Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Bullockist wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Australia ("51st State")???

o.O

I had a similar reaction whembly , although due to my anger my forehead almost made contact with the back of my monitor. 51st state? feth me being taken for granted like that statement implies is why Australia REALLY needs to have a strong look at it's foreign policy.

You took it the wrong way mate, it wasnt meant to imply being taken for granted by any means, nor was it mwant to imply that you're a vassal state or anything of the sort. Again, just another way of saying that the US and Australia have a very close relationship.... Long live Australmerica (or was it Americalia?).

I am probably taking it completely the wrong way, but i still think calling Australia the 51st state of America does definitely imply a definite vassal status. The actions of previous governments and the soon to be actions of the current Australian government will add to this perceived status.

I don't even want to start on the abomination of Americalia... the sooner it dies the better.

 djones520 wrote:
I love working with the Aussies. We have an RAAF member in my unit, and his accent just makes my heart melt.

There is nothing worse than going out in to the wide world for the first time, being surrounded by people from all over the world, and then hearing another Australian talk - "we sound like that?!"

chaos0xomega wrote:
A-10 pilot recorded a gun-kill on an Iraqi helo during the Gulf War (I actually had the honor of meeting the pilot in question, really cool dude)

I don't doubt it.. Not what I consider air-to-air, though. Helos don't exactly present much of a challenge. We've hit them - while airborne - with bombs before.

I'm not convinced. History has shown that defensive systems have evolved to keep pace with offensive systems pretty handily. Besides that, as I understand it, the F-15 is currently capable of doing that same over-the-shoulder trick (or at least thats what the Eagle drivers down at Langley led me to believe), was it really necessary to spend billions (trillions?) on the F-35 then?

You've been misled, then. Nobody can shoot over the shoulder at the moment. Look into the F-35's EOTAS. It's impressive, for a number of reasons.

I don't disagree with you, but that doesn't mean I'm 100% with you either. The idea that "no one will ever know you were there" sounds good, but I'm not convinced that stealth-tech is sufficiently future proof to give us that advantage past the end of this decade. The technology to track an F-22 and an F-35 already exists, we know this because LockMart (amongst others no doubt) developed just that type of radar system.

No, not really. You spot F-22s when they light up their AESA, which is sadly not as good as it could be. If they stay dark, they're extremely difficult to find unless they're very, very close. If they're very, very close, you're already dead. However, the F-35 has an answer to that.

The A-10 can take a hell of a lot more incoming fire than an F-35 can. It also IS a workhorse that can generate sorties at a much higher rate than the F-35 can. It can also "go slow", which as it turns out, has made it a great bird for escorting CSAR helo's (much like the Skyraiders back in Vietnam). Those qualities ALSO give the A-10 a significant advantage over the F-16 and the F-35 (let alone the added benefit of having a sexy, sexy, tank-busting minigun with a plane strapped to it) the idea that the F-35 can effectively fill the role of the A-10 is along the same vein of thinking that comes down from Air Force brass every time they try to get rid of the thing.

The A-10's much mythologized, but in truth it's no more effective than anything else that's been doing air-to-ground gunnery. It can withstand punishment, but it's better not to be hit at all. It's not an aircraft we can send into hostile airspace. There's absolutely zero question about this. SAMs built in the 50s will have no trouble spiking it. It's perfectly adequate for conflicts where there is zero ground-to-air or air-to-air threat, but we can find much cheaper alternatives for that kind of work - which is why the Air Force is looking at far less costly prop-driven aircraft.

I don't know what you mean by referring to its ability to "go slow," either. I assure you the F-35's plenty capable of staying aloft at 200 knots.

But with the presence of a Growler, which as I understand it basically puts up a nice little bubble of broad-spectrum electronic 'feth you' to anything that might threaten another aircraft, was the F-35's VLO/stealth capability really necessary?

Absolutely. The fewer planes you need to include in a strike package, the better. The Growler isn't the first EW aircraft we've ever designed, so that question's a bit like saying, "Hey, we already have Prowlers or Wild Weasels, why bother?" The Q Package strike from '91 is your answer.

