It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A Push in the Australian Senate to Reexamine the Purchase of the F-35

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 07:38 PM
link   

A push to examine the wisdom of Australia's planned $24 billion fleet of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters - ranking as the nation's largest ever defence purchase - is underway in the Senate.

Greens defence spokesman Peter Whish-Wilson on Friday has urged the Senate's standing committee on foreign affairs and trade to inquire into the suitability of the stealth jet for Australia's strategic interests.

The move comes after the election last month of new Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on a promise to abandon plans to purchase the troubled fighter.


link.

Will the Aussies stick with it? I'd speculate, 'yes.'

However, as I say, I have been wrong before and will be again.




posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 07:47 PM
link   
Given the climate I guess buying 100x Sukhoi Su-35 for a saving of $17 billion out of the 24 billion be out of the question. Nothing against the F35 but the Su-35 has better range, is faster and generally harder to kill, than clubbing baby seals.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 09:02 PM
link   
I seriously hope we don't get the F-35, what an absolute waste of money!!! The F-16 and the FA-18 are still the all round better Jets!

Look how silly the F-35 look.


edit on 29-11-2015 by muSSang because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 09:15 PM
link   
a reply to: glend

Won't happen. Allies as close as the US and Australia want to have commonality of equipment. If they buy Su-35s they have to buy new weapons, or do major modifications to the aircraft to allow them to use Western datalinks and weapons systems. It would cost almost as much.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 09:16 PM
link   
a reply to: muSSang

The F-18 has less range than the F-35, and neither of them will be able to penetrate a modern air defense system like the F-35 can.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 09:38 PM
link   
a reply to: [post=20088932]Zaphod58[/post


The F-18 has less range than the F-35, and neither of them will be able to penetrate a modern air defense system like the F-35 can.


Yes but here in Australia we DONT need a jet to combat a modern AD system, the F-16 blitzed the f-35 in dog fighting so your point is half true in that it is modern but its not a very good air defense system....




A test pilot has some very, very bad news about the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The pricey new stealth jet can’t turn or climb fast enough to hit an enemy plane during a dogfight or to dodge the enemy’s own gunfire, the pilot reported following a day of mock air battles back in January.




The F-35 Can't Beat The Plane It's Replacing In A Dogfight: Report




But to its credit, it is still in its infancy, lets just hope they iron out some wrinkles first.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 09:53 PM
link   
a reply to: muSSang

Yeah, go figure. A non-production version of the F-35, that's heavier than production models, didn't have half the sensors or software that production aircraft have, and performing absolutely basic maneuvers against an aircraft built from the ground up as a lightweight dogfighter got beat.

Funny how that happens.

And if you think that Australia doesn't need to penetrate modern defenses you need to rethink that. Or just get rid of the military altogether. Any potential opponent is not going to be sitting still with 30 year old defenses.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 09:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: muSSang
a reply to: [post=20088932]Zaphod58[/post


The F-18 has less range than the F-35, and neither of them will be able to penetrate a modern air defense system like the F-35 can.


Yes but here in Australia we DONT need a jet to combat a modern AD system, the F-16 blitzed the f-35 in dog fighting so your point is half true in that it is modern but its not a very good air defense system....




A test pilot has some very, very bad news about the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The pricey new stealth jet can’t turn or climb fast enough to hit an enemy plane during a dogfight or to dodge the enemy’s own gunfire, the pilot reported following a day of mock air battles back in January.




The F-35 Can't Beat The Plane It's Replacing In A Dogfight: Report




But to its credit, it is still in its infancy, lets just hope they iron out some wrinkles first.


Not true, the RAAF supporting operations in Syria, they did in GW2 and Afg, whilst some of these could be deemed un necessary for F-35 Russia is deploying S400 and Airwarfare Destroyer type ships off Syria, I would rather have an F35 than a Superhornet in that theatre, then there are the problems with Indonesia and they could theoretically get decent SAMs in the next 10 years.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 10:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Forensick

Not only is Indonesia looking at Su-35s, but they want S300s too. They're not as advanced as the 400, but they're dangerous enough to legacy aircraft.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 10:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: muSSang
Yes but here in Australia we DONT need a jet to combat a modern AD system, the F-16 blitzed the f-35 in dog fighting so your point is half true in that it is modern but its not a very good air defense system....


