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

[ADMk2]

Ah, just what we need - an experimental unproven design from a manufacturer with little experience. Service entry - 2040?

I agree, though maybe we can try and talk the Spanish into trying this aircraft out on-board Juan Carlos before we do?

I mean I'm sure it's a "great" idea attempting to operate a fixed wing aircraft, not designed for landing on anything besides a normal land based runway, onto an LHD with no arrestor systems, no fixed wing operations control facility and an airframe that has no excess power to allow "bolters" in the event it's unable to stop in time, prior to crashing into all those pesky helicopters that are supposed to be operated from the Landing HELICOPTER Dock ship's flight deck, but maybe we should get someone else to try it before we spend our precious few defence dollars on it?

Maybe we can even get Donutboy to try the first landing?

 

[Volkodav]

I agree, though maybe we can try and talk the Spanish into trying this aircraft out on-board Juan Carlos before we do?

I mean I'm sure it's a "great" idea attempting to operate a fixed wing aircraft, not designed for landing on anything besides a normal land based runway, onto an LHD with no arrestor systems, no fixed wing operations control facility and an airframe that has no excess power to allow "bolters" in the event it's unable to stop in time, prior to crashing into all those pesky helicopters that are supposed to be operated from the Landing HELICOPTER Dock ship's flight deck, but maybe we should get someone else to try it before we spend our precious few defence dollars on it?

Maybe we can even get Donutboy to try the first landing out?

I personally believe we should be buying Sea Gripens for the RAN FAA to fly off the LHDs. I recon we could design a kit for the LHDs in the form of a converted barge that contains all the required aviation gear and just float it into the dock as required.

 

[jack412]

well seeing the f-22 wont be ship launched, if we asked APA/Koop he would say that we should go with the SU-33, I'm sure he would have a chart showing how

 

[ADMk2]

I personally believe we should be buying Sea Gripens for the RAN FAA to fly off the LHDs. I recon we could design a kit for the LHDs in the form of a converted barge that contains all the required aviation gear and just float it into the dock as required.

Why stop there? We should talk to Watpac, the multiple story carpark experts. We could get them to build a double decker flight deck and that way launch helos from the upper deck and fixed wing aircraft from the normal flight deck at the same time!

No-one could accuse us of groupthink on the idea either!

All our problems solved!

 

[AegisFC]

I personally believe we should be buying Sea Gripens for the RAN FAA to fly off the LHDs. I recon we could design a kit for the LHDs in the form of a converted barge that contains all the required aviation gear and just float it into the dock as required.

No the obvious solution is to fit the LHD's with extra generators and use that extra power for EMALS.

 

[ADMk2]

No the obvious solution is to fit the LHD's with extra generators and use that extra power for EMALS.

EMALS launched AHRLAC's would be awesome! The only issue would be designing a combination EMALS / Ski - Jump, with the EMALS curving upwards at 12 degrees or so, but I'm sure it would only be a minor engineering issue requiring some minor "sheet metal bashing", much like the minor engineering needed to fit entirely new engines to a bomber aircraft.

Sure they probably also exceed their maximum cruise speed off the flight deck too, but only for a short distance. The extremely hgh drag wing would be perfect for slowing the aircraft up and of course reducing speeds for landing...

I think we've hit on a winner here. Just remember, we've come up with the idea too, so we'll have to bill the RAN for using our intellectual property when this project works up...

 

[Volkodav]

EMALS launched AHRLAC's would be awesome! The only issue would be designing a combination EMALS / Ski - Jump, with the EMALS curving upwards at 12 degrees or so, but I'm sure it would only be a minor engineering issue requiring some minor "sheet metal bashing", much like the minor engineering needed to fit entirely new engines to a bomber aircraft.

Sure they probably also exceed their maximum cruise speed off the flight deck too, but only for a short distance. The extremely hgh drag wing would be perfect for slowing the aircraft up and of course reducing speeds for landing...

I think we've hit on a winner here. Just remember, we've come up with the idea too, so we'll have to bill the RAN for using our intellectual property when this project works up...

