RAAF farewell's the F-111

[TarJak]

http://www.smh.com.au/queensland/final-flight-for-f111s-20101201-18g9t.html

:salute: 37 years of service.

[Sailor Steve]

Dang. I remember building Revell's model of the Aardvark, in RAAF Vietnam-era camoflage, back in 1968.

[Jimbuna]

Not to dissimilar to the Harrier situation over here you could say....end of an era.

[TLAM Strike]

Truly a great Aircraft. Some don't know but their was a carrier based variant of the F-111 that was passed over in favor of the F-14 Tomcat by the Navy.

Not to dissimilar to the Harrier situation over here you could say....end of an era.

Not really... the 'Vark was actually useful, unlike the Harrier... :O:

Harrier = Air Cover over your own carrier.
Aadvark = Bombing people on the next continent.

[darius359au]

Truly a great Aircraft. Some don't know but their was a carrier based variant of the F-111 that was passed over in favor of the F-14 Tomcat by the Navy.



Not really... the 'Vark was actually useful, unlike the Harrier... :O:

Harrier = Air Cover over your own carrier.
Aadvark = Bombing people on the next continent.

The F-111 here had the tail hooks for carrier landings ,there was a couple of times where they set up the arrester cables on the main runway at Amberly to stop them when there was a problem.

[TLAM Strike]

The F-111 here had the tail hooks for carrier landings ,there was a couple of times where they set up the arrester cables on the main runway at Amberly to stop them when there was a problem.

Taking off would be a problem (unless they fitted it with a JATO- its been done with planes bigger than the 'Vark), gear isn't configured for it and its not been painted with special paint that resists salt water.

Probably the hook was for landing if the wings jammed in the delta configuration.

[krashkart]

The original design was to be carrier-based before it was deemed too heavy. Then it was put into attack and EW roles. One of my favorite combat jets. I'd be sad to see it go from the Aussie's care, but home plate lost her Spark 'Varks to the boneyards some time in the 90's. Been somewhat empty since. Never once got to see one fly. :cry:

[Platapus]

I am still trying to get past "farewell's" :doh:

Turning a noun into a verb by adding a possessive? :shifty::nope:

[bookworm_020]

Always remember seeing a dump and burn at the Richmond Airshow in the 80's. Was banned is the US, but was the "Pig"s party trick here.

Also remember them screaming over our house with full afterburner to attack Butterworth airbase in Malaysia when my parents worked for the RAAF in the early 80's. Something you never forget!:rock:

[krashkart]

Always remember seeing a dump and burn at the Richmond Airshow in the 80's. Was banned is the US, but was the "Pig"s party trick here.

Also remember them screaming over our house with full afterburner to attack Butterworth airbase in Malaysia when my parents worked for the RAAF in the early 80's. Something you never forget!:rock:

You bastard! :wah:

[TarJak]

I am still trying to get past "farewell's" :doh:

Turning a noun into a verb by adding a possessive? :shifty::nope:
Never cared much for that grammar stuff, me.:O:

[TarJak]

Always remember seeing a dump and burn at the Richmond Airshow in the 80's. Was banned is the US, but was the "Pig"s party trick here.

Also remember them screaming over our house with full afterburner to attack Butterworth airbase in Malaysia when my parents worked for the RAAF in the early 80's. Something you never forget!:rock:

You bastard! :wah:
Seen the dump and burn a couple of times. I remember the 1988 bicentennial celebration over the harbour bridge and opera house right on dusk. Really a sight to see.

This one's from Brisbane but it gives a good idea of what it looked like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrhmwP7SofA&feature=fvw

[krashkart]

Seen the dump and burn a couple of times. I remember the 1988 bicentennial celebration over the harbour bridge and opera house right on dusk. Really a sight to see.

This one's from Brisbane but it gives a good idea of what it looked like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrhmwP7SofA&feature=fvw

Thank you so much. :up:

[TarJak]

NP. This ones a bit better I think: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx2Nw4MkBQU&feature=related

[Jimbuna]

Not really... the 'Vark was actually useful, unlike the Harrier... :O:

Harrier = Air Cover over your own carrier.
Aadvark = Bombing people on the next continent.

Nope...I was talking in the context of what each aircraft meant to both respective countries as well as the stirling service they gave :DL

In fact the Harrier gave a lot more in terms of usage during times of conflict....Falklands, Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Jimbuna]

NP. This ones a bit better I think: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx2Nw4MkBQU&feature=related

A beautiful sight mate :yeah:

[TLAM Strike]

Nope...I was talking in the context of what each aircraft meant to both respective countries as well as the stirling service they gave :DL I know, I just like busting the balls of all our resident Harrier lovers.

In fact the Harrier gave a lot more in terms of usage during times of conflict....Falklands, Iraq and Afghanistan. Now that's debatable. Just in number of conflicts the both are fairly equal; Vietnam and SE Asia, Operation El Dorado Canyon, Desert Storm, and Bosnia (EF-111). However Vietnam's air war was on a scale only duplicated in Desert Storm.

If you compare their first combat operations the F-111 flew 4,000 missions with only six losses. I know the FAA lost 6 Sea Harriers in the Falklands but I doubt they flew anything close to 4,000 missions, it would probably be a couple wars before they reached that.

In the Gulf war 84 F-111s dropped 80% of the LGBs employed and had the highest success rate of any Coalition aircraft (3.2 to 1).

[krashkart]

NP. This ones a bit better I think: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx2Nw4MkBQU&feature=related

Yyyeeeaaahhh baby! That's good entertainment. :haha:

[Oberon]

Damn, that's a shame, the F-111s are nice birds, and the dump and burn is just spectacular.

