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

[StingrayOZ]

Nope, because that's the difference between a professionally trained military that understands ROE and international law, and a bunch of bully thugs.

At what stage do things escalate to something mildly warm? We still basically have this idea that things will just cool down and go back to normal relations. I see Canada has also been complaining about China's actions in the SCS in relation to its patrols.

Will P8's need escorts?

 

[ADMk2]

At what stage do things escalate to something mildly warm? We still basically have this idea that things will just cool down and go back to normal relations. I see Canada has also been complaining about China's actions in the SCS in relation to its patrols.

Will P8's need escorts?

Self-escorting P-8A’s maybe?

 

[John Newman]

Self-escorting P-8A’s maybe?

View attachment 49403

Or.....

A future Loyal Wingman escort perhaps?

A future evolved Loyal Wingman, with long range/endurance, may well be a suitable armed escort for P-8A, KC-30A or E-7A.

Time will tell.

 

[Julian 82]

Or.....

A future Loyal Wingman escort perhaps?

A future evolved Loyal Wingman, with long range/endurance, may well be a suitable armed escort for P-8A, KC-30A or E-7A.

Time will tell.

What about F-35As operating from RMAF Butterworth with KC-30 tanker support?

 

[old faithful]

Nope, because that's the difference between a professionally trained military that understands ROE and international law, and a bunch of bully thugs.

I would suggest that pulling up in front, and dispensing chaff in your face, where engines ingest some, might step up the ROE, and allow action for self defence and defence of the crew.
Just a 3 second burst of some of the EW suite would send a message to get out of the way, without escalating the situation further. Also a good opportunity to see the reaction of the PLAAF pilots, if any.

 

[south]

Just a 3 second burst of some of the EW suite would send a message to get out of the way, without escalating the situation further. Also a good opportunity to see the reaction of the PLAAF pilots, if any.

Firstly - what effect do you suggest a notional “EW suite” could provide to provoke a reaction?

Secondly - from a quick online search it becomes evident that baseline P-8a does not currently have an onboard Jammer, and the USN are working at integrating a podded solution. The podded solution is likely still in test. Given the relative newness of the article(s), and a lack of any formal notices of RAAF acquisition, I’d say that it is very unlikely that RAAF P-8 have the podded system in use at this time.

 

[DDG38]

I would suggest that pulling up in front, and dispensing chaff in your face, where engines ingest some, might step up the ROE, and allow action for self defence and defence of the crew.
Just a 3 second burst of some of the EW suite would send a message to get out of the way, without escalating the situation further. Also a good opportunity to see the reaction of the PLAAF pilots, if any.

Great, and if the PLA have any semi competent SIGINT assets nearby you've just given them data on your jamming capability just to get a reaction from one fighter jock. Hardly a decent trade.

 

[old faithful]

Yeah a 3 second burst of some of the capabilities is what I suggested.
Reaction would be to see if the fighter jock reacts. Confirming that it blinds his systems for a few seconds.
The AN/APS 149 , fitted to all of the production P8s as standard is capable of radar jamming, producing fake targets, frying electronic components, and some cyberwarfare.
I don't think their sigint would get any benefit at all from a burst like that other than probably blacking them out for a few seconds as well.
It would send a message that it's not ok to bully aircraft in international airspace.
Dumping chaff in front of one our or any other countries aircraft is totally unacceptable.
Potentially damaging engines and endangering the crew and aircraft.
Or we just let them do as they please and publish an article in the ABC then retract it again, so as not to poke the tiger in case he gets angrier.....

 

[hauritz]

I would suggest that this is one of the roles the loyal wingman was designed to fill. Maybe you would need to develop a longer ranged version, use external fuel tanks or in flight refuelling but it’s presence might be enough to deter any fighter jock from getting too close.

Playing chicken with an attritable aircraft isn’t likely to end well.

 

[DDG38]

The AN/APS 149 , fitted to all of the production P8s as standard is capable of radar jamming, producing fake targets, frying electronic components, and some cyberwarfare.

I'm not up to speed on the P-8 fitouts in RAAF service, but I'm sure I haven't seen any photo of one of our P-8s fitted with that pod, do you have a reference confirming it's a standard fit ?

