F/A-18. F-15 didn't have strike capability when we were buying and was too expensive and Tornado was really an interceptor and strike fighter. Also with the F/A-18 there was the ability to operate them US carriers. All that together and we were willing to except the weight penalties.
@RasterGraph I think USAF should sell the RAAF some of our equipment we are retiring- we have them in these stupid "boneyards" in perfectly fine condition. Do you think the Aussies could use some of the American B-1Bs for deep-strike role to replace the F-111? And F-15Cs perhaps too. We are replacing a lot with the F-35 and I think Australia should purchase some of the older planes. Personally I despise the 35 and wish we were upgrading the '15s, '16s, and '18s.
I agree the USA should sell us all those old F-111s. We could get them nice and cheap so we could buy lots of them for parts and to bulk up our Airforce. We could most definitely use the F-111 however the B-1s are too expensive to maintain and operate. We would be better getting lots of F-111s then a few B-1s. Also we don't need the range or payload that the B-1s offer.
@KATAERO1 Australia should buy America's older B-1Bs for deep strike. Why they insist on using Fighter Bombers is beyond me. The era of the fighter bomber (F-105, F-111, F-117) is long over. It's time to switch to heavy deep-range bombers or advanced fighters. Personally I think an air force would be fine with B-1s, B-2s, F-15Es, and F-22s- nothing else.
@nbarile18 Who is Australia's potential adversary? Is it continue to be Indonesia?
I think RAAF decided to scrapped its deep strike capability & shift its strategy toward defensive posture because SE Asia has become much more peaceful & stable.
I thought Australia has limited defense budget! B-1, B-2 & F-22 are extremely expensive weapon system in the world.
@KATAERO1 I never said Australia should get B-2s and F-22s- those are America's most coveted aircraft and I doubt they would ever sell them. But F-15s and F-16s? And B-1s or B-52s? The deep strike role is imperative for power projection. And "the best defense is good offense"- if there was an impending strike on Australia, you would want to strike first and take out enemy runways and ships.
But the F-15 is a great interceptor because of its vertical climb capability, too.
@nbarile18 I agree with you that F-15 & F-16 are excellent non-stealthy fighter combination, both have better thrust/weight ratio (better agility) & payload/range than F-18. The only thing they can't do is to land & takeoff from carrier's deck.
The US has found out that deep strike mission is best suit to UCAVs (including stealthy ones) & is developing them like crazy, even naval version, to be operated from US carriers.
@KATAERO1 Only advantage of UAVs are the range and loiter time. I think the X-47B for our carriers will be good but you cannot replace the air superiority mission. That is why we need F-15s and F-22s. But the goddamn F-35 is replacing everything which means we won't have em. That is why I think they should go to the RAAF where they could actually be used.
Stealth is taking over performance. Eventually the Chinese will copy one of our advanced radars and it will be for nothing...
@nbarile18 Of course, air superiority still belongs to human brains in the cockpits, but for taking out specific targets deep within hostile territory, nothing beats relatively cheap & expendable UCAVs or even the good old cruise missiles.
I heard old antique long-band radar can be tweaked to detect stealth with limited success at close range. That's how the Serbs managed to shoot down a lame F-117, but F-22's supercruise will sure take care of that.
@KATAERO1 Friend, you are absolutely right. I'm Australian - we have no enemies! We will continue to have deep strike capacity via airborne missiles but really - why would we want to hit Jakarta?
@hdmccart What to become East Timor use to belong to the Indonesians, and the least Australia can do is to not involving itself in East Timor at all, not to mention sending Australian soldiers over there!
@hdmccart We have plenty of enemies. Were lumped in with the Brits and the US as far as world politics goes. Infact were a softer target than those two so more likely to get hit.
@Antifaith29 If it weren't for the fact that we are 16,000Km from the action I would support you. But, we are not and it is universally recognised that even the US would have a difficult time maintaining a logistical tail all the way down here to support any action.
SU30? dont ever match something non battle proved aircraft. F18 is so reliable, thas why US is still using it.. If you have a plane that cannot be used because of bad wheater, thats not an aircraft. thats handicraft!!
I would say RAAF F-18F Super Hornet would stand a chance against Malaysian Su-30MKM, Indonesian Su-30MK1/2, and Indonesian Su-27SKM in the region. The F-18F Super Hornet is two crews pilots and it can carry up to 12 missiles. If the RAAF buy MBDA METEOR RAMJET MISSILES and armament to F-18F Super Hornet. There will be no escape zone for Sukhoi fighters. If I were RAAF cancel the F-35 is a useless fighter. Just buy F-15SE Silent Eagle.
@USAAIRPOWER I'll go along with the F15 se. I think it's going to amaze people with its abilities. wanna bet they have a second block designed with thrust vectoring?
-AAM WEAPONS:(AIM-120C5/7, AIM-9X Block II, & AIM-132 ASRAAM)
-AGM/JSW/ASM/CM:(AGM-154C1, JSOW ER, JSOW Block II, AGM-154A/B/C JSOW, AGM-158 JASSM-ER, AGM-158A JASSM, AGM-65E/F/G/H/K, JAGM, AGM-84H SLAM ER, Harpoon Block II, & AGM-88E AARGM)
-BOMBS:(Paveway II DMLGB, Mk-84 Laser JDAM, JDAM ER, GBU-31/32/35/38 JDAM, GBU-10/12/16 Paveway II, & GBU-24/27 Paveway III).
@xTomcatsForeverVF84x The F-18 super hornet is an amazing aircraft. It is arguably one of the best aircraft in the world. Its main downfall is it looks like an 18 wheeler on radar. The Super Hornet and regular Hornet are two completely different aircraft.
@cchanderson Yeah, but who is going to try and argue that the F/A-18F is the best aircraft in the world? when it quite obviously isn't. Also what determines the best aircraft? no aircraft can be the best aircraft unless it's good for everything. You don't say the best aircraft, you say the best fighter aircraft, stealth aircraft, transport aircraft ect.
@IIproductionsII Well shit for brains when I say "arguably the best aircraft" and I am referring to the fighter...everyone generally assumes I mean fighter aircraft...unless you are a moron like you! When dady told you to stick her in the hole when you were 16 I bet she couldn't shit for a week!
@cchanderson actually the F/A-18E super hornet has the lowest RCS of any fighter in the US or British arsenal(aside from the F-22 and F-35). so it is actually extremely stealthy for what it can do and for what it costs($55million). but when it comes to value for money the F/A-18E is probably the best aircraft in existence(it is a carrier based aircraft that has been filling every role in the book for almost 30 years with the US Navy).
@finalmind The Hornet is inferior to the Sukhoi? Well if it is, that doesn't matter, because our JSF's will take them out before they take out our Hornets and then the Hornets can drop there bombs on Jakarta... nice trolling though
We should have just kept the F111's flying til 2020 and used the spare change to do some practice bombing runs on New Zealand from time to time. Wouldn't be hard, they don't even have a fighter division anymore..
