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

[the road runner]

With the Pacific Airshow kicking off have a look at a RAAF FA 18F pilots view
The G force display is pretty cool and so is the view from the cockpit

 

[Bob53]

I never quite understood why Australia cancelled the Sea Guardian plan?, GA-ASI's MQ-9B SeaGuardian Showcased at RIMPAC 2024 - Naval News

 

[OldTex]

I never quite understood why Australia cancelled the Sea Guardian plan?, GA-ASI's MQ-9B SeaGuardian Showcased at RIMPAC 2024 - Naval News

Perhaps to safeguard the number of P-8As and MQ-4Cs planned or ordered by the Government. Sticker shock for the ordered systems would have made the MQ-9B a threat, even though it does not have the same capabilities or characteristics to replace either of them. It would have complimented them, as another option to use in the right circumstances, and provided another layer of ISR. But bean counters don't like options and redundancy.

 

[StingrayOZ]

just buy 28 F-35B’s put them on the Canberra class decks and have them give air over to RAN Ships leaving the airforce to strike from northern bases with tankers.. I’m shocked this government is so one dimensional and budget is used to not defend and increase our capability now while we have a chance.

I understand the desire, but we couldn't offer meaningful capability in a high intensity conflict doing that. And it would be super expensive.

Italy and Spain with their carrier capability aren't intending to fight China. They are however quite capable of projecting some power over lower tier nations around Africa. But with China, even the US can't just slide up a carrier (or 6 with a massive battle group) to its coast and make it work. For fleet defence, we have access to long range munitions for strike and air. Firing off some air to air missiles from a F-35B running off a Canberra doesn't really change the game.

Doing so would drain man power and money for more meaningful and useful capability we desperately need.

I would have liked to have seen another squadron of F35s as well. Would prefer the A rather than B, as it sacrifices about 20% of its combat radius and payload for the STOVL capability.

The B has other issues than just Range. the best maritime strike weapon, JSM, doesn't fit in it. In fact most heavy weapons don't fit in it. It also is significantly different that it will likely be the last to receive new upgrades and updates. If its required in the region, Singapore has them, and has better need for that type of aircraft. Of course allies the US and the UK have them too. But Australia it makes a lot of sense to just focus on F-35A, the block IV upgrade will keep us very busy just with that. No capability for new types.

Frankly we still need to get our F-35A FOC, and until block IV and those weapon integrations happen, (LRASM etc) we don't need more of them. We are still one of the largest F-35 fleet operators in the world.

I think the super hornets however are better than originally thought, hence the decision to keep them longer.

They get updates, the USN intends to use them for a long time, and seems to be happy to have more of them than expected for longer. What may have seemed a late emergency Lease/purchase of a dead end platform, now looks like a proven capability, with a long service life ahead, and further development, particularly in terms of weapons, sensors and processing. Being navy, they are almost always the first to get integrated new weapons suitable for maritime, which ultimately is ultra important to Australia. Also with F-35 supplies and upgrades being tight and often late, having another platform that is easily to get spares and fast to get updates is a nice compliment to our capability. There are no bone yards of F-35 to pick parts from for example, if conflict came and flight hours increased significantly.

 

[Beam]

Can't see where this has been posted before, it would seem the the RAAF will be training new Luftwaffe pilots from next year.

The article is not clear on whether it is all new pilots or advanced jet training.

RAAF to train German Air Force pilots from next year

The RAAF has already hosted German military aircraft and personnel during the recent air combat training activity, Exercise Pitch Black, in the Northern Territory.

australianaviation.com.au

"The Royal Australian Air Force has signed an agreement to train pilots from the German Air Force in 2025.

The agreement, a Letter of Intent signed by Chief of Air Force Australia Air Marshal Stephen Chappell and Chief of the German Air Force Lieutenant General Ingo Gerhartz, was announced on 10 August."


Regards,

 

[Volkodav]

I have a different take on the F-35B.

I see it as a highly survivable, stand off, integrated sensor platform, that is also highly capable of air defence and strike.

