RAAF Stopgap air plan is 'dumb'

[Aussie Digger]

Qantas has never had a jet aeroplane type less than 20 years. 4 A330-200 aircraft are going to Jetstar International. After Jetstar Intl get B787's maybe, but in this weeks 5 year plan they are to return to Qantas. The delayed A380 arrival has left the airline short of capacity. Sorry to disappoint but no nothing about the DCP!

Ah well, guess the possible KC-130J's will have to do if we are to get any additional AAR capability.

Re Occum, the difference between you and I, if I may be so bold, is that I've experienced Government promises whilst being employed by them, and have seen them failed to deliver repeatedly, both by Federal and State Governments.

This is the main reason for my cynicism about some of your ideas about additional capability. Good old Aussie knowhow is a fine ideal and I support it as a concept 100%. I also find innovative thinking highly laudable and would much prefer to see it from Government and Defence. Unfortunately we don't see it very often.

We have the largest budget surplusses in our history at present and what do they spend it on? "Milkshake and sandwich" tax cuts which do nothing. Significant improvements in education, health, defence, road transport, science and technological research could be achieved from the $12b that went on our $5 dollar a week tax cuts, but guess what the politicians thinks buys more votes???

Hence, my (IMHO) realistic opinions on these things. I doubt we'll get anymore than 5 A330 AAR's despite their lack of utility in anything more serious than training scenario's and limited operational deployments.

We "might" get a few more if a "bargain of the century" type deal became available and again we "might" gain the few rumoured KC-130J's "IF" the C-130H upgrade is cancelled (though the project still exists in DCP06) and
"IF" the refuelling capbility option were taken, rather than just buying additional standard C-130J's.

There's more than a few "if's" involved in this and by far the most realistic scenario is that the 5x A330's on order are all we'll ever get. It's a shame, but then there's so many capability gaps in our order of battle, that it's pointless getting upset.

If funding were to be granted for additional A330 MRTT's, it would most likely be at some other projects expense and there's not 1 single project for ADF that I would cancel in favour of another.

 

[Capt. Picard]

It is true that there is some demand for B744 airframes however it needs to be pointed out that this is because they are cheap right now. The cost of conversion to freighters is small as is the extra fuel burn and maintanence when you look at the difference between these and more modern aircrafft. $80 million buys a lot of avtur! B744 are too old to use as tankers.

The idea of using QF airframes as an on demand freighter would have to include the cost of carting about the extra weight of the modifications when in airline service.

"The main reason airlines opt for 'second hand' aircraft isn't the economics, it's the immediate availability of extra capacity that they offer."

This is not correct. It is absolutely for economics. They buy airframes at very cheap rates to eliminate leasing costs. It is very lucrative for airlines to do this, if they have cash. Leased new airframes are readily available from leasing companies all the time. Cathay Pacific does this and it has been key to their sucess for quite some time. I know... I work for them.

 

[Sea Toby]

The US leased many airliners during both Gulf wars to move the troops. If any military program gets short shifted, it will be the tanker and airlift programs. This capability can be attained by using and/or converting existing airliners cheaply and quickly.

 

[rossfrb_1]

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19613627-31477,00.html

"
Buy F-22 Raptors or face air gap: Beazley

Patrick Walters, National security editor June 28, 2006

AUSTRALIA should consider buying US F-22 Raptor stealth fighters to avoid a serious gap opening up in the RAAF's air combat power after 2010, Kim Beazley said yesterday.

Pointing to possible delays in the $16billion Joint Strike Fighter program, the Opposition Leader claimed the RAAF was about to lose its technological superiority in Southeast Asia as neighbouring countries acquired more sophisticated aircraft.
"It's a very serious situation. A big capability gap is building up now - Australia versus the region," he said.
"We have always enjoyed technological superiority. We are now about to lose it."
The US House of Representatives voted last week to lift a 10-year-old ban on foreign sales of the F-22, built by the JSF contractor, Lockheed Martin.
The F-22, an air superiority fighter, is already in production but at about $180 million each remains much more expensive than the JSF, which is expected to undertake its maiden flight in October.
Mr Beazley said the F-22 could be the answer for the RAAF after the retirement of the F-111 strike force from 2010 to ensure that a serious gap did not emerge in the country's front-line defences. This would give defence planners more time to make an appropriate decision about the JSF's capabilities and whether it was the best choice for the RAAF.
"The job of our diplomacy is to build friendships on the basis of a proper recognition of Australian national interest. But we do need to keep a reserve," Mr Beazley said.
"And that reserve is in technological superiority. That is about to go. Gone, gone.
"The JSF will not be ready in time to fill that."
But Defence Minister Brendan Nelson, visiting the JSF production plant at Forth Worth, Texas, emphasised that the next-generation fighter remained on schedule for delivery to Australia from 2012.
The RAAF plans to buy up to 100 JSFs, currently estimated to cost about $100 million each, to eventually replace the F-111 bombers and the F/A-18 fighters.
"As far as pricing is concerned, there has been very little upward movement on price," Dr Nelson said in Fort Worth yesterday. "This is the right aircraft for us. It will serve Australia's needs for more than 30 years."
The Government is due to sign later this year a key memorandum of understanding with the US on the JSF, which will cover access to computer source codes to maintain the aircraft."