I also want to point out, in reference to the A/C version (because its truly irrelevant to the B), when you say "loaded for bear" unless I've been mislead, using the external racks in any which way, shape, or form, completely neutralizes any benefit that might be derived from all that lovely stealth capability, meaning you're relying solely on the internal bays, which offer an extremely limited air-to-air payload.

The F-35 will be capable of carrying eight AMRAAMs in its internal bay. That's hardly a limited air-to-air payload. All you do, see, is put racks on the internal hardpoints, with two AIM-120s on each rack. They've already tested them. Works fine, and provides an absolute monster that nobody's going to want to fight, given all its other advantages.

Here's the thing about the F-35; it's years away from being operational. It's extremely expensive. Its procurement process was arguably one of the worst in history. The general public is feeding on information on it that's a couple years out of date at best. Much of what makes it amazing is difficult to understand for people who don't fly fighters. It's not going to set any speed records, and it's not going to be doing all the fancy post-departure maneuvering that the F-22 or the new Flankers do at air shows. It's a very easy target for people who don't understand the way it was designed to fight. The best analogy I've heard is that trying to explain the F-35 would be like trying to explain the B-17 to someone who only knew about World War I bombers. He'd say, "You idiots, there's no open cockpit. How's the pilot supposed to throw bombs out of the aircraft?!"

What any of this has to do with China flexing its nascent military muscle, I don't know.

Bullockist wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Australia ("51st State")???

o.O

I had a similar reaction whembly , although due to my anger my forehead almost made contact with the back of my monitor. 51st state? feth me being taken for granted like that statement implies is why Australia REALLY needs to have a strong look at it's foreign policy.

Dude... we don't take you for granted. o.O

We fething love the Aussies. Don't ever forget that man.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 sebster wrote:

Bullockist wrote:
I had a similar reaction whembly , although due to my anger my forehead almost made contact with the back of my monitor. 51st state? feth me being taken for granted like that statement implies is why Australia REALLY needs to have a strong look at it's foreign policy.

It's a tough issue, to be honest. On the one hand, the idea that our unquestioning support for US actions gets us pretty much zero recognition among the general US population. I mean, just read dakka "oh us poor Americans go it alone in all these conflicts" is practically a mantra.

Oh stop it. Stoooooooop it. STAAAAAHP!

We love the Aussies. Never forget that.

On the other hand, we actually can't go it alone. Our choices are either to aid the US or to simply not deploy troops overseas. Because we've basically got a handful of glorified rifle companies. And then there's intelligence - the working relationship between Australia and the US on matters of intelligence is extremely close - we simply can't afford to launch our own satellites and so we either find a way to access their's or we do without.

Yep... we like helping our battle-brothers and what ya'll do for us!

 sebster wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
I love working with the Aussies. We have an RAAF member in my unit, and his accent just makes my heart melt.

There is nothing worse than going out in to the wide world for the first time, being surrounded by people from all over the world, and then hearing another Australian talk - "we sound like that?!"

This , so much this. I remember coming back home and hearing some Australian speak " Owyougoin ? I'm orf for a bee-a , you comin?" and thinking jesus i knew we had a weird accent, but that just sounds bad.

Whembly , Americans may like Aussies but it doesn't stop you subsidising farmers and destroying our farmers whilst under a free trade agreement. After that happened I place a lot less value on American agreements.

Bullockist wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
I love working with the Aussies. We have an RAAF member in my unit, and his accent just makes my heart melt.

There is nothing worse than going out in to the wide world for the first time, being surrounded by people from all over the world, and then hearing another Australian talk - "we sound like that?!"

This , so much this. I remember coming back home and hearing some Australian speak " Owyougoin ? I'm orf for a bee-a , you comin?" and thinking jesus i knew we had a weird accent, but that just sounds bad.

Whembly , Americans may like Aussies but it doesn't stop you subsidising farmers and destroying our farmers whilst under a free trade agreement. After that happened I place a lot less value on American agreements.

Your right. I'm gonna go slap the first American I see for being such a dick.

Yknow what Seaward, I conced victory, youve made excelelnt points, and I got nothing left to counter with.

And Ill second/third/fourth it, we love Australians, and the accent is sexy and rugged.... not like them prissy English and Canadian accents ;P

chaos0xomega wrote:
Yknow what Seaward, I conced victory, youve made excelelnt points, and I got nothing left to counter with.