You take a sword, fight someone who is using a gun with no bullets. Who has the superior weapon?

Now give that person bullets. Anything change?

The report you link is basically an F-35 with everything that makes it an F-35 removed. It's not meant to be a dogfighter just like the gun is not meant to be a close range blunt instrument.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 10:47 PM
link   
I could take one of those down with a car, you know in case I run outta bullets 😆
(sry had throw in the die hard reference.)



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 11:56 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

This is simple, Australia is trying to get a better deal I would suspect! With all that has changed that is with setbacks and other war tension increasing. If they can't get a better price or deal with the US(more jets). F-35 should be primarily defensive and partial everything else. If they can work in other models or even mix Russian in if that is possible do it. I would suspect that is a no no but I am wondering how it is or looks on paper.

Please someone feel free to educate me before I get to digging.
Maybe I have more faith than others in the F-35. Is the F-22 as bad as people make out or is USA really in the dust at this point. I would like to think not and price is the issue.



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 12:02 AM
link   
a reply to: randomthoughts12

With the ending of the Canadian order the average price per aircraft went up somewhere around a million dollars or so. They're going to try to get the best price they can for their aircraft.



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 01:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Only a million? meh that aint bad considering that last few lots have shown a consistent downward trend.



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 01:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Bfirez

That was the estimate. They didn't have a particularly large order.



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 02:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Question . Indonesia launches SU-35s against us . Australian radar picks them up with plenty of time . Who wins , given that the F35s have all their bugs ironed out . Thats the bottom line .



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 03:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: anzha

A push to examine the wisdom of Australia's planned $24 billion fleet of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters - ranking as the nation's largest ever defence purchase - is underway in the Senate.

Greens defence spokesman Peter Whish-Wilson on Friday has urged the Senate's standing committee on foreign affairs and trade to inquire into the suitability of the stealth jet for Australia's strategic interests.

The move comes after the election last month of new Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on a promise to abandon plans to purchase the troubled fighter.


link.

Will the Aussies stick with it? I'd speculate, 'yes.'

However, as I say, I have been wrong before and will be again.



Common sense says Australia should invest half the amount these things will cost to build good relationships with its neighbours and ensure its safety through peaceful means.

Funny how there is lot of demonisation of the dole and those who claim it on prime time TV these days while at the same time they are talking about upping the GST which only wage and salary earners pay.

Now they are going to buy exteremly extensive weapons to help the US fight wars on countries who have done Australia no harm at all??

Adding 2 and 2 together tells me they are going cut the welfare system for individuals while at the same time saying nothing about corporate welfare costs, ramp up wage and salary taxes and at the same time spend heaps of money to buy hate weapons that have no productive capacity at all.

no wonder these people treat us like idiots when we let them get away with things like this.



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 03:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: hutch622
a reply to: Zaphod58

Question . Indonesia launches SU-35s against us . Australian radar picks them up with plenty of time . Who wins , given that the F35s have all their bugs ironed out . Thats the bottom line .

You need to penetrate enemy air defenses. Do you want SU-35 or F-35?

For a forced F-35 vs SU-35 (which is not the F-35's real role) the F-35 would use stealth and avionics to remain hidden and attack from BVR.



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 03:21 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha
What a dog. And they made us bury OUR pigs (after 40 odd years of tweaking to get right) so there was no turning back....
I say we buy the old plans for the TSR-2 off BAE and start almost from scratch and build something that's actually suited for our conditions/requirements.
Does anyone remember the arguments against a single engine from back in the f16/f18 selection days?
Obviously no-one in the RAAF does.
Still..... its not as if we actually had any choice in the matter....



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 03:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Azureblue


Common sense says Australia should invest half the amount these things will cost to build good relationships with its neighbours and ensure its safety through peaceful means.

Yes, I mean the PI is just nice to China, and China treats them fairly, right?




top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join