Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates

[barra]

Oh great, three major types (F-35A, F/A-18A/B, F/A-18F) and five sub-types (F-35B, EA-18G) of fast jets - just what the RAAF needs! Lets keep it simple guys - one or two types with as little cross-over as possible.

Magoo has hit on a good point there, the RAAF planned to operate a single fighter/bomber type, the F-35A. Now that seems to be going out the window with a possible two tier structure. They well understand the extra costs of operating different types, operating different variants of those types only magnifies the costs. Less F-35A's means an even slimmer chance of F-35B's. Face it boys the -B is a pipe dream, the RAAF doesn't want it.
As for crossover, the classics will still be around until there are enough operational F-35's to take up the slack. Same thing happened with the mirages, there is a Sqn photo at 77 from the mid eighties when the sqn had 43 Mirages, 17 Macchis and over 500 personnel. Now thats a super sqn!!!

Hooroo

 

[Magoo]

Sorry didnt get to this before.

So it is possible to to aquire the kits without the extra airframes to be installed when needed???? Even if it took a week it may not be a bad idea. However you would need the trained personell and therefore leaving the kits in a werehouse somewere may not be a realistic option, unless the RIO's are intended to have on the job training. As far as the rear seat looking different in the G, i would have thought that the major modifications (apart form the external ones) would have been software. Is there extra LCD dispays or contoll pannels???

I doubt it would be as easy as you think, and I can't see us doing it if we're only operating 24 airframes. I suspect it may require the jet's wings to be pulled off and quite a bit of cabling, insulation, different displays and panels in the rear, and other work to be done on the jet to turn it into a G - sounds like depot stuff to me! Barra?

Anyway, it's not why we bought the jet, but perhaps down the road it may be a good capability to have if it becomes necessary. I doubt it's a high priority at this time though.

Magoo

 

[Magoo]

Face it boys the -B is a pipe dream, the RAAF doesn't want it.

Nor does Navy or Army...no matter how many big deck LHDs we end up with, F-35Bs would be a really hard sell!

As for crossover, the classics will still be around until there are enough operational F-35's to take up the slack. Same thing happened with the mirages, there is a Sqn photo at 77 from the mid eighties when the sqn had 43 Mirages, 17 Macchis and over 500 personnel. Now thats a super sqn!!!

I've seen that pic when I was there a couple of times last year - awesome!

Magoo

 

[Tasman]

Nor does Navy or Army...no matter how many big deck LHDs we end up with, F-35Bs would be a really hard sell!

Magoo

If the RAAF does end up with around 100 F-35’s I guess there is a slim chance that they might be persuaded of the merits of a squadron of VSTOL aircraft being included in the mix because of the extra deployment options (e.g. the LHD’s) that would be available. If the number of F-35’s is substantially less than 100 I agree with Barra and others that the possibility would be even more remote.

I don’t think we will see the F-35B in Australian service unless the navy and/or the army demand it and the government is able to find the money to fund additional aircraft beyond the 100 combat aircraft currently planned. As Magoo has said, neither the navy nor the army are currently showing any interest in doing so.

Unless Pacific Island countries begin to acquire combat aircraft during the next few decades I think that the army will be satisfied with close air support being provided by Tiger ARH’s deployed from the LHD’s. The navy is also only likely to push for fixed wing aircraft operations from the LHD’s if they are likely to be deployed to hostile waters in SE Asia without air support being available from the USN and/or are outside of the range of land based air support. For either of these scenarios to occur there would have to be a major change in Australia’s strategic circumstances.

I am a great fan of the potential of naval aviation but at this stage I have to agree with Barra that operating F-35B's from the LHD's is a 'pipe dream.' Still it is nice to dream sometimes.

Tas

 

[Aussie Digger]

Really??? Can you elaborate??? What do you mean by compromised, Elint or espionage???? Either way thats entreging.

The APG-65 was compromised by the Russians in the early to mid 90's. I have no idea the particulars of how or why, but I suspect espionage...

