YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

we would be better with jets

@MrKieranwalsh Not really, no. The idea may seem cool....but jets as in the F/A-18's and not as agile as the PC-9's. The F/A-18's really can only do the formation flying and some areobatics, but it would be much harder to do PC9 routines in a F/A-18. Although it would be easier for us to use a Hawk 127 than a hornet, but still I don't really think jets would be a smart idea, they cost too much to maintain...and it's a waste of 30 million or so dollars to go to an areobatics team.

IIproductionsII 6 months ago

@IIproductionsII I no its an old comment, but i think the only reason we dont use f18's for the roulettes is cost. The Blue angels use f18's to more effect then the roulettes. if anything they r more agile. But they use retired aircraft. We dont have the budget for it. The PC-9's r also regarded as bouncy & challenging to fly in the roulette application. So i dont think its a more perfect platform then an f18. I still like them though.

slickstrings 6 days ago

@slickstrings Ahh, I always thought the PC-9's would of been a bit more agile like the Extra 300's although obviously not as agile as Extra's. Mabye one day we could look at using Hawks, I mean we used to use Macchi's so I don't see why we coudn't.

IIproductionsII 6 days ago

@IIproductionsII i think there was an accident which killed a couple of pilots in the macchi's. the hawks are sweet. The red arrows use them. A friend of mine works on them in 76 squad. Great little plane. But like anything fun, i doubt the government would be interested. They prefer to spend 19 million TELLING us how they will improve the health system, instead of spending the 19 million on ACTUALLY improving the health system. Idiots.

slickstrings 6 days ago

@slickstrings Yeah, personally I would like to see some SU-34's, but I know that will never happen, the government pretends to listen to the Air Forces needs, but in the end of the day they think about themselves first, and think about public relations, and that's why they got the F-35, although I can't lie..the F-35 will be amazing compared to what we've got now, although it's been delayed for quite a long time. You just an enthusiast? or do you have some affiliation with the RAAF?

IIproductionsII 6 days ago

@IIproductionsII I guess you would call me an enthusiast. The governments plan at the moment is to use private contractors to do all the maintenance on training squad's aircraft ie hawks. What a stupid idea. Pay a for profit organisation to do the work to save money. Morons. But with the f35, im skeptical. It wont be as manoverable as the f18, it wont be particularly fast, it will be too expensive to fly a lot so pilot training will suffer. I dont like the sound of it.

slickstrings 6 days ago

@slickstrings Private contractors are you serious? I have to admit, the number of private contracted chefs that have been employed in RAAF messes has increased, but never would I thought that they would hire private contractors for maintainance on aircraft. I think the main advantage of the F-35 is supposed to be it's advanced electronics and stealth capability. I haven't really compared the Hornet to the Lightning, but I love the look of the Hornet, not that, that matters in combat.

IIproductionsII 6 days ago

@IIproductionsII yeah the f35, the engineers did an amazing job actually getting it to work, but the fact is too much is being asked of it. It wont be able to perform anything really well. It will do a lot of things quite averagely. Stealth, thats good but its at the cost of ability to turn, speed, range, payload. & its so complex pilots wont get the flight hours needed. Its a defence contractors project. its for profit. not for pilots if you ask me.

slickstrings 6 days ago

@slickstrings Yes, when you really think about it interms of spead and payload, the F-111 was the best aircraft we ever had, shame we couldn't keep it going longer..but I guess they were just getting way too old.

IIproductionsII 6 days ago

@IIproductionsII Yeah. they were amazing. A cold war aircraft that still outperforms anything in production 40 years later. I was lucky enough to see them fly at their last airshow in williamtown. They had a very unique sound. At the show they would be displaying some aircraft out the front of everyone, then an F111 would sneak up from behind at low level and come blasting over out of nowhere. Was awsome.

slickstrings 5 days ago

@slickstrings Yeah, wished I'd gone to that airshow last year. Shame we can't keep the ones we have on display flying, like the F-111 at the RAAF Museum.

IIproductionsII 5 days ago

@IIproductionsII apparantly they are considered too complex to be privately owned. so it stands to reason that from now on, no modern fighter jets will be kept flying. The most modern fighter you will see flying after retirement will be the old f88 sabre. very sad.

slickstrings 5 days ago

@slickstrings That seems stupid, I don't see why a bunch of F-111 enthusiasts can't just get together and keep one going, for displays and all. I mean I'm sure ex RAAF engineers and mechanics who worked on the F-111 would have a good idea on how to do it.

IIproductionsII 5 days ago

@IIproductionsII well, maybe. But it would be so expensive to run. Like rediculously. & parts cant really just be machined up for it when they break. For example, even while they were in service, the air force guys really only did routine stuff. When it came to actually fixing engines & complex internal gear, staff from raytheon & general dynamics etc came in to do the heavy stuff.

slickstrings 5 days ago

@slickstrings Yeah, being such an old aircraft I would assume parts would be prone to failure. I hope to buy a Viper Jet one day, they're easy to maintain.

IIproductionsII 5 days ago