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

[Redlands18]

Just a broad question here….if the RAAF does go ahead with the next order of F35s… taking the numbers to 100 odd. What will that mean for the fleet enablers and the numbers of wedge tails and KC30As? Would an increase in their numbers be required as a consequence?

My logic says if we want extra air frames it’s would be so we could have the option of additional simultaneous and perhaps dispersed flight operations, and that would mean the same for the enablers.

Replacing the Super Hornets or as an extra Sqn? One big issue, will be that any 737 or A330 purchased now for conversion would be significantly different aircraft to the original 737s and A330s, causing logistics headaches for limited numbers of aircraft (2-3?). Australia's AEW&C numbers are similar to that of the UK, France, Turkey, ROK who all operate more Sqns than Australia does. 6 E-7s, by world standards is a pretty significant capability now, numbers wise.

 

[hauritz]

A lot will depend on whether the current government follows the Defence Capability plan set out by the previous government in 2020. Under that plan the Wedgetails were to be replaced in the 2030s and new refuelers to replace our current fleet was in fact the single most expensive project to be undertaken by the Air Force.

Much has happened since then.

Nuclear submarines, AUKUS, new government, further deterioration of the strategic environment and of course a new defence review due out in the next couple of months could change the priorities of that paper.

To complicate things even further we have delays in major programs such as replacing the Collins class and the possibility that aircraft such as the B-21 might become available to Australia.

The AEW replacement program will now be likely to be tied in with our AUKUS partners since both these countries our now Wedgetail operators. In the case of the US it will only be a partial replacement as they work towards a more advanced system due in the 2030s. Not hard to imagine Australia and the UK as part of that project.

I imagine all three countries will cooperate on replacements for its tanker aircraft as well.

in Australia’s case I don’t believe it is likely that you will see the expansion of the AEW and AAR fleets in the immediate future.

In fact defence planning for the future gets way more complex with the further development of AI and robotics, delays in major projects, covering likely capability gaps and so on.

 

[Tbone]

Is the potential order for F35A’s only or can the raaf potentially acquire f35B’s instead?
Not sure why f35a would be the best outcome for this as the F35B’s offer more potential to be used from forward operating base offshore with out the need for costly runway upgrades and used from lhd if they navy had some for site giving the adf reach and cover for assets further away from the mainland

 

[ddxx]

Is the potential order for F35A’s only or can the raaf potentially acquire f35B’s instead?
Not sure why f35a would be the best outcome for this as the F35B’s offer more potential to be used from forward operating base offshore with out the need for costly runway upgrades and used from lhd if they navy had some for site giving the adf reach and cover for assets further away from the mainland

Australia has 28 ‘options’ for F-35s in addition to the 72 F-35As, all of which are due to have been delivered by the end of this year / early next year.

I’d imagine these options could be taken up in the form of any variant if so desired, but not as a replacement for the Super Hornets (which appear to have a key role to play for a while yet) but rather fleet growth and capability enhancement.

 

[seaspear]

If a different airborne platform can offer a capability not presented by the current air fleet there should be no reason not to consider it and stay focused instead on just the f-35 ,I would believe there is plenty of time for the R.A.A.F to consider options

 

[Volkodav]

An interesting possibility is, depending on its configuration, the RAF Wedgetail could be an option to replace and zero time the RAAF capability.

This could be beneficial if, for instance, greater capability could be gained affordably by replacing instead of upgrading the original fleet. A coordinated buy with the UK and possibly other customers, while also gaining synergies with the P-8 fleets.

Sell the existing fleet to an approved end user and the entire process could be better value than an upgrade.

 

[Redlands18]

Australia has 28 ‘options’ for F-35s in addition to the 72 F-35As, all of which are due to have been delivered by the end of this year / early next year.

I’d imagine these options could be taken up in the form of any variant if so desired, but not as a replacement for the Super Hornets (which appear to have a key role to play for a while yet) but rather fleet growth and capability enhancement.

