Guest Guest66881 Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 The Abbott government is defending its decision to spend more than $12 billion on new fighter jets while preparing to make big cuts to other areas of the federal budget. Prime Minister Tony Abbott on Wednesday will announce the purchase of another 58 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, taking the Australian fleet to 72 by 2020. Australia will spend $12.4 billion to bolster its air combat capability with the order, with the price tag to include weapons, spare parts and maintenance facilities. Defence Minister David Johnston says the purchase will give Australia's air combat capability "the sort of technological edge that it must continue to have". He defended the billions in spending - less than a month before Treasurer Joe Hockey delivers a budget with expected cuts to health and welfare. The money for the fighters had been put aside since the government's initial order of 14 aircraft, he said. "The money is contained within the defence budget in the outyears of the budget and beyond," Senator Johnston told ABC radio. https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/22860658/australia-to-spend-12-4b-on-fighter-jets/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belinda Au Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 It's lucky we have lots of good infrastructure and public transport everywhere, full employment and access to education and healthcare for all who need it otherwise this proposed expenditure would look really bad. :laugh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VERYSTORMY Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Oh yeah, we need all these flighter aircraft in case the Kiwis start lobbing sheep at us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Les Patterson Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 It wouldn't be so bad if the F35 wasn't basically an overpriced,under performing piece of junk....heaven help us if we ever have to go up against the Sukhoi SU-35 or the new T-50. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest40285 Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 @Sir Les Patterson you would think they would have advisors on which is the best plane, or is it all about price mate ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest66881 Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 @Mattw it's all about sucking cockadoodle doo mate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sustain Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Oh yeah, we need all these flighter aircraft in case the Kiwis start lobbing sheep at us Yeah rub it in At least you have a airforce:daydreaming: Guess we could borrow some skyhawks from Malaysia :shocked: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Les Patterson Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 (edited) @Sir Les Patterson you would think they would have advisors on which is the best plane, or is it all about price mate ? Defence procurement has always had problems with many purchases over the years......they have advisors but it seems in many cases they don't listen to what the people at the coal face want. The tank replacement was a glaring example.....the Army wanted the Leopard 2 as a replacement for their Leopard 1 tanks but what did the Howard Govt. do.......bought second hand American Abrams.....a special deal from Dubya for his mate Johnny........no range on internal fuel, too big, too heavy (they even had to buy new tank transporter as the ones they had were too small).......at times the buying of defence equipment is a complete cluster f##k in this country. We had the best Long Range Strike Bomber ever made (my beloved Pig) but we retired them prematurely.....the Super F18.s cannot and never will match the F111's capability. Myself like many others still think that a large scale refurbishment would have been better and cheaper. Edited April 23, 2014 by Sir Les Patterson addition Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 The Yanks have to come to our rescue anyway under the terms of ANZUS. But how long will it take them to get here may be the issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Les Patterson Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 The Yanks have to come to our rescue anyway under the terms of ANZUS. But how long will it take them to get here may be the issue. There is no written obligation that they will/ would under the terms of the ANZUS Treaty come to our assistance if the sh!t really hit the fan.......their national interests will always come first. .......actually read the ANZUS Treaty you will be surprised what it doesn't do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Well an attack on any one of us is deemed an attack on all isn't it ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Les Patterson Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Well an attack on any one of us is deemed an attack on all isn't it ? Actually no, as I said US interests will always override everything, I actually read the Treaty many years ago and it is full of a lot of it's, but's, maybe's and whatever's .......I certainly wouldn't class it as an iron clad guarantee. I know when I was flying the Pig there was certainly talk amongst us crew that nukes would be supplied by the Yanks if needed, don't know if it was true but it was a good rumour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasepom Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Is anyone really gonna launch an attack against Australia? Everyone loves us !!! As for Abbott his credibility drops by the day. Big spending on defence while making cuts to welfare, sounds like a vote winner. Oops too late the elections over. Damn we voted for the wrong guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArthurPendragon Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 It wouldn't be so bad if the F35 wasn't basically an overpriced,under performing piece of junk....heaven help us if we ever have to go up against the Sukhoi SU-35 or the new T-50. Here is my humble opinion on this topic. The SU35 and SU30 are 4+ generation aircrafts and the T-50 PAKFA is the fifth generation aircraft which is still having development problems and is way behind schedule compared to F35. But the proliferation of cheap but capable fighter planes in the neighbourhood would have forced us to select this plane. F-35 is a radical new design and as with any new aircraft, there were budget overruns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArthurPendragon Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Is anyone really gonna launch an attack against Australia? Everyone loves us !!! As for Abbott his