Raptor jet fighter tops defence wish list

R

rock45

Active member
Raptor jet fighter tops defence wish list


Ian McPhedran
January 06, 2008 11:00pm

ONE of the world's most expensive fighter jets is on the Rudd Government's wish list for talks with air force chiefs on the nation's future defence capability.
Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon said the US-built F-22 Raptor would be in the mix with Russian-built Sukhoi and MiG fighters as the Government reviews options to replace the RAAF's ageing F-111 and F/A-18 Hornet fighters.
"I intend to pursue American politicians for access to the Raptor to get it into the mix," Mr Fitzgibbon said. The Raptor has to date been been banned by US law from export to any country, even to close allies such as Australia.
The Howard Government all but signed up to the Lockheed Martin Joint Strike Fighter but Labor has stepped back from buying $16 billion worth of the yet-to-be-built next-generation aircraft.
When The Courier-Mail asked if the Russian-built jets would be considered, he said all options would be included.
"The review should include a comparative analysis of everything on the market," Mr Fitzgibbon said.
"I am not ruling out any option," he said.
That would include the latest Russian Sukhoi 35 and Mig 29 fighters, which compare favourably on performance and very favourably on price compared with US-built planes.



Full story
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23014867-953,00.html
 
rock45 said:
Raptor jet fighter tops defence wish list


Ian McPhedran
January 06, 2008 11:00pm

ONE of the world's most expensive fighter jets is on the Rudd Government's wish list for talks with air force chiefs on the nation's future defence capability.
Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon said the US-built F-22 Raptor would be in the mix with Russian-built Sukhoi and MiG fighters as the Government reviews options to replace the RAAF's ageing F-111 and F/A-18 Hornet fighters.
"I intend to pursue American politicians for access to the Raptor to get it into the mix," Mr Fitzgibbon said. The Raptor has to date been been banned by US law from export to any country, even to close allies such as Australia.
The Howard Government all but signed up to the Lockheed Martin Joint Strike Fighter but Labor has stepped back from buying $16 billion worth of the yet-to-be-built next-generation aircraft.
When The Courier-Mail asked if the Russian-built jets would be considered, he said all options would be included.
"The review should include a comparative analysis of everything on the market," Mr Fitzgibbon said.
"I am not ruling out any option," he said.
That would include the latest Russian Sukhoi 35 and Mig 29 fighters, which compare favourably on performance and very favourably on price compared with US-built planes.



Full story
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23014867-953,00.html
Click to expand...


I do not place any faith in this article, Australia is already on board with the F-35, and the Super Hornets will be leased to them until the F-35 starts filling their ranks, everyone wants the Raptor and the only country that stands a chance of getting it will be Japan. This is a hollow threat and the chances of Australia flying anything Russian are slim to nil, Australia`s security alliance is very dependant on the U.S, especially now with the way things are shaping up over there in that part of the world.
 
F-35 Down the road

When I saw this news clip it kind of struck me as fluff in sense that there locked into the F-35 program for billions of dollars already. I couldn't figure if it was a way of pleading the F-22 request case, or by mentioning Russian aircraft to draw attention away from backing out of the Hornet deal? It just seems there shouldn't have picked the Hornet in the first place and that's the process that needs to be addressed first. Another thought what happens if they back out the F-35 deal I know that would be slim to none because they need the aircraft but when cancel last minute it just looks bad on the higher ups overall. I assume the US Navy can absorb these Hornets over time or if like you mention there lease then until the F-35 becomes operational. I didn't hear anything about leasing myself has that been announce? Only 30/40 percent of the new Hornets are comparable to the older models anyway the F-15 in some form should have been picked in the first place. Better speed, better range, and better able to stand up to the Flankers in that region, and built by the same aircraft maker too. The cost are very similar and Australia doesn't have carriers anyway so choosing Hornet anyway makes you scratch your head. Training there pilots for carrier landing is basically pretty new an doesn't add into buying the Hornet in the first place. Maybe the E/F are better lead aircraft to F-35s and this might have help in there choice of the Hornets in the first place, Hornets have very modern cockpits second only to F-22/35. Down the road a little I might pick Australia over Japan on getting the F-22 but that's just my two cents.
 
