Australia wants the F-22

[Neilster]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

It's amazing how perception is in the eye of the beholder.

I saw Sarge's post as a good natured poke at our ally for NOT having the means to protect themselves and having to turn to us for thier needs instead and not quite as the slam Neilster interpreted to be.

I realize we quite frequently come across as arrogant, but try looking at things from our side sometimes.

How would you like it if every one else in the world looked to you to solve their problems for them and andf provide them with the "stuff" they need?

Don't you think it would get old after a while?

Don't you think you would eventually grow somewhat calloused toward it?

Don't you think you would also fall prey to the tendency to respond flippantly to it on occasion?

So, please guys cut us some slack and stop being so thin skinned.

Please. [:)]

And yes, the Aussies are the staunchest ally we have. No slight inetended to the Brits, btw.

I appreciate the tone of your post but the US doesn't "provide" Australia with military hardware, we buy it, just as you occasionally do from other countries too (and even Australian gear. Jindivik anyone?). This keeps American defence workers in jobs and helps offset the R&D costs.

What annoyed me was that I started a serious thread about an important topic and he posted imbecilic, trolly garbage. Now, that's his prerogative but he shouldn't be surprised if he gets an arse kicking. His accusation that we can't defend ourselves also grated when I had a career in the Australian Air Force and the Australian Defence force (ADF) is considered to be among the most efficient and capable in the world.

Cheers, Neilster

[freeboy]

Are U splitting hairs?
To provide and to sell are really the same thinf IMO but, for the record I wouldsell u just about anything in our arsenall.. new or used.. maybe we could unload some bradleys.. how about some Iowa class BB's? awesome cruise missile platforms..
those 22's do look nice and I agree with u re the stealth aspect of modern techs... Perhaps there will be another model made buy one of our partners??? which uses some of these same ideas and is less costly?

[Jeffrey H.]

ORIGINAL: 06 Maestro

In view of the strong likelihood that China will have all sensitive U.S. info in a few years anyway, why not sell defense products to a trusted ally? The U.S. is under constant and significant espionage attack from China, but that is their waste-the next Bolshevik president will give them everything they want. Australia could not possibly loose the technology faster than the U.S.
Come to think of it; if Australia can wait about 5 years for its new A/C, it may be able to buy a superior A/C from China at a drastic discount. Of course, there is a chance there may be lead in the air purification system.

Just an after thought: I wonder what my senator (Harry Reid) would have to say about my sentiment-I will have to e-mail the old Bolshevik tonight.

The idiot notion of enforced "diversity" will enable spys to simply get a job at some defense contractor and go about stealing from the inside. This is happening right now. We don't need another Clinton-esqe administration or some traitor to sell us out, it's built in now.

[Sarge]

ORIGINAL: Neilster

What annoyed me was that I started a serious thread about an important topic and he posted imbecilic, trolly garbage. Now, that's his prerogative but he shouldn't be surprised if he gets an arse kicking.
Cheers, Neilster

but the previous government appeared to be on the drugs when it came to defence acquisition

Funny how you can make casual insults but suddenly become offended when handed the same BS in return .

Save the fake rage for the new members [>:]

[Neilster]

ORIGINAL: Sarge

ORIGINAL: Neilster

What annoyed me was that I started a serious thread about an important topic and he posted imbecilic, trolly garbage. Now, that's his prerogative but he shouldn't be surprised if he gets an arse kicking.
Cheers, Neilster

but the previous government appeared to be on the drugs when it came to defence acquisition

Funny how you can make casual insults but suddenly become offended when handed the same BS in return .

Save the fake rage for the new members [>:]

You started it, mate.

Additionally, the Howard Government's defence procurement is a national scandal so describing them as "on the drugs" is completely reasonable and frankly a lot kinder than what most commentators are calling them. The Aussie taxpayer is less than impressed with massive cost blowouts and programs that may simply fail such as Navy helicopters that have been restricted so they can't fly at night or over water!

