ADF General discussion thread

[ngatimozart]

I haven't seen this one posted here yet, from the 24th, Australia needs a radical expansion of its land-based strike capabilities | The Strategist (aspistrategist.org.au)- it follows the theme from recent posts. There is an article today in the Drive speculating the USAF is looking at a drone to fly with the B21, this is a separate craft not simply using the B21 unmanned. That price tag of nearly a billion dollars a pop for the B21 must be causing indigestion.

Jeez. They're still on that bandwagon. So you buy a crap load of GLCM and say some IRBM and MRBM for good measure. Dig nice holes in the ground to hide them in and stop them from getting sunburnt, melanoma, and eaten by salties. I suppose you could hide them underneath termite mounds. Anyway, all you would be doing is providing fixed georeferenced targets for PLA-RF targeting personnel and software.

 

[Rock the kasbah]

Jeez. They're still on that bandwagon. So you buy a crap load of GLCM and say some IRBM and MRBM for good measure. Dig nice holes in the ground to hide them in and stop them from getting sunburnt, melanoma, and eaten by salties. I suppose you could hide them underneath termite mounds. Anyway, all you would be doing is providing fixed georeferenced targets for PLA-RF targeting personnel and software.

I'm unsure of the alphabet above but my understanding is that even the biggest missile can fit on the back of a semi.
So we may be able to shuffle the deck a little, a bit like that game of finding the ball under the cups. ( which by the way I have never won. And unfortunately for me I have had a few drunken cracks at )

 

[Massive]

Just saw this:

More troops for nuclear submarines, cyber in $38 billion Defence Force expansion

The number of army, air force and navy personnel will rise to 80,000 by 2040 to help Australia face future threats, the Prime Minister said.

www.theage.com.au

Sharing quickly. Yet to examine in detail.

Regards,

Massive

 

[phreeky]

More troops for nuclear submarines, cyber in $38 billion Defence Force expansion

The number of army, air force and navy personnel will rise to 80,000 by 2040 to help Australia face future threats, the Prime Minister said.

www.theage.com.au

The obvious question is the timing given current affairs, however I am going to assume that the plan wasn't quickly thrown together. However was it only now approved given recent events, or does anyone know whether this was always a go-ahead?

I'm glad to see cyber given a mention with the large role it plays these days. I suppose my concerns with cyber however is how much of the countries critical infrastructure is run by various government bodies, local government and contractors, while there is already significant capabilities in the private sector in Australia but I haven't yet seen anywhere near enough integration/coordination across those sectors. I hope to see that increase.

The other thing that stands out to me is that 2040 is 18 years away, so new recruits at the end of that period will be born this year. Recruitment will obviously be a challenge, and that must surely be influenced by the alternative opportunities available to 'kids'. Maybe I'm making this sound simpler than it really is, but a tougher economic climate should present fewer private-sector opportunities and make the military a more desirable career choice. Obviously I'm massively speculating on times ahead.

 

[Julian 82]

The obvious question is the timing given current affairs, however I am going to assume that the plan wasn't quickly thrown together. However was it only now approved given recent events, or does anyone know whether this was always a go-ahead?

I'm glad to see cyber given a mention with the large role it plays these days. I suppose my concerns with cyber however is how much of the countries critical infrastructure is run by various government bodies, local government and contractors, while there is already significant capabilities in the private sector in Australia but I haven't yet seen anywhere near enough integration/coordination across those sectors. I hope to see that increase.

The other thing that stands out to me is that 2040 is 18 years away, so new recruits at the end of that period will be born this year. Recruitment will obviously be a challenge, and that must surely be influenced by the alternative opportunities available to 'kids'. Maybe I'm making this sound simpler than it really is, but a tougher economic climate should present fewer private-sector opportunities and make the military a more desirable career choice. Obviously I'm massively speculating on times ahead.

I recall some def pros have made the point previously that recruitment is not the issue (there are many more people wanting to join the ADF than places available). Lots of capable people are being turned away or being strung out in the recruitment pipeline until places become available. The issue is that there was no funding in place for the additional personnel. This announcement would appear to address this issue.

