F-35 Joint Strike Fighter - Abbott agrees to buy more, more, more.

[RightorKhan]

If you're alive for the next 10-60yrs you'll eventually see black triangle ufo's one day lol.

So in reality these planes are s**t because all the funds have been diverted into flying black triangles that can already do s**t we wouldn't have thought we could do for 500 years

 

[Jones_3_16]

flying black triangles that can already do s**t we wouldn't have thought we could do for 500 years

You are starting to sound like a LH salesman.

 

[Jakko]

Its an awkward period for military air planners. Stealth, modern data linking, internally stored weapons all point towards a non piloted future. Not only do you save a lot of weight from life support systems etc, you can start going for crazy G forces that a human could never handle.

There are no perfect planes available for the next 15+ years. Maybe the first stage is using planes like F22/F35 as motherships for smaller drones? Use the cheap and agile drones to act as a personal shield for the manned aircraft. If their linking systems are what they claim, then that isn't far fetched at all.

The future may not be 100% manned or unmanned, it would likely be a mix.

 

[Power Raid]

I don't doubt there are major concerns in the JSF program but does anyone really think we will engage in dogfights in combat anymore?

 

[Play by Numbers]

I don't doubt there are major concerns in the JSF program but does anyone really think we will engage in dogfights in combat anymore?

They serve zero purpose.

The best argument I have heard is as a mobile command for drones, but the things barely fly.

 

[Elroo]

I don't doubt there are major concerns in the JSF program but does anyone really think we will engage in dogfights in combat anymore?

Yes we will.

The guns are also in place to do the ground attack/straffing role currently undertaken by the A10 warthog. Unfortunately due to having to first having to reduce the number of rounds it can carry due to weight problems, and now a gun that wont fire this role cannot be meet.

 

[Power Raid]

Yes we will.

The guns are also in place to do the ground attack/straffing role currently undertaken by the A10 warthog. Unfortunately due to having to first having to reduce the number of rounds it can carry due to weight problems, and now a gun that wont fire this role cannot be meet.

I dare say "dog fights" will be executed over the horizon meaning EFW is more important.

We had the same debate re subs, aircraft and tanks in the 70s and 80s. In many areas the soviets had better hardware but the electronic superiority of the West was the real difference.

This trend has and will continue.


oh and for ground support......what is the current best? I dare say we already have the right recipe

 

[Power Raid]

What I find humorous is how defence procurement works. you have 60yo heads of military wanting what they didn't have 40 years ago. The only problem with that is the Missouri is no longer relevant. you have bureaucrats doing their slippery thing and there are some ripping kickbacks in Oz, so you could imagine how bad it is in the US. then you have the big machine of military suppliers and their awesome lobbying power.

It is no wonder we can get it so wrong, so many times.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

its all internal US politics.

the simple fact is several US states rely on defence spending for a large part of employment and economics.

the US did not NEED to keep producing F22's domestically which is all they are interested. what they DO NEED is to keep producing planes.
You bring forward a proposal to build a new jet which is going to take decades to produce anything effective. Everything from steal production to munitions to computer systems hardware and software, oxygen generation systems, flight suits, power plants, stealth systems and whatever the hell else is involved in production and reps and senators from states that stand to have people employed and $$$ coming in will vote for it.

whether it works or not is irrelevant worst case senario they scrap the idea and now the Aging F22's need to replaced so they reopen production lines.

 

[Belnakor]

I don't doubt there are major concerns in the JSF program but does anyone really think we will engage in dogfights in combat anymore?

depends what you mean by dogfights. Piloted drones are still the reality. Its just the pilots themselves will be back at the base.

AI based drones are still 10-15 years away.

 

[Contra Mundum]

What I find humorous is how defence procurement works. you have 60yo heads of military wanting what they didn't have 40 years ago. The only problem with that is the Missouri is no longer relevant. you have bureaucrats doing their slippery thing and there are some ripping kickbacks in Oz, so you could imagine how bad it is in the US. then you have the big machine of military suppliers and their awesome lobbying power.

It is no wonder we can get it so wrong, so many times.

Liberal and to an extent Labor politicians get the slick bullshit from the bloated US military establishment and they lose all common sense. They think nothing of a multi billion dollar procurement here - but before we spend a razoo on a infrastructure project - you have to have fifteen feasibility studies. Unlike any other period in the history of federation do we have politicians who are incapable of making an informed decision - the public service which used to be full of people giving full and frank advice on these matters has been cut so that all institutional memory is gone - you are left with "advisers" who can rely on a hefty job with one of the military contractors when their period of public service" is at an end

 

[Slax]

Didn't we have some old subs that beat the Yanks in war games about 15 years ago and left the US Navy with massive egg on their faces.

 

[Power Raid]

depends what you mean by dogfights. Piloted drones are still the reality. Its just the pilots themselves will be back at the base.

AI based drones are still 10-15 years away.

I would suggest over the horizon warfare is more likely than a dog fight

 

[Power Raid]

Didn't we have some old subs that beat the Yanks in war games about 15 years ago and left the US Navy with massive egg on their faces.

yep but that was a beat up for a variety of reasons

our collins class subs are a heap of s**t

 

[Dagger5]

Dog fighting will remain very relevant for the years to come, as electronic warfare is getting more sophisticated it remains very tough to shoot things down over the horizon due to jamming and interference. The US thought they would be able to replace numerous airframes with one cheap replacement but as we have seen it has become incredibly overweight and complex. Our gutless governments which are full of US spies btw, have sold us down the river and they are too gutless to say no to their masters. What we needed is a large two engined fighter that specialises in air superiority but can also carry out a few different ground attack missions. In effect what we need is either the Rafale or if we want 5th gen, the Sukhoi PAK FA but as that's Russian that won't ever happen.