Why not just go for a VLS version of the F-111, fit some really really large diameter cells and a big booster, you could rig each LHD with 12 cells, i.e. 12 F-111. Replace their landing gear with a hovercraft skirt and they could land next to the LHD and taxi into the dock for recovery and reloading into the VLS from below.

 

[ADMk2]

Why not just go for a VLS version of the F-111, fit some really really large diameter cells and a big booster, you could rig each LHD with 12 cells, i.e. 12 F-111. Replace their landing gear with a hovercraft skirt and they could land next to the LHD and taxi into the dock for recovery and reloading into the VLS from below.

I like it, but I can't help wondering if the F-111 is as capable as the AHRLAC in Australia's techno-strategic environment though?

 

[Abraham Gubler]

It's unlikely that the FAC aircraft will be any different to the AIR 5428 aircraft, as 4 Sqn is more of a developmental unit rather than operational unit. Both the favourites in the PC-21 and T-6 have weapons hardpoints, so they both can undertake the role.
I like the the AT-6 and probably it is a good capability for the RAAF to field (beefed up structure, and enhanced targeting and weapons capability), but it is different enough to the T-6 that it would deter any hypothetical RAAF purchase.

AIR 5428 actually has in it the replacement of the 4 SQN PC-9s with a new FAC aircraft. It also has a draft increase in numbers and a requirement for an actualy operational FAC aircraft rather than a training platform. The reason the PC-9 is training only is it is not designed for combat survivability. The pilots sit on top of stored liquid oxygen bottles... As to T-6/AT-6 it is more common than two different aircraft types.

 

[Tasman]

AIR 5428 actually has in it the replacement of the 4 SQN PC-9s with a new FAC aircraft. It also has a draft increase in numbers and a requirement for an actualy operational FAC aircraft rather than a training platform. The reason the PC-9 is training only is it is not designed for combat survivability. The pilots sit on top of stored liquid oxygen bottles... As to T-6/AT-6 it is more common than two different aircraft types.

Hmm - sitting on top of stored liquid oxygen bottles while flying over an armed enemy position would not be my preferred seat. AIR 5428 seems to be a step in the right direction.

Abe, how does the PC-21 stack up against the T-6/AT-6 re survivability?


Tas

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Abe, how does the PC-21 stack up against the T-6/AT-6 re survivability?

The T-6 has an oxgen generator and the AT-6 cockpit armour and the like. AFAIK the PC-21 is still a training only platform (stored oxygen).

Personally I think the Super Tucano is probably better in the FAC/LARA mission.

http://www.builtforthemission.com/imagedir/1305786238.jpg

 

[weegee]

Hi guys, I just happened to come over this article.
Cookies must be enabled | The Australian
I just wonder to myself when are these clown's going to give up their witch hunt on these planes? What do they base their opinions on? there is far more information about the F35 than there and how competent it is than there is about the T-50 and the Chinese thing which are so far behind in development compared to the F35 its not funny.

 

[Todjaeger]

Hi guys, I just happened to come over this article.
Cookies must be enabled | The Australian
I just wonder to myself when are these clown's going to give up their witch hunt on these planes? What do they base their opinions on? there is far more information about the F35 than there and how competent it is than there is about the T-50 and the Chinese thing which are so far behind in development compared to the F35 its not funny.

They might (emphasis MIGHT) give it up once the F-35 has entered service, been deployed to combat, and defeated the Su-35, PAk-FA and J-20 in air to air combat. Again, they only might drop it once all the above have occurred. Honestly I suspect that the real reason why Kopp and the Goon squad will end up dropping it is because they die of old age and/or they go into cardiac failure/stroke out when they are proven wrong.

Something which leaves me rather disappointed with the Australian is that they indicated that APA had done recent modeling to determine that the Russian and Chinese aircraft would defeat the F-35. The Australian neglected to mention anything about APA's qualifications or access to technical information which would qualify them to accurately model such engagements. By just including that they had modeled such an engagement, the Australian ended up leaving people who are otherwise ignorant of who/what APA is with the impression that APA is in a position to have an expert opinion.