 

[rjmaz1]

Magoo has hit on a good point there, the RAAF planned to operate a single fighter/bomber type, the F-35A. Now that seems to be going out the window with a possible two tier structure.

Actually we wont be going with a two tier structure, atleast not for very long.

I'll confirm a few things here.

The current order of 24 Super Hornets will be spread over TWO squadrons. 12 aircraft per squadron means that each individual aircraft will be flown often and they will have very high flight hours by 2020. At around 2020 we will probably still be receiving the F-35.

I've asked around and here it is...


The Plan

Our 24 F-111's will be retired for when the 24 Super Hornets arrive. The F-111's will be replaced 1 for 1 with Super Hornets. This will happen around 2010. Squadrons 1 and 6 will be converting across from the F-111 to the Super Hornet.

Our 60 odd Classic Hornets will be retired for when the F-35 arrives. Again the Classic Hornets will be replaced 1 for 1. This will happen around 2015. Squadrons 3, 75 and 77 will convert across to the F-35.

Our 24 Super Hornets will be retired for additional F-35. Again they will be replaced 1 for 1. This will happen around 2020. Squadrons 1 and 6 will then convert across to the F-35.


The Goal

By 2025 the goal is that we will operate around 80 F-35's. Squadrons; 1, 3, 6, 75 and 77 will now all fly the F-35. Thats 5 squadrons and 16 aircraft per squadron which is spot on.


Why more Super Hornets?

The rumour behind the purchase of a second batch of Super Hornets is because the F-35 may experience delays and/or the CBR program may run into problems. If the F-35 is delayed by a year or two then the classic hornets will struggle to last even with the centre barrels replaced. By converting one of the classic hornet squadrons over to second batch of Super Hornets it will allow the remaining two classic squadrons to fly for longer and transition smoothly over to the F-35.

If the CBR runs into severe problems then the Classic Hornets will not last until the F-35 arrives. Additional Super Hornets will allow one Classic Hornet squadron to convert to Supers. This should allow the non rebarreled Classic hornets to last until the F-35 arrives.

If the F-35 is delayed or the CBR program runs into problems then the first batch of Super Hornets will see even more flight time. Remember the first batch of Super Hornets have to last until the last batch of F-35's arrive. The Super Hornets may struggle to last if the 12 aircraft per squadron is retained. This is why if a second batch of Super Hornets is purchased due to these delays it will purchase 24 aircraft instead of 12. So instead of operating 12 aircraft per squadron it will now operate 16 aircraft per squadron. This will allow the Super Hornets to last out until 2030 which should be plenty of time for all the F-35's to arrive.

So in the end Australia will be flying F-35's only.

The Super Hornet is a transition aircraft only.

 

[Navor86]

And you have the intel from where.Beacause Ive read that only 1stSqn will get Rhino and 6 will be the first to get F-35 so for some time it will stand down.

 

[Todjaeger]

Actually we wont be going with a two tier structure, atleast not for very long.

I'll confirm a few things here.

The current order of 24 Super Hornets will be spread over TWO squadrons. 12 aircraft per squadron means that each individual aircraft will be flown often and they will have very high flight hours by 2020. At around 2020 we will probably still be receiving the F-35.

I've asked around and here it is...


The Plan

Our 24 F-111's will be retired for when the 24 Super Hornets arrive. The F-111's will be replaced 1 for 1 with Super Hornets. This will happen around 2010. Squadrons 1 and 6 will be converting across from the F-111 to the Super Hornet.

Our 60 odd Classic Hornets will be retired for when the F-35 arrives. Again the Classic Hornets will be replaced 1 for 1. This will happen around 2015. Squadrons 3, 75 and 77 will convert across to the F-35.

Our 24 Super Hornets will be retired for additional F-35. Again they will be replaced 1 for 1. This will happen around 2020. Squadrons 1 and 6 will then convert across to the F-35.


The Goal

By 2025 the goal is that we will operate around 80 F-35's. Squadrons; 1, 3, 6, 75 and 77 will now all fly the F-35. Thats 5 squadrons and 16 aircraft per squadron which is spot on.


