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

[cdxbow]

Yep, and given that @hairyman's concerns have long centred on long-range strike, I thought this was relevant:

Lockheed Martin Progressing Towards LRASM Integration on F-35 - Naval News

During the Surface Navy Association (SNA) 2021 Virtual Symposium held last week, Lockheed Martin was showcasing new artist impression showing two LRASM fitted on a F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

www.navalnews.com

The F35A can already hit F111-level range stats on a single AAR top-up, so a decent stockpile of JSM, LRASM and JASSM-ER's distributed across the 72 airframes (plus the Rhinos) should take our long-range strike to an entirely new level.

The P8, too.
Does anyone know how many LRASM the P8 can carry? It is reported to have 5 internal hardpoints and 6 external. I know not all hardpoints are necessarily equal. The other missile question I had was can the F35 carry 2 JSM internally and 2 LRASM externally at the same time?
The other question I had was how far the proposed drop tanks would increase the range of the F35? I know this is 'how long is a bit of string' and it would depend on weight and the aerodynamic effects of what they are carrying, This article from the drive Lockheed Eyes Giving F-35s More Gas With Drop Tanks And That's A Very Good Thing (thedrive.com) talks about 600 lb drop tanks and says this "The F-35A's internal fuel capacity is almost 18,500 pounds. The two drop tanks would give the Joint Strike Fighters around 26,650 pounds of fuel in total" which is approximately a third more fuel. Roughly how much further range would that give?

 

[Redlands18]

For anyone who is interested ABC Australia to broadcast a RAAF Centenary tribute tonight Monday 29/3 at 9.30pm, might be worth watching.

 

[Boagrius]

The P8, too.
Does anyone know how many LRASM the P8 can carry? It is reported to have 5 internal hardpoints and 6 external. I know not all hardpoints are necessarily equal. The other missile question I had was can the F35 carry 2 JSM internally and 2 LRASM externally at the same time?
The other question I had was how far the proposed drop tanks would increase the range of the F35? I know this is 'how long is a bit of string' and it would depend on weight and the aerodynamic effects of what they are carrying, This article from the drive Lockheed Eyes Giving F-35s More Gas With Drop Tanks And That's A Very Good Thing (thedrive.com) talks about 600 lb drop tanks and says this "The F-35A's internal fuel capacity is almost 18,500 pounds. The two drop tanks would give the Joint Strike Fighters around 26,650 pounds of fuel in total" which is approximately a third more fuel. Roughly how much further range would that give?

The stat I read (see my earlier post on the subject) was ~40%. The adaptive/variable cycle engine update/replacement of the F135 is routinely associated with a further 30-35% range bump (claimed) so the post-2030 F35A may have some serious legs on it.

Not sure about P8 hardpoints for LRASM but I imagine a 2 x JSM (internal) + 2 x LRASM (external) should be doable. The alternative, if a "dirty" external loadout is acceptable, would be 4-6 x JSM (2 internal; up to 4 external) + 2 x internal AMRAAM/JATM for self defence.

Photo shows F-35A fitted with two externally mounted Joint Strike Missiles

Last week the Norwegian Crown Prince visited Lockheed Martin’s Ft Worth facility as part of an effort to promote Norwegian industry within the

theaviationist.com

Given that JSM is a ~300nm weapon (on a hi-hi-low profile) that is... a lot of stealthy standoff weapons. 24 LACM/AShM from a single 4-ship...

 

[ngatimozart]

From memory the LRASM is quite a bit heavier than the Harpoon. Therefore it may be possible for the P-8A to carry a LRASM on the inboard hard points and a JSM on the outboard hard points. I am looking at both from a range POV and also a warhead size POV.

 

[Stampede]

2 points I'd note - with some circumspection....

1. There is no project for a fourth JSF Sqn. There is a project for additional long-range strike that may be answered by a 4th Sqn (and is a common view), but without going into details it could also be answered by a...say, Tomahawk.

2. There was significant wargamming and analysis with the FSP, especially with respect to the KC-30s. As the final result shows, there are other aspects that improve effects on Red Force that are better value than the extra tankers. It was a ....contriversial, decision shall we say. But it was solid enough to make commitments on.

Looking at manned fast air numbers over the decades

72 x Classic Hornet / F35 A + 36 x S Hornet / Growlers - ( yep lost a couple and the Growlers do clever stuff ) = Around 108
75 x Classic Hornets + 24 x F111 ( Plus some top ups over their service life including a Tranche of 15 in the 1990's and some others ) = Around 99 - 114
110 x plus Mirage + 24 x F111 plus 20 x FAA A 4G Skyhawk = around 150 aircraft

The above is a rough guide as to what we have had over the decades. Attrition and tops up aircraft will play with the numbers but the important thing to take away is that in broad terms fleet numbers have gone down.