All the best anyway. I've had my say.

Cheers, Neilster

[1275psi]

Sarge

if that was a casual insult -OK -Im an aussie and I can take it -but a little more care next time please mate.

Aussie is punching well above its wieght in the world at the moment

Iraq
Afghanistan (where the fighting is)
Timor
Solomons
PNG
UN peace keeping in the middle east (cyprus I think)
and the usual military exercise stuff.

Pity the rest of the world other than USA/Canada and britain have conceded defeat against our facist enemies.

[Raverdave]

Actually the ties go back further than WW 1............any one remember that little scuffle called the Boxer rebellion? 

[Neilster]

ORIGINAL: Raverdave

Actually the ties go back further than WW 1............any one remember that little scuffle called the Boxer rebellion?

I work with some Chinese people. As Basil Fawlty said, "Don't mention the war!" [:'(]

Cheers, Neilster

[06 Maestro]

ORIGINAL: Jeffrey H.


The idiot notion of enforced "diversity" will enable spys to simply get a job at some defense contractor and go about stealing from the inside. This is happening right now. We don't need another Clinton-esqe administration or some traitor to sell us out, it's built in now.

This is painfully true. I was not joking about Australia not possibly loosing sensitive technology before the U.S. It might even be a good idea to hire the Aussies to safeguard all of our top secret info. The U.S. has been sold out, but to who-that is the question.
The president still has a major impact on how well sensitive info is protected by his appointments to key positions and by direct order; so it is still an important factor. It's certainly not the only factor, but important none the less.

[USSAmerica]

ORIGINAL: Neilster

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker

We'd be better off buying the Tomcats and AIM 54's the Yanks are throwing away.

Surely they'd be willing to part with a wing of F15E's too.

Not IMHO. The F-14 (much as I love them) is a naval fighter which means it is built to survive catapult take-offs and the controlled crashes that pass for their landings, so they're heavier than they need to be for our purposes. They're also a very complicated and expensive aircraft to maintain.

The F-15 is very good but was designed to defeat Soviet aircraft of the 80s and 90s. The real problem is the lack of stealth with these 4th generation designs. Stealth doesn't make you invisible, it reduces the distance at which you can be detected, giving those with it a massive tactical advantage.

They also can't supercruise and don't have internal weapons carriage. I could go on but in short, going for a budget option would be a false economy.

Cheers, Neilster

Minor nit-pick from an ex-Navy airdale. The F-14D's could supercruise. The GE engines in them really cranked up their flight performance. Nevertheless, no internal weapons storage, very high maintainance time and expenses compared to newer planes, and carrier capable frames if they are not flying from carriers are all reasons why they have been retired instead of sold off. The only selling point today would be the Phoenix missile's looooooong range.

[Armygrognard]

Australia rocks. [&o]

I'd sell 'em if it were up to me.

ORIGINAL: 1275psi

Nothing personal no -but your country is pretty nuts about how it treats its friends -half of america would not even know where australia is.
pity about sharing stealth technology - we give full access to the most stealthy submarine in the world -the collins class to your navy.
I know from personal experience -a Los angeles submarine is a rock band at sea compared to our ss

So, you're going to compare a sub first launched in 1976 with one (designed by the Swedes, wasn't it?) launched in 1996???

Why not the Seawolf or Virginia classes?

Do you compare Sopwith Camels to P-51's also?

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Neilster


I appreciate the tone of your post but the US doesn't "provide" Australia with military hardware, we buy it, just as you occasionally do from other countries too (and even Australian gear. Jindivik anyone?). This keeps American defence workers in jobs and helps offset the R&D costs.

What annoyed me was that I started a serious thread about an important topic and he posted imbecilic, trolly garbage. Now, that's his prerogative but he shouldn't be surprised if he gets an arse kicking. His accusation that we can't defend ourselves also grated when I had a career in the Australian Air Force and the Australian Defence force (ADF) is considered to be among the most efficient and capable in the world.

