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

[Redlands18]

Embraer Team to Visit HAL for Collaboration on C-390 Millennium MTA – Indian Defence Research Wing (idrw.org)
This has a lot of potential for the C-390, if and that is a big if, India can get it together on such a project. The requirement is for 60-80 aircraft and that would be a game changer for the C-390.

 

[Todjaeger]

The C-390 is a much newer design that is a bigger, faster aircraft and would probably make a better Rapid Dragon platform in a one v one competition. But the improvements would not even be close enough to make it worthwhile. The disadvantages of introducing a whole new aircraft type would negate those performance improvements.

One also needs to remember that the USAF has also developed and tested Rapid Dragon from the C-17, with a maximum loadout of five pallets of nine missiles each... So if the RAAF were to seriously look into adding Rapid Dragon to the ADF toolbox of capabilities, it could be for use from both the C-130 and C-17 fleets.

 

[Bob53]

The question being answered was whether or not Rapid Dragon, if used from a C-130 (or C-17 for that matter) would present the same risk or exposure to GBAD as attempting to fly in and land HIMARS, which could then be used to launch missiles at GBAD or other targets.

From what I have been able to gather about the Rapid Dragon palletized weapon delivery system is that the answer is, "No." Unless of course the users are being stupid. GBAD missile systems, if one is including systems like S-400, have a max range of ~400 km. This means that GBAD units might be within range of airfields or suitable landing strips where C-130 or C-17 airlifters could land to offload M142 HIMARS launchers, before the HIMARS could then be used to launch strikes against the GBAD or other units. Yes, I am aware that if PrSM is loaded, HIMARS might have even longer reach, but it is distinctly possible that suitable landing sites might not be available to get HIMARS onto the ground where that extra range could be used.

Rapid Dragon OTOH has been tested with JASSM and derivatives, as well as JDAM ordnance and is used as an airdrop/air-launch. Using the AGM-158B JASSM-ER, a C-130 or C-17 could release Rapid Dragon pallets up to ~925 km away from the intended target, well beyond the ~400 km range of something like S-400. If the AGM-158B-2 is loaded instead, then the reach jumps up to ~1,900 km.

Basically, using something like Rapid Dragon could enable airlifters to release standoff ordnance at significant ranges from potential GBAD threats, either as strategic strikes or if the ISR resources enable it, to delaminate GBAD itself. That sounds like a better system to use than to try and land land-based missile systems from aircraft, so that the land-based missiles could then be used to try and attack the GBAD systems.

The last bit I posted was in reference to the purchase of 200+ ship-launched RGM-109E Tomahawk missiles to provide the ADF with a long-range LACM capability using VLS cells aboard the Hobart-class DDG's. If the capability deemed important was for the ADF to acquire long-ranged strike capabilities, then Rapid Dragon sounds much more promising to me than fitting and older LACM design in the already too few VLS cells the RAN will have available for air defence aboard the principle air defence vessels for the RAN.

Acknowledged and agree. A bit higher costing pinging off a bunch JASSM vs MLRS of any type…but a lot less risk in using Rapid Dragon.

 

[Bob53]

if the Air Force knew 10 years ago what it knows now, how many more C17 would of been ordered? even tiny UAE has 8, the same number as Australia.

 

[John Fedup]

if the Air Force knew 10 years ago what it knows now, how many more C17 would of been ordered? even tiny UAE has 8, the same number as Australia.

Even worse for the RCAF, only 5. Our fleet must be one of the smallest.

 

[swerve]

If Boeing hadn’t screwed up so badly on development of the Dreamliner, MAX, KC-46, and Airforce One projects the Embraer-Boeing agreement might have changed the “9” to a much higher number. Stuff happens!

Boeing seems to have been very good at screwing things up for quite a long time. Consider the fiasco of the A310/KC-767 tanker competition, where Boeing held all the cards, but blew it by getting caught cheating. Didn't even bother to hide it! The 787's a success, at last - after the digression into the rather silly Sonic Cruiser - but Boeing's failed to properly address the increasingly outdated 737. The basic design's too old. The attack on Bombardier was a gift to Airbus. The partnership with Embraer had potential - but then Boeing dropped it. Won the KC-45/46 competition, but politically, not technically, & then seems to have lost interest in actually developing & producing the bloody thing, resulting in massive problems & delays.

 

[John Fedup]

Boeing seems to have been very good at screwing things up for quite a long time. The fiasco of the A310/KC-767 tanker competition, where Boeing held all the cards, but blew it by getting caught cheating. Didn't even bother to hide it! The 787's a success, at last - after the digression into the rather silly Sonic Cruiser - but Boeing's failed to properly address the increasingly outdated 737. The basic design's too old. The attack on Bombardier was a gift to Airbus. The partnership with Embraer had potential - but then Boeing dropped it. Won the KC-45/46 competition, but politically, not technically, & then seems to have lost interest in actually developing & producing the bloody thing, resulting in massive problems & delays.