 

[ngatimozart]

I'm unsure of the alphabet above but my understanding is that even the biggest missile can fit on the back of a semi.
So we may be able to shuffle the deck a little, a bit like that game of finding the ball under the cups. ( which by the way I have never won. And unfortunately for me I have had a few drunken cracks at )

GLCM = Ground Launched Cruise Missile.
IRBM = Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile.
RMBM = Medium Range Ballistic Missile. Which when I think about is an IRBM. I should have used SRBM being Short Range Ballistic Missile.
Finally you have ICBM which is Inter Continental Ballistic Missile.

And no you cannot fire them all from a semi.

 

[the road runner]

The ADF will grow by 18,500 people to around 80,000 people by 2040
Defence workforce to grow above 100,000 | Prime Minister of Australia (pm.gov.au)
So i assume we will add another 20,000 civilian jobs to back defense in the public sector ?


Below is 40 minutes 7 news interview from the PM and the Defense Minister
Facebook Live | Facebook

Its about time the ADF grew .Isn't this the amount of people we had back in the 80s in the ADF when we had a smaller population and smaller budget? 75.000 i think !

 

[Redlands18]

The ADF will grow by 18,500 people to around 80,000 people by 2040
Defence workforce to grow above 100,000 | Prime Minister of Australia (pm.gov.au)
So i assume we will add another 20,000 civilian jobs to back defense in the public sector ?


Below is 40 minutes 7 news interview from the PM and the Defense Minister
Facebook Live | Facebook

Its about time the ADF grew .Isn't this the amount of people we had back in the 80s in the ADF when we had a smaller population and smaller budget? 75.000 i think !

Those numbers only include Defence Civilians who are directly employed by the DOD, on top of that you have those employed by Companies who are contracted to supply Goods and Services etc to the ADF.
The size of the ADF has been around the 60,000 mark(give or take 3-4000) since the late 70s.

 

[STURM]

We could have no more than half a dozen old Tomahawk missiles in inventory and this would make an adversary think very differently to the alternative of none.

It would I feel depend on who that adversarry is. An adversary in South East Asia mAybe but certainly not China which although would be concerned is well placed to withstand the effects of 12 Tomahawks.

If it's land based launchers then an ideal situation would be for the ADF to forward deploys them to a friendly country. Ideally they would be ship and sub launched.

 

[Oldbeagle]

The reality of Australia’s long range strike capability seems indisputable at the moment, despite the intent and promises from both the major political parties, new capability will take a long time to arrive.
New strike capable ships and Submarines for the Navy and missiles for the Army are both long term projects so largely we will be reliant on the R.A.A.F to provide this coverage for the near term. The CJ27 Spartans are a relatively modern asset which are no longer used as a battlefield air-lifter but simply as an HADR asset, an important but not necessarily defence related role and could be retasked. The latest Spartan NG upgrade includes a dedicated maritime patrol variant capable of acquiring targets and launching both anti-ship missiles and anti submarine torpedos. I have no idea of lead times or costs but working with existing Navy and Airforce assets may be a worthwhile addition,
I didn’t post a link as as a newish member with few posts, I believe there is a restriction, so just google Spartan NG at
Leonardo.com

 

[Rock the kasbah]

The reality of Australia’s long range strike capability seems indisputable at the moment, despite the intent and promises from both the major political parties, new capability will take a long time to arrive.
New strike capable ships and Submarines for the Navy and missiles for the Army are both long term projects so largely we will be reliant on the R.A.A.F to provide this coverage for the near term. The CJ27 Spartans are a relatively modern asset which are no longer used as a battlefield air-lifter but simply as an HADR asset, an important but not necessarily defence related role and could be retasked. The latest Spartan NG upgrade includes a dedicated maritime patrol variant capable of acquiring targets and launching both anti-ship missiles and anti submarine torpedos. I have no idea of lead times or costs but working with existing Navy and Airforce assets may be a worthwhile addition,
I didn’t post a link as as a newish member with few posts, I believe there is a restriction, so just google Spartan NG at
Leonardo.com

Cool mate
I bit
But are you inferring that the customer is the ADF ?
Don't get me wrong it looks like a beuty

 

[ngatimozart]

The reality of Australia’s long range strike capability seems indisputable at the moment, despite the intent and promises from both the major political parties, new capability will take a long time to arrive.

