Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Poor Mr. Smith's Plan B for the F-35 is a Plan F

Smith's plan-B for the F-35 is a failure.

The Boeing sales force is licking their chops. They can almost taste the next order from Australia for more Super Hornets.

As usual, the quality of the news reporting on this topic is near copy-paste and shallow. So, I will do the work of the lazy slobs and fill in the blanks.

The poorly advised and under-briefed Defence Minister has drawn a line in the sand over the F-35 debacle. Sometime in 2012 is D-Day.

The "B" in Smith's "plan-B" is for bad. Both the Super Hornet and the F-35 will be obsolete against emerging threats in the Pacific Rim. With that, the Super Hornet is superior in every possible war-fighting metric compared to the F-35; simply because the power of the F-35 exists only in PowerPoint.

As we have seen the tired boiler-plate quotes about the "plans" from Defence before, there isn't much surprise. There was a "buffer" built into the schedule and time. "Thank goodness we are looking at the less complicated CTOL F-35A" and so on. All of it is misinformation.

There is a bold-faced lie too. Years ago, when Defence briefed this mess, it was specifically stated that if the F-35 wasn't "suitable", things would start over with a competition for the next fighter purchase.

(source-2004 Defence briefing)

Yet, that just is not so is it? All the pretend Defence strategy people just assume the Super Hornet is the plan-B. Defence has failed to prove that the F-35 is suitable.

And, such a huge decision based on "partial information" demonstrates incompetence.

Are we paying out all this money to have a taxpayer supported flying club or a potent air force? Given what I have seen over the years, my vote is "flying club".


Goldeel1 said...

Ok ,WTF!

"An obvious plan B", Smith says. Since when?

For years we have been told that there was no plan B, no need for a plan B only plan A. Right up until recent months and weeks both the minister and the various incoming/outgoing CDF's and CAF's have told us it wasn't necessary or even planned. The same story we have heard for years.

Suddenly Smith announces that there actually is a plan B and that its obvious. Almost as if he is saying "oh what didn't know or were you not listening? Of course there is an alternative, we told you that all along"

These people are either schizophrenic or habitual liars, or both. And apparently we dont even need to make an appraisal of the choices because "its obvious" that the Super Hornet is the right choice.

Why should we trust anything they say or their judgement competence? For nearly 10 years they have rammed the F-35 down the throats of anyone who was even remotely listening, despite there being no publicly known evaluation ever undertaken or even considered necessary of any possible contenders. Now that reality is starting to seep in we are being told that there is suddenly an alternate as if it was always there.

This latest statement proves that we can trust nothing they have told us. We need to start pressing for real answers and competent evaluations and leadership. Otherwise they simply dont deserve our tax money or trust.

Anonymous said...

Still wondering why Plan-G (the "G" stands for Gripen NG, by the way) isn't in the offing.


Atticus said...

One of Houstons and Gumleys major legacys.
What a bright bunch.

Anonymous said...

Maybe it's fitting for Angus Houston to be put in charge of organising the celebration to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the first great Australian military disaster, Gallipoli. After all, he's got great experience of overseeing a Great Australian Military Disaster - the years when he was CAF and CDF.

Snorbak said...

Looking back to when we operated the Mirage, if the long term goal for the RAAF is simply a flying club & as such no need for weapons, lets buy Rafale's from the French. (Sarcasm intended)

Anonymous said...

French, don' get it?

Snorbak said...

Meaning, The French refused to provide weapons for the Mirage when we wanted to operate them in Vietnam.

RS said...

The Mirage was not operated in Vietnam. The Sabre was stationed in Thailand for a period and Canberras operated from South Vietnam.
No problem with parts as we manufactured the whole thing.
Not only, that they would not provide spare parts as well.We did make parts of it.
Sweden stopped supplying th Carl Gustav and ammunition.
The French (Mirage 2000)are also taking years to supply parts to the Taiwanese, taking excessive time to overhaul engines etc after pressure from Beijing