 

[old faithful]

An/aps 149 is not a pod, it's the standard radar fitted to the P8s as far as I'm aware.

My bad, the standard radar is the AN/APY 10, which is a development of the 149.

AN/APY10 is an American multifunction radar developed for the U.S. Navy's Boeing P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol and surveillance aircraft.[1] AN/APY-10 is the latest descendant of a radar family originally developed by Texas Instruments, and now Raytheon after it acquired the radar business of TI, for Lockheed P-3 Orion, the predecessor of P-8.

The AN/APY-10 mechanically scanned radar is a development of Raytheon's AN/APS-149 radar.[2] Compared to the AN/APS-137, it is smaller in size, lighter, and uses less power.[1] The radar is optimized for (from Wikipedia) I know, but othe sites state the same info, like global security.

 

[rossfrb_1]

Who can forget the Hainan Island incident?

Hainan Island incident - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Apparently the Chinese gained a lot of information from having that EP-3 land on their turf.
Who knows maybe they are trying again?
I imagine the self destruct mechanisms on a P8 are a lot more comprehensive.
If anyone can shed some non-classified light on that I'd be interested to know.
rb

 

[Rock the kasbah]

As an outsider who has seen the P8 crew at their work station on the tv
What's the plan?
They're not sitting in ejection seats,
Not even wearing parachutes
Is it a run to grab one and head for the door?

 

[John Newman]

What about F-35As operating from RMAF Butterworth with KC-30 tanker support?

Possible, but isn’t that the type of role an MQ-28A Ghost Bat is meant for? Being a Loyal Wingman?

According to the RAAF website (airforce.gov.au), an F-35A has a range of 2,200km and a combat radius of 1093km.

The same RAAF website lists the MQ-28A as having a range of 3,700km, no combat radius is given, but let’s assume it’s approx half, eg, 1,850km.

Yes an F-35A is capable of AAR, an MQ-28A isn’t.

But let’s roll the clock forward, let’s assume in the future there will be other versions of MQ-28A, a B or C or D etc, version.

Versions with longer range, capable of AAR, capable of providing AAR to other MQ-28.

I think the heart of the Loyal Wingman program is not the airframe, but the AI tech, which should reasonably easily be ‘transplanted’ to other unmanned airframes.

I would rather see a ‘future’ RAAF having the very expensive, and combat capable, manned aircraft not being bogged down escorting assets such as P-8A, KC-30A, E-7A, etc, that role should be performed by a ‘flock’ of Loyal Wingman (which will also operate in the front line too).

Anyway, just my opinion of course.

 

[Bob53]

What would the response be if the chaff caused both engines to shut down and brought the P8 down! What could we do about it! Protest loudly?

 

[ADMk2]

Yeah a 3 second burst of some of the capabilities is what I suggested.
Reaction would be to see if the fighter jock reacts. Confirming that it blinds his systems for a few seconds.
The AN/APS 149 , fitted to all of the production P8s as standard is capable of radar jamming, producing fake targets, frying electronic components, and some cyberwarfare.
I don't think their sigint would get any benefit at all from a burst like that other than probably blacking them out for a few seconds as well.
It would send a message that it's not ok to bully aircraft in international airspace.
Dumping chaff in front of one our or any other countries aircraft is totally unacceptable.
Potentially damaging engines and endangering the crew and aircraft.
Or we just let them do as they please and publish an article in the ABC then retract it again, so as not to poke the tiger in case he gets angrier.....

What they would do to such an action, is to soak up all those electrons using ELINT aircraft capabilities and then laugh at us.

At the very least they would gain better understanding of the frequency spectrum spread our radar uses, the amount of energy such a radar is producing and it’s sidelobe patterns and we’d be expanding their threat libraries for them, free of charge, with no discernible advantage to us.

 

[hauritz]

Possible, but isn’t that the type of role an MQ-28A Ghost Bat is meant for? Being a Loyal Wingman?

According to the RAAF website (airforce.gov.au), an F-35A has a range of 2,200km and a combat radius of 1093km.

