RAAF Stopgap air plan is 'dumb'

[Aussie Digger]

No - different internals. The RAAF has chosen the JASSM, it just hasn't been announced yet. Both Boeing and LockMart officials have been informed as of early February.



No - different fuselage shape and flight profile. The JASSM is less of a missile and more of an unmanned aircraft in shape, and wouldn't lend itself to the violence of a vertical launch. Allied naval units use the TLAM as their land attack missile, and Australia uses the Harpoon Block II from the Anzac frigates (or at least, will soon) and possibly from the four remaining Perry's if they receive the Block II upgrade as well. I hear there may be a land-attack version of the SM-2 in the wings as well?

Magoo

There was a while ago (1997 - 2002) in the form of the SM-4 land attack standard missile (LASM). The project got canned however in 2002 after it was shown the missile would have only limited capability against mobile or hardened targets.

It would have been a pretty sweet deal though. A supersonic vertically launched land attack missile with a 280k+ range. Developments to the propulsion system would have given it a 350K+ range. It carried a unitary warhead, but a "cargo" type warhead was under development as well. On top of this, it was re-manufactured from obsolete Standard missiles, meaning it didn't cost much either. Just a new guidance system and warhead.

IF the ADF wants a land attack missile for it's AWD's it'll pretty much have to go the Tactom nowadays. There's talk of development of a 180k+ vertically launched Harpoon variant, with land attack capabilities (over and above those of the Block II variant) but I'd imagine that would be some years off yet.

The RAN will just have to make do with Harpy Block II and ERGM (once the AWD's are in-service) for some time yet, I reckon...

P.S. FFG will have Block II as well. ALL ADF Harpoon stocks are being upgraded to the Block II standard...

 

[Magoo]

The RAN will just have to make do with Harpy Block II and ERGM (once the AWD's are in-service) for some time yet, I reckon...

P.S. FFG will have Block II as well. ALL ADF Harpoon stocks are being upgraded to the Block II standard...

A Boeing guy told me at the PAC06 expo a couple of weeks ago that Harpoon Block III isn't far away, and is really only a software change from the Block II with a datalink allowing re-targetting in flight from the launcher or a third party platform. It will only have the ~100km range of the Block I/II, still far short of the 350km+ legs of a JASSM unfortunately.

While all ADF Harpoon rounds are now/will be Block IIs, only the Anzacs will be able to download GPS and shoreline data to them in the near term which gives them their 'Block II'ness'. It is hoped the Collins' will get that capability down the track, and the F/A-18 and AP-3C's air launched rounds should have this from 08/09 if they can put 1553 databusses out to the Orion's wing hardpoints. The FFGs (probably) and F-111s (certainly) will always be Block II missiles launched from Block I launchers, therefore will only be the equivalent of Block I capable.

Magoo

 

[cherry]

Lockheed Martin’s Joint Air-to-Surface Stand-off Missile (or JASSM) has been selected as the new long range air-to-surface missile to equip the Australian Defence Force’s F/A-18 Hornet fleet.
The acquisition of long range missiles does not represent a change in Australia’s defence posture and capability planning. Acquiring a long range air to surface missile has been publicly listed in Defence’s Capability Plan since 2001 and specific details were announced in August 2004.
The missile is planned to be operational on the aircraft by December 2009.
The introduction and fitting of the JASSM to the F/A-18 Hornet provides an important capability for Defence and forms a key part of the Government’s plan to withdraw the F-111 aircraft.
The acquisition is a prudent decision to ensure Australia retains its strike capability so Australian objectives can be met whilst maintaining the safety of aircraft and crews.
Importantly, this new missile has the potential to be fitted to future platforms including the Joint Strike Fighter.
The previous concept for the project had considered equipping both the F/A-18 Hornet and AP-3C Orion aircraft with the missile. This decision will reduce overall cost and risk of the project by equipping the F/A-18 only.
The Government has committed to spending $28.5 billion on defence capability over the 10-year period to 2010.
This funding builds on the 2000 White Paper commitment to increase Defence funding by 3 per cent annually until 2010/11.
postamble();

 

[rossfrb_1]

