If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#171
|
|||
|
|||
"Brash" wrote in message u... Actually Infantry is over sucribed, the school of cool is not that full these days cause there is only limited postions in the Battalions. How often r the Battalions being deployed? all the bloody time, how often r the F111s being deployed? Obviously the finer points of Strategy are lost on you. Infantry battalions (especially those a "light" as ours) don't make much of a strategic deterrent. And F111s aren't suited to peace-keeping. again the gate guard shows his ignorance. The size of the Army force in Aus significantly raises the bar as to what constitutes an effective invasion force, which consequently raises the logistic requirements to invade Aust significantly. Perhaps if you didn't use words that you don't understand (like 'strategy'), you would not keep making such a fool of yourself? Long range strike is a very useful capability for Aust, but it doesn't neccessarily need to be delivered by F-111 and it is not the be all and end all of deterrent. |
#172
|
|||
|
|||
"Brash" wrote in message u... "Graham" wrote in message ... I agree with Tas, i'm just a digger I won't hold it against you, but you need more than a digger's eye view to grasp some of this. You need a gates eye view! lol. but i do see what is getting used the most on deployments in this new climate and its not F111 (great aircraft tho) and really i dont see them or a a new type being used often or at all. There's a Chinese bloke named Sun Tzu, he wrote a book called "The Art of War". In it, he says the only true victory in a war is to not have to fight it. Fighting it (and hopefully) then winning it, is a bit of a mug's game. F111's (and their class of aircraft) are designed not to win wars by fighting them but to win wars by preventing them. Show me an infantry battalion that can do *that*. Show me a country that has been deterred by Australian F-111s. The other disadvantage of relying on Mr Tzus deterrence is that if the enemy calls your bluff, 35 x F-111s are not going to last very long (let alone the markedly smaller number we can crew) or the stocks of weapons for the a/c. 3 more Bns with supporting units (for example) would mean an enemy would need to bring at least 9 more Bns to invade (actually more, but lets not quibble), with the consequent increase in logistic support, transport, shipping, escorts etc. It raises the cost significantly more for the attacker than the defender. See how deterrence works? And those forces are available for other tasks when the threat to Aust is not high, as well as increasing the most effective recruiting pool for SASR - the ones who are most effective in the current, existing war. What is being used allmost to the breaking point is us (diggers) and our equipment. And you haven't even been in a proper war yet. Makes you worry, doesn't it? Certainly when money is being spent on a/c that Aust hasn't used and won't use. Have they put EW on them that would let them risk it on real world ops yet? Has the interim jammer even made it to the plane yet? This is where our limited budget neads to go. Can't agree with that. If we do it your way, we'll end up with an ADF that will actually have to defend Australia. Sun Tzu wouldn't approve. Or we can keep putting money into a/c that soak up resources, but are of no use dealing with the threats we face. Truely I cant sea a situation where we will need the long range of the 111 to defend Aus, who is willing or wants to have a go at us? I guess you haven't read the paper lately. Who has the capability that is more threatened by F-111s than SASR? I just dont see anyone out there who realy would have a go. Wake up................. the rag-heads are on our case right now. If the Intel revealed a al-Q or JI camp someplace that we couldn't openly get at, wouldn't it makes sense to go in and bomb said camp with a plane that fly across countries and avoid radar detection, hit the camp, and make it back to international airspace without needing AAR 4 or 5 times? Or to hit it covertly with SASR and recover intelligence as well. Or pass the info onto our allies who have the ability to hit it with a proper strike package rather than a half arsed attempt. The F111s are great but can we aford them now (old) and what is needed? ie look at what is being used. We just dont have the $ for every thing we need. We would if we didn't waste millions on arts festivals for lefty ******s. Spend the $ where its needed is what i say. Spend the money where it will give us the most strategic value, I say. Which may not be the F-111 given the limited need for long ranged strike and the disproportionate amount of funding the F-111 soaks up. |
#173
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 22:53:59 +1000, Vector
wrote: On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 22:02:24 +1000, "Brash" wrote: Obviously you never saw Williamtown in full swing when PTS was operating there alongside a couple of Mirage or Hornet squadrons. Maybe he didn't - but neither did you. I did - and the DZ was NOT on the airfield. Yair...but the DZ is within spitting distance of Saltash air-ground gunnery range and operations at both sites comfortably interlaced without much of a hitch (when it was in full swing in the 70s anyway!) |
#174
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 09:25:38 +1000, "L'acrobat"
wrote: Poor gate guard, you are a second rate loser and you know it. Gate guards ain't in military uniform these days, Sunshine! The job has been contracted out to civvy security companies. Ipso facto, Brash ain't on a gate!! |