The RAAF and other air forces have deployed very small numbers (as few as two or four) of combat aircraft to war zones, which is seen as a useful contribution. Small numbers, i.e. four or six, attack helicopters, one or two Maritime (ASW) helicopters are seen as perfectly adequate. Large deck amphibs and light carriers often carry only six or so Harriers/F-35B, which is seen as worthwhile.

Steel is cheap, air is free, with all the additional amphibious lift the ADF is getting the question has to be asked whether replacing the LHDs with like, for like is the best way forward?

A simpler (no flood able dock) higher speed, more survivable platform, acquired in greater numbers, may be better value for money as well as more capable.

 

[Stampede]

I have a different take on the F-35B.

I see it as a highly survivable, stand off, integrated sensor platform, that is also highly capable of air defence and strike.

The RAAF and other air forces have deployed very small numbers (as few as two or four) of combat aircraft to war zones, which is seen as a useful contribution. Small numbers, i.e. four or six, attack helicopters, one or two Maritime (ASW) helicopters are seen as perfectly adequate. Large deck amphibs and light carriers often carry only six or so Harriers/F-35B, which is seen as worthwhile.

Steel is cheap, air is free, with all the additional amphibious lift the ADF is getting the question has to be asked whether replacing the LHDs with like, for like is the best way forward?

A simpler (no flood able dock) higher speed, more survivable platform, acquired in greater numbers, may be better value for money as well as more capable.

Yes small numbers of a capability can generate big outcomes

The F35 B is niche and maybe a luxury for many a scenario or it may in fact be that must have game changer for a particular senario

Too much fixation on a maritime battle in the SCS
The F35 will be serving in the ADF for the next 25 to 30 years.
Regrettably they will probably not see a peaceful life and will have to address anyone of a wide range of challenges
For a maritime nation like Australia ,deployed aviation at sea is a no brainer even if in only in modest numbers.
It’s our point of difference in the region

land based assets can only do so much

There is a reason the F35B exists and nations want it and build the ships to support it

It’s a prudent and necessary capability.
The F35 A B and C offer so much more than their predecessor generationof aircraft

A puzzling omission for the ADF
on so many levels.

Cheers S

 

[hauritz]

I have a different take on the F-35B.

I see it as a highly survivable, stand off, integrated sensor platform, that is also highly capable of air defence and strike.

The RAAF and other air forces have deployed very small numbers (as few as two or four) of combat aircraft to war zones, which is seen as a useful contribution. Small numbers, i.e. four or six, attack helicopters, one or two Maritime (ASW) helicopters are seen as perfectly adequate. Large deck amphibs and light carriers often carry only six or so Harriers/F-35B, which is seen as worthwhile.

Steel is cheap, air is free, with all the additional amphibious lift the ADF is getting the question has to be asked whether replacing the LHDs with like, for like is the best way forward?

A simpler (no flood able dock) higher speed, more survivable platform, acquired in greater numbers, may be better value for money as well as more capable.

The F-35B may yet have a role to play. The Air Force may eventually be expected to contribute to littoral operations in support of the army. This could mean forward basing aircraft on remote islands. Also we do have a couple of large LHDs. Obviously not carriers but at a pinch you could use them as austere floating airfields.

Inside How The Marine's Island-Hopping F-35B Playbook Is Being Written

F-35Bs operating from remote landing areas that could be destroyed soon after they takeoff is one way the Marines look to counter China.

www.twz.com

 

[StingrayOZ]

It may be that a F-35B takes off from a Canberra class. It may be that F-35B's are regularly embarked on the Canberras or their replacements.
But it is also a long and difficult argument that those F-35B's need to be in the ADF and funded directly by Australia over other capabilities.

Canberras have fairly limited fixed air wing capability, and we have only two of them, and for the defence of Australia, it would hard to really conceive of a situation where that is the best spend of the limited money.

