Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Should we abolish the RAAF combat fleet??
DropBear    6/13/2005 4:53:55 AM
In response to lacrobat's comment wrt "Why not cut the JSFs entirely?" I am interested to know how many of you believe the F-111, F-18 and Hawk127 are a complete waste of time, resources, money, training, funding, manpower etc etc etc... What would you spend the allocated funds on otherwise? You know my views, what are yours...
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   NEXT
fall out    RE:Also...   6/13/2005 7:00:54 AM
no im not, but we didnt have adequate naval cover either so i dont see your point about Australia 60yrs ago concerning current and future procurement decisions for now, the 21st century??
 
Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer    RE:Should we abolish the RAAF combat fleet??   6/13/2005 8:14:22 AM
the RAAF is the ADFs big stick, it has the most rapid response time and most devasting capability of any of the services, only if the RAN get a whole lot of tomohawks will it be able to rival the RAAF in hitting power. The JSF is going to make the RAAF all but unstopable in the region. If the stealth bomb pods from the FB-22 program filter down to something that can be mounted externally and stealthily on the JSF your looking at hitting 24 targets per plane, it will also have the capability to find and identify those targets. Nothing will be safe from the RAAF then, including the apparently invincible CDG, I reckon 4 F-35s carrying dropping 8 2000lb glide bombs through its deck would send it to the bottom real quick.
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear    RE:Should we abolish the RAAF combat fleet??   6/13/2005 8:15:30 AM
Love ya thinking :)
 
Quote    Reply

southern cross    RE:Should we abolish the RAAF combat fleet??   6/14/2005 2:41:25 AM
>>>I reckon 4 F-35s carrying dropping 8 2000lb glide bombs through its deck would send it to the bottom real quick.<<< Probably, but considering the little $h!ts would be swatted from over the horizon I dont think there is any chance of that happening. I am sure a grenade in the pit of a F-35 would screw the plane up, but its not like thats going to happen.
 
Quote    Reply

lacrobat    RE:Should we abolish the RAAF combat fleet?? - SC   6/14/2005 5:32:26 AM
"I'd be quite shocked if a JSF is that expensive. $40-50M is more likely." Plan on being shocked. very shocked indeed. The F-111, another tri service fiasco, tripled in price. USN and USAF have both already talked about cutting their buys of JSF, its already over budget and behind schedule.
 
Quote    Reply

lacrobat    RE:Should we abolish the RAAF combat fleet?? - DB   6/14/2005 5:36:25 AM
"Have you forgotten the valiant defence of Darwin with a few planes?" Not terribly effective, the place got a pasting. "It wasn't the army or navy that drove back the swarms of Zeroes." Actually, yes it was. Losses in other areas are what stopped the raids, not the 'valiant defence' of the RAAF But what has the RAAF fighter arm done in the last 50 years that justifies the cost? Where is the threat that they meet?
 
Quote    Reply

lacrobat    RE:Also...   6/14/2005 5:41:29 AM
"Repilse and Prince of Wales had nothing to do with Oz air power doctrine. Funnily enough, it was AIRPOWER that sunk these two ships. They wern't sunk by enemy ships." Repulse and PoW both had inadequate air defence, hence the Aegis AAWs - why do you think that the RAAF would forward deploy a significant chunk of our fighter force in time of a threat to Aust and without a threat to Aust why do we need the fighters? Land based airpower has always been 2nd rate at fleet defence, let alone at long range fleet defence, so why not give the RAN a first rate AAW destroyer rather than the limited possibility of getting 2nd rate air cover?
 
Quote    Reply

lacrobat    RE:Should we abolish the RAAF combat fleet??   6/14/2005 5:53:10 AM
"the RAAF is the ADFs big stick, etc" No it isn't. our big stick is the US alliance - the "RAAF big stick" is an airshow only force, look at Iraq - they contributed nothing that the US couldn't have supplied themselves, the Army provided top rate special forces that the US were short on - the RAN, Clearance divers and 5 inch NGS that the US were short on. The RAAF contributed F-18s that the US have plenty of and then complicated it by using their own ROE. Its all well and good to get caught up in the high tech wiz bangery of the RAAF, but we all know it won't get a workout and thats why the money is better spent on the RAN AAW destroyers, they will be sent in harms way.
 
Quote    Reply

fall out    RE:Also...   6/14/2005 7:57:25 AM
"Land based airpower has always been 2nd rate at fleet defence, let alone at long range fleet defence, so why not give the RAN a first rate AAW destroyer rather than the limited possibility of getting 2nd rate air cover" - so why not not build the destroyers, save $6B, and spend this on more collins, battalions and more cruise missiles and better pay (recent survey anyone...) as when was the last time in 50yrs the RAN stood alone by itself against an agressor? that's right.
 
Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer    RE:Should we abolish the RAAF combat fleet??   6/14/2005 8:05:01 AM
So your basically saying we should abandon having a comprehensively equipped military and only focus on niche capabilities? I think it's unwise to assume our allies will have the resources or the motivation to jump to our rescue at a moments notice. The RAAF is basically the only offensive force we have. Our navy is too small to even project force independently. The army is also too small and it's also limited by the size of the RAN. We will not be able to dictate the tempo of a conflict if we entirely on the defensive due to lack of combat aircraft, which have time and time again shown themselves to be the most effective way of delivering crippliing blows to an enemies plans. It is a powerful deterrent. If you want to talk about things that have never and will never be used, look at the Leos and Abrams. Tanks are cool pieces of kit, I'll give you that, they have a lot going for them if you have the logistics to back them up, but even the US struggles to support those beasts. We've deployed the hornets and orions more than we have leos, I don't believe we've deployed them ever. AWDs are similar. When are we going to have to defeat saturation missile attacks, when are the AWDs going to get a work out. You don't need a 2 billion dollar ship to deliver NGFS. The FFGs and the ANZACs will probably be able to deal with the odd anti ship missile or MPA. However, I want the ADF to have all of these capabilities because I want the ADF to be actually prepared if war comes to town, rather than being a mix-match of capabilities unable to defend our country because our allies are too busy fighting themselves to take up the slack in our forces and fill in the gaps. And if war does come to the region the combat arm of the RAAF is going to be the first line of defence and the most potent offensive force we have.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics