Wonderful, Baz.

Re: In order to be able to invade Australia a potential aggressor needs to be able to land significant occupying forces here.

Perhaps you need to explain further.

If an aggressor lands a significant forces ... OK, then where will the landing take place?
On the north coast ? How about the west coast.

Where will the enemy lines of communication extend ? Across the desert ? When they land then what?

So they come down the eastern sea board ... Of course we just let them come and do nothing .... Only shoot when we see the whites of their eyes?

Who has the capability to take Australia by force and are willing to do so? USA, Russia, ah, the UK.

The last time that people tries to take a continent the size of Australia they really came to grief. Adolf Hitler and Napoleon come to mind.

You are a military man so read the Defence White papers on the threats to Australia before telling us how this massively expensive will save us from invasion. These will not be too good in protecting our sea lanes and trade routes, yes?

K. Why waste your time with rational argument? Baz is a crude propagandist.

As a software engineer I find the boasting of the number of lines of code to make the thing run a bit scary.
You've got to think of lines of code or function points would be a better measure as parts that could go wrong. The amount of testing you need to do grows exponentially as the number of function points grows. To the point where trying it and waiting for something to fail becomes to most cost effective option.
While I agree we need a strong air capability we can’t afford to be on the leading edge.
We just need one better then the most likely attackers and maybe the bomb for those that are going to always be bigger and better than us.

. Of course we just let them come and do nothing ..
Kilmouski,
Yep ! I"d say the bulk is already here & it won't be that much longer before the numbers are right.
The Left was instrumental in the taxpayer funded invasion & inevitable take-over by anti west religious interests of this Nation .

Actually it is probably a total waste of money the next generation of of fighter aircraft will not have on board pilots. As per usual we are getting the weapons to fight the last war not the next one.

The first point is simple a human even with the best G suit is not able to withstand anything much over 8 times gravity on the other hand a pilot-less aircraft can be made to withstand 30+Gs this translates to a huge increase in manoeuvrability, in fact so much so that it should be possible to out manoeuvre just about any rocket that is fired at it.

The second point is that the aircraft will be flown be one pilot but he can have as many assistances as he wants to take care of all the weapons and defence systems.

The third point is it will save a heap of weight not having to provide a life support system or space for the pilot which in turn allows the aircraft to be even more manoeuvrable, or to carry more fuel or bombs.

The last point is the cost can be brought down because it will not need to be as sophisticated and nor will airworthiness be so critical. It also means there is no risk of losing expensively and highly trained pilots.

The aircraft I envisage would be launched vertically with disposable rockets. It would be able to land by parachute or on a runway as required. It would be able to out manoeuvre anything fired at it. It would be capable of flying at extreme low altitude if required. It would be built in a range of sizes depending on the role. It would be entirely practical for Australia to build something along these lines right now

The author of this article may have received one of the gee wiz classified briefings on the F-35 that convinced that privileged audience that its a silver bullet solution. We public plebs didn't receive the briefing but we, as taxpayers, will pay for the F-35. The word is Australia is buying only 24 to 30 F-35s, costing $200 million a piece.

Not to cast aspersions - just facts.

1. I understand Flight Lieutenant Baz Bardoe is a RAAF officer.

RAAF officers frequently leave the RAAF to work for Lockheed Martin Australia http://www.lockheedmartin.com.au/ .

Lockheed Martin makes the F-35.

2. Winston Churchill said of the F-35:

Never in the field of human conflict were so many $Billions owed by so many Australians for so few F-35s.