And Ill second/third/fourth it, we love Australians, and the accent is sexy and rugged.... not like them prissy English and Canadian accents ;P

What you talkin aboot?

What's the up roar about....for all we know some old school actor has found steady employment that was right up his alley...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-25144465

The plot thickens.

The Chinese have been placed in an awkward position. With the US sending warplanes through without notifying them, and several commercial airlines saying they will no longer do so either, they're in severe danger of losing face here. Which is something no communist party in any country has ever been happy to tolerate.

The question is how much closer to the brink this one can physically get. I suspect the next step for the Chinese will be to buzz a fighter jet or two past a few airliners sufficiently close to the mainland, and give them flying/landing instructions. They won't be stupid enough to try it with actual military craft, but they can't make this big of a song and dance about a defence ID zone, and then look past everybody blatantly ignoring them.

What was the Navy bird that had a Chinese jet bounce off them?

 Jihadin wrote:
What was the Navy bird that had a Chinese jet bounce off them?

It was a P-3 Orion, way back in early 2001 I think.

Thanks DJ. I couldn't remember if it was like a standard cargo aircraft or an AWAC's aircraft or something. Wait..let's not forget the Russian Mig pilot that downed a SK Airliner to...

 Jihadin wrote:
Thanks DJ. I couldn't remember if it was like a standard cargo aircraft or an AWAC's aircraft or something. Wait..let's not forget the Russian Mig pilot that downed a SK Airliner to...

It was a USN Sub Hunter. Technically a combat aircraft.

I believe that incident was a result of the Chinese pilots stupidity (for which he paid with his life) more then China thumping it's chest.

yup, either chinas gonna shoot stuff down, or just back away slowly.

or just pretend like their air zone is working... i guess thats always an option.

 Jihadin wrote:
Thanks DJ. I couldn't remember if it was like a standard cargo aircraft or an AWAC's aircraft or something. Wait..let's not forget the Russian Mig pilot that downed a SK Airliner to...

I wouldn't to roundly condemn that as a purely Russian thing since a couple years later, the U.S. downed an Indian airliner. Some people I knew that were in India at the time had to claim they were Canadian to avoid being mobbed.

After all those incidents we're not in a shooting war till its One....2nd aircraft....three, four, five......six....seven, eight...well you know. Over a very short period of time

 easysauce wrote:
yup, either chinas gonna shoot stuff down, or just back away slowly.

or just pretend like their air zone is working... i guess thats always an option.

I would say the thing to do would be thank everyone for their restraint to help everyone save face and possibly cool down, then sit the principles in a room to get this gak settled once and for all before it does turn into a shooting war that no one wins.

Bullockist wrote:
Whembly , Americans may like Aussies but it doesn't stop you subsidising farmers and destroying our farmers whilst under a free trade agreement. After that happened I place a lot less value on American agreements.

Everybody always thinks that their poor businesses are being left in the cold and everyone else is getting vast subsidies. The truth is always a lot more complex than that.

Also, a free trade agreement doesn't actually mean that any and all subsidies and tariffs are removed. It just means that the two countries involved have made an agreement that expands free trade in lots of areas, but typically still includes lots of government interference. Our on-going subsidy of electricity production and water supply does not, in fact, breach any of our free trade agreements.

 easysauce wrote:
yup, either chinas gonna shoot stuff down, or just back away slowly.

or just pretend like their air zone is working... i guess thats always an option.

We claim the right to shoot you all down!

…

We're just not going to exercise it right now. But you watch out!

 Jihadin wrote:
After all those incidents we're not in a shooting war till its One....2nd aircraft....three, four, five......six....seven, eight...well you know. Over a very short period of time

Is that our red line, or the world's?

 djones520 wrote:

Bullockist wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
I love working with the Aussies. We have an RAAF member in my unit, and his accent just makes my heart melt.

There is nothing worse than going out in to the wide world for the first time, being surrounded by people from all over the world, and then hearing another Australian talk - "we sound like that?!"

This , so much this. I remember coming back home and hearing some Australian speak " Owyougoin ? I'm orf for a bee-a , you comin?" and thinking jesus i knew we had a weird accent, but that just sounds bad.