I feel sorry for the Hornet pilots who have to go up against a late model Flanker, they're gonna get there ass handed to them on a plate.
The Hornet is inferior to the Flanker in all the key areas and with the introduction of the PAK FA only a few years away this aircraft has become irrelevant in modern air warfare.
@ColdWarWarriors You are a joke with that kind of silly statement! You have no idea! your statement is so stupid it pisses me off. you should not comment on things that are beyond your comprehension.
@cherylz1 You obviously have no concept of what modern airwarfare entails. Read the Airpower Australia website, in simulated engagments with an Su35, the Flanker wins with a 4 to 1 kill ratio, and please don't mention the PAK FA.
The F22 is the only aircraft that is survivable in the Asia Pacific region, that is what the RAAF should be purchasing, not updated cold war relics.
@ColdWarWarriors Key word is "Simulated". Believed in what your country has and the technology. RAAF Fighter Pilots are great at what they do. F-22's ? well you guys can't have that, but it'll be near by to keep those 35's at bay. I have a great understanding of what's going on. F-18 super Hornets can hold their own in the hands of the RAAF believe me. Don't count out your Countries Pilots they got what it takes to kick some 35 ass. : )
@ColdWarWarriors The F-35 can win against the Flanker too. Plus, who knows? The PAK FA could be the biggest flunk ever. We just don't now! It seems great, but who knows waht'll happen?
@ColdWarWarriors Dude just for listening to Airpower Australia you have to be fucking retarded. They don't base their facts off anything and when asked where they get their info from they say "it is classified to AirPower Australia employees and clients."
We are getting the F-35s which are awesome, they can defeat all current Sukhoi's flying. Jesus, it can bloody fire a missile at a target from any angle and it will hit the tale, say good bye to having to get behind your target to hit it.
@minerofblood Yeah, 24 Su34 maritime strike fighters. Of course it will never happen though. DoD are tied to the apron strings of the US dfence industry.
I remember a newpaper Cartoon which had an Aboriginal describing one of his boomerangs as the F111 model. "Sometimes it returns, sometimes it doesn't".
F111 has come a long way from it's early unreliable days. Along with the Caribou Aircraft, they are both the most brilliant designed for their roles. Thus extremely hard to replace.
Only 10 Amraams? I thought it was 12 - four on stations 2, 5, 7 and 10 plus eight on double rails on stations 3,4,8 and 9, or do the double rail mountings have clearance issues?
BTW, will the AIM-132 ASRAAM be integrated for RAAF Super Hornets, or is Australia going to buy AIM-9X Sidewinders. Mind you that unlike the AIM-132 the 9X doesn't yet have LOAL capability. The 132 can engage targets behind you (I guess that's why they call it "ASS-RAM" ;))
Also it would be good if F-18E/F Super Hornet block 2 would use F-15E turbofan or even better power the F414-GE-400 with thrust vectoring from F119-PW-100 used by F-22. See since 187 F-22 Raptor going built but there are only 187 are being used leaving 213 not been using. Pratt & Whitney should make add thrust vectoring from F-22 and Mach 2.5 speed to F414-GE-400.
I think it would be good if RAAF should buy AN/APG-82 v 1 to use on F-18E/F Super Hornet. The AN/APG-82 v 1 match Front/Back antenna of APG-63 v 3 use by F-15C & APG-79 use by F-18E/F Super Hornet. The AN/APG-82 v 1 will help RAAF Super Hornet tracking more range, targets, faster tracking, track more targets, & allowing to carry 5th Gen. AAM, AGM, & bombs. The AN/APG-82 v 1 is being use on 224 F-15E. Unclear Raytheon would export APG-82 v 1 that use on F-15SE.
I'm no expert, but why not a F22A ????? Apart from no carrier ops it seems a better package. Don't even get me started about a F35 either.... HAS AUSTRALIA BOUGHT A WORN OUT HACK?????????
@angelodeath99 The US doesn't sell the F-22 to anybody, and the damn thing is so expensive people wouldn't want it anyway (except the Japanese for some reason).
@ev8d8 - Australia would consider the Raptor. Some say we still might. The biggest mistake the US Government made was not selling the F22. As a result, production ceases at 187 airframes for the USAF. Not enough. The USAF would have loved the idea of having a couple of friendly F22's in SE Asia and Europe. Strategically useful.
The per unit cost, with foreign export to the US' closest allies only, would have come down allowing the USAF to acquire more aircraft as well. So it appears quite clear that the Obey Amendment is a text book case of chopping ones nose off to spite ones face.
@smeary10 Personally I think its a great idea to sell them to you guys and the Japanese (maybe even South Korea if I wasn't so sure that would piss off North Korea off even more than usual). But as you say, "chopping off the nose to spite the face." The Japanese even proposed a downgraded version with much of the stuff Congress is so concerned with falling into the wrong hands, and it was still rejected. As for Europe, they seem to prefer their own designs (excepting the F-16 of course).
@smeary10 And why didn't you guys spring for Strike Eagles to replace the old Hornets and F-111s? They're far more capable than the Super Hornets and could even give the F-35 a run for its money when it comes online, long as they're new builds, not old airframes.
@ev8d8 - Good question mate. I don't know, other than to suggest that our government was spruking the "We're a Hornet Country" crap. I don't agree with the Super purchase either. I'm OK with the last 12 loomed up as Growlers, though. They'll be bloody useful, actually. I don't know if Eagles are the right choice either. 1970's design etc etc. The F-15 is nearing a close now anyway. The Raptor is what we need. We just have to officially ask for it. And we haven't done that yet.
@smeary10 Most Strike Eagles, like the ones the Koreans and the Saudis get, are new builds from the ground up, and are truthfully as good or better tech-wise than the ones we fly. Raptor is still better, sure, but its better than having Super Hornets. Seems silly to have a carrier based fighter with their infamously short range in a country that A. has no carriers, and B. by necessity has its pilots fly very large distances.
@ev8d8 - I hear ya mate. There are benefits in buying carrier based aircraft, though. Stronger airframes, strengthened and extra large under carriage, two engines etc.... all the reasons why we bought the Classics back in '82. Like I said, the thought of having a squadron of Growlers excites me. They will be a very handy asset. Our new KC-330 MRTT's will give us range so that's ok. We need Raptor for other reasons. Air superiority against a growing number of Su-35's and future PAK's in APAC.
@ev8d8 - Exactly. China is probably the only one we have to be concerned about due to their size and numbers. The Indo's & Malays aren't a problem though. We'd finish them off pretty quickly. India & Oz are pretty close allies so no probs there.