Now I do get its not apple for apples over the generations and the catch phrase today is about creating effects through a holistic galvanizing of broad resources to "Do the Job".
That being said be it a tank, ship of plane sometimes it's still just a numbers game.

My personal view is that 4th Sqn is budgeted for and will be adopted.
Will it be additional F35s or retention of the S Hornet time will tell, but again it is about manned numbers in the RAAF.
Unmanned platforms will evolve and be adopted; but will they be at the expense of manned platforms or a compliment to existing manned numbers.
This is the question for the 2020's which I'm sure will be different to later decades.

Given this transition, what manned numbers regardless of plane type flown could / should the RAAF play with in the next ten to fifteen years.


Regards S

 

[Boagrius]

Looking at manned fast air numbers over the decades

72 x Classic Hornet / F35 A + 36 x S Hornet / Growlers - ( yep lost a couple and the Growlers do clever stuff ) = Around 108
75 x Classic Hornets + 24 x F111 ( Plus some top ups over their service life including a Tranche of 15 in the 1990's and some others ) = Around 99 - 114
110 x plus Mirage + 24 x F111 plus 20 x FAA A 4G Skyhawk = around 150 aircraft

The above is a rough guide as to what we have had over the decades. Attrition and tops up aircraft will play with the numbers but the important thing to take away is that in broad terms fleet numbers have gone down.

Now I do get its not apple for apples over the generations and the catch phrase today is about creating effects through a holistic galvanizing of broad resources to "Do the Job".
That being said be it a tank, ship of plane sometimes it's still just a numbers game.

My personal view is that 4th Sqn is budgeted for and will be adopted.
Will it be additional F35s or retention of the S Hornet time will tell, but again it is about manned numbers in the RAAF.
Unmanned platforms will evolve and be adopted; but will they be at the expense of manned platforms or a compliment to existing manned numbers.
This is the question for the 2020's which I'm sure will be different to later decades.

Given this transition, what manned numbers regardless of plane type flown could / should the RAAF play with in the next ten to fifteen years.


Regards S

Happy to defer to @Takao's expertise on this as it far outstrips my own but I do believe last year's Strategic Update explicitly mentioned an additional air combat capability valued at up to $6.7b post 2025. This was listed as distinct from Air Teaming Vehicle (loyal wingman) and various other standoff weapon programs.

https://www1.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-11/Factsheet_Air.pdf

That said, recent comments from the top suggest that the RAAF may be keeping its options open regarding the 4th squadron (looking at you NGAD), including whether they pursue one at all.

Air force could reject extra Joint Strike Fighters

The RAAF chief says changing strategic circumstances and technological advances could see Australia only accept the 72 fighter jets it has committed to.

www.afr.com

Retooling for new objectives, Air Force looks beyond 'things with wings'

Defence leaders have been steering the organisation and industry to better prepare for so-called grey zone conflicts.

www.canberratimes.com.au

 

[hauritz]

It is quite conceivable that the Super Hornet might solder on for quite a few years yet for the simple reason that it can do stuff that the F-35 can't. For example potential game changing weapons such as hypersonic missiles may be too large to fit the F-35s internal weapons bay.

Australia Teams Up With U.S. To Get Hypersonic Missiles For Its Super Hornets In Five Years

Plans call for the rapid prototyping of a new air-breathing long-range missile for the Royal Australian Air Force.

www.thedrive.com

 

[Boagrius]

Interesting. IIRC the F35's inboard wing stations are rated up to ~5000lbs, so it should be able to lug some pretty hefty missiles externally, albeit to the detriment of RCS values. Then again the Super Hornet may well make a more cost-effective bus for really long-range standoff weapons. Clearly momentum building in this space at any rate...

 

[StingrayOZ]

The RAAF seemed very focused on the 4th squadron, they even had it listed on their website regarding the F-35.

F-35A Lightning II | Royal Australian Air Force

The F-35A Lightning II is the Australian Defence Force’s first fifth-generation air combat capability. It is a highly advanced multi-role, supersonic, stealth fighter which will meet Australia’s requirements to defeat current and emerging threats.

web.archive.org

The forth squadron is seen as critical for overseas deployments and basing (such as Butterworth). Its not just about extra airframes, its about having enough of a singular type to be able to meet that demand for deployment afar. So it can sustain such a presence long term.

