While we will be looking at it I am of the opinion the time frame is very optimistic. Considering development timeframes for aircraft over the last few decades combined with recent cuts in development funding for it for a clean sheet design I'm thinking a 20+ year development more realistic then 10+ years.
Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates
It seems to me that it would be extremely unlikely that the RAAF would seek to replace its EA-18G and FA-18F fleets earlier than the USN replaces theirs. With the USN driving the replacement program it would make sense for Australia to keep in step with them so, like Redlands, I believe it likely that the RAAF will be taking a very keen interest in the program. However long the development program takes I can't see it likely that an alternative would be any faster. If one does appear the RAAF could obviously consider it.
Of course it is possible that Australia will take a different path (e.g. an all F-35 fleet replacing the F-35A/FA-18F mix) but the Defence Strategic Update and Force Structure Plan does project a replacement of the capability currently provided by the EA-18G force with the operational effectiveness of the Growlers being maintained until that time.
Tas
Of course it is possible that Australia will take a different path (e.g. an all F-35 fleet replacing the F-35A/FA-18F mix) but the Defence Strategic Update and Force Structure Plan does project a replacement of the capability currently provided by the EA-18G force with the operational effectiveness of the Growlers being maintained until that time.
Tas
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Your right the NGAD program timing does look optimistic, we haven’t even seen what Boeing, LM and possibly Nothrop might offer for this program at this stage the only realistic contender for a Fighter buy in the early 30s is the F-35, none of the programs currently underway can realistically be talked about at this stage, an enormous amount of work and money needs to happen before that.
I think that there is one big difference between the NGAD program and the F-35 program. The NGAD program is not trying to make one platform be like a Swiss army knife that the F-35 was trying to do. So it's focused on being a carrier borne aircraft and like I said on the USN page as long as the USAF keeps its nose out, it should be ok. If they are prepared to undergo incremental improvements with each new tranche, and have more tranches, then they may be able get it out reasonably quickly. But the biggest risk to the program is the continual political dysfunction at Federal level in the Congress and between the Congress and the White House. Continuing Resolutions do not funding security make and many programs across the Defence landscape have been affected by this dysfunction. It creates uncertainty, extra costs, equipment and capability shortfalls etc., which snowball each year with each continuing resolution.
Short clip of a RAAF F-35A doing an inert bomb drop at the Evans Head range in Northern NSW, looks like I will have to keep an eye out ! Can't wait to catch a glimpse.
Cheers
Cheers
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Some good points there NG and one other point is it is a single Nation and single service program with 2 very experienced Jet Fighter designers so yes it should be doable on the technical level.
Boagrius
Well-Known Member
I suppose a lot may hinge on how technologically ambitious the project is as well. Clean sheet design suggests they're not going completely low-risk so that could get interesting. Nevertheless the likely requirements seem reasonably clear at this point so here's hoping it goes relatively smoothly. I have a suspicion that once H-20 breaks cover (and the massed LACM/ASCM/ASM capability that inevitably comes with it) the rationale for F/A-XX will become ever more obvious.
MARKMILES77
Active Member
Boeing released video of Loyal Wingman Engine test run.
Looks like aircraft is very close to flying.
So just curious, would anyone else consider the tail design to be a Pelikan Tail as was at one stage proposed for the Boeing X-32 ?
Cheers
Would say no coincidence at all, the guy that designed it originally worked for them and moved to Boeing in the buy out and put it forward as a design option for the X-32, so could have been the same guy, from memory there was a big split in the team on what tail design to go with on the X-32Looks that way to my untrained eye. The overall geometry reminds me of the McDonnell Douglas JAST concept:
No coincidence perhaps?
Cheers
Boagrius
Well-Known Member
Jeez, I'm no engineer but between the X-32 and the MD JAST design, I know which one I would have been rooting for (based on looks alone)!
V interesting to see it brought to life in the LW program. Looks damn slick from my POV.
Apache helicopters on the cusp of replacing Tigers
The government is on the cusp of spending $4.5 billion to buy 29 American-made Apache gunship helicopters – a deal which would cost hundreds of highly skills jobs including many in Queensland. Sky News understands a recommendation will be put to the National Security Committee to retire the...
www.skynews.com.au
More press rumours of an impending announcement of a Tiger replacement. That should go down well with the people currently employed maintaining the Tiger (who may have to get employed by Boeing now)
oldsig
That's a Murdoch outfit and about as reliable as Tass, Pravda or the Peoples Daily. I'd treat that with a very large dose of salt. Let's wait until a decision is released by the Minister before waxing lyrical.Apache helicopters on the cusp of replacing Tigers
The government is on the cusp of spending $4.5 billion to buy 29 American-made Apache gunship helicopters – a deal which would cost hundreds of highly skills jobs including many in Queensland. Sky News understands a recommendation will be put to the National Security Committee to retire the...
More press rumours of an impending announcement of a Tiger replacement. That should go down well with the people currently employed maintaining the Tiger (who may have to get employed by Boeing now)
oldsig
Yes, hence the word "rumours". It's almost as reliable as Fox (faux) news
oldsig
oldsig
Was wondering if anyone can answer?
Would the P8's have the required software to operate loyal wingman? If not, could it be updated?
Might be a way for NZ to have some sort of air defence without getting back into fast jets.
Would the P8's have the required software to operate loyal wingman? If not, could it be updated?
Might be a way for NZ to have some sort of air defence without getting back into fast jets.
Takao
The Bunker Group
No.
Would it likely be 'easy' (watch the software engineers cringe), yes. The -18's are USN, as are the P-8s so that simplifies a lot of the issues. It'll probably take a back seat to ASW / ASuW mods though, and I'd see it as self-defence for the P-8, not anyhting a fighter force would do.
Loyal Wingman Mk 2 though....
It was my understanding that the P-8A Poseidon already has the ability to command and control the MQ-4C Triton (UAV) so it would not be a huge leap to connect the Loyal Wingman. I'm guessing the Loyal Wingman would not have the same range as the MQ-4C, but I'm willing to bet that it could carry more of a load IE: Northrop Grumman’s recently-unveiled Very Lightweight Air launched Torpedo. LINK to flightglobal
I find the ”jobs” issue an interesting one. Somehow there will be fewer jobs, because we’re buying a larger fleet of a more complicated and advanced helicopter, if the rumours are correct?Apache helicopters on the cusp of replacing Tigers
The government is on the cusp of spending $4.5 billion to buy 29 American-made Apache gunship helicopters – a deal which would cost hundreds of highly skills jobs including many in Queensland. Sky News understands a recommendation will be put to the National Security Committee to retire the...
More press rumours of an impending announcement of a Tiger replacement. That should go down well with the people currently employed maintaining the Tiger (who may have to get employed by Boeing now)
oldsig
This larger fleet won’t have sustainment and update requirements, just like the current one has?
22 airframes were worth local assembly, but 29 aren’t?
It’s a curious argument...