@ev8d8 - LOL. No mate. Oz is short for Australia. We're known as the Land of Oz (out of The Wizard of Oz movie). Sydney is known as the Emerald City. New Zealand is NZ. Militarily we have absorbed NZ into our forces now. Their fighter pilots are flying Hornets out of Australia. They're very highly regarded in the fighter pilot community.
@smeary10 Oh I see, I didnt know you meant "Australia and India are very close allies" though you were listing allies. I've heard very good things about the NZ fighter pilots as well, and they certainly have quite a pedigree going back to WW2. Shame their own government saw fit to ground them (A-4s are better than nothing), but at least you guys got them.
@smeary10 can kiwis join the RAAF? coz that would be cool man. honestly a country like nz doesn't need fighters, they would blow the budget. they almost got f-16s that were originally for the Paki's but they pissed off america so the yanks offered them to nz. but still for no reason. i think the RNZAF is more for logistics and transport. i mean whos gonna attack nz? the arabs? lol via Aussie? LOL
@mahmoudalfucktard - Well most of the RNZAF fighter pilots that were flying A4' Skyhawks came to the RAAF and moved into Hornets and F-111's. We have very close ties between our countries that this is a relatively simple move compared to other nations. Our militaries are very close, to the point where we're as good as integrated as a single fighting unit. But yes. There were many Kiwis flying Hornets here.
@smeary10 thats cool, makes sense. so do kiwi's have to be in the rnzaf first before they go to aussie? or can they just finish school and cross the ditch and they're in? do the raaf have the f-35JSF yet? i'm going to avalon next year, gonna be pretty sweet
@mahmoudalfucktard - I think it's pretty easy for Kiwis to join the RAAF straight up. We have our first 6 JSF's coming in 1012 or 2014 for testing purposes. They'll be some of the first off the production line. They are planning to be fully operational with many more by 2016 from memory. Then we'll fit out 12 Super Hornets that have already been loomed up into Growlers. (electronic warfare jamming) That will be cool.
@smeary10 cool man cheers for the info ur airforce is awesome aussie and nz are great countries its good that u have a close relationship/mate-ship (if that is a word lol) i am sliiightly jealous :D where i am theres so much hostility i want to get out. PEACE!
@smeary10 there's no need for a raptor for the aussies,you do know that u.s f-15,f-16 n f-18 av been upgraded wit new advance avionic systems,a joint helmet mounted cueing system n also carry the high off-boresight capable aim-9x,wit this upgrades,t-vectoring jets would be no problem,bvr combat on other hand,nato jet still av the edge in that arena,aussie superhornet will av a jhmcs n will be armed wit the british asraam air to air missile which is a very great wvr missile,no need raptor.
@smeary10 And it will be nice to have an ally with a combat SEAD and ECM aircraft for once, after the Brits and Germans start retiring their ECM Tornadoes (not that they send the damn things overseas anyway). Our Prowlers are overworked enough as it is.
hey wanted commonality in equipment and training the F15SE would of required all new training, its also not to mention the F15 cost less than the super hornet given its only a stop gap aircraft, its also not a favored aircraft by RAAF high command for some reason.
@OlderG0ds Because he's an american navy pilot who speaks and the sup horn replaces F-14s in the us navy. It's the director's fault that in this part it's not clear wether an australian pilot speaks ot not and that's a not.
@nikhilbw The problem with that is they are f series not fa that means they arent strike fighters just fighters so your an idiot the navy uses strike fighters and the airforce has the plain fighters i know because im in the navy and work on fa18 a+s
rx4pain 1 month ago
I want to be a journalist to fly the F/A 18 Super Hornet
gliderpilot99 2 months ago
Thanks for video though.
nikhilbw 3 months ago
This purchase was a waste of money. Aus would have been better off buying second hand F16's and refurbishing/upgrading them to block 50 standard.
That would have been sufficient till the time the F35's arrived.
nikhilbw 3 months ago
@nikhilbw No, F-16's were always out of the question. Before we got the original F/A-18A's we considered the F-16, and it was decided that they're too large for a single engine aircraft. We didn't get the F-15 as they're more of a air-air combat system, so the F/A-18 was really the best option at the time, good all-rounder aircraft, and the F/A-18F is a nice upgrade, to keep us moving forward till we get the F-35.
IIproductionsII 2 months ago
@nikhilbw I don't think the F-35 is what it is purported to be. China and Russia have stolen the stealth coding on it. It can't carry that much payload and countries would be much better mainting a fleet of F-22s, F-15s, A-10s and F-16s (supplemented by heavy bombers.) We don't need stealth for airstrikes against terrorists. The only time they would be needed is against a country like Iran (although that didn't really work out with that drone.)
nbarile18 1 month ago
@Not22Greedy The F35JSF that Australia is getting isn't the navy version. It has no vertical take off.
catinraincoat 3 months ago
the weapon pack is awesome`!
manofadventure 3 months ago
There's something slightly unsettling about a journalist who takes such an interest in machines of violence, but I'm not sure why :/
gloomyoutlook 4 months ago
i need one to fix some problems in my neighborhood can i get it?
maxxbad17 4 months ago
doesn't stop you blacking out you douche bag host. it helps. doesnt prevent.
myfunkychannel 5 months ago
yeah...what I couldn't help notice was the way the ordinance was not parallel to the center barrel...
hdmccart 6 months ago
F18 super hornet on top of the rest? Just lost the US$11 billion tender in India for 126 fighters to EF Typhoon n Dassault Rafale.
Was it USA foreign policy of supplying F16s' for free to ungrateful terrorist loving, Osama hosting pakistan that caused the USA to lose this tender n all those jobs at Boeing?
MrSabot88 6 months ago
The F-18 Super Hornet is a bloody fine airplane
ToonandBBfan 6 months ago
MiG-29 Fulcrum, F/A 18 Super Hornet, F-16 Fighting Falcon and Su-35 will be available in Battlefield 3!
archedperson 6 months ago
F-16's and 15's would be a nice addition to the RAAF fleet, but we don't really need them. At the momment, we have the standard F-18 Hornets and the F-18 Super Hornets, and we are getting our F-35's soon. Our government was holding talks to try and pursuade the US to sell some F-22's to us, but they declined.
IIproductionsII 7 months ago
@IIproductionsII tbh F-35 is overhyped and shit. Such a waste of money by our government. And why the heck do we need F-35 against Fiji and Indonesia. LOL. overkill
myfunkychannel 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The United States has tremendous military power. But this power has been compromised in recent years. In 1985, under President Reagan, the United States Army had 27 divisions. Today, we have 10 divisions. In 1985, we had 37 Air Force wings. Today, we are down to 13 wings. In 1985, we had 546 ships in the United States Navy. Today, we have 339.
How does America's current strength match up with Russia's?