While I would say the 4th squadron is not a certainty, I would say its a bit premature to say its dead and buried, afaik the RAAF still very much feels the same way about it and other solutions do not solve their actual problem. But this is still a commitment to be made, and the RAAF has other acquisitions it wants to make. It doesn't want to get into a trading game for that 4th squadron.

The F-35 as a platform is maturing, its entirely possible it will be able to replace the Superhornets in their roles in block 4 or 5. From Australia's point of view the F-35 has been a reasonable acquisition, it is a good fit for Australia, and other allies, like Singapore and Japan have also acquired the plane. It also has significant development potential.

While unmanned platforms exist and will be acquired, generally they are in combination to manned platforms. They are fundamentally different platforms, with different roles, treated differently. I am somewhat sceptical that unmanned platforms will exist in a low risk way, in numbers, to be able to effectively replace the needs of the 4th squadron. Even if they do, then that may cause a complete restructure to the RAAF and they may change the number of aircraft in a squadron and the whole CONOPS around aircraft and airpower. That is a huge change to happen within 8 years, and to happen so strongly enough to completely change the existing structures.

Given the future strategic environment, I think F-35 is still in the game. However, there are other issues at play like fleet obsolesce, which has bitten us before.

 

[ADMk2]

It is quite conceivable that the Super Hornet might solder on for quite a few years yet for the simple reason that it can do stuff that the F-35 can't. For example potential game changing weapons such as hypersonic missiles may be too large to fit the F-35s internal weapons bay.

Australia Teams Up With U.S. To Get Hypersonic Missiles For Its Super Hornets In Five Years

Plans call for the rapid prototyping of a new air-breathing long-range missile for the Royal Australian Air Force.

www.thedrive.com

When Block IV JSF lands and full external stores carriage arrives, the only thing Super Hornet will really bring us, is some security in case of JSF groundings...

Apart from arguable benefits of a two seater, there is no capability area where the Super Hornet will be a better option than F-35A. It is however a sunk cost, so maximising the return on investment makes sense, but I suspect the Chief of Air Force’s comments on the 4th JSF squadron and possible other options (ie: NGAD, Tempest or missile based solutions perhaps) mean that Shornet may not have that much longer to serve within RAAF.

Personally I think given the deterioration of our strategic environment the 4th JSF squadron should be acquired immediately as an addition not replacement to the existing 1/6 Sqn capability, but that is a big decision for Government to make, substantially increasing the size of RAAF’s fighter force.

 

[DDG38]

Happy birthday RAAF ! "Forming the number 100, to represent Air Force's centenary, gathered personnel are representative of the specialisations and musterings in today's Air Force. One of each RAAF aircraft, in service, is also represented at RAAF Base Amberley, Queensland." Image source : ADF Image Library link -

 

[alexsa]

Happy to defer to @Takao's expertise on this as it far outstrips my own but I do believe last year's Strategic Update explicitly mentioned an additional air combat capability valued at up to $6.7b post 2025. This was listed as distinct from Air Teaming Vehicle (loyal wingman) and various other standoff weapon programs.

https://www1.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-11/Factsheet_Air.pdf

That said, recent comments from the top suggest that the RAAF may be keeping its options open regarding the 4th squadron (looking at you NGAD), including whether they pursue one at all.

Air force could reject extra Joint Strike Fighters

The RAAF chief says changing strategic circumstances and technological advances could see Australia only accept the 72 fighter jets it has committed to.

www.afr.com

Retooling for new objectives, Air Force looks beyond 'things with wings'

Defence leaders have been steering the organisation and industry to better prepare for so-called grey zone conflicts.

www.canberratimes.com.au

That is Andrew Tillett again and I am beginning to suspect he draws conclusions based on a dislike of the F.35. He did have a dig noting there were 871 deficiencies with the aircraft and connecting that to the fact the 4th tranche is under review.

This seems disingenuous as AM Hupfield was reasonable where he noted that Hupfield has said it would be foolish” of him not to examine the changing strategic circumstances and advances in technology “to find out whether the right answer is more F-35s, or whether indeed there is a sixth-generation fighter ...or other options

Noting some of the development that are occurring this appears reasonable.

 

[Stampede]

When Block IV JSF lands and full external stores carriage arrives, the only thing Super Hornet will really bring us, is some security in case of JSF groundings...

Apart from arguable benefits of a two seater, there is no capability area where the Super Hornet will be a better option than F-35A. It is however a sunk cost, so maximising the return on investment makes sense, but I suspect the Chief of Air Force’s comments on the 4th JSF squadron and possible other options (ie: NGAD, Tempest or missile based solutions perhaps) mean that Shornet may not have that much longer to serve within RAAF.