Why more Super Hornets?

The rumour behind the purchase of a second batch of Super Hornets is because the F-35 may experience delays and/or the CBR program may run into problems. If the F-35 is delayed by a year or two then the classic hornets will struggle to last even with the centre barrels replaced. By converting one of the classic hornet squadrons over to second batch of Super Hornets it will allow the remaining two classic squadrons to fly for longer and transition smoothly over to the F-35.

If the CBR runs into severe problems then the Classic Hornets will not last until the F-35 arrives. Additional Super Hornets will allow one Classic Hornet squadron to convert to Supers. This should allow the non rebarreled Classic hornets to last until the F-35 arrives.

If the F-35 is delayed or the CBR program runs into problems then the first batch of Super Hornets will see even more flight time. Remember the first batch of Super Hornets have to last until the last batch of F-35's arrive. The Super Hornets may struggle to last if the 12 aircraft per squadron is retained. This is why if a second batch of Super Hornets is purchased due to these delays it will purchase 24 aircraft instead of 12. So instead of operating 12 aircraft per squadron it will now operate 16 aircraft per squadron. This will allow the Super Hornets to last out until 2030 which should be plenty of time for all the F-35's to arrive.

So in the end Australia will be flying F-35's only.

The Super Hornet is a transition aircraft only.

Huh?

Australia is currently purchasing 24 F/A-18F SH to replace the retiring F-111C/G in the Strike/Attack role (what replaces the RF-111C?). What is being discussed is a possible 2nd purchase of F/A-18 SH (of -E/F/G) which would again be about 24 aircraft.

As mentioned, this is because of possible feasibility issues with the HUG/CBR program which could cause an unacceptablely low number of aircraft to be available for operations or deployment.

The first 24, those replacing the F-111, are (were) expected to serve for about 10 years, with replacement by F-35 in ~2020, with life left in the airframe. If a second set of 24 replaces some of the current F/A-18 A/B, not sure at what point these aircraft would be replaced, or by what (F-35, UCAV etc?).

The info on the 24 Super Hornets already ordered can be found here.

-Cheers

 

[Tasman]

Actually we wont be going with a two tier structure, atleast not for very long.

I'll confirm a few things here.

What is your source for this info?

Barra and Magoo both have considerable professionally based knowledge of the air combat situation within the RAAF. What is your 'confirmation' based on?

Tas

 

[rjmaz1]

And you have the intel from where.Beacause Ive read that only 1stSqn will get Rhino and 6 will be the first to get F-35 so for some time it will stand down.

No thats incorrect. Where did you get that intel from? Please show me a source?

I'll show my source...

http://www.defence.gov.au/raaf/aircraft/superhornet.htm

Twenty-four Super Hornets will replace the F-111s at Nos 1 and 6 Squadrons at RAAF Base Amberley from 2010.

Huh?

Mate did you not even read my post? You just rewrote exactly what i did! You obviously just skimmed over my post or something?

Atleast give me credit for copying :

Australia is currently purchasing 24 F/A-18F SH to replace the retiring F-111C/G in the Strike/Attack role.

and i wrote...

Our 24 F-111's will be retired for when the 24 Super Hornets arrive. The F-111's will be replaced 1 for 1 with Super Hornets. This will happen around 2010. Squadrons 1 and 6 will be converting across from the F-111 to the Super Hornet.

As mentioned, this is because of possible feasibility issues with the HUG/CBR program which could cause an unacceptablely low number of aircraft to be available for operations or deployment.

and i wrote...

The rumour behind the purchase of a second batch of Super Hornets is because the F-35 may experience delays and/or the CBR program may run into problems.

The first 24, those replacing the F-111, are (were) expected to serve for about 10 years, with replacement by F-35 in ~2020

and i wrote...

Our 24 Super Hornets will be retired for additional F-35. Again they will be replaced 1 for 1. This will happen around 2020. Squadrons 1 and 6 will then convert across to the F-35.