America's military superiority ought to be questioned
dardingz 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The one would be to overestimate our strength, and thus neglect crucially important actions in the period just ahead. The other would be to underestimate our strength. Thereby we might dishearten our friends, and to lose our national poise and perspective in approaching the complex problems ahead. Any orderly balance-sheet of military strength must be in two parts. The first is the position as of today. The second is the position in the period ahead.Eisenhower-State of the Union-1958
dardingz 8 months ago
Should not have retired the F-111's, We should have upgraded them for CAC
ThatAdelaideGuy 8 months ago
35% more thrust than the C/D models, so yes it does fly faster even with the added weight of the E/F models.
NevadaWrangler 8 months ago
@NevadaWrangler yes but don't forget its heavier also.
myfunkychannel 5 months ago
f1-11's are the shit.
JacobTaborOz 8 months ago
@JacobTaborOz Yes, I agree with you, the F111 is a piece of crap. It won't even stand a chance at all against the ancient Mig-17, air-to-air, except to run away at supersonic speed at low level. Its "F" designator should be replaced by a "P" for a piece of crap. The guy who led the Fighter Mafia & the Father of F-16, Col John Boyd, tried his best to kill it, but somehow, it survived. I can't believe RAAF waste huge sum of money on it.
KATAERO1 8 months ago
@KATAERO1
@JacobTaborOz
Your responses shows you have no knowledge as to the role the F-111 plays within the Australian Defence Force. They are not used for air-to-air engagements, they are used as a medium-range bomber and for strike missions. In that role they serve the ADF's needs and there is no western aircraft available that meets all the mission requirements that the F-111 does. I.E. Range/Speed/Payload. Everything else falls short of those three requirements.
RasterGraph 7 months ago
@RasterGraph If F-111s are so good as bombers, why do you think the USAF can't wait to scrap them & replace them with F-15E? Aussie AF scrapped them too, right?
Congress even tried to operate it from aircraft carrier as fleet defense fighter, when F-14 Tomcat was born.
KATAERO1 7 months ago
@KATAERO1
To answer your first question quite simply, the US Military Budget is $687,105,000,000 and the Australian Military Budget is $19,799,000,000. If we had the US Budget we would not need the F-111.
The second part of your response is not really a question, however let me say that Australia has not the luxury off spending huge sums of money on military resources/equipment/research. We have a military strategy that calls for the capabilities the F-111 offers.
RasterGraph 7 months ago
@RasterGraph May I ask you a question? When the F-111s were in the service with RAAF, what were RAAF air-defense fighters? F-111s were offensive platforms designed to fly low & fast to strike targets deep within hostile territory, presumeably, in Indonesia.
The US crapped its F-111 to save money too as F-15E can do the bombing job nearly as well & can fight its way out too, if needed, a true multi-role aircraft.
KATAERO1 7 months ago
@KATAERO1
We use the F/A-18a/b/e/f Hornet as our Air-Defence/Superiorty/Strike Fighter.
I would agree the F-15E is almost as good in the role the F-111 plays, however the F-15E combat radius is less than that of the F-111 as well as the maximum weapons carrying capacity and the maximum tafe-off weight. All of this means that the F-15E cannot strike as far or as hard as the F-111. The other point is we don't have the F-15E and do have the aforementioned limited budget.
RasterGraph 7 months ago
If that's the case, why RAAF decided to abandon its deep strike capability or whether such threat never existed in the first place?
Also, why RAAF decided to buy carrier-based fighter like F/A-18 CD & EF? Naval jets are designed to be operated from aircraft carrier, penalized by weight penalty of beefed up airframe/landing gear/tail hook & other constrains of dimentional limitation imposed by carrier operation? Will RAAF be better off with land-base counter parts free of those constrains.
KATAERO1 7 months ago
Comment removed
RasterGraph 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KATAERO1
I believe that the reason for the F/A-18 was that to start with we wanted twin engine so no F-16 leaving only the F-15, Tornado and F/A-18. F-15 didn't have strike capability when we were buying and was too expensive and Tornado was really an interceptor and strike fighter. Also with the F/A-18 there was the ability to operate them US carriers. All that together and we were willing to except the weight penalties.
RasterGraph 1 month ago
@RasterGraph I think USAF should sell the RAAF some of our equipment we are retiring- we have them in these stupid "boneyards" in perfectly fine condition. Do you think the Aussies could use some of the American B-1Bs for deep-strike role to replace the F-111? And F-15Cs perhaps too. We are replacing a lot with the F-35 and I think Australia should purchase some of the older planes. Personally I despise the 35 and wish we were upgrading the '15s, '16s, and '18s.
nbarile18 7 months ago
Comment removed
RasterGraph 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nbarile18
I agree the USA should sell us all those old F-111s. We could get them nice and cheap so we could buy lots of them for parts and to bulk up our Airforce. We could most definitely use the F-111 however the B-1s are too expensive to maintain and operate. We would be better getting lots of F-111s then a few B-1s. Also we don't need the range or payload that the B-1s offer.
RasterGraph 1 month ago
@KATAERO1 Australia should buy America's older B-1Bs for deep strike. Why they insist on using Fighter Bombers is beyond me. The era of the fighter bomber (F-105, F-111, F-117) is long over. It's time to switch to heavy deep-range bombers or advanced fighters. Personally I think an air force would be fine with B-1s, B-2s, F-15Es, and F-22s- nothing else.
nbarile18 7 months ago
@nbarile18 Who is Australia's potential adversary? Is it continue to be Indonesia?
I think RAAF decided to scrapped its deep strike capability & shift its strategy toward defensive posture because SE Asia has become much more peaceful & stable.
I thought Australia has limited defense budget! B-1, B-2 & F-22 are extremely expensive weapon system in the world.
KATAERO1 7 months ago
@KATAERO1 I never said Australia should get B-2s and F-22s- those are America's most coveted aircraft and I doubt they would ever sell them. But F-15s and F-16s? And B-1s or B-52s? The deep strike role is imperative for power projection. And "the best defense is good offense"- if there was an impending strike on Australia, you would want to strike first and take out enemy runways and ships.
But the F-15 is a great interceptor because of its vertical climb capability, too.
nbarile18 7 months ago
@nbarile18 I agree with you that F-15 & F-16 are excellent non-stealthy fighter combination, both have better thrust/weight ratio (better agility) & payload/range than F-18. The only thing they can't do is to land & takeoff from carrier's deck.
The US has found out that deep strike mission is best suit to UCAVs (including stealthy ones) & is developing them like crazy, even naval version, to be operated from US carriers.
KATAERO1 7 months ago
@KATAERO1 Only advantage of UAVs are the range and loiter time. I think the X-47B for our carriers will be good but you cannot replace the air superiority mission. That is why we need F-15s and F-22s. But the goddamn F-35 is replacing everything which means we won't have em. That is why I think they should go to the RAAF where they could actually be used.
