Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 39

Thread: F111 fighters stripped and scrapped

  1. #21
    85 county is offline AULRO Holiday Reward Points Winner!
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    adelaide
    Posts
    2,250
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JDNSW View Post
    Along those lines, the technology put forward by Captain Cochrane for a chemical warfare attack on the port of Brest in 1813 was only declassified in the 1960s......

    But on the other hand, the basic theory behind the Atomic Bomb was published by the US government less than a month after the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima.

    John
    The bomb is a bit like a jet motor
    Very simple when you look at a drawing or read an explanation of how it works, but in practice it is a lot more complicated than that.

    In addition getting the materials to build a bomb is not quite the DIY thing.

    But then again as you said the Basic theory. What was publish amounts to the same as saying, an airplane has 2 wings a motor and a pilot sits in the middle.

    I am not saying it correct but!

  2. #22
    JDNSW's Avatar
    JDNSW is offline RoverLord Silver Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    29,511
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 85 county View Post
    .......

    I am not saying it correct but!
    No, but I know what you mean. Knowing how the bomb works, even in considerable detail does not really help very much - in 1945, the USA was probably the only country with the economic resources to actually implement the technology (something a bit different to theory!). The Manhattan Project, which produced exactly three bombs, was the largest single industrial project ever undertaken (it may still be!). There was no chance of anyone building a bomb without duplicating a lot of the technology that was invented in that project. Today it is much easier, as some cheaper technology has been developed, but it still represents many years of work and huge investments for countries such as China, India, Pakistan (Britain and to a lesser extent France got information from the USA that cut a lot of corners - and so did the USSR, albeit not by intention of the USA).

    Just to give an example of a possible reason why the USA might not want any F-111s lying about - one of the key problems that delayed production was the wing carry-through structure. The problems were finally solved with some very special metallurgy. If one continues to exist, it is possible to analyse the steel it is made from to duplicate the alloy. Something that the USA probably would prefer to keep to themselves.

    News item just now - an F-111 went through Dubbo today on a truck, headed to Point Cook for display.

    John
    Last edited by JDNSW; 25th May 2011 at 05:18 PM. Reason: More information
    John

    JDNSW
    1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
    1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Clarkson
    Posts
    51
    Total Downloaded
    0
    when the seppos sold us the F-111s they were single seater aircraft, the australians made them into dual seaters and the eletronics were upgraded for RAAF use and a large majority of the aircraft was aussie engeneered and built, all we basily bought was the frame and chassis.
    they should be spread around the country for display, whats 5 not even 1 for every state snd terratory, what a croc.
    sorry getting carried away this is not 'the soapbox' section i was a loadmaster in the RAAF in the late 90s and i did a bit of work with them.
    the F/A-18s are remarkable aircraft by any speck 20 years ago but as with the F-111 we bought 20yrs old at the time the aussies will make this aircraft truely our own.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    NSW far north coast
    Posts
    17,285
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Galoop View Post
    when the seppos sold us the F-111s they were single seater aircraft, the australians made them into dual seaters and the eletronics were upgraded for RAAF use and a large majority of the aircraft was aussie engeneered and built, all we basily bought was the frame and chassis.

    [snip]
    All F111's have always been a pilot and nav with side by side seating, it was designed that way

    Design phase
    The F-111A and B variants used the same airframe structural components and TF30-P-1 turbofan engines. They featured side by side crew seating in escape capsule as required by the Navy
    General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  5. #25
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    On The Road
    Posts
    30,031
    Total Downloaded
    0
    its special,,,
    "How long since you've visited The Good Oil?"

    '93 V8 Rossi
    '97 to '07. sold.
    '01 V8 D2
    '06 to 10. written off.
    '03 4.6 V8 HSE D2a with Tornado ECM
    '10 to '21
    '16.5 RRS SDV8
    '21 to Infinity and Beyond!


    1988 Isuzu Bus. V10 15L NA Diesel
    Home is where you park it..

    [IMG][/IMG]

  6. #26
    VladTepes's Avatar
    VladTepes is offline Major Part of the Heart and Soul of AULRO Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Bracken Ridge, Qld
    Posts
    16,055
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Galoop View Post
    when the seppos sold us the F-111s they were single seater aircraft, the australians made them into dual seaters and the eletronics were upgraded for RAAF use and a large majority of the aircraft was aussie engeneered and built, all we basily bought was the frame and chassis..
    Poppycock !
    It's not broken. It's "Carbon Neutral".


    gone


    1993 Defender 110 ute "Doris"
    1994 Range Rover Vogue LSE "The Luxo-Barge"
    1994 Defender 130 HCPU "Rolly"
    1996 Discovery 1

    current

    1995 Defender 130 HCPU and Suzuki GSX1400


  7. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Gladstone
    Posts
    1,086
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by VladTepes View Post
    The -G's are nuclear capable (or were, at any rate) not the -C's.

    The USA would be very unlikely to make exceptions on that sort of thing as they won;t want to set any sort of precedent.

    Aust Government stated reason include asbestos risk... so I guess there musn't be an asbestos brake pads on those land rovers they got rid of eh ?
    The C's were delivered with the Nuclear consent panel. We had to cover the things for public display. They were later removed during an avionics update.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Gladstone
    Posts
    1,086
    Total Downloaded
    0
    There are far greater risks in the F111 than asbestos. They have depleted uranium and beriliumn (cant spell it) both these are very toxic to people.

    They also have the dubious honor of killing more of its maintainers than enemies. I think the last thing the Govt wants is civilians crawling around inside the things poisoning themselves.

    Mind you it was ok for them force RAAF techo's into them to be poisoned.

    I spent to many years working on the Pig to miss it. I was helicopter man in an Airforce without helicopters and ended up back in the F111 World.

    I would love the chance to drive a wrecking ball into one.

  9. #29
    VladTepes's Avatar
    VladTepes is offline Major Part of the Heart and Soul of AULRO Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Bracken Ridge, Qld
    Posts
    16,055
    Total Downloaded
    0
    I hardly think there will be too much need for civilains to be crawling around inside an F1-11's fuel tanks in a static exhibit somewhere mate. I think you are overstating the risk. In published reasons as to why they were not going to release these aircraft for display the gov't highlighted asbestos risk but I haven;t see any mention of those others - depleted uranium etc.

    +1 on the fact they didn't worry about the people they forced into those fuel tanks though. Poor bastards.
    It's not broken. It's "Carbon Neutral".


    gone


    1993 Defender 110 ute "Doris"
    1994 Range Rover Vogue LSE "The Luxo-Barge"
    1994 Defender 130 HCPU "Rolly"
    1996 Discovery 1

    current

    1995 Defender 130 HCPU and Suzuki GSX1400


  10. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Gladstone
    Posts
    1,086
    Total Downloaded
    0
    I was one of the poor bastards forced to work in the tanks.

    People have been known to do some pretty silly things in the past and it isn't hard to open the fuel tanks. Do you honestly think the Govt would publicly talk about the depleted uranium?

    There are a wide range of toxic products and metals in the F111 trust me when I say asbestos is the least of the potential hazards.

    F-111s Out of Service

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!