You may be right but knowing politics down this way it could be 3010 ,
There has been some debate, at one time they hinted they would go very soon
but the problem is the new aircraft can't perform all the roles of the F111,
I guess the overall size of Australia brings range capabilities into focus.
however some of the Aussie F111's make for nice subject matter, Also the
Aussie F18,s are getting quite old so quite a lot of change is due in the
coming years, regards JimboD
>> F111's are still in active service with the RAAF regards JimboD
>
> Only for the next 4 years IIRC, as they are being replaced in 2010 by the
> joint development fighter or something to that effect.
>
> I may be wrong on this, mainly because I do not do much in modern air.
Al Superczynski - 12 Jan 2006 05:13 GMT
>...the new aircraft can't perform all the roles of the F111...
That didn't stop the USAF from retiring its F-111s... :(

Signature
Al Superczynski, MFE, IPMS/USA #3795, continuous since 1968
My "From" address is munged - use 'modeleral (at) swbell (dot) net' to respond via email.
Check out my want lists and eBay listings at "Al's Place":
http://www.network54.com/realm/modeleral/
"Build what YOU like, the way YOU want to,
and the critics will flame you every time."
Rich - 17 Jan 2006 12:39 GMT
>>...the new aircraft can't perform all the roles of the F111...
>
> That didn't stop the USAF from retiring its F-111s... :(
My understanding, andd this is a request for additional data from those who
know more, is that the later upgraddes and retoolings, by the Aussies made
it a much better plane for their needs. They were able to use it in a way
the USAF never did. Granted, my info comes from a former RAAF guy, but he
was space command.
Rich
kim - 12 Jan 2006 13:05 GMT
> You may be right but knowing politics down this way it could be 3010 ,
> There has been some debate, at one time they hinted they would go very
> soon but the problem is the new aircraft can't perform all the roles of
> the F111, I guess the overall size of Australia brings range capabilities
> into focus.
I would have thought the F-15 with ferry tanks attached would fulfill the
range requirements? Not ideal I know but then neither is the F-111
(kim)
The Raven - 13 Jan 2006 10:44 GMT
>> You may be right but knowing politics down this way it could be 3010 ,
>> There has been some debate, at one time they hinted they would go very
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> I would have thought the F-15 with ferry tanks attached would fulfill the
> range requirements? Not ideal I know but then neither is the F-111
F-111 is ideal at what it does, keeps the neighbours honest....
It's the only aircraft in the region that has it's capabilities and some of
them are very hard to counter/stop.
F-15E was considered as a possible temporary solution but decided against
because bringing them into RAAF service would have been almost as costly as
bringing in a brand new aircraft. Cost wasn't justifiable for such a
temporary measure, even though we did a similar thing by leasing Phantoms
while the RAAF waited for the F-111 problems to be ironed out.
Replacing the F-111 capabilities (those that are specifically needed) is
argued to be something that could be met by some long range cruise missiles
and evolving UAV technology. Not quite there yet but in a few years that may
not sound so silly.

Signature
The Raven
http://www.80scartoons.co.uk/batfinkquote.mp3
** Now I will bring chaos to the world!