As much as I like the F-22 it makes me cringe to read about Beazley suggesting that they are a suitable F-111 replacement (well words to that effect).
The interesting bit for me is the statement that the JSF may now cost $100 million each. I wonder where they got that figure from? It wasn't that long ago that Angus Houston was steadfastly maintaining that the price was still 45 million each, then just a few months ago it has been raised to 60ish million.
Has the Australian just plucked one of the many pricing guesstimates out of the air, or is this a cunning plan via a Ministry of Defence 'leak' to ease the thought into everyone's mind that JSF pricing is gonna rise?
Ergo - it ain't gonna be one hundred JSFs ordered.
I'm still highly sceptical of the 2012 timeline for RAAF delivery of JSFs.
That's when they are supposed to start rolling off the production lines, no (assuming no more problems)?
The USAF would have first dibs surely?

rb

 

[Aussie Digger]

As much as I like the F-22 it makes me cringe to read about Beazley suggesting that they are a suitable F-111 replacement (well words to that effect).
The interesting bit for me is the statement that the JSF may now cost $100 million each. I wonder where they got that figure from? It wasn't that long ago that Angus Houston was steadfastly maintaining that the price was still 45 million each, then just a few months ago it has been raised to 60ish million.
Has the Australian just plucked one of the many pricing guesstimates out of the air, or is this a cunning plan via a Ministry of Defence 'leak' to ease the thought into everyone's mind that JSF pricing is gonna rise?
Ergo - it ain't gonna be one hundred JSFs ordered.
I'm still highly sceptical of the 2012 timeline for RAAF delivery of JSFs.
That's when they are supposed to start rolling off the production lines, no (assuming no more problems)?
The USAF would have first dibs surely?

rb

Defmin NELSON stated publicly yesterday that Government was committed to purchasing 100 JSF's despite the price rise.

Beazley's talking sh*t again.

 

[scraw]

I'm still highly sceptical of the 2012 timeline for RAAF delivery of JSFs.
That's when they are supposed to start rolling off the production lines, no (assuming no more problems)?
The USAF would have first dibs surely?
rb

A lockheed martin bigwig was on TV last night saying the 2012 date was still accurate.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Here's one of the latest bits of info from Defence Industry Daily news letter, dated, 27 June 2006.

"In an exclusive interview, Israeli Air Force (IAF) chief procurement officer Brigadier-General Ze'ev Snir told Israel's Globes publication that F-35 Joint Strike Fighter was a key part of their IAF recapitalization plans, and that Israel intends to buy over 100 of the fighters to replace their F-16s over time. The 100-plane deal will cost at least $5 billion by Israeli estimates, and will be the F-35A conventional take-off Air Force version. Snir added that "The IAF would be happy to equip itself with 24 F-22s but the problem at this time is the US refusal to sell the plane, and its $200 million price tag." :cop

As is plainly clear F-22 is not currently available for purchase by anyone besides the USAF, regardless of interest or ability to fund it. These arguments over the publicly available data and speculation on the various technical elements are futile. Australia cannot currently buy F-22.

As such I think we need to discuss the best AVAILABLE way of ensuring RAAF's future Air Combat Capability...

 

[RubiconNZ]

A lockheed martin bigwig was on TV last night saying the 2012 date was still accurate.

Interesting to see who out of the RAAF or RAF/RN gets them first they both have a similar timeline do they not?

 

[scraw]

Interesting to see who out of the RAAF or RAF/RN gets them first they both have a similar timeline do they not?

I believe it was Magoo that posted the first RAAF birds would come from LRIP Tranche 4 so apparently someone has mapped out who gets what and when.