3. For a more sober OLO article on the F-35 see "Don't Buy in Haste" at http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=7401

Pete

When the F111, F 18 etc were being discussed as the next Australian fighter, the very much cheaper Harrier was available.
It could land and take off anywhere without the benefit of an airfield.
It was superb as a strafing aircraft for ground support. It could and did outmanoeuvre and destroy much faster jets as it did in the Falklands.
They could be hidden in out of the way places till required and then appear out of the blue to strike.
They could even be carried and used from commercial shipping.
They would have been the ideal aircraft for the RAAF.
But they lacked panache.
No they did not put on a show burning thousands of gallons of fuel at air shows as they blowtorched their way across an airfield.
They were chosen by the US marines and did a good job for them.
When the Afghan war was on they were STILL in use as ground support aircraft.
Why do we have to have the latest toy in the US toy store when the Harrier and it's updates version would be of better and cheaper use to us?

why i can sleep at night
http://rss.infowars.com/20131223_Mon_Alex.mp3
alex was talking today regarding bill biff william hammon..hannon?
thus i have been..pre occupied..trying to spell..it

anyhow..it looks like biff*..got hit by a double whammy.

the working theory so/far seems to be..[i have to/say it alex].. malfeasance..see antibiotic...has in-it a mould killer..[but it kills off benificient molds..[without micro flora..our body cant process nutrients]..deies

hear yesterdaYS..CALLER..

anyhow go biff hamon

pericules..<<..Perhaps I didn't grieve enough.>>

grief..is so hard..on/the departed..
spiritually..it holds them back..from/adjusting to their new life
see our grief is FELT physically..by the departed..yet there they are HELPLESS..to make you know..they live
see
http://new-birth.net/booklet/Subaltern_Spirit_Land.pdf

trauma also requires great attention..[see blue island]
http://www.ghostcircle.com/ebooks/William%20T%20Stead%20-%20The%20Blue%20Island%20Pardoe%20Woodman%20&%20E%20Stead%20.pdf

anyhow..has*been..[will/be]..your departed father..never departed
here is a example..of what the..dead..can*..go through/after life
the 'hero..was well known..at the time..and unlike biff..was a scoundrel

anyhow it follows on from page 8[on.the pdf bar]
but properly..on..page 3..of the book..[page three will show up..as page 9]

anyhow..note the times..it was written[100 years ago]..yet EVEN then
he had an..ipad..[moving picture frame/that showed him..in real-time..what his beloved was going through

http://new-birth.net/booklet/Wanderer_a4.pdf

please recall alex is key..in..this..edward snowden project
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6152#178808

if i want my father..i just have a drink..with him...
the dead arnt dead[so please guys..get that out of your head]

this too is a key text..in the intro is a science thesis..from the same time[please note..electrification..dumbed down..out receptivity
plus drugs booze..tv..but then death so frightens some.

fear no evil
http://www.divinetruth.com/PDF/People/Other/Jane%20Sherwood%20-%20Post%20Mortem%20Journal.pdf
even atheists are having their vieuw
http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=15624
i just need some time to read/edit it..one day

Hi Baz,

If I had not read your bio I would not have picked you as Military. I will just say this, any military defense power is dependent in it’s ability to attack and defend across a broad range tactical and strategic assets within its geographic domain.

To focus on a single piece of “perhaps” great technology in the F35 seems a bit nonsensical.

The vast oceans around Australia pose greater problems for potential attackers than for us. How on earth would and enemy cross such distances with air transports needing refueling, ships that are exposed to attack by subs and finally, all of the above being picked of by land based “pop ups” like the F35.

Your not making sense laddy.

I am with Warmair. Drones are the go. Cheap and cheerful and we do not lose actual pilots, in fact anyone can pilot them to the battle and then the expert can take over.
We are always fighting the last war but Eisenhower said "Beware the military industrial complex". They will pay for fly boys to tell us how good they are by us paying top dollar for stuff that gets knocked out quick smart.

Love the discussion thus far except Mr. / Ms " under one god" ... Don't know what your'e on about.

But merry christmas to all and I hope you all have a very safe, happy and prosperous new year.

About the invasion of Australia ... thank god for the Norforce they're worth more for the defence of this great place than any number of F35's

I suspect the enemy has already arrived. They are just waiting to be in big enough numbers to enforce their laws. They will keep breeding and Aussies will keep aborting. No need to invade.

runner,
Yes, the education system here has made sure over the past four decades that people aren't smart enough to notice. It worked.