WRT the Bombardier C-series dispute, not only did Boeing gift Bombardier to Airbus they also lost the interim order for 18 Superhornets. Had that order gone through junior might have been able to derail the F-35 order in favour of more SHs.

 

[At lakes]

Royal Australian Air Force’s First MQ-4C Triton Uncrewed Aircraft Takes Flight - MilitaryLeak.COM

Northrop Grumman Corporation successfully completed the first flight of Australia’s multi-intelligence MQ-4C Triton uncrewed aircraft on Thursday, Nov. 9 at

militaryleak.com

I dont know if this is been posted before, but the article stated first flight was Nov 9th so maybe not
Currently undergoing flight trials in the US and is due in Australia some time in 2024.

 

[jack412]

Staying on UAV. this is a development that could help.

U.S. and Australia agree to cooperate with Japan on military drones

Biden and Albanese discuss defense partnership under complex challenges

asia.nikkei.com

I don't remember seeing this posted. We are stopping at 72 F-35 for now and are also looking at the US and UK 6th gen fighter.

Australia Starts Looking Beyond The F-35 For Next-Gen Fighter Needs | Aviation Week Network

Next-generation fighters will be available when Australia searches for a replacement for a squadron of Boeing F/A-18E/Fs in the mid-2030s.

aviationweek.com

 

[Redlands18]

Staying on UAV. this is a development that could help.

U.S. and Australia agree to cooperate with Japan on military drones

Biden and Albanese discuss defense partnership under complex challenges

asia.nikkei.com

I don't remember seeing this posted. We are stopping at 72 F-35 for now and are also looking at the US and UK 6th gen fighter.

Australia Starts Looking Beyond The F-35 For Next-Gen Fighter Needs | Aviation Week Network

Next-generation fighters will be available when Australia searches for a replacement for a squadron of Boeing F/A-18E/Fs in the mid-2030s.

aviationweek.com

Australia is in no hurry to replace the F/A-18F, it will still be a very capable well into the 2030s and we have enough obsolete and or worn out systems that need replacing, suspect the Hawk replacement will come first. I think it will be very much a wait and see what projects survive before the RAAF looks seriously at what is available.

 

[Reptilia]

Australia is in no hurry to replace the F/A-18F, it will still be a very capable well into the 2030s and we have enough obsolete and or worn out systems that need replacing, suspect the Hawk replacement will come first. I think it will be very much a wait and see what projects survive before the RAAF looks seriously at what is available.

would be good to get another 12-24 super hornets before then. Taking a bit of time to fully integrate LRASM onto the f35s and P8s.

 

[Volkodav]

It's commonsense.

While the RAAF has been doing well, perhaps better with their fleet management than the other two services, having fleets hitting or exceeding 30 years is a problem, especially when it's an entire raft of capabilities encountering obsolescence.

Yes there are economies of scale, economies in support systems etc. but there are also advantages in having complementary fleets with overlapping capabilities that are markedly different ages.

Imagine if the RAAF had gotten those 30 Starfighters instead of the last batch of Sabres, or had disbanded a mirage squadron (which happened a couple of years later anyway) to keep the Phantoms? A split buy of F/A-18 A/B to replace the Mirage, followed by D's or even Strike Eagles to replace the Phantoms.

 

[jack412]

Australia is in no hurry to replace the F/A-18F, it will still be a very capable well into the 2030s and we have enough obsolete and or worn out systems that need replacing, suspect the Hawk replacement will come first. I think it will be very much a wait and see what projects survive before the RAAF looks seriously at what is available.

We were in a hurry. You would remember. We were going to place an order for the F-35 in the first quarter of this year. The F/A-18F were to retire in 2030 and the Growler in 2035. Things have changed.

 

[Redlands18]

We were in a hurry. You would remember. We were going to place an order for the F-35 in the first quarter of this year. The F/A-18F were to retire in 2030 and the Growler in 2035. Things have changed.

F-35 order this year, where do you get that from? F/A-18F to retire in 2030, Growler in 2035, where do you get that from? The last we heard from the Morrison Govt on more combat aircraft, was from the 2020 Defence Update forecasting $5-6B for extra air combat capability but no word on what that entailed. The Albanese Government was in the middle of the DSR, so they certainly were not about to announce any intention to order more F-35s this year, they didn't know what was going to be recommended.

 

[jack412]

I got 2030/35 from several sources including Ten years of RAAF Super Hornets - Australian Defence Magazine
The announced intention to place an order in the first quarter, was also from the last gov.

 

[Redlands18]

I got 2030/35 from several sources including Ten years of RAAF Super Hornets - Australian Defence Magazine
The announced intention to place an order in the first quarter, was also from the last gov.