 

[Magoo]

I believe it was Magoo that posted the first RAAF birds would come from LRIP Tranche 4 so apparently someone has mapped out who gets what and when.

The UK's jets will be F-35B STOVL jets which are due to be delivered from 2014.

Magoo

 

[swerve]

I believe it was Magoo that posted the first RAAF birds would come from LRIP Tranche 4 so apparently someone has mapped out who gets what and when.

Flight International had a couple of long articles on F-35 production yesterday. Said the same thing. Australia & UK are scheduled to get their first F-35 from LRIP. Other partners will get series production, i.e. after 2013. Though LRIP doesn't mean quite the same thing in JSF-speak as normal language, like F-35 no. AA-1, scheduled to fly this year, being a "production" model despite being a one-off, built to a unique design. There are scheduled to be 424 "LRIP" F-35, of which the first 21 (first of which expected to fly 2008) will really be pre-production test aircraft.

 

[RubiconNZ]

Cheers

The UK's jets will be F-35B STOVL jets which are due to be delivered from 2014.

Magoo

Oh ok I forgot it would be a all STOVL purchase. Well that eliminates the competition over the early deliveries.

 

[Supe]

"In an exclusive interview, Israeli Air Force (IAF) chief procurement officer Brigadier-General Ze'ev Snir told Israel's Globes publication that F-35 Joint Strike Fighter was a key part of their IAF recapitalization plans, and that Israel intends to buy over 100 of the fighters to replace their F-16s over time. The 100-plane deal will cost at least $5 billion by Israeli estimates, and will be the F-35A conventional take-off Air Force version.

IAF 100 JSF fleet for 5 Billion??? Vs how much for up to 100 for the RAAF? Australian Govt needs to get on that gravy train.

 

[rjmaz1]

As much as I like the F-22 it makes me cringe to read about Beazley suggesting that they are a suitable F-111 replacement (well words to that effect).

The F-22 is more of a F111 replacement than the JSF IMO. If Australia bought 60 or so F-22's by the time they were operational the US would have added all the advanced strike features to the aircraft making it one of the most potent aircraft in the world.

Flying at Mach 1.5 towards indonesia at 40,000ft then dropping a Small diameter bomb 50miles away from target and having it hit a target with high accuracy.

Compared to the JSF, flying towards target at half the speed of the F-22 and having to get twice as close to target before dropping its bombs is not simialr to an F-111.

60 F-22's would be able to hit the same amount of targets as 100 JSF's could due to the higher speed providing a higher sortie rate. So less means more in this case.

I'm still highly sceptical of the 2012 timeline for RAAF delivery of JSFs.
That's when they are supposed to start rolling off the production lines, no (assuming no more problems)?

The USAF would have first dibs surely?

You'd be surprised that we may get them rather quickly.

I can see now that the USAF will say "Thats ok we'll wait! You can give 20 of our 40 allocated aircraft to export customers, we dont mind!!"

Then they'll go off and order another 10 F-22 to keep the production line open

The USAF will not cancel its orders now as it will look very bad for the JSF program if they did.

However i can gurantee that when the F-22 production line is nearing an end they will continue to buy F-22's and divert funds from the JSF once all the export customers have locked in their orders. Once the 180 or so F-22's have been delivered all the development costs will have been paid for, any extra F-22's delivered will be extremely cheap and cost LESS than the first batches of JSF aircraft. So the USAF will kindly donate their first aircraft

Another thing. The JSF was originally planned to cost half as much as the F-22. Now if the original orders of 750 F-22's was compared to the current JSF program the F-22's would cost LESS than the JSF plane for plane. So the JSF currently costs TWICE as much as it should.

and rising...

I think we are best off waiting until after low rate production if we buy the JSF at all.

Who knows the first flight in october the plane might crash and the whole project may get canceled.

Either way of which of the two aircraft we buy we will still have the best air force in the region. The JSF is impressive but the F-22 provides much better and i beleive the higher price tag is a small price to pay for that extra capability.

 

[gf0012-aust]

The F-22 is more of a F111 replacement than the JSF IMO.

Since when did an air superiority fighter = a strike bomber?

 

[RubiconNZ]

Cutting Costs

IAF 100 JSF fleet for 5 Billion??? Vs how much for up to 100 for the RAAF? Australian Govt needs to get on that gravy train.

Whats an extra billion here or there Perhaps its because of the long buy time so they are capitalising on a decrease in p/unit costs over the length of their acquisition. I tend to think the third tranche order which may/may not be JSFs will, if only because they should be quite decent price rather purchasing what will be a newsih sytem of UCAVs. The F22 price certainly from what I have read here and on other sites certainly seems to have decreased. Does anyone think this decrease is purely Lockhead trimming costs in order to secure more orders?