"Why 'fifth gen' helps me sleep at night"

Seriously, purchase some Whale Song, learn to count sheep but lets not pretend a few Jet Fighters have any chance of doing anything except appeasing the factories producing this crap, nor allowing a few defence force groupies a little fapping material.

For me, it means less sleep at night ! What a giant waste of public money. I think of all the good that could be done, the Science, the Innovation, paying down public debt. So many things, free solar panels for any home-owner earning < $40K per annum for example (free to landlords renting to people on the same who they sign up to 5 year leases). Fund the NBN, Gonski reforms, NDIS, repeal all HECS debt the list goes on of things where the money would be better spent. They could even just give it back to the people they took it off in the first place, just about anything would be better.

They don't need fifth gen.
They have fifth column.

Baz Bardoe, "In order to be able to invade Australia a potential aggressor needs to be able to land significant occupying forces here."

They already do.
100,000 a year.
100,000 people with no allegience to our civilisation, our race.
80% of all immigrants arriving now are non-Western/White.

Kilmouski "OK, then where will the landing take place?"

Sydney Airport, every day of the year.

"The last time that people tries to take a continent the size of Australia they really came to grief. Adolf Hitler and Napoleon come to mind."

Because they faced many armies (and civilian resisters) devoted to their people/nation and many large population centres.

Australia has two or three major cities and a politically apathetic, live-for-the-weekend population.

cornonacob "We just need one better then the most likely attackers"

What is one better than a box cutter?

Baz Bardoe has lost the plot. Australia is already being invaded by millions of foreigners who have more loyalty to their individual religions or to their former homelands than they have to our culture, and overly expensive "F-35's" are useless in combating that.

There are more ways to invade a country and take it over than just barging in the front door with guns. Smarter enemies barge in the front door demanding "asylum" in the knowledge that the people who's culture they sneer at will actually give them accommodation and a living for free.

Other smart enemies and competitors know that while Aussies might fight like devils to repel people with guns who want this take over this country, the leaders of Australia are not averse to selling the country bit by bit to any enemy with a fat chequebook.

F-35's, AWACS, M1A1 tanks and a couple of VTOL capable aircraft carriers are wonderful weapon systems if you define your country within a geographical area who's inhabitants culture and who's resources you are prepared to defend. But they are useless when dealing with foreign takeover from within caused by internal birth rate differentials or foreign economic takeover of vital industries.

If the Australian government is now buying ammunition for it's spacey looking Austeyr F-88 rifles from China then we might as well chuck the useless things away and equip our Aussie soldiers with frying pans manufactured in Australia. If there are any frying pan manufactures left in Australia, that is.

The acquisition of the most desirable, lethal and horrendously expensive foreign built weapons systems will do nothing for our defence if we invite people who have no allegiance to our people, or to our culture, to cross our moat and set up parallel cultures within our keep. Syria had a huge army with all the latest Russian gear and it is now fighting itself because it's inhabitants defined their identity by their separate religious, cultural and ethnic identities. Australia is now making the same mistake but Baz Bardoe sleeps peacefully in his bed dreaming that F-35's will keep him safe.

Yes Shochadelic what you say in response to me may be described by three words : True, Tragic and Funny ( not funny ha ha!).

There is a saving grace though; Our ADF though small is really very very good. They are a tough and dedicated bunch not withstanding the odd scandal.

If this most unlikely invasion were to take place we would have to set up the most wonderful of refugee camps in the out back to accommodate the latte sipping set, greens and progressives as they and the Snowden " want to be's" flee the cities. These camps will we provided with all mod cons and, of course, full internet connectivity and a direct line to the UN.

here is something to wake you up
http://investmentwatchblog.com/rob-kirby-when-china-doesnt-get-their-gold-thats-when-this-ends/

back ground is fort know gold is long gone
[the remaining..'gold'is tungsten plate]
at 911[building seven..more gold ..was 'lost'
[plus all the proof of enron/building 7 wasnt hit by as plane
cyclone sandy..yet..again..huge gold lost..when the vault 'flooded'

sonow wee got the promise of the next generation
that cant fly..to even our nearest neighbor[round trip]
see we needed[sorry exploiters needed a nice exchange rate..to go to their tax havens..so a lower dollar=lots of money..so we spend billions on yanki planes..they spend..our dollars..and the value of them remains low..artifically low

so what if your paying double its worth
lots of overseas duel passport holders need your your de-valued labor

i hope you watch..the vidio..or get up to speed
http://xml.nfowars.net/Alex.rss
stop sleeping..and wake up
http://rss.infowars.com/20131224_Tue_Alex.mp3
http://whatreallyhappened.com/node

Given that it's Christmas Day, this thread seems to be obscene!