Singapore has F-35B's, but no ship to fly them off. Japan, UK, US, Italy, all have significant numbers of F-35B's,

 

[Stampede]

It may be that a F-35B takes off from a Canberra class. It may be that F-35B's are regularly embarked on the Canberras or their replacements.
But it is also a long and difficult argument that those F-35B's need to be in the ADF and funded directly by Australia over other capabilities.

Canberras have fairly limited fixed air wing capability, and we have only two of them, and for the defence of Australia, it would hard to really conceive of a situation where that is the best spend of the limited money.

Singapore has F-35B's, but no ship to fly them off. Japan, UK, US, Italy, all have significant numbers of F-35B's,

Thanks for the reply.

Agree finite dollars can only go so far.

Is the current ADF and what is planned for the future the right mix of capability going forward.
Not sure!

Can we turn back the clock and do things differently!

Cheers S

 

[OldNavy63]

It may be that a F-35B takes off from a Canberra class. It may be that F-35B's are regularly embarked on the Canberras or their replacements.
But it is also a long and difficult argument that those F-35B's need to be in the ADF and funded directly by Australia over other capabilities.

Canberras have fairly limited fixed air wing capability, and we have only two of them, and for the defence of Australia, it would hard to really conceive of a situation where that is the best spend of the limited money.

Singapore has F-35B's, but no ship to fly them off. Japan, UK, US, Italy, all have significant numbers of F-35B's,

A possible future development of the U.S. Marine Rotational Force - Darwin. Similar to the USMC F-35Bs deployed on HMS Queen Elizabeth for CSG-21 to the Indo-Pacific - a Flight of F-35Bs and their maintainers could train on a Canberra LHD. Or cross deck from a USN LHA/LHD. Little steps.

 

[hauritz]

Another concept that I am starting to warm to is the GCAP. Not a lot of info on it but it does have at least one thing I like. Lots of range.

That is something we really haven’t had since the F-111 and does seem to fit in with the aspirations of the Australia’s National Defence Strategy.

GCAP: a big fighter designed for Pacific (and Australian) distances | The Strategist

BAE Systems and its Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) partners pulled off a coup of technology theatre at the Farnborough air show in July, unveiling a new design for their GCAP figher, in full-scale model ...

www.aspistrategist.org.au

 

[Bluey 006]

Perhaps to safeguard the number of P-8As and MQ-4Cs planned or ordered by the Government. Sticker shock for the ordered systems would have made the MQ-9B a threat, even though it does not have the same capabilities or characteristics to replace either of them. It would have complimented them, as another option to use in the right circumstances, and provided another layer of ISR. But bean counters don't like options and redundancy.

This is the type of situation is where I think Australia and New Zealand can consider complementary unique procurements.

RAAF - P-8A / MQ-4C
RNZAF - P-8A / MQ-9B

Each capability has ability to operate independently and in a sovereign capacity, but as a complete system working together they build on the capabilities of the other.

 

[swerve]

Singapore has F-35B's, but no ship to fly them off. Japan, UK, US, Italy, all have significant numbers of F-35B's,

I think Singapore wants them to operate from runways with holes, stretches of road, etc.

 

[StingrayOZ]

I think Singapore wants them to operate from runways with holes, stretches of road, etc.

Which means its an obvious choice for Singapore, they are very much airfield limited and space constrained. Singapore is so much so that just an aviation accident (or just an accident say a building fire) at Changi would pretty much lock out much of their air capability. For the risks and needs of Singapore, the F-35B makes a lot of sense, even with no intention of getting them on ships. It also makes sense for Singapore to be able to distribute their forces, and the F-35B makes it very easy to do that.

Singapore gets its first F-35B in 2026. So there is quite a mountain to climb even for something that is ordered, and already operates quite a large air force. While mostly intended to operate from traditional airports and airfields, no doubt they will have access to training with the US Marines. Which means ship borne operations on allied platforms is always possible. Even if it is just for training purposes.

Australia and Singapore are quite close both geographically and politically. Having a Canberra to deploy to the region and have some Singaporean F-35B aboard, probably wouldn't break the world.