Thats pretty shocking.

What is your source for this info?

Barra and Magoo both have considerable professionally based knowledge of the air combat situation within the RAAF. What is your 'confirmation' based on?

Not one thing i have said contradicts anything Magoo or Barra has posted. I have never heard them once mention the RAAF plan on retaining the Super Hornets when the last batch of F-35's replace them.

You should ask Todjaeger the same question he obviously has some insider knowledge..

 

[Tasman]

Not one thing i have said contradicts anything Magoo or Barra has posted. I have never heard them once mention the RAAF plan on retaining the Super Hornets when the last batch of F-35's replace them.

You should ask Todjaeger the same question he obviously has some insider knowledge..

The RAAF has continued to state publicly that it still wants an all F-35 force. What we are talking about is speculation that additional Super Hornets will be ordered and that this may lead to the RAAF having a two tier force (approx 50% SH's and 50% F-35's). Read Barra's Post 201 as an example. Magoo and Barra have both given credence to the possibility that the RAAF will not end up with its desired all F-35 force.

No one is saying that this WILL happen just that it is being speculated that it might and with a potential change of government (to one that has stated that it will review the F-35 program) along with reported problems with the CBR program for the classic Hornets, there is a basis for that speculation, IMO.

My concern was your comment that you could 'confirm' that the RAAF would end up with an all F-35 force. Even the Australian PM and Chief of Airforce can't do this. It is certainly what the RAAF wants but no one is in a position to confirm that it will happen. So far not one F-35 has actually been ordered by Australia. What is on the public record confirms that an all F-35 force is what the present RAAF leadership wants and that this is supported in principle by the present government, but it does not confirm that this is what it will actually get. I apologise if I've misunderstood what it was that you were actually confirming.

Tas

 

[Todjaeger]

Perhaps there was a misunderstanding of your post, but the following line is why I went "Huh?"

This is why if a second batch of Super Hornets is purchased due to these delays it will purchase 24 aircraft instead of 12.

When I read that, I had thought you were stating that the existing SH order was for 12 aircraft, and a possible second SH order as referenced by Tasman from The Age and supported by Magoo and Barra was supposed to be for a further batch of 12.

If that is not what you meant, then there was a misunderstanding.

If the F-35 is delayed or the CBR program runs into problems then the first batch of Super Hornets will see even more flight time. Remember the first batch of Super Hornets have to last until the last batch of F-35's arrive. The Super Hornets may struggle to last if the 12 aircraft per squadron is retained. This is why if a second batch of Super Hornets is purchased due to these delays it will purchase 24 aircraft instead of 12. So instead of operating 12 aircraft per squadron it will now operate 16 aircraft per squadron. This will allow the Super Hornets to last out until 2030 which should be plenty of time for all the F-35's to arrive.

Given the above, you seem to be writing that the planned purchase for 24 SH for Strike roles will result in high airtimes, particularly if the CBR program runs into trouble. From what I get when reading the above quote, a second order of 24 SH, would also serve in the squadrons that are tasked with Strike missions.

My understanding of the discussion by Tasman, Barra, Magoo and others is that a second 24 SH order would likely replace some of the high airtime Hornets, in addition to, or in lieu of additional CBR.

I do not see a second SH order significantly altering the numbers of aircraft the RAAF feel are needed for Strike missions, which seems to be what you are writing.

-Cheers

 

[Magoo]

Perhaps there was a misunderstanding of your post, but the following line is why I went "Huh?"



When I read that, I had thought you were stating that the existing SH order was for 12 aircraft, and a possible second SH order as referenced by Tasman from The Age and supported by Magoo and Barra was supposed to be for a further batch of 12.

If that is not what you meant, then there was a misunderstanding.



Given the above, you seem to be writing that the planned purchase for 24 SH for Strike roles will result in high airtimes, particularly if the CBR program runs into trouble. From what I get when reading the above quote, a second order of 24 SH, would also serve in the squadrons that are tasked with Strike missions.