Whembly , Americans may like Aussies but it doesn't stop you subsidising farmers and destroying our farmers whilst under a free trade agreement. After that happened I place a lot less value on American agreements.

Your right. I'm gonna go slap the first American I see for being such a dick.

Get it line man... we'd be slapping all day long.

It is Black Friday, so you do have a target rich day

Looks like we have an escalation in conflict.


http://rt.com/news/china-follow-japan-jets-488/

"Chinese fighter jets were scrambled and followed US and Japanese planes that had entered the newly-proclaimed Chinese air defense zone in the disputed area of the East China Sea, Xinhua reports.

Two US surveillance aircraft and 10 Japanese F-15 jets were ‘tailed’ by Chinese pilots on Friday.

China ordered an urgent dispatch of its Su-30 and J-10 fighter jets to an area in the East China Sea after the foreign aircraft “invaded” the air defense zone, they said.

The reported intrusions came in defiance of the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ), established by Beijing last week.

China’s move has triggered outrage from several states in the region and critical rhetoric from the US, as the vast zone covers disputed areas, including the islets claimed by both China and Japan.

Earlier on Thursday, the Chinese Air Force conducted its first air patrol flights over the zone, as Japan and South Korea sent their own military aircraft into the zone's airspace in an act of defiance.

China has stressed its decision to enforce the airspace identification zone - which requires all aircraft flying over or near it to identify themselves - follows common international practices and “is a necessary measure in China’s exercise of self-defense rights.”

No international flights will be affected by the setup of the zone, Chinese Air Force spokesman, Shen Jinke, told Xinhua.

Japan and its US ally blasted the decision as “unacceptable” and rejected the “unilateral” declaration, saying it would create dangerous tension. However, Chinese officials gave a reminder that both countries have long had their own ADIZ, and that the Japanese never discussed theirs with their neighbor.

“If they want it revoked, then we would ask that Japan first revoke its own air defense identification zone and China will reconsider it after 44 years,” China’s Defense Ministry spokesman, Yang Yujun, said in a statement posted on the ministry’s website on Thursday.

While possible action against the zone’s infiltrators has been vaguely defined as “defensive emergency measures,” The Global Times, a Chinese state media newspaper, on Friday called for “timely countermeasures without hesitation,” should Tokyo violate the new ADIZ.

At the same time, the paper suggested China could ignore violations by some other states, including the US. Two US military B-52 bombers flew over the area on Monday without prior notice, with a Pentagon spokesman telling Reuters we “have continued to follow our normal procedures.”

I like how they "invaded" the ADZ, when Japan has long already had it's ADZ in much of that area.

if you look at both chinas, and japans zones, they BOTH come close the others physical landmass.

Japan declared theirs unilaterally too... china just didnt have anyone backing them up when they complained.

not that it matters at all, as by the UN-revokable rule of dibs its only the FIRST person to unilaterally declare something is theirs who gets it.

lots of hate between the two countries, the Chinese people have a lot of hard feelings still from WW2, and I cannot say I blame them. From what I can tell the legit anger has been nothing but flamed by both the communist regime, as well as incidents with the Japanese officials stirring up old WW2 grudges.

I would be suprised if china backs down, they seem like they want to make a point that the US isnt the only one who can just "do stuff" anymore.

they really dont want to be seen as a paper tiger

Regarding Aus in all of this, aren't the current trade deals with China for the minerals coming out of Australian mines worth something like a billion dollars a week?

Regarding this escalating, while this is a wargaming forum that is of course built on foundations of 'what if' scenarios and imagined conflicts which is generally interesting to read, I think the chances of any actual military confrontation (short of the worst kind, that could not possible be ignored) is extremely slim. Read about 'Chimerica', and the way that the economies of the two countries are so closely entwined - it would represent the pinnacle of failure in politics if it did come down to war, and we have to have some faith that the people in charge of great nations have some idea about what they are doing and wouldn't commit such a spectacular own-goal.

Pacific, the economies of various European powers were in many ways more intertwined prior to World War 1 than China and Americas are today, as we all know that wasnt enough to prevent the outbreak of the war, and I doubt that will be the case here, especially in a decade, as domestic manufacturing and re-industrialization are slowly becoming a thing in the US.