Modelling > Scenarios
Australian continuous building program for combat aircraft
Volkodav:
Just reread the topic and got thinking as I have recently been looking at the Australian shipbuilding plan, i.e. a planned and scheduled continuous build program to create a sustainable industry. Basically Australia initiates a continuous building program for combat aircraft in the early 70s by selecting the Mirage F1 to supplement then replace the Mirage III with surplus IIIs being cascaded to regional allies. The F1 would follow the last of the IIIDs on the production line.
GTX_Admin:
--- Quote from: Volkodav on January 30, 2021, 10:04:34 PM ---Just reread the topic and got thinking as I have recently been looking at the Australian shipbuilding plan, i.e. a planned and scheduled continuous build program to create a sustainable industry. Basically Australia initiates a continuous building program for combat aircraft in the early 70s by selecting the Mirage F1 to supplement then replace the Mirage III with surplus IIIs being cascaded to regional allies. The F1 would follow the last of the IIIDs on the production line.
--- End quote ---
It would depend upon what number of aircraft and what production rate you are talking about in order to make something like that possible.
M.A.D:
--- Quote from: Volkodav on January 30, 2021, 10:04:34 PM ---I have recently been looking at the Australian shipbuilding plan, i.e. a planned and scheduled continuous build program to create a sustainable industry.
--- End quote ---
Would be very interested to know more about your thought process and what you've derived Volkodav, if you wouldn't mind PMing me😯👍
MAD
M.A.D:
--- Quote from: GTX_Admin on January 31, 2021, 01:31:08 AM ---
--- Quote from: Volkodav on January 30, 2021, 10:04:34 PM ---Just reread the topic and got thinking as I have recently been looking at the Australian shipbuilding plan, i.e. a planned and scheduled continuous build program to create a sustainable industry. Basically Australia initiates a continuous building program for combat aircraft in the early 70s by selecting the Mirage F1 to supplement then replace the Mirage III with surplus IIIs being cascaded to regional allies. The F1 would follow the last of the IIIDs on the production line.
--- End quote ---
It would depend upon what number of aircraft and what production rate you are talking about in order to make something like that possible.
--- End quote ---
I would think along the lines of a 50/50 ratio at minimum GTX - 50 x Spey-powered F1 replacing the earliest Mirage IIIO's....then later 50 x Northrop F-18L's replacing the the latter remaining Mirage IIIO's in the early 1980's......🤔😉
MAD
GTX_Admin:
--- Quote from: M.A.D on January 31, 2021, 03:14:19 PM ---I would think along the lines of a 50/50 ratio at minimum GTX - 50 x Spey-powered F1 replacing the earliest Mirage IIIO's....then later 50 x Northrop F-18L's replacing the the latter remaining Mirage IIIO's in the early 1980's......🤔😉
--- End quote ---
Why Spey powered? It would make much more sense to go with the standard SNECMA Atar 9K-50 so as to keep a degree of commonality with the earlier SNECMA Atar 09C in the Mirage IIIs rather than introduce a completely new engine type in the form of the RR Spey that wouldn't be getting used in any other RAAF platform. I would say that one might also up-engine the Mirage IIIs with the Atar 9K-50 but that would undermine the basic premise here.
Re the numbers, one could use the F/A-18A/B production as a basis for comparison:
This would thus result in a production of 50 acft (as you suggest) taking nominally around 3.8yrs to complete and if we therefore allow for around 6yrs to allow for a degree of tooling up/training for each new batch (this may well be optimistic in the real world but one might compensate by assuming a semi trained workforce was already there) and assume say a production commencement around 1975 (for round numbers + one could argue the idea is initiated by the Whitlam Government - let's say the 1975 dismissal did not occur):
The problem with this is that you end up having very expensive production costs plus having to constantly find a new program or else producer at lower rates which increases costs even more and results in a fleet of very wide spread ages etc. Relying on domestic needs just does not make sense for Australia. One has to either export (hard if its's someone else's design in the first place) or accept to being part of a bigger program (e.g. the F-35). This is something Sir Lawrence Wackett clearly identified back in 1972 in his autobiography.
I somewhat addressed this issue in my The French Connection story by increasing production to over 125 jets plus including another 92 export jets plus introducing the Mirage UpGrade (MUG) program to generate work in addition to any 'normal' sustainment activities for industry.
If one were to try for this sort of continuous building program it would be far better to work on a evolutionary style approach so as to reduce change over costs etc and also to maximise investments already made. Thus one might go with the Mirage F.1 in the mid 1970s but then stick with it or derivatives over a longer period rather than introduce completely new, unrelated types.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version