My understanding of the discussion by Tasman, Barra, Magoo and others is that a second 24 SH order would likely replace some of the high airtime Hornets, in addition to, or in lieu of additional CBR.

I do not see a second SH order significantly altering the numbers of aircraft the RAAF feel are needed for Strike missions, which seems to be what you are writing.

-Cheers

Hey Tod

Let it go man. Unfortunately there's often not alot of sense to made from RJMAZ's posts, and it's better to just let them go through to the keeper (or to 'take a ball rather than swing at a high and outside pitch' in Baseball parlance) .

There are mixed messages coming out of the Air5349 BACC project team about which units will operate the Supers - some say it will be 1SQN only with 6SQN standing down from F-111 ops in 2010 and then taking the first F-35s from 2013ish, while others say both 1SQN and 6SQN will fly them. I don't think it's been finalised yet, despite what the RAAF website says.

It's unlikely we'd buy any less than 24 Supers in a second batch if it were to happen. The Supers are built in 24 aircraft lots (build runs), while another 12 aircraft only would give the RAAF an awkward number of 36 jets which is too few for three SQNs and too many for two SQNs to run.

I like the 48 Supers and 48 F-35s ORBAT model, with the Supers retired in the late 2020s, and the F-35s in the late 2030s.

Cheers

Magoo

 

[Tasman]

I like the 48 Supers and 48 F-35s ORBAT model, with the Supers retired in the late 2020s, and the F-35s in the late 2030s.

As you mentioned in an earlier post there are clear advantages in a two tier air combat force. Firstly the entire force would not be grounded in the event of a problem with one aircraft and secondly the RAAF would not be placed in the position it is in now of having to replace the entire air combat force at the same time.

The 48/48 model would give the RAAF the option of replacing the Supers in the late 2020's either with late model F-35's or a completely new type, if a more suitable alternative exists at that time. Either way it seems to me to be a much better proposition for taxpayers to be paying for the replacement of half the force every 10/12 years than the whole force every 20/25 years. It would also mean that the RAAF would always have at least half its air combat force composed of comparatively modern, low mileage aircraft.

The other thing I would like to see Australia get away from is the concept of major expensive upgrade programs like those seen on the Hornet CBR program and the navy's FFGUP. It would be interesting to look at how cost effective these programs have really been when compared with the alternative of buying new aircraft or ships.

Tas

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

As you mentioned in an earlier post there are clear advantages in a two tier air combat force. Firstly the entire force would not be grounded in the event of a problem with one aircraft and secondly the RAAF would not be placed in the position it is in now of having to replace the entire air combat force at the same time.

Yeah but we take a serious loss in capability. F35 would run rings arround an F18F any way you look at it, strike, maritime strike, reece, air superiority, looks, the whole deal. IMO thats a big price to pay for the conveniance of avoiding a fleet wide problem (which is pretty darn unlikely, especially given the different blocks of aircraft we would use). Its akin to a real and significant loss in capability in exchange for a theoretical avoidance of an unlikely potential problem. That doesnt sit too well with me.

The 48/48 model would give the RAAF the option of replacing the Supers in the late 2020's either with late model F-35's or a completely new type, if a more suitable alternative exists at that time. Either way it seems to me to be a much better proposition for taxpayers to be paying for the replacement of half the force every 10/12 years than the whole force every 20/25 years. It would also mean that the RAAF would always have at least half its air combat force composed of comparatively modern, low mileage aircraft.

This may be true half way through the next generation of platforms, but in this case the SH's will only be slightly younger (or perhaps the same age in the case of the second batch) than the first batch of F35's.

I'm not sure how purchasing 50 odd new platforms every decade would somehow be cheaper than replaceing 100 every 2. It may save us money on upgrade programes such as HUG, but it would limit our choices as far as what combat aircraft to purchase. it would also leave the RAAF in an almost constant state of flux. Every 10~15 years we go through a 4~6 year programe of replacing half the air combat force. This would have its own costs, especially if contenders for a new platform had to be chosen.