#175
|
|||
|
|||
"matt weber" wrote in message
US lost several in VN in the first deployment, probably due to TFR failures, but since no bits and pieces were ever found... Not true. They never recovered the first or third aircraft lost on the initial Combat Lancer deployment, but the second aircraft was located and retrieved. They ultimately traced the loss to a structural failure in the stabilator at low level. Not the fault of the radar at all. http://afmuseum.com/friends/journal/frj_242.html I believe EF-111A's were used in First Gulf War, but I suspect the last time they carried weapons was probably over Libya.. AFAIK, the EF-111s never carried weapons (unlike their EA-6B counterparts). USAF F-111s definitely dropped weapons in Gulf War 1. They were much praised for "tank-plinking" with 500-lb laser-guided bombs, in addition to their usual interdiction/deep attack missions. http://www.afa.org/magazine/perspect.../1093tank.html -- Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail "If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed) |
#176
|
|||
|
|||
"smithxpj" wrote in message ... On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 09:25:38 +1000, "L'acrobat" wrote: Poor gate guard, you are a second rate loser and you know it. Gate guards ain't in military uniform these days, Sunshine! The job has been contracted out to civvy security companies. Ipso facto, Brash ain't on a gate!! Correct, they can't be trusted to carry out their only useful function any longer. It was the high point of his undistinguished career. |
#177
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 10:31:12 +1000, smithxpj
wrote: On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 22:53:59 +1000, Vector wrote: On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 22:02:24 +1000, "Brash" wrote: Obviously you never saw Williamtown in full swing when PTS was operating there alongside a couple of Mirage or Hornet squadrons. Maybe he didn't - but neither did you. I did - and the DZ was NOT on the airfield. Yair...but the DZ is within spitting distance of Saltash air-ground gunnery range and operations at both sites comfortably interlaced without much of a hitch (when it was in full swing in the 70s anyway!) Which does nothing to validate Brash's BS claim that the DZ was on the airfield. It wasn't - even though PJI's did occasional demo jumps there. And if he didn't have his head so far up his Khyber, Brash might realise his other claim re the PTS operating alongside Mirages and Hornets was complete bull**** as well - it never happened! |
#178
|
|||
|
|||
L'acrobat wrote:
Show me a country that has been deterred by Australian F-111s. The one bad thing (or good thing, depending upon your point of view) about deterrence is that it is virtually impossible to show a 100% certain 'win' for it. On the other hand, it is also almost impossible to show a situation in which deterrence may not have played a factor, unless an attack actually took place. In other words, the natural response to your question is the challenge "show me a nation that carried out their aggressive plans against Australia in spite of the F-111. Since I have not read of an invasion or other blatant attack against Australia proper (as opposed to against Australians, outside of the country), I would be hard pressed to point to a failure of deterrence. And while I haven't been observing ALL that closely, I'd expect to have noticed a large scale incident that would prove that reply wrong... Mike |
#179
|
|||
|
|||
"Michael Williamson" wrote in message ... L'acrobat wrote: Show me a country that has been deterred by Australian F-111s. The one bad thing (or good thing, depending upon your point of view) about deterrence is that it is virtually impossible to show a 100% certain 'win' for it. On the other hand, it is also almost impossible to show a situation in which deterrence may not have played a factor, unless an attack actually took place. In other words, the natural response to your question is the challenge "show me a nation that carried out their aggressive plans against Australia in spite of the F-111. OK, show me a nation that we could, credibly, have deterred with F-111s. |
#180
|
|||
|
|||
"matt weber" wrote in message
... On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 21:33:39 +1000, "The Raven" wrote: "Graham" wrote in message ... Yeah hi, can anyone tell me when the F111s were last deployed in combat? The Australian F-111's or just general F-111's? have they ever? just asking. I believe some were used in VN but not sure if that included Australia. I would have thought Australia received them too late for VN. US lost several in VN in the first deployment, probably due to TFR failures, but since no bits and pieces were ever found... Due to wing failures. I believe EF-111A's were used in First Gulf War, but I suspect the last time they carried weapons was probably over Libya.. Spark 'Varks were used, so were bomb truck Pigs as well IIRC. The Yanks asked us to send our photo Pigs too. -- De Oppresso Liber. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
IFR Flight Plan question | Snowbird | Instrument Flight Rules | 5 | August 13th 04 12:55 AM |
NAS and associated computer system | Newps | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | August 12th 04 05:12 AM |
Canadian IFR/VFR Flight Plan | gwengler | Instrument Flight Rules | 4 | August 11th 04 03:55 AM |
IFR flight plan filing question | Tune2828 | Instrument Flight Rules | 2 | July 23rd 03 03:33 AM |
USA Defence Budget Realities | Stop SPAM! | Military Aviation | 17 | July 9th 03 02:11 AM |