What happened to 'Thou shall not Kill,' and 'Love thy Neighbour' and all that jazz?

Australia can't be defended, it's too big and our population is too small and dumb.

Besides, even the U.S. is going bankrupt trying to build the F-35s. It's already out of date and is filled with glitches.

Better to walk down the peace road, Man. Peace is our only chance!

Down with all warmongers!

Actually, it is 'Thou shalt not murder", DavidG, a different concept altogether. And as for 'Love thy neighbour", that is a Christian concept that is now being replaced by Muslims in the West with "Fight the unbelievers who are near to you, lay ambushes for them, strike terror into their hearts" (Koran)

If you preer peace then you should be able to make some connections.

1. Chrisianity is a religion of peace.
2. Islam is a religion of war.

Therefore, Christian based civilisation is preferable to Muslim civilisation. Especially since most terrorists in this world are Muslims.

And whadyajknow? most people do not want to live in Muslim countries, and that includes Muslims. They prefer prosperous Christian based western countries. if you were capable of rubbing two neurones together to form a rational thought then you would have to conclude that western civilisation should be supported while Muslim civilisation should be opposed.

LEGO, 'Western Civilization' is an oxymoron!

Any society that is based upon insatiable greed, war, and the law of the jungle cannot be said to be 'civilized'.

Even animals and insects can work out that waging war against your own kind is counterproductive, even less so when nukes are involved.

All this excitement about F35s, WTF. Grow up, boys. Get a life!

WAR = EXTINCTION!

<<Even animals and insects can work out that waging war against your own kind is counterproductive>>

ROFL -- where did you learn that,Greenie Sunday school?

Try introducing foreign ants to another groups nest and see how they are "greeted"--or one bird into anothers territory.

sappy/Try introducing foreign ants to another groups nest and see how they are "greeted"--or one bird into anothers territory.
Posted by SPQR,quote....<<

oh for freak-sake sap

yes they..kill that NOT THEIR OWN
but they are beasts[havnt we got beyond judging books by the spin/blurb?

human..is one species..as close to godlyness as the incarnate can evolve to[from the humane incarnation..we hold eternity efore us as we each..hit the final..higher..[a son of the light][ie a sun/withthy own 'let there be light moment

your own days od creation[look at the heavens
so many HAVE gone before theee..oh son/of man
any comment re my night walk?..on..new years eve?
just seeing if thy masters have and 'requests'[openline]

Where are all these F35's going to land after they've bombed the crap out of this planet ?

undivided/quote..<<..Where are all these F35's going to land after they've bombed the crap out of this planet ?>>

they wont take off
if forced by threat..they shall revert..to self destruction
you forget..these guys though doped up/on speed..[thats the only way these things can/be 'flown'..arnt stupid]..its the drones..they will take divine intervention..funny it will validate free movement..in time and space..[see ross kelly..for the love of ana][ana=the sun]..not god..[just as we each in-time..too can evolve into living stars

but..dont worry..wether...huh-man..or angel
wont need to arise./.those thinking they can..are deceived by satanists..fools half-wits and yes-men[the powerful fear power..so thus sow their own..end..regardless of what way they go..more clever/than them/use them[and any-less clever are fools[fools cant be trusted]..its catch 22[point 2]

in today repeat..of alex jones..they even CLAIM..a unique gene
we are all inter-related..[and we know what scientists will/can do for money..we saw it with the green scams[the melted poles?..lo/look at it snow/the hockey stick..lol..go see the prediction..versis the reality..

media simply isnt telling no-one about.

pathetic

anyhow IF..[big if]..the bombers do..go..
just sit by a bank..they dont bomb banks
[they payed for EVERY war..not even called..the war]
even the drug war money..they launder..yep just go sit near the empty..vaults...looters need their booty safe*..be safe next to a big safe.

ps the bomber boats..got remote self destruct
but dying a few days early..so what.

heaven..is better than this hell
just dont fear no..evil..live by love..or its not a usefull/life.