-Cheers

 

[jack412]

They might (emphasis MIGHT) give it up once the F-35 has entered service, been deployed to combat, and defeated the Su-35, PAk-FA and J-20 in air to air combat. Again, they only might drop it once all the above have occurred. Honestly I suspect that the real reason why Kopp and the Goon squad will end up dropping it is because they die of old age and/or they go into cardiac failure/stroke out when they are proven wrong.

Something which leaves me rather disappointed with the Australian is that they indicated that APA had done recent modeling to determine that the Russian and Chinese aircraft would defeat the F-35. The Australian neglected to mention anything about APA's qualifications or access to technical information which would qualify them to accurately model such engagements. By just including that they had modeled such an engagement, the Australian ended up leaving people who are otherwise ignorant of who/what APA is with the impression that APA is in a position to have an expert opinion.

-Cheers

He seems quite proud of his modeling

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Something which leaves me rather disappointed with the Australian is that they indicated that APA had done recent modeling to determine that the Russian and Chinese aircraft would defeat the F-35. The Australian neglected to mention anything about APA's qualifications or access to technical information which would qualify them to accurately model such engagements. By just including that they had modeled such an engagement, the Australian ended up leaving people who are otherwise ignorant of who/what APA is with the impression that APA is in a position to have an expert opinion.

The worst was ABC who broadcast to air Peter Criss and Chris Mills playing Dungeons and Dragons or something to demonstrate air combat. They are both sitting at a table and one says 'my Hornets fired their missiles' then the other says 'my Sukhois shot down your tankers' and they roll a dice or something... and that proved the entire RAAF air power srategy was wrong.

Insert face palm here.

 

[lopez]

The worst was ABC who broadcast to air Peter Criss and Chris Mills playing Dungeons and Dragons or something to demonstrate air combat. They are both sitting at a table and one says 'my Hornets fired their missiles' then the other says 'my Sukhois shot down your tankers' and they roll a dice or something... and that proved the entire RAAF air power srategy was wrong.

Insert face palm here.

LOL where can I see this?

 

[jack412]

I can't wait to read the full transcript of their public submission, although some were 'visibly' moved by it

"By the time the group was 30 minutes into its presentation at least five of the committee members had left the room."
Joint strike fighter program a 'failure': think tank - National News - National - General - The Canberra Times

@ lopez
Four Corners: Flying Blind - Video on Demand

 

[Milne Bay]

I can't wait to read the full transcript of their public submission, although some were 'visibly' moved by it

"By the time the group was 30 minutes into its presentation at least five of the committee members had left the room."
Joint strike fighter program a 'failure': think tank - National News - National - General - The Canberra Times

It seems that this was the highlight of the presentation:

Judging from the number of questions, the remaining committee members found the segment of the presentation detailing computer simulations of a hypothetical 2018 air battle between either 240 F-35s, 240 F-22 Raptors or 240 Super Hornets and an equivalent number of Sukhoi SU35s off the coast of Taiwan the most interesting.

It was claimed only 30 F-35s would survive as against no survivors for the Super Hornet force and 139 survivors for the F-22 force.

Senator Johnston said the claims were interesting but stressed it was important the committee be provided with the assumptions on which the simulation was based so it could be assessed with some degree of accuracy.


The assumptions on which the simulation was based appear to be ... well ......
And how did they achieve access to classified data on any of the platforms .....

Let's hope that this dog has had its day .

 

[Abraham Gubler]

LOL where can I see this?

See the link Jack4xy provided. Four Corners showing so much ignorance about defence that it raises serious questions about all that other stuff they show that I don't have any competency to judge them by. It was back in 2007 or so at the height of the media's made up Super Hornet 'conspiracy' frenzy.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The assumptions on which the simulation was based appear to be ... well ......
And how did they achieve access to classified data on any of the platforms .....

Let's hope that this dog has had its day .

What and miss out on all the fun?