Admin Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 In the Media section today: http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/australia-likely-to-acquire-sixth-c-17-365095/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultralights Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 i wouldnt say its $300M wasted, when they are put to good use serving australia, whats a waste is giving $100M worth of refurbished Hercs to Indonesia just to say sorry to them for some strange reason, you would almost thing we need permission off our regional neighbours to do anything in our own country now.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Communications Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Actually the C-17 is a awesome aircraft and with a country the size of ours and for transporting relief for disaster and humanitarian situations also troop and equipment movement. The travesty was the Chinook swap. We should also have great heavy lift capability for similar reasons and the versatility of being a help. I think we gave the yanks 13 and got back 6...The blackhawks just don't cut the mustard. Don't get me started on the JSF waste of money though Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultralights Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 yep, the C17 has been the wisest choice of aircraft the bureaucrats in canberra have made! we use them constantly to move the military helicopter fleet all over the country, and not to mention keeping supply lines open to Afghanistan. even the F18 Hornets have been transported in them. not to mention the work they did last Feb in QLD during the flood disaster. just dont mention the sea sprite, or now the MRH90 debacle unfolding as we speak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 The irony was that the RAAF as I understood it didnt ask for the C17, rather the Government of the day, under Howard said.....Your having them, we need them and we need them now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 iI wouldnt worry too much about another C 17.If looked after the jet will last 50 years.300 million is cheap.The trouble is, is that there current aircraft are doing alot of work.The RAAF will welcome a new jet.From what I have read in Australian Aviation.They where, in the near future going to have problems with a couple of jets running into Deep level maintenance at a similar time.That is the problem of operating a small QTY of jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 LS-with all due respect, a second hand Turbine powered Abrahams will SH!T all over our old leopard tanks.The down side is that they weigh about 60 Tonnes.If I was a crew member in a tank.The Abrahams would be my first choice.They have been refurbished.As the military budget goes C17 aircraft do not cost alot of money to buy or maintain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 when was the last time the ADF was in a tank battle? with the rise of drone technology most of these weapon systems are redundant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 you could be right mate.The thing is, we have soldiers at war.They dont decide where they go.Public servants make that decision.I just want the best equipment available to keep them alive. ( they dont get thet best BTW)The MI battle tank we have bought, where totally rebuild from the ground up.It is the best Main battle Tank in the world today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 when was the last time the ADF was in a tank battle? with the rise of drone technology most of these weapon systems are redundant. Indeed, and to take that logic to its natural conclussion, when was the last time we were in an aerial battle, or a sea battle...ergo all airforce and naval assets are clearly a waste of money and time. Dont use any tanks in afganistan cause the taliban will get them with their drone technology, or maybe their killer satelitte technology, failing that a roadside improvised bomb or a mustaphfa with an RPG left over from the soviet folly would be next down their technology tree....... The problem with a properly equiped defence force is that it makes the other guy think twice...or more. Hence if nothing happens then it was clearly a waste. From my perspective best we have it and let those among us with mental capacities well in excess of mine bemoan the expenditure, rather than the opposite occuring. I accept that the rationale above is a gross simplification, but hey, a gross simplifaction is always better than a gross stupidity IMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Talking of gross stupidity, what credible evidence do yo have that Australia is in danger of attack of invasion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andys@coffs Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Talking of gross stupidity, what credible evidence do yo have that Australia is in danger of attack of invasion? Well none of course, we all know that the right thing to do is to not have any defence force until about 30 minutes before they come ashore. At 30 minutes you take out your "In case of emergcy inflate defence force cards" and start huffing and puffing..... More seriously what evidence, that sound enough to bet a nation on, do you have that there arent! After all, last time I checked it was pretty rare that someone who felt the need to start a war, took out full page adds in advance of the fact. Given that thwe " there is, or isnt any evidence" question can never be answerred with surity, then the historic approach, and one I agree with is be prepared. Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now