I don't think we ever optioned 28 F-35s, the original intention was to buy 100 to replace the entire Fast Jet fleet, this changed to getting 24 FA-18Fs to replace the F-111 as a bridging capability for 10 years and then replace them with F-35s. 72 F-35s (don't recall anything about options) were ordered around 2012 so the original plan has flown out the window.
Options wouldn't have been a thing anyway in this case, as we are paying exactly the same amount per aircraft as the USAF is and that is set on a year by year basis.
The biggest problem would be getting production slots, the number of countries buying the F-35 has basically doubled since we ordered ours. Fortunately the Super Hornets and Growlers are still relatively young and will still be relevant into the mid 2030s.

 

[Stampede]

I don't think we ever optioned 28 F-35s, the original intention was to buy 100 to replace the entire Fast Jet fleet, this changed to getting 24 FA-18Fs to replace the F-111 as a bridging capability for 10 years and then replace them with F-35s. 72 F-35s (don't recall anything about options) were ordered around 2012 so the original plan has flown out the window.
Options wouldn't have been a thing anyway in this case, as we are paying exactly the same amount per aircraft as the USAF is and that is set on a year by year basis.
The biggest problem would be getting production slots, the number of countries buying the F-35 has basically doubled since we ordered ours. Fortunately the Super Hornets and Growlers are still relatively young and will still be relevant into the mid 2030s.

A good point re production slots.
The F35 A, B, C are not lying on a shop keepers shelf awaiting purchase.

Should additional lightnings be purchased it would be interesting to know the timeframe for aquistion.

Role on the DSR


Cheers S

 

[old faithful]

I like the idea of 2 different platforms.
If one platform is easily countered by some future magic bullet, or a capability grounds a fleet, then a different platform does have advantages.
The F15EX, apart from being very expensive, would make a good replacement for the F18Fs. (F111 replacement)
Huge range and payload, proven record (well the As, Cs and E's anyway) operated in our region Singapore, and soon Indonesia, and the USA are moving quite quickly on them.
The downside being introducing another supply train, simulators and training package. (and the cost!)
It would however, give the RAAF a very fast, agile platform, should stealth not be needed.

 

[ddxx]

I don't think we ever optioned 28 F-35s, the original intention was to buy 100 to replace the entire Fast Jet fleet, this changed to getting 24 FA-18Fs to replace the F-111 as a bridging capability for 10 years and then replace them with F-35s. 72 F-35s (don't recall anything about options) were ordered around 2012 so the original plan has flown out the window.

As per Lockheed Martin’s own website, Australia’s Program of Record is for 100 F-35As.

 

[Redlands18]

As per Lockheed Martin’s own website, Australia’s Program of Record is for 100 F-35As.

Yes L-M has a program of record from 20 years ago when Australia joined the JSF program as a Level 3 partner but that does not mean Australia is holding 28 options. Nobody has ever said Australia won't buy 100 F-35s so L-M can leave it up on its website, because 100 sounds better than 72. Australia as a JSF partner does not need to hold options, we are guaranteed the best possible price through the partnership, we pay exactly the same as the USAF does per ac.

 

[seaspear]

I suppose the price gradually dropping is attractive to delay any new order too
Pentagon announces F-35 jet prices for next three years | Reuters

 

[Bob53]

I like the idea of 2 different platforms.
If one platform is easily countered by some future magic bullet, or a capability grounds a fleet, then a different platform does have advantages.
The F15EX, apart from being very expensive, would make a good replacement for the F18Fs. (F111 replacement)
Huge range and payload, proven record (well the As, Cs and E's anyway) operated in our region Singapore, and soon Indonesia, and the USA are moving quite quickly on them.
The downside being introducing another supply train, simulators and training package. (and the cost!)
It would however, give the RAAF a very fast, agile platform, should stealth not be needed.

I’m not sure F15ex has ever been on the table for Australia so this might be straying into fantasy fleet but from my readings it looks to be a better option for Australia than the Shornets… primarily due to longer range including the option of both conformal and drop tanks, a range of integrated stand off strike weapons and greater overall payload. Would lighten the load on refuelling due to its greater range.