Lockheed Martin’s Joint Air-to-Surface Stand-off Missile (or JASSM) has been selected as the new long range air-to-surface missile to equip the Australian Defence Force’s F/A-18 Hornet fleet.
The acquisition of long range missiles does not represent a change in Australia’s defence posture and capability planning. Acquiring a long range air to surface missile has been publicly listed in Defence’s Capability Plan since 2001 and specific details were announced in August 2004.
The missile is planned to be operational on the aircraft by December 2009.
The introduction and fitting of the JASSM to the F/A-18 Hornet provides an important capability for Defence and forms a key part of the Government’s plan to withdraw the F-111 aircraft.
The acquisition is a prudent decision to ensure Australia retains its strike capability so Australian objectives can be met whilst maintaining the safety of aircraft and crews.
Importantly, this new missile has the potential to be fitted to future platforms including the Joint Strike Fighter.
The previous concept for the project had considered equipping both the F/A-18 Hornet and AP-3C Orion aircraft with the missile. This decision will reduce overall cost and risk of the project by equipping the F/A-18 only.
The Government has committed to spending $28.5 billion on defence capability over the 10-year period to 2010.
This funding builds on the 2000 White Paper commitment to increase Defence funding by 3 per cent annually until 2010/11.
postamble();

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,18308543%255E31477,00.html
" Missile purchase to upset region
Cameron Stewart
March 01, 2006 AUSTRALIA'S F/A-18 fighters will be armed with the most lethal long-range cruise missiles in the region, a move likely to upset our Asian neighbours.

In a controversial decision, the federal Government announced yesterday that it had chosen to buy the most deadly of the three cruise missile types it was examining to help offset the looming retirement of the F-111 strike bombers. The decision to choose the longer-range Joint Air-To-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) will be seen by Indonesia as provocative, given that Jakarta has previously warned that such missiles could trigger a regional arms race.
The Lockheed Martin JASSM was by far the most deadly of the three missiles being considered by Australia.
The 909kg missiles, which cost about $544,000 each, are described by the US...."



Must be a slow news day, how many times do they have to rehash this?

rb

 

[Whiskyjack]

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,18308543%255E31477,00.html
" Missile purchase to upset region
Cameron Stewart
March 01, 2006 AUSTRALIA'S F/A-18 fighters will be armed with the most lethal long-range cruise missiles in the region, a move likely to upset our Asian neighbours.

In a controversial decision, the federal Government announced yesterday that it had chosen to buy the most deadly of the three cruise missile types it was examining to help offset the looming retirement of the F-111 strike bombers. The decision to choose the longer-range Joint Air-To-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) will be seen by Indonesia as provocative, given that Jakarta has previously warned that such missiles could trigger a regional arms race.
The Lockheed Martin JASSM was by far the most deadly of the three missiles being considered by Australia.
The 909kg missiles, which cost about $544,000 each, are described by the US...."



Must be a slow news day, how many times do they have to rehash this?

rb

Well everyone in the region knows that Aussies are bent on world domination...

 

[Supe]

Those sort of articles boggle the mind. They seem less about foreign government sensitivities than journo reliving Uni flashbacks, where it is almost de rigueur for some Uni students to tut tut all things defence related. Could you imagine a 'defence' policy fashioned by these people?

 

[seantheaussie]

The ADF would be delighted with a regional arms race. Australia is the 800 billion dollar gorilla & could not lose. Treasury would go apeshit though.

 

[knightrider4]

Jassm

I see that the idea of fitting the system to the Orion's has been canned and rightly so.

 

[Supe]

The ADF would be delighted with a regional arms race.

I wouldn't and I hope that's not a majority view in the ADF.

 

[Aussie Digger]

I see that the idea of fitting the system to the Orion's has been canned and rightly so.

I agree that the AP-3C shouldn't really be armed with JASSM, it's (AP-3C) too vulnerable to be used in such an important mission (ie: strike). It SHOULD have an air to surface capability besides Harpoon and Torpedo's though.

Something like a Maverick, Brimstone or Hellfire, so that it can engage the rapidly moving smally water craft and "over land" targets of opportunity that seem to be it's main operational missions these days...

It's got a FLIR sensor which can be intergrated with a laser rangefinder and target indicator, it's railed for weapons already. How hard could integration be???

This would allow it a significant capability enhancement and conduct the sorts of missions, UAV's are doing at present. The aircraft's there. Why not give it an immediate firepower role rather than just a surveillance role? It's going to be quicker than calling in a fast mover in most circumstances...

 

[Magoo]

I agree that the AP-3C shouldn't really be armed with JASSM, it's (AP-3C) too vulnerable to be used in such an important mission (ie: strike). It SHOULD have an air to surface capability besides Harpoon and Torpedo's though.

Something like a Maverick, Brimstone or Hellfire, so that it can engage the rapidly moving smally water craft and "over land" targets of opportunity that seem to be it's main operational missions these days...

It's got a FLIR sensor which can be intergrated with a laser rangefinder and target indicator, it's railed for weapons already. How hard could integration be???

This would allow it a significant capability enhancement and conduct the sorts of missions, UAV's are doing at present. The aircraft's there. Why not give it an immediate firepower role rather than just a surveillance role? It's going to be quicker than calling in a fast mover in most circumstances...