Singaporean Chinooks already are qualified to fly off Canberra. They see that as operationally useful. With F-35s, its a lot more involved, but that is something that could be looked at.

Singaporean helicopters fly from Australian LHDs - Australian Defence Magazine

Singaporean CH-47 Chinook heavy-lift helicopter crews have qualified to take off and land on Australia’s Canberra class LHDs.

www.australiandefence.com.au

IMO Such investigations are probably more realistic than Australia acquiring F-35B's in some sort of reasonable timeframe, straight off its own bat. Operating with allies would de-risk things much easier. Plus capability to meet threat. What exactly are we trying to meet in terms of threat.

For Australia, its unlikely we will need to fend off air threats with a carrier and carrier based aircraft in Australian waters. In SEA that would be different.

 

[DDG38]

Meanwhile, in the real world right now :
"A Royal Australian Air Force E-7A Wedgetail, two EA-18G Growler jets and two F-35A Lightning II aircraft fly in formation with two United States Air Force B-2 Bombers and two F-22 Raptor fighter jets." Image Source : ADF Image Library

 

[thatsamguy]

Meanwhile, in the real world right now :
"A Royal Australian Air Force E-7A Wedgetail, two EA-18G Growler jets and two F-35A Lightning II aircraft fly in formation with two United States Air Force B-2 Bombers and two F-22 Raptor fighter jets." Image Source : ADF Image Library
View attachment 51607

Now to play a game of "how many aircraft can you see in this picture" depending on the sensor

Regular ATC
Mk1 eyeball
JORN
ANZAC CEAFAR
Hobart AEGIS SPY-1D(V)
Enemy fighter radar

[Edit] Forgot my own answer - if the EA-18Gs are active, maybe only Mk1 and JORN have a chance?

 

[Bob53]

I don’t know if this article re the Super Hornets has been discussed but there has been some significant changes in some the assumptions of the planned US programs since it was published. NGAD on the back burner. Ghost Bat not included at this stage in the US CCA program.

Of note this comment.

The Royal Australian Air Force says it will fly its 24 F/A-18F Super Hornets through to the mid-2030s rather than retiring them by 2027 as had been intended. And it will open up a competition for a replacement rather than necessarily acquiring additional F-35A Lightning IIs.

Given the timing for the Rhino replacement is mid 30s….. things would need to get moving on a replacement soon? I wonder if the changes noted above open up for a platform like F15ex.

The Super Hornet flies on | The Strategist

The Royal Australian Air Force says it will fly its 24 F/A-18F Super Hornets through to the mid-2030s rather than retiring them by 2027 as had been intended. And it will open up a competition ...

www.aspistrategist.org.au

 

[Stampede]

I don’t know if this article re the Super Hornets has been discussed but there has been some significant changes in some the assumptions of the planned US programs since it was published. NGAD on the back burner. Ghost Bat not included at this stage in the US CCA program.

Of note this comment.

The Royal Australian Air Force says it will fly its 24 F/A-18F Super Hornets through to the mid-2030s rather than retiring them by 2027 as had been intended. And it will open up a competition for a replacement rather than necessarily acquiring additional F-35A Lightning IIs.

Given the timing for the Rhino replacement is mid 30s….. things would need to get moving on a replacement soon? I wonder if the changes noted above open up for a platform like F15ex.

The Super Hornet flies on | The Strategist

The Royal Australian Air Force says it will fly its 24 F/A-18F Super Hornets through to the mid-2030s rather than retiring them by 2027 as had been intended. And it will open up a competition ...

www.aspistrategist.org.au

The RAAF has to my knowledge always operated more than one type of aircraft to fulfil the Fighter / bomber role.
Now generally called multi role fighters to fulfil all functions within your small to medium sized air forces, is it therefore feasible and prudent to have one or two platforms going forward?
There are of course benefits and limitations in having one or two aircraft types.
Had the capability's of the SHornet, currently not found in the early F35 aircraft actually existed, and the timing of the role out for the F35 not been so late, we may of actually consolidated on an all F 35 fleet.

