Tiger replacement I would assume is to be replaced with a like type of platform, so I don't see it intersecting with another project.
Quibble - it does. I think I know what you mean (the Tiger replacement can't fulfil any other project needs), but the project intercets with a number of others. Comms, BMS, fuel, etc.
I said quibble!
LR Rotocraft? The only Aircraft that fits that currently is the CV-22 or the MH-47G/KC-130J combo and the RAAF doesn’t have any KC-130Js.
Could they also be thinking some birds (Blackhawks) fitted with ESSS stubs? Adds fair bit of range and opens up weapons options which would also come in handy for SF. Fills in SF needs, long range program and commonality with navy aircraft.
The answer for the forseeable future about V-22s is not likely to be no, but rather hell no. The -47G has more range than the -47F thanks to the bigger saddle tanks and so is a likely contender (plus its a simple addition). I'd also suggest the larger C-130 buy and/or KC-30 replacement allows options for refuelling helos.....
Our Black Hawks already have ESSS. We used to run them regularly - especially when under RAAF colours. The problem with ESSS is that running them with full tanks regularly does some pretty vicious cracking along key stations - we spent a lot of time and $$ in 2002-05 rectifying those cracks.
There is no next Generation Rotocraft currently on the Market so that would mean latest models of either the NH-90, H-60s or something else, can’t see much reason to get brand new NH-90s and an all new Aircraft is highly unlikey, so that would mean H-60s.
For Next Gen Rotorcraft, read FVL. Calling it that allows us to look at options beyond the FVL program. It won't be anything currently operating.
And on the very same vein the US Army is about to replace its Apache Armed Reconnaissance variants with the FARA program:
It's Invictus versus Raider in the Army's Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft competition.
www.defensenews.com
So why would we but Apaches unless we now want a design for anti-tank warfare?
The current FVL is not an Apache replacement, it's a Kiowa replacement. There are 5 parts to FVL (Kiowa, Apache, Black Hawk, Chinook, Heavy) and they are happening along separate timelines. The Apache replacement is likely to be the 3rd or 4th one brought online - probably 25 - 30 years away.
Also note that advacements in the -64E's avionics and its weapons (AGM-114R and APKWS) makes an Apache so much more than an anti-tank weapon now.
I think the answer is the new Army doctrine of 'hardened and networked'. The Tiger ARH was specified and selected before the ADF had developed its network doctrine, which is now mainly US aligned, and the concept of Manned-Unmanned-Teaming (MUMT). Airbus can offer Link 16 in a Tiger upgrade but may not have access to the latest US MUMT networks that are probably specified for the MQ-9B and next Land 129 project.
Oh - and I forgot about Boeings Loyal Wingman being developed here in Oz. That too may co-operate with Apache MUMT but probably not and Tiger network!
I doubt there'll be the need (perhaps want) for Loyal Wingman and Tiger replacement - but your first para is 100% on point. The networking capability of Tiger replacement needs to be capable and robust.
That would be a big bail out and replacement cost if they were to get rid of the MRH-90. That's 47 aircraft requiring replacement and they would probably need at least 60 Blackhawks in order to achieve the same lift capability.
Not sure the maths adds up there... Have I missed something?
The Next Generation Rotocraft Project as per the update is due to begin in the 2033-35 time period and that is looking a pretty good timeframe for the FVL to be mature enough for export orders.
That's when $$ start becoming available for the project to start. It'd be another ~5 years before the first order was placed and another ~2 for delivery to IOC. Hence you'd be looking at mid 2040s for the first Sqn. Also remember that the first FVL is a Kiowa replacement - we may not choose to purchase that.
