F-35B's for Australia?????

[skyhawk1]

Gidday all,
I wonder if anyone has "gamed" the RAN with it's new/projected hardware - updated ANZAC's, 3 (4?) Hobart Class AWD's and 2 Canberra Class LHD's in ANY scenario's at all WITH and WITHOUT F-35B's operating off the LHD's.
Currently there are no official (or unofficial) plans to purchase ANY F-35B STOVL Models by Australia only "up to 100" F-35A's but it seems to me that owning 2 Canberra Class LHD's that were DESIGNED to operate F-35B's as well as Helicopters (we are even keeping the Ski-jump) and then NOT buying any F-35B's is like buying a car without brakes.

If I was ANY Army boss with a Battle Group ashore I'd damned sure trust Jets to be more flexible and effective than relying totally on ANY missile umbrella, no matter how good. Besides - try bringing a missile back AFTER shooting it. Fighter eyeballs contact and id's it as some Civvy Jet without the buttons in the right spots , waves and watches him go on his way ----- USS Vincennes sure could have used THAT a while ago. "Missile Away - splash 1 innocent airliner". btw that is NOT a criticism so please don't take offense.

Show me one platoon Commander who rather have missiles than a couple of Fast-Movers at his beck and call and I'll show you a total IDIOT - as good as our Tiger Attack/Recon Choppers are, they are comparatively slow and vulnerable to AAA, missiles and even small arms.

Even a token buy of 12 F-35B's makes sense to me (am I the only one?) - NOT buying them is just STOOPID!!! Having a fixed wing umbrella outside the Missile umbrella is just BASIC SMARTS --isn't it?

A classic test (realistic??) would be the East Timor situation with the Indonesians opposing the Australian Expedition BUT outside the range of land based F-35a's ---- run it both with and without the F-35b's and I'll bet the difference in cost to Australian would be amazingly different.

Hey - how about a discovery of the world's ONLY source of Abloodymazingium - a new metal that has super powers and make it on Christmas Island (which is closer to Indonesia than Australia but IS part of Australia). The ownership dispute is between Indonesia and Australia (a la de Falkland Islands). Try THAT sucker without fast movers on the LHD's and tell me the likely outcome. Personally I think we'd clean their clock BUT a dozen STOVLS would reduce the cost and time to do it by a pretty high factor.

I don't know if this is appropriate but I'd love to see a result, good , bad or indifferent. It's just that buying 2 STOVL capable LHD's and NOT buying at least SOME F-35B's just seems to be DUMB! DUMB! DUMB!

[TonyE]

Sounds like a fun exercise but haven't seen it done yet.

[skyhawk1]

I wish I was capable of doing it but I don't have the Harpoon OR Technical Expertise to do it justice..

[Tarawa565]

Sounds like a cool idea, I would try it but SE doesn't work on my system.

One thing though is that they couldn't just buy 12 F-35B's. For a number of reasons:

1) In acquisition, as the number drops, the price goes WAY up. For example, originally, buying 750 F-22's would have "only" cost the USAF $50 million (airframe, not including R&D). But since the order was significantly decreased, to 183 Raptors, the flyaway cost for each airframe has risen to $133 million.

2) Also, 12 F-35's purchased would really get you only about 6-7 operational aircraft due to maintance, training, testing, etc. (Thats just a rough figure based on some percentage data)
So, for a operational fleet of 12 F-35's, you would really need to buy 19-20 aircraft for those 12 to operate.
And even then, although the game doesn't really simulate it, maintanence would down more aircraft.

I do see your point and agree entirely on it, just thought I'd give some more food for thought .

David

Source used: http://www.afa.org/PresidentsCorner/Not ... -29-08.pdf

[CV32]

Most any Harpoon scenario involving Australia will (in short order) tell you a lot about the vast distances involved and the challenges of not only projecting power, but even simply defending the nation (continent). Probably to the point of convincing you that fixed wing naval aviation in the RAN should not have ended with HMAS Melbourne. But, alas, strategic thinking and budgetary realities rarely get along. That's why we have 'scenarios'. [:)]

[skyhawk1]

In the 60's and 70's aboard HMAS Melbourne we managed to mantain a Standard Carrier Air Group of 6 Wessex Mk31B (ASW Helo), 6 Grumman S2-E (G) Trackers and 4 A4-G Skyhawks with a total of 8 single seat A4-G's (ASW are just passengers). In the early 70's we aquired a further 8 A4-G's (we also had 4 TA4-G's -- T stood for Trainer which was not always the case) and our Standard Air Group became 4 S2-G's, 4 Wessex31B's (or Seakings) and 8 A4-G's. So your numbers add up perfectly as far as I'm concerned. I have a very nice colour shot of the Old Girl carrying this Air Group but it's too big and I have no idea how to shrink the bloody thing.