 

[Stampede]

I’m not sure F15ex has ever been on the table for Australia so this might be straying into fantasy fleet but from my readings it looks to be a better option for Australia than the Shornets… primarily due to longer range including the option of both conformal and drop tanks, a range of integrated stand off strike weapons and greater overall payload. Would lighten the load on refuelling due to its greater range.

On paper the F15 looks appealing, but the reality is its bones are decades old and you would have to question is that the platform to see us through into the decades ahead.....................You can only modify and upgrade a fighter platform so much.
Transport aircraft however seem to stand the test of time.
Anyway we will find out in March if not sooner.

For good or bad my money is on more F35's.


Cheers S

 

[StingrayOZ]

The F15EX, apart from being very expensive, would make a good replacement for the F18Fs. (F111 replacement)

Its a bit late for a F-111 replacement.

Also I don't see the point or value in replacing a F-18 Superhornets with F-15EX. I think we have made our choice for 4.5 Gen fighter, and its the Superhornet. The oldest Superhornet is not 10 years old, and the newest one is yet to be delivered. The F-15 while quite agile, is an older, less stealthy platform, and more importantly another completely unique platform to support.

The order window for the F-35 is looking long. Not only that but the existing fleet will need significant upgrades to be competitive and perform missions that the F-18 superhornets currently do.

I am not sure a single airframe "5th gen" fleet is ideal. 5th gen fighters have downsides and limitations, although they are quickly being addressed, and not just limited to 5th gen and we will see the same sort of issues with 6th gen.

We are seeing slow weapons integration, we are seeing low tempo rates, we are seeing the need for hardware upgrades. Limited spares.

4th gen fighters also typically have a large pool of experienced maintainers and simpler production chains. There are airframes sitting in storage. Some roles are still quite suitable for a 4th gen basic EEZ/air space enforcement, bomb truck type missions etc. Superhornets seem to have operating costs simular to a F-16.

If a big global hot war was coming, and the F-35 production line was booked ten years into the future and the F-35 fleet requiring significant hardware upgrades, I can see value in getting more superhornets. Maybe bringing it up to a two full squadrons to help manage the transition. Its integrated with all our weapons, its got all the latest 4.5gen technologies like networking, advanced cockpit, advanced radar, reduced radar signature, longer life and now with blk III, conformal fuel tanks if we wish. The US has a bone yard with some superhornets and there is a fairly robust supply chain for the Superhornet and will be in the USN fleet for a long while yet.

I wonder if eventually it may be worth phasing them out for more capable trainers in the future as a more capable lower tier. KA T50's with F404 or F414 would be quite a capable aircraft. Our big old SH fleet could then provide a lot of resources for such a trainer if it ever needed to operate at a high tempo.

I know the RAAF trainer has been selected, but there was a rumor that the US was going to Lease KAI T-50 because the backlog and slow production. Also there is a defence review going on. And replacing an existing aircraft with a more capable one isn't impossible.

 

[ngatimozart]

I like the idea of 2 different platforms.
If one platform is easily countered by some future magic bullet, or a capability grounds a fleet, then a different platform does have advantages.
The F15EX, apart from being very expensive, would make a good replacement for the F18Fs. (F111 replacement)
Huge range and payload, proven record (well the As, Cs and E's anyway) operated in our region Singapore, and soon Indonesia, and the USA are moving quite quickly on them.
The downside being introducing another supply train, simulators and training package. (and the cost!)
It would however, give the RAAF a very fast, agile platform, should stealth not be needed.

The F-15EX flyaway cost is supposed to be US$80 million and have a CPFH of US$29,000. If that remains the case, then it's really no more expensive than the F-35A and has a smaller CPFH. If it was acquired through FMS then the USAF cost would apply.

F-15EX is a boon to Boeing, but it might not break the international fighter market

Is the F-15EX ready for the competitive international field?

www.defensenews.com

 

[old faithful]

I have read several F15EX articles, and the most quoted figure is more like $110 million.
However, it is cheaper in the long run apparently.
As for comparing it to the F18F, it is a more survivable platform, has longer legs, and a bigger payload.
I like it as a platform, that's all. The RAAF will have their reasons for going with the F18F, and I am sure they know better than me , as to what they want or need.

