Exremely interesting Documentry on Australia's decision to retire the F-111 early and purchase a gap fighter (Super Hornet). Puts a few of those clips from the Tomcat crews baggin the Hornets capabilities in perspective...

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2007/20071029_hornets/interviews.htm

As you said it was interesting but to me it seamed to have an agender making the JSF and super hornets out to be wrong for the RAAF but no where did it state an alternative to the JSF or super hornet

and as for the JSF being risky is its got to be less of a risk than making your own fighter your self

Did anybody notice the very obvious flaw at the headline page? Do Australian F/A-18s REALLY cost 6.6 BILLION dollars each? Perhaps Australia should buy 3 B-2s or 2 Nimitz Class carriers instead of this beast...whatever it may be. Gosh...that Australian Hornet must have some serious **** installed on it to command that price tag. Heh...just kidding. More junk journalism.

IguanaKing - Ummmm "6.6 Billion each"...maybe you should pay more attention to the Documentry...You are a bit off the mark with what they quoted...but you are right with the total...

Now Sir Zerg, I didn't get the impression that they were saying the JSF was the wrong type of aircraft for the RAAF. It was more the process that was invovled in the purchase, and possible politician involvement. They didn't look at any other aircraft.

The Super Hornet was knocked back initially by the RAAF for use as a gap fighter as the Hornets we have and the F-111 would see us through to the JSF. Then an F-111 fails a stress test on the wing and Bam, 6.6 Billion on a gap fighter. A stress test that has since been reported as being set up wrong. Thus the question remains, if the stress test results are invalid, do we need to spend 6.6 Billion for a gap fighter that does not seem ideal for our regional needs?

I mean the the US didn't want the Super Hornet initially. Boeing had failed to sell the Super Hornet to anyone but the US Navy. But they had a secret weapon - Quote from - ANDREW FOWLER: "Trying to sell the Super Hornet was no easy task, but Boeing had a secret weapon - none other than Andrew Peacock, former Liberal Party leader and former Ambassador to the United States, was now President of Boeing Australia."


It seems the new Government is having concerns too and has put a hold on the purchase and a complete review of the purchase.

"More junk journalism" IguanaKing??? You offer no reasons for your feelings of junk journalism. I hope it wasn't just for the miss quoted price tag... I think the people interviewed have more than enough credentials and knowledge to make a more informed decision than others... I mean I am sure it is a capable aircraft (SUper Hornet) and I am sure none of the people posting here know the full capabilities of the aircraft (unless they are ADF whom I presume shouldn't be posting here). But two people who have a far better understanding of our Airforce requirements have got to be WING COMMANDER CHRIS MILLS (RTD), and AIR VICE-MARSHAL PETER CRISS (RTD), AIR COMMANDER AUSTRALIA 1999-2000. The processes that lead to the Super Hornet purchase seemed unusual to me...

Even the current Air Force Chief AIR MARSHAL GEOFF SHEPHERD states that a bridging fighter is the last resort...Quote below.

AIR MARSHAL GEOFF SHEPHERD, AIR FORCE CHIEF: The Government has announced of course that if the JSF were to slide substantially - and once again I stress we are seeing no indications of that - than a purchase of a bridging fighter would be the last resort. But there are strategies before we got to that level, possibly extending the F-111 and looking to upgrade more centre barrels on the FA18 Hornets.