The same RAAF website lists the MQ-28A as having a range of 3,700km, no combat radius is given, but let’s assume it’s approx half, eg, 1,850km.

Yes an F-35A is capable of AAR, an MQ-28A isn’t.

But let’s roll the clock forward, let’s assume in the future there will be other versions of MQ-28A, a B or C or D etc, version.

Versions with longer range, capable of AAR, capable of providing AAR to other MQ-28.

I think the heart of the Loyal Wingman program is not the airframe, but the AI tech, which should reasonably easily be ‘transplanted’ to other unmanned airframes.

I would rather see a ‘future’ RAAF having the very expensive, and combat capable, manned aircraft not being bogged down escorting assets such as P-8A, KC-30A, E-7A, etc, that role should be performed by a ‘flock’ of Loyal Wingman (which will also operate in the front line too).

Anyway, just my opinion of course.

Even unarmed I imagine the loyal wingman would likely just have to place itself between the aircraft it is escorting and any Intercepting fighter. Very hard to get around an aircraft that is perfectly willing to sacrifice itself rather than let you approach too close to its escort.

 

[old faithful]

What they would do to such an action, is to soak up those all electrons using ELINT aircraft capabilities and then laugh at us.

At the very least they would gain better understanding of the frequency spectrum spread our radar uses, the amount of energy such a radar is producing and it’s sidelobe patterns and we’d be expanding their threat libraries for them, free of charge, with no discernible advantage to us.

Ok, ok I get the picture.
Personally, I don't think they would gain much at all. I'm sure the P8s system is well protected, otherwise , even when scanning the ocean and looking at what's going on in SCS gives them plenty of knowledge, as the radar is active for hours.
Just ignore them, hope the chaff dosnt damage the engines, or their pilot dosnt clip the P8.
It's not like they are not laughing now anyway.
We just put out a media release, and then they turn and twist it to what are you doing in our region anyway?
PLAAF pulling stunts like this is going to require more action than the ABC publishing a weak protest article to stop them continuing.
Let's see how many more incidents happen.....if they are reported.

 

[Pusser01]

An/aps 149 is not a pod, it's the standard radar fitted to the P8s as far as I'm aware.

My bad, the standard radar is the AN/APY 10, which is a development of the 149.

AN/APY10 is an American multifunction radar developed for the U.S. Navy's Boeing P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol and surveillance aircraft.[1] AN/APY-10 is the latest descendant of a radar family originally developed by Texas Instruments, and now Raytheon after it acquired the radar business of TI, for Lockheed P-3 Orion, the predecessor of P-8.

The AN/APY-10 mechanically scanned radar is a development of Raytheon's AN/APS-149 radar.[2] Compared to the AN/APS-137, it is smaller in size, lighter, and uses less power.[1] The radar is optimized for (from Wikipedia) I know, but other sites state the same info, like global security.

Actually, Wikipedia is incorrect on this. The APY-10 is the radar fitted in the nose of the P-8A. The APS-149 was the radar in a canoe type pod fitted to the underbelly of some P-3C's. An updated form of this radar, the APS-154 has been fitted to a limited number of USN P-8A's. To my knowledge, this radar system has not been exported to any other countries yet. Cheers. Behold These Awesome Shots Of A Navy P-8A Poseidon Carrying Its Big Secretive Radar Pod (thedrive.com)

 

[recce.k1]

Actually, it could be that Australia gets the last laugh.

Yet another CCP fail (hot on the heals of their failure to gain a security deal with the Pacific Is)? They certainly aren't winning friends with their tactics.

There is a measure of carrot-and-stick in all this perhaps intended to influence the new Australian government. However, this game can be played both ways. The Australian government waited ten days before revealing the P-8 intercept. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s purposeful olive branch media announcement attempting to suggest that Australia needs to respond by adjusting its approach will now be drowned out by global media reaction to Chinese military aggression. It now appears China needs to change as it is at fault.

A flare up in China’s deliberate pattern of aggression | Lowy Institute

The intercept of an Australian patrol over the South China Sea escalates a “grey zone” conflict to a dangerous level.

www.lowyinstitute.org