 

[Slax]

yep but that was a beat up for a variety of reasons

our collins class subs are a heap of s**t

Ok, I'll put that down to the fact the Yanks knew this and were caught out by the fact that the Collins subs made it to the area where the war games were being held without breaking down.

 

[Power Raid]

Ok, I'll put that down to the fact the Yanks knew this and were caught out by the fact that the Collins subs made it to the area where the war games were being held without breaking down.

we have 6 subs and only 1 operable. it is hardly a glowing success.

the positives are when on battery power they are quiet meaning they can travel short distances or sit on the sea floor and wait. A draw back is they are slow and make noise when they fire a torpedo. This means that when they fire a torpedo they give their position away and can't run. The torpedo range is 23miles at 55kn whilst the fast subs can reach close to 50kn (35-50 is normal for fast attack) meaning attack subs can return fire and out run our torps (if at any distance from our sub).

 

[madmug]

we have 6 subs and only 1 operable. it is hardly a glowing success.

the positives are when on battery power they are quiet meaning they can travel short distances or sit on the sea floor and wait. A draw back is they are slow and make noise when they fire a torpedo. This means that when they fire a torpedo they give their position away and can't run. The torpedo range is 23miles at 55kn whilst the fast subs can reach close to 50kn (35-50 is normal for fast attack) meaning attack subs can return fire and out run our torps (if at any distance from our sub).

Thankfully we wont have to defend ourselves against the USA, Russia, China, India, France or the UK. It'd be pointless anyway!

Anyone else might be put off by an old but nasty Collins sub.

 

[Power Raid]

Thankfully we wont have to defend ourselves against the USA, Russia, China, India, France or the UK. It'd be pointless anyway!

Anyone else might be put off by an old but nasty Collins sub.

yeah! cop that Fiji and NZ........and there's more where that came from!


on a serious note, I agree. We have to do our bit but our contribution needs to be focused on areas we can exceed.

we shouldn't bother with subs until we have a nuclear industry (in SA) which is 30 years away.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Didn't we have some old subs that beat the Yanks in war games about 15 years ago and left the US Navy with massive egg on their faces.

That was the Collins class the so called lemon.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

we have 6 subs and only 1 operable. it is hardly a glowing success.

Because they're broken or because they can't crew them or a combination of both?

 

[Power Raid]

Because they're broken or because they can't crew them or a combination of both?

Both.

You need 18 crews for 6 subs........we have one crew

Fortunately we only have one operable sub meaning we are only two crews short rather than seventeen short.


So why are we getting new subs if we don't and haven't had the crews to man them? This has been an issue since the 80s

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

Both.

You need 18 crews for 6 subs........we have one crew

Fortunately we only have one operable sub meaning we are only two crews short rather than seventeen short.


So why are we getting new subs if we don't and haven't had the crews to man them? This has been an issue since the 80s

The story I always liked was that when the Collins was first commissioned and it was having issues, We had no sub coverage. The last O boat that was decommissioned, was dismantled and all the parts labelled. Unfortunately, they decided to then acid wash said parts and all of the markings came off.

It was decided to re-assemble it to give us sub coverage, the problem now was they didn't know how to re-assemble it.

They brought original designers / engineers out from England, who were in their 80s, to oversee the re-assembly.

 

[Power Raid]

The story I always liked was that when the Collins was first commissioned and it was having issues, We had no sub coverage. The last O boat that was decommissioned, was dismantled and all the parts labelled. Unfortunately, they decided to then acid wash said parts and all of the markings came off.

It was decided to re-assemble it to give us sub coverage, the problem now was they didn't know how to re-assemble it.

They brought original designers / engineers out from England, who were in their 80s, to oversee the re-assembly.

lol

I wasn't aware of that. was that ovens or oxley?

I'm struggling to remember the other boats.....otama, orion?, otway? and onslow

 

[Jones_3_16]

Dog fighting will remain very relevant for the years to come, as electronic warfare is getting more sophisticated it remains very tough to shoot things down over the horizon due to jamming and interference. The US thought they would be able to replace numerous airframes with one cheap replacement but as we have seen it has become incredibly overweight and complex. Our gutless governments which are full of US spies btw, have sold us down the river and they are too gutless to say no to their masters. What we needed is a large two engined fighter that specialises in air superiority but can also carry out a few different ground attack missions. In effect what we need is either the Rafale or if we want 5th gen, the Sukhoi PAK FA but as that's Russian that won't ever happen.

History will judge the current crop of decision makers very harshly. There should be a RC into the JSF procurement process and what advice (if any) that was provided by so called Defence Department experts in relation to the delivery of the program. If you track the career progression of these defence department mandarins you see a disturbing pattern of defence department "experts" green lighting these projects then within 5 years decide to "shift to the private sector" and low and behold end up employed by the very same contractor they were green lighting.

If the JSF program was simply a waste of money it would not be so bad. But things are much much worse than that. The JSF is a cockup of monumental proportions - keep in mind people have been sounding alarm bells over this project for well over 10 years - all of the performance issues associated with the test pilots reports are not unexpected - it is exactly what the critics have been saying for over a decade. All the while, departmental sycophants have sat back telling us that "everything will be fine".

Now the F22 is out of production (and not for sale in any event), and the JSF is the only game in town.

The Australian people have been betrayed.