Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military
From: gnb@bby.oz.au (Gregory N. Bond)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Mcdonnell-douglas/northrop F/a-18
Message-ID: <1990Aug24.034151.781@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 24 Aug 90 03:41:51 GMT
References: <1990Aug8.030635.26316@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: Burdett, Buckeridge and Young Ltd.
Lines: 21
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: gnb@bby.oz.au (Gregory N. Bond)
>>>>> On 15 Aug 90 03:22:09 GMT, dak@sq.sq.com (David A Keldsen) said:
David> I'd like to point out that the Canadian Forces have drawn the same 
David> conclusion; this was apparently one of the reasons for rejecting the
David> F-20 for DEW-line defense.

The Australian air force also chose F/A-18s over F-16s.  The 2-vs-1
engine argument was prominent, although issues of dual-role and
greater range probably held greater weight.

When it comes down to it, issues like licenced manufacturing, local
content and technology transfer probably had just as much weight with
the pollies.

Greg.
--
Gregory Bond, Burdett Buckeridge & Young Ltd, Melbourne, Australia
Internet: gnb@melba.bby.oz.au    non-MX: gnb%melba.bby.oz@uunet.uu.net
Uucp: {uunet,pyramid,ubc-cs,ukc,mcvax,prlb2,nttlab...}!munnari!melba.bby.oz!gnb