Hi folks,
Thanks for all the comments. The article was never intended to be a definitive piece on Australia's defence, and yes it is very aero-centric - I like stuff that flies. Obviously F35's will be part of a holistic approach to defence, with the other services and their respective hardware.
When I was a kid I used to always imagine that by 2014 humanity would be involved in the peaceful exploration of space, and we would have solved many of the major problems that plague us. Sadly that isn't the case. In the current environment I think most people accept we need to be proactive to ensure our safety - I accept that there will be many different ideas about how this might be achieved. There is a line of thought that suggests that the large scale movement of people and complex webs of cross border investment mean that large scale wars may no longer take place - perhaps that could be the subject of another article?
Also I completely accept that more lines of code doesn't mean better, and in fact greater complexity can be fraught, but the main detail is the vast improvement in situational awareness and adaptability.
I think someone described me as a 'dull witted propagandist'. I am not too sure about the former, and as for the latter whilst I am an aircraft fan this is very much my personal opinion.
Great to see people engaging in such passionate debate on an important subject, and some stuff to ponder for sure.

In "Why 'fifth gen' helps me sleep at night" (24 December 2013) Baz Bardoe describes the advanced features of the fifth generation F-35 aircraft. But the F-35 is years behind the original schedule and many billions of dollars over budget. There is a good chance the F-35 will be completed, but it will take years to develop the capabilities of the complex computer systems on the aircraft and it may never do all that has been promised.

In the interim Australia has the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet in service. These are much less capable than the F-35 is planned to be, but they are available and proven. The F/A-18E/F was to be a stop-gap measure until the F-35 was available, but it looks like they will be retained alongside the F-35 (assuming the F-35 is acquired).

While the F-35 is a stealthy aircraft it is not completely invisible to radar. Australia has ordered the electronic warfare version of the F/A-18E/F, called the EA-18G "Growler". This can detect and jam enemy radar. The Growler can also fire missiles which home in on and destroy radar sites, making the radar operators reluctant to turn them on. The RAAF would use the Growlers to clear a path for F/A-18E/F and F-35.

It should be kept in mind that Australia is a large island surrounded by large expanses of water. Attack aircraft would have difficulty finding their targets and reaching them, without far less glamorous new aircraft in service with the RAAF. These are modified airliners, including the Boeing 737 AEW&C E-7A Wedgetail airborne early warning and control aircraft, and the Airbus A330 KC-30A Multi Role Tanker Transport (MRTT). These have not been without development problems: the Wedgetail's radar software took longer than expected and a refuelling boom fell of a KC-30A, but they are now both in service.

Australia will also likely order the Boeing 737 P-8 Poseidon anti-submarine warfare and electronic intelligence aircraft for patrolling large ocean areas (already ordered by India). The P-8 has provision to carry a long-range high-resolution air-to-surface radar, which could be used over both sea and land.

Hi tomw

I'm in full agreement that Australian air operations involve a range of aircraft doing different jobs.

This, to a degree, deflates the claims of the author, a serving RAAF officer, that the F-35 is a silver bullet solution that Australia must buy at all costs.

Australia does not have to buy 100 F-35s, a nice round number mooted in Defence White Papers, a smaller number integrated with other aircraft types is more realistic.

The opportunity cost of buying 100 F-35s would include severely delaying or cancelling Australia's much needed SEA 1000 future submarine project - see http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2013/11/australian-naval-shipbuilding-and.html .