Maybe our multiple fleet of the future is one manned platform and one unmanned platform.
Maybe that's what we should aspire to.

So what does that look like for the SHornet.

That answer realistically lies with the question of the Block 4 upgrade for the F35 and the time, expense and relevance of a 4th Gen SHornet for now and into the future.
Timing and coin for those two will dictate what is prudent.

With so much coin invested in SSN's, forget about looking at an RAAF 6th Gen aircraft until the mid 2040's at the very best
These projects will run late; will be expensive; will prioritise the parent nation and not us.
Is just not, not, not going to happen any time soon for the RAAF.
Fantasy land!

What's reality

Money for aircraft upgrade...........sure.
Money for an unmanned platform............sure.
Maybe some money for a MODEST additional tranche of F35s in the 2030's to hopefully replace the SHornets earlier rather than later......sure

All F35 fleet with Ghost Bat supported with refuelling, command and control assets would be a good mix and about what we could realistically aspire to for the 2030's

I don't see anything else on the radar other than the choice of which F35 variant we purchase.

The price of the F35 will come down with time with over 600 produced today and another 1000 to yet be built.
Like it or not the RAAF will be centred around the F35 for the 2020's, 30's and 40's.

A future without the Stop gap SHornet and in all probability reduced numbers of manned aircraft.



Cheers S

 

[hauritz]

The RAAF has to my knowledge always operated more than one type of aircraft to fulfil the Fighter / bomber role.
Now generally called multi role fighters to fulfil all functions within your small to medium sized air forces, is it therefore feasible and prudent to have one or two platforms going forward?
There are of course benefits and limitations in having one or two aircraft types.
Had the capability's of the SHornet, currently not found in the early F35 aircraft actually existed, and the timing of the role out for the F35 not been so late, we may of actually consolidated on an all F 35 fleet.

Maybe our multiple fleet of the future is one manned platform and one unmanned platform.
Maybe that's what we should aspire to.

So what does that look like for the SHornet.

That answer realistically lies with the question of the Block 4 upgrade for the F35 and the time, expense and relevance of a 4th Gen SHornet for now and into the future.
Timing and coin for those two will dictate what is prudent.

With so much coin invested in SSN's, forget about looking at an RAAF 6th Gen aircraft until the mid 2040's at the very best
These projects will run late; will be expensive; will prioritise the parent nation and not us.
Is just not, not, not going to happen any time soon for the RAAF.
Fantasy land!

What's reality

Money for aircraft upgrade...........sure.
Money for an unmanned platform............sure.
Maybe some money for a MODEST additional tranche of F35s in the 2030's to hopefully replace the SHornets earlier rather than later......sure

All F35 fleet with Ghost Bat supported with refuelling, command and control assets would be a good mix and about what we could realistically aspire to for the 2030's

I don't see anything else on the radar other than the choice of which F35 variant we purchase.

The price of the F35 will come down with time with over 600 produced today and another 1000 to yet be built.
Like it or not the RAAF will be centred around the F35 for the 2020's, 30's and 40's.

A future without the Stop gap SHornet and in all probability reduced numbers of manned aircraft.



Cheers S

Another defence review is due in 2026 and this will probably need to address the replacement of the Super Hornet and Growler fleet. Probably want to add the Wedgetails and refuelling aircraft into the mix as well.

Most likely we will be looking a complex system of systems replacement so it won’t be anything as straight forward as buying additional F-35s. So much will depend on technology that is still in development and may not even be sufficiently mature when the Super Hornet replacement falls due.

Australia could already be falling behind on working out a solution for this. The US has already started work on NGAD and the USN F/A-XX programs neither of which might be entirely suitable for Australia. Personally I think the British led FCAS may be better suited.

Australia may yet decide to work on its own unique solution. It is all very complex and given Australia’s propensity to procrastinate on these decisions we could even see us having to come up with an interim solution to replace the Super Hornets, which ironically were themselves an interim solution.