I haven't seen the Harrier do displays, she used to come up to Lowestoft and perform there...and then this happened:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgo2hOYhFW4

And they stopped bringing her... :damn:

Still, I got to see two Harriers fly over the other day nice and low heading out to sea, so that's my farewell moment for them I think.

Oi, and TLAM, hush you, Harriers are lovely birds, MDD wouldn't have nicked them if they didn't think so. :O: Ok, so there were some big setbacks in the initial development, particularly in the engine, including but not limited to, a lone unmanned Harrier trying to defect to the GDR, and another one getting stuck at a 75 degree angle on take-off, bending its nose point, and scaring the pilot enough to make him eject...unfortunately horizontally into a tree, breaking his neck. However, it was better than the Hummingbird and VAK 191B. :O::O:

[Oberon]

http://i602.photobucket.com/albums/tt104/vor033/Australian%20Defence%20Forces/9809c2da.jpg

http://i602.photobucket.com/albums/tt104/vor033/Australian%20Defence%20Forces/7101cdbc.jpg

http://i602.photobucket.com/albums/tt104/vor033/Australian%20Defence%20Forces/04b0e9fc.jpg

[krashkart]

http://i602.photobucket.com/albums/tt104/vor033/Australian%20Defence%20Forces/04b0e9fc.jpg

That is a rockin' picture. :salute:

Happy with new wallpaper :D

[TLAM Strike]

http://i602.photobucket.com/albums/tt104/vor033/Australian%20Defence%20Forces/7101cdbc.jpg



This is why US made bombers don't carry a tail gun like Russian bombers... our planes fart napalm...

[krashkart]

This is why US made bombers don't carry a tail gun like Russian bombers... our planes fart napalm...

They swiped my chili recipe. :hmmm:

[THE_MASK]

I went to every amberly airshow and lots of riverfire so they will be missed by me .

[Oberon]

This is why US made bombers don't carry a tail gun like Russian bombers... our planes fart napalm...

Reminds me of the Stukas in IL2... :hmmm:

[krashkart]

Reminds me of the Stukas in IL2... :hmmm:

Haven't played IL2, but the Stukas in BoB II can't stand up to anything. :-?

[TarJak]

Reminds me of the Stukas in IL2... :hmmm:
And just about all the Japanese planes.:D

[Oberon]

Haven't played IL2, but the Stukas in BoB II can't stand up to anything. :-?

Generally the Stukas in IL2 tend to burst into flame after a few good hits, does make you wonder if it was a Junkers/Mitsubishi joint effort in Olegs world... :yep:

[krashkart]

Generally the Stukas in IL2 tend to burst into flame after a few good hits, does make you wonder if it was a Junkers/Mitsubishi joint effort in Olegs world... :yep:

OIC :haha:

How is IL2 overall? Have heard about it before but tended toward a Cold War sim at the time.

[TarJak]

With mods that you can't talk about here it's like SH3 + GWX and then some.

[TLAM Strike]

NVM. Moved to its own thread...

[Sailor Steve]

Are you familiar with the Flight Sim forum?
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=216

[TLAM Strike]

D'oh. Forgot about that.

Oh well its late and I just got off work, my brain is all a mess...

[Sailor Steve]

Now you know how I feel all the time. :doh:

[TarJak]

That's why we get along so well:doh:

[heartc]

The F-111 here had the tail hooks for carrier landings ,there was a couple of times where they set up the arrester cables on the main runway at Amberly to stop them when there was a problem.

Plenty of military jets have tailhooks, even though they're not Navy, like for example the F-104, F-15, F-16, F-22 etc.
What you described above is a standard emergency procedure and not limited to the 'Vark.

The tail hook is used with all these jets when something goes wrong during take off or landing, like, engine failure (take off), hydraulics failure (brakes), gear configuration errors, icy runways, or the drag chute cannot be used because of the crosswind component exceeding the drag chute limit etc.

There will be a barrier / cables of some sort being set up or activated on the runway which the airplane is supposed to run into or get "hooked" by.

Like this F-16:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jCNc8FnK6c

[Jimbuna]

I know, I just like busting the balls of all our resident Harrier lovers.

Now that's debatable. Just in number of conflicts the both are fairly equal; Vietnam and SE Asia, Operation El Dorado Canyon, Desert Storm, and Bosnia (EF-111). However Vietnam's air war was on a scale only duplicated in Desert Storm.

If you compare their first combat operations the F-111 flew 4,000 missions with only six losses. I know the FAA lost 6 Sea Harriers in the Falklands but I doubt they flew anything close to 4,000 missions, it would probably be a couple wars before they reached that.

In the Gulf war 84 F-111s dropped 80% of the LGBs employed and had the highest success rate of any Coalition aircraft (3.2 to 1).

No problem about the ball busting :DL but your reference toward the number of missions flown in combat is about those flown by the Aussies, yes?

Or are we straying away from the respective comparator countries (UK and Austaralia) again? :hmmm:

[TarJak]

No problem about the ball busting :DL but your reference toward the number of missions flown in combat is about those flown by the Aussies, yes?

Or are we straying away from the respective comparator countries (UK and Austaralia) again? :hmmm:
I think he's talking about US missions and or both US and AU missions?

[Jimbuna]

I think he's talking about US missions and or both US and AU missions?

So do I....you ain't got enough gas to complete that many missions :DL

Mind, neither do we now :-?

[TLAM Strike]

So do I....you ain't got enough gas to complete that many missions :DL

Mind, neither do we now :-?

That's why we are always going to war... to get the gas to go to war...

... wait.... :-?


:O:

[krashkart]

That's why we are always going to war... to get the gas to go to war...

... wait.... :-?


:O:

We don't need war for that... just a good tamale pie. :salute:

http://www.billsrecipeideas.net/Tamale%20pie.jpg