Stealth is taking over performance. Eventually the Chinese will copy one of our advanced radars and it will be for nothing...
nbarile18 7 months ago
@nbarile18 Of course, air superiority still belongs to human brains in the cockpits, but for taking out specific targets deep within hostile territory, nothing beats relatively cheap & expendable UCAVs or even the good old cruise missiles.
I heard old antique long-band radar can be tweaked to detect stealth with limited success at close range. That's how the Serbs managed to shoot down a lame F-117, but F-22's supercruise will sure take care of that.
KATAERO1 7 months ago
@KATAERO1 Friend, you are absolutely right. I'm Australian - we have no enemies! We will continue to have deep strike capacity via airborne missiles but really - why would we want to hit Jakarta?
hdmccart 6 months ago
@hdmccart Friend, "we have no enemies" is more suitable to New Zealand than Australia, don't you think?
"Why would we want to hit Jakata?" The answer is to remind Indonesians of what would happen to them if they decided to invade East Timor (again).
Do you think messing around in your neighbor's backyard will create friends or rather enemies?
KATAERO1 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KATAERO1 'Do you think messing around in your neighbor's backyard will create friends or rather enemies?' I don't understand your subtext.
hdmccart 6 months ago
@hdmccart What to become East Timor use to belong to the Indonesians, and the least Australia can do is to not involving itself in East Timor at all, not to mention sending Australian soldiers over there!
KATAERO1 1 month ago
@hdmccart We have plenty of enemies. Were lumped in with the Brits and the US as far as world politics goes. Infact were a softer target than those two so more likely to get hit.
Antifaith29 4 months ago
@Antifaith29 If it weren't for the fact that we are 16,000Km from the action I would support you. But, we are not and it is universally recognised that even the US would have a difficult time maintaining a logistical tail all the way down here to support any action.
hdmccart 4 months ago
@hdmccart For a sustained war yes. I agree with you 100% .
When i say " Hit" i meant terror attacks ect, one off bombings and all that kinda stuff, not so much a sistained war with a clear enemy.
Antifaith29 4 months ago
@Antifaith29 Fair enough...I generally stick to peer-to-peer conflicts as they do real damage.
hdmccart 4 months ago
SU30? dont ever match something non battle proved aircraft. F18 is so reliable, thas why US is still using it.. If you have a plane that cannot be used because of bad wheater, thats not an aircraft. thats handicraft!!
blackchoc777 9 months ago
I would say RAAF F-18F Super Hornet would stand a chance against Malaysian Su-30MKM, Indonesian Su-30MK1/2, and Indonesian Su-27SKM in the region. The F-18F Super Hornet is two crews pilots and it can carry up to 12 missiles. If the RAAF buy MBDA METEOR RAMJET MISSILES and armament to F-18F Super Hornet. There will be no escape zone for Sukhoi fighters. If I were RAAF cancel the F-35 is a useless fighter. Just buy F-15SE Silent Eagle.
USAAIRPOWER 9 months ago
@USAAIRPOWER I'll go along with the F15 se. I think it's going to amaze people with its abilities. wanna bet they have a second block designed with thrust vectoring?
mustangsthree 8 months ago
F-18F AN/APG-79 INFO PT 2:
-Low probability of intercept radar capability
-High speed capability of Data-link/communication
-Advanced functions for Microwave-weapon / CPU virus spreader/ Net-Hacker
-MTBF (mean time between failures): 1000 hrs
-Sensor Fusion
USAAIRPOWER 9 months ago
F-18F AN/APG-79 INFO:
-Style of antenna AESA, 1,100 T/R
-Effective tracking range for RCS = 1 m2 target 120-130 km
-Horizontal tracking angles +/- 60 degrees
-Target number of TWS at the same time >20 targets
-Performing A-A and A-G modes at the same time
USAAIRPOWER 9 months ago
Comment removed
USAAIRPOWER 9 months ago
F-18F Super Hornet Block II Performance:
-Maximum Speed:(Mach 1.9)
-Maximum Range:(>3,455 km)
-Service Ceiling:(50,033 ft)
-Combat Radius:(722 km)
-Rate of Climb:(>50,000 ft)
-Wing loading: 94.0 lb/ft² (459 kg/m²)
-Thrust/weight:(0.93)
-Design load factor:(7.6 g)
-Turbofan Engine:(2x F414-GE-400 EDE Thrust 22,000 lb)
USAAIRPOWER 9 months ago
F-18F Super Hornet Block II:
-Conformal Fuel Tanks
-Enhanced Performance Engines
-Spherical Missile / Laser Warning
-Enclosed Weapons Pod
-5th Generation Cockpit (check my background of Super Hornet Block 2 cockpit)
-Internal IRST aka Inferred Search and Track
USAAIRPOWER 9 months ago
@USAAIRPOWER Does the F-18 Super Hornet with the enhanced engines fly faster than the normal Super Hornet?
rb21122b 9 months ago
@rb21122b
NO! The Super Hornet will still fly the speed of Mach 1.9.
USAAIRPOWER 9 months ago
F-18F Super Hornet Block II:
-HMD:(JHMCS)
-GUNS:(M61A2)
-AAM WEAPONS:(AIM-120C5/7, AIM-9X Block II, & AIM-132 ASRAAM)
-AGM/JSW/ASM/CM:(AGM-154C1, JSOW ER, JSOW Block II, AGM-154A/B/C JSOW, AGM-158 JASSM-ER, AGM-158A JASSM, AGM-65E/F/G/H/K, JAGM, AGM-84H SLAM ER, Harpoon Block II, & AGM-88E AARGM)
-BOMBS:(Paveway II DMLGB, Mk-84 Laser JDAM, JDAM ER, GBU-31/32/35/38 JDAM, GBU-10/12/16 Paveway II, & GBU-24/27 Paveway III).
USAAIRPOWER 9 months ago
F-18F Super Hornet Block II:
-AESA RADARS:(AN/APG-79)
-AVIONICS:(AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR pod-mounted infrared system, F/A-18E/F IRST, AN/ALR-67 warning system, AN/ALE-55 fiber optic towed decoy system, AN/ALQ-214 IDECM next generation self-protection system, Shared Reconnaissance Pod aka SHARP, Next Generation Jammer, & AN/ALQ-218 TJSR Tactical Jamming System Receiver).
USAAIRPOWER 9 months ago
The RAAF are getting total of 42 F-18F Super Hornet Block II since the delay of F-35. watch?v=yZZZpcve_to&feature=channel_video_title.
USAAIRPOWER 9 months ago
5 people are avid readers of Carlo Kopp's website..
s2pidpaul 10 months ago
Anti-radiation missile? Why on Earth would ever need one of those? Nevermind. I dont wanna know the answer to that question.