 

[Cootamundra]

Either way of which of the two aircraft we buy we will still have the best air force in the region. The JSF is impressive but the F-22 provides much better and i beleive the higher price tag is a small price to pay for that extra capability.

They are not the same kind of aircraft. Without doubt the Raptor is THE best air superiority fighter in the world, hands down! In the future it might well be a great strike bird but as of today is still cannot drop the full range of air to ground munitions or martime strike weaps. Nor does it have the tactical recce capabilities that the JSF will have. Finally the JSF will do data fusion like nothing else around. So tell me where is the 'extra capability'? IMHO they are different birds with different functions.

 

[Occum]

Hi Larry

Figured this post to 'USAF of the 21st Century' should really reside in this thread -

Originally Posted by gf0012-aust
If we could get F-22's without financially jeopardising the rest of the national military capability across all 3 services - then I'd be as happy as larry.

A simplified, somewhat crude but conservative look at the cost/budgetary data and the costing models that I have been privy to provides the following:

1. NACC/Air 6000 Project Budget (refer Defence Capability Plans published in 2001, 2004, 2006 and Defence Annual Reports 2001 to 2005) = A$11,500 million to A$15,500 million (2004 dollars),

minus

2. Cost of 55 x F-22A systems @ US$116 million average unit procurement cost (Then Year - 2008 dollars) = US$6,380 million. At a risk hedged exchange rate of 0.7000, this equates to A$9,115 million

plus

3. Saving from not doing remaining F/A-18 HUG Phases, R3+ Deeper Level Maintenance, Repaint, Kapton Wiring Replacement, Fuel Tanks, etc = A$2,700 million (2004 dollars) - Note: This figure does not include the increases made or flagged in DCP 2006-2016 nor the further cost increases in HUG Phases 2.3, 2.4 and 3.2

plus

4. Saving in total operating and maintenance expenditure (not including 3. above) from not operating F/A-18s out to 2015+ = A$4,500 million (2004 Dollars)

minus

5. Total operating expenditure of F-111s out to 2020 (based on highest of the RAAF's figures provided in the Air Combat Capability Paper dated 03 June 2004 tabled to the Australian Parliament by AM Angus Houston) = A$3,500 million (2004 dollars)

Net Result = better than A$6 Bn to A$10 Bn savings in 2004 dollars. The 'better than' arises from the normalised TVM aspects in this comparison.

More than enough to procure additional tanker, AEW&C, other ISR and Evolved F-111 capabilities, if managed correctly. From what I have seen, there is a bucket load of work (and good work) for Australian Industry, particularly if Australia achieves international launch customer status on the F-22 Program! This approach also has far less of a negative effect on Australia's balance of trade than the current plans.

Are you now happy?

 

[rjmaz1]

They are not the same kind of aircraft. Without doubt the Raptor is THE best air superiority fighter in the world, hands down! In the future it might well be a great strike bird but as of today is still cannot drop the full range of air to ground munitions or martime strike weaps. Nor does it have the tactical recce capabilities that the JSF will have. Finally the JSF will do data fusion like nothing else around. So tell me where is the 'extra capability'? IMHO they are different birds with different functions.

The F-22 will be cleared to drop SDB very soon. Do you have any idea how far a SDB bomb can travel if dropped at 60,000ft at Mach 2? We're talking up to 80miles here, this weapon can be used against all stationary ground targets and soon moving targets that will include ships.

Tactical Reconnaissance and the JSF? Reconnaissance will be one of the F-22 primary upcoming roles. Just think about it, what would you prefer, a JSF flying at 50,000feet at 1000km/h or a F-22 flying at 80,000ft at 2,000km/h? The F-22 will be untouchable by most SAM's as the F-22 can pull 9G and change course 45degree's automatically putting it in the escape zone of all SAM's. Thats if it was even detected in the first place

Theres alot of extra capabilities that will be added to the F-22, most have been kept under wraps. Its only a matter of time until it has 2-way datalinks, full air to ground capabilities as well as Reconnaissance. The best bit though is from a credible source the F-22 can supercruise at level flight in the "stratosphere" which after searching this is from 70,000ft upwards.

So tell me where is the 'extra capability'?

Now lets look at the weapon loading of each aircraft.