Basically i can only see a few benifits in making the F18F a more permanant part of the RAAF orbat (ie pat 2020) rather than the limited stopgap that it is currently. I can however see serious dissadvantages in this permanant two tiered orbat:

• We loose all the economies of scale and maintinance benifits that come with a single platform choice. This was a primary consideration for the RAAF IIRC, technically we would be in the same boat (maintince wise) we are now, but with new platforms.
  
• We are effectively exchanging 50% of our orbat for a platform (F18F) that is seriously less capable in terms of range, payload, avionics, raw performance, maintainability (possibly), (and the big one) real LO, and lethality. Basically we are sacrificing a serious ammount of capability and combat lethality because we dont like the HUG programe.

The other thing I would like to see Australia get away from is the concept of major expensive upgrade programs like those seen on the Hornet CBR program and the navy's FFGUP. It would be interesting to look at how cost effective these programs have really been when compared with the alternative of buying new aircraft or ships.

This would entail purchsing new platforms as soon as threat platforms reach a level of capability that is comperable to ours, as new platform aquisitions take up to a decade to go from desision to platform. In order to aviod the FFGUP programe we would have had to decide on new platform aquisition in 1995ish. We would have had to rush the platform choice. What would we have bought, 2 or 3 off the run Arleigh Burkes which we couldn't man? Hardly ideal.

Upgrade programes may be expensive, and may not allways go so smoothly. However they allow us to make purchases that really suit or needs. If we intended to replace any platforms without upgrading them it would be a serious waste of said platforms service life. Why go through all the trouble of implementing a large and expensive platform aquisition programe because we want to aviod upgrading our current platforms when making those upgrades would keep said platforms combat viable. To be sure some upgrade programs were less than ideal, such as M113 & Sea Sprite, were platform aquisitions would have been a better choice. However i have to disagree with any notion of replaceing all of our platforms rather than upgrading them every time threat platforms reach an apropriate level of capability. It would be both constricting, wastefull and in some cases exesively expensive option.

 

[Tasman]

This would entail purchsing new platforms as soon as threat platforms reach a level of capability that is comperable to ours, as new platform aquisitions take up to a decade to go from desision to platform. In order to aviod the FFGUP programe we would have had to decide on new platform aquisition in 1995ish. We would have had to rush the platform choice. What would we have bought, 2 or 3 off the run Arleigh Burkes which we couldn't man? Hardly ideal.

The RAN had an excellent alternative in the offer from the USA of Four Kidd class DDGs, complete with SM-2 missiles.

Ozzy, I agree with a lot of what you say and I am not really advocating that we should never consider upgrading our major platforms. What I would like to see is a thorough cost benefit analysis before we do. In the case of the FFGUP I believe that purchase of the Kidds would have been far more beneficial for the RAN but the government of the day opted for a program that was of benefit to an Australian shipbuilder. There were good reasons for this but IMO, and with the benefit of hindsight based on the stuff up of the program, they made the wrong decision. In the case of the Hornet upgrade I agree that some upgrades were essential but once it reached the stage where CBR was necessary for a large proportion of the fleet I think enough was enough and F-15Es or Super Hornets should have been purchased some time ago.

Re the air combat force I concede that there is certainly a strong argument for a single platform for simplicity of maintenance and training but this needs to be balanced against the disadvantages of a single type and the problems caused by block obsolescence, as outlined by Magoo. I worry that Australia seems to have a boom/bust approach to defence purchases. I would like to see a well planned steady replacement program for major equipment across all three components of the ADF.

If the RAAF ends up with 90-100 F-35's I will be a very happy person but I will also be happy with a 50/50 or 25/75 mix of FA-18E/F's and F-35's with the FA-18E/F componment being replaced by the end of the 2020's with late model F-35's or an alternate platform such as the F-22 ,if it is cleared for export by then, or perhaps a yet to be designed aircraft.