SouthOCmixdown 10 months ago
F 22 + F 35 ll + F A 18 E\F are the best birds in the sky
JUFFAIR101 10 months ago
right now the eagle is the best fighter
Diemorder 10 months ago
@Diemorder No the raptor is.. the eagle can't even see the raptor. (no pun intended, if you think of them literally as actual birds)
Kirkzzy 10 months ago
it sucks that the f1 - 11 is retired now.
pasteusernamehere234 11 months ago
wow look at all the Jolly rodgers at 2:14
highlo3517 1 year ago
SexyToshi!!!!!!!!!
f15ceagle2341 1 year ago
I can't believe the Tomcat was replaced by a damn Bug.....I prefer the Tomcat over the Bug any day.
xTomcatsForeverVF84x 1 year ago
@xTomcatsForeverVF84x The F-18 super hornet is an amazing aircraft. It is arguably one of the best aircraft in the world. Its main downfall is it looks like an 18 wheeler on radar. The Super Hornet and regular Hornet are two completely different aircraft.
cchanderson 1 year ago 2
@cchanderson super hornet best aircraft my ass. Ever heard of a F-22 Raptor?
IIproductionsII 11 months ago
@IIproductionsII Hey shit for brains did you see that I put it looks like an 18 wheeler on radar...Everything else is arguable...like I said.
cchanderson 10 months ago
@cchanderson Yeah, but who is going to try and argue that the F/A-18F is the best aircraft in the world? when it quite obviously isn't. Also what determines the best aircraft? no aircraft can be the best aircraft unless it's good for everything. You don't say the best aircraft, you say the best fighter aircraft, stealth aircraft, transport aircraft ect.
IIproductionsII 10 months ago
@IIproductionsII Well shit for brains when I say "arguably the best aircraft" and I am referring to the fighter...everyone generally assumes I mean fighter aircraft...unless you are a moron like you! When dady told you to stick her in the hole when you were 16 I bet she couldn't shit for a week!
cchanderson 10 months ago
@cchanderson Lol, that's the second time you've said "shit for brains" that all you got?
Look we've already established that you're a dumbass....Why did you say the best aircraft, when you could of instead said the best fighter..
Also you didn't ask my other question, what dumbass is going to try and argue that the F/A-18 is the best "FIGHTER" aircraft in the world?
IIproductionsII 10 months ago
@cchanderson actually the F/A-18E super hornet has the lowest RCS of any fighter in the US or British arsenal(aside from the F-22 and F-35). so it is actually extremely stealthy for what it can do and for what it costs($55million). but when it comes to value for money the F/A-18E is probably the best aircraft in existence(it is a carrier based aircraft that has been filling every role in the book for almost 30 years with the US Navy).
hotpocketpoison 3 months ago
F111 around for a few gets to come? I wish :( I was so devo when I found they were retiring them...
basicoptimalmouse 1 year ago
so is the US going to use the f 35 on carriers?
syngates4life11 1 year ago
2:07 DUMP 'N BURN!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Actually, Afterburners turned on and then dump fuel...)
I wanna be a jet fighter pilot...
MilitaryAircraft101 1 year ago
@MilitaryAircraft101 Go for it! Keep trying and you can do anything just try :)
DramaticPrairieDog 1 year ago
Inferior in all aspects to the Sukoi Flanker family........which the Asian nation's all around Australia have been purchasing....Well done RAAF!.....
finalmind 1 year ago
@finalmind
"Inferior in all aspects to the Sukoi Flanker"
Says who?
MokomaSusi 1 year ago
@MokomaSusi Says 10 out of 10 russian internet trolls that who :)
DumbYankies 1 year ago
@MokomaSusi says the Russian Military fanboys haha
icanmyshoetie 1 year ago
@finalmind The Hornet is inferior to the Sukhoi? Well if it is, that doesn't matter, because our JSF's will take them out before they take out our Hornets and then the Hornets can drop there bombs on Jakarta... nice trolling though
bushpigification 1 year ago
We should have just kept the F111's flying til 2020 and used the spare change to do some practice bombing runs on New Zealand from time to time. Wouldn't be hard, they don't even have a fighter division anymore..
wildzero7777 1 year ago
Tomcats are better
mgrande11 1 year ago
@mgrande11
No, F-14 were retired for good reasons.
MokomaSusi 1 year ago
What tv is this called? It was aired on Channel 7 but I forgot what is was called.
pcgeek15 1 year ago
@pcgeek15 It was called The shape of things to come
SexyToshi 1 year ago
@SexyToshi Cheers mate
pcgeek15 1 year ago
@SexyToshi
You can see the whole programme on sydney morning herald website, if you don't mind occasional commercial breaks.
benhongh 4 months ago
i heard our fine RAAF was purchasing f35 lightning II's.
thatguywiththename 1 year ago
@thatguywiththename You heard correctly.
ceskazbrojovka17HMR 1 year ago
@thatguywiththename
Yeah, they're getting about 80 JSF's
thetyler1212 1 year ago
@thetyler1212 Up to 100 I believe.
ceskazbrojovka17HMR 1 year ago
was an exchange pilot
biscuits4dinner 1 year ago
24 superhornets, replacing the 21 f - 111's
minerofblood 1 year ago
I feel sorry for the Hornet pilots who have to go up against a late model Flanker, they're gonna get there ass handed to them on a plate.
The Hornet is inferior to the Flanker in all the key areas and with the introduction of the PAK FA only a few years away this aircraft has become irrelevant in modern air warfare.
ColdWarWarriors 1 year ago
@ColdWarWarriors You are a joke with that kind of silly statement! You have no idea! your statement is so stupid it pisses me off. you should not comment on things that are beyond your comprehension.
cherylz1 1 year ago 5
@cherylz1 You obviously have no concept of what modern airwarfare entails. Read the Airpower Australia website, in simulated engagments with an Su35, the Flanker wins with a 4 to 1 kill ratio, and please don't mention the PAK FA.
The F22 is the only aircraft that is survivable in the Asia Pacific region, that is what the RAAF should be purchasing, not updated cold war relics.
ColdWarWarriors 1 year ago
@ColdWarWarriors Key word is "Simulated". Believed in what your country has and the technology. RAAF Fighter Pilots are great at what they do. F-22's ? well you guys can't have that, but it'll be near by to keep those 35's at bay. I have a great understanding of what's going on. F-18 super Hornets can hold their own in the hands of the RAAF believe me. Don't count out your Countries Pilots they got what it takes to kick some 35 ass. : )
cherylz1 1 year ago 7
@cherylz1 regardless where allies and where gonna fuck the comies up!!!
ilgopeds4378 8 months ago
@cherylz1 Arent we buying the 35 anyway?