Cheers

Pete

While Australia seems to now have a reasonably balanced to fighter aircraft acquisition: buying some F/A-18E/F & Gs now and F-35s later (if they work), the SEA 1000 future submarine project does not have that level of pragmatism about it. The plan seems to be to buy US nuclear power submarines and if Australia can't have them then build a bespoke conventionally powered equivalent. But nuclear powered submarines are not politically feasible for Australia and a conventional equivalent is not feasible, nor is it clear what strategic need this would satisfy.

The smaller conventional submarines available off the shelf from European makers would be suitable for defending Australia's maritime approaches. About the only use for a larger vessel is to strategically threaten countries far from our shores. As those countries could respond with nuclear weapons, Australia would be making its strategic environment less secure as a result.

Given the difficulties with building the Collins class submarine, the chances of a larger more complex construction being successful are close to nil. Also Australia would have difficulty finding enough highly trained sailors to operate very large submarines.

Instead I suggest Australia could acquire European designed submarines, with systems proven to interoperate with NATO allies (including the USA). The first few could be quickly and cheaply built in Europe and later ones in Australia (if this is required for political reasons).

Assuming the two Canberra-class landing helicopter dock ships being built by Spanish company Navantia are successful, then the obvious choice would be their S-80-class submarine. This is not because the S-80 is more advanced than other designs (or without problems), but that there is a reasonable chance of them being built at an affordable cost and timetable.

US plans to sell V-22 Osprey exclusively to Israel
http://www.timesofisrael.com/us-plans-to-sell-v-22-osprey-exclusively-to-israel/?

Purchase of six advanced aircraft is part of a proposed weapons package worth NIS 4 billion; Congress has two weeks to object.


Congress won't object. It's an election year!
http://www.infowars.com/nuke-commander-purge-another-34-missile-launch-officers-terminated-by-air-force/

And I don't know why they use the word "sell" when the US Government gives Israel your money with which to buy the planes. They might as well say "give.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/01/15/345819/israel-hijacked-us-military-since-911/

http://ftmdaily.com/daily-briefing/011614/

http://rt.com/news/hypersonic-vehicle-missile-china-665/

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/15/truth-israels-secret-nuclear-arsenal

http://intellihub.com/2014/01/16/shell-oil-refinery-mysteriously-explodes-in-germany-creating-carcinogenic-soot/

Hi tomw

I agree the SEA 1000 project has less pragmatism than many projects. SEA 1000's official parameters eg. must be conventional, Australian built, built in/near Adelaide, suggests priorities other than lowest price or sheer military efficiency.

The official parameters do suggest that Federal money for South Australia for manufacturing industry development, business, union and electoral interests are prime considerations. With an SEA 1000 in-service deadline of around 2035 we may well continue to have this discussion for the next 5 years :)

Leaving aside the most capable sub in the shape of 4 to 6 Virginia SSNs, there appears to be 4 or 5 conventional choices.

HDW (Type 214 or 216?) and DCNS (Scorpene?) being the firms with the greatest export experience and deepest knowledge base in conventional subs appear to be, or should be, the front-runners. Inter-operability with the US is important hence its is highly desirable that these firms would be permitted by the US to incorporate the US combat system and weapons fit.

The Navantia S-80 apparently incorporate the US combat system-weapons fit. However the S-80 falls down in not being completed, not exported. The S-80 has been significantly delayed due to basic design faults including balance. Navantia (or Spain?) apparently has never completed a submarine by itself or exported a sub itself. As things stand this may make Navantia a higher risk sub maker than Kockums was in the 1980s?

Note in the 1980s Kockums was chosen over the more proven HDW at the last minute - and the rest is history. Now we have never completed a sub Navantia.

If Defence-DMO-Navy wish to choose Navantia for the wrong bureaucratic high risk-problematic reasons then Navantia instead of HDW or DCNS might make sense.

Other builders are South Korea building HDW designed subs and Japan's Soryu class - though noting Japan has never exported large weapon systems, peace constitution and highly changeable government policies.

If Navantia develops a demonstrably efficient S-80 and gets some export orders for subs experience before 2025 then it might be less high risk and less expensive.

Regards

Pete