Cheers, Neilster

No, Neilster I don't think you appreciated the tone of my post at all. If you did, you wouldn't have responded with the flippant comment splitting hairs over the term "provide".

What you don't seem to appreciate was the ingratiating tone of your original post that was rife with entitlement mentality. My guess is that the few caustic responses you got were as a direct result of the entitlement mentality evident in that first post. Entitlement mentality is the excliusive pervue of the liberals of our society.

Conservatives tend to stomp on it whenever they encounter it and it takes only a smattering of common sense to figure that the majority of people you encounter on a wargame forum will likely be conservatives as liberals tend to want nothing to do with the study of warfare.

A "Hey guys, we really deserve this, don't you think you ought to share it with us?" approach rather than a "Hey guys we are entitled to this so you should stop being jerks and let us buy it" approach would have gone long way toward precluding the responses you found so offensive.

Cheers back at ya!

Hope there are no hard feelings. [:)]

[ORANGE]

ORIGINAL: 1275psi
Nothing personal no -but your country is pretty nuts about how it treats its friends -half of america would not even know where australia is.

Not that I think it is true at all but does it matter if half of Americans do not know where Australia is?

As for this I have mixed feelings. Australia was a great ally but now it is a little less than lukewarm to us so we have to look at what is, not what was.

And what benefit does the US get from this? How many fighters can you man if needed?

IMHO the US needs to start working more with China and Russia. Public opinion in Europe, Canada and Australia is too fickle for my liking. At least we know that Russia and China will back stab us.

[ORANGE]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: Neilster


I appreciate the tone of your post but the US doesn't "provide" Australia with military hardware, we buy it, just as you occasionally do from other countries too (and even Australian gear. Jindivik anyone?). This keeps American defence workers in jobs and helps offset the R&D costs.

What annoyed me was that I started a serious thread about an important topic and he posted imbecilic, trolly garbage. Now, that's his prerogative but he shouldn't be surprised if he gets an arse kicking. His accusation that we can't defend ourselves also grated when I had a career in the Australian Air Force and the Australian Defence force (ADF) is considered to be among the most efficient and capable in the world.

Cheers, Neilster

No, Neilster I don't think you appreciated the tone of my post at all. If you did, you wouldn't have responded with the flippant comment splitting hairs over the term "provide".

What you don't seem to appreciate was the ingratiating tone of your original post that was rife with entitlement mentality. My guess is that the few caustic responses you got were as a direct result of the entitlement mentality evident in that first post. Entitlement mentality is the excliusive pervue of the liberals of our society.

Conservatives tend to stomp on it whenever they encounter it and it takes only a smattering of common sense to figure that the majority of people you encounter on a wargame forum will likely be conservatives as liberals tend to want nothing to do with the study of warfare.

A "Hey guys, we really deserve this, don't you think you ought to share it with us?" approach rather than a "Hey guys we are entitled to this so you should stop being jerks and let us buy it" approach would have gone long way toward precluding the responses you found so offensive.

Cheers back at ya!

Hope there are no hard feelings. [:)]

Well said!

[Marauders]

This begs the question, when is it that you believe China is going to invade Australia?

One would think the F-16 FSX/F-2 to be good enough to defend Australian air space.

Heck, I don't even believe the United States really needs the F-22.

[ORANGE]

ORIGINAL: Marauders

This begs the question, when is it that you believe China is going to invade Australia?

One would think the F-16 FSX/F-2 to be good enough to defend Australian air space.

Heck, I don't even believe the United States really needs the F-22.

China cannot even invade Taiwan! [:o]

[Neilster]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: Neilster


I appreciate the tone of your post but the US doesn't "provide" Australia with military hardware, we buy it, just as you occasionally do from other countries too (and even Australian gear. Jindivik anyone?). This keeps American defence workers in jobs and helps offset the R&D costs.