Antifaith29 4 months ago
@ColdWarWarriors The F-35 can win against the Flanker too. Plus, who knows? The PAK FA could be the biggest flunk ever. We just don't now! It seems great, but who knows waht'll happen?
Tabby266 1 year ago
@ColdWarWarriors Dude just for listening to Airpower Australia you have to be fucking retarded. They don't base their facts off anything and when asked where they get their info from they say "it is classified to AirPower Australia employees and clients."
We are getting the F-35s which are awesome, they can defeat all current Sukhoi's flying. Jesus, it can bloody fire a missile at a target from any angle and it will hit the tale, say good bye to having to get behind your target to hit it.
Kirkzzy 11 months ago
@ColdWarWarriors we need 24 flankers i reakon
minerofblood 1 year ago
@minerofblood Yeah, 24 Su34 maritime strike fighters. Of course it will never happen though. DoD are tied to the apron strings of the US dfence industry.
ColdWarWarriors 1 year ago
@ColdWarWarriors yeah i know, it would be cool, su 34 is nicknamed after an australian animal Platypus :P
minerofblood 1 year ago
i just have to say it
DO A BARREL ROLL
ticktak10 1 year ago
f-18 hornet pilot finnish air force mp
mrmakemakkara 1 year ago
why are they showing an american super hornet?
Halfand8 1 year ago
@Halfand8 cause the RAAF is getting the F-18E
yoyoyoyoshua 1 year ago
@yoyoyoyoshua nah I think its the -F ... we are getting the two seater only I think.
hogey74 1 year ago
I remember a newpaper Cartoon which had an Aboriginal describing one of his boomerangs as the F111 model. "Sometimes it returns, sometimes it doesn't".
F111 has come a long way from it's early unreliable days. Along with the Caribou Aircraft, they are both the most brilliant designed for their roles. Thus extremely hard to replace.
grl8862 1 year ago
F/A-18F is short for F/A-18FuckYeah!
AnonymousDiv0 1 year ago
@AnonymousDiv0 I heard it was short for "F/A-18, FUCK! (the last thing a terrorist says.)
aqinthe 1 year ago
JDAM extremely accurate? In Afghan war, 2 JDAMS dropped by F-18 completely missed the target and killed allied soldiers nearby. Show came out on TV.
AccordGTR 1 year ago
Aussie made an excellent choice in buying the F18. We Yanks support you serving in ANZAC just like the Brits.
336kgf 1 year ago
I love the fact that some of the 111s in the lot had the skull and bones logo. Huzzah for Macross. :D
vharshyde 1 year ago
Wait, you can fly a fighter jet with glasses on?
RedFoxAce 1 year ago
@RedFoxAce I don't know aboput other countries but you can't in the US
yoyoyoyoshua 1 year ago
F-18's F-15's and F-22's ROOL!
mahmoudalfucktard 1 year ago
Only 10 Amraams? I thought it was 12 - four on stations 2, 5, 7 and 10 plus eight on double rails on stations 3,4,8 and 9, or do the double rail mountings have clearance issues?
BTW, will the AIM-132 ASRAAM be integrated for RAAF Super Hornets, or is Australia going to buy AIM-9X Sidewinders. Mind you that unlike the AIM-132 the 9X doesn't yet have LOAL capability. The 132 can engage targets behind you (I guess that's why they call it "ASS-RAM" ;))
Hairysteed 1 year ago
The F-111 is such as beautiful plane.
julianshield1 1 year ago
cool planes
MrMickle28 1 year ago
USAAIRPOWER 1 year ago
Also it would be good if F-18E/F Super Hornet block 2 would use F-15E turbofan or even better power the F414-GE-400 with thrust vectoring from F119-PW-100 used by F-22. See since 187 F-22 Raptor going built but there are only 187 are being used leaving 213 not been using. Pratt & Whitney should make add thrust vectoring from F-22 and Mach 2.5 speed to F414-GE-400.
USAAIRPOWER 1 year ago
I think it would be good if RAAF should buy AN/APG-82 v 1 to use on F-18E/F Super Hornet. The AN/APG-82 v 1 match Front/Back antenna of APG-63 v 3 use by F-15C & APG-79 use by F-18E/F Super Hornet. The AN/APG-82 v 1 will help RAAF Super Hornet tracking more range, targets, faster tracking, track more targets, & allowing to carry 5th Gen. AAM, AGM, & bombs. The AN/APG-82 v 1 is being use on 224 F-15E. Unclear Raytheon would export APG-82 v 1 that use on F-15SE.
USAAIRPOWER 1 year ago
Was at the Aus Gran Prix on Saterday, and this thing flew about 100 meters directly above me a few times. Freakin loud I tell ya! Very cool.
Ghreldon 1 year ago
I'm no expert, but why not a F22A ????? Apart from no carrier ops it seems a better package. Don't even get me started about a F35 either.... HAS AUSTRALIA BOUGHT A WORN OUT HACK?????????
angelodeath99 1 year ago
Look mate NZ can do you a deal. We have some old Skyhawks in a tin shed in the South Island, swap you for a crate of home brew.
brettv8 1 year ago
@angelodeath99 The US doesn't sell the F-22 to anybody, and the damn thing is so expensive people wouldn't want it anyway (except the Japanese for some reason).
ev8d8 1 year ago
@ev8d8 - Australia would consider the Raptor. Some say we still might. The biggest mistake the US Government made was not selling the F22. As a result, production ceases at 187 airframes for the USAF. Not enough. The USAF would have loved the idea of having a couple of friendly F22's in SE Asia and Europe. Strategically useful.
smeary10 1 year ago
The per unit cost, with foreign export to the US' closest allies only, would have come down allowing the USAF to acquire more aircraft as well. So it appears quite clear that the Obey Amendment is a text book case of chopping ones nose off to spite ones face.
smeary10 1 year ago
@smeary10 Personally I think its a great idea to sell them to you guys and the Japanese (maybe even South Korea if I wasn't so sure that would piss off North Korea off even more than usual). But as you say, "chopping off the nose to spite the face." The Japanese even proposed a downgraded version with much of the stuff Congress is so concerned with falling into the wrong hands, and it was still rejected. As for Europe, they seem to prefer their own designs (excepting the F-16 of course).
ev8d8 1 year ago
@smeary10 And why didn't you guys spring for Strike Eagles to replace the old Hornets and F-111s? They're far more capable than the Super Hornets and could even give the F-35 a run for its money when it comes online, long as they're new builds, not old airframes.
ev8d8 1 year ago
@ev8d8 - Good question mate. I don't know, other than to suggest that our government was spruking the "We're a Hornet Country" crap. I don't agree with the Super purchase either. I'm OK with the last 12 loomed up as Growlers, though. They'll be bloody useful, actually. I don't know if Eagles are the right choice either. 1970's design etc etc. The F-15 is nearing a close now anyway. The Raptor is what we need. We just have to officially ask for it. And we haven't done that yet.