Multitole
F-22, Four 250lb SDB, Three AMRAAMS, Two Sidewinders.
JSF, Four 250lb SDB, ONE AMRAAM, Two Sidewinders.


Air to Air
F-22: Six AMRAAM, Two Sidewinder
JSF: Two AMRAAM, Two Sidewinder

Gee the RAAF is going to have a hard time when the F-22 carries 3 times as many medium range missiles compared to the JSF.

The fact that the JSF can carry a variety of ground weapons is irrelevant as the SDB can take out the majority of targets, plus this is good as the RAAF orders less types of weapons.

 

[Cootamundra]

The F-22 will be cleared to drop SDB very soon. Do you have any idea how far a SDB bomb can travel if dropped at 60,000ft at Mach 2? We're talking up to 80miles here, this weapon can be used against all stationary ground targets and soon moving targets that will include ships.

Geez where would I be without your amazing intellect and adroit ability to instruct me in all things airforce! "Do you have any idea"....give me a break

You know what is available on the internet just like me...big deal!

Tactical Reconnaissance and the JSF? Reconnaissance will be one of the F-22 primary upcoming roles. Just think about it, what would you prefer, a JSF flying at 50,000feet at 1000km/h or a F-22 flying at 80,000ft at 2,000km/h? The F-22 will be untouchable by most SAM's as the F-22 can pull 9G and change course 45degree's automatically putting it in the escape zone of all SAM's. Thats if it was even detected in the first place

OK, before we go any further let me make 2 points.
1. The Raptor is the KING, the king of a2a, the king of SEAD, the king of any first day war effort
2. At present the Raptor is not available for FMS. FULL STOP! Maybe in the future it will get sold to allies but not today

Now while the Raptor maybe the king of a2a and first day strike it has not been built to be a 'down in the mud' striker. That is why the USAF is pushing for 2 platforms, not just Raptor, they obvioulsy believe that both birds have their advantages and disadvantages. The JSF has been built to be a strike platform. It is being configured with all of this in mind. Now it is never goong to be on par with the supercruising Raptor but then again it was never intended to be. What it will be able to do is do NCW like nothing else around. Maybe (and this is a maybe with $$$$'s attached) the Raptor will be able to do data linking, recce etc like the JSF but to get this a customer will need to spend more money on top of an already large purchas eprice. Take a look at the comments from Prof Ross Babbage at the most recent JSF Senate hearing, you know the one where the AirPower boys got smacked from left right. Babbage makes some very interesting points around how many people are underestimating the real value of the JSF in linking up disparate parts of the ADF when on the field. Also if I'm not mistaken isn't the JSF going to have the most adavnced radar going around - even more advanced than the Raptor's?

Theres alot of extra capabilities that will be added to the F-22, most have been kept under wraps. Its only a matter of time until it has 2-way datalinks, full air to ground capabilities as well as Reconnaissance. The best bit though is from a credible source the F-22 can supercruise at level flight in the "stratosphere" which after searching this is from 70,000ft upwards.Now lets look at the weapon loading of each aircraft.
Multitole
F-22, Four 250lb SDB, Three AMRAAMS, Two Sidewinders.
JSF, Four 250lb SDB, ONE AMRAAM, Two Sidewinders.
Air to Air
F-22: Six AMRAAM, Two Sidewinder
JSF: Two AMRAAM, Two Sidewinder
Gee the RAAF is going to have a hard time when the F-22 carries 3 times as many medium range missiles compared to the JSF.

The fact that the JSF can carry a variety of ground weapons is irrelevant as the SDB can take out the majority of targets, plus this is good as the RAAF orders less types of weapons.

Last I heard the Raptor was a much bigger aircraft, so of course it is going to be able to carry more weapons. Out of interest what happens when hardpoints are being used how do things stack up then? Anyway, whatever the case the Raptor is clearly a better airplance in many regards. However my argument has always been;
1. The Raptor is NOT a better striker (at the moment and without costly upgrades)
2.The Raptor costs more - and don't bother with the various estimates that have been bandied about on this thread and others - NONE of us know what the JSF will cost Australia nor do any of us know how much the Raptor would cost us ASSUMING it ever allowed for FMS.

Finally your point about buying less weapons is bullshite, we will be purchasing SDB's but they are limited in destructive capacity (250lb) not to mention range (30+Kms). That's why we went with JASSM (as well) with its 300km range. JASSM-ER is going to see that push out to 750km and beyond so the JSF will have plenty of options from both a range and payload point of view and the ADF will buy them - that is as it should be...