Actually, the JASSM's 350km+ range makes the AP-3C an almost ideal launch platform, especially against shipping, as it wont need to come anywhere near an IADS or a fighter screen in order to launch. I'd rather be shooting a JASSM from an AP-3 from 300km than a Maverick from 15km or a Hellfire from 6km... small boats have been known to carry Iglas and Stingers. :shudder

The reason the AP-3 has been taken off the launcher list is because there is a higher element of risk in integrating the JASSM with the Orion, especially as the Orion's wing hardpoints aren't wired to be able to feed the JASSM the necessary targeting data. JASSM has already been trialed from USN 'classic' and Super Hornets, with about 80% of the integration work already complete. This suggests the ADF has pretty much decided not to re-wing the AP-3C and will possibly go down the MMA road after all.

Now watch the pro-F-111 crowd come out of the woodwork and claim that one of the caveats for the F-111 being retired in 2010, i.e. the fitting of the FOSOW to the AP-3, will now not happen, so that means the F-111 will need to be retained!

Magoo

 

[rossfrb_1]

Now watch the pro-F-111 crowd come out of the woodwork and claim that one of the caveats for the F-111 being retired in 2010, i.e. the fitting of the FOSOW to the AP-3, will now not happen, so that means the F-111 will need to be retained!

Magoo

Nah, that's a minor reason. If it aint going to happen for the major ones, I can't see something like that tipping the balance

rb

 

[Aardvark Fury]

Now watch the pro-F-111 crowd come out of the woodwork and claim that one of the caveats for the F-111 being retired in 2010, i.e. the fitting of the FOSOW to the AP-3, will now not happen, so that means the F-111 will need to be retained! Magoo

I'm a huge fan of the F-111 and would like to see it retained until the F-35 comes online, but even I have to admit the "stealthy" JASSM with it's 400km range is a suitable substitute. I'm sure it can hit targets it would be virtual suicide to send the F-111 to attack.

I read somewhere Australia is looking to spend about $350 million on its purchase of the JASSM so I'm guessing that's about 70 rounds worth (at $500,000 ea).

By the way, does anyone know how the Australian contingent of F-111s and F/A-18s fared this year at Red Flag 06? I read they had a mission availability rate of 97% or so. I also read somewhere that last time we were at Red Flag (04?) we had a 100% mission availability rate and "lost" no aircraft to "SAMs". Does anyone have more info. on this year's effort?

 

[Magoo]

By the way, does anyone know how the Australian contingent of F-111s and F/A-18s fared this year at Red Flag 06? I read they had a mission availability rate of 97% or so. I also read somewhere that last time we were at Red Flag (04?) we had a 100% mission availability rate and "lost" no aircraft to "SAMs". Does anyone have more info. on this year's effort?

They did really well. You can't really compare the previous 100% availability rates with this flag, as we had more aircraft this time (13 vs 9),and the scope of this Flag concentrated mainly on EW, SEAD and datalinks.

Initial reports indicate our guys (F-111s and Hornets) performed very well again, with the USAF and RAF being impressed by our ability to get through to targets which they couldn't get near, although to come through an exercise like that without getting 'shot down' is highly unlikely.

Magoo

 

[cherry]

I read somewhere Australia is looking to spend about $350 million on its purchase of the JASSM so I'm guessing that's about 70 rounds worth (at $500,000 ea).

I think you will find 70 X $500,000 equates to $35m, not $350m. So this may indicate that around 700 missiles could be attained. I don't know how much of this cost counts for through life support and installation onto the F/A-18.

 

[Aussie Digger]

I think you will find 70 X $500,000 equates to $35m, not $350m. So this may indicate that around 700 missiles could be attained. I don't know how much of this cost counts for through life support and installation onto the F/A-18.

The RAAF also has between $450 - $600mil to spend on this project, not $350mil. My guess is RAAF would be looking for at least 300 - 500 missiles, given that JASSM is destined to provide the bulk of long range strike capabilities for the RAAF, both for land and maritime attacks and it needs to build up it's warstock from scratch...

 

[chrishorne]

Actually, the JASSM's 350km+ range makes the AP-3C an almost ideal launch platform, especially against shipping, as it wont need to come anywhere near an IADS or a fighter screen in order to launch. I'd rather be shooting a JASSM from an AP-3 from 300km than a Maverick from 15km or a Hellfire from 6km... small boats have been known to carry Iglas and Stingers. :shudder

The reason the AP-3 has been taken off the launcher list is because there is a higher element of risk in integrating the JASSM with the Orion, especially as the Orion's wing hardpoints aren't wired to be able to feed the JASSM the necessary targeting data. JASSM has already been trialed from USN 'classic' and Super Hornets, with about 80% of the integration work already complete. This suggests the ADF has pretty much decided not to re-wing the AP-3C and will possibly go down the MMA road after all.