Tas

 

[rjmaz1]

When I read that, I had thought you were stating that the existing SH order was for 12 aircraft, and a possible second SH order as referenced by Tasman from The Age and supported by Magoo and Barra was supposed to be for a further batch of 12.

What i meant that the second batch would be 24 aircraft instead of 12. Bringing the total number of Super Hornets including the first batch to 48 instead of 36. The First 24 Super Hornets will be used by two squadrons thats 12 aircraft per squadron. So if a third squadron of Super Hornets were required to convert some Classic hornets pilots over then we'd need another 12 aircraft. Even though we'd need only 12 aircraft we'd actually buy 24.

if a second batch of Super Hornets is purchased due to these delays it will purchase 24 aircraft instead of 12. So instead of operating 12 aircraft per squadron it will now operate 16 aircraft per squadron.

Operating 24 Super Hornets between two squadrons will be tight. Operating 36 Super Hornets between three squarons would be just as tight. Thats why 48 Super Hornets would be logical number if 3 squadrons are required.

Given the above, you seem to be writing that the planned purchase for 24 SH for Strike roles will result in high airtimes, particularly if the CBR program runs into trouble. From what I get when reading the above quote, a second order of 24 SH, would also serve in the squadrons that are tasked with Strike missions.

No quite. Number 1 and 6 squadrons will operate 12 Super Hornets each.
The second batch of 24 aircraft would allow 4 additional aircraft to each of these squadrons bringing Number 1 and 6 squadrons up to 16 Super Hornets each. This then leaves 16 second batch Super Hornets will allow one of the Classic Hornets to convert over to.

The Classic Hornets will then be shuffled around between the remaining squadrons

I do not see a second SH order significantly altering the numbers of aircraft the RAAF feel are needed for Strike missions, which seems to be what you are writing.

The RAAF doesn't need extra aircraft for the strike mission. Ordering another 24 makes it simpler and allows each squadron to operate a decent number of 16 aircraft per squadron. The second SH order would primarily be used for a Classic Hornet squadron to transfer over to which will help ease the load on the Classic Hornets. The Strike squadrons would get additional aircraft bringing the squadrons up to 16 aircraft each.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Operating 24 Super Hornets between two squadrons will be tight. Operating 36 Super Hornets between three squarons would be just as tight. Thats why 48 Super Hornets would be logical number if 3 squadrons are required.

I very much doubt the SH's will be evenly split the 2 Squadrons. 6 Squadron is the training unit and 1 Squadron is the operational unit, remember?

I think the split will depend (as always) on available airframes, they will be moved between the Squadrons based on training/operational requirements and will more than likely be closer to an 18 - 6 split between the operational squadron and the training squadron on a "permanent" basis which is similar to 1 Sqn now with it's 17x "operational" F-111C aircraft.

No quite. Number 1 and 6 squadrons will operate 12 Super Hornets each.
The second batch of 24 aircraft would allow 4 additional aircraft to each of these squadrons bringing Number 1 and 6 squadrons up to 16 Super Hornets each. This then leaves 16 second batch Super Hornets will allow one of the Classic Hornets to convert over to.

Can you show me one piece of credible information that shows defence is currently eying an additional SH buy?

 

[gf0012-aust]

I very much doubt the SH's will be evenly split the 2 Squadrons. 6 Squadron is the training unit and 1 Squadron is the operational unit, remember?

The split is likely to be uneven, plus its also more likely to be one squadron and a flight. Plus 1-2 aircraft could end up at ARDU (or whatever they call themselves now!)

The RAAF is unlikely to split up 24 aircraft into 2 short squadrons.

 

[Aussie Digger]

The split is likely to be uneven, plus its also more likely to be one squadron and a flight. Plus 1-2 aircraft could end up at ARDU (or whatever they call themselves now!)

The RAAF is unlikely to split up 24 aircraft into 2 short squadrons.

Er, that's what I said, didn't I? :

It's what I meant anyway... The idea that 2 short squadrons would be created is somebodies dream I think. I have never read anything that indicates it's likely to happen.