rock45 said:
When I saw this news clip it kind of struck me as fluff in sense that there locked into the F-35 program for billions of dollars already. I couldn't figure if it was a way of pleading the F-22 request case, or by mentioning Russian aircraft to draw attention away from backing out of the Hornet deal? It just seems there shouldn't have picked the Hornet in the first place and that's the process that needs to be addressed first. Another thought what happens if they back out the F-35 deal I know that would be slim to none because they need the aircraft but when cancel last minute it just looks bad on the higher ups overall. I assume the US Navy can absorb these Hornets over time or if like you mention there lease then until the F-35 becomes operational. I didn't hear anything about leasing myself has that been announce? Only 30/40 percent of the new Hornets are comparable to the older models anyway the F-15 in some form should have been picked in the first place. Better speed, better range, and better able to stand up to the Flankers in that region, and built by the same aircraft maker too. The cost are very similar and Australia doesn't have carriers anyway so choosing Hornet anyway makes you scratch your head. Training there pilots for carrier landing is basically pretty new an doesn't add into buying the Hornet in the first place. Maybe the E/F are better lead aircraft to F-35s and this might have help in there choice of the Hornets in the first place, Hornets have very modern cockpits second only to F-22/35. Down the road a little I might pick Australia over Japan on getting the F-22 but that's just my two cents.
Click to expand...


Agreed - I would trust Australia also with the F-22 technology versus Japan due to Japans track record with technology secrets.

Kuwait and Switzerland just love their Hornets and Australia does like their F-18s also, this plane offers more capability than what alot folks give it credit for.
 
Hornets

I'm not a Hornet hater by any means and like this aircraft for what it was designed for. Most people don't look at that way and can't get past it's not as good as a F-14 issue. I think it's a similar problem with Australia's air force as well because of the way it was brought up as a F-111 replacement. Both are classic aircraft where both pilot and maintenance personnel take a lot of pride in. There is nothing wrong in having pride in something you work on or fly in this case it's just something you can't compare because there not even in the same class. I'm too lazy to look for it but if most people saw a picture of a F-14 next to a Hornet there understand why F-14s have more range. There huge and carry tons of fuel and are true full size fighter only Flankers are bigger. The same goes for the F-111 compared to a Hornet as well, Hornets are mid size fighter/attack aircraft. At work I have a good picture of a unnamed African AF Flanker next to three Fulcrums and you just can't believe how much bigger the Flanker is, there huge. Modern day air battle are not fought 1 vs 1, and using AWACS Hornets can be used effectively and make best use of there very advance weapons systems.
 
rock45 said:
I'm not a Hornet hater by any means and like this aircraft for what it was designed for. Most people don't look at that way and can't get past it's not as good as a F-14 issue. I think it's a similar problem with Australia's air force as well because of the way it was brought up as a F-111 replacement. Both are classic aircraft where both pilot and maintenance personnel take a lot of pride in. There is nothing wrong in having pride in something you work on or fly in this case it's just something you can't compare because there not even in the same class. I'm too lazy to look for it but if most people saw a picture of a F-14 next to a Hornet there understand why F-14s have more range. There huge and carry tons of fuel and are true full size fighter only Flankers are bigger. The same goes for the F-111 compared to a Hornet as well, Hornets are mid size fighter/attack aircraft. At work I have a good picture of a unnamed African AF Flanker next to three Fulcrums and you just can't believe how much bigger the Flanker is, there huge. Modern day air battle are not fought 1 vs 1, and using AWACS Hornets can be used effectively and make best use of there very advance weapons systems.
Click to expand...

Thats the best thing going for the Hornets, you can use it as a gun fighter or as a bomb thrower if needed. It really doesn`t really matter what you give a Aussie, they will fly and fight the wings off of it. They have a reputation as being some of the best fighter pilots in the world.

I will not take anything away from Russian aircraft, they have some good platforms also.
 