Now watch the pro-F-111 crowd come out of the woodwork and claim that one of the caveats for the F-111 being retired in 2010, i.e. the fitting of the FOSOW to the AP-3, will now not happen, so that means the F-111 will need to be retained!

Magoo

I assume thou that the Orions will be able to carry the Harpoon IIs which do have an alternate GPS Targeting abilty and thus can be used as a standoff weapon if required. I'm also guessing that the Harpoon II while having a much reduced range than the JASSM also costs a lot less but also gives the Orions a big stick when required. Orions are much easier to shoot down than a F18 as well I would venture so all round it does make economic sense to not put the JASSM on an Orion. After all if the target was that important and protected do you think an Orion could get close enough to launch the weapon and get away safely?

 

[cherry]

Sorry about this, but, I find this debate very interesting but being a civilian I don't quite understand the formation of our air combat wing. I know that RAAF operates 6 squadrons of combat aircraft (discounting the Hawk 127 squadrons), the No. 2 Operational Conversion Unit operating the F/A-18A & F/A-18B; No. 3 squadron, No. 75 squadron and No. 77 squadron all operating the F/A-18; and No. 1 squadron and No. 6 squadron both operating the F-111. Could somebody please inform me as to the make up of the numbers of aircraft in each squadron, when on missions do they operate in teams of 2,3, or 4 etc, the numbers of platforms in each squadron how many of them are strictly for training purposes only? Cheers

 

[Magoo]

I assume thou that the Orions will be able to carry the Harpoon IIs which do have an alternate GPS Targeting abilty and thus can be used as a standoff weapon if required. I'm also guessing that the Harpoon II while having a much reduced range than the JASSM also costs a lot less but also gives the Orions a big stick when required. Orions are much easier to shoot down than a F18 as well I would venture so all round it does make economic sense to not put the JASSM on an Orion. After all if the target was that important and protected do you think an Orion could get close enough to launch the weapon and get away safely?

Yes, the Orions can carry Harpoon Block IIs, however they are only as effective as the Block Is as the Orion cannot feed GPS and shoreline data to the weapon. At this time the only ADF platforms which can fire a Block II as a Block II are the Anzac FFHs and F/A-18s.

Actually, I think the Harpoon costs more than a JASSM, but don't quote me on that. JASSM has a range of 350km+, whereas Harpoon's is around 100km+. JASSM is stealthy, Harpoon isn't. If the target were high value, you wouldn't send a P-3 within 120km of it.

Magoo

 

[Aussie Digger]

Sorry about this, but, I find this debate very interesting but being a civilian I don't quite understand the formation of our air combat wing. I know that RAAF operates 6 squadrons of combat aircraft (discounting the Hawk 127 squadrons), the No. 2 Operational Conversion Unit operating the F/A-18A & F/A-18B; No. 3 squadron, No. 75 squadron and No. 77 squadron all operating the F/A-18; and No. 1 squadron and No. 6 squadron both operating the F-111. Could somebody please inform me as to the make up of the numbers of aircraft in each squadron, when on missions do they operate in teams of 2,3, or 4 etc, the numbers of platforms in each squadron how many of them are strictly for training purposes only? Cheers

The operational F/A-18 squadrons, (3, 75 and 77 Sqn's) operate 16x Hornets per squadron. Normally about 12 aircraft are available for ops at any one time. I guess for "surge" operations they could man all available aircraft. The number of aircraft used on missions, would be dependant entirely on the tactical situation. I believe in Iraq, they mostly operated in 4x ship flights, though I could be mistaken.

Not sure about 2 OCU. This is a training squadron and is not operational. If absolutely necessary I suppose it could be used to provide an additional operational unit, but I'm not sure how many aircraft it operates.

In addition to these units, ARDU also operates F/A-18 aircraft for on-going test and development work, plus we have to at Boeing's plant in the USA undergoing the final stages of the 2.2/2.3 HUG program.

For the F-111, 1 Sqn is the operational Sqn, 6 Sqn is the training unit and is only equipped with F-111G's, IIRC. 1 Sqn maintains (a paper strength) of around 18 F-111C's and 4 R/F-111C's. 6 Sqn currently maintains around 11x F-111G's (I believe) with 3-4 in storage.

The availability of the F-111's isn't all that crash hot however. A little while back, late last year, it was reported that the RAAF had as little as 6 operational F-111C's, with the rest of the fleet requiring extensive work to bring them back to operational readiness.

From that POV, maintaining a fleet of 35 aircraft, for an operationally ready force of 6, doesn't seem like a brilliant investment to me (or the RAAF or Government either, apparently)...