Think about this - would the US EVER (r) EVER send a Marine Expeditionary Force to sea WITHOUT AIR COVER?? That's what these moron politicians are set on doing with the current proposed Australian Fleet Composition. TOTAL reliance on missiles is a recipe for disaster --- remember the boffins all saying "guns are finished - it's all missiles now" - now think about the F4 experience in Vietnam, they couldn't get a gun back fast enough.

A big problem is that any F-35B's bought for the RAN would probably have to come off the RAAF wish list and THAT would be a fight. Our Defence Force Boss is Airforce so the Navy would have a battle for sure. Politicians can only see as far as the next election - the morons. The current idiots are spending 48 BILLION AUD on the bloody internet alone and there's nothing wrong with what we have that a 100th of that wouldn't fix.

A late thought ........ how smart would it be if you rich yanks gave/loaned us a few with an option to buy after say 10 years. I wouldn't think even the RAAF could argue with that. After all there's only ONE country that's backed you guys in everything since WWII and that's who? Australia -- payback time?

[Tarawa565]

Cool, its nice to hear for real that the numbers make sense. And if you could figure out a way to post that color picture I would love to see it! .

And I can totally see your point, our military NEVER seems to do ANYTHING without air superiority, and in the rare event that we don't have superiority, we're fighting for it.

If I was the guy in charge I think I would have, as much as it would make all your RAN guys mad, the RAAF substitute 1 of their 3 F-35A squadrons for an F-35B squadron and have that remain under RAAF control unless needed and then have them deploy to your LHD's if needed. Sort of how our Marine Corps flies off Navy Carriers but also from shore bases. And maybe have it be a mixed RAN/RAAF force flying them. Just an idea though.

David

[skyhawk1]

If someone will give me an email address I'll send the pic and a few very nice A4-G shots that'll cream your jeans. The one of the Melbourne is an Official RAN Pic and some of the Skyhawk shot's belong to a fellow who was the pilot of the 747 that had a big mid-air oxygen cylinder explosion and Emergency landed at Manilla a couple of years ago (John Bartells) although I don't know if he still has the copyright on them --- all these photo's have been widely used.

As much of a NAVY Man as I am I really don't give a rat's arse WHO "owns and operates" them, it's the capability that's important --- look at the Brits, they've had a "mixed Fleet Air Component" since the demise of fixed wing flying in the RN.

Check out the sexy A4-G pic that I sort of attached - (c) John Bartells

btw.... the A4-G was a "simplfied" version (no Hump) that was specially adapted and optimised for the Air-to-Air role (ie Fleet Defense) and could carry 4 Sidewinders as well as the A/G Ordnance. They all ended up with The RNZAF where they were upgraded in the KAHI Project -- they now sit gathering dust in a hangar.

[Tarawa565]

I'll send you a PM with my email in it. That one picture is great!

Thanks,
David

[Tarawa565]

HMAS Melbourne...credits go to Skyhawk1 for the picture!

[Tarawa565]

And the other one. Again, credits to Skyhawk1.

[mbar]

Nice pics, guys! I'm a sucker for the simple but very functional designs like the A-4.

[TonyE]

I look at that A-4 photo and think to myself, "the black helmet was a really good idea," since the white would sure stand out against the black cockpit background (what's up with the black anyway?).

[donaldseadog]

Hi SteveD, (Love the photos)
While it isn't what you originally asked for if you go to Harpgamer, in the battleset section of downloads and get my "Australia Battleset" - game two "they keep coming" has the LHD Canberra and some F35Bs (and F35Cs). You'll have to ferry them over to Stirling from Richmond. (If I remember correctly they don't have a 100% probability of appearing in each game, so reopen the game if they aren't there) They are certainly fun to play with, a little slow if you get in the sticky brown stuff but pretty stealthy (so you should be able to stay out of 'it'). A good range of ordinance which is lacking in the 'bare' Canberra.
(maybe a few less junkets for the guys in Red Hill and we'd be able to afford some F35B's, or maybe if the Defence Minister had his office on board then he'd better appreciate their benefit???[:'(])
This link might take you there but I'm not sure about it so no guarantee.
http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?autocom=downloads&showfile=430
I've also uploaded on this site (mods and scenarios) an edited version of another of my previous scenarios to put some F35Bs on HMAS Canberra enroute to Singapore and dodging (or preferable sinking) a stack of Red units along the way.
It's almost cheating with the F35s on board (now how can I strap on a couple of exocets or harpoons??)[:'(]
Happy hunting, Don Thomas