I'm not in the industry and only follow whats going on from news and ausairpower.net etc but the impression i certainly get is that political and economic aspiration of groups in America seem to be overiding a common sense approach to meeting australian defense needs.

The only reason i can see that we are persisting with the over budget and underperforming F-35 is that apart from the F-22 we don't really have many options. Nothing I know of from Europe would meet our requirements (and i wonder how much the F-35 does).

America is holding back on releasing the F-22 simply because they have invested so much into the F-35 and it would be dropped like a hot potato by their international partners if they could get their hands on the proven F-22.

The only thing in the F-35's favour is undisclosed capability which had better be damn good to make up for it's short range and low speed (compared to F-22, F-111) should regional Su 27s crack the 'stealth'.

I have a lot of respect for DSTO and saw this from outgoing DSTO chief Roger Lough, but i'm still not convinced.

"He has no doubt that the RAAF's preference for the F-35 joint strike fighter is the right choice for Australia when compared with the more expensive F-22 Raptor.

"The F-22 is a very nice fighter aircraft, but it is not what we want and we have the studies to prove that. DSTO has done the major part of the operational studies for the new air combat capability and that includes an assessment of the F-22.

"Many, if not most, of the avionics in the JSF are F-22 derived. So you have learned the lessons of the F-22 and applied them to the JSF. So they are cheaper, more robust, they are more maintainable and they are arguably increasing performance.

Aeronautic and space system is a highly complicated and integrated system. Airforce combat ability is partly, or maybe largely, dependent on aircraft performance.

But, most countries in the world, including Australia, even they have their own integrated space and ground supporting system, after 24 hours large scale air combat with enemies at the same level, their airforce combat ability is largely dependent on their aircraft system supplier if their airforce still exists.

Centra

"Aeronautic and space system is a highly complicated and integrated system."

I'm not sure who/what you are or who orginated these words. Some "information" parts of the Chinese Ministry of Defence spring to mind as an originator... :)

You or someone said "But, most countries in the world, including Australia, even they have their own integrated space and ground supporting system, after 24 hours large scale air combat with enemies at the same level, their airforce combat ability is largely dependent on their aircraft system supplier if their airforce still exists."

This may/may not apply. It may be the rhetorical question of an expert - but I see the statement as fishing for a useful response.

One with real access to a nation's air force supply network disposition could respond but this would be sensitive stuff and they would be breaking the law - if they officially knew - which I don't - and won't :)

Regards

Pete

Pete

"I'm not sure who/what you are or who orginated these words. Some "information" parts of the Chinese Ministry of Defence spring to mind as an originator... :)"

I am not a worrywart. My technical experience tells me that intelligence agency in most countries can pinpoint the internet users and get their detailed personnel information within minutes if they want. Even the technical team of this form can know a little about the commentators.

"It may be the rhetorical question of an expert - but I see the statement as fishing for a useful response."

At age of 9, I was still impressed by Falkland/Malvinas Islands War. Later, I knew that Argentine jet fighter combat time is numbered by minutes. If brave Argentine could get continuous, or even limited supply of spares, missile etc, Briton would pay much higher cost.

Although I got a little experience in the industry, all the conclusion I got is based on some basic open information, plus simple logic. (At this point, there are much more open discussion in the Chinese, Indian and Pakistani forum.)

Do not underestimate Australia, China and other countries. If any country treasures these basic information, then its opponent should be rhathymia.

After all, all my comment is relevant(that means I follow the forum rule). My conclusion is that Australia has no choice. A few years ago, South Kora set a example. South Korean airforce wanted to replace their jet fighter by international bid. There were competitive bid, but American did not agree, Did Korean dare to change? Same apply to Australia.

Fair enough Centra.

I believe you are a real person.

I agree with your last paragraph. Australia's choice of its next jet fighter is governed by what America is willing to provide. Our ability to shop around is limited by our desire to pay a tribute-premium to the US for the ANZUS "insurance policy".

HABIB

But going slightly off topic we are occasionally kicked in the teeth by the US despite our loyalty.

If DG ASIO O'Sullivan's explanation of Habib's rendition to Egypt is to be believed the Australian Government did not object strongly enough to prevent an Australian citizen being flown in a US jet to Egypt for the express purpose of being tortured by an American ally.

I'm just wondering why Commissioner Keelty is not doing the talking now as it happened on his watch. The explanation Keelty gave for some years to normal MPs, Senators and the Australian people seemed - well - a little economical with the truth - even if one can lie for national security reasons.

But then again another federal policeman in another land, J. Edgar Hoover, could define and propagandise a certain style of law – which put people in fear - and got away with it for years...

Habib is probably no saint but Australia owes him serious compensation.

Peter Coates
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com/

Centra,

My understanding of the Argentine airforces problems was that the pilots were often flying too low for their bombs to arm before they hit the ships. Secondly, if the british harriers had more range they could have pushed the argentine exocet carrying Super Etenards further out of range. It was the exocet which could have made the difference for the argentines

The Argentine experience does demonstrate why you shouldn’t buy your major weapons systems from anyone who isn’t a lifelong ally. Indeed a capable local military industry should be a strategic requirement for any country concerned about its security. We cannot buy French or other European arms for exactly this reason

South Korea is different to Australia in that they receive significant amounts of military funding from the US. In that sense it would be hard to blame the yanks for demanding that they use the money to buy US goods. Indeed South Korea's newfound wealth can be directly traced to America subsidising the defence of that country for 60 odd years.

Of course you can spend more money on infrastructure if someone else is picking up a large part of your defence tab.

Our AF wants to be able to operate successfully with the Americans as a matter of national strategy. The F35, if its stealth package lives up to its promise, will be the best aircraft in the region. Besides the F22 what else could we buy?

Peter,

Regarding Habib, I think we need to trust the gov’t. If he was actually in Afghanistan learning to become a terrorist then there is no need to apologise. I’m not saying I support rendition and torture, but I’m not interested in apologizing to a terrorist either. The incoming labour gov’t would have been briefed on what Habib has been up to, and if they aren’t interested in compensating him, then I’m OK with that.