 

[ngatimozart]

I have read several F15EX articles, and the most quoted figure is more like $110 million.
However, it is cheaper in the long run apparently.
As for comparing it to the F18F, it is a more survivable platform, has longer legs, and a bigger payload.
I like it as a platform, that's all. The RAAF will have their reasons for going with the F18F, and I am sure they know better than me , as to what they want or need.

From what I understand the new technology going into it and the new materials make it cheaper. However Frank Kendall, the SECAF wants the USAF to cancel the program. This looks like the same stupidity that happened with the F-22 in 2012. The USAF need the numbers to replace its old F-15C/D fleet and these can be built and entered into service quicker than the F-35. Now its about quantity because the USAF is short of modern capable fast jet aircraft.

The F-15EX Program Is In Trouble

The Air Force is looking to reduce the size of its F-15EX buy to the point that it is likely to be more trouble than it's worth.

www.thedrive.com

I really like the aircraft and for nations like Australia or NZ it makes a great maritime strike capability.

 

[ADMk2]

I have read several F15EX articles, and the most quoted figure is more like $110 million.
However, it is cheaper in the long run apparently.
As for comparing it to the F18F, it is a more survivable platform, has longer legs, and a bigger payload.
I like it as a platform, that's all. The RAAF will have their reasons for going with the F18F, and I am sure they know better than me , as to what they want or need.

How is it more survivable than a Block II / III Super Hornet?

RAAF assessed F-15E and Super Hornet Block II back before Super Hornet Blk2 was selected in 2007. F-15EX wasn’t even on the drawing board then so it was not possible to directly compare the 2.

Compared to -E models however, Super Hornet Blk 2 was found to have a better radar, better LO capability, more advanced EWSP and avionics overall, easier to introduce into service given we already operated Classics, easier to maintain and it was cheaper.

Obviously much has been updated with F-15EX compared to the F-15E’s we looked at 17 years ago, but the same has occurred with the RAAF Super Hornets, which among many other Block III designed upgrades are not far off receiving their pod mounted long-wave IRST systems. Radar upgrades if they haven’t already occurred are not far off, nor are the rest of USN spec upgrades.

F-15 is fast, long ranged and can carry a large payload. All good things of course, but the capability differences to current RAAF Super Hornets isn’t worth the $10 b - $12b plus it would cost to introduce the same number of platforms into RAAF.

And even if it was thought worthwhile, would it be worthwhile to operate 3 completely separate types of fast jet? (JSF, F-15 and Growler).

Unlikely. I like F-15EX and if we had chosen F-15E back in the mid-2000’s it would be an excellent capability growth path that I am sure would serve us well.

But that was the time to acquire F-15 for RAAF and we didn’t.

The near future when 6th gen designs are close to production lines will most certainly not the time to acquire an F-15 variant.

 

[Takao]

Just a broad question here….if the RAAF does go ahead with the next order of F35s… taking the numbers to 100 odd. What will that mean for the fleet enablers and the numbers of wedge tails and KC30As? Would an increase in their numbers be required as a consequence?

My logic says if we want extra air frames it’s would be so we could have the option of additional simultaneous and perhaps dispersed flight operations, and that would mean the same for the enablers.

Frankly? No. The bit that every twitter strategist seems to forget, these production lines are full, closed or slow. And the money has to be available in a year that the production line is too. As someone who spent hours pouring over *big grey aircraft* production dates with my RAAF offsider to fit one in - it's nearly impossible without something giving. That may have changed in the past 3 years (a nation may have given up a slot or similar), but with the effect of COVID and Ukraine on electronic supply lines I doubt it.

I also think its worth reminding people that the extra air combat capability is not explicitly for a Sqn of F-35s. It may be, but if you want the effect (which is more important), that may be answered by other platforms (and not necessarily a pointy grey thing). Depending on the effect needed, it could (for instance) be a Patriot Sqn or a buy of AIM-120 next gen....