credibility drops by the day. Big spending on defence while making cuts to welfare, sounds like a vote winner. Oops too late the elections over. Damn we voted for the wrong guy. Its capability of the neighbours that will drive a defence policy. As intent change and when things get hot, we can't raise our capabilities suddenly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasepom Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Not being aware of our neighbours capabilities is this strategic spending or possibly a show of force ? I'm not military minded so interested to why the F-35 was selected if there are existing capable fighters out there with cheaper operational costs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Les Patterson Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Here is my humble opinion on this topic.The SU35 and SU30 are 4+ generation aircrafts and the T-50 PAKFA is the fifth generation aircraft which is still having development problems and is way behind schedule compared to F35. But the proliferation of cheap but capable fighter planes in the neighbourhood would have forced us to select this plane. F-35 is a radical new design and as with any new aircraft, there were budget overruns. it is still not a good and capable aircraft......Australia needed if anything the F22 Raptor but the Yanks won't sell it........I would still stack a 1960's F111 up against anything today on a long range interdiction strike. My Nav could put a 1000kg smart bomb through your front door on any given day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasepom Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 I think you're right Les. If the following article is anything to go by, the F35 doesn't stack up - http://www.ausairpower.net/jsf.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beach pig Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Sir les what about the euro fighter it would of been a good wicket for baa in aus and jobs all round.memory tells me though that the euro fighter is just an air to air fighter,is this new plane a air and ground attack fighter .bring back the jump jet harrier that was class.i was at southport airshow sometime back and the harriers where there .i can understand why the argies surrended now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Les Patterson Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 I think you're right Les. If the following article is anything to go by, the F35 doesn't stack up - http://www.ausairpower.net/jsf.html unfortunately it's going to be a very expensive exercise in mediocrity....I wonder what the Royal Navy knucks will think of the F35 when they get the Naval VTOL version.....I hope for the UK's sake it is better than the land based version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambethlad Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 I thought we were broke and going to have to cut benefits to pensioners and the poor? And what about middle class welfare? Paying woman up to $70,000 to have a baby must be part of Tony's dream of reviving the big catholic family. Then again he has always been an opponent of abortion and birth control. Lucky he is a papist - he can always go to confession and receive absolution for his lies and sins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Les Patterson Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Sir les what about the euro fighter it would of been a good wicket for baa in aus and jobs all round.memory tells me though that the euro fighter is just an air to air fighter,is this new plane a air and ground attack fighter .bring back the jump jet harrier that was class.i was at southport airshow sometime back and the harriers where there .i can understand why the argies surrended now. the Euro Fighter (Typhoon) from what I gather is an absolute beauty......the Luftwaffe in war games against the F22 raptor had a high proportion of kills.....IMO the Typhoon would have been a preferable option......but only as a fighter.....Australia needs a bomber (to replace the Pig as well)......this is the role the "multi role Fighter" (F15 Strike Eagle for example) is supposed to fill. However it is the "Jack of all trades,master of none" scenario. The F22 would probably be able to achieve this but as I said the Yanks won't sell it (not even to us). There is no specific long range, low level, interdiction strike bomber in the current Western armoury except for the B1 Lancer which again the Yanks won't sell.....the Russians have the Su-35 but even that is multi role......the Yanks are supposedly developing the NGB (Next generation Bomber) but it is years away and maybe like the F22 they will not sell it and maybe we couldn't afford it. Oh if only we had updated F111s. The Harrier, particularly the American AV8 version (due to it's redesigned wing) was a great aeroplane.....but it was still a subsonic, short range attack aircraft (the RN hope to use as a Harrier replacement the F35 VTOL version).........great as a shipborne attack aircraft but that is the limits of it's capability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasepom Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 I thought we were broke and going to have to cut benefits to pensioners and the poor? And what about middle class welfare? Paying woman up to $70,000 to have a baby must be part of Tony's dream of reviving the big catholic family. Then again he has always been an opponent of abortion and birth control. Lucky he is a papist - he can always go to confession and receive absolution for his lies and sins. How anyone can be against abortion AND birth control is beyond me. Birth control leads to less abortions don't ya know. Mind you nothing Tony says or does makes any sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasepom Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 (edited) unfortunately it's going to be a very expensive exercise in mediocrity....I wonder what the Royal Navy knucks will think of the F35 when they get the Naval VTOL version.....I hope for the UK's sake it is better than the land based version. I hope so too. The Sea Harriers was unproven until it was deployed during the Falklands Conflict. Turned out to be a formidable aircraft with only 20 Harriers they managed to defeat a number of enemy Mirages without loss patrolling the skies with authority. Edited April 23, 2014 by jasepom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Les Patterson Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 this sort of sums it up http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/liberal-mp-dennis-jensen-attacks-joint-strike-fighter-order-as-a-dud-decision-20140423-zqy6a.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.