smeary10 1 year ago
@smeary10 Most Strike Eagles, like the ones the Koreans and the Saudis get, are new builds from the ground up, and are truthfully as good or better tech-wise than the ones we fly. Raptor is still better, sure, but its better than having Super Hornets. Seems silly to have a carrier based fighter with their infamously short range in a country that A. has no carriers, and B. by necessity has its pilots fly very large distances.
ev8d8 1 year ago
@ev8d8 - I hear ya mate. There are benefits in buying carrier based aircraft, though. Stronger airframes, strengthened and extra large under carriage, two engines etc.... all the reasons why we bought the Classics back in '82. Like I said, the thought of having a squadron of Growlers excites me. They will be a very handy asset. Our new KC-330 MRTT's will give us range so that's ok. We need Raptor for other reasons. Air superiority against a growing number of Su-35's and future PAK's in APAC.
smeary10 1 year ago
@smeary10 True enough, what with India and Indonesia buying up Suks and China always a factor.
ev8d8 1 year ago
@ev8d8 - Exactly. China is probably the only one we have to be concerned about due to their size and numbers. The Indo's & Malays aren't a problem though. We'd finish them off pretty quickly. India & Oz are pretty close allies so no probs there.
smeary10 1 year ago
@smeary10 Oz? Is that New Zealand?
ev8d8 1 year ago
@ev8d8 - LOL. No mate. Oz is short for Australia. We're known as the Land of Oz (out of The Wizard of Oz movie). Sydney is known as the Emerald City. New Zealand is NZ. Militarily we have absorbed NZ into our forces now. Their fighter pilots are flying Hornets out of Australia. They're very highly regarded in the fighter pilot community.
smeary10 1 year ago 3
@smeary10 Oh I see, I didnt know you meant "Australia and India are very close allies" though you were listing allies. I've heard very good things about the NZ fighter pilots as well, and they certainly have quite a pedigree going back to WW2. Shame their own government saw fit to ground them (A-4s are better than nothing), but at least you guys got them.
ev8d8 1 year ago
@smeary10 can kiwis join the RAAF? coz that would be cool man. honestly a country like nz doesn't need fighters, they would blow the budget. they almost got f-16s that were originally for the Paki's but they pissed off america so the yanks offered them to nz. but still for no reason. i think the RNZAF is more for logistics and transport. i mean whos gonna attack nz? the arabs? lol via Aussie? LOL
mahmoudalfucktard 1 year ago
@mahmoudalfucktard - Well most of the RNZAF fighter pilots that were flying A4' Skyhawks came to the RAAF and moved into Hornets and F-111's. We have very close ties between our countries that this is a relatively simple move compared to other nations. Our militaries are very close, to the point where we're as good as integrated as a single fighting unit. But yes. There were many Kiwis flying Hornets here.
smeary10 1 year ago
@smeary10 thats cool, makes sense. so do kiwi's have to be in the rnzaf first before they go to aussie? or can they just finish school and cross the ditch and they're in? do the raaf have the f-35JSF yet? i'm going to avalon next year, gonna be pretty sweet
mahmoudalfucktard 1 year ago
@smeary10 Can a Dutchman like me join the land of oz forces too... or do I have to fuck Naomi Robson first?
MrJambone1 1 year ago
@MrJambone1 - LOL
smeary10 1 year ago
@mahmoudalfucktard - I think it's pretty easy for Kiwis to join the RAAF straight up. We have our first 6 JSF's coming in 1012 or 2014 for testing purposes. They'll be some of the first off the production line. They are planning to be fully operational with many more by 2016 from memory. Then we'll fit out 12 Super Hornets that have already been loomed up into Growlers. (electronic warfare jamming) That will be cool.
smeary10 1 year ago
@smeary10 cool man cheers for the info ur airforce is awesome aussie and nz are great countries its good that u have a close relationship/mate-ship (if that is a word lol) i am sliiightly jealous :D where i am theres so much hostility i want to get out. PEACE!
mahmoudalfucktard 1 year ago
@smeary10 OZ RULES! I still remember living in Woomera in the late 70s. Lots of cool stuff to see.
336kgf 1 year ago
@smeary10 there's no need for a raptor for the aussies,you do know that u.s f-15,f-16 n f-18 av been upgraded wit new advance avionic systems,a joint helmet mounted cueing system n also carry the high off-boresight capable aim-9x,wit this upgrades,t-vectoring jets would be no problem,bvr combat on other hand,nato jet still av the edge in that arena,aussie superhornet will av a jhmcs n will be armed wit the british asraam air to air missile which is a very great wvr missile,no need raptor.
fmoa 1 year ago
@smeary10 And it will be nice to have an ally with a combat SEAD and ECM aircraft for once, after the Brits and Germans start retiring their ECM Tornadoes (not that they send the damn things overseas anyway). Our Prowlers are overworked enough as it is.
ev8d8 1 year ago
@ev8d8 - The way the JSF is going, it will be just as expensive by the time we buy it, mate.
smeary10 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
hey wanted commonality in equipment and training the F15SE would of required all new training, its also not to mention the F15 cost less than the super hornet given its only a stop gap aircraft, its also not a favored aircraft by RAAF high command for some reason.
bandp2 1 year ago
They should of bought F15SE.
thebtron 1 year ago
Comment removed
bandp2 1 year ago
Wow that is a lot of payload.
wanbfriends 1 year ago
2 and a half month untill i can apply to fly these monsters
THEROLLINNGDICE99 1 year ago
lol soz didnt see it he sounds like a yank tho
xboxlivegstar66 1 year ago
Comment removed
xboxlivegstar66 1 year ago
retard, raaf :royal australian air force
djchestfire 1 year ago
does all of these G force have a long term affect on the body?
poyanator 1 year ago
an interesting and informative video, thanks mate
shlongmire 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
LOL at 2:52 they are not hornets or super hornets they are F-14 Tomcats. Good video aswell x)
RangaDawg 2 years ago
Huh?
Australia doesn't have F-14 tomcats.
and the part @ 2:52 is a F-111
OlderG0ds 1 year ago 12
@OlderG0ds that guy was talking about the tom cat coz he's american
alip2310 1 year ago
@OlderG0ds He flew with and interviewed a U.S. Super Hornet Pilot... The U>S> Pilot was referring to the F-14...
cchanderson 1 year ago
@OlderG0ds
The US pilot ment the planes comparable to the F111 back at his days on the tomcat
grtz
longsweep1 1 year ago
@OlderG0ds Because he's an american navy pilot who speaks and the sup horn replaces F-14s in the us navy. It's the director's fault that in this part it's not clear wether an australian pilot speaks ot not and that's a not.
gketchup777 1 year ago