I would be careful about throwing words like indisputable around especially where pollies are concerned. They say one thing before an election to get votes and if they win they are then known to do aa totally different thing. Pollies keeping their promises is an oxymoron.

New strike capable ships and Submarines for the Navy and missiles for the Army are both long term projects so largely we will be reliant on the R.A.A.F to provide this coverage for the near term. The CJ27 Spartans are a relatively modern asset which are no longer used as a battlefield air-lifter but simply as an HADR asset, an important but not necessarily defence related role and could be retasked. The latest Spartan NG upgrade includes a dedicated maritime patrol variant capable of acquiring targets and launching both anti-ship missiles and anti submarine torpedos. I have no idea of lead times or costs but working with existing Navy and Airforce assets may be a worthwhile addition,

The C-27J in an RAAF MPA role is probably not a goer for a variety of reasons.

• By removing it from the Battlefield Air Lifter role and limiting to the HADR role, the RAAF is showing its lack of faith in the aircraft.
• The RAAF has the P-8A Poseidon, MQ-4C Triton and MQ-9B SkyGuardian which are used for ASW, ASuW, & C3/4ISR in the maritime domain. The MQ-9B SeaGuardian is also available from General Atomic.
• The RAAF has a very large maritime area to cover and the C-27J may not have the required range and loiter time.
• Is the upgraded C-27J maritime module in service with an other air arm?
  • If so has it reached IOC or preferably FOC yet?
  • The RAAF would not want to be the launch client because that entails a significant amount of risk, especially financial risk.

I didn’t post a link as as a newish member with few posts, I believe there is a restriction, so just google Spartan NG at
Leonardo.com

No restriction on new members posting links.

 

[ASSAIL]

I don’t think the RAAF has lost faith in the C 27 aircraft, rather I think they believe it’s survivability in a hot zone is below their expectation and therefore unsustainable as a “Battlefield Lifter”

 

[old faithful]

Number of problems, the side doors can't be used for Para deployments, as it stresses the airframe apparently. That only leaves ramp exits, really only suitable for free fall deployment, as the drop zone would need to be twice as big as for sim doors.

 

[Oldbeagle]

The C-27J in an RAAF MPA role is probably not a goer for a variety of reasons.

• By removing it from the Battlefield Air Lifter role and limiting to the HADR role, the RAAF is showing its lack of faith in the aircraft.
• The RAAF has the P-8A Poseidon, MQ-4C Triton and MQ-9B SkyGuardian which are used for ASW, ASuW, & C3/4ISR in the maritime domain. The MQ-9B SeaGuardian is also available from General Atomic.
• The RAAF has a very large maritime area to cover and the C-27J may not have the required range and loiter time.
• Is the upgraded C-27J maritime module in service with an other air arm?
  • If so has it reached IOC or preferably FOC yet?
  • The RAAF would not want to be the launch client because that entails a significant amount of risk, especially financial risk.

I would totally agree that it is unlikely that the C-27J will ever appear as an MPA in R.A.A.F colours, specifically as you say because of the risk of being the launch client and associated costs, however I would like to respectively make a couple of points.
The U.S Coast Guard successfully operates C-27J as MPAs
I raised this possibility because of the difficulty in quickly acquiring launch platforms to engage hostile vessels both surface and submarine at range from our shores and as suggested in my original post there are no quick fixes without cost or risk. The P8 Poseidon coupled with Triton gives a great capability, however there are only so many of them and MQ-9B SkyGuardian is not without its critics ( link below). At this stage, without any carrier aircraft, the ability to provide our Naval vessels with aircraft cover as well as our coast line remain vital. The range of the specific maritime patrol variant is not clear but with additional fuel tanks ,12 hour flight duration is possible and in addition the aircraft has air to air refuelling capability.
Finally like ASSAIL I don’t believe the R.A.A.F has lost faith in the airframe but in its ability to operate in contested space, ironically, an ability the NG upgrade may fix. i probably should have put a link to the upgrade in the R.A.A.F thread suggesting it could return to its original role, however I also see advantages in having an expanded Hercules fleet in the long term. I would also love to see these orphans properly employed not join the many other costly defence acquisitions cast to the scrap heap .
Australia has more important things to buy than MQ-9 drones | The Strategist
C-27J Next Generation for tactical support
like