Russian fighters

Some Russian fighter have bad reps like the Mig-29 Fulcrum. This is a fighter that's never been pushed to the edge in combat really by skilled pilot in a non exported model. It has never faced NATO aircraft without be outnumbered and alway against AWACS supported fighters too. It has it's weaknesses to like any fighter but it climbs faster then an F-15 and has better thrust to. 99% of the time the Fulcrums used in combat were A models flown by under trained pilots or had equipment that didn't work. You wouldn't get too many Viper or Eagle pilots to admit but Fulcrums are not push over a little closer then mid range to close range, 2 vs 2 without AWACS and a full tank of gas. To me pilot skill in the most important part of air combat because newer missiles aren't like the Topgun movie they don't miss much. Having the big picture and staying in your aircraft/missile strengths means life or death. Skill on keeping your aircraft out of your enemy strengths is part of the mix. Combat isn't fair I understand that and using a advantage like numbers and AWACS should always be brought to bare it's about wining and living. I'm glad the Russians never produced a Fulcrum with a good radar team with a smokeless engines that didn't eat fuel at an alarming rate and so on. For our guys I'm glad as aviation fan the Fulcrum could have been so much better. I'm very interested in the future Indian Mig-29K on paper it seems very good but like most Russian equipment we have to wait and see. I wonder if you take out the foreign parts and equipment out of the Indian Su-30 MKI would it be that good? If the Flanker were lighter it would be almost unbeatable but that's another thread. I'm also a big fan of Su-25s and the poor mans F-111, the Su-24.
icon14.gif
 
rock45 said:
Some Russian fighter have bad reps like the Mig-29 Fulcrum. This is a fighter that's never been pushed to the edge in combat really by skilled pilot in a non exported model. It has never faced NATO aircraft without be outnumbered and alway against AWACS supported fighters too. It has it's weaknesses to like any fighter but it climbs faster then an F-15 and has better thrust to. 99% of the time the Fulcrums used in combat were A models flown by under trained pilots or had equipment that didn't work. You wouldn't get too many Viper or Eagle pilots to admit but Fulcrums are not push over a little closer then mid range to close range, 2 vs 2 without AWACS and a full tank of gas. To me pilot skill in the most important part of air combat because newer missiles aren't like the Topgun movie they don't miss much. Having the big picture and staying in your aircraft/missile strengths means life or death. Skill on keeping your aircraft out of your enemy strengths is part of the mix. Combat isn't fair I understand that and using a advantage like numbers and AWACS should always be brought to bare it's about wining and living. I'm glad the Russians never produced a Fulcrum with a good radar team with a smokeless engines that didn't eat fuel at an alarming rate and so on. For our guys I'm glad as aviation fan the Fulcrum could have been so much better. I'm very interested in the future Indian Mig-29K on paper it seems very good but like most Russian equipment we have to wait and see. I wonder if you take out the foreign parts and equipment out of the Indian Su-30 MKI would it be that good? If the Flanker were lighter it would be almost unbeatable but that's another thread. I'm also a big fan of Su-25s and the poor mans F-111, the Su-24.
icon14.gif
Click to expand...

What is it that you like inregards to the Frogfoot.
 
Su-25

I like it for a number of reasons one it's battle proven and has good armor. Second I like the speed advantage over our A-1O design. I like the our A-10s don't get me wrong I just think leaving the target area a little faster is a good thing. It's simple to it use and maintain in the field and uses Mig-21 engines so maintenance is cheap as well.
 
Last edited:
rock45 said:
I like it for a number of reasons one it's battle proven and has good armor. Second I like the speed advantage over our A-1O design. I like the our A-10s don't get me wrong I just think leaving the target area a little faster is a good thing. It's simple to it use and maintain in the field and uses Mig-21 engines so maintenance is cheap as well.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but a A-10 is one tough bird, I do not think that anyone can touch it as far as being tough, it has brought pilots back with missing tail sections, one engine shot to pieces, plus it is a true tank buster. I have seen them in action and can appreciate the fact that they are on our side.

The Frogfoot does seem popular also though, Iran just picked up a additional batch of them not to long ago.
 
Aircraft

Hi Pale Rider
I'm going to start a mixed aircraft thread just in case somebody reaching F-22 and gets six other topics.
icon7.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top