Personally I think given the deterioration of our strategic environment the 4th JSF squadron should be acquired immediately as an addition not replacement to the existing 1/6 Sqn capability, but that is a big decision for Government to make, substantially increasing the size of RAAF’s fighter force.

Realistically the RAAF are in a very good position going forward.
Three Squadrons of 5 gen Aircraft in the F35A and a Squadron of S Hornets; which by all accounts are a top performer, young in flight hours and will be in US Navy services for decades to come which should allow for growth and supportability.

I recall reading an article some time ago which I cannot find today as to what is the optimum number of Multirole fighter Squadrons for the RAAF?
Three was deemed too little, four maybe Ok, but the real desired number at the top of the wish list was understandably a total of Five.

Sure the unmanned stuff and long ranged weapons' will be adopted, but as to manned aircraft numbers there will be some pressure due to the geostrategic environment to make some big decisions maybe earlier on specific platforms than was originally hoped for a decade ago.
This could certainly imply an extra Tranche of F35's and suggest retention of the Super Hornets and Growlers.

If so would the RAAF have the personal to support such fleet numbers?

Regards S

 

[ngatimozart]

The 2021 Avalon Airshow has been delayed a week because of the change in dates for the Formula 1 GP in November. New dates for the Air Show is now 30/11/21 - 05

AVALON Airshow deferred a week because of F1 Grand Prix - CONTACT magazine

The Australian International Air Show at Avalon, Victoria, has been deferred for a week because of the rescheduled Melbourne Formula 1.

www.contactairlandandsea.com

Happy centenary congratulations to the RAAF from the RNZAF

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=195723088694427

 

[ADMk2]

Realistically the RAAF are in a very good position going forward.
Three Squadrons of 5 gen Aircraft in the F35A and a Squadron of S Hornets; which by all accounts are a top performer, young in flight hours and will be in US Navy services for decades to come which should allow for growth and supportability.

I recall reading an article some time ago which I cannot find today as to what is the optimum number of Multirole fighter Squadrons for the RAAF?
Three was deemed too little, four maybe Ok, but the real desired number at the top of the wish list was understandably a total of Five.

Sure the unmanned stuff and long ranged weapons' will be adopted, but as to manned aircraft numbers there will be some pressure due to the geostrategic environment to make some big decisions maybe earlier on specific platforms than was originally hoped for a decade ago.
This could certainly imply an extra Tranche of F35's and suggest retention of the Super Hornets and Growlers.

If so would the RAAF have the personal to support such fleet numbers?

Regards S

Like the RAN, I think RAAF would have to expand to properly man 5 fighter squadrons, but I don’t see that as a particularly large problem for our nation. Just a matter of will and funding...

 

[oldsig127]

Like the RAN, I think RAAF would have to expand to properly man 5 fighter squadrons, but I don’t see that as a particularly large problem for our nation. Just a matter of will and funding...

Bloody difficult when enlisting to retain the numbers we have now is hard enough and more importantly retaining the new enlistees after training. Pilots, technical and specialist members take an age to reach full competency and then become very attractive to civilian employers with $$$. And if they leave you get a gap in the middle ranks where the greatest strength should be.

Don't underestimate manning as an major element on your critical path to standing up new assets.

oldsig

 

[John Fedup]

The manning issue will be influenced on how well the commercial aviation sector recovers from COVID. The business travellers provide a significant portion of revenue to this sector and there might very well be big changes wrt business travel just like the trend to work from home. Travel might be deemed as a only when absolutely necessary expense. Huge savings using Zoom versus travel and commercial office space. The next 2-4 years could see some big changes.

 

[ADMk2]

The manning issue will be influenced on how well the commercial aviation sector recovers from COVID. The business travellers provide a significant portion of revenue to this sector and there might very well be big changes wrt business travel just like the trend to work from home. Travel might be deemed as a only when absolutely necessary expense. Huge savings using Zoom versus travel and commercial office space. The next 2-4 years could see some big changes.

Indeed, I see the relative security of Government jobs. aka ADF as one of the biggest pluses at the present time, with respect to any ADF expansion.

Certainly ADF hold few (publicly anyway) concerns with respect to manning, when they are doubling the size of the submarine force, increasing the manning requirements with the Hobart, Canberra, Hunter and Arafura Classes and expanding Army positions with respect to Beersheba Brigades and the new land capabilities announced under 2020 Strategic Update.

Seems RAAF is overdue for it’s turn at expansion and increased personnel positions, in that light...

 

[John Fedup]

I can think of a few Commonwealth members looking at the ADF and seeing very green pastures.

 

[Boagrius]

I can think of a few Commonwealth members looking at the ADF and seeing very green pastures.

Just the English speaking ones?