What annoyed me was that I started a serious thread about an important topic and he posted imbecilic, trolly garbage. Now, that's his prerogative but he shouldn't be surprised if he gets an arse kicking. His accusation that we can't defend ourselves also grated when I had a career in the Australian Air Force and the Australian Defence force (ADF) is considered to be among the most efficient and capable in the world.

Cheers, Neilster

No, Neilster I don't think you appreciated the tone of my post at all. If you did, you wouldn't have responded with the flippant comment splitting hairs over the term "provide".

What you don't seem to appreciate was the ingratiating tone of your original post that was rife with entitlement mentality. My guess is that the few caustic responses you got were as a direct result of the entitlement mentality evident in that first post. Entitlement mentality is the excliusive pervue of the liberals of our society.

Conservatives tend to stomp on it whenever they encounter it and it takes only a smattering of common sense to figure that the majority of people you encounter on a wargame forum will likely be conservatives as liberals tend to want nothing to do with the study of warfare.

A "Hey guys, we really deserve this, don't you think you ought to share it with us?" approach rather than a "Hey guys we are entitled to this so you should stop being jerks and let us buy it" approach would have gone long way toward precluding the responses you found so offensive.

Cheers back at ya!

Hope there are no hard feelings. [:)]

This is what I originally wrote...

The new Australian government wants the option to buy F-22 Raptors, which I believe would require a law change in the US. Defence experts here have been loudly calling for this but the previous government appeared to be on the drugs when it came to defence acquisition.

Their mystifying decision to retire the F-111 early and bridge the gap until the F-35 with (outrageously expensive IMHO) Super Hornets has been roundly criticised. The F-35 may not reach RAAF squadrons until 2018ish, leaving Australia's air defence to 24 Super Hornets and updated but aging F-18s in the meantime. There's an ongoing build-up of pretty hot Russian fighters armed with scary weaponry in our region and by 2018 there's a good chance that the 5th generation Russian "Raptorski" could be in service with our northern neighbours.

In short, the F-111 shouldn't be retired and we should request F-22s. The Triple One has unique capabilities, had a massive upgrade in the late 90s and is not that expensive to maintain. The F-22 is in service, is extremely capable, has room for capability growth and has a unit price that is coming down. A nice fat order from Oz will keep the production line open and bring down the unit price for the US taxpayer too (because I think the USAF will be buying more).

IMHO the US would be foolish to deny Australia F-22s and let us lose our regional air superiority. Australia has been a trustworthy and loyal ally and it seems like a win/win situation to sell us some Raptors.

Now exactly what in that suggests "Hey guys we are entitled to this so you should stop being jerks and let us buy it"? I used the word "request" and suggested that this could be a symbiotic relationship.

You have misrepresented my position and dragged the whole "liberals vs conservatives" war into this. I also wasn't splitting hairs over the word "provide" either. You used it in the context of the US being taken for granted and it has connotations of charity.

Cheers, Neilster

[TonyAAA]

I think the problem is that the US has several "allies" that it can't trust not to sell/reveal stealth tech to it's enemies. Israel comes to mind (something like: US sells F-22s to Israel, who then sell stealth technology to China.)

How do you sell the F-22 to allies like Australia, Canada, England, etc but not to "allies" like Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Japan, etc?

Probably why we have that law not to sell it to anybody......makes the diplomatic angle easier.

[Zap]

Sell those things to the Aussie's. Yes, I have to say I would feel safer with the Aussie's loaded to the teeth with good technology in this unsafe world.

[Armygrognard]

ORIGINAL: Marauders

This begs the question, when is it that you believe China is going to invade Australia?

One would think the F-16 FSX/F-2 to be good enough to defend Australian air space.

Heck, I don't even believe the United States really needs the F-22.

There's the truth of it. The Raptor is so far advanced that it doesn't have a competitor even close to it. It is a response to a threat 20 years down the road.

Still, it's a beautiful plane to watch. I was up near Lockheed in Atlanta when one flwe over, going slow and low. Oh so nice...