 

[ADMk2]

I would totally agree that it is unlikely that the C-27J will ever appear as an MPA in R.A.A.F colours, specifically as you say because of the risk of being the launch client and associated costs, however I would like to respectively make a couple of points.
The U.S Coast Guard successfully operates C-27J as MPAs
I raised this possibility because of the difficulty in quickly acquiring launch platforms to engage hostile vessels both surface and submarine at range from our shores and as suggested in my original post there are no quick fixes without cost or risk. The P8 Poseidon coupled with Triton gives a great capability, however there are only so many of them and MQ-9B SkyGuardian is not without its critics ( link below). At this stage, without any carrier aircraft, the ability to provide our Naval vessels with aircraft cover as well as our coast line remain vital. The range of the specific maritime patrol variant is not clear but with additional fuel tanks ,12 hour flight duration is possible and in addition the aircraft has air to air refuelling capability.
Finally like ASSAIL I don’t believe the R.A.A.F has lost faith in the airframe but in its ability to operate in contested space, ironically, an ability the NG upgrade may fix. i probably should have put a link to the upgrade in the R.A.A.F thread suggesting it could return to its original role, however I also see advantages in having an expanded Hercules fleet in the long term. I would also love to see these orphans properly employed not join the many other costly defence acquisitions cast to the scrap heap .
Australia has more important things to buy than MQ-9 drones | The Strategist
C-27J Next Generation for tactical support
like

If there is substantially more money to acquire more MPA ‘response’ capability, why would the RAAF not simply seek to acquire more P-8A’s?

 

[John Fedup]

Are the additional MPAs for coast areas watching for smugglers and illegals or are they for hard military patrol? I would think a P-8 is a very expensive piece of kit for the former. A few more P-8s would be nice though.

 

[ADMk2]

Are the additional MPAs for coast areas watching for smugglers and illegals or are they for hard military patrol? I would think a P-8 is a very expensive piece of kit for the former. A few more P-8s would be nice though.

We use P-8A’s now, it is our main dedicated military maritime patrol capability. C-130J’s are also used for search and rescue upon occasion and we have civilian coast-watch aircraft (Surveillance Australia) for the roles you suggest, but are not equipped for military MPA duties. In future we will also have Triton, but I’m not sure there is enough money in such a plan to acquire more of these…

If there is more money, I personally think it should be used to acquire specific military MPA capability and in our context that equals P-8A and Triton.

The C-27J’s already have many roles to play.

 

[seaspear]

With the government announced increase in defense funding there seems a plethora of suggestions for its use, I would not expect to read of any capability they wish to acquire for the A.D.F but would hope that if so, it is based on some risk analysis and benefit , obviously naval shipbuilding include projects of concern because of the increased timelines and costs and perhaps much of this extra funding may be targetted at this, certainly identifying future needs and risks and the means to meet particular goals may be difficult to be met with current platforms or even second-hand ones

 

[hauritz]

I thought the announcement of the ADF personnel numbers expanding by about a third was really just stating the obvious. That the ADF of the future will need to increase its personnel to operate more frigates and submarines, more armoured vehicles, land based missiles, more bases, autonomous vehicles, tanker aircraft, more helicopters, more large ships ... and the list goes on really.

Even the expanded ADF will be tiny compared to potential adversaries such as China. I think the priority for the ADF should be to continue expanding its uninhabited vehicle fleets.

The idea of manned aircraft flying orbits around Australia sounds a huge waste of manpower to me. Get more MQ-4C Triton and MQ-9B for that role. Save the P-8As for warfighting.