Australian Air force chief: PAK FA, J-20 years behind F-35 in development

[dbc]

Australia hardly has a choice apart from buyin overpriced weapons from AMIC.

Sure they have a choice, they choose the French Dassault Mirage III and rejected the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter in 1960.As a matter of fact the RAAF was the largest Mirage III operator between 1968 and 1980.

 

[OrionHunter]

This guy is talking through his hat! Period!

Next....

 

[Kompromat]

Sure they have a choice, they choose the French Dassault Mirage III and rejected the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter in 1960.As a matter of fact the RAAF was the largest Mirage III operator between 1968 and 1980.

Correct, however i am talking about the present day.

 

[dbc]

Correct, however i am talking about the present day.

What has changed? The Australians are very serious about their defense, their defense procurement standards and controls is certified by independent auditors as the best in the world. You claim the Australian purchase of the F-35 is being influenced - why should we believe you? As a forum moderator you should hold yourself to much higher standards, you made a claim please back it up.

For the Australian Air Chief to go out on a limb and defend an unpopular acquisition in parliament is either brave or foolish. Why is he risking his career and distinguished service record for the F-35?

 

[MilSpec]

What has changed? The Australians are very serious about their defense, their defense procurement standards and controls is certified by independent auditors as the best in the world. You claim the Australian purchase of the F-35 is being influenced - why should we believe you? As a forum moderator you should hold yourself to much higher standards, you made a claim please back it up.

For the Australian Air Chief to go out on a limb and defend an unpopular acquisition in parliament is either brave or foolish. Why is he risking his career and distinguished service record for the F-35?

Please shed some light on which auditors "certify" defense procurement standards and controls.

 

[Kompromat]

What has changed? The Australians are very serious about their defense, their defense procurement standards and controls is certified by independent auditors as the best in the world. You claim the Australian purchase of the F-35 is being influenced - why should we believe you? As a forum moderator you should hold yourself to much higher standards, you made a claim please back it up.

For the Australian Air Chief to go out on a limb and defend an unpopular acquisition in parliament is either brave or foolish. Why is he risking his career and distinguished service record for the F-35?

No competetive tendering process was carried out by Harvard govt,for JSF procurement. Harvard took a clean chit from the RAAF chief and joined a program still in its infancy.

The reason i say,that Australia has no choice is because the time to ditch the JSF and start another tender is gone. Not to forget,Julia gets an orgasm as soon as anything American is mentioned.

American corporations along with their lobbies are deeply entrentched in the Australian business,scene including GE and Reytheon. There is a huge outcry to ditch the JSF in Australia but it hardly has a choice except carrying on with a white elephant.

JSF will come to Australia,regardless of how much of a big ripp off it is to the Australian taxpayers including myself.

 

[dbc]

Please shed some light on which auditors "certify" defense procurement standards and controls.

The procurement itself is audited by the Australian National Audit Office which reports to the Australian Parliament. The 'procurement process' is audited by both the ANAO and civilians or independent civilian firms engaged by the Australian Parliament. Process audit may or may not be related to a specific acquisition it audits the steps involved (due diligence) in the acquisition process this includes approval and oversight.

Germany and Australia are the only countries that have strong anti-corruption mechanisms according to the index, with measures in place such as robust parliamentary oversight of defence policy. Nine countries Algeria, Angola, Cameroon, DRC, Egypt, Eritrea, Libya, Syria, and Yemen exhibit critical risk, lacking basic measures such as controls to enable accountability, making institutionalisation of anti-corruption mechanisms in the sector near impossible. South America and Eastern Europe, on the other hand, show lower risk of corruption thanks to strong technical controls in areas such as administration of audits.

The Index bands countries according to their level of risk of corruption. The risk of corruption is determined by the danger and extent of it occurring and by the frequency citizens may face it.



BAND A – Very Low Risk (2 COUNTRIES): Australia, Germany

BAND B – Low Risk (7 COUNTRIES): Austria, Norway, South Korea, Sweden, Taiwan, United Kingdom, United States

BAND C – Moderate Risk (16 COUNTRIES): Argentina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Czech Republic, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Poland, Slovakia, Spain

BAND D+ - High Risk (15 COUNTRIES): Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cyprus, India, Israel, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Mexico, Nepal, Serbia, Singapore, South Africa, Thailand, Ukraine, UAE

BAND D- - High Risk (15 COUNTRIES) Bangladesh, Belarus, China, Ethiopia, Georgia, Ghana, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Pakistan, Palestine, Russia, Rwanda, Tanzania, Turkey

BAND E – Very High Risk (18 COUNTRIES): Afghanistan, Bahrain, Cote d'Ivoire, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Morocco, Nigeria, Oman, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Uganda, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Zimbabwe

BAND F – Critical Risk (9 COUNTRIES): Algeria, Angola, Cameroon, DRC, Egypt, Eritrea, Libya, Syria, Yemen

Press releases - 70% of governments fail to protect against corruption in the defence sector

 

[dbc]

No competetive tendering process was carried out by Harvard govt,for JSF procurement. Harvard took a clean chit from the RAAF chief and joined a program still in its infancy.

The reason i say,that Australia has no choice is because the time to ditch the JSF and start another tender is gone. Not to forget,Julia gets an orgasm as soon as anything American is mentioned.

American corporations along with their lobbies are deeply entrentched in the Australian business,scene including GE and Reytheon. There is a huge outcry to ditch the JSF in Australia but it hardly has a choice except carrying on with a white elephant.