The ADM article is from Mar 2020, thus predates the 2020 Defence Update and that makes no mention of buying more F-35Bs. Can you provide a source for the Morrison Government announcing any intention to order more F-35s?

 

[ngatimozart]

I don't remember seeing this posted. We are stopping at 72 F-35 for now and are also looking at the US and UK 6th gen fighter.

Australia Starts Looking Beyond The F-35 For Next-Gen Fighter Needs | Aviation Week Network

Next-generation fighters will be available when Australia searches for a replacement for a squadron of Boeing F/A-18E/Fs in the mid-2030s.

aviationweek.com

I have always thought that a combination of the F-35 and 4+ or 4++ gen fast jets would be quite a lethal combination. The F-35s to sneak in and kick down door, with the 4+ or 4++ gen aircraft wrecking the joint.

would be good to get another 12-24 super hornets before then. Taking a bit of time to fully integrate LRASM onto the f35s and P8s.

Maybe but they will have to be quick. My platform of choice is the F-15EX purely because of its range and weapons carriage capability. However, it costs money and even though Boeing has claimed it will be able to meet a flyaway cost of US$80 million per aircraft, Boeing isn't exactly well known for meeting such price targets.

It's commonsense.

While the RAAF has been doing well, perhaps better with their fleet management than the other two services, having fleets hitting or exceeding 30 years is a problem, especially when it's an entire raft of capabilities encountering obsolescence.

Yes there are economies of scale, economies in support systems etc. but there are also advantages in having complementary fleets with overlapping capabilities that are markedly different ages.

Imagine if the RAAF had gotten those 30 Starfighters instead of the last batch of Sabres, or had disbanded a mirage squadron (which happened a couple of years later anyway) to keep the Phantoms? A split buy of F/A-18 A/B to replace the Mirage, followed by D's or even Strike Eagles to replace the Phantoms.

I don't think that the F-104 Starfighter would have been a wise acquisition for the RAAF. The Luftwaffe called them widowmakers with good cause. I think that keeping the F-4 Phantom would have been a far better idea.

 

[jack412]

The ADM article is from Mar 2020, thus predates the 2020 Defence Update and that makes no mention of buying more F-35Bs. Can you provide a source for the Morrison Government announcing any intention to order more F-35s?

The defence article was to show the original 2030 retirement of the FA-18. Do we agree the decision was going to be made in 2025?
I wasn't clear, I meant the last gov 2023 defence update , to your 2020 defence update. There was intention to bring the 4th squadron decision forward to first quarter 2023, which was to recommend a 4th squadron. There are numerous articles to this. This has now changed and the FA-18 will be kept to 2035 and it is now a FA-18 replacement program with several options. As per the AVweek link.

" “What the fourth squadron of F-35s has become is the Super Hornet replacement, not just [a plan to buy] the fourth squadron of F-35s,” RAAF Air Marshal Robert Chipman told Aviation Week at the Global Air and Space Chiefs’ Conference in London July 12-13.

Instead, the RAAF plans to upgrade and extend the service life of the Super Hornet squadron before replacing those aircraft in the mid-2030s. The new replacement schedule means the RAAF will have more options than only F-35As, including a new generation of uncrewed collaborative combat aircraft (CCA) and crewed fighters scheduled to be fielded in the mid-2030s by the U.S. and a UK/Italy/Japan consortium.

“We will look at the F-35, and we’re very, very comfortable and very happy with the capability of the F-35,” Chipman said. “But it would be remiss of me not to look at what else is available for us to replace our Super Hornets in the future.”

The options include the U.S. Next-Generation Air Dominance program and the Global Combat Air Program (GCAP), which in 2022 merged the UK-led BAE Systems Tempest and Japan’s Mitsubishi F-X projects into a common aircraft system. The French/German/Spanish Future Combat Air System program plans to field a crewed fighter in 2040, which is possibly beyond Australia’s ideal time frame. "

 

[swerve]

I don't think that the F-104 Starfighter would have been a wise acquisition for the RAAF. The Luftwaffe called them widowmakers with good cause. I think that keeping the F-4 Phantom would have been a far better idea.

The Luftwaffe had an especially high loss rate of F-104s, for various reasons specific to how it trained & operated at the time. Other air forces weren't as bad.

Mind you, just about every military jet back then crashed a hell of a lot, & the Starfighter may have been worse than most.

 

[Meriv90]

I can understand the starfighter for us Germans and Italians, literally strap yourself to a rocket to intercept the bombers ASAP min autonomy but that was our reality if we were invaded, everything would have been decided in literally minutes.

But for Australia long ranges?

I'm even realizing that I don't know what were the cold war threats for Australia. Chinese Bombers? Did they have range? Soviet SSBN?

What was your scenario?

On the Beach (novel) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

considering books like those wasn't Australia a safe "haven"?