Devils advocate, does the RAAF really need 100 top end combat aircraft or could our needs be meet by :

A) Fewer F-35's
B) Fewer F-35's in conjunction with a cheaper fighter or attack type
C) Fewer F-35's in conjunction with specialist types including UCAV's
D) Fewer F-35's and a couple of squadrons of the result of USAF future bomber studies

Come 2020 what will we have, 24 SH plus 14 F-35 and a handful of HUG Bugs held together with string and chewing gum?

 

If the F-35 is delayed and the F-35 is late we could end up being defended by the SH's and the first batch of F-35.  Should this actually work out could the government actually decide that we don't need 100 combat aircraft and that 50 to 75 could be sufficient?

 

Remember there are precedents in the ADF, we lost our carrier in part because we hadn't needed it while it was layed up prior to the delivery of Invincible, the replacement for the DDG's was delayed for so long that it will now also replace the FFG's, i.e. 3 airdefence ships replacing 9!  The army has also seen reductions as well, 59 tanks replacing 100 etc.

 

If the RAAF is seen to do ok with a significantly smaller number of combat aircraft what is stopping a future government from deciding to save money by making the smaller force permanent.  Remember, until the late 70's we used to have 4 to 5 fighter squadrons and 3 bomber / stike squadrons, as well as the FAA, vs the 3 plus 2 we now have.

All that they would do is to say that because the F-35 is so capable that we don't need two strike squadrons

There was a lot of talk about retiring the F-111's in the late 80's as well but thankfully sense prevailed. Instead we lost 12 Chinooks and only got 4 back.

 

There was a story going around that a senior bureaucrat who had been lobbying to have the F-111 retired pre AUP, do to it being outdated and useless, received a print of a Pavetacks cross hairs over his Canberra office window demonstrating just what it could do.

The Chook was initially retired altogether as the RAAF refused to continue operating them and the Army, still suffering indigestion from taking on the Blackhawks and Hueys, was unable to.

"There was a story going around that a senior bureaucrat who had been lobbying to have the F-111 retired pre AUP, do to it being outdated and useless, received a print of a Pavetacks cross hairs over his Canberra office window demonstrating just what it could do"

 

Yep true story. there is/was a small clip of the camera footage on youtube, in part of one of those aussie music videos of the pig

 

don't ask me which clip i saw it 2, or maybe 3 years ago

had a quick look and i found it

 

go to youtube then backslash and then ;

 

watch?v=dIYDGVFisD0&feature=related

it is 54 to 57 seconds into the clip

 

i think there is some longer footage on youtube in another video, cant be bothered looking for it though

 

 

 

Going back to the thread title, the 100 aircraft number is in reality - 4x combat squadrons + an OCU and attrition and development aircraft.

 

This is RAAF's directed level of capability and in theory allows for 1x fighter squadron plus a squadron minus to be deployed operationally, whilst 2x Squadrons remain within Australia. Now RAAF deployed a squadron minus to Iraq in 2003 just from the F/A-18 fighter force (3x squadrons) and it worked out just fine, so I'd suggest this precedent combined with financial stricture and delays in the F-35 program, may eventually lead Government to believing the RAAF can get by with just 3x fighter squadrons.

With the Super Hornets providing one fully capable squadron (and allowing squadron minus level deployments) I think the legacy Hornets, with 11x aircraft having undergone CBR, can be managed for 3 squadrons for some years yet and perhaps reducing to 2x squadrons a couple of years out (as 6 Squadron did in releasing their operational role on the F-111) with one of the 3 squadrons losing it's Hornets and commencing the conversion to F-35.

 

When all 3x squadrons have converted to F-35, I seriously think F/A-18F will be sold or perhaps traded back to the US and not directly replaced by F-35. A UAV/UCAV capability may be looked at, but I don't expect 100 JSF's any time soon. That is what I think WILL happen.

 

What I think SHOULD happen, is that the Hornets should be replaced largely, NOW with Super Hornet Block II's and some EA-18G Growlers and we run 3x squadrons of Shornets/Growlers and 1x squadron of legacy Hornets, to provide 4x full squadrons for the next decade or so. When mature F-35 examples are ready (and in full rate production) we acquire a squadron plus worth of F-35's to "quarterback" the Shornet force and provide RAAF with it's VLO fighter capability. 

 

Nothing within our region would match such a force structure, especially combined with Wedgetail, KC-30A, JORN, Vigilaire etc and we'd save a packet on costs (Shornets being cheaper to run than tired old Hornets being constantly maintained and cheaper to acquire than LRIP F-35's), we'd gain a greater capability throughout the next 10 years, we'd gain dedicated EA and airborne force level electronic warfare capability for the first time and we'd move into VLO fighter operations at a reasonable time and cost, when the threat level of our region is predicted to be "heating up".