JSF will come to Australia,regardless of how much of a big ripp off it is to the Australian taxpayers including myself.

Why is it too late? Canada reversed its decision? Why can't Australia? If Australian citizens are convinced its a 'white elephant' and a waste of tax dollars surely the Australian Government can be be forced to reconsider. Australia is an industrial partner in the JSF program so a tender is out of the question. It was an US$150 investment decision made by the Government of Australia, this amount has been more than recovered by work share to the Australian industry, so Australia will come out ahead even if she decides to walk away.

The following Australian suppliers have already benefited from work share in the JSF program.

. Tooling (Marand, Broens, Hofmann Metaltec)
• Support equipment (Varley, Broens)
• Airframe Machined parts (Ferra, Lovitt, Levett)
• Electronic equipment chassis (TAE, AW Bell)
• Weapon adapters (Ferra )
• Actuators for LG and weapons bay doors (Goodrich, Rosebank)
• Composite panels (Quickstep)
• Vertical Tails (Marand)
• Engine Removal & Installation trailers (Marand)
• Engine parts (Levett)
• EW system components (BAES Aust)
• Training courseware (KBR)
• Cockpit Voice Recognition (Adacel)
• Radar Components (Micreo)
• Test Program Sets and Interface Test Adaptors (Partech Systems)

 

[MilSpec]

The procurement itself is audited by the Australian National Audit Office which reports to the Australian Parliament. The 'procurement process' is audited by both the ANAO and civilians or independent civilian firms engaged by the Australian Parliament. Process audit may or may not be related to a specific acquisition it audits the steps involved (due diligence) in the acquisition process this includes approval and oversight.

Let me rephrase, Was the selection process for F35 certified by auditors ( civilians/government ), Were there multiple platforms evaluated for the selection process, if yes can you please tell us which platforms were compared and what were the key criterion for the selection of F35 JSF?

 

[sancho]

Why is it too late? Canada reversed its decision? Why can't Australia? If Australian citizens are convinced its a 'white elephant' and a waste of tax dollars surely the Australian Government can be be forced to reconsider.

They didn't thy are just evaluating other fighters now too and the F35 is in the competition as well. Not that they have a choice anyway, any kid knows that they are dependent on the US weapons and that's why they will continue to buy US fighters. However, they might follow Australias way to order some new F18SHs to replace the older Hornets and lower numbers of F35s instead.

 

[dbc]

Let me rephrase, Was the selection process for F35 certified by auditors ( civilians/government ), Were there multiple platforms evaluated for the selection process, if yes can you please tell us which platforms were compared and what were the key criterion for the selection of F35 JSF?

Compare what? In 2002 when Australia decided to opt in the PAK-FA and J-20 was barely a notion in someones mind. Again, you fail to understand that Australia decided to participate in the development of the Joint Strike Fighter program. The price of admission was a 205m$, Australia is free to walk away or launch a competition for fighter selection. Remember Canada is a Tier 2 partner just like Australia.

 

[MilSpec]

Compare what? In 2002 when Australia decided to opt in the PAK-FA and J-20 was barely a notion in someones mind. Again, you fail to understand that Australia decided to participate in the development of the Joint Strike Fighter program. The price of admission was a 150m$, Australia is free to walk away or launch a competition for fighter selection. Remember Canada is a Tier 2 partner just like Australia.

So what exactly with respect to the F35 JSF program needed certification from auditors?

 

[dbc]

So what exactly with respect to the F35 JSF program needed certification from auditors?

The 205m$ investment needed oversight from the ANAO, Australia is yet to commit to the 100 units it plans to procure.The ANAO describes the investment in the JSF partnership as a modest.

Australia’s partnership in the JSF Program

29. For comparatively modest investments of US$205 million and an estimated US$643 million respectively, Australia has secured Level 3 partner status in the SDD phase and in the production and later phases of the JSF Program.20 This status has enabled Defence to access a comprehensive range of data to inform the acquisition recommendations it has progressively presented to Government; to influence the decision-making within the JSF Program to suit Australia’s operational requirements, through membership of the JSF Executive Steering Board; and to facilitate Australian industry participation in the broader JSF Program. While the partner nation contributions to the SDD and production phases are separate from the costs of Australia’s acquisition of its own F-35 aircraft, in due course Australia will also benefit by acquiring F-35 aircraft at JSF partner nation prices.21

30. Subject to further government decisions, Australia intends to acquire up to 100 F-35 aircraft. In September 2012, the total development and production cost of 100 F-35As, and other costs shared with JSF partner nations, was estimated to be US$13.211 billion (then-year dollars). At the time of the audit, US Department of Defense agencies were conducting a coordinated, in-depth cost analysis of the production program with the aim of achieving increased efficiencies so as to reduce production contract prices.

Audit brochure

They didn't thy are just evaluating other fighters now too and the F35 is in the competition as well. Not that they have a choice anyway, any kid knows that they are dependent on the US weapons and that's why they will continue to buy US fighters. However, they might follow Australias way to order some new F18SHs to replace the older Hornets and lower numbers of F35s instead.

Canada did it, is Canada not dependent on the US?

 

[MilSpec]

@Death.By.Chocolate Thanks for the info

 

[Kompromat]

DBC

It is too late because of its existing commitment to JSF. There isn't any alternative availble yet,except non stealthy air craft ie Typhoons or Rafale. Australia has a weak federal govt right now which cannot make drastic decision and which may put it at the odds with the US.

Australia may cut the order short but won't scrap it. It just cant.IDK if Canada has backed out yet or not.