Australia confirms F/A-18F Purchase and eyes Growler EW variant

reply to post by FredT

---

Fine, FredT,

then I would expect that (in your circumstance) it's just fine with you if Congress just buys the USAF whatever Congress thinks it needs without any input whatsoever from the USAF - because that's what we are talking about here.


And, no the RAAF did NOT see a need for the SH as a stop-gap for F-111 - the (then) Minister TOLD them that they had a requirement - which has now undoubtedly turned into a requirement because the F-111's have now begun de-commissioning. There is still no requirement for retaining SHs beyond the introduction of F-35 (and I'm not going to quibble about the time taken to get F-35 into service beyond the first delivery date).

There is still no service stated requirement for Growler, so the government (according to Australian government practices and regulations) has no right 'eyeing' any purchase of Growler!

But let's not allow any fundamental change in the way Australia buys stuff stand in the way of a good discussion of 'mines bigger than yours'

The Winged Wombat

[edit on 9/4/08 by The Winged Wombat]

reply to post by The Winged Wombat

---

WW,

Thats how the cookie crumbles. The USN did NOT want the Seawolf class sub. But 3 were built because influential congressmen decided that they needed to protect thier districts where the subs were to be built.

Im not saying its right but thats how it works in most countires. I said the same thing int he KC-45 thread.

Well, there you go FredT.

Our great democracies are no better than the worst dictatorships when it comes to graft and corruption - what a bleeding surprise.

So let's stop claiming the high ground shall we.

The Winged Wombat

WW, the US lost the highground the moment it invaded Iraq

Indeed, FredT,

We are in agreement there. For too long the democracies have taken the high ground on the basis that democracy is intrinsically better than a dictatorship. A false premise indeed. It appears that Mr Bush has turned that falsehood (or is this now called 'misspeak') into a policy that justifies any obscenity.

The Winged Wombat

Relax Wombat,
I was not just indulging in fantasies or rolling over on Westpoint23's argument.

I think the way equipment selection is being carried out in this country these days SUCK'S!!, but I cant do jack about it. I totaly agree that no real argument or mandate for the SH selection has ever been properly put forward or justified by either the Govt or RAAF, and I have said as such here on ATS many times.

As for Westy's point, upon reflection I tend to agree with him that an EW component would be good EVEN with stealth capability, BUT as you point out a justification must be put forward by the powers that be. I dont want our tax dollars being piddled up against the pub latrine as it were on follies, any more than the next man. However I would have much rather seen the plan put forward by the USAF a few years back to reactivate and jointly operate a squadron of EF-111's put forward. On range, loiter and transit speed alone they would have made far more sense. But hey Im not some dumb ass politician looking to feather his political retirement bed now am I?(RE: Andrew Peacock syndrome).

LEE.

Well I think we can all do something about it - by continuing to point out that (apparently in another time) the actions of the former Minister (and potentially the current minister) could well be considered as graft and corruption, or at the very least to be well outside the parameters laid down that are supposed to govern the selection of equipment for Australian Forces.

In that light is is totally irrelevant to debate the 'suitability' or otherwise of something that is intrinsically corrupt or potentially illegal!

Apparently it cannot be corrected at the ballot box as it would appear that the current government is 'eyeing' equipment for which there is no official requirement. This is no different to the former minister buying equipment for which no official requirement existed.

It needs to be said and it needs to be remembered (at least as the point beyond which the professionals no longer have any say whatsoever in acquisitions or strategic planning).

The Winged Wombat



[edit on 9/4/08 by The Winged Wombat]